4.5 Article

Identifying Drivers of Parallel Evolution: A Regression Model Approach

期刊

GENOME BIOLOGY AND EVOLUTION
卷 10, 期 10, 页码 2801-2812

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/gbe/evy210

关键词

parallel evolution; experimental evolution; Poisson regression; negative binomial regression

资金

  1. European Research Council under the European Union [311341]
  2. European Research Council (ERC) [311341] Funding Source: European Research Council (ERC)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Parallel evolution, defined as identical changes arising in independent populations, is often attributed to similar selective pressures favoring the fixation of identical genetic changes. However, some level of parallel evolution is also expected if mutation rates are heterogeneous across regions of the genome. Theory suggests that mutation and selection can have equal impacts on patterns of parallel evolution; however, empirical studies have yet to jointly quantify the importance of these two processes. Here, we introduce several statistical models to examine the contributions of mutation and selection heterogeneity to shaping parallel evolutionary changes at the gene-level. Using this framework, we analyze published data from forty experimentally evolved Saccharomyces cerevisiae populations. We can partition the effects of a number of genomic variables into those affecting patterns of parallel evolution via effects on the rate of arising mutations, and those affecting the retention versus loss of the arising mutations (i.e., selection). Our results suggest that gene-to-gene heterogeneity in both mutation and selection, associated with gene length, recombination rate, and number of protein domains drive parallel evolution at both synonymous and nonsynonymous sites. While there are still a number of parallel changes that are not well described, we show that allowing for heterogeneous rates of mutation and selection can provide improved predictions of the prevalence and degree of parallel evolution.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据