Population Consequences of Mutagenesis and Antimutagenesis
Although the progress in basic understanding of mutagenesis and in techniques for precise measurement of mutation rates in test systems has been enormous, there has been very little progress in applying this information to estimates of germline mutation in humans, and even less in translating such estimates into quantitative assessments of the impact on future generations. This doesn’t mean that new information about the mutation process, and antimutagens in particular, is not useful. Lowering the human mutation rate would be good, even if we can’t say how good.
Some simple population kinetics of a change of mutation are discussed, and it is shown that future environmental changes can be ignored if we assume that the impact of a disease on human welfare is changed by the environment in the same proportion as its effect on fitness.
Since the human mutation rate appears to be much higher in males than in females, it would be especially important to find ways of reducing the male rate. The role of transposable elements in determining human spontaneous mutation rates is unknown, but unless data from experimental organisms are grossly misleading, this role may be substantial.
It is sometimes argued that such responses as error-prone repair systems may be an evolutionary strategy to allow the population to try a larger repertoire of mutations in times of environmental change. They may also be a survival strategy. I suggest that, although such an evolutionary strategy may possibly be adopted in asexual organisms with a very high reproductive rate, it is very unlikely in Mendelian species with limited reproduction such as most higher animals. The amount of existing variability in a large population is so great relative to that which arises in a few generations by mutation that segregation and recombination of existing alleles would appear to be a better way of coping with changing environment.
As the human age of reproduction has increased in the recent evolutionary past, it is possible that the compensatory adjustment of mutation rates has not been fast enough to keep up. Perhaps evolution of mutation rates is more determined by selection to reduce somatic mutation than by selection to reduce germinal mutation. Regardless of the answer to the question of the optimum mutation rate for long-time evolution, in my view, the optimum mutation rate from the standpoint of human welfare for the foreseeable future is zero.
KeywordsToxicity Ethyl Recombination Germinal Caffeine
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Aquadro, C.F., S.F. Deese, M.M. Bland, C.H. Langley, and C.C. Laurie-Ahlberg (1986) Molecular population genetics of the alcohol dehydrogenase gene region of Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics (in press).Google Scholar
- 5.Cox, E.C., and T.C. Gibson (1974) Selection for high mutation rates in chemostats. Genetics 77:169–184.Google Scholar
- 7.Crow, J.F. (1979) Minor viability mutants in Drosophila. Genetics 92s:165–172.Google Scholar
- 9.Crow, J.F., and C. Denniston (1985) Mutation in human populations. Adv. Hum Genet. 15:59–123.Google Scholar
- 10.Crow, J.F., and members of the NIH Genetics Study Section (1968) Chemical risk to future generations. Scientist and Citizen June-July, pp. 113–117.Google Scholar
- 13.Haldane, J.B.S. (1949) The rate of mutation of human genes. Hereditas 1949(Suppl.):267–273.Google Scholar
- 14.Leigh, E. (1973) The evolution of mutation rates. Genetics 73s:1–18.Google Scholar
- 15.Li, W.H., and M. Nei (1972) Total number of individuals affected by a single deleterious mutation in a finite population. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 24:667–679.Google Scholar
- 18.Muller, H.J. (1950) Our load of mutations. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 2:111–176.Google Scholar
- 19.National Academy of Sciences (1983) Identifying and Estimating the Genetic Impact of Chemical Mutagens, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
- 20.Neel, J.V. (1942) A study of a case of high mutation rate in Drosophlla melanogaster. Genetics 27:519–536.Google Scholar
- 23.Shapiro, J. A. (1983) Mobile Genetic Elements, Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
- 25.Vogel, F. (1977) A probable sex difference in some mutation rates. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 29:312–319.Google Scholar
- 26.Vogel, F., and A.G. Motulsky (1979) Human Genetics, Springer-Verlag, Berlin.Google Scholar