Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences logoLink to Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
. 2002 Nov 22;269(1507):2357–2362. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2002.2163

The costs and benefits of being a chimera.

Kevin R Foster 1, Angelo Fortunato 1, Joan E Strassmann 1, David C Queller 1
PMCID: PMC1691165  PMID: 12495504

Abstract

Most multicellular organisms are uniclonal. This is hypothesized to be because uniclonal organisms function better than chimeras (non-clonal organisms), owing to reduced levels of internal genetic conflict. We tested this idea using the social amoeba or slime mold Dictyostelium discoideum. When starving, the normally solitary amoebae aggregate to form a differentiated multicellular slug that migrates towards light and forms a fruiting body, facilitating the dispersal of spores. We added 10(7) amoebae to Petri plates containing 1, 2, 5 or 10 clones mixed together. We found an intrinsic cost to chimerism: chimeric slugs moved significantly less far than uniclonal slugs of the same size. However, in nature, joining with other clones to form a chimera should increase slug size, and larger slugs travel further. We incorporated this size effect into a second experiment by giving chimeras more cells than single clones (single clones had 10(6) cells, two-clone chimeras had 2 x 10(6) cells and so on). The uniclonal treatments then simulated a clone in a mixture that refuses to form chimeras. In this experiment, chimeras moved significantly further than the uniclonal slugs, in spite of the intrinsic cost. Thus, chimerism is costly, which may be why it evolves so seldom, but in D. discoideum the benefits of large size appear to compensate.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (200.0 KB).

Selected References

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

  1. BONNER J. T., CLARKE W. W., Jr, NEELY C. L., Jr, SLIFKIN M. K. The orientation to light and the extremely sensitive orientation to temperature gradients in the slime mold Dictyostelium discoideum. J Cell Physiol. 1950 Oct;36(2):149–158. doi: 10.1002/jcp.1030360203. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Buss L. W. Somatic cell parasitism and the evolution of somatic tissue compatibility. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1982 Sep;79(17):5337–5341. doi: 10.1073/pnas.79.17.5337. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Clark J., Collins O. R. Directional Cytotoxic Reactions between Incompatible Plasmodia of DIDYMIUM IRIDIS. Genetics. 1973 Feb;73(2):247–257. doi: 10.1093/genetics/73.2.247. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Crespi B. J. The evolution of social behavior in microorganisms. Trends Ecol Evol. 2001 Apr 1;16(4):178–183. doi: 10.1016/s0169-5347(01)02115-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Ennis H. L., Dao D. N., Pukatzki S. U., Kessin R. H. Dictyostelium amoebae lacking an F-box protein form spores rather than stalk in chimeras with wild type. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2000 Mar 28;97(7):3292–3297. doi: 10.1073/pnas.050005097. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Francis D., Eisenberg R. Genetic structure of a natural population of Dictyostelium discoideum, a cellular slime mould. Mol Ecol. 1993 Dec;2(6):385–391. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-294x.1993.tb00031.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Hughes T. P., Jackson J. B. Do corals lie about their age? Some demographic consequences of partial mortality, fission, and fusion. Science. 1980 Aug 8;209(4457):713–715. doi: 10.1126/science.209.4457.713. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Kondrashov A. S. Mutation load under vegetative reproduction and cytoplasmic inheritance. Genetics. 1994 May;137(1):311–318. doi: 10.1093/genetics/137.1.311. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Moore Harry, Dvoráková Katerina, Jenkins Nicholas, Breed William. Exceptional sperm cooperation in the wood mouse. Nature. 2002 Jul 11;418(6894):174–177. doi: 10.1038/nature00832. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Pál C, Papp B. Selfish cells threaten multicellular life. Trends Ecol Evol. 2000 Sep;15(9):351–352. doi: 10.1016/s0169-5347(00)01932-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Ryan F. J., Lederberg J. Reverse-Mutation and Adaptation in Leucineless Neurospora. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1946 Jun;32(6):163–173. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Scofield V. L., Schlumpberger J. M., West L. A., Weissman I. L. Protochordate allorecognition is controlled by a MHC-like gene system. Nature. 1982 Feb 11;295(5849):499–502. doi: 10.1038/295499a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Stoner D. S., Rinkevich B., Weissman I. L. Heritable germ and somatic cell lineage competitions in chimeric colonial protochordates. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1999 Aug 3;96(16):9148–9153. doi: 10.1073/pnas.96.16.9148. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Strassmann J. E., Zhu Y., Queller D. C. Altruism and social cheating in the social amoeba Dictyostelium discoideum. Nature. 2000 Dec 21;408(6815):965–967. doi: 10.1038/35050087. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Velicer G. J., Kroos L., Lenski R. E. Developmental cheating in the social bacterium Myxococcus xanthus. Nature. 2000 Apr 6;404(6778):598–601. doi: 10.1038/35007066. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences are provided here courtesy of The Royal Society

RESOURCES