Diversity for commonality in the evolutionary changes of the reduced genome to regain the growth fitness

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

In this study, the authors explored how the reduced growth fitness, resulting from genome reduction, can be compensated through evolution. They conducted an evolution experiment with a strain of Escherichia coli that carried a reduced genome, over approximately 1,000 generations. The authors carried out sequencing and found no clear genetic signatures of evolution across replicate populations. They carry out transcriptomics and a series of analyses that lead them to conclude that there are divergent mechanisms at play in individual evolutionary lineages. The authors used gene network reconstruction to identify three gene modules functionally differentiated, correlating with changes in growth fitness, genome mutation, and gene expression, respectively, due to evolutionary changes in the reduced genome.

I think that this study addresses an interesting question. Many microbial evolution experiments evolve by loss of function mutations, but presumably, a cell that has already lost so much of its genome needs to find other mechanisms to adapt. Experiments like this have the potential to study "constructive" rather than "destructive" evolution.

At the top of the results, the authors should say what species they're working with and give some background about the nature of the reduced genome. It is important to know what the changes were and especially how much of the genome was deleted. Some insights into the genes that were deleted would also be useful context for understanding the evolution experiment. This could be included in the introduction or results.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

This manuscript describes an adaptive laboratory evolution (ALE) study with a previously constructed genome-reduced E. coli. The growth performance of the end-point lineages evolved in M63 medium was comparable to the full-length wild-type level at lower cell densities. Subsequent mutation profiling and RNA-Seq analysis revealed many changes in the genome and transcriptomes of the evolved lineages. The authors did a great deal of analyzing the patterns of evolutionary changes between independent lineages, such as the chromosomal periodicity of transcriptomes, pathway enrichment analysis, weight gene co-expression analysis, and so on. They observed a striking diversity in the molecular characteristics amongst the evolved lineages, which, as they suggest, reflect divergent evolutionary strategies adopted by the genome-reduced organism.

As for the overall quality of the manuscript, I am rather torn. The manuscript leans towards elaborating observed findings, rather than explaining their biological significance. For this reason, readers are left with more questions than answers. For example, fitness assay on reconstituted (single and combinatorial) mutants was not performed, nor was any supporting evidence on the proposed contributions of each mutant provided. This leaves the nature of mutations - be they beneficial, neutral, or deleterious, the presence of epistatic interactions, and the magnitude of fitness contribution, largely elusive. Also, it is difficult to tell whether the RNA-Seq analysis in this study managed to draw biologically meaningful conclusions or instill insight into the nature of genome-reduced bacteria. The analysis primarily highlighted the differences in transcriptome profiles among each lineage based on metrics such as 'DEG counts' and the 'GO enrichment'. However, I could not see any specific implications regarding the biology of the evolved minimal genome drawn. In their concluding remark, 'Multiple evolutionary paths for the reduced genome to improve growth fitness were likely all roads leading to Rome,' the authors observed the first half of the sentence, but the distinctive characteristics of 'all roads' or 'evolutionary paths', which I think should have been the key aspect in this investigation, remains elusive.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

Summary:
Studying evolutionary trajectories provides important insight into the genetic architecture of adaptation and provides a potential contribution to evaluating the predictability (or unpredictability) of biological processes involving adaptation. While many papers in the field address adaptation to environmental challenges, the number of studies on how genomic contexts, such as large-scale variation, can impact evolutionary outcomes adaptation is relatively low. This research experimentally evolved a genome-reduced strain for ~1000 generations with 9 replicates and dissected their evolutionary changes. Using the fitness assay of OD measurement, the authors claimed that there is a general trend of increasing growth rate and decreasing carrying capacity, despite a positive correlation among all replicates. The authors also performed genomic and transcriptomic research at the end of experimental evolution, claiming the dissimilarity in the evolution at the molecular level.

Strengths:
The experimental evolution approach with a high number of replicates provides a good way to reveal the generality/diversity of the evolutionary routes.

The assay of fitness, genome, and transcriptome all together allows a more thorough understanding of the evolutionary scenarios and genetic mechanisms.

Weaknesses:
My major concern is the current form of statistical analysis leads to the conclusion that the dissimilarity is not very strong. Adding some more statistical analysis should substantially improve the strength of the manuscript. As mentioned in the Discussion, I understand that there are more available methods to test for generality in experimental evolution but less for diversity. When it is improper to use a canonical statistical test, a test with some simulation and resampling can be useful. For example, I particularly appreciate the analysis done in Figure 2B. An analysis like that should be done more throughout the entire manuscript.