Are better-adapted genes less easily mutated?

  • Thread starter Loren Booda
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Genes
In summary, the conversation discusses the resistance of established traits to further changes in the environment. It is suggested that better adapted genes may be resistant to mutation, but this could also make them poorly adapted when new changes occur. Furthermore, some genes are highly conserved across species due to their importance, and natural selection removes mutations that decrease survival. However, there is no extra protection for specific genes and mutation rates are similar for all genes. Additionally, there are DNA sequences that facilitate recombination and repair, but they have not been specifically associated with important genes. Overall, cellular protection against mutagenic agents occurs for the entire genome rather than specific genes.
  • #1
Loren Booda
3,125
4
Once a trait is established to its environment, might that indicate, by definition or process, that it is more likely resistant to further changes in that environment?
 
Biology news on Phys.org
  • #2
Loren Booda said:
Once a trait is established to its environment, might that indicate, by definition or process, that it is more likely resistant to further changes in that environment?

I don't know if this is true or not but if a better adapted gene is resistant to mutation, that would make it a badly adapted gene when new changes come along and it can't mutate.
 
  • #3
Loren Booda said:
Once a trait is established to its environment, might that indicate, by definition or process, that it is more likely resistant to further changes in that environment?

Can you specify what you mean by 'it' in the second clause? Do you mean changes in the environment, or changes in the trait? (Perhaps you can give an example.)
 
  • #4
The "adapted genes" still mutated and the same rate as the other genes; however, the mutated "adapted genes" may be selected out of the gene pool if it creates a disavantage for the carrier. Mutation occurs in functionnaly important and unimportant regions of a protein. The mutations in functionnaly important usually alter the function and the phenotype. Mutations in functionnal unimportant region usually do not cause a change in phenotype and function of a protein. This also dependents on the type of mutation.

http://users.rcn.com/jkimball.ma.ultranet/BiologyPages/M/Mutations.html
 
  • #5
iansmith, NateTG and Crumbles - let me modify my original question by asking whether a vital variation among "typical" genes is around their mean likelihood to mutate (saying that a gene in general is more or less beneficially susceptible to radiation or chemicals).
 
  • #6
iansmith said:
The "adapted genes" still mutated and the same rate as the other genes; however, the mutated "adapted genes" may be selected out of the gene pool if it creates a disavantage for the carrier. Mutation occurs in functionnaly important and unimportant regions of a protein. The mutations in functionnaly important usually alter the function and the phenotype. Mutations in functionnal unimportant region usually do not cause a change in phenotype and function of a protein. This also dependents on the type of mutation.

http://users.rcn.com/jkimball.ma.ultranet/BiologyPages/M/Mutations.html

It is a fact that some genes are "conserved" across a startlingly large range of species, implying a vast stretch of time. For example I have read we share something like 20% of our genes with some plants (oak trees were mentioned). This implies that some genes are so important that evolution has found a way to shield them from the more common mutations.
 
  • #7
It's strange no one mentioned genetic homeostasis. I think natural selection would tend to favour phenotypes which are more or less the average among the population rather than the extremes. In fact, Gould and Eldredge did use such an argument to make their case for PE, saying that genetic homeostasis acts as a bar against species undergoing anagenesis.
 
  • #8
selfAdjoint said:
It is a fact that some genes are "conserved" across a startlingly large range of species, implying a vast stretch of time. For example I have read we share something like 20% of our genes with some plants (oak trees were mentioned). This implies that some genes are so important that evolution has found a way to shield them from the more common mutations.

There is not a additional protection for certain genes. Some genes are highly conserved because any mutation usually has a negative effects and selected against. These genes were present in the animal and plant common ancestor and were kept due to the importance. These genes are usually an absolute requirement for growth and regulation and any slight modification of the protein protein will result into the death of the cell.

The mutation rate is similar for any gene with exception of mutation hot-spot; however the substitution rate is low in highly important gene and high in non-coding sequences. It implies that natural selection removes mutation that leads to a decrease in survival.

However, there is some DNA sequnces that facilitate recombination of DNA and increase recombination repair in a certain area. Those sequnces are found thorugh out the genome and have not yet been show to be specifically associated with important genes. Also the recombination repair mechanism is not perfect and could introduce mutation in the gene.
 
  • #9
Loren Booda said:
iansmith, NateTG and Crumbles - let me modify my original question by asking whether a vital variation among "typical" genes is around their mean likelihood to mutate (saying that a gene in general is more or less beneficially susceptible to radiation or chemicals).

Most of the cellular protection against mutagenic agent are to product the cell and all the genome rather than some specific set of genes. Mutation will be fixed regadless of the type of DNA sequence. Some nucleotides are also more susceptible to certain type of mutation. The relative % of GC of may prevent certain mutation and offer a protective effect but the %GC through out the genome is usually same for any genes/DNA sequences of a given species. %GC is usually different in DNA sequences obtain from other species.

Deinococcus radiodurans is the bacteria that withstand the most DNA damage but it is due to repair mechanism rather than a "Shield".
 

1. What does it mean for a gene to be "better-adapted"?

For a gene to be considered "better-adapted", it means that its specific sequence of DNA allows for a greater likelihood of survival and reproduction in a given environment. This can be due to various factors such as enhanced functionality, increased resistance to disease, or improved efficiency in a certain biological process.

2. How is gene mutation related to adaptation?

Mutations are random changes in the DNA sequence of a gene. These changes can result in new traits that may be beneficial, harmful, or have no effect on an organism's survival. In the process of natural selection, individuals with beneficial mutations are more likely to survive and pass on their genes, leading to adaptation over time.

3. Are all genes equally susceptible to mutation?

No, all genes are not equally susceptible to mutation. Some genes have a higher mutation rate due to their location in the genome or the type of DNA they contain. Additionally, certain environmental factors such as radiation or exposure to harmful chemicals can increase the likelihood of mutations in certain genes.

4. Can a gene be both "better-adapted" and easily mutated?

Yes, it is possible for a gene to be both "better-adapted" and easily mutated. While it may have a beneficial function in a particular environment, it may also have a high mutation rate due to its location or type of DNA. This can be advantageous as it allows for more genetic variation and the potential for further adaptation in changing environments.

5. How does natural selection play a role in the frequency of mutations in a population?

Natural selection is the process by which individuals with advantageous traits are more likely to survive and reproduce, passing on their genes to future generations. This can lead to the spread of beneficial mutations within a population, while harmful mutations are less likely to be passed on. Therefore, natural selection plays a significant role in determining the frequency of mutations in a population over time.

Similar threads

  • Biology and Medical
Replies
7
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
778
  • Biology and Medical
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
12
Views
1K
  • Biology and Medical
Replies
8
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • Biology and Medical
Replies
15
Views
1K
  • Biology and Medical
2
Replies
63
Views
8K
  • Biology and Medical
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • Biology and Medical
Replies
1
Views
832
Back
Top