Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Stationary mutant distributions and evolutionary optimization

  • Published:
Bulletin of Mathematical Biology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Molecular evolution is modelled by erroneous replication of binary sequences. We show how the selection of two species of equal or almost equal selective value is influenced by its nearest neighbours in sequence space. In the case of perfect neutrality and sufficiently small error rates we find that the Hamming distance between the species determines selection. As the error rate increases the fitness parameters of neighbouring species become more and more important. In the case of almost neutral sequences we observe a critical replication accuracy at which a drastic change in the “quasispecies”, in the stationary mutant distribution occurs. Thus, in frequently mutating populations fitness turns out to be an ensemble property rather than an attribute of the individual.

In addition we investigate the time dependence of the mean excess production as a function of initial conditions. Although it is optimized under most conditions, cases can be found which are characterized by decrease or non-monotonous change in mean excess productions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Literature

  • Anderson, P. W. 1958. “Absence of Diffusion in Certain Random Lattices.”Phys. Rev. 109, 1492–1505.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Demetrius, L. 1974. “Demographic Parameters and Natural Selection.” Proc. natn. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.71, 4645–4647; (1983). “Statistical Mechanics and Population Biology.”J. stat. Phys. 30, 729–773.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • —, P. Schuster and K. Sigmund. 1985. Polynucleotide Evolution and Branching Processes.Bull. math. Biol. 47, 239–262.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Domingo, E., P. Ahlquist and J. J. Holland (Eds.) In press.RNA-Genetics, Vols I and II. Baton Rouge: CRC-Press.

  • Eigen, M. 1971. “Selforganization of Matter and the Evolution of Biological Macromolecues”Naturwissenshcaften 58, 465–526.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — 1985. “Macromolecular Evolution: Dynamical Ordering in Sequence Space.”Ber. Bunsenges. phys. Chem.,89, 658–667.

    Google Scholar 

  • — and P. Schuster. 1979.The Hypercycle—a Principle of Natural Self-Organization. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eigen, M., J. McCaskill and P. Schuster. In press. “Dynamics of Darwinian Molecular Systems.”J. phys. Chem.

  • Ewens, W. J. 1979. “Mathematical Population Genetics.” InBiomathematics, Vol. 9. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feinberg, M. 1977. “Mathematical Aspects of Mass Action Kinetics.” InChemical Reaction Theory: A Review, N. Amundsen and L. Lapidus (Eds), pp. 1–78. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, B. L. 1978 (Eds) “Some Principles Governing Selection in Self-Reproducing Macromolecular Systems.”J. math. Biol. 6, 169–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • —, R. H. Enns and S. S. Ragnekar. 1976. On the Theory of Selection of coupled Macromolecular Systems.”Bull. math. Biol. 38, 12–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — and K. H. Leung, 1981. “Stochastic Analysis of a Nonlinear Model for Selection of Biological Macromolecules.”Bull. math. Biol. 43, 665–680.

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Kato, T. 1966. “Perturbation Theory for Linear OperatorsGrundl. Math. Wiss. 132.

  • Kimura, M. 1983.The Neutral Theory of Molecular Evolution, Cambridge University Press.

  • Leuthäusser, I. 1986. “An Exact Correspondence Between Eigens Evolution Model and a Two-Dimensional Ising Model.”J. chem. Phys. 84, 1884.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • McCaskill, J. 1984. “A Localization Threshold for Macromolecular Quasispecies from Continuously Distributed Replication Rates.”J. chem. Phys. 80, 5194–5202.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • — 1984. “A Stochastic Theory of Molecular Evolution.”Biol. Cybernetics,50, 63–73.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Rumschitzky, D. 1987. “Spectral Properties of Eigen Evolution Matrices.”J. math. Biol.,24, 667–680.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Schuster, P. 1986. “Dynamics of Molecular Evolution.”Physica,16D, 100–119.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • — and K. Sigmund. 1985. “Dynamics of Evolutionary Optimization.”Ber. Bunsenges. phys. Chem.,89, 668–682.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stein, D. L. and P. W. Anderson. 1984. A Model for the Origin of Biological Catalysis.Proc. Natn. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 81, 1751–1753.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swetina, J. and P. Schuster. 1982. Selfreplication with Errors. A Model for Polynucleotide Replication.Biophys. Chem. 16, 329–353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, C. J. and J. L. McBride. 1974. “On Eigens Theory of the Selforganization of Molecules and the Evolution of Biological Macromolecules.”Math. Biosci.,21, 127–142.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institut für theoretische Chemie und Strahlenchemie der Universität Wien, Währingerstraße 17, A 1090, Wien, Austria

    Peter Schuster & Jörg Swetina

Authors
  1. Peter Schuster
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jörg Swetina
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Schuster, P., Swetina, J. Stationary mutant distributions and evolutionary optimization. Bltn Mathcal Biology 50, 635–660 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02460094

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02460094

Keywords

Search

Navigation