Author
Listed:
- Ana Filipa Moutinho
- Adam Eyre-Walker
- Julien Y Dutheil
Abstract
Understanding the dynamics of species adaptation to their environments has long been a central focus of the study of evolution. Theories of adaptation propose that populations evolve by “walking” in a fitness landscape. This “adaptive walk” is characterised by a pattern of diminishing returns, where populations further away from their fitness optimum take larger steps than those closer to their optimal conditions. Hence, we expect young genes to evolve faster and experience mutations with stronger fitness effects than older genes because they are further away from their fitness optimum. Testing this hypothesis, however, constitutes an arduous task. Young genes are small, encode proteins with a higher degree of intrinsic disorder, are expressed at lower levels, and are involved in species-specific adaptations. Since all these factors lead to increased protein evolutionary rates, they could be masking the effect of gene age. While controlling for these factors, we used population genomic data sets of Arabidopsis and Drosophila and estimated the rate of adaptive substitutions across genes from different phylostrata. We found that a gene’s evolutionary age significantly impacts the molecular rate of adaptation. Moreover, we observed that substitutions in young genes tend to have larger physicochemical effects. Our study, therefore, provides strong evidence that molecular evolution follows an adaptive walk model across a large evolutionary timescale.This study uses population genomic datasets from Arabidopsis and Drosophila to show that young genes adapt faster and are subject to mutations of larger fitness effects, providing strong evidence that molecular evolution follows an adaptive walk model across a large evolutionary timescale.
Suggested Citation
Ana Filipa Moutinho & Adam Eyre-Walker & Julien Y Dutheil, 2022.
"Strong evidence for the adaptive walk model of gene evolution in Drosophila and Arabidopsis,"
PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 20(9), pages 1-26, September.
Handle:
RePEc:plo:pbio00:3001775
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3001775
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pbio00:3001775. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosbiology (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.