Genetic architecture and the evolution of sex

Journal of Heredity

Volumn 101, Issue SUPPL. 1, 2010, Pages

  Lohaus, Rolf ^a   Burch, Christina L ^b   Azevedo, Ricardo B R ^a  

^a University of Houston   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA   (United States)

Author keywords

Canalization; Directional epistasis; Gene regulatory networks; Recombination load; Robustness

Indexed keywords

ASEXUAL REPRODUCTION; CONFERENCE PAPER; GENETIC SELECTION; GENETIC VARIABILITY; GENOTYPE; MUTATIONAL ANALYSIS; NONHUMAN; PHENOTYPE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SEXUAL DEVELOPMENT; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; COMPUTER SIMULATION; EPISTASIS; EVOLUTION; GENE REGULATORY NETWORK; GENETIC RECOMBINATION; GENETICS; MUTATION; REPRODUCTIVE FITNESS; SEX;

COMPUTER SIMULATION; EPISTASIS, GENETIC; EVOLUTION; GENE REGULATORY NETWORKS; GENETIC FITNESS; MODELS, GENETIC; MUTATION; RECOMBINATION, GENETIC; SELECTION, GENETIC; SEX; BIOLOGICAL EVOLUTION;

EID: 77951999340     PISSN: 00221503     EISSN: 14657333     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/jhered/esq013     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (62)

1. Azevedo R B R, Lohaus R, Srinivasan S, Dang KK, Burch CL. 2006. Sexual reproduction selects for robustness and negative epistasis in artificial gene networks. Nature. 440:87-90.
2. Barton NH. 1995. A general model for the evolution of recombination. Genet Res. 65:123-145.
3. Bell G. 1982. The masterpiece of nature: the evolution and genetics of sexuality. Berkeley (CA): University of California Press.
4. Burch CL, Chao L. 2000. Evolvability of an RNA virus is determined by its mutational neighbourhood. Nature. 406:625-628.
5. Burch CL, Chao L. 2004. Epistasis and its relationship to canalization in the RNA virus 6. Genetics. 167:559-567.
6. Burt A. 2000. Perspective: sex, recombination, and the efficacy of selection-was Weismann right? Evolution. 54:337-351.
7. Butcher D. 1995. Muller's ratchet, epistasis and mutation effects. Genetics. 141:431-437.
8. Charlesworth B. 1990. Mutation-selection balance and the evolutionary advantage of sex and recombination. Genet Res. 55:199-221.
9. Charlesworth B, Barton NH. 1996. Recombination load associated with selection for increased recombination. Genet Res. 67:27-41.
10. Crawley MJ. 2002. Statistical computing: an introduction to data analysis using S-Plus. Chichester (UK): Wiley.
11. Crow JF, Kimura M. 1965. Evolution in sexual and asexual populations. Am Nat. 99:439-450.
12. de Visser J A G M, Elena SF. 2007. The evolution of sex: empirical insights into the roles of epistasis and drift. Nat Rev Genet. 8:139-149.
13. Desai MM, Weissman D, Feldman MW. 2007. Evolution can favor antagonistic epistasis. Genetics. 177:1001-1010.
14. Dobzhansky T, Levene H, Spassky B, Spassky N. 1959. Release of genetic variability through recombination. III. Drosophila prosaltans. Genetics. 44:75-92.
15. Drummond DA, Silberg JJ, Meyer MM, Wilke CO, Arnold FH. 2005. On the conservative nature of intragenic recombination. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 102:5380-5385.
16. Feldman M, Christiansen F, Brooks L. 1980. Evolution of recombination in a constant environment. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 77:4838-4841.
17. Feldman MW. 1972. Selection for linkage modification. I. Random mating populations. Theor Popul Biol. 3:324-346.
18. Felsenstein J. 1974. The evolutionary advantage of recombination. Genetics. 78:737-756.
19. Gordo I, Campos P R A. 2008. Sex and deleterious mutations. Genetics. 179:621-626.
20. Graur D, Li WH. 2000. Fundamentals of molecular evolution. 2nd ed. Sunderland (MA): Sinauer.
21. Haldane J B S. 1937. The effect of variation of fitness. Am Nat. 71:337-349.
22. Hansen TF. 2006. The evolution of genetic architecture. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst. 37:123-157.
23. Hill WG, Robertson A. 1966. The effect of linkage on limits to artificial selection. Genet Res. 8:269-294.
24. Iles MM, Walters K, Cannings C. 2003. Recombination can evolve in large finite populations given selection on sufficient loci. Genetics. 165:2249-2258.
25. Jaeger J, Blagov M, Kosman D, Kozlov KN, Manu, Myasnikova E, Surkova S, Vanario-Alonso CE, Samsonova M, Sharp DH, et al. 2004. Dynamical analysis of regulatory interactions in the gap gene system of Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics. 167:1721-1737.
26. Jasnos L, Korona R. 2007. Epistatic buffering of fitness loss in yeast double deletion strains. Nat Genet. 39:550-554.
27. Kassen R, Bataillon T. 2006. Distribution of fitness effects among beneficial mutations before selection in experimental populations of bacteria. Nat Genet. 38:484-488.
28. Keightley PD, Otto SP. 2006. Interference among deleterious mutations favours sex and recombination in finite populations. Nature. 443:89-92.
29. Kimura M. 1964. Diffusion models in population genetics. J Appl Probab. 1:177-232.
30. Kimura M, Maruyama T. 1966. The mutational load with epistatic gene interactions in fitness. Genetics. 54:1337-1351.
31. Kondrashov AS. 1988. Deleterious mutations and the evolution of sexual reproduction. Nature. 336:435-440.
32. Kondrashov AS. 1993. Classification of hypotheses on the advantage of amphimixis. J Hered. 84:372-387.
33. Kouyos RD, Otto SP, Bonhoeffer S. 2006. Effect of varying epistasis on the evolution of recombination. Genetics. 173:589-597.
34. Livnat A, Papadimitriou C, Dushoff J, Feldman MW. 2008. A mixability theory for the role of sex in evolution. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 105:19803-19808.
35. MacCarthy T, Bergman A. 2007. Coevolution of robustness, epistasis, and recombination favors asexual reproduction. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 104:12801-12806.
36. Martin OC, Wagner A. 2009. Effects of recombination on complex regulatory circuits. Genetics. 183:673-684.
37. Maynard Smith J. 1978. The evolution of sex. Cambridge (UK): Cambridge University Press.
38. Misevic D, Kouyos RD, Bonhoeffer S. 2009. Predicting the evolution of sex on complex fitness landscapes. PLoS Comput Biol. 5: e1000510.
39. Misevic D, Ofria C, Lenski RE. 2006. Sexual reproduction reshapes the genetic architecture of digital organisms. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 273:457-464.
40. Misevic D, Ofria C, Lenski RE. 2010. Experiments with digital organisms on the origin and maintenance of sex in changing environments. J Hered. doi: 10.1093/jhered/esq017.
41. Montville R, Froissart R, Remold SK, Tenaillon O, Turner PE. 2005. Evolution of mutational robustness in an RNA virus. PLoS Biol. 3: e381.
42. Muller HJ. 1964. The relation of recombination to mutational advance. Mutat Res. 1:2-9.
43. Nei M. 1967. Modification of linkage intensity by natural selection. Genetics. 57:625-641.
44. Normark BB, Judson OP, Moran NA. 2003. Genomic signatures of ancient asexual lineages. Biol J Linn Soc. 79:69-84.
45. Otto SP, Barton NH. 2001. Selection for recombination in small populations. Evolution. 55:1921-1931.
46. Otto SP, Feldman MW. 1997. Deleterious mutations, variable epistatic interactions, and the evolution of recombination. Theor Popul Biol. 51:134-147.
47. Otto SP, Lenormand T. 2002. Resolving the paradox of sex and recombination. Nat Rev Genet. 3:252-261.
48. Peck JR, Barreau G, Heath SC. 1997. Imperfect genes, fisherian mutation and the evolution of sex. Genetics. 145:1171-1199.
49. Perfeito L, Fernandes L, Mota C, Gordo I. 2007. Adaptive mutations in bacteria: high rate and small effects. Science. 317:813-815.
50. Raff RA. 1996. The shape of life. Chicago (IL): University of Chicago Press.
51. Rice SH. 2008. Theoretical approaches to the evolution of development and genetic architecture. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1133:67-86.
52. Rokyta DR, Beisel CJ, Joyce P, Ferris MT, Burch CL, Wichman HA. 2008. Beneficial fitness effects are not exponential for two viruses. J Mol Evol. 67:368-376.
53. Sanjuán R, Moya A, Elena SF. 2004. The distribution of fitness effects caused by single-nucleotide substitutions in an RNA virus. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 101:8396-8401.
54. Schlosser G, Wagner GP. 2004. Modularity in development and evolution. Chicago (IL): University of Chicago Press.
55. Schultz S, Lynch M. 1997. Mutation and extinction: the role of variable mutational effects, synergistic epistasis, beneficial mutations, and degree of outcrossing. Evolution. 51:1363-1371.
56. Shields WM. 1982. Inbreeding and the paradox of sex: a resolution? Evol Theory. 5:245-279.
57. Siegal ML, Bergman A. 2002. Waddington's canalization revisited: developmental stability and evolution. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 99:10528-10532.
58. Sloan DB, Panjeti VG. Forthcoming 2010. Evolutionary feedbacks between reproductive mode and mutation rate exacerbate the paradox of sex. Evolution. Advance Access published October 23, 2009, doi: 10.1111/j.1558-5646.2009.00869.
59. Spassky B, Spassky N, Levene H, Dobzhansky T. 1958. Release of genetic variability through recombination. I. Drosophila pseudoobscura. Genetics. 43:844-867.
60. Spiess EB. 1959. Release of genetic variability through recombination. II. Drosophila persimilis. Genetics. 44:43-58.
61. Szafraniec K, Wloch DM, Sliwa P, Borts RH, Korona R. 2003. Small fitness effects and weak genetic interactions between deleterious mutations in heterozygous loci of the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Genet Res. 82:19-31.
62. Wagner A. 1996. Does evolutionary plasticity evolve? Evolution. 50:1008-1023.