Abstract
Mutational load depends not only on the number and nature of mutations but also on the reproductive mode. Traditionally, only a few specific reproductive modes are considered in the search of explanations for the maintenance of sex. There are, however, many alternatives. Including these may give radically different conclusions. The theory on deterministic deleterious mutations states that in large populations segregation and recombination may lead to a lower load of deleterious mutations, provided that there are synergistic interactions. Empirical research suggests that effects of deleterious mutations are often multiplicative. Such situations have largely been ignored in the literature, since recombination and segregation have no effect on mutation load in the absence of epistasis. However, this is true only when clonal reproduction and sexual reproduction with equal male and female ploidy are considered. We consider several alternative reproductive modes that are all known to occur in insects: arrhenotoky, paternal genome elimination, apomictic thelytoky, and automictic thelytoky with different cytological mechanisms to restore diploidy. We give a method that is based on probability-generating functions, which provides analytical and numerical results on the distributions of deleterious mutations. Using this, we show that segregation and recombination do make a difference. Furthermore, we prove that a modified form of Haldane's principle holds more generally for thelytokous reproduction. We discuss the implications of our results for evolutionary transitions between different reproductive modes in insects. Since the strength of Muller's ratchet is reduced considerably for several forms of automictic thelytoky, many of our results are expected to be also valid for initially small populations.
Full Text
The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (142.8 KB).
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Barton N. H., Charlesworth B. Why sex and recombination? Science. 1998 Sep 25;281(5385):1986–1990. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Beukeboom L. W., Pijnacker L. P. Automictic parthenogenesis in the parasitoid Venturia canescens (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae) revisited. Genome. 2000 Dec;43(6):939–944. doi: 10.1139/g00-061. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Charlesworth B. Mutation-selection balance and the evolutionary advantage of sex and recombination. Genet Res. 1990 Jun;55(3):199–221. doi: 10.1017/s0016672300025532. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Dawson K. J. The dynamics of infinitesimally rare alleles, applied to the evolution of mutation rates and the expression of deleterious mutations. Theor Popul Biol. 1999 Feb;55(1):1–22. doi: 10.1006/tpbi.1998.1375. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Elena S. F., Lenski R. E. Test of synergistic interactions among deleterious mutations in bacteria. Nature. 1997 Nov 27;390(6658):395–398. doi: 10.1038/37108. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Hopf F. A., Michod R. E., Sanderson M. J. The effect of the reproductive system on mutation load. Theor Popul Biol. 1988 Jun;33(3):243–265. doi: 10.1016/0040-5809(88)90015-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Kondrashov A. S. Classification of hypotheses on the advantage of amphimixis. J Hered. 1993 Sep-Oct;84(5):372–387. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.jhered.a111358. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Kondrashov A. S. Deleterious mutations as an evolutionary factor. 1. The advantage of recombination. Genet Res. 1984 Oct;44(2):199–217. doi: 10.1017/s0016672300026392. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Normark Benjamin B. The evolution of alternative genetic systems in insects. Annu Rev Entomol. 2002 Jun 4;48:397–423. doi: 10.1146/annurev.ento.48.091801.112703. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Otto S. P., Feldman M. W. Deleterious mutations, variable epistatic interactions, and the evolution of recombination. Theor Popul Biol. 1997 Apr;51(2):134–147. doi: 10.1006/tpbi.1997.1301. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Otto S. P. Unravelling gene interactions. Nature. 1997 Nov 27;390(6658):343–343. doi: 10.1038/36996. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Rivero Ana, Balloux Francois, West Stuart A. Testing for epistasis between deleterious mutations in a parasitoid wasp. Evolution. 2003 Jul;57(7):1698–1703. doi: 10.1111/j.0014-3820.2003.tb00375.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Siller S., Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, UK. steven.siller@zoo.ox.ac.uk Sexual selection and the maintenance of sex. Nature. 2001 Jun 7;411(6838):689–692. doi: 10.1038/35079578. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Tucker K W. Automictic Parthenogenesis in the Honey Bee. Genetics. 1958 May;43(3):299–316. doi: 10.1093/genetics/43.3.299. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]