Skip to main content
PMC home page
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences logoLink to Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
. 2000 Nov 29;355(1403):1563–1572. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2000.0717

The degeneration of Y chromosomes.

B Charlesworth 1, D Charlesworth 1
PMCID: PMC1692900  PMID: 11127901

Abstract

Y chromosomes are genetically degenerate, having lost most of the active genes that were present in their ancestors. The causes of this degeneration have attracted much attention from evolutionary theorists. Four major theories are reviewed here: Muller's ratchet, background selection, the Hill Robertson effect with weak selection, and the 'hitchhiking' of deleterious alleles by favourable mutations. All of these involve a reduction in effective population size as a result of selective events occurring in a non-recombining genome, and the consequent weakening of the efficacy of selection. We review the consequences of these processes for patterns of molecular evolution and variation at loci on Y chromosomes, and discuss the results of empirical studies of these patterns for some evolving Y-chromosome and neo-Y-chromosome systems. These results suggest that the effective population sizes of evolving Y or neo-Y chromosomes are severely reduced, as expected if some or all of the hypothesized processes leading to degeneration are operative. It is, however, currently unclear which of the various processes is most important; some directions for future work to help to resolve this question are discussed.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (258.5 KB).

Selected References

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

  1. Akashi H. Synonymous codon usage in Drosophila melanogaster: natural selection and translational accuracy. Genetics. 1994 Mar;136(3):927–935. doi: 10.1093/genetics/136.3.927. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Anagnostopoulos T., Green P. M., Rowley G., Lewis C. M., Giannelli F. DNA variation in a 5-Mb region of the X chromosome and estimates of sex-specific/type-specific mutation rates. Am J Hum Genet. 1999 Feb;64(2):508–517. doi: 10.1086/302250. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Bachtrog D., Charlesworth B. Reduced levels of microsatellite variability on the neo-Y chromosome of Drosophila miranda. Curr Biol. 2000 Sep 7;10(17):1025–1031. doi: 10.1016/s0960-9822(00)00656-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Barton N. H., Charlesworth B. Why sex and recombination? Science. 1998 Sep 25;281(5385):1986–1990. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. 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]
  6. Birky C. W., Jr, Walsh J. B. Effects of linkage on rates of molecular evolution. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1988 Sep;85(17):6414–6418. doi: 10.1073/pnas.85.17.6414. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Bremer K. Early Cretaceous lineages of monocot flowering plants. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2000 Apr 25;97(9):4707–4711. doi: 10.1073/pnas.080421597. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Bulmer M. The selection-mutation-drift theory of synonymous codon usage. Genetics. 1991 Nov;129(3):897–907. doi: 10.1093/genetics/129.3.897. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Caballero A. On the effective size of populations with separate sexes, with particular reference to sex-linked genes. Genetics. 1995 Feb;139(2):1007–1011. doi: 10.1093/genetics/139.2.1007. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Charlesworth B. Background selection and patterns of genetic diversity in Drosophila melanogaster. Genet Res. 1996 Oct;68(2):131–149. doi: 10.1017/s0016672300034029. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Charlesworth B., Charlesworth D., Hnilicka J., Yu A., Guttman D. S. Lack of degeneration of loci on the neo-Y chromosome of Drosophila americana americana. Genetics. 1997 Apr;145(4):989–1002. doi: 10.1093/genetics/145.4.989. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Charlesworth B., Charlesworth D. Rapid fixation of deleterious alleles can be caused by Muller's ratchet. Genet Res. 1997 Aug;70(1):63–73. doi: 10.1017/s0016672397002899. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Charlesworth B. Model for evolution of Y chromosomes and dosage compensation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1978 Nov;75(11):5618–5622. doi: 10.1073/pnas.75.11.5618. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Charlesworth B., Morgan M. T., Charlesworth D. The effect of deleterious mutations on neutral molecular variation. Genetics. 1993 Aug;134(4):1289–1303. doi: 10.1093/genetics/134.4.1289. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Charlesworth B., Sniegowski P., Stephan W. The evolutionary dynamics of repetitive DNA in eukaryotes. Nature. 1994 Sep 15;371(6494):215–220. doi: 10.1038/371215a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Charlesworth B. The effect of background selection against deleterious mutations on weakly selected, linked variants. Genet Res. 1994 Jun;63(3):213–227. doi: 10.1017/s0016672300032365. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Charlesworth B. The evolution of chromosomal sex determination and dosage compensation. Curr Biol. 1996 Feb 1;6(2):149–162. doi: 10.1016/s0960-9822(02)00448-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Charlesworth D., Charlesworth B. Sequence variation: looking for effects of genetic linkage. Curr Biol. 1998 Sep 10;8(18):R658–R661. doi: 10.1016/s0960-9822(07)00416-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Comeron J. M., Kreitman M., Aguadé M. Natural selection on synonymous sites is correlated with gene length and recombination in Drosophila. Genetics. 1999 Jan;151(1):239–249. doi: 10.1093/genetics/151.1.239. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Delichère C., Veuskens J., Hernould M., Barbacar N., Mouras A., Negrutiu I., Monéger F. SlY1, the first active gene cloned from a plant Y chromosome, encodes a WD-repeat protein. EMBO J. 1999 Aug 2;18(15):4169–4179. doi: 10.1093/emboj/18.15.4169. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Di Rienzo A., Donnelly P., Toomajian C., Sisk B., Hill A., Petzl-Erler M. L., Haines G. K., Barch D. H. Heterogeneity of microsatellite mutations within and between loci, and implications for human demographic histories. Genetics. 1998 Mar;148(3):1269–1284. doi: 10.1093/genetics/148.3.1269. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Duret L., Mouchiroud D. Expression pattern and, surprisingly, gene length shape codon usage in Caenorhabditis, Drosophila, and Arabidopsis. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1999 Apr 13;96(8):4482–4487. doi: 10.1073/pnas.96.8.4482. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Felsenstein J. The evolutionary advantage of recombination. Genetics. 1974 Oct;78(2):737–756. doi: 10.1093/genetics/78.2.737. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Filatov D. A., Monéger F., Negrutiu I., Charlesworth D. Low variability in a Y-linked plant gene and its implications for Y-chromosome evolution. Nature. 2000 Mar 23;404(6776):388–390. doi: 10.1038/35006057. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Fu Y. X., Li W. H. Statistical tests of neutrality of mutations. Genetics. 1993 Mar;133(3):693–709. doi: 10.1093/genetics/133.3.693. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Gessler D. D. The constraints of finite size in asexual populations and the rate of the ratchet. Genet Res. 1995 Dec;66(3):241–253. doi: 10.1017/s0016672300034686. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Gessler D. D., Xu S. On the evolution of recombination and meiosis. Genet Res. 1999 Apr;73(2):119–131. doi: 10.1017/s001667239800367x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Gordo I., Charlesworth B. The degeneration of asexual haploid populations and the speed of Muller's ratchet. Genetics. 2000 Mar;154(3):1379–1387. doi: 10.1093/genetics/154.3.1379. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Hamilton W. D. Extraordinary sex ratios. A sex-ratio theory for sex linkage and inbreeding has new implications in cytogenetics and entomology. Science. 1967 Apr 28;156(3774):477–488. doi: 10.1126/science.156.3774.477. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Hill W. G., Robertson A. The effect of linkage on limits to artificial selection. Genet Res. 1966 Dec;8(3):269–294. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Jarne P., David P., Viard F. Microsatellites, transposable elements and the X chromosome. Mol Biol Evol. 1998 Jan;15(1):28–34. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a025844. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Jaruzelska J., Zietkiewicz E., Labuda D. Is selection responsible for the low level of variation in the last intron of the ZFY locus? Mol Biol Evol. 1999 Nov;16(11):1633–1640. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a026076. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Jegalian K., Page D. C. A proposed path by which genes common to mammalian X and Y chromosomes evolve to become X inactivated. Nature. 1998 Aug 20;394(6695):776–780. doi: 10.1038/29522. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Johnson T. The approach to mutation-selection balance in an infinite asexual population, and the evolution of mutation rates. Proc Biol Sci. 1999 Dec 7;266(1436):2389–2397. doi: 10.1098/rspb.1999.0936. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Karafet T., de Knijff P., Wood E., Ragland J., Clark A., Hammer M. F. Different patterns of variation at the X- and Y-chromosome-linked microsatellite loci DXYS156X and DXYS156Y in human populations. Hum Biol. 1998 Dec;70(6):979–992. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Keightley P. D., Eyre-Walker A. Terumi Mukai and the riddle of deleterious mutation rates. Genetics. 1999 Oct;153(2):515–523. doi: 10.1093/genetics/153.2.515. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. 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]
  38. Lahn B. T., Page D. C. Four evolutionary strata on the human X chromosome. Science. 1999 Oct 29;286(5441):964–967. doi: 10.1126/science.286.5441.964. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Lahn B. T., Page D. C. Functional coherence of the human Y chromosome. Science. 1997 Oct 24;278(5338):675–680. doi: 10.1126/science.278.5338.675. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Leslie J. F., Vrijenhoek R. C. Genetic dissection of clonally inherited genomes of poeciliopsis. I. Linkage analysis and preliminary assessment of deleterious gene loads. Genetics. 1978 Dec;90(4):801–811. doi: 10.1093/genetics/90.4.801. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Li W. H. Models of nearly neutral mutations with particular implications for nonrandom usage of synonymous codons. J Mol Evol. 1987;24(4):337–345. doi: 10.1007/BF02134132. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Lucchesi J. C. Gene dosage compensation and the evolution of sex chromosomes. Science. 1978 Nov 17;202(4369):711–716. doi: 10.1126/science.715437. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. Lynch M., Blanchard J. L. Deleterious mutation accumulation in organelle genomes. Genetica. 1998;102-103(1-6):29–39. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  44. MULLER H. J. THE RELATION OF RECOMBINATION TO MUTATIONAL ADVANCE. Mutat Res. 1964 May;106:2–9. doi: 10.1016/0027-5107(64)90047-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  45. Maside X., Assimacopoulos S., Charlesworth B. Rates of movement of transposable elements on the second chromosome of Drosophila melanogaster. Genet Res. 2000 Jun;75(3):275–284. doi: 10.1017/s0016672399004474. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  46. McAllister B. F., Charlesworth B. Reduced sequence variability on the Neo-Y chromosome of Drosophila americana americana. Genetics. 1999 Sep;153(1):221–233. doi: 10.1093/genetics/153.1.221. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  47. 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]
  48. Muller H J. Genetic Variability, Twin Hybrids and Constant Hybrids, in a Case of Balanced Lethal Factors. Genetics. 1918 Sep;3(5):422–499. doi: 10.1093/genetics/3.5.422. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  49. Nachman M. W. Patterns of DNA variability at X-linked loci in Mus domesticus. Genetics. 1997 Nov;147(3):1303–1316. doi: 10.1093/genetics/147.3.1303. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  50. Nachman M. W. Y chromosome variation of mice and men. Mol Biol Evol. 1998 Dec;15(12):1744–1750. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a025900. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  51. Nagylaki T. The expected number of heterozygous sites in a subdivided population. Genetics. 1998 Jul;149(3):1599–1604. doi: 10.1093/genetics/149.3.1599. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  52. Orr H. A., Kim Y. An adaptive hypothesis for the evolution of the Y chromosome. Genetics. 1998 Dec;150(4):1693–1698. doi: 10.1093/genetics/150.4.1693. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  53. Peck J. R. A ruby in the rubbish: beneficial mutations, deleterious mutations and the evolution of sex. Genetics. 1994 Jun;137(2):597–606. doi: 10.1093/genetics/137.2.597. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  54. Pritchard J. K., Seielstad M. T., Perez-Lezaun A., Feldman M. W. Population growth of human Y chromosomes: a study of Y chromosome microsatellites. Mol Biol Evol. 1999 Dec;16(12):1791–1798. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a026091. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  55. Rice W. R. Genetic hitchhiking and the evolution of reduced genetic activity of the Y sex chromosome. Genetics. 1987 May;116(1):161–167. doi: 10.1093/genetics/116.1.161. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  56. Schwartz A., Chan D. C., Brown L. G., Alagappan R., Pettay D., Disteche C., McGillivray B., de la Chapelle A., Page D. C. Reconstructing hominid Y evolution: X-homologous block, created by X-Y transposition, was disrupted by Yp inversion through LINE-LINE recombination. Hum Mol Genet. 1998 Jan;7(1):1–11. doi: 10.1093/hmg/7.1.1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  57. Smith J. M., Haigh J. The hitch-hiking effect of a favourable gene. Genet Res. 1974 Feb;23(1):23–35. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  58. Steinemann M., Steinemann S. Enigma of Y chromosome degeneration: neo-Y and neo-X chromosomes of Drosophila miranda a model for sex chromosome evolution. Genetica. 1998;102-103(1-6):409–420. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  59. Steinemann S., Steinemann M. The Amylase gene cluster on the evolving sex chromosomes of Drosophila miranda. Genetics. 1999 Jan;151(1):151–161. doi: 10.1093/genetics/151.1.151. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  60. Underhill P. A., Jin L., Lin A. A., Mehdi S. Q., Jenkins T., Vollrath D., Davis R. W., Cavalli-Sforza L. L., Oefner P. J. Detection of numerous Y chromosome biallelic polymorphisms by denaturing high-performance liquid chromatography. Genome Res. 1997 Oct;7(10):996–1005. doi: 10.1101/gr.7.10.996. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  61. WESTERGAARD M. The mechanism of sex determination in dioecious flowering plants. Adv Genet. 1958;9:217–281. doi: 10.1016/s0065-2660(08)60163-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  62. Yi S., Charlesworth B. Contrasting patterns of molecular evolution of the genes on the new and old sex chromosomes of Drosophila miranda. Mol Biol Evol. 2000 May;17(5):703–717. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a026349. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  63. Zurovcova M., Eanes W. F. Lack of nucleotide polymorphism in the Y-linked sperm flagellar dynein gene Dhc-Yh3 of Drosophila melanogaster and D. simulans. Genetics. 1999 Dec;153(4):1709–1715. doi: 10.1093/genetics/153.4.1709. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

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

RESOURCES