The evolution of genetic drift over 50,000 generations
Ascensao, J. A.; Yu, Q.; Hallatschek, O.
Show abstract
Random variation in reproductive success--genetic drift--profoundly shapes genetic diversity and evolutionary trajectories. The strength of drift depends on the variance in descendant number, [Formula], which governs key evolutionary outcomes: for instance, the establishment probability of a beneficial mutation scales inversely with [Formula]. However, whether [Formula] itself evolves over long timescales has remained unclear, because allele-frequency fluctuations depend on drift only through the effective population size, [Formula], which blends census population size with descendant-number variance. Here, we disentangle these components by using model-based Bayesian inference combined with joint tracking of (i) frequency fluctuations of neutrally barcoded lineages and (ii) census population sizes across growth cycles in the E. coli Long-Term Evolution Experiment. Analyzing 33 clones spanning the ancestor through 50,000 generations in two replicate populations (Ara-2 and Ara+2), we find that the strength of genetic drift evolved markedly--and divergently--between the two replicate populations. Both census size and [Formula] changed substantially through time, with most variation in Ne driven by shifts in [Formula] rather than census size. After approximately 2,000 generations, the [Formula] of the two populations diverged sharply: Ara+2 generally remained close to a bottleneck-only null expectation, whereas Ara-2 exhibited 1.5-5xstronger drift, consistent with an evolved increase in stochasticity during growth. Because establishment probability scales as [Formula], a beneficial mutation of given effect is roughly twice as likely to establish in Ara+2 as in Ara-2. Our results demonstrate that the key parameter governing genetic drift can itself evolve, with direct consequences for adaptation.
Matching journals
The top 4 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.