Abstract
In this paper, we revisit and adapt to viral evolution an approach based on the theory of branching process advanced by Demetrius et al. (Bull. Math. Biol. 46:239–262, 1985), in their study of polynucleotide evolution. By taking into account beneficial effects, we obtain a non-trivial multivariate generalization of their single-type branching process model. Perturbative techniques allows us to obtain analytical asymptotic expressions for the main global parameters of the model, which lead to the following rigorous results: (i) a new criterion for “no sure extinction”, (ii) a generalization and proof, for this particular class of models, of the lethal mutagenesis criterion proposed by Bull et al. (J. Virol. 18:2930–2939, 2007), (iii) a new proposal for the notion of relaxation time with a quantitative prescription for its evaluation, (iv) the quantitative description of the evolution of the expected values in four distinct “stages”: extinction threshold, lethal mutagenesis, stationary “equilibrium”, and transient. Finally, based on these quantitative results, we are able to draw some qualitative conclusions.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Aguirre, J., & Manrubia, S. C. (2008). Effects of spatial competition on the diversity of a quasispecies. Phys. Rev. Lett., 100(3), 038106.
Aguirre, J., Lázaro, E., & Manrubia, S. C. (2009). A trade-off between neutrality and adaptability limits the optimization of viral quasispecies. J. Theor. Biol., 261, 148–155.
Antoneli, F., Dias, A. P. S., Golubitsky, M., & Wang, Y. (2005). Patterns of synchrony in lattice dynamical systems. Nonlinearity, 18(5), 2193–2209. doi:10.1088/0951-7715/18/5/016.
Antoneli, F., Bosco, F., Castro, D., & Janini, L. M. (2013a). Viral evolution and adaptation as a multivariate branching process. In R. P. Mondaini (Ed.), BIOMAT 2012—proceedings of the international symposium on mathematical and computational biology. Singapore: World Scientific. http://arxiv.org/abs/1110.3368.
Antoneli, F., Bosco, F., & Janini, L. M. (2013b, in preparation). Fluctuations and correlations of a phenotypic quasi-species.
Athreya, K. B., & Ney, P. E. (1972). Branching processes. Berlin: Springer.
Bull, J. J., Meyers, L. A., & Lachmann, M. (2005). Quasispecies made simple. PLoS Comput. Biol., 1(6), 450–460.
Bull, J. J., Sanjuán, R., & Wilke, C. O. (2007). Theory of lethal mutagenesis for viruses. J. Virol., 18(6), 2930–2939. doi:10.1128/JVI.01624-06.
Bull, J. J., Sanjuán, R., & Wilke, C. O. (2008). Lethal mutagenesis. In E. Domingo, C. R. Parrish, & J. J. Holland (Eds.), Origin and evolution of viruses (2nd ed., pp. 207–218). London: Academic Press. Chap. 9. doi:10.1016/B978-0-12-374153-0.00009-6.
Capitán, J. A., Cuesta, J. A., Manrubia, S. C., & Aguirre, J. (2011). Severe hindrance of viral infection propagation in spatially extended hosts. PLoS ONE, 6(8), 358. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0023358. e23.
Carrasco, P., de la Iglesia, F., & Elena, S. F. (2007). Distribution of fitness and virulence effects caused by single-nucleotide substitutions in tobacco etch virus. J. Virol., 18(23), 12979–12984.
Castro, D. (2011). Simulação computacional e análise de um modelo fenotípico de evolução viral. Master’s thesis, Universidade Federal de São Paulo—UNIFESP, São Paulo.
Castro, D., Antoneli, F., Bosco, F., & Janini, L. M. (2011, in preparation). Computational simulation of a model for viral evolution.
Crotty, S., Cameron, C. E., & Andino, R. (2001). RNA virus error catastrophe: direct molecular test by using ribavirin. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 98, 6895–6900.
Cuesta, J. A. (2011). Huge progeny production during transient of a quasi-species model of viral infection, reproduction and mutation. Math. Comput. Model., 54, 1676–1681.
Cuesta, J. A., Aguirre, J., Capitán, J. A., & Manrubia, S. C. (2011). Struggle for space: viral extinction through competition for cells. Phys. Rev. Lett., 106(2), 028104.
Delbrück, M. (1945). The burst size distribution in the growth of bacterial viruses (bacteriophages). J. Bacteriol., 50(2), 131–135.
Demetrius, L., & Legendre, S. (2013). Evolutionary entropy predicts the outcome of selection: competition for resources that vary in abundance and diversity. Theor. Popul. Biol., 83, 39–54.
Demetrius, L., Schuster, P., & Sigmund, K. (1985). Polynucleotide evolution and branching processes. Bull. Math. Biol., 47(2), 239–262. http://www.springerlink.com/content/h362q6007842h042/.
Dietz, K. (2005). Darwinian fitness, evolutionary entropy and directionality theory. BioEssays, 27, 1097–1101.
Domingo, E., et al. (1985). The quasispecies (extremely heterogeneous) nature of viral RNA genome populations: biological relevance—a review. Gene, 40(1), 1–8.
Domingo, E., Baranowski, E., Ruiz-Jarabo, C. M., Martín-Hernández, A. M., Sáiz, J. C., & Escarmís, C. (1998). Quasispecies structure and persistence of RNA viruses. Emerg. Infect. Dis., 4(4), 521–527.
Domingo-Calap, P., Cuevas, J. M., & Sanjuán, R. (2009). The fitness effects of random mutations in single-stranded DNA and RNA bacteriophages. PLoS Genet., 5(11), e1000742.
Eigen, M. (1971). Selforganization of matter and the evolution of biological macromolecules. Naturwissenschaften, 58, 465–523.
Eigen, M., & Schuster, P. (1979). The hypercycle. a principle of natural self-organization. Berlin: Springer.
Elena, S. F., & Sanjuán, R. (2005). Adaptive value of high mutation rates of RNA viruses: separating causes from consequences. J. Virol., 79(18), 11555–11558. doi:10.1128/JVI.79.18.11555-11558.2005.
Elena, S. F., Wilke, C. O., Ofria, C., & Lenski, R. E. (2007). Effects of population size and mutation rate on the evolution of mutational robustness. Evolution, 61(3), 666–674. doi:10.1111/j.1558-5646.2007.00064.x.
Escarmís, C., Lázaro, E., & Manrubia, S. C. (2006). Population bottlenecks in quasispecies dynamics. Curr. Top. Microbiol. Immunol., 299, 141–170.
Eyre-Walker, A., & Keightley, P. D. (2007). The distribution of fitness effects of new mutations. Nat. Rev. Genet., 8(8), 610–618. doi:10.1038/nrg2146.
Feller, W. (1968). An introduction to probability theory and its applications (3rd ed., Vol. 1). New York: Wiley.
Forster, R., Adami, C., & Wilke, C. O. (2006). Selection for mutational robustness in finite populations. J. Theor. Biol., 243(2), 181–190. doi:10.1016/j.jtbi.2006.06.020.
Gantmacher, F. (2005). Applications of the theory of matrices. New York: Dover.
Gray, R. M. (2006). Toeplitz and circulant matrices: a review. Hanover: Now Publishers.
Grenander, U., & Szegö, G. (1958). Toeplitz forms and their applications. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Harris, T. (1963). The theory of branching processes. Berlin: Springer.
Hermisson, J., Redner, O., Wagner, H., & Baake, E. (2002). Mutation-selection balance: ancestry, load, and maximum principle. Theor. Popul. Biol., 62(1), 9–46. doi:10.1006/tpbi.2002.1582.
Imhof, M., & Schlotterer, C. (2001). Fitness effects of advantageous mutations in evolving escherichia coli populations. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 98(3), 1113–1117. doi:10.1073/pnas.98.3.1113.
Jagers, P., Klebaner, F. C., & Sagitov, S. (2007). On the path to extinction. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 104(15), 6107–6111.
Jiřina, M. (1970). A simplified proof of the Sevastyanov theorem on branching processes. Ann. Inst. Henri Poincaré, B Calc. Probab. Stat., 6(1), 1–7.
Keightley, P. D., & Lynch, M. (2003). Toward a realistic model of mutations affecting fitness. Evolution, 57(3), 683–685; discussion 686–689.
Kimmel, M., & Axelrod, D. (2002). Branching processes in biology. New York: Springer.
Kowald, A., & Demetrius, L. (2005). Directionality theory: a computational study of an entropic principle. Proc. R. Soc. B, 272, 741–749.
Kurtz, T. G., Lyons, R., Pemantle, R., & Peres, Y. (1994). A conceptual proof of the Kesten-Stigum theorem for multi-type branching processes. In K. Athreya & P. Jagers (Eds.), IMA math. appl.: Vol. 84. Classical and modern branching processes (pp. 181–185). New York: Springer.
Lázaro, E., Escarmís, C., Domingo, E., & Manrubia, S. C. (2002). Modeling viral genome fitness evolution associated with serial bottleneck events: evidence of stationary states of fitness. J. Virol., 76(17), 8675–8681.
Leuthäusser, I. (1987). Statistical mechanics of Eigen’s evolution model. J. Stat. Phys., 48(1/2), 343–360.
Manrubia, S. C., Lázaro, E., Pérez-Mercader, J., Escarmís, C., & Domingo, E. (2003). Fitness distributions in exponentially growing asexual populations. Phys. Rev. Lett., 90(18), 188102.
Meyer, C. (2000). Matrix analysis and applied linear algebra. Philadelphia: SIAM.
Miralles, R., Gerrish, P. J., Moya, A., & Elena, S. F. (1999). Clonal interference and the evolution of RNA viruses. Science, 285(5434), 1745–1747.
Ojosnegros, S., Beerenwinkel, N., Antal, T., Nowak, M. A., Escarmís, C., & Domingo, E. (2010a). Competition-colonization dynamics in an RNA virus. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 107(5), 2108–2112. doi:10.1073/pnas.0909787107.
Ojosnegros, S., Beerenwinkel, N., & Domingo, E. (2010b). Competition-colonization dynamics: an ecology approach to quasispecies dynamics and virulence evolution in RNA viruses. Commun. Integr. Biol., 3(4), 333–336.
Orr, H. A. (2003). The distribution of fitness effects among beneficial mutations. Genetics, 163(4), 1519–1526.
Parera, M., Fernàndez, G., Clotet, B., & Martínez, M. A. (2007). HIV-1 protease catalytic efficiency effects caused by random single amino acid substitutions. Mol. Biol. Evol., 24(2), 382–387. doi:10.1093/molbev/msl168.
Rokyta, D. R., Beisel, C. J., Joyce, P., Ferris, M. T., Burch, C. L., & Wichman, H. A. (2008). Beneficial fitness effects are not exponential for two viruses. J. Mol. Evol., 67(4), 368–376. doi:10.1007/s00239-008-9153-x.
Sanjuán, R., Moya, A., & Elena, S. F. (2004). The distribution of fitness effects caused by single-nucleotide substitutions in an RNA virus. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 101, 8396–8401.
Steinhauer, D. A., Domingo, E., & Holland, J. J. (1992). Lack of evidence for proofreading mechanisms associated with an RNA virus polymerase. Gene, 122(2), 281–288.
Swetina, J., & Schuster, P. (1982). Self-replication with errors: a model for polynucleotide replication. Biophys. Chem., 16(4), 329–345. doi:10.1016/0301-4622(82)87037-3.
Thompson, C. J., & McBride, J. L. (1974). On Eigen’s theory of the self-organization of matter and the evolution of biological macromolecules. Math. Biosci., 21(1–2), 127–142. doi:10.1016/0025-5564(74)90110-2.
Timm, A., & Yin, J. (2012). Kinetics of virus production from single cells. Virology, 424(1), 11–17. doi:10.1016/j.virol.2011.12.005.
Watson, H. W., & Galton, F. (1874). On the probability of the extinction of families. J. Anthropol. Inst. G. B. Irel., 4, 138–144.
Wilke, C. O. (2003). Probability of fixation of an advantageous mutant in a viral quasispecies. Genetics, 163(2), 467–474.
Wilke, C. O., Wang, J. L., Ofria, C., Lenski, R., & Adami, C. (2001). Evolution of digital organisms at high mutation rates leads to survival of the flattest. Nature, 412(6844), 331–333. doi:10.1038/35085569.
Wilkinson, J. H. (1965). Algebraic eigenvalue problem. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Zhu, Y., Yongky, A., & Yin, J. (2009). Growth of an RNA virus in single cells reveals a broad fitness distribution. Virology, 385(1), 39–46. doi:10.1016/j.virol.2008.10.031.
Ziehe, M., & Demetrius, L. (2005). Directionality theory: an empirical study of an entropic principle in life-history evolution. Proc. R. Soc. B, 272, 1185–1194.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank C.O. Wilke for some pertinent comments on a previous version of this work. FA wishes to acknowledge the support of CNPq through the grant PQ-313224/2009-9. FB received support from the Brazilian agency FAPESP. DC received financial support from the Brazilian agency CAPES.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Dedicated to the memory of our dear collaborator and friend Francisco de Assis Ribas Bosco (1955–2012).
Appendix: Spectral Perturbation Theory
Appendix: Spectral Perturbation Theory
In order to carry out the perturbative calculations, we need to solve the spectral problem for the matrix
The eigenvalues \(\lambda_{r}^{0}\) of the mean matrix M 0 are
In particular, the Malthusian parameter is the largest positive eigenvalue
The normalized left and right eigenvectors, \(\boldsymbol{v}_{r}^{0}\) and \(\boldsymbol {u}_{r}^{0}\), associated to the eigenvalue \(\lambda_{r}^{0}\), satisfy
Writing \(\boldsymbol{v}_{r}^{0}\) and \(\boldsymbol{u}_{r}^{0}\) in components as
one has that
and
Now we write the eigenvalue λ r of M as a function of the parameter b, expanded as a power series
where \(\lambda_{r}^{0}\) is the corresponding eigenvalue of M 0. Clearly, \(\lambda_{r}(b)\to\lambda_{r}^{0}\) as b→0. The higher order perturbation coefficients \(\lambda_{r}^{i}\), (i=1,2,3,…) are written in terms of all the eigenvalues \(\lambda_{s}^{0}\) (s=0,…,R) of M 0 and their associated left and right normalized eigenvectors \(\boldsymbol{v}_{s}^{0}\) and \(\boldsymbol{u}_{s}^{0}\) and the perturbation matrix
Note that the operator norm of P is ∥P∥=2(R−1) and so the magnitude of the perturbation is 2b(R−1).
The general expressions for the first and second order coefficients of the perturbation expansion of an eigenvalue are
We want to use these formulas to compute a perturbation approximation (for b around 0) of the Malthusian parameter m(b) of ( M). Recall that, m(0)=m 0=R(1−d) and the corresponding left and right eigenvectors are given by
with u R (k)=binom(k;R,1−d). The first-order coefficient of the Malthusian parameter is
For the second-order coefficient, we also need
The second-order coefficient is
Analogous perturbative formulas exist for the perturbation expansion of the left and right eigenvector corresponding to an eigenvalue λ r . The left and right eigenvector v r and u r of the matrix M associated with the eigenvalue λ r can be written as a function of the parameter b, expanded as a vector-valued power series:
where \(\boldsymbol{v}_{r}^{0}\) and \(\boldsymbol{u}_{r}^{0}\) are, respectively, the left and right eigenvectors of the matrix M 0 associated to the eigenvalue \(\lambda_{r}^{0}\). The perturbation terms \(A_{r,s}^{i}\) and \(B_{r,s}^{i}\) with i=1,2,3,… , can be written in terms of the eigenvalues of M 0 and their associated left and right eigenvectors and the perturbation matrix P. Observe that when b→0 we get the normalized left and right eigenvectors \(\boldsymbol{v}_{R}^{0}\) and \(\boldsymbol{u}_{R}^{0}\) associated to the dominant eigenvalue m 0=(1−d)R of the mean matrix M 0.
We are interested in the normalized eigenvectors v R and u R associated to the Malthusian parameter m=(1−d)R
with \(\alpha_{k}=A_{R,k}^{1}\), (0⩽k⩽R−1) and \(\alpha_{R}=-\sum_{k=0}^{R-1} \alpha_{k}\),
with \(\beta_{k}=B_{R,k}^{1}\), (0⩽k⩽R−1) and \(\beta_{R}=-\sum_{k=0}^{R-1} \beta_{k}\).
The first-order coefficients are given by
and the second-order terms are given by
for s=0,…,R−1.
One may use the formula of v R up to second order
and the first-order expansion \(\boldsymbol{u}_{R} = \boldsymbol{u}_{R}^{0} + \mathit {O}(b)\) in order to estimate the product of coefficients u R (r)v R (r) (up to their leading order). For instance, it is easy to find that
In general, using a higher order expansion formula for v R , one concludes that
This follows form the fact that the coefficient of order b r in the perturbation expansion of v R is a linear combination of the left eigenvectors \(\boldsymbol{v}_{R-1}^{0},\ldots,\boldsymbol{v}_{r-R}^{0}\), all of which have zeros in the first r−1 components.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Antoneli, F., Bosco, F., Castro, D. et al. Virus Replication as a Phenotypic Version of Polynucleotide Evolution. Bull Math Biol 75, 602–628 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11538-013-9822-9
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11538-013-9822-9