Mutational meltdown

Last updated

In evolutionary genetics, mutational meltdown is a sub class of extinction vortex in which the environment and genetic predisposition mutually reinforce each other. [1] Mutational meltdown (not to be confused with the concept of an error catastrophe [2] ) is the accumulation of harmful mutations in a small population, which leads to loss of fitness and decline of the population size, which may lead to further accumulation of deleterious mutations due to fixation by genetic drift.

Contents

A population experiencing mutational meltdown is trapped in a downward spiral and will go extinct if the phenomenon lasts for some time. Usually, the deleterious mutations would simply be selected away, but during a mutational meltdown, the number of individuals not reproducing (e.g. by suffering an early death) is too large relative to the overall population size so that mortality exceeds the birth rate.

Explanation


The mechanism behind mutational meltdown is that a spontaneous deleterious mutation is introduced and after some time is eventually fixed into the population. This, in turn, leads to an accumulation in small populations where the growth rate as well as the population size both decrease. This, in consequence, allows the mutation to accumulate new deleterious alleles into the population until it is eventually extinct. [1] In more detail, the accumulation of mutations in small populations can be divided into three phases. In the second phase a population starts in mutation/selection equilibrium, mutations are fixed at a constant rate through time, and the population size is constant because the fecundity exceeds mortality. However, after a sufficient number of mutations have been fixed in the population, the birth rate is slightly less than the death rate, and the population size begins to decrease. This is due to the fixation of deleterious mutations, which increases the death rate. The death rate eventually becomes too large in the population, theoretically infinite, that the time that it takes the deleterious mutant alleles to be fixated can be equated to the mean fixation time of a neutral mutation. This is only due to the small population that mutation is affecting, where the time for fixation is comparatively short. The smaller population size allows for more rapid fixation of deleterious mutations, and a more rapid decline of population size, which becomes irreversible after a certain number of generations [3]

Effects compared on asexual and sexual populations


In asexual species, the effects of mutation accumulation are more significant compared to sexual species. In an asexual population, all the individual species are equally affected by the selective pressures from the environment, which includes, deleterious and/or beneficial mutations. This is due to the lack of recombination of alleles and diversity in the genome that allows the accumulation of mutations to effectively take over the asexual population. [4] The accumulation of mutation can occur during a short period of time, and this is because the offspring of the species that were introduced to the deleterious mutation does not have a recombination of alleles passed on by the parents. Instead, the exact copy and number of genes that were originally in the parent species is passed on to the offspring with no genetic changes. This puts asexual reproductive species under the high selective pressure of mutational meltdown.

In sexual reproducing species, the time it takes for the mutational meltdown to occur takes longer, if at all. In sexually reproducing populations, the segregation and recombination of alleles allow genetic diversity to flourish within the population. Genetic diversity increases exponentially as the population gets larger over time. This, however; does not eliminate the chance of deleterious mutations to occur. [5] An accumulation of deleterious alleles can do irreversible damage to the population before the species has time to reproduce. In simulated models of sexually reproductive species being introduced to an accumulation of deleterious alleles, it was shown that the population will not go extinct, or it takes an exponential amount of time to do so. This is due to if the sexually reproducing population was put under a strong selection for deleterious mutation, that it causes most of the population to be eliminated. The individuals in the population that do survive will have a lower fitness level, as well as overcome the accumulation of different deleterious mutations, even though their genome might have resistance to the previous deleterious mutations.

The extinction based on mutational accumulation on sexual species, unlike asexual species, is under the assumption that the population is small or is highly restricted in genetic recombination. [6] However; even under certain conditions in a large population, a mutational meltdown can still occur in sexually reproducing species. Factors that include, low birth and recombination rate, as well as having a strong mutation-selection, can a large sexually reproducing population can go extinct. In contrast, the same conditions that can cause extinction in a sexually reproducing population can aid in the avoidance of mutation meltdown. In a tested environment, where variables can be theoretically manipulated, the strong mutation-selection in a large sexually reproducing population can be prevented from mutational meltdown if the birth rate were to increase.

The effect on both asexual and sexually reproducing populations is still confounding to external variables. In cases where a large sexually reproducing population underwent a bottleneck can cause an immediate decrease in population, which causes the population to be more susceptible to mutations accumulating in the population at a fast occurring rate. Mutational meltdown relies on external variables aside from small population size to eliminate the allelic frequency of a population. In such cases, mutational meltdown relies on genetic drift, in terms of a small population, to have time for the mutation to be fixated in the population.

Mutational meltdown in an altruistic population

The filamentous multicellular bacterium Streptomyces coelicolor forms colonies in which a subpopulation of cells arise that hyperproduce beneficial, but metabolically costly antibiotics. [7] This results in a division of labor that increases overall colony fitness. Because the antibiotic producing cells contain large genomic deletions that cause a massive reduction to individual fitness, their altruistic behavior is similar to that of altruistic castes in social insects or somatic cells in multicellular organisms. Over successive generations these putatively altruistic cells continue to decline in fitness losing more fragments from their chromosomes while undergoing a roughly 10-fold increase in mutation rate, possibly due to mutations in genes for DNA replication and DNA repair. [7] These changes lead to an inevitable and irreversible type of mutational meltdown. [7]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Inbreeding</span> Reproduction by closely related organisms

Inbreeding is the production of offspring from the mating or breeding of individuals or organisms that are closely related genetically. By analogy, the term is used in human reproduction, but more commonly refers to the genetic disorders and other consequences that may arise from expression of deleterious recessive traits resulting from incestuous sexual relationships and consanguinity. Animals avoid incest only rarely.

Genetic drift, also known as random genetic drift, allelic drift or the Wright effect, is the change in the frequency of an existing gene variant (allele) in a population due to random chance.

Small populations can behave differently from larger populations. They are often the result of population bottlenecks from larger populations, leading to loss of heterozygosity and reduced genetic diversity and loss or fixation of alleles and shifts in allele frequencies. A small population is then more susceptible to demographic and genetic stochastic events, which can impact the long-term survival of the population. Therefore, small populations are often considered at risk of endangerment or extinction, and are often of conservation concern.

Population genetics is a subfield of genetics that deals with genetic differences within and among populations, and is a part of evolutionary biology. Studies in this branch of biology examine such phenomena as adaptation, speciation, and population structure.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Muller's ratchet</span> Accumulation of harmful mutations

In evolutionary genetics, Muller's ratchet is a process which, in the absence of recombination, results in an accumulation of irreversible deleterious mutations. This happens because in the absence of recombination, and assuming reverse mutations are rare, offspring bear at least as much mutational load as their parents. Muller proposed this mechanism as one reason why sexual reproduction may be favored over asexual reproduction, as sexual organisms benefit from recombination and consequent elimination of deleterious mutations. The negative effect of accumulating irreversible deleterious mutations may not be prevalent in organisms which, while they reproduce asexually, also undergo other forms of recombination. This effect has also been observed in those regions of the genomes of sexual organisms that do not undergo recombination.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Evolution of sexual reproduction</span> How sexually reproducing multicellular organisms could have evolved from a common ancestor species

Sexual reproduction is an adaptive feature which is common to almost all multicellular organisms and various unicellular organisms. Currently, the adaptive advantage of sexual reproduction is widely regarded as a major unsolved problem in biology. As discussed below, one prominent theory is that sex evolved as an efficient mechanism for producing variation, and this had the advantage of enabling organisms to adapt to changing environments. Another prominent theory, also discussed below, is that a primary advantage of outcrossing sex is the masking of the expression of deleterious mutations. Additional theories concerning the adaptive advantage of sex are also discussed below. Sex does, however, come with a cost. In reproducing asexually, no time nor energy needs to be expended in choosing a mate and, if the environment has not changed, then there may be little reason for variation, as the organism may already be well-adapted. However, very few environments have not changed over the millions of years that reproduction has existed. Hence it is easy to imagine that being able to adapt to changing environment imparts a benefit. Sex also halves the amount of offspring a given population is able to produce. Sex, however, has evolved as the most prolific means of species branching into the tree of life. Diversification into the phylogenetic tree happens much more rapidly via sexual reproduction than it does by way of asexual reproduction.

In population genetics and population ecology, population size is a countable quantity representing the number of individual organisms in a population. Population size is directly associated with amount of genetic drift, and is the underlying cause of effects like population bottlenecks and the founder effect. Genetic drift is the major source of decrease of genetic diversity within populations which drives fixation and can potentially lead to speciation events.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Conservation genetics</span> Interdisciplinary study of extinction avoidance

Conservation genetics is an interdisciplinary subfield of population genetics that aims to understand the dynamics of genes in a population for the purpose of natural resource management and extinction prevention. Researchers involved in conservation genetics come from a variety of fields including population genetics, natural resources, molecular ecology, biology, evolutionary biology, and systematics. Genetic diversity is one of the three fundamental measures of biodiversity, so it is an important consideration in the wider field of conservation biology.

Genetic load is the difference between the fitness of an average genotype in a population and the fitness of some reference genotype, which may be either the best present in a population, or may be the theoretically optimal genotype. The average individual taken from a population with a low genetic load will generally, when grown in the same conditions, have more surviving offspring than the average individual from a population with a high genetic load. Genetic load can also be seen as reduced fitness at the population level compared to what the population would have if all individuals had the reference high-fitness genotype. High genetic load may put a population in danger of extinction.

Inbreeding depression is the reduced biological fitness which has the potential to result from inbreeding. Biological fitness refers to an organism's ability to survive and perpetuate its genetic material. Inbreeding depression is often the result of a population bottleneck. In general, the higher the genetic variation or gene pool within a breeding population, the less likely it is to suffer from inbreeding depression, though inbreeding and outbreeding depression can simultaneously occur.

Genetic hitchhiking, also called genetic draft or the hitchhiking effect, is when an allele changes frequency not because it itself is under natural selection, but because it is near another gene that is undergoing a selective sweep and that is on the same DNA chain. When one gene goes through a selective sweep, any other nearby polymorphisms that are in linkage disequilibrium will tend to change their allele frequencies too. Selective sweeps happen when newly appeared mutations are advantageous and increase in frequency. Neutral or even slightly deleterious alleles that happen to be close by on the chromosome 'hitchhike' along with the sweep. In contrast, effects on a neutral locus due to linkage disequilibrium with newly appeared deleterious mutations are called background selection. Both genetic hitchhiking and background selection are stochastic (random) evolutionary forces, like genetic drift.

Enquiry into the evolution of ageing, or aging, aims to explain why a detrimental process such as ageing would evolve, and why there is so much variability in the lifespans of organisms. The classical theories of evolution suggest that environmental factors, such as predation, accidents, disease, and/or starvation, ensure that most organisms living in natural settings will not live until old age, and so there will be very little pressure to conserve genetic changes that increase longevity. Natural selection will instead strongly favor genes which ensure early maturation and rapid reproduction, and the selection for genetic traits which promote molecular and cellular self-maintenance will decline with age for most organisms.

Background selection describes the loss of genetic diversity at a non-deleterious locus due to negative selection against linked deleterious alleles. It is one form of linked selection, where the maintenance or removal of an allele from a population is dependent upon the alleles in its linkage group. The name emphasizes the fact that the genetic background, or genomic environment, of a neutral mutation has a significant impact on whether it will be preserved or purged from a population. In some cases, the term background selection is used broadly to refer to all forms of linked selection, but most often it is used only when neutral variation is reduced due to negative selection against deleterious mutations. Background selection and all forms of linked selection contradict the assumption of the neutral theory of molecular evolution that the fixation or loss of neutral alleles is entirely stochastic, the result of genetic drift. Instead, these models predict that neutral variation is correlated with the selective pressures acting on linked non-neutral genes, that neutral traits are not necessarily oblivious to selection. Because they segregate together, non-neutral mutations linked to neutral polymorphisms result in decreased levels of genetic variation relative to predictions of neutral evolution.

In population genetics, fixation is the change in a gene pool from a situation where there exists at least two variants of a particular gene (allele) in a given population to a situation where only one of the alleles remains. That is, the allele becomes fixed. In the absence of mutation or heterozygote advantage, any allele must eventually be lost completely from the population or fixed. Whether a gene will ultimately be lost or fixed is dependent on selection coefficients and chance fluctuations in allelic proportions. Fixation can refer to a gene in general or particular nucleotide position in the DNA chain (locus).

The nearly neutral theory of molecular evolution is a modification of the neutral theory of molecular evolution that accounts for the fact that not all mutations are either so deleterious such that they can be ignored, or else neutral. Slightly deleterious mutations are reliably purged only when their selection coefficient are greater than one divided by the effective population size. In larger populations, a higher proportion of mutations exceed this threshold for which genetic drift cannot overpower selection, leading to fewer fixation events and so slower molecular evolution.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Clonal interference</span> Phenomenon in evolutionary biology

Clonal interference is a phenomenon in evolutionary biology, related to the population genetics of organisms with significant linkage disequilibrium, especially asexually reproducing organisms. The idea of clonal interference was introduced by American geneticist Hermann Joseph Muller in 1932. It explains why beneficial mutations can take a long time to get fixated or even disappear in asexually reproducing populations. As the name suggests, clonal interference occurs in an asexual lineage ("clone") with a beneficial mutation. This mutation would be likely to get fixed if it occurred alone, but it may fail to be fixed, or even be lost, if another beneficial-mutation lineage arises in the same population; the multiple clones interfere with each other.

Host–parasite coevolution is a special case of coevolution, where a host and a parasite continually adapt to each other. This can create an evolutionary arms race between them. A more benign possibility is of an evolutionary trade-off between transmission and virulence in the parasite, as if it kills its host too quickly, the parasite will not be able to reproduce either. Another theory, the Red Queen hypothesis, proposes that since both host and parasite have to keep on evolving to keep up with each other, and since sexual reproduction continually creates new combinations of genes, parasitism favours sexual reproduction in the host.

Genetic purging is the reduction of the frequency of a deleterious allele, caused by an increased efficiency of natural selection prompted by inbreeding.

This glossary of genetics and evolutionary biology is a list of definitions of terms and concepts used in the study of genetics and evolutionary biology, as well as sub-disciplines and related fields, with an emphasis on classical genetics, quantitative genetics, population biology, phylogenetics, speciation, and systematics. Overlapping and related terms can be found in Glossary of cellular and molecular biology, Glossary of ecology, and Glossary of biology.

A mutation accumulation (MA) experiment is a genetic experiment in which isolated and inbred lines of organisms are maintained such that the effect of natural selection is minimized, with the aim of quantitatively estimating the rates at which spontaneous mutations occur in the studied organism. Spontaneous mutation rates may be directly estimated using molecular techniques such as DNA sequencing, or indirectly estimated using phenotypic assays.

References

  1. 1 2 Camille Coron; Sylvie Méléard; Emmanuelle Porcher; Alexandre Robert (May 2013). "Quantifying the Mutational Meltdown in Diploid Populations". The American Naturalist. 181 (5). doi:10.1086/670022.
  2. Eigen, M (15 October 2002). "Error catastrophe and antiviral strategy" (PDF). Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 99 (21): 13374–6. Bibcode:2002PNAS...9913374E. doi: 10.1073/pnas.212514799 . PMC   129678 . PMID   12370416.
  3. Graham Rowe; Trevor J. C. Beebee (January 2003). "Population on the Verge of a Mutational Meltdown? Fitness Costs of Geneticload for an Amphibian in the Wild". Evolution. 57 (1): 177–181. doi: 10.1111/j.0014-3820.2003.tb00228.x .
  4. M. Lynch; R. Bürger; D. Butcher; W. Gabriel (September 1993). "The Mutational Meltdown in Asexual Populations". Journal of Heredity. 84 (5): 339-344. doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.jhered.a111354.
  5. Michael Lynch; John Conery; Reinhard Burger (December 1995). "Mutational Meltdowns in Sexual Populations". : Society for the Study of Evolution. 49: 1067–1080. JSTOR   2410432.
  6. Bernardes, A.T. (July 31, 1995). "Mutational Meltdowns in Large Sexual Populations". Physics Abstracts.
  7. 1 2 3 Zhang Z, Shitut S, Claushuis B, Claessen D, Rozen DE. Mutational meltdown of putative microbial altruists in Streptomyces coelicolor colonies. Nat Commun. 2022 Apr 27;13(1):2266. doi: 10.1038/s41467-022-29924-y. PMID: 35477578; PMCID: PMC9046218

Further reading