Close

A direct experimental test of Ohno’s hypothesis

Ljiljana Mihajlovic, Bharat Ravi Iyengar, Florian Baier, Içvara Barbier, Justyna Iwaszkiewicz, Vincent Zoete, Andreas Wagner, Yolanda Schaerli

Posted on: 4 December 2023 , updated on: 5 December 2023

Preprint posted on 25 September 2023

An experimental system to test hypotheses on the evolution of gene duplication. Was S. Ohno right?

Selected by Alejandra Herbert Leffler's Lab

Categories: evolutionary biology

  • Background to the preprint.

Gene duplications are a common evolutionary phenomenon. However, comprehending the underlying mechanisms, identifying the resulting patterns, and determining the circumstances that lead to these patterns remains a challenge. Multiple hypotheses have been proposed, yet these theories have seldom been linked to experimental models. According to Innan and colleagues, gene duplication can be classified into three main categories: category I includes neofunctionalization and subfunctionalization of the duplicated genes, where duplication is neutral with no selection acting before the duplicate reaches fixation; in the case of category II, the gene duplication is advantageous (adaptive); category III gene duplication is advantageous but occurs in a polymorphic gene that becomes fixed in the duplicated copy.

This preprint focuses on Ohno’s hypothesis (category I), which proposes that a duplicated gene is relaxed from purifying selection and thus can result in pseudogenization or gain a new function by accumulating mutations (Fig1). Some evolutionary predictions arising from this model involve equal divergence before fixation and combined copy gene functions contributing to fitness, similar to unduplicated orthologs in closely related species.

  • Key findings of the preprint.

-Under selection, the redundancy provided by gene duplication appeared to enhance gene resilience to mutations observed during “early” time points (generations 1-3). This was evaluated based on robustness, measured by the number of cells that maintained fluorescence after mutagenesis over multiple generations.

-Gene duplication did not lead to enhanced early functional differentiation. To test Ohno’s prediction that gene duplication facilitates phenotypic evolution, the authors searched in the green-selected experiment whether green fluorescence evolved faster in double-copy populations. In contrast to the prediction, the authors observed no difference in fluorescence but noticed greater variance in double-copy populations.

-Gene duplication leads to a rapid loss of function before diverged gene function. The experiment showed that after one generation of double-copy populations around ~40% of cells possessed an inactive copy.

-In agreement with other preprint results, duplicated gene copies diversified faster on average than control single active and inactive copies. Although most mutations are under purifying selection, the experiment also showed that some common mutations arise frequently that may confer structural protein stability.

-Early loss of function in either gene copy might explain enhanced purifying selection on the active one, reducing the relative differences with single copy genes. The inactivation of one copy leads to higher constrained in the remaining copy; thus, making single copy and double copy populations (after inactivation of one copy) behave similarly after the 3rd generation in this experiment.

  • What I like about the preprint/why I think this new work is important.

What I like about this preprint is that it tests a fundamental theoretical biological framework possibly driving common evolutionary patterns: gene duplications. It is hard to find experimental studies testing evolutionary hypotheses in the literature. Although the model presented in this work lacks biological realism, it is capable of testing Ohno’s (evolutionary) hypothesis. Also, observational approaches, including comparative analysis, that have been used in the past agree with the results presented in this preprint. These usually lack experimental validation but in this preprint the authors have set up a clever experimental evolution design demonstrating that their approach can reconcile theory and data, making evolutionary hypotheses and their predictions testable.

  • Questions for the authors

If selection pressure was constant across generations or if the direction was variable across generations what would be your prediction for this gene duplication system?

Could you please elaborate on why you think only green specialization was observed? why not a symmetrical behavior when applying similar selecting pressures to both phenotypes?

In the future, would it be possible to predict the time window for the gene to lose or gain a new function? Could you adapt your experimental system to make inferences about it?

Using your system, could you speculate on the time window between gene duplication innovation and loss of function? Do you think this is mostly driven by gene-specific characteristics or population-driven effects?

Could your system be expanded to predict whether “protein” promiscuity precedes a specific duplication hypothesis?

  • References

Innan, H., & Kondrashov, F. (2010). The evolution of gene duplications: Classifying and distinguishing between models. Nature Reviews Genetics, 11(2), 97-108. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg2689

 

doi: https://doi.org/10.1242/prelights.36041

Read preprint (No Ratings Yet)

Author's response

Yolanda Schaerli shared

Here are the authors’ responses to our questions:

  • If selection pressure was constant across generations or if the direction was variable across generations what would be your prediction for this gene duplication system?

I predict that if we had used the same high selection pressure in the first rounds as we did in later rounds, we would have had less gene inactivation. It would be interesting to repeat the experiment with alternating selection between green and blue. Maybe this might lead to specialization for green of one copy and for blue of the other copy.

  • Could you please elaborate on why you think only green specialization was observed? why not a symmetrical behavior when applying similar selecting pressures to both phenotypes?

We also observed blue specialization when we selected for blue. The specific mutations that enriched under this regime were G147A and G147C. However, it is true that the phenotypic fold-change in the blue populations was much smaller than for the green population. I attribute this to the starting variant and the specific properties of the protein that cannot become much better in the blue fluorescence. If we had started with a completely green variant, the change towards blue would have been more extensive.

  • In the future, would it be possible to predict the time window for the gene to lose or gain a new function? Could you adapt your experimental system to make inferences about it?

I suspect that this time window is dependent on the specific conditions used (such as mutation rate and selection pressure) and the specific gene one is working with. So only after we repeated the evolution experiment under different conditions and with different proteins we might be able to get a feeling for this time window.

  • Using your system, could you speculate on the time window between gene duplication innovation and loss of function? Do you think this is mostly driven by gene-specific characteristics or population-driven effects?

As we are using a high mutation rate and large population size, effects of genetic drift are negligible in our system. I therefore think the loss of function depends on gene-specific characteristics as well as on the selection pressure.

  • Could your system be expanded to predict whether “protein” promiscuity precedes a specific duplication hypothesis?

It would be interesting to repeat the same evolution experiment with other proteins, both promiscuous and not promiscuous. We might be able to detect a consistent difference between the two types of proteins.

Have your say

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Sign up to customise the site to your preferences and to receive alerts

Register here

Also in the evolutionary biology category:

Geometric analysis of airway trees shows that lung anatomy evolved to enable explosive ventilation and prevent barotrauma in cetaceans

Robert L. Cieri, Merryn H. Tawhai, Marina Piscitelli-Doshkov, et al.

Selected by 26 November 2024

Sarah Young-Veenstra

Evolutionary Biology

Enhancer-driven cell type comparison reveals similarities between the mammalian and bird pallium

Nikolai Hecker , Niklas Kempynck , David Mauduit, et al.

Selected by 02 July 2024

Rodrigo Senovilla-Ganzo

Bioinformatics

Modular control of time and space during vertebrate axis segmentation

Ali Seleit, Ian Brettell, Tomas Fitzgerald, et al.

AND

Natural genetic variation quantitatively regulates heart rate and dimension

Jakob Gierten, Bettina Welz, Tomas Fitzgerald, et al.

Selected by 24 June 2024

Girish Kale, Jennifer Ann Black

Developmental Biology

preLists in the evolutionary biology category:

‘In preprints’ from Development 2022-2023

A list of the preprints featured in Development's 'In preprints' articles between 2022-2023

 



List by Alex Eve, Katherine Brown

preLights peer support – preprints of interest

This is a preprint repository to organise the preprints and preLights covered through the 'preLights peer support' initiative.

 



List by preLights peer support

EMBO | EMBL Symposium: The organism and its environment

This preList contains preprints discussed during the 'EMBO | EMBL Symposium: The organism and its environment', organised at EMBL Heidelberg, Germany (May 2023).

 



List by Girish Kale

9th International Symposium on the Biology of Vertebrate Sex Determination

This preList contains preprints discussed during the 9th International Symposium on the Biology of Vertebrate Sex Determination. This conference was held in Kona, Hawaii from April 17th to 21st 2023.

 



List by Martin Estermann

EMBL Synthetic Morphogenesis: From Gene Circuits to Tissue Architecture (2021)

A list of preprints mentioned at the #EESmorphoG virtual meeting in 2021.

 



List by Alex Eve

Planar Cell Polarity – PCP

This preList contains preprints about the latest findings on Planar Cell Polarity (PCP) in various model organisms at the molecular, cellular and tissue levels.

 



List by Ana Dorrego-Rivas

TAGC 2020

Preprints recently presented at the virtual Allied Genetics Conference, April 22-26, 2020. #TAGC20

 



List by Maiko Kitaoka et al.

ECFG15 – Fungal biology

Preprints presented at 15th European Conference on Fungal Genetics 17-20 February 2020 Rome

 



List by Hiral Shah

COVID-19 / SARS-CoV-2 preprints

List of important preprints dealing with the ongoing coronavirus outbreak. See http://covidpreprints.com for additional resources and timeline, and https://connect.biorxiv.org/relate/content/181 for full list of bioRxiv and medRxiv preprints on this topic

 



List by Dey Lab, Zhang-He Goh

1

SDB 78th Annual Meeting 2019

A curation of the preprints presented at the SDB meeting in Boston, July 26-30 2019. The preList will be updated throughout the duration of the meeting.

 



List by Alex Eve

Pattern formation during development

The aim of this preList is to integrate results about the mechanisms that govern patterning during development, from genes implicated in the processes to theoritical models of pattern formation in nature.

 



List by Alexa Sadier
Close