How does adaptation sweep through the genome? Insights from long-term selection experiments

A major goal in evolutionary biology is to understand the origins and fates of adaptive mutations. Natural selection may act to increase the frequency of de novo beneficial mutations, or those already present in the population as standing genetic variation. These beneficial mutations may ultimately reach fixation in a population, or they may stop increasing in frequency once a particular phenotypic state has been achieved. It is not yet well understood how different features of population biology, and/or different environmental circumstances affect these adaptive processes. Experimental evolution is a promising technique for studying the dynamics of beneficial alleles, as populations evolving in the laboratory experience natural selection in a replicated, controlled manner. Whole-genome sequencing, regularly obtained over the course of sustained laboratory selection, could potentially reveal insights into the mutational dynamics that most likely occur in natural populations under similar circumstances. To date, only a few evolution experiments for which whole-genome data are available exist. This review describes results from these resequenced laboratory-selected populations, in systems with and without sexual recombination. In asexual systems, adaptation from new mutations can be studied, and results to date suggest that the complete, unimpeded fixation of these mutations is not always observed. In sexual systems, adaptation from standing genetic variation can be studied, and in the admittedly few examples we have, the complete fixation of standing variants is not always observed. To date, the relative frequency of adaptation from new mutations versus standing variation has not been tested using a single experimental system, but recent studies using Caenorhabditis elegans and Saccharomyces cerevisiae suggest that this a realistic future goal.

[1]  H. Muller Some Genetic Aspects of Sex , 1932, The American Naturalist.

[2]  A. Novick,et al.  Experiments with the Chemostat on spontaneous mutations of bacteria. , 1950, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[3]  K. Atwood,et al.  Periodic selection in Escherichia coli. , 1951, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[4]  D. Falconer,et al.  Introduction to Quantitative Genetics. , 1961 .

[5]  M. Kimura,et al.  Evolution in Sexual and Asexual Populations , 1965, The American Naturalist.

[6]  J. M. Smith,et al.  The hitch-hiking effect of a favourable gene. , 1974, Genetical research.

[7]  C. Paquin,et al.  Relative fitness can decrease in evolving asexual populations of S. cerevisiae , 1983, Nature.

[8]  D. Falconer Introduction to quantitative genetics. 1. ed. , 1984 .

[9]  N L Kaplan,et al.  The "hitchhiking effect" revisited. , 1989, Genetics.

[10]  R. Frankham Introduction to quantitative genetics (4th edn): by Douglas S. Falconer and Trudy F.C. Mackay Longman, 1996. £24.99 pbk (xv and 464 pages) ISBN 0582 24302 5 , 1996 .

[11]  S. Elena,et al.  Clonal interference and the evolution of RNA viruses. , 1999, Science.

[12]  A F Bennett,et al.  Genetic architecture of thermal adaptation in Escherichia coli. , 2001, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[13]  W. Stephan,et al.  Detecting a local signature of genetic hitchhiking along a recombining chromosome. , 2002, Genetics.

[14]  R. Lenski,et al.  Microbial genetics: Evolution experiments with microorganisms: the dynamics and genetic bases of adaptation , 2003, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[15]  M. Rose,et al.  Methuselah Flies: A Case Study in the Evolution of Aging , 2004 .

[16]  J. Hermisson,et al.  Soft Sweeps , 2005, Genetics.

[17]  G. Coop,et al.  THE SIGNATURE OF POSITIVE SELECTION ON STANDING GENETIC VARIATION , 2005, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[18]  D. Hartl,et al.  An Equivalence Principle for the Incorporation of Favorable Mutations in Asexual Populations , 2006, Science.

[19]  Anu Raghunathan,et al.  Comparative genome sequencing of Escherichia coli allows observation of bacterial evolution on a laboratory timescale , 2006, Nature Genetics.

[20]  J. Hermisson,et al.  Soft sweeps II--molecular population genetics of adaptation from recurrent mutation or migration. , 2006, Molecular biology and evolution.

[21]  Joachim Hermisson,et al.  Soft Sweeps III: The Signature of Positive Selection from Recurrent Mutation , 2006, PLoS genetics.

[22]  Michael M. Desai,et al.  The Speed of Evolution and Maintenance of Variation in Asexual Populations , 2007, Current Biology.

[23]  Gavin Sherlock,et al.  Molecular Characterization of Clonal Interference during Adaptive Evolution in Asexual Populations of Saccharomyces cerevisiae , 2008, Nature Genetics.

[24]  F. Hospital,et al.  Selective Sweep at a Quantitative Trait Locus in the Presence of Background Genetic Variation , 2008, Genetics.

[25]  D. Schluter,et al.  Adaptation from standing genetic variation. , 2008, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[26]  D. Botstein,et al.  The cost of gene expression underlies a fitness trade-off in yeast , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[27]  Jeffrey E. Barrick,et al.  Genome-wide mutational diversity in an evolving population of Escherichia coli. , 2009, Cold Spring Harbor symposia on quantitative biology.

[28]  P. Phillips,et al.  Mutation load and rapid adaptation favour outcrossing over self-fertilization , 2009, Nature.

[29]  T. Garland,et al.  Experimental Evolution: Concepts, Methods, and Applications of Selection Experiments , 2009 .

[30]  Kevin R. Thornton,et al.  Genome-wide analysis of a long-term evolution experiment with Drosophila , 2010, Nature.

[31]  Leonid Kruglyak,et al.  Dissection of genetically complex traits with extremely large pools of yeast segregants , 2010, Nature.

[32]  Mats E. Pettersson,et al.  Genome-Wide Effects of Long-Term Divergent Selection , 2010, PLoS genetics.

[33]  Philipp W. Messer,et al.  Evidence that Adaptation in Drosophila Is Not Limited by Mutation at Single Sites , 2010, PLoS genetics.

[34]  P. Wiener,et al.  Deciphering the genetic basis of animal domestication , 2011, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[35]  Aaron M. Tarone,et al.  Population-Based Resequencing of Experimentally Evolved Populations Reveals the Genetic Basis of Body Size Variation in Drosophila melanogaster , 2011, PLoS genetics.

[36]  Ali Bashir,et al.  Experimental selection of hypoxia-tolerant Drosophila melanogaster , 2011, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[37]  Alan M. Moses,et al.  Revealing the genetic structure of a trait by sequencing a population under selection. , 2011, Genome research.

[38]  Michael M. Desai,et al.  Genetic Variation and the Fate of Beneficial Mutations in Asexual Populations , 2011, Genetics.

[39]  Y. Rinott,et al.  Pervasive Adaptive Protein Evolution Apparent in Diversity Patterns around Amino Acid Substitutions in Drosophila simulans , 2011, PLoS genetics.

[40]  Bernardo Lemos,et al.  Ribosomal DNA Deletions Modulate Genome-Wide Gene Expression: “rDNA–Sensitive” Genes and Natural Variation , 2011, PLoS genetics.

[41]  Craig R. Miller,et al.  Mutational Effects and Population Dynamics During Viral Adaptation Challenge Current Models , 2011, Genetics.

[42]  D. Tautz,et al.  Parallel Selection Mapping Using Artificially Selected Mice Reveals Body Weight Control Loci , 2012, Current Biology.

[43]  A. F. Bennett,et al.  The Molecular Diversity of Adaptive Convergence , 2012, Science.