DOCSLIB.ORG

The Concept of Adaptive Phenotypic Polymorphism in Evolutionary Theory

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Concept of Adaptive Phenotypic Polymorphism in Evolutionary Theory The concept of adaptive phenotypic polymorphism in evolutionary theory Olof Leimar, Stockholm University Polymorphic outcomes in evolutionary games A. Conditional strategy - genetic monomorphism B. Mixed or randomized strategy - can be limit of A (Harsanyi) C. Genetic polymorphism - a version of B? (exemplified by the Hawk-Dove game) • Is there a unifying perspective? – Push the concept of a conditional strategy as far as it can go – Study evolutionary games in structured populations Two traditions in evolutionary theory The phenotypic gambit Population genetics • Adaptationism • Explicit evolutionary dynamics • Evolutionary game theory • Single- or multi-locus models • Life history theory • Quantitative genetics The phenotypic gambit emphasizes evolutionary equilibria Population genetics emphasizes genetic variation The traditions differ in their view on genetic polymorphism Phenotypic gambit: genetic polymorphism is an example of imperfect adaptation (for instance because of constraints) Population genetics: genetic polymorphism is an important issue in itself Can the traditions be united under a single umbrella? Some forgotten ideas about polymorphism The Dobzhansky - Cain & Sheppard - Fisher debate ? Dobzhansky (1951) Genetics and the origin of species Polymorphism as such is frequently adaptive; polymorphism enables a species to exploit the environment more efficiently (referring to genetic polymorphism) Cain & Sheppard (1954) The theory of adaptive polymorphism “This interesting theory may be correct, but it is not clear what is meant by one population being more highly adapted than another to a particular environment” Fisher (1958) Polymorphism and natural selection • "I would not have alluded to this storm in a tea-cup, but for the circumstance that I mean to put forward some ideas on this problem of the possible adaptive value of polymorphisms" • Dobzhansky is essentially right, but the idea traces back to "a little-known book of nearly a hundred years ago, called The Origin of Species" • "I propose to suggest that one way of making this intricate system intelligible to the human mind is by the analogy of games of skill, or to speak somewhat more pretentiously, of the Theory of Games" (referring to species interactions, like those between predator and prey) • Balanced polymorphism can be viewed as a randomized strategy in a game Genetic polymorphism regarded as a randomized strategy Dobzhansky (1951) on adaptive polymorphism "... polymorphism within a species, or any other kind of diversity of sympatric forms, increases the efficiency of the exploitation of the resources of the environment by the living matter. A single genotype, no matter how versatile, could hardly function with maximal efficiency in all environments. Hence, natural selection has preserved a variety of genotypes, more or less specialized to render the organism efficient in a certain range of the existing environments." Evolutionary ecology perspective Alternative phenotypes Members of a population fall Phenotypic polymorphism into two or more fairly distinct categories (morphs) with respect to some of their traits Three systems of phenotype determination genetic environmental random (combinations possible) • Look for general evolutionary theory of phenotype determination – Important idea: genetic variation can act as an adaptive cue for phenotype determination Phenotypic polymorphism Levins, 1968, Changing Environments • Basic idea: advantage from specialization – compared to generalist phenotype • An advantage can arise in different ways – varied environments (in space or time), local frequency dependence, competitive character displacement • Good to match phenotype to conditions – this is the basic idea for both adaptive phenotypic plasticity and local genetic adaptation Hoplothrips Ambystoma Sketch of phenotype determination morph 1 genetic recent genotype cue selection switching device environment environmental cue morph 2 Developmental switching genotypic environmental random (combinations) Switching can be adaptive Sketch of phenotype determination morph 1 genetic recent genotype cue selection switching device environment environmental cue morph 2 • Genetic variation can act as adaptive cue for switching – predictor of the coming selective conditions • Environmental variation can act as adaptive cue in the same manner • Random variation – produced by switching device – component of genetic or environmental variation – can regulate morph frequencies Genetic variation as input to a strategy? Alleles at polymorphic locus Genes coding for switching device morph 1 genetic recent genotype cue selection switching device environment environmental cue morph 2 From the point of view of adaptation of the switching device, environmental and genetic cues may play similar roles Consequences of genetic variability at certain loci can be seen as input to a developmental switch Simplest possible example: two selective conditions (two habitats) and binary cues Habitats 1 and 2: Low and High predation risk Pi proportion of patches with habitat i z1 z2 alternative phenotypes sik survival in habitat i of zk y binary environmental cue ui probability y = i in habitat i m rate of migration Non-overlapping generations, haploid genetics Each individual observes independent copy of cue • reproduction in each patch • observation of cue and then development • trait-based selection • density regulation to carrying capacity • migration through dispersal pool Assume s11 = s22 = 1, s12 = s21 = s, u1 = u2 = u z1 z2 Invasion analysis Eigenvalue problem for invasion of mutant into resident population " >1 "w1 = (1# m1)r1w1 + m1r2w2 "w2 = m2r1w1 + (1# m2)r2w2 " <!1 m1 = mP2, m2 = mP1, ri = si si si = mutant survival, si = resident survival ! ! Example P1 = P2 = 0.5 ! resident is environmental determination environmental mutant is z1 (specialist on habitat 1) ! s1 =1, s2 = s, s1 = s2 = u + (1" u)s Normalization: P1w1 + P2w2 =1 genetic Pw + P w s ! " = rPw + r P w " = 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 u + (1# u)s Leimar, Hamm!e rstein and Van Dooren (2006) ! ! Conditional strategy interpretation An individual has a “genetic cue locus”, with at most two alleles, and another locus coding for a “switching device” Switching devices: Se pure environmental phenotype determination Sg pure genetic phenotype determination S1ge develop z1 when allele 1 is present at cue locus, otherwise use environmental determination S2ge develop z2 when allele 2 is present at cue locus, otherwise use environmental determination A strategy is uninvadable if no other strategy is better at predicting coming selective conditions (habitat) General problem of a binary choice based on two binary cues E-cue G-cue Se Sg S1ge S2ge 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 2 1 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Claim: The evolutionary outcome can be interpreted as an optimal decision rule based on environmental and genetic cues Next example: alternative male mating types Habitats 1 and 2: Low and High population density Pi proportion of patches with habitat i S F alternative phenotypes (Searcher, Fighter) fi probability of fighting interaction in habitat i V value of winning C injury cost of losing a fight x male growth rate (potential fighting ability) p(x,y) probability of winning for x against y m rate of migration p(x,y) = 0.5 [1 + u (x - y)] x and y are iid uniform on (0,1) u is a payoff relevance parameter Strategy: become F when x > xk xk is a threshold for switching Possible outcomes: Searcher Fighter • a single threshold x0 Hoplothrips • genetic polymorphism x1, x2 x Some results for the male 2 x0 mating type example Depending on the parameters, we can have x1 • a single evolutionarily stable threshold x0 (pure environmental determination) • a genetic polymorphism with x1, x2 at 0 and 1 (pure genetic determination) • a genetic polymorphism with 0 < x1, x2 < 1 (combined environmental and genetic) Interpretation: The environmental cue x can inform a male abut how likely he is to win a fight Frequency in each habitat of x1 With genetic polymorphism, a male’s genotype can be though of as a habitat cue Different cues (like environmental and genetic) may predict different aspects of coming selective conditions Leimar, McNamara and Cuthill, in prep. Summary and conclusion • A developmental machinery can evolve to make efficient use of both genetic and environmental cues • The availability of a genetic cue depends on the selective maintenance of polymorphism at genetic cue loci • The presence of this polymorphism need not be guided by the well-being of the organism • Nevertheless, both genetic and environmental phenotype determination can be viewed as conditional strategies Fully resolves the polymorphism debate from the 1950’s Genetic variation can play a part in an adaptive device for the organism Genetic polymorphism can be integrated into the phenotypic gambit .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • ENZYME POLYMORPHISM and ADAPTATION ( Enzyme Polymorphism, Electrophor Esis, Neutral Hypothesis)
    STADLER SYMP. Vo l . 7 ( 1 975) University of Missouri, Columbia - 91 ENZYME POLYMORPHISM AND ADAPTATION ( enzyme polymorphism, electrophor esis, neutral hypothesis) GEORGE B. JOHNSON Depa rtment of Biology Washin gt on University St. Louis, Missouri 631 30 SUMMARY After a brief resume of the controversy concerning the adaptive value of enzyme polymorphisms , a physiological hypo­ thesis is advanced that heterosis for enzymes of intermediary metabolism results from the differential kinetic behavior of the alleles, which in heterozygotes serve to buffer rate - deter­ mining reactions from environmental perturbations . Polymor­ phism within a population of alpine butterflies is examined in some detail , and the results strongly implicate ongoing selec­ tive processes. A more detailed understanding would seem to require more pointed in vivo physiological analyses of the polymorphic variants. A characterization of the physical na­ ture of the electrophoretic variants suggests that many vari ­ ants do not involve a charge difference , while almost all in­ volve a significant conformational difference. The value of explicit error estimates associated with each data characteri ­ zation is stressed throughout. INTRODUCTION With the extensive use in the last ten years of zone elec­ trophoresis as a genetic survey technique, it has become clear that level s of genet ic variability are quite h i gh in natural populations. The average levels of heterozygosity exceed 10% , 30% of examined loci are polymorphic . Thi s degree of varia­ bility is much higher than had been expected, and its inter­ pretation has become one of the central questions of popula­ tion genetics. Kimura and others have advanced the idea that this level of genetic variation reflects random events , the polymorphic enzyme alleles detected by electrophoresis actually having 92 JOHNSON little or no differential effect on fitness.
    [Show full text]
  • Polymorphism Under Apostatic
    Heredity (1984), 53(3), 677—686 1984. The Genetical Society of Great Britain POLYMORPHISMUNDER APOSTATIC AND APOSEMATIC SELECTION VINTON THOMPSON Department of Biology, Roosevelt University, 430 South Michigan Avenue, Chicago, Illinois 60805 USA Received31 .i.84 SUMMARY Selection for warning colouration in well-defended species should lead to a single colour form in each local population, but some species are locally polymor- phic for aposematic colour forms. Single-locus two-allele models of frequency- dependent selection indicate that combined apostatic and aposematic selection may maintain stable polymorphism for one, two or three aposematic forms, provided that at least one form is subject to net apostatic selection. Frequency- independent selective differences between colour forms broaden the possibilities for aposematic polymorphism but lead to monomorphism if too large. Concurrent apostatic and aposematic selection may explain polymorphism for warning colouration in a number of jumping or moderately unpalatable insects. 1. INTRODUCTION Polymorphism for warning colouration poses a paradox for evolutionists because, as Fisher (1958) seems to have been the first to note, selection for warning colouration (aposematic selection) should lead to monomorphism. Under aposematic selection predators tend to avoid previously encountered phenotypes of undesirable prey, so that the fitness of each phenotype increases as it becomes more common. Given the presence of two forms, each will suffer at the hands of predators conditioned to avoid the other and one will eventually prevail because as soon as it gets the upper hand numerically it will drive the other to extinction. Nonetheless, many species are polymorphic for colour forms that appear to be aposematic. The ladybird beetles (Coccinellidae) furnish a number of particularly striking examples (Hodek, 1973; and see illustration in Ayala, 1978).
    [Show full text]
  • I Xio- and Made the Rather Curious Assumption That the Mutant Is
    NOTES AND COMMENTS NATURAL SELECTION AND THE EVOLUTION OF DOMINANCE P. M. SHEPPARD Deportment of Genetics, University of Liverpool and E.B. FORD Genetic Laboratories, Department of Zoology, Oxford 1. INTRODUCTION CROSBY(i 963) criticises the hypothesis that dominance (or recessiveness) has evolved and is not an attribute of the allelomorph when it arose for the first time by mutation. None of his criticisms is new and all have been discussed many times. However, because of a number of apparent mis- understandings both in previous discussions and in Crosby's paper, and the fact that he does not refer to some important arguments opposed to his own view, it seems necessary to reiterate some of the previous discussion. Crosby's criticisms fall into two parts. Firstly, he maintains, as did Wright (1929a, b) and Haldane (1930), that the selective advantage of genes modifying dominance, being of the same order of magnitude as the mutation rate, is too small to have any evolutionary effect. Secondly, he criticises, as did Wright (5934), the basic assumption that a new mutation when it first arises produces a phenotype somewhat intermediate between those of the two homozygotes. 2.THE SELECTION COEFFICIENT INVOLVED IN THE EVOLUTION OF DOMINANCE Thereis no doubt that the selective advantage of modifiers of dominance is of the order of magnitude of the mutation rate of the gene being modified. Crosby (p. 38) considered a hypothetical example with a mutation rate of i xio-and made the rather curious assumption that the mutant is dominant in the absence of modifiers of dominance.
    [Show full text]
  • Gene Mutation and DNA Polymorphism Outline of This Chapter
    Gene mutation and DNA polymorphism Outline of this chapter Gene Mutation DNA Polymorphism GeneGene MutationMutation Definition Major Types DefinitionDefinition A gene mutation is a change in the nucleotide sequence that composes a gene. Somatic mutations Germline mutations SomaticSomatic mutationsmutations are mutations that occur in cells of the body excluding the germline. Affects subsequent somatic cell descendants Limited to impact on the individual and not transmitted to offspring Germline mutations are mutations that occur in the germline cells Possibility of transmission to offspring Major Types Point mutations Insertion or deletion Fusion gene Dynamic mutation Point mutation substitution of one base with another Point mutation Transition purine replaces purine A G or pyrimidine replaces pyrimidine C T Transversion purine replaces pyrimidine A G or pyrimidine replaces purine C T What are the consequences? Within coding region: Silent mutation (same sense mutation) Missense mutation Nonsense mutation Stop codon mutation Within noncoding region: Splicing mutation Regulatory sequence mutation SilentSilent MutationMutation changes one codon for an amino acid to another codon for that amino acid no change in amino acid MissenseMissense mutationmutation A point mutation that exchanges one codon for another causing substitution of an amino acid Missense mutations may affect protein function severely, mildly or not at all. CGT AGT Hemoglobin Four globular proteins surrounding heme group with iron atom: two beta chains and two alpha chains Function is to carry oxygen in red blood cells from lungs to body and carbon dioxide from cells to lungs SingleSingle basebase changechange inin hemoglobinhemoglobin genegene causescauses sicklesickle cellcell anemiaanemia Wild-type mutant allele allele Wild-type mutant phenotype phenotype NonsenseNonsense mutationmutation A point mutation changing a codon for an amino acid into a stop codon (UAA, UAG or UGA).
    [Show full text]
  • Population Genetics of Polymorphism and Divergence Stanley A
    Population Genetics of Polymorphism and Divergence Stanley A. Sawyer∗, † and Daniel L. Hartl† ∗Department of Mathematics, Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri 63130, †Department of Genetics, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri 63110 November 3, 1992 ABSTRACT Frequencies of mutant sites are modeled as a Poisson random field in two species that share a sufficiently recent common ancestor. The selective effect of the new alleles can be favorable, neutral, or detrimental. The model is applied to the sample configurations of nucleotides in the alcohol dehydrogenase gene (Adh) in Drosophila simulans and D. yakuba (McDonald and Kreitman 1991, Nature 351: 652–654). Assuming a synonymous mutation rate of 1.5 × 10−8 per site per year and 10 generations per year, we obtain 6 estimates for the effective population size (Ne =6.5 × 10 ), the species divergence time −6 (tdiv =3.74 Myr), and an average selection coefficient (σ =1.53 × 10 per generation for advantageous or mildly detrimental replacements), although it is conceivable that only two of the amino acid replacements were selected and the rest neutral. The analysis, which includes a sampling theory for the independent infinite sites model with selection, also suggests the estimate that the number of amino acids in the enzyme that are susceptible to favorable mutation is in the range 2–23 out of 257 total possible codon positions at any one time. The approach provides a theoretical basis for the use of a 2 × 2 contingency table to compare fixed differences and polymorphic sites with silent sites and amino acid replacements. t has been more than 25 years since Lewontin have been more at odds, and a great controversy en- I and Hubby (1966) first demonstrated high levels sued.
    [Show full text]
  • Speciation Genetics: Evolving Approaches
    REVIEWS Speciation genetics: evolving approaches Mohamed A. F. Noor* and Jeffrey L. Feder‡ Abstract | Much progress has been made in the past two decades in understanding Darwin’s mystery of the origins of species. Applying genomic techniques to the analysis of laboratory crosses and natural populations has helped to determine the genetic basis of barriers to gene flow which create new species. Although new methodologies have not changed the prevailing hypotheses about how species form, they have accelerated the pace of data collection. By facilitating the compilation of case studies, advances in genetic techniques will help to provide answers to the next generation of questions concerning the relative frequency and importance of different processes that cause speciation. Gene flow What types of genetic change bring about speciation is sophisticated methods has led to finer dissection of the The movement of alleles one of the most basic questions in biology. Speciation is a genetic origins of species down to the level of the indi- between local populations that fundamental outcome of life. Given metabolism, repro- vidual loci and eventually nucleotides. Technical and is due to the migration of duction, mutation, heredity, and the spatial–temporal statistical advances are also extending laboratory-based individuals. subdivision of the environment and of individuals into discovery to natural populations, allowing researchers Hybrid zone populations, new species form through time, increasing to investigate barriers to gene flow, genomic interactions A location where the hybrid biodiversity. The evolution of this biodiversity can only and the genetic permeability of species boundaries in offspring of two divergent, be fully explained if we identify the heritable underpin- hybrid zones where differentiated taxa overlap and inter- partially geographically nings of species formation and the forces responsible breed.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 23: Population Genetics (Microevolution)  Microevolution Is a Change in Allele Frequencies Or Genotype Frequencies in a Population Over Time
    Chapter 23: Population Genetics (Microevolution) Microevolution is a change in allele frequencies or genotype frequencies in a population over time Genetic equilibrium in populations: the Hardy-Weinberg theorem Microevolution is deviation from Hardy- Weinberg equilibrium Genetic variation must exist for natural selection to occur . • Explain what terms in the Hardy- Weinberg equation give: – allele frequencies (dominant allele, recessive allele, etc.) – each genotype frequency (homozygous dominant, heterozygous, etc.) – each phenotype frequency . Chapter 23: Population Genetics (Microevolution) Microevolution is a change in allele frequencies or genotype frequencies in a population over time Genetic equilibrium in populations: the Hardy-Weinberg theorem Microevolution is deviation from Hardy- Weinberg equilibrium Genetic variation must exist for natural selection to occur . Microevolution is a change in allele frequencies or genotype frequencies in a population over time population – a localized group of individuals capable of interbreeding and producing fertile offspring, and that are more or less isolated from other such groups gene pool – all alleles present in a population at a given time phenotype frequency – proportion of a population with a given phenotype genotype frequency – proportion of a population with a given genotype allele frequency – proportion of a specific allele in a population . Microevolution is a change in allele frequencies or genotype frequencies in a population over time allele frequency – proportion of a specific allele in a population diploid individuals have two alleles for each gene if you know genotype frequencies, it is easy to calculate allele frequencies example: population (1000) = genotypes AA (490) + Aa (420) + aa (90) allele number (2000) = A (490x2 + 420) + a (420 + 90x2) = A (1400) + a (600) freq[A] = 1400/2000 = 0.70 freq[a] = 600/2000 = 0.30 note that the sum of all allele frequencies is 1.0 (sum rule of probability) .
    [Show full text]
  • Speciation As a Sieve for Ancestral Polymorphism
    bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/155176; this version posted June 25, 2017. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under aCC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license. 1 Speciation as a Sieve for Ancestral Polymorphism 1,* 1,2 2 Rafael F. Guerrero and Matthew W. Hahn 3 1 Department of Biology, Indiana University, 1001 E Third St, Bloomington, IN 47405, USA 4 2 School of Informatics and Computing, Indiana University, 1001 E Third St, Bloomington, IN 47405, USA 5 * Corresponding author: [email protected] 6 7 Keywords: balancing selection, genomic divergence, allopatric speciation, differential gene flow 8 9 Running title: Balanced polymorphisms sieved by speciation 10 11 bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/155176; this version posted June 25, 2017. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under aCC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license. 12 Studying the process of speciation using patterns of genomic divergence between 13 species requires that we understand the determinants of genetic diversity within 14 species. Because sequence diversity in an ancestral population determines the starting 15 point from which divergent populations accumulate differences (Gillespie & Langley 16 1979), any evolutionary forces that shape diversity within species can have a large 17 impact on measures of divergence between species.
    [Show full text]
  • Serotonin Transporter Polyadenylation Polymorphism Modulates the Retention of Fear Extinction Memory
    Serotonin transporter polyadenylation polymorphism modulates the retention of fear extinction memory Catherine A. Hartleya,1, Morgan C. McKennab, Rabia Salmana, Andrew Holmesc, B. J. Caseyd, Elizabeth A. Phelpsa,e, and Charles E. Glattb,1 aDepartment of Psychology and eCenter for Neural Science, New York University, New York, NY 10003; bDepartment of Psychiatry and dThe Sackler Institute for Developmental Psychobiology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY 10065; and cLaboratory of Behavioral and Genomic Neuroscience, National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, Bethesda, MD 20852-9411 Edited by Michael Posner, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR, and approved February 21, 2012 (received for review February 3, 2012) Growing evidence suggests serotonin’s role in anxiety and depres- of extinction memory may underlie serotonin’s effects on anxiety sion is mediated by its effects on learned fear associations. Pharma- and depression. cological and genetic manipulations of serotonin signaling in mice Research in animal models provides strong evidence for this alter the retention of fear extinction learning, which is inversely hypothesis. Genetic knockout of the serotonin transporter (5- associated with anxious temperament in mice and humans. Here, HTT) increases anxiety and depression-related behavior in the we test whether genetic variation in serotonin signaling in the form mouse (12). Furthermore, during fear conditioning, 5-HTT knock- of a common human serotonin transporter polyadenylation poly- out mice show normal acquisition and initial extinction learning, morphism (STPP/rs3813034) is associated with spontaneous fear but exhibit a selective deficit in extinction recall (13, 14) accom- recovery after extinction. We show that the risk allele of this poly- panied by abnormal neuronal morphology in regions that support morphism is associated with impaired retention of fear extinction extinction retention (9, 13).
    [Show full text]
  • Balancing Selection Via Life-History Trade-Offs Maintains an Inversion Polymorphism in a Seaweed fly
    ARTICLE https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-14479-7 OPEN Balancing selection via life-history trade-offs maintains an inversion polymorphism in a seaweed fly Claire Mérot 1*, Violaine Llaurens 2, Eric Normandeau 1, Louis Bernatchez 1,5 & Maren Wellenreuther 3,4,5 1234567890():,; How natural diversity is maintained is an evolutionary puzzle. Genetic variation can be eroded by drift and directional selection but some polymorphisms persist for long time periods, implicating a role for balancing selection. Here, we investigate the maintenance of a chro- mosomal inversion polymorphism in the seaweed fly Coelopa frigida. Using experimental evolution and quantifying fitness, we show that the inversion underlies a life-history trade-off, whereby each haplotype has opposing effects on larval survival and adult reproduction. Numerical simulations confirm that such antagonistic pleiotropy can maintain polymorphism. Our results also highlight the importance of sex-specific effects, dominance and environ- mental heterogeneity, whose interaction enhances the maintenance of polymorphism through antagonistic pleiotropy. Overall, our findings directly demonstrate how over- dominance and sexual antagonism can emerge from a life-history trade-off, inviting recon- sideration of antagonistic pleiotropy as a key part of multi-headed balancing selection processes that enable the persistence of genetic variation. 1 Département de biologie, Institut de Biologie Intégrative et des Systèmes (IBIS), Université Laval, 1030 Avenue de la Médecine, G1V 0A6 Quebec, Canada. 2 Institut de Systématique, Evolution et Biodiversité (UMR 7205 CNRS/MNHN/SU/EPHE), Museum National d’Histoire Naturelle, CP50, 57 rue Cuvier, 75005 Paris, France. 3 The New Zealand Institute for Plant & Food Research Ltd, PO Box 5114Port Nelson, Nelson 7043, New Zealand.
    [Show full text]
  • Genetic Diversity Polymorphism Population Genetics Microevolution
    Evolution and Medicine • Evolution of the Genomes • Genetic Diversity and Polymorphism • Evolutionary Mechanisms Ø Microevolution vs Macroevolution Ø Population Genetics Ø Evolution and Medicine Personalized genomics PLoS Biology | www.plosbiology.org October 2007 | Volume 5 | Issue 10 From an individual to a population • It took a long time (20-25 yrs) to produce the draft sequence of the human genome. • Soon (within 5-10 years), entire populations can have their DNA sequenced. Why do we care? • Individual genomes vary by about 1 in 1000bp. • These small variations account for significant phenotype differences. • Disease susceptibility. • Response to drugs are just few but important examples • How can we understand genetic variation in a population, and its consequences? Population Genetics • Individuals in a species (population) are phenotypically different. • These differences are inherited (genetic). Understanding the genetic basis of these differences is a key challenge of biology! • The analysis of these differences involves many interesting algorithmic questions. • We will use these questions to illustrate algorithmic principles, and use algorithms to interpret genetic data. Variation in DNA • The DNA is inherited by the child from its parent. • The copying is not identical, but might be mutated. • If the mutation lies in a gene,…. • Different proteins are produced but not only proteins • Genes are switched on or off • Different phenotype. Random Drift and Natural selectionThree outcomes of mutations • Darwin suggested the following: • Organisms compete for finite resources. • Organisms with favorable characteristics are more likely to reproduce, leading to fixation of favorable mutations (Natural selection). • Over time, the accumulation of many changes suitable to an environment leads to speciation if there is Lethalisolation.
    [Show full text]
  • Molecular Polymorphism: How Much Is There and Why Is There So Much?
    UC Irvine UC Irvine Previously Published Works Title Molecular polymorphism: How much is there and why is there so much? Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/86g5m66g Journal Developmental Genetics, 4(4) ISSN 0192-253X Author Ayala, FJ Publication Date 1983 DOI 10.1002/dvg.1020040412 License https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ 4.0 Peer reviewed eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California Developmental Genetics 4:379-391 (1984) Molecular Polymorphism: How Much Is There and Why Is There So Much?* Francisco J. Ayala Department of Genetics, University of California, Davis The evidence for genetic variation can be traced to Mendel’s experiments: The discovery of the laws of heredity was made possible by the expression of segregating alleles. Since that time, the study of genetic variation in natural populations has been characterized by a gradual discovery of ever-increasing amounts of genetic variation. In the early decades of this century geneticists thought that an individual is homozygous at most gene loci and that individuals of the same species are genetically almost identical. Recent discoveries suggest that, at least in outcrossing organisms, the DNA sequences inherited one from each parent are likely to be different for nearly every gene locus in every individual: ie, that every individual may be heterozygous at most, if not all, gene loci. But the efforts to obtain precise estimates of genetic variation have been thwarted for various reasons. Key words: genetic variation, molecular evolution, natural selection, DNA polymorphism INTRODUCTION This paper consists of two parts. First, I review the question of how much molecular genetic variation exists in natural populations.
    [Show full text]