Percolation on the fitness hypercube and the evolution of reproductive isolation.

We study the structure and properties of adaptive landscapes arising from the assumption that genotype fitness can only be 0 (inviable genotype) or 1 (viable genotype). An appropriate image of resulting ("holey") fitness landscapes is a (multidimensional) flat surface with many holes. We have demonstrated that in the genotype space there are clusters of viable genotypes whose members can evolve from any member by single substitutions and that there are "species" defined according to the biological species concept. Assuming that the number of genes, n, is very large while the proportion of viable genotypes among all possible genotypes, p, is very small, we have deduced many qualitative and quantitative properties of holey adaptive landscapes which may be related to the patterns of speciation. Relationship between p and n determines two qualitatively different regimes: subcritical and supercritical. The subcritical regime takes place if p is extremely small. In this case, the largest clusters of viable genotypes in the genotype space have size of order n and there are many of such size; typical members of a cluster are connected by a single ("evolutionary") path; the number of different (biological) species in the cluster has order n; the expected number of different species in the cluster within k viable substitutions from any its member is of order k. The supercritical regime takes place if p is small but not extremely small. In this case, there exists a cluster of viable genotypes (a "giant" component) that has size of order 2n/n; the giant component comes "near" every point of the genotype space; typical members of the giant component are connected by many evolutionary paths; the number of different (biological) species on the "giant" component has at least order n2; the expected number of different species on the "giant" component within k viable substitution from any its member is at least of order kn. At the boundary of two regimes all properties of adaptive landscapes undergo dramatic changes, a physical analogy of which is a phase transition. We have considered the most probable (within the present framework) scenario of biological evolution on holey landscapes assuming that it starts on a genotype from the largest connected component and proceeds along it by mutation and genetic drift. In this scenario, there is no need to cross any "adaptive valleys"; reproductive isolation between populations evolves as a side effect of accumulating different mutations. The rate of divergence is very fast: a few substitutions are sufficient to result in a new biological species. We argue that macroevolution and speciation on "rugged" fitness landscapes proceed according to the properties of the corresponding holey landscapes.

[1]  M. Rosenzweig,et al.  How are diversity and productivity related , 1993 .

[2]  L. Ginzburg,et al.  Multilocus population genetics: relative importance of selection and recombination. , 1980, Theoretical population biology.

[3]  G. Wagner,et al.  Epistasis can facilitate the evolution of reproductive isolation by peak shifts: a two-locus two-allele model. , 1994, Genetics.

[4]  N. Barton,et al.  Group selection and the shifting balance , 1993 .

[5]  M. Conrad The geometry of evolution. , 1990, Bio Systems.

[6]  János Komlós,et al.  Largest random component of ak-cube , 1982, Comb..

[7]  S. Kauffman,et al.  Towards a general theory of adaptive walks on rugged landscapes. , 1987, Journal of theoretical biology.

[8]  G. A. Horridge,et al.  Animal species and evolution. , 1964 .

[9]  O. Antoine,et al.  Theory of Error-correcting Codes , 2022 .

[10]  N. Barton,et al.  PERSPECTIVE: A CRITIQUE OF SEWALL WRIGHT'S SHIFTING BALANCE THEORY OF EVOLUTION , 1997, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[11]  John Maynard Smith,et al.  Natural Selection and the Concept of a Protein Space , 1970, Nature.

[12]  M Conrad,et al.  Natural selection and the evolution of neutralism. , 1982, Bio Systems.

[13]  Nicholas H. Barton,et al.  Adaptation and the shifting balance , 1993 .

[14]  S. Gavrilets ON PHASE THREE OF THE SHIFTING‐BALANCE THEORY , 1996, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[15]  M. Huynen,et al.  Smoothness within ruggedness: the role of neutrality in adaptation. , 1996, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[16]  C. Pigott Genetics and the Origin of Species , 1959, Nature.

[17]  Béla Bollobás,et al.  Exact Face-isoperimetric Inequalities , 1990, Eur. J. Comb..

[18]  A. Templeton,et al.  The theory of speciation via the founder principle. , 1980, Genetics.

[19]  R. Lande EFFECTIVE DEME SIZES DURING LONG‐TERM EVOLUTION ESTIMATED FROM RATES OF CHROMOSOMAL REARRANGEMENT , 1979, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[20]  H. Poincaré,et al.  Percolation ? , 1982 .

[21]  P. Schuster,et al.  From sequences to shapes and back: a case study in RNA secondary structures , 1994, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[22]  N. Barton,et al.  The barrier to genetic exchange between hybridising populations , 1986, Heredity.

[23]  A. Hastings,et al.  Founder Effect Speciation: A Theoretical Reassessment , 1996, The American Naturalist.

[24]  P. Higgs,et al.  Population evolution on a multiplicative single-peak fitness landscape. , 1996, Journal of theoretical biology.

[25]  Bengt Olle Bengtsson,et al.  A two-locus mutation—Selection model and some of its evolutionary implications , 1983 .

[26]  R. Lewontin,et al.  Heterosis as an explanation for large amounts of genic polymorphism. , 1978, Genetics.

[27]  S. Wright,et al.  Evolution in Mendelian Populations. , 1931, Genetics.

[28]  J. B. Walsh,et al.  How often do duplicated genes evolve new functions? , 1995, Genetics.

[29]  Martin Dyer,et al.  On the Strength of Connectivity of Random Subgraphs of the n-Cube , 1987 .

[30]  H. A. Orr,et al.  The population genetics of speciation: the evolution of hybrid incompatibilities. , 1995, Genetics.

[31]  M. Nei,et al.  Models of evolution of reproductive isolation. , 1983, Genetics.

[32]  A. Hastings,et al.  Dynamics of polygenic variability under stabilizing selection, recombination, and drift. , 1995, Genetical research.

[33]  J. Spencer,et al.  EVOLUTION OF THE n-CUBE , 1979 .

[34]  R. Lande,et al.  The fixation of chromosomal rearrangements in a subdivided population with local extinction and colonization , 1985, Heredity.

[35]  M. Whitlock,et al.  MULTIPLE FITNESS PEAKS AND EPISTASIS , 1995 .

[36]  Sewall Wright,et al.  GENIC AND ORGANISMIC SELECTION , 1980, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[37]  M. Turelli,et al.  Should individual fitness increase with heterozygosity? , 1983, Genetics.

[38]  C. Wu,et al.  Genetics of reproductive isolation in the Drosophila simulans clade: complex epistasis underlying hybrid male sterility. , 1994, Genetics.

[39]  J. Maynard Smith Natural Selection and the Concept of a Protein Space , 1970 .

[40]  W. Fischer,et al.  Sphere Packings, Lattices and Groups , 1990 .

[41]  B. Bollobás,et al.  Random Graphs of Small Order , 1985 .

[42]  Yoshiharu Kohayakawa,et al.  Connectivity Properties of Random Subgraphs of the Cube , 1995, Random Struct. Algorithms.

[43]  Yoshiharu Kohayakawa,et al.  The Evaluation of Random Subgraphs of the Cube , 1992, Random Struct. Algorithms.

[44]  S. Karlin,et al.  Numerical studies on two-loci selection models with general viabilities. , 1975, Theoretical population biology.