Abstract
New alleles arising in a population by mutation ultimately are either fixed or lost. Either is possible, for both beneficial and deleterious alleles, because of stochastic changes in allele frequency due to genetic drift. Spatially structured populations differ from unstructured populations in the probability of fixation and the time that this fixation takes. Previous results have generally made many assumptions: that all demes contribute to the next generation in exact proportion to their current sizes, that new mutations are beneficial, and that new alleles have additive effects. In this article these assumptions are relaxed, allowing for an arbitrary distribution among demes of reproductive success, both beneficial and deleterious effects, and arbitrary dominance. The effects of population structure can be expressed with two summary statistics: the effective population size and a variant of Wright's F(ST). In general, the probability of fixation is strongly affected by population structure, as is the expected time to fixation or loss. Population structure changes the effective size of the species, often strongly downward; smaller effective size increases the probability of fixing deleterious alleles and decreases the probability of fixing beneficial alleles. On the other hand, population structure causes an increase in the homozygosity of alleles, which increases the probability of fixing beneficial alleles but somewhat decreases the probability of fixing deleterious alleles. The probability of fixing new beneficial alleles can be simply described by 2hs(1 - F(ST))N(e)/N(tot), where hs is the change in fitness of heterozygotes relative to the ancestral homozygote, F(ST) is a weighted version of Wright's measure of population subdivision, and N(e) and N(tot) are the effective and census sizes, respectively. These results are verified by simulation for a broad range of population structures, including the island model, the stepping-stone model, and a model with extinction and recolonization.
Full Text
The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (163.9 KB).
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Caballero A., Hill W. G. Effects of partial inbreeding on fixation rates and variation of mutant genes. Genetics. 1992 Jun;131(2):493–507. doi: 10.1093/genetics/131.2.493. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- KIMURA M., MARUYAMA T., CROW J. F. THE MUTATION LOAD IN SMALL POPULATIONS. Genetics. 1963 Oct;48:1303–1312. doi: 10.1093/genetics/48.10.1303. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- KIMURA M. On the probability of fixation of mutant genes in a population. Genetics. 1962 Jun;47:713–719. doi: 10.1093/genetics/47.6.713. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Kimura M., Ohta T. The Average Number of Generations until Fixation of a Mutant Gene in a Finite Population. Genetics. 1969 Mar;61(3):763–771. doi: 10.1093/genetics/61.3.763. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Lande R. Risk of population extinction from fixation of deleterious and reverse mutations. Genetica. 1998;102-103(1-6):21–27. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Lewontin R. C., Krakauer J. Distribution of gene frequency as a test of the theory of the selective neutrality of polymorphisms. Genetics. 1973 May;74(1):175–195. doi: 10.1093/genetics/74.1.175. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Maruyama T., Kimura M. Genetic variability and effective population size when local extinction and recolonization of subpopulations are frequent. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1980 Nov;77(11):6710–6714. doi: 10.1073/pnas.77.11.6710. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Maruyama T. On the fixation probability of mutant genes in a subdivided population. Genet Res. 1970 Apr;15(2):221–225. doi: 10.1017/s0016672300001543. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Nagylaki T. Geographical invariance in population genetics. J Theor Biol. 1982 Nov 7;99(1):159–172. doi: 10.1016/0022-5193(82)90396-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Nagylaki T. The strong-migration limit in geographically structured populations. J Math Biol. 1980 Apr;9(2):101–114. doi: 10.1007/BF00275916. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Slatkin M. Gene flow and genetic drift in a species subject to frequent local extinctions. Theor Popul Biol. 1977 Dec;12(3):253–262. doi: 10.1016/0040-5809(77)90045-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Tachida H., Iizuka M. Fixation probability in spatially changing environments. Genet Res. 1991 Dec;58(3):243–251. doi: 10.1017/s0016672300029992. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Whitlock M. C., Barton N. H. The effective size of a subdivided population. Genetics. 1997 May;146(1):427–441. doi: 10.1093/genetics/146.1.427. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Whitlock M. C. Fixation of new alleles and the extinction of small populations: drift load, beneficial alleles, and sexual selection. Evolution. 2000 Dec;54(6):1855–1861. doi: 10.1111/j.0014-3820.2000.tb01232.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Whitlock Michael C. Selection, load and inbreeding depression in a large metapopulation. Genetics. 2002 Mar;160(3):1191–1202. doi: 10.1093/genetics/160.3.1191. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Wright S. Evolution in Mendelian Populations. Genetics. 1931 Mar;16(2):97–159. doi: 10.1093/genetics/16.2.97. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]