Evolution of Recombination Due to Random Drift

In finite populations subject to selection, genetic drift generates negative linkage disequilibrium, on average, even if selection acts independently (i.e., multiplicatively) upon all loci. Negative disequilibrium reduces the variance in fitness and hence, by Fisher's (1930) fundamental theorem, slows the rate of increase in mean fitness. Modifiers that increase recombination eliminate the negative disequilibria that impede selection and consequently increase in frequency by “hitchhiking.” Thus, stochastic fluctuations in linkage disequilibrium in finite populations favor the evolution of increased rates of recombination, even in the absence of epistatic interactions among loci and even when disequilibrium is initially absent. The method developed within this article allows us to quantify the strength of selection acting on a modifier allele that increases recombination in a finite population. The analysis indicates that stochastically generated linkage disequilibria do select for increased recombination, a result that is confirmed by Monte Carlo simulations. Selection for a modifier that increases recombination is highest when linkage among loci is tight, when beneficial alleles rise from low to high frequency, and when the population size is small.

[1]  R. A. Fisher,et al.  The Genetical Theory of Natural Selection , 1931 .

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

[3]  M. Kimura Attainment of Quasi Linkage Equilibrium When Gene Frequencies Are Changing by Natural Selection. , 1965, Genetics.

[4]  The response to artificial selection due to autosomal genes of large effect. II. The effects of linkage on limits to selection in finite populations. , 1965, Australian journal of biological sciences.

[5]  The Response to Artificial Selection Due to Autosomal Genes of Large Effect III. The Effects of Linkage on the Rate of Advance and Approach to Fixation in Finite Populations , 1966 .

[6]  M. Kimura,et al.  The mutational load with epistatic gene interactions in fitness. , 1966, Genetics.

[7]  J. M. Smith Evolution in Sexual and Asexual Populations , 1968, The American Naturalist.

[8]  M. Williamson,et al.  Population Size, Natural Selection and the Genetic Load , 1968, Nature.

[9]  R. D. Cook,et al.  The genetic structure of natural populations , 1969 .

[10]  T. Mukai The Genetic Structure of Natural Populations of DROSOPHILA MELANOGASTER. VII Synergistic Interaction of Spontaneous Mutant Polygenes Controlling Viability. , 1969, Genetics.

[11]  M W Feldman,et al.  Selection for linkage modification. I. Random mating populations. , 1972, Theoretical population biology.

[12]  J. Felsenstein The evolutionary advantage of recombination. , 1974, Genetics.

[13]  J. M. Smith Evolution of sex , 1975, Nature.

[14]  B. Charlesworth Recombination modification in a fluctuating environment , 1976, Advances in Applied Probability.

[15]  J. Felsenstein,et al.  The evolutionary advantage of recombination. II. Individual selection for recombination. , 1976, Genetics.

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

[17]  W. Ewens Mathematical Population Genetics , 1980 .

[18]  F B Christiansen,et al.  Evolution of recombination in a constant environment. , 1980, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[19]  J. M. Smith,et al.  Selection for recombination in a polygenic model , 1980 .

[20]  A. Kondrashov Selection against harmful mutations in large sexual and asexual populations. , 1982, Genetical research.

[21]  F. Ayala,et al.  Chromosome interactions in Drosophila melanogaster. II. Total fitness. , 1982, Genetics.

[22]  Chromosome interactions in Drosophila melanogaster. I. Viability studies. , 1982, Genetics.

[23]  Marcus W. Feldman,et al.  On Evolutionary Genetic Stability of the Sex Ratio , 1982 .

[24]  A. Kondrashov Deleterious mutations as an evolutionary factor. 1. The advantage of recombination. , 1984, Genetical research.

[25]  M W Feldman,et al.  Selection, generalized transmission and the evolution of modifier genes. I. The reduction principle. , 1987, Genetics.

[26]  A. Kondrashov Deleterious mutations as an evolutionary factor. III. Mating preference and some general remarks. , 1988, Journal of theoretical biology.

[27]  J. M. Smith,et al.  Selection for recombination in a polygenic model--the mechanism. , 1988, Genetical research.

[28]  A. Kondrashov Deleterious mutations and the evolution of sexual reproduction , 1988, Nature.

[29]  N. Barton,et al.  Natural and sexual selection on many loci. , 1991, Genetics.

[30]  Thomas Wiehe,et al.  The Effect of Strongly Selected Substitutions on Neutral Polymorphism: Analytical Results Based on Diffusion Theory , 1992 .

[31]  E. Szathmáry,et al.  Do deleterious mutations act synergistically? Metabolic control theory provides a partial answer. , 1993, Genetics.

[32]  B. Charlesworth Directional selection and the evolution of sex and recombination. , 1993, Genetical research.

[33]  A. Kondrashov,et al.  Classification of hypotheses on the advantage of amphimixis. , 1993, The Journal of heredity.

[34]  T. Nagylaki The evolution of multilocus systems under weak selection. , 1993, Genetics.

[35]  A. Korol,et al.  Increased recombination frequencies resulting from directional selection for geotaxis in Drosophila , 1994, Heredity.

[36]  N. Barton Linkage and the limits to natural selection. , 1995, Genetics.

[37]  N. Barton,et al.  A general model for the evolution of recombination. , 1995, Genetical research.

[38]  J. D. de Visser,et al.  The effect of sex and deleterious mutations on fitness in Chlamydomonas , 1996, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[39]  P. Keightley Nature of deleterious mutation load in Drosophila. , 1996, Genetics.

[40]  R. Hoekstra,et al.  TEST OF INTERACTION BETWEEN GENETIC MARKERS THAT AFFECT FITNESS IN ASPERGILLUS NIGER , 1997, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[41]  P. Keightley,et al.  Genomic mutation rates for lifetime reproductive output and lifespan in Caenorhabditis elegans. , 1997, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[42]  N. Barton,et al.  The evolution of recombination: removing the limits to natural selection. , 1997, Genetics.

[43]  R. Lenski,et al.  Test of synergistic interactions among deleterious mutations in bacteria , 1997, Nature.

[44]  M W Feldman,et al.  Deleterious mutations, variable epistatic interactions, and the evolution of recombination. , 1997, Theoretical population biology.

[45]  Nicholas H. Barton,et al.  The effect of hitch-hiking on neutral genealogies , 1998 .

[46]  A. D. Peters,et al.  Testing for epistasis between deleterious mutations. , 1998, Genetics.

[47]  P. Keightley,et al.  Deleterious mutations and the evolution of sex. , 2000, Science.

[48]  N. Barton,et al.  SELECTION FOR RECOMBINATION IN SMALL POPULATIONS , 2001, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[49]  S. Otto,et al.  Evolution of sex: Resolving the paradox of sex and recombination , 2002, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[50]  W. Rice Evolution of sex: Experimental tests of the adaptive significance of sexual recombination , 2002, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[51]  C. Cannings,et al.  Recombination can evolve in large finite populations given selection on sufficient loci. , 2003, Genetics.

[52]  T. Morgan Heredity and sex , 2005, Zeitschrift für induktive Abstammungs- und Vererbungslehre.

[53]  S. Otto,et al.  Selection for Recombination in Structured Populations , 2006, Genetics.

[54]  B. Charlesworth Mutation-selection balance and the evolutionary advantage of sex and recombination. , 2007, Genetical research.