ArticleScientific reports2019
Distribution of fitness effects of mutations obtained from a simple genetic regulatory network model.
Article in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Phenotype Design Space Provides a Mechanistic Framework Relating Molecular Parameters to Phenotype Diversity Available for Selection.Journal of molecular evolution · 2023Article
- Inferring the distributions of fitness effects and proportions of strongly deleterious mutations.G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2023Article
- Selection in a growing colony biases results of mutation accumulation experiments.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Bacterial fitness landscapes stratify based on proteome allocation associated with discrete aero-types.PLoS computational biology · 2021Article
- Experimental Evolution of Anticipatory Regulation inFrontiers in microbiology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Beneficial and deleterious mutations change an organism's fitness but the distribution of these mutational effects on fitness are unknown. Several experimental, theoretical, and computational studies have explored this question but are limited because of experimental restrictions, or disconnect with physiology. Here we attempt to characterize the distribution of fitness effects (DFE) due to mutations in a cellular regulatory motif. We use a simple mathematical model to describe the dynamics of gene expression in the lactose utilization network, and use a cost-benefit framework to link the model output to fitness. We simulate mutations by changing model parameters and computing altered fitness to obtain the DFE. We find beneficial mutations distributed exponentially, but distribution of deleterious mutations seems far more complex. In addition, we find neither the starting fitness, nor the exact location on the fitness landscape, affecting these distributions qualitatively. Lastly, we quantify epistasis in our model and find that the distribution of epistatic effects remains qualitatively conserved across different locations on the fitness landscape. Overall, we present a first attempt at exploring the specific statistical features of the fitness landscape associated with a system, by using the specific mathematical model associated with it.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.