Shifts in mutation spectra enhance access to beneficial mutations
Sane, M.; Diwan, G. D.; Bhat, B. A.; Wahl, L. M.; Agashe, D.
Show abstract
Biased mutation spectra are pervasive, with wide variation in the magnitude of mutational biases that influence genome evolution and adaptation. How do such diverse biases evolve? Our experiments show that changing the mutation spectrum allows populations to sample previously under-sampled mutational space, including beneficial mutations. The resulting shift in the distribution of fitness effects is advantageous: beneficial mutation supply and beneficial pleiotropy both increase, while deleterious load reduces. More broadly, simulations indicate that reducing or reversing the direction of a long-term bias is always selectively favoured. Such changes in mutation bias can occur easily via altered function of DNA repair genes. A phylogenetic analysis shows that these genes are repeatedly gained and lost in bacterial lineages, leading to frequent bias shifts in opposite directions. Thus, shifts in mutation spectra may evolve under selection, and can directly alter the outcome of adaptive evolution by facilitating access to beneficial mutations. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENTMutations are important because they provide raw material for evolution. Some types of mutations occur more often than others, and the strength of such mutational bias varies across species. It is not clear how this variation arises. We experimentally measured the immediate effects of changing the mutation bias of E. coli, and used simulations to understand the long-term effects. Altering mutational bias is beneficial whenever the new bias increases sampling of mutational classes that were previously under-sampled. We also show that historically, bacteria have often experienced such beneficial bias switches. Our work thus demonstrates the importance of mutational biases in evolution. By allowing exploration of new mutational space, altered mutation biases could drive rapid adaptation.
Matching journals
The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.