Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35975326›Full record

ArticleGenome biology and evolution2022

Idiosyncratic Purifying Selection on Metabolic Enzymes in the Long-Term Evolution Experiment with Escherichia coli.

Rohan Maddamsetti

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genome biology and evolution, 2022. 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

1 author.

Rohan MaddamsettiDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3370-092X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bacteria, Archaea, and Eukarya all share a common set of metabolic reactions. This implies that the function and topology of central metabolism has been evolving under purifying selection over deep time. Central metabolism may similarly evolve under purifying selection during long-term evolution experiments, although it is unclear how long such experiments would have to run (decades, centuries, millennia) before signs of purifying selection on metabolism appear. I hypothesized that central and superessential metabolic enzymes would show evidence of purifying selection in the long-term evolution experiment with Escherichia coli (LTEE). I also hypothesized that enzymes that specialize on single substrates would show stronger evidence of purifying selection in the LTEE than generalist enzymes that catalyze multiple reactions. I tested these hypotheses by analyzing metagenomic time series covering 62,750 generations of the LTEE. I find mixed support for these hypotheses, because the observed patterns of purifying selection are idiosyncratic and population-specific. To explain this finding, I propose the Jenga hypothesis, named after a children's game in which blocks are removed from a tower until it falls. The Jenga hypothesis postulates that loss-of-function mutations degrade costly, redundant, and non-essential metabolic functions. Replicate populations can therefore follow idiosyncratic trajectories of lost redundancies, despite purifying selection on overall function. I tested the Jenga hypothesis by simulating the evolution of 1,000 minimal genomes under strong purifying selection. As predicted, the minimal genomes converge to different metabolic networks. Strikingly, the core genes common to all 1,000 minimal genomes show consistent signatures of purifying selection in the LTEE.

Indexed as

Escherichia coliMetabolic Networks and PathwaysArchaeaChildEvolution, MolecularGenomeHumansMutationSelection, Geneticexperimental evolutionmetabolic networkspurifying selection

Identifiers

PMID35975326
PMCPMC9768419

What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.