Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Genetics logoLink to Genetics
. 2001 Jul;158(3):1227–1234. doi: 10.1093/genetics/158.3.1227

Positive and negative selection on the human genome.

J C Fay 1, G J Wyckoff 1, C I Wu 1
PMCID: PMC1461725  PMID: 11454770

Abstract

The distinction between deleterious, neutral, and adaptive mutations is a fundamental problem in the study of molecular evolution. Two significant quantities are the fraction of DNA variation in natural populations that is deleterious and destined to be eliminated and the fraction of fixed differences between species driven by positive Darwinian selection. We estimate these quantities using the large number of human genes for which there are polymorphism and divergence data. The fraction of amino acid mutations that is neutral is estimated to be 0.20 from the ratio of common amino acid (A) to synonymous (S) single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) at frequencies of > or =15%. Among the 80% of amino acid mutations that are deleterious at least 20% of them are only slightly deleterious and often attain frequencies of 1-10%. We estimate that these slightly deleterious mutations comprise at least 3% of amino acid SNPs in the average individual or at least 300 per diploid genome. This estimate is not sensitive to human population history. The A/S ratio of fixed differences is greater than that of common SNPs and suggests that a large fraction of protein divergence is adaptive and driven by positive Darwinian selection.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (103.5 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Akashi H. Within- and between-species DNA sequence variation and the 'footprint' of natural selection. Gene. 1999 Sep 30;238(1):39–51. doi: 10.1016/s0378-1119(99)00294-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Barton N. H. Linkage and the limits to natural selection. Genetics. 1995 Jun;140(2):821–841. doi: 10.1093/genetics/140.2.821. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Bittles A. H., Neel J. V. The costs of human inbreeding and their implications for variations at the DNA level. Nat Genet. 1994 Oct;8(2):117–121. doi: 10.1038/ng1094-117. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Cargill M., Altshuler D., Ireland J., Sklar P., Ardlie K., Patil N., Shaw N., Lane C. R., Lim E. P., Kalyanaraman N. Characterization of single-nucleotide polymorphisms in coding regions of human genes. Nat Genet. 1999 Jul;22(3):231–238. doi: 10.1038/10290. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Eyre-Walker A. Evidence of selection on silent site base composition in mammals: potential implications for the evolution of isochores and junk DNA. Genetics. 1999 Jun;152(2):675–683. doi: 10.1093/genetics/152.2.675. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Eyre-Walker A., Keightley P. D. High genomic deleterious mutation rates in hominids. Nature. 1999 Jan 28;397(6717):344–347. doi: 10.1038/16915. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Fay J. C., Wu C. I. Hitchhiking under positive Darwinian selection. Genetics. 2000 Jul;155(3):1405–1413. doi: 10.1093/genetics/155.3.1405. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Fu Y. X. Statistical properties of segregating sites. Theor Popul Biol. 1995 Oct;48(2):172–197. doi: 10.1006/tpbi.1995.1025. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Grantham R. Amino acid difference formula to help explain protein evolution. Science. 1974 Sep 6;185(4154):862–864. doi: 10.1126/science.185.4154.862. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Halushka M. K., Fan J. B., Bentley K., Hsie L., Shen N., Weder A., Cooper R., Lipshutz R., Chakravarti A. Patterns of single-nucleotide polymorphisms in candidate genes for blood-pressure homeostasis. Nat Genet. 1999 Jul;22(3):239–247. doi: 10.1038/10297. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. MULLER H. J. Our load of mutations. Am J Hum Genet. 1950 Jun;2(2):111–176. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. McDonald J. H., Kreitman M. Adaptive protein evolution at the Adh locus in Drosophila. Nature. 1991 Jun 20;351(6328):652–654. doi: 10.1038/351652a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. McVean G. A., Charlesworth B. The effects of Hill-Robertson interference between weakly selected mutations on patterns of molecular evolution and variation. Genetics. 2000 Jun;155(2):929–944. doi: 10.1093/genetics/155.2.929. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Morton N. E., Crow J. F., Muller H. J. AN ESTIMATE OF THE MUTATIONAL DAMAGE IN MAN FROM DATA ON CONSANGUINEOUS MARRIAGES. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1956 Nov;42(11):855–863. doi: 10.1073/pnas.42.11.855. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Shabalina S. A., Kondrashov A. S. Pattern of selective constraint in C. elegans and C. briggsae genomes. Genet Res. 1999 Aug;74(1):23–30. doi: 10.1017/s0016672399003821. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Sunyaev S. R., Lathe W. C., 3rd, Ramensky V. E., Bork P. SNP frequencies in human genes an excess of rare alleles and differing modes of selection. Trends Genet. 2000 Aug;16(8):335–337. doi: 10.1016/s0168-9525(00)02058-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Templeton A. R. Contingency tests of neutrality using intra/interspecific gene trees: the rejection of neutrality for the evolution of the mitochondrial cytochrome oxidase II gene in the hominoid primates. Genetics. 1996 Nov;144(3):1263–1270. doi: 10.1093/genetics/144.3.1263. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Watterson G. A. Estimating the proportion of neutral mutants. Genet Res. 1987 Oct;50(2):155–163. doi: 10.1017/s0016672300023569. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Watterson G. A. On the number of segregating sites in genetical models without recombination. Theor Popul Biol. 1975 Apr;7(2):256–276. doi: 10.1016/0040-5809(75)90020-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Wyckoff G. J., Wang W., Wu C. I. Rapid evolution of male reproductive genes in the descent of man. Nature. 2000 Jan 20;403(6767):304–309. doi: 10.1038/35002070. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Genetics are provided here courtesy of Oxford University Press

RESOURCES