Skip Navigation


MBE Advance Access originally published online on June 17, 2009
Molecular Biology and Evolution 2009 26(9):2097-2108; doi:10.1093/molbev/msp119
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Supplementary Data
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
26/9/2097    most recent
msp119v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Eyre-Walker, A.
Right arrow Articles by Keightley, P. D.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Eyre-Walker, A.
Right arrow Articles by Keightley, P. D.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2009. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Molecular Biology and Evolution. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Research Articles

Estimating the Rate of Adaptive Molecular Evolution in the Presence of Slightly Deleterious Mutations and Population Size Change

Adam Eyre-Walker* and Peter D. Keightley{dagger}

* Centre for the Study of Evolution and School of Life Sciences, University of Sussex, Brighton, United Kingdom
{dagger} Institute of Evolutionary Biology, School of Biological Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom

E-mail: keightley.mbe2009{at}gmail.com.

Accepted for publication June 11, 2009.

The prevalence of adaptive evolution relative to genetic drift is a central problem in molecular evolution. Methods to estimate the fraction of adaptive nucleotide substitutions ({alpha}) have been developed, based on the McDonald–Kreitman test, that contrast polymorphism and divergence between selectively and neutrally evolving sites. However, these methods are expected to give downwardly biased estimates of {alpha} if there are slightly deleterious mutations, because these inflate polymorphism relative to divergence. Here, we estimate {alpha} by simultaneously estimating the distribution of fitness effects of new mutations at selected sites from the site frequency spectrum and the number of adaptive substitutions. We test the method using simulations. If data meet the assumptions of the analysis model, estimates of {alpha} show little bias, even when there is little or no recombination. However, population size differences between the divergence and polymorphism phases may cause {alpha} to be over or underestimated by a predictable factor that depends on the magnitude of the population size change and the shape of the distribution of effects of deleterious mutations. We analyze several data sets of protein-coding genes and noncoding regions from hominids and Drosophila. In Drosophila genes, we estimate that approximately 50% of amino acid substitutions and approximately 20% of substitutions in introns are adaptive. In protein-coding and noncoding data sets of humans, comparison to macaque sequences reveals little evidence for adaptive substitutions. However, the true frequency of adaptive substitutions in human-coding DNA could be as high as 40%, because estimates based on current polymorphism may be strongly downwardly biased by a decrease in the effective population size along the human lineage.

Key Words: adaptation • humans • drosophila • site frequency spectrum • nucleotide polymorphism


Barbara Holland, Associate Editor


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.