Search engine for discovering works of Art, research articles, and books related to Art and Culture
ShareThis
Javascript must be enabled to continue!

Comparing evolvability and pleiotropy across environments

View through CrossRef
Abstract The environment can play an important role in determining evolutionary outcomes (Reboud and Bell 1997; Stanton et al. 2000; Gresham et al. 2008; Cooper and Lenski 2010; Becks and Agrawal 2012; Bailey et al. 2015). Populations may increase in fitness more after evolution in one environment than in another (Hegreness et al. 2008). This may be because the distance between the ancestral genotype and the top of the locally accessible fitness peak may be greater in one environment or the other. Additionally, the rate at which mutations occur and populations move up the peaks could differ. For this reason, comparing evolvability across environments presents an interesting problem. Here, we show an environment impacts evolvability in two ways, directly by impacting the rate of adaptative evolution, and indirectly by limiting the range of fitness outcomes that are possible. We show that correlated responses are often highly idiosyncratic, due to variation in the range of possible fitness outcomes in the environment and differences in pleiotropic effects across environments but can also be predicted from the ancestral growth rate regardless of the environment in which populations evolve. Interestingly, we also show a negative correlation between increase in an environment X following evolution in environment Y and the increase in environment Y following evolution in environment X. These results highlight the necessity to measure fitness in both environments when comparing the evolvability or repeatability of evolution across environments.
Title: Comparing evolvability and pleiotropy across environments
Description:
Abstract The environment can play an important role in determining evolutionary outcomes (Reboud and Bell 1997; Stanton et al.
2000; Gresham et al.
2008; Cooper and Lenski 2010; Becks and Agrawal 2012; Bailey et al.
2015).
Populations may increase in fitness more after evolution in one environment than in another (Hegreness et al.
2008).
This may be because the distance between the ancestral genotype and the top of the locally accessible fitness peak may be greater in one environment or the other.
Additionally, the rate at which mutations occur and populations move up the peaks could differ.
For this reason, comparing evolvability across environments presents an interesting problem.
Here, we show an environment impacts evolvability in two ways, directly by impacting the rate of adaptative evolution, and indirectly by limiting the range of fitness outcomes that are possible.
We show that correlated responses are often highly idiosyncratic, due to variation in the range of possible fitness outcomes in the environment and differences in pleiotropic effects across environments but can also be predicted from the ancestral growth rate regardless of the environment in which populations evolve.
Interestingly, we also show a negative correlation between increase in an environment X following evolution in environment Y and the increase in environment Y following evolution in environment X.
These results highlight the necessity to measure fitness in both environments when comparing the evolvability or repeatability of evolution across environments.

Related Results

Colonization of a novel host plant reduces phenotypic variation
Colonization of a novel host plant reduces phenotypic variation
Abstract Understanding the evolutionary potential of populations –evolvability– is key to predicting their ability to cope with novel environment...
Abstract PR006: Evolution of evolvability
Abstract PR006: Evolution of evolvability
Abstract The purpose of this work is to better understand how the rate of phenotypic adaptation of cells in a tumor affects its ability to survive treatment. Drug re...
Antagonistic, synergistic, and social pleiotropy in microbial cheaters
Antagonistic, synergistic, and social pleiotropy in microbial cheaters
Abstract Cooperation is widespread among microbes. One mechanism proposed to constrain cheating is antagonistic pleiotropy, wherein mutations tha...
Pleiotropy robust methods for multivariable Mendelian randomization
Pleiotropy robust methods for multivariable Mendelian randomization
AbstractMendelian randomization is a powerful tool for inferring the presence, or otherwise, of causal effects from observational data. However, the nature of genetic variants is s...
The Pleiotropy Hypothesis of Molecular Evolution
The Pleiotropy Hypothesis of Molecular Evolution
Abstract Under the nearly-neutral model of protein evolution, the evolutionary rate is virtually determined by the selection int...
Evolutionary Potential of Herkogamy
Evolutionary Potential of Herkogamy
AbstractHerkogamy, the spatial separation of male and female sexual functions in flowers, is an important floral trait mediating variation in plant mating systems. Understanding th...
Protein Dynamism and Evolvability
Protein Dynamism and Evolvability
The traditional view that proteins possess absolute functional specificity and a single, fixed structure conflicts with their marked ability to adapt and evolve new functions and s...
Molecular Evolution, Mutation Size and Gene Pleiotropy: A Geometric Reexamination
Molecular Evolution, Mutation Size and Gene Pleiotropy: A Geometric Reexamination
Abstract The influence of phenotypic effects of genetic mutations on molecular evolution is not well understood. Neutral and nearly neutral theories of molecular evo...

Back to Top