Skip to main content

Hidden Evolution: Progress and Limitations in Detecting Multifarious Natural Selection

Abstract

From illustrative examples of research on the best-studied group of species to date, Drosophila melanogaster and its closest relatives, we argue that selection is multifarious, but often hidden. Selective fixation of new, highly advantageous alleles is the most parsimonious explanation for a typical pattern of molecular variation observed in genomic regions characterized by very low recombination: drastically reduced DNA sequence variation within species and typical levels of sequence divergence among species. At the same time, the identity of the gene (or genes) influenced by selection is not just difficult to discern; it may be impossible. Studies of the genetic basis of reproductive isolation demonstrate that, although the D. melanogaster complex species appear virtually identical, dozens of currently unidentified genes contribute to hybrid sterility. We argue that these findings are best explained by selectively-driven functional divergence and demonstrate the multifarious nature of selection. Although multifarious selection certainly occurs, the exact characters responsible for differences in survival and reproductive success are unknown. We do not see these inherent limits as a cause for despair or a problem for evolutionary biology. Instead, we hope to raise awareness of these complexities of evolution by highlighting both the progress and the limitations of characterizing multifarious natural selection.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  1. Adams, M.D. et al., 2000. The genome sequence of Drosophila melanogaster. Science 287: 2185-2195.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Akashi, H., 1995. Inferring weak selection from patterns of polymorphism and divergence at 'silent’ sites in Drosophila DNA. Genetics 139: 1067-1076.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Akashi, H. &; S.W. Schaeffer, 1997. Natural selection and the frequency distributions of 'silent’ DNA polymorphism in Drosophila. Genetics 146: 295-307.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Aquadro, C.F., 2000. The problem of inferring selection in evolutionary history from molecular data. Evol. Biol. 32: 135-149.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Begun, D.J. &; C.F. Aquadro, 1991. Molecular population genetics of the distal portion of the X chromosome in Drosophila: evidence for genetic hitchhiking of the yellow-achaete region. Genetics 129: 1147-1158.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Berry, A.J., J.W. Ajioka &; M. Kreitman, 1991. Lack of polymorphism on the Drosophila fourth chromosome resulting from selection. Genetics 129: 1111-1117.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Caccone, A., E.N. Moriyama, J.M. Gleason, L. Nigro &; J.R. Powell, 1996. A molecular phylogeny for the Drosophila melanogaster subgroup and the problem of polymorphism data. Mol. Biol. Evol. 13: 1224-1232.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Charlesworth, B., 1996. Background selection and patterns of genetic diversity in Drosophila melanogaster. Genet. Res. 68: 131-149.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Charlesworth, B., M.T. Morgan &; D. Charlesworth, 1993. The effect of deleterious mutations on neutral molecular evolution. Genetics 134: 1289-1303.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Clark, A.G., 2000. Limits to prediction of phenotypes from knowledge of genotypes. Evol. Biol. 32: 205-224.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Clegg, M.T., M.X. Hecht &; R.J. MacIntyre (eds), 2000. Evolutionary Biology: Limits to Knowledge in Evolutionary Genetics, Vol. 32. Kluwer, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Cowling, D.E. &; B. Burnet, 1981. Courtship songs and genetic control of their acoustic characteristics in sibling species of the Drosophila melanogaster subgroup. Anim. Behav. 29: 924-935.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Coyne, J.A. &; M. Kreitman, 1986. Evolutionary genetics of two sibling species, Drosophila simulans and Drosophila sechellia. Evolution 40: 673-691.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Coyne, J.A., A. Crittenden &; K. Mah, 1994. Genetics of a pheromonal difference contributing to reproductive isolation in Drosophila. Science 265: 1461-1464.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Darwin, C., 1859. The Origin of Species by Natural Selection. John Murray, London.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Davis, A.W., J. Roote, T. Morley, K. Sawamura, S. Herrmann &; M. Ashburner, 1996. Rescue of hybrid sterility in crosses between D. melanogaster and D. simulans. Nature 380: 157-159.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Davis, A.W. &; C.-I. Wu, 1996. The broom of the sorcerer's apprentice: the fine structure of a chromosomal region causing reproductive isolation between two sibling species of Drosophila. Genetics 143: 1287-1298.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Dawkins, R., 1986. The Blind Watchmaker. Norton, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Dennett, D.C., 1995. Darwin's Dangerous Idea. Simon and Schuster, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Dobzhansky, Th., 1936. Studies of hybrid sterility. II. Localization of sterility factors in Drosophila pseudoobscura hybrids. Genetics 21: 113-135.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Dobzhansky, Th., 1937. Genetics and the Origin of Species. Columbia University Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Doi, M., M. Matsuda, M. Tomaru, H. Matsubayashi &; Y. Oguma, 2001. A locus for female discrimination behavior causing sexual isolation in Drosophila. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 98: 6714-6719.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Eanes, W.F., M. Kirchner &; J. Yoon, 1993. Evidence for adaptive evolution of the G6pd gene in the Drosophila melanogaster and Drosophila simulans lineages. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 90: 7475-7479.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Felsenstein, J., 1974. The evolutionary advantage of recombination. Genetics 78: 737-756.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Futuyma, D.J., 1998. Evolutionary Biology. 2nd edn, Sinauer Press, Sunderland, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Golding, G.B. &; A.M. Dean, 1998. The structural basis of molecular adaptation. Mol. Biol. Evol. 15: 355-369.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Haldane, J.B.S., 1922. Sex-ratio and unisexual sterility in hybrid animals. J. Genet. 12: 101-109.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Harris, E.E. &; J. Hey, 1999. X chromosome evidence for ancient human histories. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 96: 3320-3324.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Harris, E.E. &; J. Hey, 2001. Human populations show reduced DNA sequence variation at the Factor IX locus. Curr. Biol. 11: 774-778.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Hawley, R.S. &; C.A. Mori, 1999. The Human Genome: A User's Guide. Academic Press, San Diego.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Hey, J., 1999. The neutralist, the fly and the selectionist. Trends Ecol. Evol. 14: 35-38.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Hey, J., 2000. Anticipating scientific revolutions in evolutionary genetics. Evol. Biol. 32: 97-111.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Hill, W.G. &; A. Robertson, 1966. The effect of linkage on limits to artificial selection. Genet. Res. 8: 269-294.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Hilton, H., R.M. Kliman &; J. Hey, 1994. Using hitchhiking genes to study adaptation and divergence during speciation within the Drosophila melanogaster species complex. Evolution 48: 1900-1913.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Hollocher, H. &; C.-I. Wu, 1996. The genetics of reproductive isolation in the Drosophila simulans clade: X vs. autosomal effects and male vs. female effects. Genetics 143: 1243-1255.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Horgan, J., 1996. The End of Science. Broadway Books, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Hudson, R.R., 1990. Gene genealogies and the coalescent process, pp. 1-44 in Oxford Surveys in Evolutionary Biology, Vol. 7, edited by D.J. Futuyma &; J. Antonovics. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Hudson, R.R., M. Kreitman &; M. Aguadé, 1987. A test of neutral molecular evolution based on nucleotide data. Genetics 116: 153-159.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Johnson, G.C.L. &; J.A. Todd, 2000. Strategies in complex disease mapping. Curr. Opinion Genet. Dev. 10: 330-334.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Johnson, N.A., 1992. Genetics of hybrid male sterility in three sibling species of the Drosophila melanogaster species subgroup. PhD Dissertation, University of Rochester, NY.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Johnson, N.A., 2000. Gene interaction and the origin of species, pp. 197-212 in Epistasis and the Evolutionary Process, edited by J.B. Wolf, E.D. Brodie III &; M.J. Wade. Oxford University Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Kimura, M., 1968. Evolutionary rate at the molecular level. Nature 217: 624-626.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  44. Kimura, M. &; J.F. Crow, 1964. The number of alleles that can be maintained in a finite population. Genetics 49: 725-738.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Kimura, M. &; T. Ohta, 1969. The average number of generations until fixation of a mutant gene in a finite population. Genetics 61: 763-771.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Kliman, R.M., 1999. Recent selection on synonymous codon usage in Drosophila. J. Mol. Evol. 49: 343-351.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Kliman, R.M. &; J. Hey, 1993. Reduced natural selection associated with low recombination in Drosophila melanogaster. Mol. Biol. Evol. 10: 1239-1258.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Kliman, R.M., P. Andolfatto, J.A. Coyne, F. Depaulis, M. Kreitman, A.J. Berry, J. McCarter, J. Wakeley &; J. Hey, 2000. The population genetics of the origin and divergence of the Drosophila simulans complex species. Genetics 156: 1913-1931.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Kreitman, M., 1983. Nucleotide polymorphism at the alcohol dehydrogenase locus of Drosophila melanogaster. Nature 304: 412-417.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Kreitman, M. &; R.R. Hudson, 1991. Inferring the evolutionary histories of the Adh and Adh-dup loci in Drosophila melanogaster from patterns of polymorphism and divergence. Genetics 127: 565-582.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Kruglyak, L., 1999. Prospects for whole-genome linkage disequilibrium mapping of common disease genes. Nature Genet. 22: 139-144.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Kyriacou, C.P. &; J.C. Hall, 1986. Interspecific genetic control of courtship song production and reception in Drosophila. Science 232: 494-497.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Lachaise, D., M.-L. Cariou, J.R. David, F. Lemeunier, L. Tsacas &; M. Ashburner, 1988. Historical biogeography of the Drosophila melanogaster species subgroup. Evol. Biol. 22: 159-225.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Langley, C., J.M. MacDonald, N. Miyashita &; M. Aguadé, 1993. Lack of correlation between interspecific divergence and intraspecific polymorphism at the suppressor of forked region in Drosophila melanogaster and Drosophila simulans. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 90: 1800-1803.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Li, W.-H., 1997. Molecular Evolution. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Ludwig, M.Z., C. Bergman, N.H. Patel &; M. Kreitman, 2000. Evidence for stabilizing selection in a eukaryotic enhancer element. Nature 403: 564-567.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Mayr, E., 1991. One Long Argument. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Mayr, E. &; W.B. Provine (eds), 1980. The Evolutionary Synthesis: Perspectives on the Unification of Biology. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Maynard Smith, J. &; J. Haigh, 1974. The hitchhiking effect of a favorable gene. Genet. Res. 23: 23-35.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Mitchell-Olds, T., 2001. Arabidopsis thaliana and its wild relatives: a model system for ecology and evolution. Trends Ecol. Evol. 16: 693-700.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Muller, H.J., 1942. Isolating mechanisms, evolution and temperature. Biol. Symp. 6: 71-125.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Nachman, M.W., 1997. Patterns of DNA variability at X-linked loci in Mus domesticus. Genetics 147: 1303-1316.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Noor, M.A.F., A.L. Cunningham &; J.C. Larkin, 2001. Consequences of recombination rate variation on QTL mapping studies: simulations based on the Drosophila melanogaster genome. Genetics 159: 581-588.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Ohta, T., 1996. The current significance and standing of neutral and nearly neutral theories. Bioassays 18: 673-677.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Orr, H.A., 1997. Haldane's rule. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 28: 195-218.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Orr, H.A. &; M. Turelli, 2001. The evolution of postzygotic isolation: accumulating Dobzhansky-Muller incompatibilities. Evolution 55: 1085-1094.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Palopoli, M.F. &; C.-I. Wu, 1994. Genetics of hybrid male-sterility between Drosophila sibling species: a complex web of epistasis is revealed in interspecific studies. Genetics 138: 329-341.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Palopoli, M.F., A.W. Davis &; C.-I. Wu, 1996. Discord between the phylogenies inferred from molecular versus functional data: uneven rates of functional evolution or low levels of gene flow? Genetics 144: 1321-1328.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Perez, D.E., C.-I. Wu, N.A. Johnson &; M.-L. Wu, 1993. Genetics of reproductive isolation in the Drosophila simulans clade: DNA marker-assisted mapping and characterization of a hybrid-male sterility gene, Odysseus (Ods). Genetics 134: 261-275.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Perez, D.E. &; C.-I. Wu, 1995. Further characterization of the Odysseus locus of hybrid sterility in Drosophila: one gene is not enough. Genetics 140: 201-206.

    Google Scholar 

  71. Pigliucci, M. &; J. Kaplan, 2000. The fall and rise of Dr. Pangloss: adaptationism and the Spandrels paper 20 years later. Trends Ecol. Evol. 15: 66-70.

    Google Scholar 

  72. Powell, J.R., 1997. Progress and Prospects in Evolutionary Biology: the Drosophila Model. Oxford University Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  73. Reich, D.E., M. Cargill, S. Bolk, J. Ireland, P.C. Sabeti, D.J. Richter, T. Lavery, R. Kouyoumjian, S. Farhadian, R. Ward &; E.S. Lander, 2001. Linkage disequilibrium in the human genome. Science 411: 199-204.

    Google Scholar 

  74. Rose, M.R. &; G.V. Lauder (eds), 1996. Adaptation. Academic Press, San Diego.

    Google Scholar 

  75. Rubin, G.M. &; E.B. Lewis, 2000. A brief history of Drosophila's contributions to genome research. Science 287: 2216-2220.

    Google Scholar 

  76. Sawyer, S.A. &; D.L. Hartl, 1992. Population genetics of polymorphism and divergence. Genetics 132: 1161-1176.

    Google Scholar 

  77. Simmons, G.M., W. Kwok, P. Matulonis &; T. Venkatesh, 1994. Polymorphism and divergence at the prune locus in Drosophila melanogaster and D. simulans. Mol. Biol. Evol. 11: 666-671.

    Google Scholar 

  78. Smith, N.G.C. &; A. Eyre-Walker, 2002. Adaptive protein evolution in Drosophila. Nature 15: 1022-1024.

    Google Scholar 

  79. Stephan, W. &; S.J. Mitchell, 1992. Reduced levels of DNA polymorphism and fixed between-population differences in the centromeric region of Drosophila ananassae. Genetics 132: 1039-1045.

    Google Scholar 

  80. Ting, C.-T., S.-C. Tsaur &; C.-I. Wu, 2000. The phylogeny of closely related species as revealed by the genealogy of a speciation gene, Odysseus. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 97: 5313-5316.

    Google Scholar 

  81. Ting, C.-T., S.-C. Tsaur, M.-L. Wu &; C.-I. Wu, 1998. A rapidly evolving homeobox at the site of a hybrid sterility gene. Science 282: 1501-1504.

    Google Scholar 

  82. True, J.R., J. Liu, L.F. Stam, Z.-B. Zeng &; C.C. Laurie, 1997. Quantitative genetic analysis of divergence in male secondary sexual traits between Drosophila simulans and Drosophila mauritiana. Evolution 51: 816-832.

    Google Scholar 

  83. True, J.R., J.M. Mercer &; C.C. Laurie, 1996. Differences in crossover frequency and distribution among three sibling species of Drosophila. Genetics 142: 507-523.

    Google Scholar 

  84. True, J.R., B.S. Weir &; C.C. Laurie, 1996. A genome-wide survey of hybrid incompatibility factors by introgression of marked segments of Drosophila mauritiana chromosomes into Drosophila simulans. Genetics 142: 819-837.

    Google Scholar 

  85. Vigilant, L., M. Stoneking, H. Harpending, K. Hawkes &; A.C. Wilson, 1991. African populations and the evolution of human mitochondrial DNA. Science 253: 1503-1507.

    Google Scholar 

  86. Wang, W., K. Thornton, A. Berry &; M. Long, 2002. Nucleotide variation along the Drosophila melanogaster fourth chromosome. Nature 295: 134-137.

    Google Scholar 

  87. Wayne, M.L. &; K.L. Simonsen, 1998. Statistical tests of neutrality in the age of weak selection. Trends Ecol. Evol. 13: 236-240.

    Google Scholar 

  88. Williams, G.C., 1992. Natural Selection: Domains, Levels and Challenges. Oxford University Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  89. Wright, S., 1969. Evolution and the Genetics of Populations, Vol. 2: The Theory of Gene Frequencies. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  90. Wu, C.-I., 2000. Genetics of species differentiation: what is unknown and what will be unknowable? Evol. Biol. 32: 239-248.

    Google Scholar 

  91. Wu, C.-I. &; A.W. Davis, 1993. Evolution of postmating reproductive isolation: the composite nature of Haldane's rule and its genetic bases. Amer. Natur. 142: 187-212.

    Google Scholar 

  92. Wu, C.-I. &; M.F. Palopoli, 1994. Genetics of postmating reproductive isolation in animals. Ann. Rev. Genet. 28: 283-308.

    Google Scholar 

  93. Wu, C.-I., N.A. Johnson &; M.F. Palopoli, 1996. Haldane's rule and its legacy: why are there so many sterile males? Trends Ecol. Evol. 11: 281-284.

    Google Scholar 

  94. Wu, C.-I., D.E. Perez, A.W. Davis, N.A. Johnson, E.L. Cabot, M.F. Palopoli &; M.-L. Wu, 1993. Molecular genetic studies of postmating reproductive isolation in Drosophila, pp. 191-211 in Mechanisms of Molecular Evolution, edited by N. Takahata &; A.G. Clark. Sinauer Associated Press, Sunderland, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  95. Wyckoff, G.J., W. Wang &; C.-I. Wu, 2000. Rapid evolution of male reproductive genes in the descent of man. Nature 403: 304-309.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Johnson, N.A., Kliman, R.M. Hidden Evolution: Progress and Limitations in Detecting Multifarious Natural Selection. Genetica 114, 281–291 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016288725718

Download citation

  • Drosophila
  • genetic hitchhiking
  • hybrid sterility
  • molecular population genetics
  • natural selection
  • reproductive isolation