1. Genetics and Genomics
Download icon

Spontaneous mutations and the origin and maintenance of quantitative genetic variation

  1. Wen Huang
  2. Richard F Lyman
  3. Rachel A Lyman
  4. Mary Anna Carbone
  5. Susan T Harbison
  6. Michael M Magwire
  7. Trudy FC Mackay  Is a corresponding author
  1. North Carolina State University, United States
  2. Knox College, United States
Research Article
Cite this article as: eLife 2016;5:e14625 doi: 10.7554/eLife.14625
14 figures and 1 additional file

Figures

Experimental design of the DGRP and mutation accumulation (MA) lines.

(a) The DGRP is a collection of inbred strains derived from the wild population in Raleigh, NC. The spectrum of mutations and genetic variation in the DGRP is a reflection of the combined effects of mutations, drift, and selection. In this study, we used the DGRP genotype data (Huang et al., 2014) to estimate the parameter i=1GVar(gi) (see Materials and methods), the microarray expression data collected by (Ayroles et al., 2009) and organismal phenotypes (sleep traits from Harbison et al., 2009) to estimate genetic variance among the DGRP lines (Vg). (b) We derived 25 MA lines from the inbred line DGRP_360. These lines were kept with small population sizes of 10 females and 10 males such that there is minimal natural selection. At generation 60, we sequenced the MA lines to estimate mutation rate (μ) and i=1MVar(mi), and obtained microarray gene expression and organismal phenotypic data to estimate mutational variance (Vm).

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.14625.003
Validation of mutations.

51 Mutations detected at G60 (frequency > 0.2) in MA lines 2, 11, 13, 17, or 24 were randomly selected and sequenced by Sanger sequencing at G130 and classified as Fixed (cross) or Lost (circle) by manually inspecting chromatograms. The fixation status is plotted against the initial mutant frequency at G60. A LOESS smooth line was fitted to the data (point estimates = solid line, 95% confidence interval = broken line) to estimate the fixation probability. Expectation of fixation probability (= initial mutant allele frequency) is indicated by the grey diagonal line.

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.14625.004
Classification of single base substitutions (SBS).

Single base substitutions were classified according to their ancestral alleles (top and bottom box) and mutant alleles (middle boxes). The size of each of the middle boxes indicates number of mutations in each class. Blue and red lines indicate transitions and transversions, respectively.

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.14625.005
Genomic context of mutations.

Sequence composition (GC content, a) and complexity (b) for local sequences (20 bp up and downstream of mutations) are plotted as box plots and compared between different types of mutations. The 'Random genomic' class contains 1000 randomly chosen sites in the genome. Sequence complexity is measured as –lnS, where S is calculated using the algorithm in NCBI’s DUST program and measures sequence complexity. P values were computed by Wilcoxon’s rank sum tests comparing data in each category to the 'Random genomic' category.

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.14625.006
Mutation accumulation lines accumulate deleterious mutations.

Annotation of genomic bases, standing variation, and mutations in MA lines according to their (a) genomic locations and (b) functional impact on protein sequence.

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.14625.007
Relationship between number of mutations and gene length.

Number of mutations detected in MA lines for each gene is plotted against the total number of bases covered for mutations.

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.14625.008
Inference of effective population size and mutation rate.

Expected and observed distributions of mutant allele frequency on autosomes (a) and the X chromosome (b). The expected distribution was generated based on estimates of effective population size (2Ne). Mutation rate estimates of autosomes and X chromosomes are compared for different types of mutations (c) and for different lines (d). In (d), the Pearson’s correlation coefficient (r) is calculated with (orange line) or without (green line) MA19 (orange circle).

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.14625.009
High rate of mutational variance.

Histogram of mutational heritability (hm2=Vm/Ve) for females (a) and males (b) are plotted on the log scale. The placements of organismal traits in the hm2 bins are indicated by lines connecting the bars and the trait names. AB = abdominal bristle and SB = sternopleural bristle.

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.14625.010
Correlation between mutational variance and environmental plasticity.

Mutational variance (Vm) is plotted against variance due to environmental plasticity (VENV) for females (a) and males (b). The dashed line is a LOESS fit to the data. Spearman’s correlation (ρ) and the P value of a test for its significance are also indicated.

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.14625.011
Strong apparent stabilizing selection of quantitative trait variation.

Distributions of Vm/Vg in females (a) and males (b) are plotted on the log scale. The blue, red, and purple bars indicate genes with significant (FDR = 0.05) among-line variance in DGRP only, MA lines only, and both DGRP and MA lines respectively. Placements of organismal traits are indicated by lines connecting the bars and the trait names. AB = abdominal bristles and SB = sternopleural bristles. Neutral expectations 1/4N and Var(mi)/kVar(gi) are also indicated.

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.14625.012
Strength of apparent stabilizing selection in females and males.

(a) Vm/Vg for gene expression in females are plotted against that in males. (b) Boxplots of Vm/Vg for sex-specific (S) and non-specific (NS) genes. Within each sex, Vm/Vg for sex-specific and non-specific genes are compared using Wilcoxon’s rank sum test.

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.14625.013
Strength of apparent stabilizing selection on autosomes and X chromosome.

Boxplots of Vm/Vg are plotted for each chromosome in females and males. Wilcoxon’s rank sum test is used to compare Vm/Vg on autosomes (A) and on X chromosome (X).

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.14625.014
Strength of apparent stabilizing selection differs for genes in different functional categories.

Boxplots of Vm/Vg for genes in selected Gene Ontology (GO) categories as compared to all genes.

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.14625.015
Classification of genes as expressed or not expressed in each sex.

Within each sex (females in a, males in b), the distribution of median expression for each gene across the MA lines is subject to a mixture model analysis with two normal components. The mean and variance of each component distribution is estimated using the mixtools package in R. A gene is called expressed if its posterior probability of belonging to the normal distribution with the larger mean is higher than 2/3. The histograms show the observed distribution and the estimated normal distributions and their mixture.

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.14625.016

Additional files

Supplementary file 1

Supplemental tables.

(A) Summary of DNA sequencing for MA lines. (B) List of detected mutations. (C) GO enrichment analysis of mutations. (D) Variance components of organismal traits among MA and DGRP lines. (E) Variance components of gene expression traits among MA and DGRP lines. (F) Comparison of mutational variance for genes within GO categories to that of genes outside the GO categories. (G) Comparison of apparent stabilizing selection for genes within within GO categories to that of genes outside the GO categories.

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.14625.017

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Download citations (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)