Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29649242›Full record

ArticlePLoS genetics2018

Innovation in an E. coli evolution experiment is contingent on maintaining adaptive potential until competition subsides.

Dacia Leon, Simon D'Alton, Erik M Quandt, Jeffrey E Barrick

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS genetics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. The cost of evolved constitutiveEcology and evolution · 2021
    Article
  14. The landscape of innovation in bacteria, battleships, and beyond.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2021
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Dynamics of bacterial adaptation.Biochemical Society transactions · 2021
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Dacia LeonDepartment of Molecular Biosciences, Institute for Cellular and Molecular Biology, Center for Systems and Synthetic Biology, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, United States of America.
Simon D'AltonDepartment of Molecular Biosciences, Institute for Cellular and Molecular Biology, Center for Systems and Synthetic Biology, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, United States of America.
Erik M QuandtDepartment of Molecular Biosciences, Institute for Cellular and Molecular Biology, Center for Systems and Synthetic Biology, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, United States of America.
Jeffrey E BarrickDepartment of Molecular Biosciences, Institute for Cellular and Molecular Biology, Center for Systems and Synthetic Biology, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-0888-7358

Funding

Identifying Mutations that Promote Microbial EvolvabilityR00GM087550 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN · PI BARRICK, JEFFREY EVAN · 2011 to 2013
$724k
NIGMS NIH HHS R00 GM087550NIH HHS R00-GM087550
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Key innovations are disruptive evolutionary events that enable a species to escape constraints and rapidly diversify. After 15 years of the Lenski long-term evolution experiment with Escherichia coli, cells in one of the twelve populations evolved the ability to utilize citrate, an abundant but previously untapped carbon source in the environment. Descendants of these cells became dominant in the population and subsequently diversified as a consequence of invading this vacant niche. Mutations responsible for the appearance of rudimentary citrate utilization and for refining this ability have been characterized. However, the complete nature of the genetic and/or ecological events that set the stage for this key innovation is unknown. In particular, it is unclear why it took so long for citrate utilization to evolve and why it still has evolved in only one of the twelve E. coli populations after 30 years of the Lenski experiment. In this study, we recapitulated the initial mutation needed to evolve citrate utilization in strains isolated from throughout the first 31,500 generations of the history of this population. We found that there was already a slight fitness benefit for this mutation in the original ancestor of the evolution experiment and in other early isolates. However, evolution of citrate utilization was blocked at this point due to competition with other mutations that improved fitness in the original niche. Subsequently, an anti-potentiated genetic background evolved in which it was deleterious to evolve rudimentary citrate utilization. Only later, after further mutations accumulated that restored the benefit of this first-step mutation and the overall rate of adaptation in the population slowed, was citrate utilization likely to evolve. Thus, intense competition and the types of mutations that it favors can lead to short-sighted evolutionary trajectories that hide a stepping stone needed to access a key innovation from many future generations.

Indexed as

Evolution, MolecularAdaptation, PhysiologicalCitric AcidCulture MediaDirected Molecular EvolutionEcosystemEscherichia coliEscherichia coli ProteinsGene Knock-In TechniquesGenes, BacterialModels, BiologicalModels, GeneticMutationOrganic Anion TransportersPhylogenyCitric AcidCitT protein, E coliCulture MediaEscherichia coli ProteinsOrganic Anion Transporters

Identifiers

PMID29649242
PMCPMC5918244

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.