1932
0
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics
  4. Volume 45, 2014
  5. Article

Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics

Volume 45, 2014

The Utility of Fisher's Geometric Model in Evolutionary Genetics

Abstract

The accumulation of data on the genomic bases of adaptation has triggered renewed interest in theoretical models of adaptation. Among these models, Fisher's geometric model (FGM) has received a lot of attention over the past two decades. FGM is based on a continuous multidimensional phenotypic landscape, but it is mostly used for the emerging properties of individual mutation effects. Despite its apparent simplicity and limited number of parameters, FGM integrates a full model of mutation and epistatic interactions that allows the study of both beneficial and deleterious mutations and, subsequently, the fate of evolving populations. In this review, I present the different properties of FGM and the qualitative and quantitative support they have received from experimental evolution data. I then discuss how to estimate the different parameters of the model and outline some future directions to connect FGM and the molecular determinants of adaptation.

Keyword(s): adaptive landscape, distribution of fitness effects, drift load, epistasis, Fisher's geometric model, phenotypic complexity, pleiotropy, robustness
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-120213-091846
2014-11-23
2024-04-20
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/ecolsys/45/1/annurev-ecolsys-120213-091846.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-120213-091846&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. Acevedo A, Brodsky L, Andino R. 2014. Mutational and fitness landscapes of an RNA virus revealed through population sequencing. Nature 505:7485686–90 [Google Scholar]
  2. Achaz G, Rodriguez-Verdugo A, Gaut BS, Tenaillon O. 2014. The reproducibility of adaptation in the light of experimental evolution with whole genome sequencing. Ecological Genomics CR Landry, N Aubin-Horth 211–31 Dordrect, Neth: Springer [Google Scholar]
  3. Atwood KC, Schneider LK, Ryan FJ. 1951. Periodic selection in Escherichia coli. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 37:3146–55 [Google Scholar]
  4. Barrick JE, Kauth MR, Strelioff CC, Lenski RE. 2010. Escherichia coli rpoB mutants have increased evolvability in proportion to their fitness defects. Mol. Biol. Evol. 27:61338–47 [Google Scholar]
  5. Barrick JE, Lenski RE. 2013. Genome dynamics during experimental evolution. Nat. Rev. Genet. 14:12827–39 [Google Scholar]
  6. Bataillon T, Zhang T, Kassen R. 2011. Cost of adaptation and fitness effects of beneficial mutations in Pseudomonas fluorescens. Genetics 189:3939–49 [Google Scholar]
  7. Blanquart F, Achaz G, Bataillon T, Tenaillon O. 2014. Properties of selected mutations and genotypic landscapes under Fisher's geometric model. Evolution. arXiv:1405.3504 [Google Scholar]
  8. Burch CL, Chao L. 1999. Evolution by small steps and rugged landscapes in the RNA virus ϕ6. Genetics 151:3921–27 [Google Scholar]
  9. Chao L. 1990. Fitness of RNA virus decreased by Muller's ratchet. Nature 348:6300454–55 [Google Scholar]
  10. Charlesworth B. 1990. Mutation-selection balance and the evolutionary advantage of sex and recombination. Genet. Res. 55:3199–221 [Google Scholar]
  11. Chevin L-M, Decorzent G, Lenormand T. 2014. Niche dimensionality and the genetics of ecological speciation. Evolution 68:51244–56 [Google Scholar]
  12. Chevin LM, Hospital F. 2008. Selective sweep at a quantitative trait locus in the presence of background genetic variation. Genetics 180:31645–60 [Google Scholar]
  13. Chevin LM, Martin G, Lenormand T. 2010. Fisher's model and the genomics of adaptation: restricted pleiotropy, heterogenous mutation, and parallel evolution. Evolution 64:113213–31 [Google Scholar]
  14. Chou H-H, Chiu H-C, Delaney NF, Segrè D, Marx CJ. 2011. Diminishing returns epistasis among beneficial mutations decelerates adaptation. Science 332:60341190–92 [Google Scholar]
  15. Chou H-H, Delaney NF, Draghi JA, Marx CJ. 2014. Mapping the fitness landscape of gene expression uncovers the cause of antagonism and sign epistasis between adaptive mutations. PLOS Genet. 10:2e1004149 [Google Scholar]
  16. Costanzo M, Baryshnikova A, Bellay J, Kim Y, Spear ED. et al. 2010. The genetic landscape of a cell. Science 327:5964425–31 [Google Scholar]
  17. de Visser JAGM, Cooper TF, Elena SF. 2011. The causes of epistasis. Proc. R. Soc. B 278:17253617–24 [Google Scholar]
  18. de Visser JAGM, Hermisson J, Wagner GP, Ancel Meyers L, Bagheri-Chaichian H. et al. 2003. Perspective: evolution and detection of genetic robustness. Evolution 57:91959–72 [Google Scholar]
  19. Elena SF, Ekunwe L, Hajela N, Oden SA, Lenski RE. 1998. Distribution of fitness effects caused by random insertion mutations in Escherichia coli. Genetica 102/103:349–58 [Google Scholar]
  20. Elena SF, Lenski RE. 1997. Test of synergistic interactions among deleterious mutations in bacteria. Nature 390:6658395–98 [Google Scholar]
  21. Fares MA, Ruiz-Gonzalez MX, Moya A, Elena SF, Barrio E. 2002. Endosymbiotic bacteria: GroEL buffers against deleterious mutations. Nature 417:6887398 [Google Scholar]
  22. Fisher RA. 1930. The Genetical Theory of Natural Selection Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
  23. Frank SA. 2007. Maladaptation and the paradox of robustness in evolution. PLOS ONE 2:10e1021 [Google Scholar]
  24. Gillespie JH. 1983. A simple stochastic gene substitution model. Theor. Popul. Biol. 23:2202–15 [Google Scholar]
  25. Gillespie JH. 1991. The Causes of Molecular Evolution Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
  26. Gordo I, Campos PRA. 2013. Evolution of clonal populations approaching a fitness peak. Biol. Lett. 9:20120239 [Google Scholar]
  27. Gordo I, Charlesworth B. 2000. On the speed of Muller's ratchet. Genetics 156:42137–40 [Google Scholar]
  28. Gros PA, Le Nagard H, Tenaillon O. 2009. The evolution of epistasis and its links with genetic robustness, complexity and drift in a phenotypic model of adaptation. Genetics 182:277–93 [Google Scholar]
  29. Gros PA, Tenaillon O. 2009. Selection for chaperone-like mediated genetic robustness at low mutation rate: impact of drift, epistasis and complexity. Genetics 182:2555–64 [Google Scholar]
  30. Gu X. 2007. Evolutionary framework for protein sequence evolution and gene pleiotropy. Genetics 175:41813–22 [Google Scholar]
  31. Haigh J. 1978. The accumulation of deleterious genes in a population: Muller's ratchet. Theor. Popul. Biol. 14:2251–67 [Google Scholar]
  32. Hallatschek O. 2011. The noisy edge of traveling waves. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 108:51783–87 [Google Scholar]
  33. Hartl DL, Taubes CH. 1996. Compensatory nearly neutral mutations: selection without adaptation. J. Theor. Biol. 182:3303–9 [Google Scholar]
  34. Hartl DL, Taubes CH. 1998. Towards a theory of evolutionary adaptation. Genetica 102/103:525–33 [Google Scholar]
  35. Hietpas RT, Bank C, Jensen JD, Bolon DNA. 2013. Shifting fitness landscapes in response to altered environments. Evolution 67:123512–22 [Google Scholar]
  36. Hietpas RT, Jensen JD, Bolon DNA. 2011. Experimental illumination of a fitness landscape. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 108:197896–901 [Google Scholar]
  37. Jacquier H, Birgy A, Nagard HL, Mechulam Y, Schmitt E. et al. 2013. Capturing the mutational landscape of the beta-lactamase TEM-1. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 110:3213067–72 [Google Scholar]
  38. Joyce P, Rokyta DR, Beisel CJ, Orr HA. 2008. A general extreme value theory model for the adaptation of DNA sequences under strong selection and weak mutation. Genetics 180:31627–43 [Google Scholar]
  39. Kauffman S. 1993. The Origin of Order New York: Oxford Univ. Press
  40. Khan AI, Dinh DM, Schneider D, Lenski RE, Cooper TF. 2011. Negative epistasis between beneficial mutations in an evolving bacterial population. Science 332:60341193–96 [Google Scholar]
  41. Kibota T, Lynch M. 1996. Estimate of the genomic mutation rate deleterious to overall fitness in E. coli. Nature 381:6584694–96 [Google Scholar]
  42. Kimura M. 1983. The Neutral Theory of Molecular Evolution Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  43. Kingman JFC. 1978. A simple model for the balance between selection and mutation. J. Appl. Probab. 15:1–12 [Google Scholar]
  44. Kondrashov AS. 1988. Deleterious mutations and the evolution of sexual reproduction. Nature 336:6198435–40 [Google Scholar]
  45. Kopp M, Hermisson J. 2009. The genetic basis of phenotypic adaptation I: fixation of beneficial mutations in the moving optimum model. Genetics 182:233–49 [Google Scholar]
  46. Krakauer DC, Plotkin JB. 2002. Redundancy, antiredundancy, and the robustness of genomes. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 99:31405–9 [Google Scholar]
  47. Lande R. 1979. Quantitative genetic analysis of multivariate evolution, applied to brain: body size allometry. Evolution 33:402–16 [Google Scholar]
  48. Lande R. 1980. Genetic variation and phenotypic evolution during allopatric speciation. Am. Nat. 116:4463–79 [Google Scholar]
  49. Lande R, Arnold SJ. 1983. The measurement of selection on correlated characters. Evolution 37:61210–26 [Google Scholar]
  50. Le Nagard H, Chao L, Tenaillon O. 2011. The emergence of complexity and restricted pleiotropy in adapting networks. BMC Evol. Biol. 11:326 [Google Scholar]
  51. Le Nagard H, Tenaillon O. 2013. Selection-based estimates of complexity unravel some mechanisms and selective pressures underlying the evolution of complexity in artificial networks. Advances in Network Complexity M Dehmer, A Mowshowitz, F Emmert-Streib 41–61 Hoboken, NJ: Wiley [Google Scholar]
  52. Lenski RE, Travisano M. 1994. Dynamics of adaptation and diversification: a 10,000-generation experiment with bacterial populations. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 91:156808–14 [Google Scholar]
  53. Lewis NE, Nagarajan H, Palsson BO. 2012. Constraining the metabolic genotype-phenotype relationship using a phylogeny of in silico methods. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 10:4291–305 [Google Scholar]
  54. Lourenco J, Galtier N, Glemin S. 2011. Complexity, pleiotropy, and the fitness effect of mutations. Evolution 65:61559–71 [Google Scholar]
  55. Lourenco JM, Glemin S, Galtier N. 2013. The rate of molecular adaptation in a changing environment. Mol. Biol. Evol. 30:61292–301 [Google Scholar]
  56. Maisnier-Patin S, Berg OG, Liljas L, Andersson DI. 2002. Compensatory adaptation to the deleterious effect of antibiotic resistance in Salmonella typhimurium. Mol. Microbiol. 46:2355–66 [Google Scholar]
  57. Manna F, Martin G, Lenormand T. 2011. Fitness landscapes: an alternative theory for the dominance of mutation. Genetics 189:3923–37 [Google Scholar]
  58. Martin G. 2014. Fisher's geometrical model emerges as a property of complex integrated phenotypic networks. Genetics 197:237–55 [Google Scholar]
  59. Martin G, Elena SF, Lenormand T. 2007. Distributions of epistasis in microbes fit predictions from a fitness landscape model. Nat. Genet. 39:4555–60 [Google Scholar]
  60. Martin G, Gandon S. 2010. Lethal mutagenesis and evolutionary epidemiology. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 365:15481953–63 [Google Scholar]
  61. Martin G, Lenormand T. 2006a. A general multivariate extension of Fisher's geometrical model and the distribution of mutation fitness effects across species. Evolution 60:5893–907 [Google Scholar]
  62. Martin G, Lenormand T. 2006b. The fitness effect of mutations across environments: a survey in light of fitness landscape models. Evolution 60:122413–27 [Google Scholar]
  63. Martin G, Lenormand T. 2008. The distribution of beneficial and fixed mutation fitness effects close to an optimum. Genetics 179:2907–16 [Google Scholar]
  64. McCandlish DM, Epstein CL, Plotkin JB. 2014. The inevitability of unconditionally deleterious substitutions during adaptation. Evolution 68:51351–64 [Google Scholar]
  65. Moore FB, Rozen DE, Lenski RE. 2000. Pervasive compensatory adaptation in Escherichia coli. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 267:1442515–22 [Google Scholar]
  66. Nichols RJ, Sen S, Choo YJ, Beltrao P, Zietek M. et al. 2011. Phenotypic landscape of a bacterial cell. Cell 144:143–56 [Google Scholar]
  67. Ohno S. 1970. Evolution by Gene Duplication Berlin: Springer-Verlag
  68. Orr HA. 1998. The population genetics of adaptation: the distribution of factors fixed during adaptive evolution. Evolution 52:4935–49 [Google Scholar]
  69. Orr HA. 2000. Adaptation and the cost of complexity. Evolution 54:113–20 [Google Scholar]
  70. Orr HA. 2003. The distribution of fitness effects among beneficial mutations. Genetics 163:41519–26 [Google Scholar]
  71. Orr HA. 2006. The distribution of fitness effects among beneficial mutations in Fisher's geometric model of adaptation. J. Theor. Biol. 238:2279–85 [Google Scholar]
  72. Orr HA, Coyne JA. 1992. The genetics of adaptation: a reassessment. Am. Nat. 140:5725 [Google Scholar]
  73. Ostrowski EA, Rozen DE, Lenski RE. 2005. Pleiotropic effects of beneficial mutations in Escherichia coli. Evolution 59:112343–52 [Google Scholar]
  74. Paaby AB, Rockman MV. 2013. The many faces of pleiotropy. Trends Genet. 29:266–73 [Google Scholar]
  75. Peck JR, Barreau G, Heath SC. 1997. Imperfect genes, Fisherian mutation and the evolution of sex. Genetics 145:41171–99 [Google Scholar]
  76. Perfeito L, Fernandes L, Mota C, Gordo I. 2007. Adaptive mutations in bacteria: high rate and small effects. Science 317:5839813–15 [Google Scholar]
  77. Perfeito L, Sousa A, Bataillon T, Gordo I. 2014. Rates of fitness decline and rebound suggest pervasive epistasis. Evolution 68:1150–62 [Google Scholar]
  78. Poon A, Chao L. 2005. The rate of compensatory mutation in the DNA bacteriophage phiX174. Genetics 170:3989–99 [Google Scholar]
  79. Poon A, Otto SP. 2000. Compensating for our load of mutations: freezing the meltdown of small populations. Evolution 54:51467–79 [Google Scholar]
  80. Razeto-Barry P, Díaz J, Cotoras D, Vásquez RA. 2011. Molecular evolution, mutation size and gene pleiotropy: a geometric reexamination. Genetics 187:3877–85 [Google Scholar]
  81. Razeto-Barry P, Díaz J, Vásquez RA. 2012. The nearly neutral and selection theories of molecular evolution under the Fisher geometrical framework: substitution rate, population size, and complexity. Genetics 191:2523–34 [Google Scholar]
  82. Robins WP, Faruque SM, Mekalanos JJ. 2013. Coupling mutagenesis and parallel deep sequencing to probe essential residues in a genome or gene. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 110:9E848–57 [Google Scholar]
  83. Rodríguez-Verdugo A, Gaut BS, Tenaillon O. 2013. Evolution of Escherichia coli rifampicin resistance in an antibiotic-free environment during thermal stress. BMC Evol. Biol. 13:150 [Google Scholar]
  84. Roze D, Blanckaert A. 2014. Epistasis, pleiotropy, and the mutation load in sexual and asexual populations. Evolution 68:1137–49 [Google Scholar]
  85. Sanjuan R, Moya A, Elena SF. 2004a. The contribution of epistasis to the architecture of fitness in an RNA virus. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 101:4315376–79 [Google Scholar]
  86. Sanjuan R, Moya A, Elena SF. 2004b. The distribution of fitness effects caused by single-nucleotide substitutions in an RNA virus. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 101:228396–401 [Google Scholar]
  87. Sella G, Hirsh AE. 2005. The application of statistical physics to evolutionary biology. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 102:279541–46 [Google Scholar]
  88. Sellis D, Callahan BJ, Petrov DA, Messer PW. 2011. Heterozygote advantage as a natural consequence of adaptation in diploids. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 108:5120666–71 [Google Scholar]
  89. Silander OK, Tenaillon O, Chao L. 2007. Understanding the evolutionary fate of finite populations: the dynamics of mutational effects. PLOS Biol. 5:4e94 [Google Scholar]
  90. Sousa A, Magalhães S, Gordo I. 2012. Cost of antibiotic resistance and the geometry of adaptation. Mol. Biol. Evol. 29:51417–28 [Google Scholar]
  91. Stearns FW. 2010. One hundred years of pleiotropy: a retrospective. Genetics 186:3767–73 [Google Scholar]
  92. Tenaillon O, Rodríguez-Verdugo A, Gaut RL, McDonald P, Bennett AF. et al. 2012. The molecular diversity of adaptive convergence. Science 335:6067457–61 [Google Scholar]
  93. Tenaillon O, Silander OK, Uzan JP, Chao L. 2007. Quantifying organismal complexity using a population genetic approach. PLOS ONE 2:e217 [Google Scholar]
  94. Trindade S, Sousa A, Gordo I. 2012. Antibiotic resistance and stress in the light of Fisher's model. Evolution 66:123815–24 [Google Scholar]
  95. Turelli M, Barton NH. 1994. Genetic and statistical analyses of strong selection on polygenic traits: What, me normal?. Genetics 138:3913–41 [Google Scholar]
  96. Wagner GP, Gabriel W. 1990. Quantitative variation in finite parthenogenetic populations: What stops Muller's ratchet in the absence of recombination?. Evolution 44:715–31 [Google Scholar]
  97. Wagner GP, Kenney-Hunt JP, Pavlicev M, Peck JR, Waxman D, Cheverud JM. 2008. Pleiotropic scaling of gene effects and the “cost of complexity.”. Nature 452:7186470–72 [Google Scholar]
  98. Wagner GP, Zhang J. 2011. The pleiotropic structure of the genotype-phenotype map: the evolvability of complex organisms. Nat. Rev. Genet. 12:3204–13 [Google Scholar]
  99. Walsh B, Blows MW. 2009. Abundant genetic variation + strong selection = multivariate genetic constraints: a geometric view of adaptation. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 40:41–59 [Google Scholar]
  100. Wang Z, Liao BY, Zhang J. 2010. Genomic patterns of pleiotropy and the evolution of complexity. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 107:4218034–39 [Google Scholar]
  101. Waxman D, Peck JR. 1998. Pleiotropy and the preservation of perfection. Science 279:53541210–13 [Google Scholar]
  102. Waxman D, Welch JJ. 2005. Fisher's microscope and Haldane's ellipse. Am. Nat. 166:4447–57 [Google Scholar]
  103. Weinreich DM, Delaney NF, Depristo MA, Hartl DL. 2006. Darwinian evolution can follow only very few mutational paths to fitter proteins. Science 312:5770111–14 [Google Scholar]
  104. Weinreich DM, Knies JL. 2013. Fisher's geometric model of adaptation meets the functional synthesis: Data on pairwise epistasis for fitness yields insights into the shape and size of phenotype space. Evolution 67:102957–72 [Google Scholar]
  105. Welch JJ, Waxman D. 2003. Modularity and the cost of complexity. Evolution 57:81723–34 [Google Scholar]
  106. Wilke CO, Adami C. 2001. Interaction between directional epistasis and average mutational effects. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 268:14751469–74 [Google Scholar]
  107. Wiser MJ, Ribeck N, Lenski RE. 2013. Long-term dynamics of adaptation in asexual populations. Science 342:61641364–67 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-120213-091846
Loading
The Utility of Fisher's Geometric Model in Evolutionary Genetics
Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 45, 179 (2014); https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-120213-091846
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-120213-091846
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-120213-091846
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Review Article

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error