Impacts of mutation effects and population size on mutation rate in asexual populations: a simulation study

Abstract

BackgroundIn any natural population, mutation is the primary source of genetic variation required for evolutionary novelty and adaptation. Nevertheless, most mutations, especially those with phenotypic effects, are harmful and are consequently removed by natural selection. For this reason, under natural selection, an organism will evolve to a lower mutation rate. Overall, the action of natural selection on mutation rate is related to population size and mutation effects. Although theoretical work has intensively investigated the relationship between natural selection and mutation rate, most of these studies have focused on individual competition within a population, rather than on competition among populations. The aim of the present study was to use computer simulations to investigate how natural selection adjusts mutation rate among asexually reproducing subpopulations with different mutation rates.ResultsThe competition results for the different subpopulations showed that a population could evolve to an "optimum" mutation rate during long-term evolution, and that this rate was modulated by both population size and mutation effects. A larger population could evolve to a higher optimum mutation rate than could a smaller population. The optimum mutation rate depended on both the fraction and the effects of beneficial mutations, rather than on the effects of deleterious ones. The optimum mutation rate increased with either the fraction or the effects of beneficial mutations. When strongly favored mutations appeared, the optimum mutation rate was elevated to a much higher level. The competition time among the subpopulations also substantially shortened.ConclusionsCompetition at the population level revealed that the evolution of the mutation rate in asexual populations was determined by both population size and mutation effects. The most striking finding was that beneficial mutations, rather than deleterious mutations, were the leading force that modulated the optimum mutation rate. The initial configuration of the population appeared to have no effect on these conclusions, confirming the robustness of the simulation method developed in the present study. These findings might further explain the lower mutation rates observed in most asexual organisms, as well as the higher mutation rates in some viruses.

Genomic Instability in Cancer: Teetering on the Limit of Tolerance

“…For example, one study found that under fluctuating environmental conditions (e.g. changes in temperature or oxygen availability), the SPM rate increases until it reaches an intolerable level that leads to extinction (32). Importantly, these models suggest that fitness beyond this threshold declines precipitously (7,31).…”

Correlation Between Mutation Rate and Genome Size in Riboviruses: Mutation Rate of Bacteriophage Qβ

“…However, if beneficial mutations are sufficiently strong to offset the effect of deleterious mutations, then U* = s b , where s b is the selection coefficient favoring beneficial mutations (Johnson and Barton 2002). Simulation studies have shown that natural selection can favor higher U when the strength, proportion relative to deleterious mutations, or supply (through changes in population size) of beneficial mutations increases, although this result is dependent on population structure (Jiang et al 2010) and the topology of the fitness landscape (Clune et al 2008). Other studies have shown that selection may favor the maintenance of some level of genetic variability in the population such that long-term evolvability is ensured (Barton 1995;Hayden et al 2011;Wagner 2011).…”

The Silent Cooperator: An Epigenetic Model for Emergence of Altruistic Traits in Biological Systems

“…So why does our model produce a different fate where the cooperative trait fully invades the system? This is due to beneficial mutations being more likely to arise and get fixed as the population grows [32,33]. After the initial expansion, a large population of cooperators will have higher frequency of beneficial gene X mutations than the small defector patches.…”