Cited by 911Evolution and Genetic DynamicsGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesRNA and protein synthesis mechanisms

Genetic drift, selection and the evolution of the mutation rate

Lynch, Michael, Ackerman, Matthew S., Gout, Jean-Francois, Long, Hongan, Sung, Way, Thomas, W. Kelley, Foster, Patricia L.·2016·Nature Reviews Genetics

Abstract

As one of the few cellular traits that can be quantified across the tree of life, DNA-replication fidelity provides an excellent platform for understanding fundamental evolutionary processes. Furthermore, because mutation is the ultimate source of all genetic variation, clarifying why mutation rates vary is crucial for understanding all areas of biology. A potentially revealing hypothesis for mutation-rate evolution is that natural selection primarily operates to improve replication fidelity, with the ultimate limits to what can be achieved set by the power of random genetic drift. This drift-barrier hypothesis is consistent with comparative measures of mutation rates, provides a simple explanation for the existence of error-prone polymerases and yields a formal counter-argument to the view that selection fine-tunes gene-specific mutation rates.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/nrg.2016.104

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • A high mutation rate enables quick adaptation at an evolutionary scale but comes at the cost of increased deleterious mutations.

    “c) becoming highly evolvable: a high mutation rate enables quick adaptation at an evolutionary scale but comes at the cost of increased deleterious mutations (Lynch et al., 2016;Nisioti and Moulin-Frier, 2022).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lynch, M., Ackerman, M. S., Gout, J.-F., Long, H., Sung, W., Thomas, W. K., & Foster, P. L.
Affiliations
  • Indiana University Bloomington (US)
  • University of New Hampshire (US)
Corresponding author
Lynch, Michael
Venue
Nature Reviews Genetics
Published
2016-10-14
Volume
17
Issue
11
Pages
704-714
ISSN
  • 1471-0056 (ISSN-L)
  • 1471-0064
OpenAlex
W2529873061
Cited by
911
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 82 · 2025: 86 · 2024: 123 · 2023: 125 · 2022: 133 · 2021: 82 · 2020: 112 · 2019: 62 · 2018: 69 · 2017: 34 · 2016: 3
FWCI
7.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Nature Reviews Genetics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R01GM036827, R01GM101672)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Evolution and Genetic Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › RNA and protein synthesis mechanisms
Keywords
mutation rate evolution, genetic drift, natural selection, DNA replication fidelity, error-prone polymerase, genetic diversity, population genetics
MeSH terms
Biological Evolution, Humans, Models, Genetic, Selection, Genetic, Genetic Variation, Genetic Drift, Mutation Rate

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review