The speed at which a cell fate decision in nematode worms evolves is due to the number of genes that control the decision, rather than to a high mutation rate.
Evolution is a two-step process: first, variation is generated, for example through random mutations; and then events such as natural selection determine whether specific traits become more or less common in a population. Some traits evolve faster than others, and different explanations for this emphasize the relative importance of one or the other of the two steps. For example, a fast-evolving trait could be under sustained and intense selection pressure, so that when a favorable new variant arises, it quickly spreads throughout the population. Alternatively, mutations might affect certain traits more than others, leading to more variation in these traits. Since variation is the fuel of evolution, this could make the affected traits change faster.
At the molecular level, two mechanisms can bias which traits are more likely to be affected by mutations. On one hand, the genes that affect a particular trait could be located in genomic areas with high mutation rates, known as ‘mutational hotspots’ (Fondon and Garner, 2004; Xie et al., 2019); on the other, a phenotype could depend on a large number genes, increasing the ‘mutational target size’ (Boyle et al., 2017).
Caenorhabditis elegans and C. briggsae worms have two sexes – males, which are very rare, and hermaphrodites. In hermaphrodites, the cell divisions and fate decisions that occur during development are nearly identical for individuals within a species. However, a cell called P3.p, which is involved in the development of the vulva, sometimes divides and sometimes does not, even among worms with the same genome (Sulston and Horvitz, 1977). A decade ago Marie-Anne Félix and colleagues reported that the frequency of this binary decision evolves more quickly than the cell fate decisions made by other early vulval cells, and that this fast evolution was probably due more to mutational biases – either hotspots or large target size – than selection effects (Braendle et al., 2010). Now, in eLife, Fabrice Besnard, Joao Picao-Osorio, Clément Dubois and Félix – who are based at laboratories in Lyon and Paris – report that this mutational bias is caused by a large mutational target size (Besnard et al., 2020).
To show this, Besnard et al. used mutation accumulation lines of either C. elegans or the closely related C. briggsae. These lines started from the offspring of a single individual and were bred in parallel. All of the lines were inbred: in each line a single selfing hermaphrodite was the parent of the next generation. This meant that if the parent had a new mutation, there would be a good chance that its offspring would inherit it. In this environment, the effects of natural selection were minimized because the only requirement for a line to endure was that a single hermaphrodite from that line survived and reproduced. After many generations, each line accumulated its own constellation of new mutations. Since the lines all started out genetically identical and selection was minimal, any differences in traits between the lines were be due to the different mutations.
The mutation accumulation lines used in these experiments were evolved for 250 generations (Baer et al., 2005), after which Besnard et al. chose to look at five lines in which the P3.p cell fate changed the most. By combining genomic sequencing and gene modification through CRISPR technology, they identified one gene in each line that was responsible for the change and showed that: (i) none of the genes are in a mutational hotspot in the genome; and (ii) only one of these genes was known to have a role specifically in vulval development. This suggests that the mutational target for P3.p cell fate is much broader than previously thought (Figure 1).
This broad mutational target is consistent with many genome-wide association studies and genetic mapping studies (Manolio et al., 2009; Shi et al., 2016). These experiments suggest that trait evolution tends not to be caused by one or two mutations with very large effects: rather, tens (or even hundreds) of genes carrying mutations with small effects seem to be responsible. These previous studies also suggest, rather unexpectedly, that a large fraction of the genes that underlie trait variation often have very little or no previously known functional relationships to the traits, and this is also the case in the work of Besnard et al. Therefore, there is a discrepancy between genetic pathways that have been described in the last century as being responsible for specific traits and the genes whose variation apparently fuels evolution.
The use of Caenorhabditis species in this work reinforces the power of this model system in research on developmental and evolutionary biology. Because so much is known about worm cell fates, Besnard et al. were able to go beyond identifying genes and pose testable hypotheses for why this particular cell was more variable than other vulval precursors. For example, they point out that the P3.p cell is at the far end of a gradient of cell fate-inducing molecules that are secreted from the tail end of the animal. The Félix lab previously showed that P3.p cell division is much more sensitive to variations in the dose of these molecules than?cells closer to the source of the gradient (Pénigault and Félix, 2011). This suggests that the decision by P3.p to divide or not operates close to a concentration threshold for these molecules. This in turn means that mutations with small effects on the shape of the gradient, or on the responsiveness of P3.p to the molecules, could have large effects on the fate of the P3.p cell.
Developmental processes are responsible for generating the effects of many mutations. Therefore, to fully understand how mutations influence evolution, we must first understand the developmental context in which they occur.
Evolution of a system sensitive to stochastic noise: p3.p cell fate in CaenorhabditisDevelopmental Biology 357:419–427.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ydbio.2011.05.675
Contrasting the genetic architecture of 30 complex traits from summary association dataThe American Journal of Human Genetics 99:139–153.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajhg.2016.05.013
Post-embryonic cell lineages of the nematode, Caenorhabditis elegansDevelopmental Biology 56:110–156.https://doi.org/10.1016/0012-1606(77)90158-0
Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)
Download citations (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)
Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)
Sex chromosomes are typically comprised of a non-recombining region and a recombining pseudoautosomal region. Accurately quantifying the relative size of these regions is critical for sex-chromosome biology both from a functional and evolutionary perspective. The evolution of the pseudoautosomal boundary (PAB) is well documented in haplorrhines (apes and monkeys) but not in strepsirrhines (lemurs and lorises). Here we studied the PAB of seven species representing the main strepsirrhine lineages by sequencing a male and a female genome in each species and using sex differences in coverage to identify the PAB. We found that during primate evolution, the PAB has remained unchanged in strepsirrhines whereas several recombination suppression events moved the PAB and shortened the pseudoautosomal region in haplorrhines. Strepsirrhines are well known to have much lower sexual dimorphism than haplorrhines. We suggest that mutations with antagonistic effects between males and females have driven recombination suppression and PAB evolution in haplorrhines.
Biomedical and clinical sciences are experiencing a renewed interest in the fact that males and females differ in many anatomic, physiological, and behavioral traits. Sex differences in trait variability, however, are yet to receive similar recognition. In medical science, mammalian females are assumed to have higher trait variability due to estrous cycles (the 'estrus-mediated variability hypothesis'); historically in biomedical research, females have been excluded for this reason. Contrastingly, evolutionary theory and associated data support the 'greater male variability hypothesis'. Here, we test these competing hypotheses in 218 traits measured in >26,900 mice, using meta-analysis methods. Neither hypothesis could universally explain patterns in trait variability. Sex-bias in variability was trait-dependent. While greater male variability was found in morphological traits, females were much more variable in immunological traits. Sex-specific variability has eco-evolutionary ramifications including sex-dependent responses to climate change, as well as statistical implications including power analysis considering sex difference in variance.