Long-term response to selection predictable regardless of genetic architecture

April 5, 2016
Long-term response to selection predictable regardless of genetic architecture
This gradient indicates the epistatic variance in a two-gene system. Credit: © Tiago Paixao

In their latest publication in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) Tiago Paixao, Postdoc, and Nick Barton, Professor at the Institute of Science and Technology (IST) Austria addressed the controversial role of gene interactions (or epistasis), where the effect of one gene is affected by the presence of other genes, in the response to selection for two extremely different scenarios of evolutionary mechanisms. Evolutionary biologists so far argued over the role of epistasis on adaptation: while its effects on the short-term response are small, some argue that these can accumulate to produce large effects in the long-term.

By asking the question how much the mean of a complex genetic trait can be increased by selection, Paixao and Barton show the impact of epistasis in two different regimes, when either genetic drift or selection dominate the dynamics of allele frequencies.

In the first scenario the dynamics of the allele frequencies are dominated by the mechanism of , which means a purely random change in the frequency of gene variant instead of favoring the best or "fittest" variant. The long-term response in this case can be predicted in a surprisingly simple way as it depends only on the initial components of the trait variance, regardless of the genetic architecture.

In the second scenario, allele frequencies change only due to their effect on the trait but, due to epistasis, this effect changes as the population adapts. The scientists show that epistasis can only affect the long-term response if the sign of this effect changes during the response (what they call an allelic reversal) which depends on the pattern of . They show that, in contrast with the previous scenario, the initial variance components are not predictive of these allelic reversals and hence, of the long-term response.

Both scenarios have in common that, if there is no systematic bias for the gene interactions, epistasis can only increase the long-term response to selection.

Explore further: Getting a step ahead of pathogens

More information: Tiago Paixão et al. The effect of gene interactions on the long-term response to selection, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (2016). DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1518830113

Related Stories

Getting a step ahead of pathogens

July 27, 2010

A recent article in the journal Chaos examines the possibility of using epistasis to predict the outcome of the evolutionary processes, especially when the evolving units are pathogens such as viruses.

Genetic study tackles mystery of slow plant domestications

April 18, 2014

(Phys.org) —"The Modern View of Domestication," a special feature of The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) published April 29, raises a number of startling questions about a transition in our deep history ...

New gene drive technology evokes hopes and fears

October 2, 2015

The idea of introducing a novel gene into a few individuals that then spreads through an entire population sounds like a premise for science fiction. And yet fiction can be prophetic.

Hitting the borders of expansion

May 5, 2015

Why does a species not adapt to an ever-wider range of conditions, gradually expanding its geographical range? In their paper published on May 5 in PNAS (Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences), Jitka Polechova and ...

Recommended for you

Even wild mammals have regional dialects

December 13, 2017

Researchers from Cardiff University's Otter Project have discovered that genetically distinct populations of wild otters from across the UK have their own regional odours for communicating vital information to each other. ...

1 comment

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

ogg_ogg
1 / 5 (1) Apr 05, 2016
You can predict the outcome of genetic drift? If you can, it isn't random; if it isn't random, it isn't genetic drift. Or am I mistaken? Perhaps the writer blundered and wrote "predict" when s/he meant "model"?

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.