Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2004 Oct;168(2):1053-69.
doi: 10.1534/genetics.104.027706.

Analysis of the estimators of the average coefficient of dominance of deleterious mutations

Affiliations

Analysis of the estimators of the average coefficient of dominance of deleterious mutations

B Fernández et al. Genetics. 2004 Oct.

Abstract

We investigate the sources of bias that affect the most commonly used methods of estimation of the average degree of dominance (h) of deleterious mutations, focusing on estimates from segregating populations. The main emphasis is on the effect of the finite size of the populations, but other sources of bias are also considered. Using diffusion approximations to the distribution of gene frequencies in finite populations as well as stochastic simulations, we assess the behavior of the estimators obtained from populations at mutation-selection-drift balance under different mutational scenarios and compare averages of h for newly arisen and segregating mutations. Because of genetic drift, the inferences concerning newly arisen mutations based on the mutation-selection balance theory can have substantial upward bias depending upon the distribution of h. In addition, estimates usually refer to h weighted by the homozygous deleterious effect in different ways, so that inferences are complicated when these two variables are negatively correlated. Due to both sources of bias, the widely used regression of heterozygous on homozygous means underestimates the arithmetic mean of h for segregating mutations, in contrast to their repeatedly assumed equality in the literature. We conclude that none of the estimators from segregating populations provides, under general conditions, a useful tool to ascertain the properties of the degree of dominance, either for segregating or for newly arisen deleterious mutations. Direct estimates of the average h from mutation-accumulation experiments are shown to suffer some bias caused by purging selection but, because they do not require assumptions on the causes maintaining segregating variation, they appear to give a more reliable average dominance for newly arisen mutations.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

F<sc>igure</sc> 1.—
Figure 1.—
(a) Distribution [f(s)] of mutational effects, s, for a gamma distribution with shape parameter β and mean effect formula image. (b) Distribution [g(h)] of dominance coefficients following a beta distribution with mean formula image and variance σ2h of dominance coefficients. (c) Joint distribution of dominance coefficients, h, and mutational effects, s, for the model of dominance of Caballero and Keightley (1994). The values of h are sampled from a uniform distribution between 0 and the corresponding exponential curve. Parameters are: (1) formula image; (2) formula image; (3) formula image; and (4) formula image.
F<sc>igure</sc> 2.—
Figure 2.—
Mutational parameters for newly arisen and segregating mutations for a model of dominance coefficients following a beta distribution with mean value formula image and variance formula image. Left, mutational model for λ = 0.2, formula image. Right, mutational model for λ = 0.006, formula image. Top, percentage of newly arisen (line) and segregating mutations (bars) for different classes of h. Bottom, average coefficient of selection of newly arisen (lines) and segregating mutations (bars) for different classes of h. Darkly shaded bars and solid lines, no correlation between s and h (r = 0); lightly shaded bars and dashed lines, r = −0.4. Results for newly arisen and segregating mutations are based on draws of 1,000,000 and 1000 mutations, respectively.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Agrawal, A. F., and J. R. Chasnov, 2001. Recessive mutations and the maintenance of sex in structured populations. Genetics 158: 913–917. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Caballero, A., and P. D. Keightley, 1994. A pleiotropic nonadditive model of variation in quantitative traits. Genetics 138: 883–900. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Caballero, A., P. D. Keightley and M. Turelli, 1997. Average dominance for polygenes: drawbacks of regression estimates. Genetics 147: 1487–1490. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Charlesworth, B., and D. Charlesworth, 1998. Some evolutionary consequences of deleterious mutations. Genetica 102/103: 3–19. - PubMed
    1. Charlesworth, B., and D. Charlesworth, 1999. The genetic basis of inbreeding depression. Genet. Res. 74: 329–340. - PubMed

Publication types