Back

Product inhibition can accelerate evolution

Ruth, B.; Dittrich, P.

2022-06-17 bioinformatics
10.1101/2022.06.14.496101 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Molecular replicators studied in-vitro exhibit product inhibition, typically caused by the hybridization of products into complexes that are not able to replicate. As a result, the replication rate and the selection pressure is reduced, potentially allowing the "survival of everyone". Here, we introduce a stochastic evolution model of replicating and hybridizing RNA strands to study the effect of product inhibition on evolution. We found that hybridization, though reducing the efficiency of replication, can increase the rate of evolution, measured as fitness gain within a period of time. The positive effect has been observed for a mutation error smaller than half of the error threshold. In this situation, frequency-dependent competition causes an increased diversity that spreads not only within a neutral network but also over various neutral networks through a dynamical modulation of the fitness landscape, resulting in a more effective search for better replicators. The underlying model is inspired by RNA virus replication and the RNA world hypothesis. Further investigations are needed to validate the actual effect of accelerated evolution through product inhibition in those systems.

Matching journals

The top 11 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS Computational Biology
● 1863 papers in training set
Top 4%
8.8%
Similar papers in this journal
2
BMC Bioinformatics
○ 457 papers in training set
Top 2%
5.4%
Similar papers in this journal
3
Scientific Reports
○ 3612 papers in training set
Top 16%
5.4%
Similar papers in this journal
4
Biosystems
○ 31 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
5.1%
Similar papers in this journal
5
Bioinformatics
◐ 1204 papers in training set
Top 4%
4.8%
Similar papers in this journal
6
Computational Biology and Chemistry
○ 28 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.3%
7
Journal of Computational Chemistry
○ 13 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.0%
8
Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal
● 242 papers in training set
Top 1%
4.0%
9
Physical Biology
○ 46 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.4%
10
Journal of Molecular Evolution
○ 22 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.2%
11
Journal of Theoretical Biology
○ 162 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
3.2%
50% of probability mass above
12
F1000Research
○ 88 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
3.2%
13
RNA
● 189 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
2.8%
14
PLOS ONE
● 5266 papers in training set
Top 41%
2.4%
15
PeerJ
◐ 308 papers in training set
Top 4%
2.4%
16
Nucleic Acids Research
◐ 1281 papers in training set
Top 8%
1.9%
17
Molecular Biology and Evolution
◐ 542 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
18
Biophysical Journal
○ 631 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.5%
19
Royal Society Open Science
● 214 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.4%
20
Journal of The Royal Society Interface
● 235 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.4%
21
Physical Review E
● 112 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.3%
22
iScience
○ 1154 papers in training set
Top 27%
1.1%
23
Peer Community Journal
● 281 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.1%
24
Frontiers in Genetics
○ 230 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.0%
25
The Journal of Physical Chemistry B
● 167 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.0%
26
Theoretical Population Biology
○ 50 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.0%
27
International Journal of Molecular Sciences
○ 494 papers in training set
Top 13%
1.0%
28
eLife
● 5828 papers in training set
Top 64%
1.0%
29
Genes
○ 144 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.0%
30
Briefings in Bioinformatics
◐ 354 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.9%

"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.