Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39623316›Full record

ArticleBMC ecology and evolution2024

Experimental evolution reveals evolutionary bias and its causes.

Haoyuan Wu, Yonghua Wu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC ecology and evolution, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

2 authors.

Haoyuan WuSchool of Life Sciences, Northeast Normal University, 5268 Renmin Street, Changchun, 130024, China.
Yonghua WuSchool of Life Sciences, Northeast Normal University, 5268 Renmin Street, Changchun, 130024, China. wuyh442@nenu.edu.cn.

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China 32171604
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSpecies generally exhibits evolutionary bias, adapting towards a specific direction rather than others, yet the underlying causes remains unknown.

resultsHere, we investigated evolutionary bias and its causes by conducting experimental evolution on Escherichia coli. We introduced an E. coli strain (lac-), initially unable to utilize lactose due to a frameshift mutation, into two different culture media: one medium (L) containing ample sodium acetate and lactose as carbon sources, and the other medium (G) containing abundant glucose and lactose as carbon sources. After 20 days of experimental evolution, our findings revealed that all L-populations underwent parallel evolution through reverse mutation to utilize lactose (lac+), resulting in a relatively higher fitness gain compared to utilizing sodium acetate. In contrast, all G-populations did not transition towards lactose utilization but instead continued to utilize glucose, which provides a higher fitness gain than utilizing lactose. These results demonstrate that our experimental populations in L and G media respectively exhibit biased evolution towards utilizing different carbon sources, yet all trajectories converge towards higher fitness gains. When lac+ (lactose-eater) and lac- (acetate-eater) were co-cultured in L medium, all lac- individuals were eventually eliminated, while lac + individuals were consistently selected and retained.

conclusionsOur findings indicate that species tend to evolve with a bias towards directions that offer higher fitness gains, partly because high-fitness-gain directions competitively exclude low-fitness-gain directions.

Indexed as

Biological EvolutionEscherichia coliLactoseCulture MediaGenetic FitnessGlucoseSodium AcetateCulture MediaGlucoseLactoseSodium AcetateEvolutionary biasEvolutionary constraint hypothesisEvolutionary gravitationInter-directional selectionIntradirectional selection

Identifiers

PMID39623316
PMCPMC11613857

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.