Spatial gene drives and pushed genetic waves

Significance Gene constructs introduced into natural environments have been proposed to solve various ecological problems. The CRISPR-Cas9 technology greatly facilitates construction of gene drives that allow desired traits to rapidly replace wild types, even if these convey a selective growth rate disadvantage s > 0. However, accidental release of a gene drive could damage ecosystems irreversibly. We have modeled the spatial spread of gene drives and find a preferred range of selective disadvantages, 0.5 < s < 0.697. In this regime, gene drives spread but only when a nucleus exceeds a critical size and intensity. By making gene drives uniquely susceptible to a compound, their advance can be stopped in two dimensions by finite-width barriers, even when interrupted by gaps. Gene drives have the potential to rapidly replace a harmful wild-type allele with a gene drive allele engineered to have desired functionalities. However, an accidental or premature release of a gene drive construct to the natural environment could damage an ecosystem irreversibly. Thus, it is important to understand the spatiotemporal consequences of the super-Mendelian population genetics before potential applications. Here, we use a reaction–diffusion model for sexually reproducing diploid organisms to study how a locally introduced gene drive allele spreads to replace the wild-type allele, although it possesses a selective disadvantage s > 0. Using methods developed by Barton and collaborators, we show that socially responsible gene drives require 0.5 < s < 0.697, a rather narrow range. In this “pushed wave” regime, the spatial spreading of gene drives will be initiated only when the initial frequency distribution is above a threshold profile called “critical propagule,” which acts as a safeguard against accidental release. We also study how the spatial spread of the pushed wave can be stopped by making gene drives uniquely vulnerable (“sensitizing drive”) in a way that is harmless for a wild-type allele. Finally, we show that appropriately sensitized drives in two dimensions can be stopped, even by imperfect barriers perforated by a series of gaps.

[1]  N. Barton,et al.  Deploying dengue-suppressing Wolbachia: robust models predict slow but effective spatial spread in Aedes aegypti , 2017, bioRxiv.

[2]  Martin A. Nowak,et al.  Evolutionary dynamics of CRISPR gene drives , 2016, Science Advances.

[3]  Austin Burt,et al.  Impact of mosquito gene drive on malaria elimination in a computational model with explicit spatial and temporal dynamics , 2016, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[4]  M. Lewis Finding the sweet spot for invasion theory , 2016, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[5]  K. Korolev,et al.  Range expansions transition from pulled to pushed waves as growth becomes more cooperative in an experimental microbial population , 2016, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[6]  Jennifer A. Doudna,et al.  Biology and Applications of CRISPR Systems: Harnessing Nature’s Toolbox for Genome Engineering , 2016, Cell.

[7]  E. Bier,et al.  The dawn of active genetics , 2016, BioEssays : news and reviews in molecular, cellular and developmental biology.

[8]  Ethan Bier,et al.  Highly efficient Cas9-mediated gene drive for population modification of the malaria vector mosquito Anopheles stephensi , 2015, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[9]  James E. DiCarlo,et al.  Safeguarding CRISPR-Cas9 gene drives in yeast , 2015, Nature Biotechnology.

[10]  Wenyan Jiang,et al.  CRISPR-Cas: New Tools for Genetic Manipulations from Bacterial Immunity Systems. , 2015, Annual review of microbiology.

[11]  Luciano A. Marraffini,et al.  CRISPR-Cas immunity in prokaryotes , 2015, Nature.

[12]  George M. Church,et al.  Safeguarding gene drive experiments in the laboratory , 2015, Science.

[13]  Philipp W. Messer,et al.  Modeling the Manipulation of Natural Populations by the Mutagenic Chain Reaction , 2015, Genetics.

[14]  B. Derrida,et al.  An Exactly Solvable Travelling Wave Equation in the Fisher–KPP Class , 2015, 1506.06559.

[15]  Ethan Bier,et al.  The mutagenic chain reaction: A method for converting heterozygous to homozygous mutations , 2015, Science.

[16]  N. Barton,et al.  Limits to adaptation along environmental gradients , 2015, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[17]  George M Church,et al.  Concerning RNA-guided gene drives for the alteration of wild populations , 2014, bioRxiv.

[18]  Austin Burt,et al.  Heritable strategies for controlling insect vectors of disease , 2014, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[19]  L. Alphey Genetic control of mosquitoes. , 2014, Annual review of entomology.

[20]  Andrew W. Murray,et al.  Genetic drift opposes mutualism during spatial population expansion , 2014, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[21]  D. Nelson,et al.  Asymmetric mutualism in two- and three-dimensional range expansions. , 2013, Physical review letters.

[22]  A. Burt,et al.  Modelling the spatial spread of a homing endonuclease gene in a mosquito population , 2013, The Journal of applied ecology.

[23]  James E. DiCarlo,et al.  RNA-Guided Human Genome Engineering via Cas9 , 2013, Science.

[24]  Le Cong,et al.  Multiplex Genome Engineering Using CRISPR/Cas Systems , 2013, Science.

[25]  Jennifer Doudna,et al.  RNA-programmed genome editing in human cells , 2013, eLife.

[26]  R. Weyant,et al.  Monitoring Select Agent Theft, Loss and Release Reports in the United States—2004–2010 , 2012 .

[27]  Austin Burt,et al.  Requirements for effective malaria control with homing endonuclease genes , 2011, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[28]  N. Barton,et al.  Genetic Drift Widens the Expected Cline but Narrows the Expected Cline Width , 2011, Genetics.

[29]  N. Barton,et al.  Spatial Waves of Advance with Bistable Dynamics: Cytoplasmic and Genetic Analogues of Allee Effects , 2011, The American Naturalist.

[30]  S. Russell,et al.  Insect Population Control by Homing Endonuclease-Based Gene Drive: An Evaluation in Drosophila melanogaster , 2011, Genetics.

[31]  K S Korolev,et al.  Competition and cooperation in one-dimensional stepping-stone models. , 2011, Physical review letters.

[32]  Fred Gould,et al.  Gene-drive into insect populations with age and spatial structure: a theoretical assessment , 2010, Evolutionary applications.

[33]  Erwin Frey Evolutionary game theory: Theoretical concepts and applications to microbial communities , 2010 .

[34]  K. Korolev,et al.  Genetic demixing and evolution in linear stepping stone models. , 2010, Reviews of modern physics.

[35]  K. Korolev,et al.  Fisher waves in the strong noise limit. , 2009, Physical review letters.

[36]  A. Burt,et al.  The Population Genetics of Using Homing Endonuclease Genes in Vector and Pest Management , 2008, Genetics.

[37]  Fred Gould,et al.  Broadening the Application of Evolutionarily Based Genetic Pest Management , 2008, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[38]  D. Nelson,et al.  Genetic drift at expanding frontiers promotes gene segregation , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[39]  S. Sinkins,et al.  Gene drive systems for insect disease vectors , 2006, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[40]  Alan Hastings,et al.  Allee effects in biological invasions , 2005 .

[41]  H. Levine,et al.  Fluctuation-regularized front propagation dynamics in reaction-diffusion systems. , 2004, Physical review letters.

[42]  W. Saarloos Front propagation into unstable states , 2003, cond-mat/0308540.

[43]  Austin Burt,et al.  Site-specific selfish genes as tools for the control and genetic engineering of natural populations , 2003, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[44]  James P. Keener,et al.  Mathematical physiology , 1998 .

[45]  Frank Moss,et al.  What is biological physics , 1997 .

[46]  B. Derrida,et al.  Shift in the velocity of a front due to a cutoff , 1997, cond-mat/0005362.

[47]  J. Herskowitz,et al.  Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA , 1996, Current Biology.

[48]  F. Maytag Evolution , 1996, Arch. Mus. Informatics.

[49]  P. Kareiva,et al.  Allee Dynamics and the Spread of Invading Organisms , 1993 .

[50]  N. Barton,et al.  Adaptation, speciation and hybrid zones , 1989, Nature.

[51]  E. Hall,et al.  The nature of biotechnology. , 1988, Journal of biomedical engineering.

[52]  N. Barton,et al.  Analysis of Hybrid Zones , 1985 .

[53]  D. Hartl,et al.  Principles of population genetics , 1981 .

[54]  N. Barton,et al.  The dynamics of hybrid zones , 1979, Heredity.

[55]  B. Bainbridge,et al.  Genetics , 1981, Experientia.

[56]  A. N. Stokes On two types of moving front in quasilinear diffusion , 1976 .

[57]  G. G. Foster,et al.  Chromosome rearrangements for the control of insect pests. , 1972, Science.

[58]  C. F. CURTIS,et al.  Possible Use of Translocations to fix Desirable Genes in Insect Pest Populations , 1968, Nature.

[59]  Journal of Applied Ecology , 1965, Nature.

[60]  V. Wigglesworth Annual Review of Entomology , 1960, Nature.

[61]  C. E. Clifton,et al.  Annual review of microbiology. 5. , 1951 .

[62]  R. BRIGHTMAN,et al.  Science Advances , 1948, Nature.

[63]  M. Kelsey “Annual Review of Microbiology” , 1946, Nature.

[64]  R. Fisher THE WAVE OF ADVANCE OF ADVANTAGEOUS GENES , 1937 .

[65]  Sarah Mae Sincero Heredity , 1875, Nature.

[66]  Karl Pearson,et al.  Annals of Eugenics. , 1926 .

[67]  O. Bagasra,et al.  Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , 1914, Science.

[68]  G. D,et al.  American Naturalist , 1867, Nature.

[69]  October I Physical Review Letters , 2022 .