Respect all members: no insults, harassment, or hate speech.
Be tolerant of different viewpoints, cultures, and beliefs. If you do not agree with others, just create separate note, article or collection.
Clearly distinguish between personal opinion and fact.
Verify facts before posting, especially when writing about history, science, or statistics.
Promotional content must be published on the “Related Services and Products” page—no more than one paragraph per service. You can also create subpages under the “Related Services and Products” page and publish longer promotional text there.
Do not post materials that infringe on copyright without permission.
Always credit sources when sharing information, quotes, or media.
Be respectful of the work of others when making changes.
Discuss major edits instead of removing others' contributions without reason.
If you notice rule-breaking, notify community about it in talks.
Do not share personal data of others without their consent.
A red tulip exhibiting a partially yellow petal due to a somatic mutation in a cell that formed that petal
Mutations may or may not produce detectable changes in the observable characteristics (phenotype) of an organism. Mutations play a part in both normal and abnormal biological processes including: evolution, cancer, and the development of the immune system, including junctional diversity. Mutation is the ultimate source of all genetic variation, providing the raw material on which evolutionary forces such as natural selection can act.
Mutation can result in many different types of change in sequences. Mutations in genes can have no effect, alter the product of a gene, or prevent the gene from functioning properly or completely. Mutations can also occur in non-genic regions. A 2007 study on genetic variations between different species of Drosophila suggested that, if a mutation changes a protein produced by a gene, the result is likely to be harmful, with an estimated 70% of amino acidpolymorphisms that have damaging effects, and the remainder being either neutral or marginally beneficial.[8]
Mutation and DNA damage are the two major types of errors that occur in DNA, but they are fundamentally different. DNA damage is a physical alteration in the DNA structure, such as a single or double strand break, a modified guanosine residue in DNA such as 8-hydroxydeoxyguanosine, or a polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon adduct. DNA damages can be recognized by enzymes, and therefore can be correctly repaired using the complementary undamaged strand in DNA as a template or an undamaged sequence in a homologous chromosome if it is available. If DNA damage remains in a cell, transcription of a gene may be prevented and thus translation into a protein may also be blocked. DNA replication may also be blocked and/or the cell may die. In contrast to a DNA damage, a mutation is an alteration of the base sequence of the DNA. Ordinarily, a mutation cannot be recognized by enzymes once the base change is present in both DNA strands, and thus a mutation is not ordinarily repaired. At the cellular level, mutations can alter protein function and regulation. Unlike DNA damages, mutations are replicated when the cell replicates. At the level of cell populations, cells with mutations will increase or decrease in frequency according to the effects of the mutations on the ability of the cell to survive and reproduce. Although distinctly different from each other, DNA damages and mutations are related because DNA damages often cause errors of DNA synthesis during replication or repair and these errors are a major source of mutation.[9]
Mutations can involve the duplication of large sections of DNA, usually through genetic recombination.[10] These duplications are a major source of raw material for evolving new genes, with tens to hundreds of genes duplicated in animal genomes every million years.[11] Most genes belong to larger gene families of shared ancestry, detectable by their sequence homology.[12] Novel genes are produced by several methods, commonly through the duplication and mutation of an ancestral gene, or by recombining parts of different genes to form new combinations with new functions.[13][14]
Here, protein domains act as modules, each with a particular and independent function, that can be mixed together to produce genes encoding new proteins with novel properties.[15] For example, the human eye uses four genes to make structures that sense light: three for cone cell or colour vision and one for rod cell or night vision; all four arose from a single ancestral gene.[16] Another advantage of duplicating a gene (or even an entire genome) is that this increases engineering redundancy; this allows one gene in the pair to acquire a new function while the other copy performs the original function.[17][18] Other types of mutation occasionally create new genes from previously noncoding DNA.[19][20]
Changes in chromosome number may involve even larger mutations, where segments of the DNA within chromosomes break and then rearrange. For example, in the Homininae, two chromosomes fused to produce human chromosome 2; this fusion did not occur in the lineage of the other apes, and they retain these separate chromosomes.[21] In evolution, the most important role of such chromosomal rearrangements may be to accelerate the divergence of a population into new species by making populations less likely to interbreed, thereby preserving genetic differences between these populations.[22]
Sequences of DNA that can move about the genome, such as transposons, make up a major fraction of the genetic material of plants and animals, and may have been important in the evolution of genomes.[23] For example, more than a million copies of the Alu sequence are present in the human genome, and these sequences have now been recruited to perform functions such as regulating gene expression.[24] Another effect of these mobile DNA sequences is that when they move within a genome, they can mutate or delete existing genes and thereby produce genetic diversity.[6]
Nonlethal mutations accumulate within the gene pool and increase the amount of genetic variation.[25] The abundance of some genetic changes within the gene pool can be reduced by natural selection, while other "more favorable" mutations may accumulate and result in adaptive changes.
For example, a butterfly may produce offspring with new mutations. The majority of these mutations will have no effect; but one might change the colour of one of the butterfly's offspring, making it harder (or easier) for predators to see. If this color change is advantageous, the chances of this butterfly's surviving and producing its own offspring are a little better, and over time the number of butterflies with this mutation may form a larger percentage of the population.[26]
Neutral mutations are defined as mutations whose effects do not influence the fitness of an individual. These can increase in frequency over time due to genetic drift. It is believed that the overwhelming majority of mutations have no significant effect on an organism's fitness.[27][28] Also, DNA repair mechanisms are able to mend most changes before they become permanent mutations, and many organisms have mechanisms, such as apoptotic pathways, for eliminating otherwise-permanently mutated somatic cells.[29]
Beneficial mutations can improve reproductive success.[30][31]
Four classes of mutations are (1) spontaneous mutations (molecular decay), (2) mutations due to error-prone replication bypass of naturally occurring DNA damage (also called error-prone translesion synthesis), (3) errors introduced during DNA repair, and (4) induced mutations caused by mutagens. Scientists may sometimes deliberately introduce mutations into cells or research organisms for the sake of scientific experimentation.[32]
One 2017 study claimed that 66% of cancer-causing mutations are random, 29% are due to the environment (the studied population spanned 69 countries), and 5% are inherited.[33]
Humans on average pass 60 new mutations to their children but fathers pass more mutations depending on their age with every year adding two new mutations to a child.[34]
Spontaneous mutations occur with non-zero probability even given a healthy, uncontaminated cell. Naturally occurring oxidative DNA damage is estimated to occur 10,000 times per cell per day in humans and 100,000 times per cell per day in rats.[35] Spontaneous mutations can be characterized by the specific change:[36]
Tautomerism – A base is changed by the repositioning of a hydrogen atom, altering the hydrogen bonding pattern of that base, resulting in incorrect base pairing during replication.[37] Theoretical results suggest that proton tunnelling is an important factor in the spontaneous creation of GC tautomers.[38]
Deamination – Hydrolysis changes a normal base to an atypical base containing a keto group in place of the original amine group. Examples include C → U and A → HX (hypoxanthine), which can be corrected by DNA repair mechanisms; and 5MeC (5-methylcytosine) → T, which is less likely to be detected as a mutation because thymine is a normal DNA base.
Slipped strand mispairing – Denaturation of the new strand from the template during replication, followed by renaturation in a different spot ("slipping"). This can lead to insertions or deletions.
There is increasing evidence that the majority of spontaneously arising mutations are due to error-prone replication (translesion synthesis) past DNA damage in the template strand. In mice, the majority of mutations are caused by translesion synthesis.[39] Likewise, in yeast, Kunz et al.[40] found that more than 60% of the spontaneous single base pair substitutions and deletions were caused by translesion synthesis.
Although naturally occurring double-strand breaks occur at a relatively low frequency in DNA, their repair often causes mutation. Non-homologous end joining (NHEJ) is a major pathway for repairing double-strand breaks. NHEJ involves removal of a few nucleotides to allow somewhat inaccurate alignment of the two ends for rejoining followed by addition of nucleotides to fill in gaps. As a consequence, NHEJ often introduces mutations.[41]
Alkylating agents (e.g., N-ethyl-N-nitrosourea (ENU). These agents can mutate both replicating and non-replicating DNA. In contrast, a base analogue can mutate the DNA only when the analogue is incorporated in replicating the DNA. Each of these classes of chemical mutagens has certain effects that then lead to transitions, transversions, or deletions.
Nitrous acid converts amine groups on A and C to diazo groups, altering their hydrogen bonding patterns, which leads to incorrect base pairing during replication.
Radiation
Ultraviolet light (UV) (including non-ionizing radiation). Two nucleotide bases in DNA—cytosine and thymine—are most vulnerable to radiation that can change their properties. UV light can induce adjacent pyrimidine bases in a DNA strand to become covalently joined as a pyrimidine dimer. UV radiation, in particular longer-wave UVA, can also cause oxidative damage to DNA.[44]
Ionizing radiation. Exposure to ionizing radiation, such as gamma radiation, can result in mutation, possibly resulting in cancer or death.
Whereas in former times mutations were assumed to occur by chance, or induced by mutagens, molecular mechanisms of mutation have been discovered in bacteria and across the tree of life. As S. Rosenberg states, "These mechanisms reveal a picture of highly regulated mutagenesis, up-regulated temporally by stress responses and activated when cells/organisms are maladapted to their environments—when stressed—potentially accelerating adaptation."[45] Since they are self-induced mutagenic mechanisms that increase the adaptation rate of organisms, they have some times been named as adaptive mutagenesis mechanisms, and include the SOS response in bacteria,[46] ectopic intrachromosomal recombination[47] and other chromosomal events such as duplications.[45]
Five types of chromosomal mutationsTypes of small-scale mutations
The sequence of a gene can be altered in a number of ways.[48] Gene mutations have varying effects on health depending on where they occur and whether they alter the function of essential proteins.
Mutations in the structure of genes can be classified into several types.[citation needed]
Large-scale mutations in chromosomal structure include:
Amplifications (or gene duplications) or repetition of a chromosomal segment or presence of extra piece of a chromosome broken piece of a chromosome may become attached to a homologous or non-homologous chromosome so that some of the genes are present in more than two doses leading to multiple copies of all chromosomal regions, increasing the dosage of the genes located within them.
Polyploidy, duplication of entire sets of chromosomes, potentially resulting in a separate breeding population and speciation.
Deletions of large chromosomal regions, leading to loss of the genes within those regions.
Mutations whose effect is to juxtapose previously separate pieces of DNA, potentially bringing together separate genes to form functionally distinct fusion genes (e.g., bcr-abl).
Large scale changes to the structure of chromosomes called chromosomal rearrangement that can lead to a decrease of fitness but also to speciation in isolated, inbred populations. These include:
Interstitial deletions: an intra-chromosomal deletion that removes a segment of DNA from a single chromosome, thereby apposing previously distant genes. For example, cells isolated from a human astrocytoma, a type of brain tumour, were found to have a chromosomal deletion removing sequences between the Fused in Glioblastoma (FIG) gene and the receptor tyrosine kinase (ROS), producing a fusion protein (FIG-ROS). The abnormal FIG-ROS fusion protein has constitutively active kinase activity that causes oncogenic transformation (a transformation from normal cells to cancer cells).
Loss of heterozygosity: loss of one allele, either by a deletion or a genetic recombination event, in an organism that previously had two different alleles.
Small-scale mutations affect a gene in one or a few nucleotides. (If only a single nucleotide is affected, they are called point mutations.) Small-scale mutations include:
Insertions add one or more extra nucleotides into the DNA. They are usually caused by transposable elements, or errors during replication of repeating elements. Insertions in the coding region of a gene may alter splicing of the mRNA (splice site mutation), or cause a shift in the reading frame (frameshift), both of which can significantly alter the gene product. Insertions can be reversed by excision of the transposable element.
Deletions remove one or more nucleotides from the DNA. Like insertions, these mutations can alter the reading frame of the gene. In general, they are irreversible: Though exactly the same sequence might, in theory, be restored by an insertion, transposable elements able to revert a very short deletion (say 1–2 bases) in any location either are highly unlikely to exist or do not exist at all.
Substitution mutations, often caused by chemicals or malfunction of DNA replication, exchange a single nucleotide for another.[49] These changes are classified as transitions or transversions.[50] Most common is the transition that exchanges a purine for a purine (A ↔ G) or a pyrimidine for a pyrimidine, (C ↔ T). A transition can be caused by nitrous acid, base mispairing, or mutagenic base analogues such as BrdU. Less common is a transversion, which exchanges a purine for a pyrimidine or a pyrimidine for a purine (C/T ↔ A/G). An example of a transversion is the conversion of adenine (A) into a cytosine (C). Point mutations are modifications of single base pairs of DNA or other small base pairs within a gene. A point mutation can be reversed by another point mutation, in which the nucleotide is changed back to its original state (true reversion) or by second-site reversion (a complementary mutation elsewhere that results in regained gene functionality). As discussed below, point mutations that occur within the protein coding region of a gene may be classified as synonymous or nonsynonymous substitutions, the latter of which in turn can be divided into missense or nonsense mutations.
The structure of a eukaryotic protein-coding gene. A mutation in the protein coding region (red) can result in a change in the amino acid sequence. Mutations in other areas of the gene can have diverse effects. Changes within regulatory sequences (yellow and blue) can effect transcriptional and translational regulation of gene expression.Point mutations classified by impact on proteinSelection of disease-causing mutations, in a standard table of the genetic code of amino acids[51]
The effect of a mutation on protein sequence depends in part on where in the genome it occurs, especially whether it is in a coding or non-coding region. Mutations in the non-coding regulatory sequences of a gene, such as promoters, enhancers, and silencers, can alter levels of gene expression, but are less likely to alter the protein sequence. Mutations within introns and in regions with no known biological function (e.g. pseudogenes, retrotransposons) are generally neutral, having no effect on phenotype – though intron mutations could alter the protein product if they affect mRNA splicing.
Mutations that occur in coding regions of the genome are more likely to alter the protein product, and can be categorized by their effect on amino acid sequence:
A frameshift mutation is caused by insertion or deletion of a number of nucleotides that is not evenly divisible by three from a DNA sequence. Due to the triplet nature of gene expression by codons, the insertion or deletion can disrupt the reading frame, or the grouping of the codons, resulting in a completely different translation from the original.[52] The earlier in the sequence the deletion or insertion occurs, the more altered the protein produced is. (For example, the code CCU GAC UAC CUA codes for the amino acids proline, aspartic acid, tyrosine, and leucine. If the U in CCU was deleted, the resulting sequence would be CCG ACU ACC UAx, which would instead code for proline, threonine, threonine, and part of another amino acid or perhaps a stop codon (where the x stands for the following nucleotide).) By contrast, any insertion or deletion that is evenly divisible by three is termed an in-frame mutation.
A point substitution mutation results in a change in a single nucleotide and can be either synonymous or nonsynonymous.
A synonymous substitution replaces a codon with another codon that codes for the same amino acid, so that the produced amino acid sequence is not modified. Synonymous mutations occur due to the degenerate nature of the genetic code. If this mutation does not result in any phenotypic effects, then it is called silent, but not all synonymous substitutions are silent. (There can also be silent mutations in nucleotides outside of the coding regions, such as the introns, because the exact nucleotide sequence is not as crucial as it is in the coding regions, but these are not considered synonymous substitutions.)
A nonsynonymous substitution replaces a codon with another codon that codes for a different amino acid, so that the produced amino acid sequence is modified. Nonsynonymous substitutions can be classified as nonsense or missense mutations:
A missense mutation changes a nucleotide to cause substitution of a different amino acid. This in turn can render the resulting protein nonfunctional. Such mutations are responsible for diseases such as Epidermolysis bullosa, sickle-cell disease, and SOD1-mediated ALS.[53] On the other hand, if a missense mutation occurs in an amino acid codon that results in the use of a different, but chemically similar, amino acid, then sometimes little or no change is rendered in the protein. For example, a change from AAA to AGA will encode arginine, a chemically similar molecule to the intended lysine. In this latter case the mutation will have little or no effect on phenotype and therefore be neutral.
A nonsense mutation is a point mutation in a sequence of DNA that results in a premature stop codon, or a nonsense codon in the transcribed mRNA, and possibly a truncated, and often nonfunctional protein product. This sort of mutation has been linked to different diseases, such as congenital adrenal hyperplasia. (See Stop codon.)
A mutation becomes an effect on function mutation when the exactitude of functions between a mutated protein and its direct interactor undergoes change. The interactors can be other proteins, molecules, nucleic acids, etc. There are many mutations that fall under the category of by effect on function, but depending on the specificity of the change the mutations listed below will occur.[54]
Loss-of-function mutations, also called inactivating mutations, result in the gene product having less or no function (being partially or wholly inactivated). When the allele has a complete loss of function (null allele), it is often called an amorph or amorphic mutation in Muller's morphs schema. Phenotypes associated with such mutations are most often recessive. Exceptions are when the organism is haploid, or when the reduced dosage of a normal gene product is not enough for a normal phenotype (this is called haploinsufficiency). Examples of diseases caused by a loss-of-function mutation include Gitelman syndrome and cystic fibrosis.[55]
Gain-of-function mutations also called activating mutations, change the gene product such that its effect gets stronger (enhanced activation) or even is superseded by a different and abnormal function. When the new allele is created, a heterozygote containing the newly created allele as well as the original will express the new allele; genetically this defines the mutations as dominant phenotypes. Several of Muller's morphs correspond to the gain of function, including hypermorph (increased gene expression) and neomorph (novel function).
Dominant negative mutations (also called anti-morphic mutations) have an altered gene product that acts antagonistically to the wild-type allele. These mutations usually result in an altered molecular function (often inactive) and are characterized by a dominant or semi-dominant phenotype. In humans, dominant negative mutations have been implicated in cancer (e.g., mutations in genes p53, ATM, CEBPA, and PPARgamma). Marfan syndrome is caused by mutations in the FBN1 gene, located on chromosome 15, which encodes fibrillin-1, a glycoprotein component of the extracellular matrix. Marfan syndrome is also an example of dominant negative mutation and haploinsufficiency.
Lethal mutations result in rapid organismal death when occurring during development and cause significant reductions of life expectancy for developed organisms. An example of a disease that is caused by a dominant lethal mutation is Huntington's disease.
Null mutations, also known as Amorphic mutations, are a form of loss-of-function mutations that completely prohibit the gene's function. The mutation leads to a complete loss of operation at the phenotypic level, also causing no gene product to be formed. Atopic eczema and dermatitis syndrome are common diseases caused by a null mutation of the gene that activates filaggrin.
Suppressor mutations are a type of mutation that causes the double mutation to appear normally. In suppressor mutations the phenotypic activity of a different mutation is completely suppressed, thus causing the double mutation to look normal. There are two types of suppressor mutations: intragenic and extragenic. Intragenic mutations occur in the gene where the first mutation occurs, while extragenic mutations occur in the gene that interacts with the product of the first mutation. A common disease that results from this type of mutation is Alzheimer's disease.[56]
Neomorphic mutations are a part of the gain-of-function mutations and are characterized by the control of new protein product synthesis. The newly synthesized gene normally contains a novel gene expression or molecular function. The result of the neomorphic mutation is the gene where the mutation occurs has a complete change in function.[57]
A back mutation or reversion is a point mutation that restores the original sequence and hence the original phenotype.[58]
By effect on fitness (harmful, beneficial, neutral mutations)
In genetics, it is sometimes useful to classify mutations as either harmful or beneficial (or neutral):
A harmful, or deleterious, mutation decreases the fitness of the organism. Many, but not all mutations in essential genes are harmful (if a mutation does not change the amino acid sequence in an essential protein, it is harmless in most cases).
A beneficial, or advantageous mutation increases the fitness of the organism. Examples are mutations that lead to antibiotic resistance in bacteria (which are beneficial for bacteria but usually not for humans).
A neutral mutation has no harmful or beneficial effect on the organism. Such mutations occur at a steady rate, forming the basis for the molecular clock. In the neutral theory of molecular evolution, neutral mutations provide genetic drift as the basis for most variation at the molecular level. In animals or plants, most mutations are neutral, given that the vast majority of their genomes is either non-coding or consists of repetitive sequences that have no obvious function ("junk DNA").[59]
Large-scale quantitative mutagenesis screens, in which thousands of millions of mutations are tested, invariably find that a larger fraction of mutations has harmful effects but always returns a number of beneficial mutations as well. For instance, in a screen of all gene deletions in E. coli, 80% of mutations were negative, but 20% were positive, even though many had a very small effect on growth (depending on condition).[60] Gene deletions involve removal of whole genes, so that point mutations almost always have a much smaller effect. In a similar screen in Streptococcus pneumoniae, but this time with transposon insertions, 76% of insertion mutants were classified as neutral, 16% had a significantly reduced fitness, but 6% were advantageous.[61]
This classification is obviously relative and somewhat artificial: a harmful mutation can quickly turn into a beneficial mutations when conditions change. Also, there is a gradient from harmful/beneficial to neutral, as many mutations may have small and mostly neglectable effects but under certain conditions will become relevant. Also, many traits are determined by hundreds of genes (or loci), so that each locus has only a minor effect. For instance, human height is determined by hundreds of genetic variants ("mutations") but each of them has a very minor effect on height,[62] apart from the impact of nutrition. Height (or size) itself may be more or less beneficial as the huge range of sizes in animal or plant groups shows.
Attempts have been made to infer the distribution of fitness effects (DFE) using mutagenesis experiments and theoretical models applied to molecular sequence data. DFE, as used to determine the relative abundance of different types of mutations (i.e., strongly deleterious, nearly neutral or advantageous), is relevant to many evolutionary questions, such as the maintenance of genetic variation,[63] the rate of genomic decay,[64] the maintenance of outcrossingsexual reproduction as opposed to inbreeding[65] and the evolution of sex and genetic recombination.[66] DFE can also be tracked by tracking the skewness of the distribution of mutations with putatively severe effects as compared to the distribution of mutations with putatively mild or absent effect.[67] In summary, the DFE plays an important role in predicting evolutionary dynamics.[68][69] A variety of approaches have been used to study the DFE, including theoretical, experimental and analytical methods.
Mutagenesis experiment: The direct method to investigate the DFE is to induce mutations and then measure the mutational fitness effects, which has already been done in viruses, bacteria, yeast, and Drosophila. For example, most studies of the DFE in viruses used site-directed mutagenesis to create point mutations and measure relative fitness of each mutant.[70][71][72][73] In Escherichia coli, one study used transposon mutagenesis to directly measure the fitness of a random insertion of a derivative of Tn10.[74] In yeast, a combined mutagenesis and deep sequencing approach has been developed to generate high-quality systematic mutant libraries and measure fitness in high throughput.[75] However, given that many mutations have effects too small to be detected[76] and that mutagenesis experiments can detect only mutations of moderately large effect; DNA sequence analysis can provide valuable information about these mutations.
The distribution of fitness effects (DFE) of mutations in vesicular stomatitis virus. In this experiment, random mutations were introduced into the virus by site-directed mutagenesis, and the fitness of each mutant was compared with the ancestral type. A fitness of zero, less than one, one, more than one, respectively, indicates that mutations are lethal, deleterious, neutral, and advantageous.[70]
This figure shows a simplified version of loss-of-function, switch-of-function, gain-of-function, and conservation-of-function mutations.Molecular sequence analysis: With rapid development of DNA sequencing technology, an enormous amount of DNA sequence data is available and even more is forthcoming in the future. Various methods have been developed to infer the DFE from DNA sequence data.[77][78][79][80] By examining DNA sequence differences within and between species, we are able to infer various characteristics of the DFE for neutral, deleterious and advantageous mutations.[25] To be specific, the DNA sequence analysis approach allows us to estimate the effects of mutations with very small effects, which are hardly detectable through mutagenesis experiments.
One of the earliest theoretical studies of the distribution of fitness effects was done by Motoo Kimura, an influential theoretical population geneticist. His neutral theory of molecular evolution proposes that most novel mutations will be highly deleterious, with a small fraction being neutral.[27][81] A later proposal by Hiroshi Akashi proposed a bimodal model for the DFE, with modes centered around highly deleterious and neutral mutations.[82] Both theories agree that the vast majority of novel mutations are neutral or deleterious and that advantageous mutations are rare, which has been supported by experimental results. One example is a study done on the DFE of random mutations in vesicular stomatitis virus.[70] Out of all mutations, 39.6% were lethal, 31.2% were non-lethal deleterious, and 27.1% were neutral. Another example comes from a high throughput mutagenesis experiment with yeast.[75] In this experiment it was shown that the overall DFE is bimodal, with a cluster of neutral mutations, and a broad distribution of deleterious mutations.
Though relatively few mutations are advantageous, those that are play an important role in evolutionary changes.[83] Like neutral mutations, weakly selected advantageous mutations can be lost due to random genetic drift, but strongly selected advantageous mutations are more likely to be fixed. Knowing the DFE of advantageous mutations may lead to increased ability to predict the evolutionary dynamics. Theoretical work on the DFE for advantageous mutations has been done by John H. Gillespie[84] and H. Allen Orr.[85] They proposed that the distribution for advantageous mutations should be exponential under a wide range of conditions, which, in general, has been supported by experimental studies, at least for strongly selected advantageous mutations.[86][87][88]
In general, it is accepted that the majority of mutations are neutral or deleterious, with advantageous mutations being rare; however, the proportion of types of mutations varies between species. This indicates two important points: first, the proportion of effectively neutral mutations is likely to vary between species, resulting from dependence on effective population size; second, the average effect of deleterious mutations varies dramatically between species.[25] In addition, the DFE also differs between coding regions and noncoding regions, with the DFE of noncoding DNA containing more weakly selected mutations.[25]
A mutation has caused this moss rose plant to produce flowers of different colours. This is a somatic mutation that may also be passed on in the germline.
In multicellular organisms with dedicated reproductive cells, mutations can be subdivided into germline mutations, which can be passed on to descendants through their reproductive cells, and somatic mutations (also called acquired mutations),[89] which involve cells outside the dedicated reproductive group and which are not usually transmitted to descendants.
Diploid organisms (e.g., humans) contain two copies of each gene—a paternal and a maternal allele. Based on the occurrence of mutation on each chromosome, we may classify mutations into three types. A wild type or homozygous non-mutated organism is one in which neither allele is mutated.
A heterozygous mutation is a mutation of only one allele.
A homozygous mutation is an identical mutation of both the paternal and maternal alleles.
Compound heterozygous mutations or a genetic compound consists of two different mutations in the paternal and maternal alleles.[90]
A germline mutation in the reproductive cells of an individual gives rise to a constitutional mutation in the offspring, that is, a mutation that is present in every cell. A constitutional mutation can also occur very soon after fertilization, or continue from a previous constitutional mutation in a parent.[91] A germline mutation can be passed down through subsequent generations of organisms.
The distinction between germline and somatic mutations is important in animals that have a dedicated germline to produce reproductive cells. However, it is of little value in understanding the effects of mutations in plants, which lack a dedicated germline. The distinction is also blurred in those animals that reproduce asexually through mechanisms such as budding, because the cells that give rise to the daughter organisms also give rise to that organism's germline.
A new germline mutation not inherited from either parent is called a de novo mutation.
A change in the genetic structure that is not inherited from a parent, and also not passed to offspring, is called a somatic mutation.[89] Somatic mutations are not inherited by an organism's offspring because they do not affect the germline. However, they are passed down to all the progeny of a mutated cell within the same organism during mitosis. A major section of an organism therefore might carry the same mutation. These types of mutations are usually prompted by environmental causes, such as ultraviolet radiation or any exposure to certain harmful chemicals, and can cause diseases including cancer.[92]
With plants, some somatic mutations can be propagated without the need for seed production, for example, by grafting and stem cuttings. These types of mutations have led to new types of fruits, such as the "Delicious" apple and the "Washington" navel orange.[93]
Human and mouse somatic cells have a mutation rate more than ten times higher than the germline mutation rate for both species; mice have a higher rate of both somatic and germline mutations per cell division than humans. The disparity in mutation rate between the germline and somatic tissues likely reflects the greater importance of genome maintenance in the germline than in the soma.[94]
Conditional mutation is a mutation that has wild-type (or less severe) phenotype under certain "permissive" environmental conditions and a mutant phenotype under certain "restrictive" conditions. For example, a temperature-sensitive mutation can cause cell death at high temperature (restrictive condition), but might have no deleterious consequences at a lower temperature (permissive condition).[95] These mutations are non-autonomous, as their manifestation depends upon presence of certain conditions, as opposed to other mutations which appear autonomously.[96] The permissive conditions may be temperature,[97] certain chemicals,[98] light[98] or mutations in other parts of the genome.[96]In vivo mechanisms like transcriptional switches can create conditional mutations. For instance, association of Steroid Binding Domain can create a transcriptional switch that can change the expression of a gene based on the presence of a steroid ligand.[99] Conditional mutations have applications in research as they allow control over gene expression. This is especially useful studying diseases in adults by allowing expression after a certain period of growth, thus eliminating the deleterious effect of gene expression seen during stages of development in model organisms.[98] DNA Recombinase systems like Cre-Lox recombination used in association with promoters that are activated under certain conditions can generate conditional mutations. Dual Recombinase technology can be used to induce multiple conditional mutations to study the diseases which manifest as a result of simultaneous mutations in multiple genes.[98] Certain inteins have been identified which splice only at certain permissive temperatures, leading to improper protein synthesis and thus, loss-of-function mutations at other temperatures.[100] Conditional mutations may also be used in genetic studies associated with ageing, as the expression can be changed after a certain time period in the organism's lifespan.[97]
In order to categorize a mutation as such, the "normal" sequence must be obtained from the DNA of a "normal" or "healthy" organism (as opposed to a "mutant" or "sick" one), it should be identified and reported; ideally, it should be made publicly available for a straightforward nucleotide-by-nucleotide comparison, and agreed upon by the scientific community or by a group of expert geneticists and biologists, who have the responsibility of establishing the standard or so-called "consensus" sequence. This step requires a tremendous scientific effort. Once the consensus sequence is known, the mutations in a genome can be pinpointed, described, and classified. The committee of the Human Genome Variation Society (HGVS) has developed the standard human sequence variant nomenclature,[101] which should be used by researchers and DNA diagnostic centers to generate unambiguous mutation descriptions. In principle, this nomenclature can also be used to describe mutations in other organisms. The nomenclature specifies the type of mutation and base or amino acid changes.
Nucleotide substitution (e.g., 76A>T) – The number is the position of the nucleotide from the 5' end; the first letter represents the wild-type nucleotide, and the second letter represents the nucleotide that replaced the wild type. In the given example, the adenine at the 76th position was replaced by a thymine.
If it becomes necessary to differentiate between mutations in genomic DNA, mitochondrial DNA, and RNA, a simple convention is used. For example, if the 100th base of a nucleotide sequence mutated from G to C, then it would be written as g.100G>C if the mutation occurred in genomic DNA, m.100G>C if the mutation occurred in mitochondrial DNA, or r.100g>c if the mutation occurred in RNA. Note that, for mutations in RNA, the nucleotide code is written in lower case.
Amino acid substitution (e.g., D111E) – The first letter is the one letter code of the wild-type amino acid, the number is the position of the amino acid from the N-terminus, and the second letter is the one letter code of the amino acid present in the mutation. Nonsense mutations are represented with an X for the second amino acid (e.g. D111X).
Amino acid deletion (e.g., ΔF508) – The Greek letter Δ (delta) indicates a deletion. The letter refers to the amino acid present in the wild type and the number is the position from the N terminus of the amino acid were it to be present as in the wild type.
Mutation rates vary substantially across species, and the evolutionary forces that generally determine mutation are the subject of ongoing investigation.
In humans, the mutation rate is about 50–90 de novo mutations per genome per generation, that is, each human accumulates about 50–90 novel mutations that were not present in his or her parents. This number has been established by sequencing thousands of human trios, that is, two parents and at least one child.[102]
The genomes of RNA viruses are based on RNA rather than DNA. The RNA viral genome can be double-stranded (as in DNA) or single-stranded. In some of these viruses (such as the single-stranded human immunodeficiency virus), replication occurs quickly, and there are no mechanisms to check the genome for accuracy. This error-prone process often results in mutations.
The rate of de novo mutations, whether germline or somatic, vary among organisms.[103] Individuals within the same species can even express varying rates of mutation.[104] Overall, rates of de novo mutations are low compared to those of inherited mutations, which categorizes them as rare forms of genetic variation.[105] Many observations of de novo mutation rates have associated higher rates of mutation correlated to paternal age. In sexually reproducing organisms, the comparatively higher frequency of cell divisions in the parental sperm donor germline drive conclusions that rates of de novo mutation can be tracked along a common basis. The frequency of error during the DNA replication process of gametogenesis, especially amplified in the rapid production of sperm cells, can promote more opportunities for de novo mutations to replicate unregulated by DNA repair machinery.[106] This claim combines the observed effects of increased probability for mutation in rapid spermatogenesis with short periods of time between cellular divisions that limit the efficiency of repair machinery.[107] Rates of de novo mutations that affect an organism during its development can also increase with certain environmental factors. For example, certain intensities of exposure to radioactive elements can inflict damage to an organism's genome, heightening rates of mutation. In humans, the appearance of skin cancer during one's lifetime is induced by overexposure to UV radiation that causes mutations in the cellular and skin genome.[108]
There is a widespread assumption that mutations are (entirely) "random" with respect to their consequences (in terms of probability). This was shown to be wrong as mutation frequency can vary across regions of the genome, with such DNA repair- and mutation-biases being associated with various factors. For instance, Monroe and colleagues demonstrated that—in the studied plant (Arabidopsis thaliana)—more important genes mutate less frequently than less important ones. They demonstrated that mutation is "non-random in a way that benefits the plant".[109][110] Additionally, previous experiments typically used to demonstrate mutations being random with respect to fitness (such as the Fluctuation Test and Replica plating) have been shown to only support the weaker claim that those mutations are random with respect to external selective constraints, not fitness as a whole.[111]
Changes in DNA caused by mutation in a coding region of DNA can cause errors in protein sequence that may result in partially or completely non-functional proteins. Each cell, in order to function correctly, depends on thousands of proteins to function in the right places at the right times. When a mutation alters a protein that plays a critical role in the body, a medical condition can result. One study on the comparison of genes between different species of Drosophila suggests that if a mutation does change a protein, the mutation will most likely be harmful, with an estimated 70 per cent of amino acid polymorphisms having damaging effects, and the remainder being either neutral or weakly beneficial.[8] Some mutations alter a gene's DNA base sequence but do not change the protein made by the gene. Studies have shown that only 7% of point mutations in noncoding DNA of yeast are deleterious and 12% in coding DNA are deleterious. The rest of the mutations are either neutral or slightly beneficial.[112]
If a mutation is present in a germ cell, it can give rise to offspring that carries the mutation in all of its cells. This is the case in hereditary diseases. In particular, if there is a mutation in a DNA repair gene within a germ cell, humans carrying such germline mutations may have an increased risk of cancer. A list of 34 such germline mutations is given in the article DNA repair-deficiency disorder. An example of one is albinism, a mutation that occurs in the OCA1 or OCA2 gene. Individuals with this disorder are more prone to many types of cancers, other disorders and have impaired vision.
DNA damage can cause an error when the DNA is replicated, and this error of replication can cause a gene mutation that, in turn, could cause a genetic disorder. DNA damages are repaired by the DNA repair system of the cell. Each cell has a number of pathways through which enzymes recognize and repair damages in DNA. Because DNA can be damaged in many ways, the process of DNA repair is an important way in which the body protects itself from disease. Once DNA damage has given rise to a mutation, the mutation cannot be repaired.
On the other hand, a mutation may occur in a somatic cell of an organism. Such mutations will be present in all descendants of this cell within the same organism. The accumulation of certain mutations over generations of somatic cells is part of cause of malignant transformation, from normal cell to cancer cell.[113]
Cells with heterozygous loss-of-function mutations (one good copy of gene and one mutated copy) may function normally with the unmutated copy until the good copy has been spontaneously somatically mutated. This kind of mutation happens often in living organisms, but it is difficult to measure the rate. Measuring this rate is important in predicting the rate at which people may develop cancer.[114]
Point mutations may arise from spontaneous mutations that occur during DNA replication. The rate of mutation may be increased by mutagens. Mutagens can be physical, such as radiation from UV rays, X-rays or extreme heat, or chemical (molecules that misplace base pairs or disrupt the helical shape of DNA). Mutagens associated with cancers are often studied to learn about cancer and its prevention.
Although mutations that cause changes in protein sequences can be harmful to an organism, on occasions the effect may be positive in a given environment. In this case, the mutation may enable the mutant organism to withstand particular environmental stresses better than wild-type organisms, or reproduce more quickly. In these cases a mutation will tend to become more common in a population through natural selection. That said, the same mutation can be beneficial in one condition and disadvantageous in another condition. Examples include the following:
HIV resistance: a specific 32 base pair deletion in human CCR5 (CCR5-Δ32) confers HIV resistance to homozygotes and delays AIDS onset in heterozygotes.[115] One possible explanation of the etiology of the relatively high frequency of CCR5-Δ32 in the European population is that it conferred resistance to the bubonic plague in mid-14th century Europe. People with this mutation were more likely to survive infection; thus its frequency in the population increased.[116] This theory could explain why this mutation is not found in Southern Africa, which remained untouched by bubonic plague. A newer theory suggests that the selective pressure on the CCR5 Delta 32 mutation was caused by smallpox instead of the bubonic plague.[117]
Malaria resistance: An example of a harmful mutation is sickle-cell disease, a blood disorder in which the body produces an abnormal type of the oxygen-carrying substance haemoglobin in the red blood cells. One-third of all indigenous inhabitants of Sub-Saharan Africa carry the allele, because, in areas where malaria is common, there is a survival value in carrying only a single sickle-cell allele (sickle cell trait).[118] Those with only one of the two alleles of the sickle-cell disease are more resistant to malaria, since the infestation of the malaria Plasmodium is halted by the sickling of the cells that it infests.
Antibiotic resistance: Practically all bacteria develop antibiotic resistance when exposed to antibiotics. In fact, bacterial populations already have such mutations that get selected under antibiotic selection.[119] Obviously, such mutations are only beneficial for the bacteria but not for those infected.
Lactase persistence. A mutation allowed humans to express the enzyme lactase after they are naturally weaned from breast milk, allowing adults to digest lactose, which is likely one of the most beneficial mutations in recent human evolution.[120]
By introducing novel genetic qualities to a population of organisms, de novo mutations play a critical role in the combined forces of evolutionary change. However, the weight of genetic diversity generated by mutational change is often considered a generally "weak" evolutionary force.[104] Although the random emergence of mutations alone provides the basis for genetic variation across all organic life, this force must be taken in consideration alongside all evolutionary forces at play. Spontaneous de novo mutations as cataclysmic events of speciation depend on factors introduced by natural selection, genetic flow, and genetic drift. For example, smaller populations with heavy mutational input (high rates of mutation) are prone to increases of genetic variation which lead to speciation in future generations. In contrast, larger populations tend to see lesser effects of newly introduced mutated traits. In these conditions, selective forces diminish the frequency of mutated alleles, which are most often deleterious, over time.[121]
Compensated pathogenic deviations refer to amino acid residues in a protein sequence that are pathogenic in one species but are wild type residues in the functionally equivalent protein in another species. Although the amino acid residue is pathogenic in the first species, it is not so in the second species because its pathogenicity is compensated by one or more amino acid substitutions in the second species. The compensatory mutation can occur in the same protein or in another protein with which it interacts.[122]
It is critical to understand the effects of compensatory mutations in the context of fixed deleterious mutations due to the population fitness decreasing because of fixation.[123] Effective population size refers to a population that is reproducing.[124] An increase in this population size has been correlated with a decreased rate of genetic diversity.[124] The position of a population relative to the critical effect population size is essential to determine the effect deleterious alleles will have on fitness.[123] If the population is below the critical effective size fitness will decrease drastically, however if the population is above the critical effect size, fitness can increase regardless of deleterious mutations due to compensatory alleles.[123]
As the function of a RNA molecule is dependent on its structure,[125] the structure of RNA molecules is evolutionarily conserved. Therefore, any mutation that alters the stable structure of RNA molecules must be compensated by other compensatory mutations. In the context of RNA, the sequence of the RNA can be considered as ' genotype' and the structure of the RNA can be considered as its 'phenotype'. Since RNAs have relatively simpler composition than proteins, the structure of RNA molecules can be computationally predicted with high degree of accuracy. Because of this convenience, compensatory mutations have been studied in computational simulations using RNA folding algorithms.[126][127]
Compensatory mutations can be explained by the genetic phenomenon epistasis whereby the phenotypic effect of one mutation is dependent upon mutation(s) at other loci. While epistasis was originally conceived in the context of interaction between different genes, intragenic epistasis has also been studied recently.[128] Existence of compensated pathogenic deviations can be explained by 'sign epistasis', in which the effects of a deleterious mutation can be compensated by the presence of an epistatic mutation in another loci. For a given protein, a deleterious mutation (D) and a compensatory mutation (C) can be considered, where C can be in the same protein as D or in a different interacting protein depending on the context. The fitness effect of C itself could be neutral or somewhat deleterious such that it can still exist in the population, and the effect of D is deleterious to the extent that it cannot exist in the population. However, when C and D co-occur together, the combined fitness effect becomes neutral or positive.[122] Thus, compensatory mutations can bring novelty to proteins by forging new pathways of protein evolution : it allows individuals to travel from one fitness peak to another through the valleys of lower fitness.[128]
DePristo et al. 2005 outlined two models to explain the dynamics of compensatory pathogenic deviations (CPD).[129] In the first hypothesis P is a pathogenic amino acid mutation that and C is a neutral compensatory mutation.[129] Under these conditions, if the pathogenic mutation arises after a compensatory mutation, then P can become fixed in the population.[129] The second model of CPDs states that P and C are both deleterious mutations resulting in fitness valleys when mutations occur simultaneously.[129] Using publicly available, Ferrer-Costa et al. 2007 obtained compensatory mutations and human pathogenic mutation datasets that were characterized to determine what causes CPDs.[130] Results indicate that the structural constraints and the location in protein structure determine whether compensated mutations will occur.[130]
Lunzer et al.[131] tested the outcome of swapping divergent amino acids between two orthologous proteins of isopropylmalate dehydrogenase (IMDH). They substituted 168 amino acids in Escherichia coli IMDH that are wild type residues in IMDH Pseudomonas aeruginosa. They found that over one third of these substitutions compromised IMDH enzymatic activity in the Escherichia coli genetic background. This demonstrated that identical amino acid states can result in different phenotypic states depending on the genetic background. Corrigan et al. 2011 demonstrated how Staphylococcus aureus was able to grow normally without the presence of lipoteichoic acid due to compensatory mutations.[132] Whole genome sequencing results revealed that when Cyclic-di-AMP phosphodiesterase (GdpP) was disrupted in this bacterium, it compensated for the disappearance of the cell wall polymer, resulting in normal cell growth.[132]
Research has shown that bacteria can gain drug resistance through compensatory mutations that do not impede or having little effect on fitness.[133] Previous research from Gagneux et al. 2006 has found that laboratory grown Mycobacterium tuberculosis strains with rifampicin resistance have reduced fitness, however drug resistant clinical strains of this pathogenic bacteria do not have reduced fitness.[134] Comas et al. 2012 used whole genome comparisons between clinical strains and lab derived mutants to determine the role and contribution of compensatory mutations in drug resistance to rifampicin.[133] Genome analysis reveal rifampicin resistant strains have a mutation in rpoA and rpoC.[133] A similar study investigated the bacterial fitness associated with compensatory mutations in rifampin resistant Escherichia coli.[135] Results obtained from this study demonstrate that drug resistance is linked to bacterial fitness as higher fitness costs are linked to greater transcription errors.[135]
Gong et al.[136] collected obtained genotype data of influenza nucleoprotein from different timelines and temporally ordered them according to their time of origin. Then they isolated 39 amino acid substitutions that occurred in different timelines and substituted them in a genetic background that approximated the ancestral genotype. They found that 3 of the 39 substitutions significantly reduced the fitness of the ancestral background. Compensatory mutations are new mutations that arise and have a positive or neutral impact on a populations fitness.[137] Previous research has shown that populations have can compensate detrimental mutations.[122][137][138] Burch and Chao tested Fisher's geometric model of adaptive evolution by testing whether bacteriophage φ6 evolves by small steps.[139] Their results showed that bacteriophage φ6 fitness declined rapidly and recovered in small steps .[139] Viral nucleoproteins have been shown to avoid cytotoxic T lymphocytes (CTLs) through arginine-to glycine substitutions.[140] This substitution mutations impacts the fitness of viral nucleoproteins, however compensatory co-mutations impede fitness declines and aid the virus to avoid recognition from CTLs.[140] Mutations can have three different effects; mutations can have deleterious effects, some increase fitness through compensatory mutations, and lastly mutations can be counterbalancing resulting in compensatory neutral mutations.[141][135][134]
In the human genome, the frequency and characteristics of de novo mutations have been studied as important contextual factors to our evolution. Compared to the human reference genome, a typical human genome varies at approximately 4.1 to 5.0 million loci, and the majority of this genetic diversity is shared by nearly 0.5% of the population.[142] The typical human genome also contains 40,000 to 200,000 rare variants observed in less than 0.5% of the population that can only have occurred from at least one de novo germline mutation in the history of human evolution.[143] De novo mutations have also been researched as playing a crucial role in the persistence of genetic disease in humans. With recents advancements in next-generation sequencing (NGS), all types of de novo mutations within the genome can be directly studied, the detection of which provides a magnitude of insight toward the causes of both rare and common genetic disorders. Currently, the best estimate of the average human germline SNV mutation rate is 1.18 x 10^-8, with an approximate ~78 novel mutations per generation. The ability to conduct whole genome sequencing of parents and offspring allows for the comparison of mutation rates between generations, narrowing down the origin possibilities of certain genetic disorders.[144]
^Harrison PM, Gerstein M (May 2002). "Studying genomes through the aeons: protein families, pseudogenes and proteome evolution". Journal of Molecular Biology. 318 (5): 1155–74. doi:10.1016/S0022-2836(02)00109-2. PMID12083509.
^Long M, Betrán E, Thornton K, Wang W (November 2003). "The origin of new genes: glimpses from the young and old". Nature Reviews. Genetics. 4 (11): 865–75. doi:10.1038/nrg1204. PMID14634634. S2CID33999892.
^Hurst GD, Werren JH (August 2001). "The role of selfish genetic elements in eukaryotic evolution". Nature Reviews Genetics. 2 (8): 597–606. doi:10.1038/35084545. PMID11483984. S2CID2715605.
^Pfohl-Leszkowicz A, Manderville RA (January 2007). "Ochratoxin A: An overview on toxicity and carcinogenicity in animals and humans". Molecular Nutrition & Food Research. 51 (1): 61–99. doi:10.1002/mnfr.200600137. PMID17195275.
^Freese E (June 1959). "The specific mutagenic effect of base analogues on Phage T4". Journal of Molecular Biology. 1 (2): 87–105. doi:10.1016/S0022-2836(59)80038-3.
^Elena SF, Ekunwe L, Hajela N, Oden SA, Lenski RE (March 1998). "Distribution of fitness effects caused by random insertion mutations in Escherichia coli". Genetica. 102–103 (1–6): 349–58. doi:10.1023/A:1017031008316. PMID9720287. S2CID2267064.
^Akashi H (September 1999). "Within- and between-species DNA sequence variation and the 'footprint' of natural selection". Gene. 238 (1): 39–51. doi:10.1016/S0378-1119(99)00294-2. PMID10570982.
^Kassen R, Bataillon T (April 2006). "Distribution of fitness effects among beneficial mutations before selection in experimental populations of bacteria". Nature Genetics. 38 (4): 484–8. doi:10.1038/ng1751. PMID16550173. S2CID6954765.
^Rokyta DR, Joyce P, Caudle SB, Wichman HA (April 2005). "An empirical test of the mutational landscape model of adaptation using a single-stranded DNA virus". Nature Genetics. 37 (4): 441–4. doi:10.1038/ng1535. PMID15778707. S2CID20296781.
^ ab"Somatic cell genetic mutation". Genome Dictionary. Athens, Greece: Information Technology Associates. 30 June 2007. Archived from the original on 24 February 2010. Retrieved 6 June 2010.
^Alberts B (2014). Molecular Biology of the Cell (6 ed.). Garland Science. p. 487. ISBN978-0-8153-4432-2.
^ abChadov BF, Fedorova NB, Chadova EV (1 July 2015). "Conditional mutations in Drosophila melanogaster: On the occasion of the 150th anniversary of G. Mendel's report in Brünn". Mutation Research/Reviews in Mutation Research. 765: 40–55. Bibcode:2015MRRMR.765...40C. doi:10.1016/j.mrrev.2015.06.001. PMID26281767.
^ abcWhitlock, Michael C.; Griswold, Cortland K.; Peters, Andrew D. (2003). "Compensating for the meltdown: The critical effective size of a population with deleterious and compensatory mutations". Annales Zoologici Fennici. 40 (2): 169–183. ISSN0003-455X. JSTOR23736523.
^ abcdDePristo, Mark A.; Weinreich, Daniel M.; Hartl, Daniel L. (September 2005). "Missense meanderings in sequence space: a biophysical view of protein evolution". Nature Reviews. Genetics. 6 (9): 678–687. doi:10.1038/nrg1672. ISSN1471-0056. PMID16074985. S2CID13236893.
^Kimura, Motoo (1 July 1985). "The role of compensatory neutral mutations in molecular evolution". Journal of Genetics. 64 (1): 7–19. doi:10.1007/BF02923549. ISSN0973-7731. S2CID129866.
In genetics, a mutation is a permanent alteration in the nucleotide sequence of the genome of an organism, virus, or organelle, which can lead to changes in the proteins produced by genes or disrupt their function.[1] These changes occur in the nucleotide bases—adenine (A), thymine (T), cytosine (C), and guanine (G)—that form the building blocks of DNA and can arise spontaneously or be induced by external factors.[2] Mutations are fundamental to biological evolution, providing the genetic variation that natural selection acts upon, though most are neutral or deleterious rather than beneficial.[3]Mutations are classified by their scale and effect on the genetic code. Point mutations involve the substitution of a single nucleotide, which may result in a silent mutation (no change in amino acid), missense mutation (altered amino acid), or nonsense mutation (premature stop codon).[1] Insertions and deletions (indels) add or remove nucleotides, often causing frameshift mutations that shift the reading frame and drastically alter the protein sequence downstream.[2] Larger structural mutations include duplications, inversions, translocations, or copy number variations affecting entire genes or chromosomal segments.[4]Germline mutations, occurring in reproductive cells, are heritable and can be passed to offspring, while somatic mutations arise in body cells post-fertilization and contribute to aging or diseases like cancer but are not inherited.[5]The causes of mutations span endogenous and exogenous origins. Spontaneous mutations stem from errors during DNA replication, such as base mispairing or tautomerization, or from natural cellular processes like deamination of bases.[2] Exogenous mutagens include ionizing radiation (e.g., X-rays), ultraviolet light, and chemicals like alkylating agents or those in tobacco smoke, which damage DNA directly or interfere with repair mechanisms.[1] Cells possess DNA repair pathways, such as base excision repair or mismatch repair, to correct many errors, but unrepaired mutations can accumulate and lead to phenotypic changes, genetic disorders (e.g., cystic fibrosis from CFTR gene mutations), or evolutionary adaptations.[2] Overall, mutation rates vary by organism and genomic region, approximately 1.2 × 10^{-8} per base pair per generation in humans.[6]
Overview
Definition and Scope
In molecular biology, a mutation is defined as a permanent change in the nucleotide sequence of an organism's genome, which serves as the complete set of genetic instructions encoded in DNA (or RNA in certain viruses) that directs development and functioning.[7][1][8] The genome represents the entirety of an organism's hereditary material, typically comprising DNA molecules organized into chromosomes within the cell nucleus in eukaryotes, or as a single circular chromosome in prokaryotes.[9] For RNA viruses, such as influenza or HIV, mutations occur as alterations in their RNA genome sequences, which function analogously to DNA in encoding genetic information.[10]At its core, the genome is composed of nucleotides—the fundamental building blocks of DNA—each consisting of a sugar, a phosphate group, and one of four nitrogenous bases: adenine (A), thymine (T), cytosine (C), or guanine (G). These bases pair specifically in a double-helix structure, with A pairing with T via two hydrogen bonds and C pairing with G via three, ensuring the faithful replication and transmission of genetic information during cell division.[11][12] A mutation disrupts this sequence, potentially altering the genetic code that is read in triplets (codons) to specify amino acids during protein synthesis.[13]The scope of mutations encompasses a wide range of alterations at the DNA level, from small-scale changes such as point mutations (substitution of a single nucleotide) or insertions/deletions (indels) of one or more nucleotides, to larger structural variations like gene duplications or chromosomal rearrangements that affect entire segments of chromosomes.[10] For instance, a single nucleotide change might replace one base with another, potentially altering a protein's function, while a whole gene duplication creates an extra copy that can evolve new roles over time.[7] Importantly, mutations differ from epigenetic changes, which involve heritable modifications to gene expression—such as DNA methylation or histone modifications—without altering the underlying nucleotide sequence itself.[14]These genetic changes form the raw material for evolutionary processes, enabling adaptation and diversity across species.[15]
Historical Development
The concept of mutation as a mechanism of sudden, heritable variation emerged in the early 20th century, challenging Charles Darwin's emphasis on gradual evolutionary change through natural selection. In 1901, Dutch botanist Hugo de Vries proposed the mutation theory based on his observations of the evening primrose (Oenothera lamarckiana), where he identified abrupt "sports" or variants that bred true across generations, suggesting that evolution proceeds via large, discontinuous leaps rather than incremental steps.[16] This theory, detailed in de Vries' multi-volume work Die Mutationstheorie (1901–1903), positioned mutations as the primary source of novel species, influencing early geneticists despite later refinements showing many of his "mutations" were due to chromosomal rearrangements.[17]Key experimental milestones in the 1920s and 1940s solidified mutations as inducible and random events tied to heredity. In 1927, American geneticist Hermann J. Muller demonstrated that X-rays could artificially induce mutations in fruit flies (Drosophila melanogaster), dramatically increasing lethal and visible changes in offspring compared to untreated controls, thus proving mutations were not solely spontaneous but could be triggered by external agents. This work, presented at the International Congress of Genetics, earned Muller the 1946 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine and shifted research toward mutagenesis as a tool for studying genes.[18] Building on this, the 1943 Luria-Delbrück experiment by Salvador E. Luria and Max Delbrück used statistical analysis of bacterial cultures to show that resistance to bacteriophage viruses arose from random pre-existing mutations, not adaptive responses directed by the environment, refuting directed evolution hypotheses. Concurrently, in 1944, Oswald T. Avery, Colin M. MacLeod, and Maclyn McCarty identified DNA as the "transforming principle" responsible for heritable changes in pneumococcal bacteria, providing the first biochemical evidence linking a specific molecule to genetic inheritance and mutation.The molecular era began in 1953 with James D. Watson and Francis H. C. Crick's elucidation of DNA's double-helix structure, which revealed how base-pairing enables faithful replication while allowing point mutations, insertions, or deletions to alter genetic information. This framework transformed mutation research from phenotypic observations to molecular mechanisms, enabling predictions about how errors in replication or damage could propagate heritable changes. By the 1970s, recombinant DNA technology, pioneered by Stanley N. Cohen and Herbert W. Boyer, allowed scientists to isolate, manipulate, and reinsert specific DNA segments into host organisms, uncovering diverse mutation types such as frameshifts and base substitutions at the sequence level. Their 1973 experiments with bacterial plasmids marked a pivotal advance, facilitating direct study of mutational effects and laying groundwork for modern genetics without relying on natural or induced variants alone.[19]
Mechanisms of Mutation
Spontaneous Mutations
Spontaneous mutations arise from intrinsic biochemical processes within cells, independent of external agents, and represent a fundamental source of genetic variation. These events occur during normal cellular activities such as DNA replication and maintenance, often due to the inherent chemical instability of DNA molecules. If not corrected by cellular repair mechanisms, they can lead to permanent changes in the genetic sequence.[20]One key mechanism involves tautomeric shifts, where nucleotide bases transiently adopt rare isomeric forms that alter their hydrogen-bonding patterns. For instance, adenine can shift to its imino tautomer, enabling it to pair with cytosine instead of thymine during replication, potentially resulting in A-T to G-C transitions. Similarly, thymine in its enol form may mispair with guanine. This phenomenon, first proposed by Watson and Crick as a basis for spontaneous mutagenesis, arises from proton relocation within the base structure and contributes to base substitution errors.[20][21]Depurination and depyrimidination represent another major spontaneous process, involving the hydrolysis of the N-glycosidic bond that links a base to the deoxyribose sugar in the DNA backbone. Depurination, more common for purines like adenine and guanine, results in an apurinic (AP) site where the base is lost, leaving the sugar-phosphate backbone intact but unable to serve as a proper template during replication. Depyrimidination affects pyrimidines such as cytosine and thymine in a similar manner, creating apyrimidinic sites. These abasic lesions destabilize the DNA helix and, if unrepaired, can cause transversions or deletions upon replication, as the polymerase may insert incorrect nucleotides opposite the gap.[22][23]Deamination occurs when an amino group is spontaneously removed from a base through hydrolytic reactions, altering its pairing specificity. A prominent example is the conversion of cytosine to uracil, which pairs with adenine rather than guanine, leading to C-G to T-A transitions in subsequent replications if the uracil is not excised. Adenine can deaminate to hypoxanthine, which behaves like guanine and pairs with cytosine, causing A-T to G-C transitions. These changes stem from the nucleophilic attack by water on the base and are among the most frequent spontaneous chemical alterations in DNA.[22][23]Replication errors during DNA synthesis also generate spontaneous mutations, primarily through inaccuracies in polymerase activity. Mispairing, or "wobble," can occur when non-complementary bases temporarily form hydrogen bonds, such as guanine with thymine. Additionally, polymerase slippage in regions of repetitive sequences, like microsatellites, leads to insertions or deletions (indels) that often cause frameshift mutations by shifting the reading frame of the genetic code. These errors are exacerbated in homopolymeric runs, where the enzyme may dissociate and reassociate, adding or skipping nucleotides.[20][23]Another source of spontaneous mutations is oxidative damage caused by reactive oxygen species (ROS), which are byproducts of normal cellular metabolism, particularly in mitochondria. For example, guanine is highly susceptible to oxidation, forming 8-oxoguanine (8-oxoG), which can mispair with adenine during replication, leading to G-C to T-A transversions if not repaired by base excision repair mechanisms involving enzymes like 8-oxoguanine DNA glycosylase (OGG1). Oxidative lesions are among the most abundant DNA damages in cells and contribute significantly to the spontaneous mutation rate.[24]Transposable elements, often called "jumping genes," are mobile DNA segments that can spontaneously excise and reintegrate into new locations in the genome via transposase enzymes. These movements disrupt genes at insertion sites, causing insertions, deletions, or rearrangements. For instance, the P element in Drosophila can mobilize to alter nearby sequences.[25][26]
Induced Mutations
Induced mutations arise from exposure to external agents that damage DNA or interfere with its replication, leading to alterations in the genetic sequence. These agents include physical, chemical, and biological factors, each employing distinct mechanisms to disrupt DNA integrity. Unlike spontaneous mutations driven by endogenous processes, induced mutations are extrinsic and often used in laboratory settings to study genetic effects or generate variability in organisms.[27]Physical agents such as ultraviolet (UV) light primarily cause mutations by forming covalent bonds between adjacent pyrimidine bases in DNA. UV radiation, particularly UVB wavelengths, induces cyclobutane pyrimidine dimers (CPDs), where two thymine bases link together, distorting the DNA helix and blocking replication forks. This damage, if unrepaired, leads to base substitutions during translesion synthesis, often resulting in C-to-T transitions at dipyrimidine sites. Ionizing radiation, including X-rays and gamma rays, penetrates cells and generates reactive oxygen species that ionize water molecules, producing high-energy electrons that directly break DNA strands. These events frequently create double-strand breaks (DSBs), the most severe form of DNA damage, which can lead to chromosomal rearrangements, deletions, or insertions if repaired inaccurately via non-homologous end joining.[27][28][29][30]Chemical agents induce mutations by chemically modifying DNA bases, altering their pairing properties or causing strand breaks. Alkylating agents like ethyl methanesulfonate (EMS) transfer ethyl groups to guanine bases, primarily at the O6 position, forming O6-ethylguanine that mispairs with thymine during replication, resulting in G-to-A transitions. Base analogs, such as 5-bromouracil (5-BU), structurally resemble normal nucleotides and incorporate into DNA in place of thymine; however, 5-BU can tautomerize to an enol form that pairs with guanine instead of adenine, leading to A-to-G and C-to-T transitions over multiple replication cycles.[31][32][33]Biological agents, such as viruses, contribute to induced mutations through their integration into the host genome. Viral integrations occur when retroviruses or other DNA viruses insert their genetic material into the host chromosome using integrase enzymes, potentially inactivating genes or activating oncogenes through promoter insertion, as seen with human T-cell leukemia virus type 1 (HTLV-1).[34]Error-prone repair mechanisms, activated in response to induced damage, can further propagate mutations. Translesion synthesis (TLS) employs specialized DNA polymerases, such as polymerase η or ι, to bypass lesions like thymine dimers or alkylated bases during replication; these polymerases have lower fidelity than replicative ones, inserting incorrect nucleotides opposite the damage and generating point mutations, though this tolerates lethal blocks to allow cell survival.[35][36]
Classification of Mutations
By Structural Alteration
Mutations are classified by structural alteration based on the scale and type of changes to the DNA sequence, ranging from small-scale modifications affecting individual nucleotides to large-scale rearrangements involving entire chromosomal segments or numbers.[37]Small-scale mutations include point mutations, which involve the substitution of a single nucleotide base in the DNA sequence.[38] Substitutions are categorized as transitions, where a purine base (adenine or guanine) is replaced by another purine, or a pyrimidine base (cytosine or thymine) by another pyrimidine, and transversions, where a purine is replaced by a pyrimidine or vice versa.[39] Another type of small-scale mutation is insertions and deletions (indels), which add or remove a small number of bases, typically 1 to 50, from the DNA sequence; if the number of bases affected is not a multiple of three, these indels cause frameshift mutations that alter the reading frame of the genetic code.[40] For example, sickle cell anemia results from a point mutation—a specific substitution in the beta-globin gene—leading to abnormal hemoglobin production.[41]Large-scale mutations encompass chromosomal alterations that affect broader segments of the genome. Duplications involve the replication and insertion of a DNA segment, either at the gene level or as larger segmental copies.[37] Inversions occur when a segment of DNA is reversed in orientation due to breaks and rejoining at opposite ends.[37] Translocations result from the exchange of DNA segments between non-homologous chromosomes.[37]Aneuploidy represents a change in the number of chromosomes, such as the gain or loss of an entire chromosome, deviating from the normal set.[42] An example of a large-scale deletion is seen in cri-du-chat syndrome, caused by the loss of a segment on the short arm of chromosome 5.[43]These structural alterations can influence downstream protein translation by changing the DNA template, though the specific sequence and functional impacts are addressed elsewhere.[39]
By Sequence Impact
Mutations are classified by their impact on the amino acid sequence of the encoded protein, which determines how the genetic code is translated during protein synthesis. This classification focuses on changes at the protein level resulting from DNA alterations in coding regions, particularly how they affect the reading of codons in the mRNA. Such impacts range from no change in the amino acid to complete disruption of the protein sequence, influencing protein function variably.Synonymous mutations, also known as silent mutations, occur when a nucleotide substitution in a codon does not alter the encoded amino acid due to the degeneracy of the genetic code, where multiple codons specify the same amino acid. For example, a change from GGU to GGC both encode glycine, preserving the protein's primary structure. These mutations are typically considered neutral at the sequence level but can influence gene expression through effects on mRNA stability or translation efficiency in some cases.Missense mutations involve a nucleotide substitution that results in the replacement of one amino acid with another in the protein sequence. The effect depends on whether the substitution is conservative, where the new amino acid has similar chemical properties (e.g., valine to leucine, both nonpolar and aliphatic), or non-conservative, where properties differ significantly (e.g., glycine, a small neutral residue, to arginine, a large positively charged one), potentially disrupting protein folding or interactions more severely.Nonsense mutations arise from a nucleotide change that converts a codon for an amino acid into a premature stop codon, leading to translation termination and a truncated protein. A classic example is the substitution of CAG (encoding glutamine) to TAG (a stop codon), which halts protein synthesis early and often results in a non-functional product subject to degradation.Frameshift mutations are caused by insertions or deletions (indels) of nucleotides in numbers not divisible by three, shifting the reading frame of the codon sequence downstream and altering all subsequent amino acids. This typically produces a garbled protein sequence that may include a premature stop codon, yielding a truncated or aberrant protein with little to no original function.
By Functional Effect
Mutations are classified by their functional effect on the gene product, such as proteins or RNA, which determines the phenotypic outcome independent of the underlying sequence change. This classification, originally proposed by Hermann J. Muller in the 1930s as "morphs," categorizes alleles based on how the mutant product alters wild-type activity, including reductions, enhancements, or interferences.[44]Loss-of-function mutations, also known as amorphic or null mutations, completely inactivate the gene product, resulting in no functional output from the affected allele. These often lead to enzyme deficiencies, as seen in phenylketonuria (PKU), where mutations in the PAH gene abolish phenylalanine hydroxylase activity, preventing the breakdown of phenylalanine and causing toxic accumulation.[45] Amorphic mutations typically behave recessively, requiring both alleles to be affected for a phenotype to manifest, unless haploinsufficiency occurs.[44]Gain-of-function mutations confer enhanced or novel activities to the gene product, often acting dominantly. Hypermorphic mutations increase the normal function, such as elevated expression or efficiency, exemplified by certain SCN4A mutations causing paramyotonia congenita through heightened sodium channel activity that prolongs muscle depolarization.[46] Neomorphic mutations introduce entirely new functions absent in the wild-type, like some oncogenic transformations where a protein gains aberrant signaling capabilities. A classic example is gain-of-function mutations in proto-oncogenes like RAS, which hyperactivate downstream pathways promoting uncontrolled cell proliferation in cancers such as pancreatic adenocarcinoma.[47]Hypomorphic mutations produce a partially functional gene product with reduced activity compared to wild-type, often due to lower expression or impaired efficiency. These "leaky" alleles can result in milder phenotypes, as in hypomorphic PRF1 mutations associated with familial hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis, where perforin activity is diminished but not eliminated, leading to impaired cytotoxic T-cell function.[48] Hypomorphs are typically recessive but may contribute to disease in compound heterozygotes with more severe alleles.[44]Dominant-negative mutations, or antimorphic mutations, occur when the mutant product actively interferes with the wild-type protein, often in multimeric complexes. For instance, certain TP53 missense mutations in cancer form defective tetramers that poison wild-type p53 complexes, blocking tumor suppression and promoting genomic instability.[49] This interference reduces overall function beyond simple loss, as the mutant sequesters or antagonizes normal subunits, commonly seen in proteins like transcription factors or ion channels that assemble into oligomers.[44]
By Inheritance Pattern
Mutations are classified by their inheritance pattern, which determines whether they can be transmitted to offspring or remain limited to the affected individual. Germline mutations occur in the cells that give rise to gametes, such as sperm or egg cells, and are therefore heritable, passing from parents to children during reproduction.[50] These mutations are present in every cell of the offspring and can lead to inherited disorders following Mendelian patterns, such as cystic fibrosis caused by mutations in the CFTR gene.[51] In contrast, somatic mutations arise in non-reproductive body cells after fertilization and are not passed to offspring, though they can accumulate throughout an individual's lifetime due to environmental factors like ultravioletradiation from sun exposure, which may induce mutations in skin cells.[5] Somatic mutations play a role in conditions like cancer, where they contribute to uncontrolled cell growth in affected tissues.[52]Somatic mosaicism represents a special case where a mutation occurs early in embryonic development, resulting in a mixture of cells with the normal genotype and cells carrying the mutation within the same individual.[53] This post-zygotic event leads to genetic heterogeneity across tissues, potentially influencing phenotypic outcomes depending on the proportion and distribution of mutated cells.[54]Mutation rates differ significantly between germline and somatic cells, reflecting their distinct biological contexts. The human germline mutation rate is approximately 1.2×10−8 per base pair per generation, primarily driven by errors in DNA replication during gametogenesis.[55]Somatic mutation rates are generally higher, often 4 to 25 times that of germline rates, due to ongoing cell divisions, metabolic stresses, and external exposures throughout life.[56] These elevated somatic rates contribute to the gradual accumulation of genetic changes in tissues over time.[57]
Mutation Rates and Variability
Factors Influencing Rates
Mutation rates, defined as the probability of a mutation occurring at a specific site in the genome per generation, vary significantly across organisms and are influenced by a range of intrinsic, environmental, and organismal factors. These modulators affect the frequency and spectrum of mutations, shaping genomic stability and evolutionary potential. Understanding these factors is crucial for estimating baseline mutation frequencies and predicting variability in different biological contexts.Intrinsic factors within the genome play a key role in determining mutation susceptibility. Genome size directly impacts the total number of potential mutation targets, with larger genomes accumulating more mutations overall, though per-base-pair rates often remain constrained by evolutionary pressures such as Drake's rule, which posits a roughly constant mutation rate per effective genome across microbes. For instance, in DNA-based microbes, the average mutation rate per base pair is inversely proportional to genome size, leading to a near-invariant total mutations per genome per replication. GC content also modulates mutability, as AT base pairs are generally more prone to spontaneous mutations compared to GC pairs, due to higher susceptibility to transitions like A-to-G or T-to-C, resulting in elevated mutation rates in AT-rich regions. Replication speed further influences error accumulation, as faster DNA synthesis can increase the likelihood of polymerase mistakes, creating a trade-off where enhanced replication fidelity—achieved through proofreading mechanisms—often slows the process and imposes metabolic costs.Environmental conditions externally alter mutation frequencies by stressing cellular repair systems. Elevated temperatures accelerate biochemical reaction rates, including those leading to DNA damage and replication errors, thereby increasing spontaneous mutation rates in organisms like Drosophila and bacteria. Similarly, higher oxygen levels promote the formation of reactive oxygen species (ROS), which cause oxidative damage to DNA bases, such as 8-oxoguanine lesions that lead to transversions, elevating overall mutation burdens in aerobic environments.At the organismal level, mutation rates per generation differ markedly between species, reflecting adaptations to life history and population dynamics. Bacteria typically exhibit low per-base-pair mutation rates of approximately 10−10 per site per generation, enabling rapid reproduction with minimal error accumulation, whereas humans display higher rates around 10−8 per site per generation, consistent with longer generation times and larger genomes. These rates embody evolvability trade-offs, where higher mutation frequencies can enhance adaptability to changing environments by generating more genetic variation, but at the cost of increased deleterious mutations that reduce fitness unless counterbalanced by efficient repair or selection.The basic mutation rate μ is formally estimated as \mu = \frac{\text{number of mutations}}{\text{[genome size](/page/Genome_size)} \times \text{number of generations}}, providing a per-site probability that standardizes comparisons across genomes. This parameter is derived from experimental assays, notably the Luria-Delbrück fluctuation test, which distinguishes spontaneous mutations from induced ones by analyzing variance in mutant frequencies across parallel cultures, allowing precise quantification of μ in microbial systems.
Randomness and Predictability
Mutations occur as stochastic events, fundamentally random in their timing and location within the genome, rather than being directed by environmental pressures or adaptive needs. This randomness was experimentally demonstrated in the seminal Luria-Delbrück fluctuation test, conducted on Escherichia coli populations exposed to bacteriophage T1. By growing parallel cultures and plating them on selective media, Luria and Delbrück observed highly variable numbers of resistant mutants across cultures, following a distribution that indicated mutations arose sporadically before selection, not in response to the phage.[58] The Luria-Delbrück distribution, characterized by its high variance (approaching infinite for low mutation rates), refuted Lamarckian notions of adaptive induction and established that pre-existing mutants confer resistance, underscoring the unpredictable nature of mutational events.[59]While mutations are generally unpredictable, certain genomic sites exhibit elevated rates, known as mutation hotspots, which introduce localized non-randomness without overall predictability. Prominent examples include CpG dinucleotides, where cytosine is often methylated to 5-methylcytosine (5mC); spontaneous hydrolytic deamination of 5mC yields thymine, leading to C-to-T transition mutations that are not efficiently repaired by base excision mechanisms.[60] These hotspots account for a disproportionate share of point mutations in vertebrates, with CpG sites mutating at rates up to 10-50 times higher than other dinucleotides, yet their specific activation remains probabilistic and context-dependent, preserving the broader stochasticity of mutation.[61]The debate over directed mutation, which suggested environmentally induced, non-random changes akin to Lamarckian inheritance, gained attention through Cairns' 1988 experiments on lactose-utilizing E. coli mutants appearing under starvation. However, subsequent analyses revealed these as artifacts of hypermutation in stressed cells or selection of rare pre-existing variants, not true directed changes in DNA sequence. Modern epigenetics, involving heritable modifications like DNA methylation without altering the sequence, can influence gene expression and mutation susceptibility but does not constitute directed genetic mutation, as it lacks permanence in the primary nucleotidesequence.[62]At the molecular level, quantum mechanical effects may contribute intrinsic randomness to mutations via proton tunneling, where hydrogen nuclei probabilistically shift positions in DNA base pairs, enabling rare tautomeric forms that lead to mispairing during replication. Proposed by Löwdin in 1963, this mechanism posits that double proton transfer in guanine-cytosine or adenine-thymine pairs can transiently form Hoogsteen or wobble configurations, increasing substitution error rates beyond classical predictions. Computational and experimental studies confirm tunneling probabilities on the order of 10^{-5} to 10^{-3} per replication cycle for such events, embedding fundamental unpredictability at the quantum scale while aligning with observed spontaneous mutation frequencies.[63]
Biological Impacts
Harmful Mutations and Disease
Harmful mutations, particularly those occurring in the germline and passed to offspring, underlie many inherited genetic disorders. Autosomal recessive disorders, such as Tay-Sachs disease, arise from biallelic mutations in the HEXA gene, which encodes the alpha subunit of the lysosomal enzyme beta-hexosaminidase A, leading to its deficiency and the accumulation of GM2 gangliosides in neurons, resulting in progressive neurodegeneration.[64] In contrast, autosomal dominant disorders like Huntington's disease are caused by germline expansions of CAG trinucleotide repeats in the HTT gene, typically exceeding 36 repeats, which produce a toxic polyglutamine tract in the huntingtin protein, disrupting neuronal function and causing chorea, cognitive decline, and psychiatric symptoms.[65]Somatic mutations, acquired during an individual's lifetime and not inherited, play a central role in carcinogenesis by altering key regulatory genes. Activating mutations in proto-oncogenes, such as point mutations in RAS family genes (KRAS, NRAS, HRAS), lock the proteins in a GTP-bound active state, promoting uncontrolled cell proliferation and found in approximately 30% of human cancers, including pancreatic and colorectal tumors.[66] Inactivating mutations in tumor suppressor genes, like loss-of-function alterations in TP53, impair DNA repair and apoptosis pathways, occurring in over 50% of cancers and contributing to genomic instability.[67] These changes accumulate through a multistep process of carcinogenesis, where sequential mutations in oncogenes and tumor suppressors drive the progression from normal cells to malignant tumors, often requiring 5-10 genetic hits over years.[68]Recent insights from the 2020s highlight the role of somatic mosaic mutations—post-zygotic variants present in only a subset of cells—in neurodevelopmental disorders. In autism spectrum disorder (ASD), low-level mosaic mutations in genes like CHD8 or SCN2A, detected via deep sequencing of brain tissue, contribute to unexplained cases by disrupting neuronal development and connectivity during embryogenesis, with estimates suggesting they explain approximately 3-5% of idiopathic ASD.[69][70]The accumulation of deleterious mutations, known as mutational load, exacerbates harmful effects in populations with reduced genetic diversity, such as through inbreeding. Inbreeding increases homozygosity for recessive harmful alleles, leading to inbreeding depression manifested as reduced fitness, higher infant mortality, and developmental abnormalities, primarily due to the unmasking of the preexisting mutation load rather than new mutations.[71]
Beneficial and Neutral Mutations
Beneficial mutations enhance an organism's fitness in a specific environment, conferring a selective advantage that can lead to their increased prevalence in populations. These mutations are relatively rare, comprising a small fraction of new mutations in experimental evolution studies with microorganisms. A prominent example is the lactase persistence allele, particularly the -13910*T variant in the MCM6 gene, which originated in European dairy-farming populations approximately 7,500 years ago during the Neolithic spread of animal domestication. This mutation enables adults to continue producing the enzyme lactase, allowing efficient digestion of lactose in milk and providing nutritional benefits such as increased caloric intake and calcium absorption in pastoralist societies.[72][73]Neutral mutations, by contrast, have no significant impact on fitness and represent the majority of genetic changes, often occurring as synonymous substitutions in coding regions or variations in non-coding DNA that do not alter protein function or regulation. Motoo Kimura's neutral theory of molecular evolution, introduced in 1968, posits that most evolutionary substitutions at the molecular level result from the random fixation of these neutral mutations through genetic drift rather than natural selection. This theory explains the observed uniformity in molecular evolutionary rates across species, as neutral changes accumulate at a rate equal to the mutation rate itself.[74]The distribution of fitness effects (DFE) across mutations typically follows gamma or lognormal distributions, with a long tail of rare beneficial or strongly deleterious effects and a peak of nearly neutral ones that have minimal impact. Tomoko Ohta's nearly neutral theory, proposed in 1973, refines this by emphasizing mutations with slight selective effects (|s| ≈ 1/(2N_e), where N_e is the effective population size), which behave as neutral in small populations due to drift overpowering weak selection but can influence evolution in larger ones. These nearly neutral mutations account for much of the observed molecular variation, bridging the gap between strictly neutral and adaptive changes.[75][76]Some mutations exhibit conditional effects, proving beneficial in one environmental context but neutral or harmful in another, highlighting the context-dependence of fitness. For instance, the sickle cell allele (HbS) in humans provides a heterozygote advantage in malaria-endemic regions of Africa, where carriers (AS genotype) experience reduced severity of Plasmodium falciparum infection due to enhanced phagocytosis of parasitized red blood cells, thereby lowering mortality risk. In non-malarious environments, however, the same allele is neutral or deleterious in homozygotes (SS), leading to sickle cell disease. Such conditional dynamics underscore how beneficial and neutral mutations contribute to adaptive genetic variation.[77]
Role in Evolution
Generating Variation
Mutations serve as the ultimate source of genetic novelty in evolution by introducing new alleles into populations, providing the raw material upon which evolutionary processes act. Without mutations, genetic variation would eventually deplete, stalling adaptive change, as encapsulated in Fisher's fundamental theorem of natural selection, which posits that the rate of increase in mean fitness equals the additive genetic variance in fitness, with mutations replenishing this variance over time.[78]Different types of mutations contribute to evolutionary variation at varying scales. Point mutations, which alter a single nucleotide, enable fine-tuning of existing traits by subtly modifying protein function or regulatory elements, allowing populations to adapt incrementally to environmental pressures. In contrast, large-scale mutations such as polyploidy— the duplication of entire chromosome sets—can drive rapid speciation, particularly in plants, where it has facilitated the diversification of approximately 30–70% of flowering plantspecies by creating instant reproductive isolation and novel gene interactions.[79]Recent advances in the 2020s, including CRISPR-based mutational scanning screens, have illuminated mutation hotspots that accelerate adaptive evolution by preferentially altering key genomic regions, such as those involved in enzyme function or regulatory networks, thereby enhancing the efficiency of variant generation in experimental evolution models.[80]Mutations synergize with genetic recombination to amplify diversity, as novel variants generated by mutation serve as substrates for crossing over during meiosis, reshuffling alleles to produce novel combinations that expand the adaptive potential of offspring beyond what mutation alone could achieve.[81]
Interaction with Selection
Natural selection interacts with mutations by differentially affecting their survival and spread within populations, thereby filtering the genetic variation they introduce. Beneficial mutations, which confer a fitness advantage, are favored and have a higher likelihood of becoming fixed, while deleterious mutations are typically eliminated. Neutral mutations, neither advantageous nor disadvantageous, are subject to random genetic drift rather than deterministic selection. This interplay determines the trajectory of evolutionary change, with selection acting as the primary mechanism that shapes adaptive outcomes from mutational input.The probability of fixation for a new beneficial mutation in a large population is approximately 2s, where s is the selective advantage of the mutant relative to the wild type. This result, derived from branching process approximations assuming weak selection, indicates that even advantageous mutations are likely to be lost due to stochastic effects early in their establishment, with only a small fraction achieving fixation. For neutral mutations, the fixation probability is 2N1, where N is the effective population size, reflecting their random drift to either loss or fixation without selective bias. These probabilities highlight how selection amplifies the success of beneficial variants while neutral ones depend on chance, particularly in finite populations.Purifying selection removes deleterious mutations that reduce fitness, maintaining genetic integrity by preventing their accumulation and spread. This form of negative selection is pervasive across genomes, counteracting the constant influx of harmful variants and preserving functional elements. In contrast, balancing selection actively maintains genetic polymorphisms, often through mechanisms like heterozygote advantage, where heterozygous individuals exhibit higher fitness than either homozygote, thus stabilizing multiple alleles at a locus. Examples include immune system genes where diversity enhances pathogen resistance, preventing any single allele from dominating.[82]Genetic drift plays a crucial role in the interaction, especially for neutral mutations in small populations, where random fluctuations can lead to fixation or loss independently of selection. Motoo Kimura's neutral theory emphasizes that most molecular evolution proceeds via such drift-fixed neutral changes, with selection intervening only for non-neutral variants. In small populations, drift can override weak selection, allowing mildly deleterious mutations to fix occasionally.Adaptive landscapes, conceptualized by Sewall Wright, provide a framework for understanding how mutations facilitate evolutionary shifts under selection. In this multidimensional fitness surface, populations occupy peaks representing local optima, and beneficial mutations can enable traversal of lower-fitness valleys to higher peaks. Wright's shifting balance theory posits a three-phase process: random drift in subdivided populations generates variation (phase 1), selection favors superior combinations in some demes (phase 2), and migration spreads these adaptations across the metapopulation (phase 3). Mutations enabling such peak shifts are critical, as they allow escape from suboptimal adaptive traps, promoting long-term adaptation despite rugged landscapes.[83]
Advanced Concepts
Compensatory Mutations
Compensatory mutations are secondary genetic changes that mitigate the deleterious effects of a prior mutation, thereby restoring or partially restoring the original function and fitness of the organism. These mutations can occur within the same gene (intragenic) or in a different gene (intergenic), and they typically have little or no effect on fitness in the absence of the initial deleterious mutation.[84] For instance, intragenic compensatory mutations often restore structural integrity in proteins, while intergenic examples include suppressor mutations in transfer RNA (tRNA) genes that counteract nonsense mutations in coding sequences by enabling read-through of premature stop codons. A classic example is the Su7 suppressor tRNA in Escherichia coli, where an anticodon mutation in a tryptophan tRNA allows it to recognize an amber (UAG) stop codon introduced by the primary mutation, thus suppressing the truncation of the affected protein.[85]In RNA molecules, compensatory mutations frequently act by preserving base-pairing within secondary structures, such as stem-loops or helices, which are critical for RNA folding, stability, and function. If a primary mutation disrupts a Watson-Crick base pair— for example, changing a guanine-cytosine (G-C) pair to an adenine-cytosine (A-C) mismatch—a compensatory mutation in the opposing base can restore pairing, such as by altering the cytosine to a guanine, reforming a G-C pair. This mechanism is particularly evident in tRNA anticodon loops or ribosomal RNA stems, where such paired changes maintain the RNA's three-dimensional conformation without altering the overall sequence drastically. Studies of ribosomal RNA evolution have shown that stem regions exhibit higher rates of compensatory substitutions compared to unpaired loops, underscoring their role in maintaining functional structures over evolutionary time.[86][87]From an evolutionary perspective, compensatory mutations facilitate the exploration of vast sequence space by enabling populations to traverse rugged fitness landscapes, where direct adaptive paths are impeded by intermediate states of low fitness. In these landscapes, an initial deleterious mutation reduces fitness, creating a "valley," but a subsequent compensatory mutation can elevate the genotype toward a new peak, allowing the accumulation of potentially beneficial changes that would otherwise be inaccessible. This process promotes long-term adaptation, as seen in protein evolution where compensatory pairs permit the fixation of neutral or slightly deleterious variants that later enable further innovations. Theoretical models and empirical observations indicate that such epistatic interactions between mutations shape the topology of fitness landscapes, making evolution more predictable in structured genetic networks.[88][89]Recent advancements in artificial intelligence have enhanced the prediction of compensatory mutation paths in protein folding, leveraging tools like AlphaFold to model how second-site changes counteract structural disruptions from primary mutations. For example, a 2024 study integrated AlphaFold-based structure predictions with coevolutionary analysis to identify compensatory mutations that preserve binding interfaces in protein-protein interactions, revealing how such changes evolve to maintain functional complexes despite initial destabilizing variants. These AI-driven approaches simulate evolutionary trajectories by evaluating folding stability and interaction energies, providing insights into potential compensatory routes that align with observed natural selection patterns in proteins.[90]
Conditional and Context-Dependent Mutations
Conditional and context-dependent mutations are those whose phenotypic effects, including fitness consequences, vary depending on external environmental conditions or the internal genetic background of the organism. These mutations highlight how the same genetic change can lead to different outcomes, such as lethality, neutrality, or advantage, across contexts, underscoring the complexity of genotype-phenotype relationships.[91]In environmental contexts, mutations often exhibit conditional fitness effects tied to specific stressors or resources. For instance, antibiotic resistance mutations in bacteria, such as those altering DNA gyrase in Escherichia coli, confer a selective advantage only in the presence of the corresponding antibiotic like ciprofloxacin, where they enable survival and proliferation; in its absence, these mutations impose a fitness cost due to reduced replication efficiency.[92] This context-dependency arises because the mutation's benefit is outweighed by energetic or physiological trade-offs in drug-free environments, illustrating how selective pressures dynamically shape microbial populations.[93]The genetic background further modulates mutation effects through epistasis, where the impact of a mutation at one locus depends on variants at other loci. Sign epistasis occurs when a mutation's effect on fitness changes sign (from beneficial to deleterious or vice versa) across backgrounds, potentially constraining evolutionary paths by making certain adaptive combinations inaccessible.[94] Magnitude epistasis, in contrast, alters the strength but not the direction of the effect, as seen in studies of protein evolution where synergistic or antagonistic interactions amplify or dampen fitness changes in yeast.[91] These forms of epistasis are prevalent in microbial genomes, with analyses showing sign epistasis among many beneficial mutations in evolving populations.[95]Temperature-sensitive mutations represent a classic example of conditional lethals, particularly in model organisms like bacteriophage lambda, where certain missense mutations in essential genes disrupt protein function at restrictive high temperatures (e.g., 42°C) but allow normal replication at permissive lower temperatures (e.g., 30°C).[96] These mutants, first systematically isolated in the 1960s, have been instrumental in mapping gene functions by halting development at non-permissive conditions, revealing roles in DNA replication and morphogenesis without permanent lethality.[97]Recent advances in microbiome research have revealed how host-microbe interactions can modulate the fitness of microbial mutations within the gut ecosystem. In 2024 studies, experimental evolution in Drosophila showed that host-associated microbial communities alter the distribution of fitness effects for mutations in gut bacteria, with certain host genotypes enhancing the spread of beneficial variants under dietary stress through resource competition and metabolite exchange.[98] Similarly, analyses of within-host microbiome dynamics indicate that community composition influences mutation fixation rates, where beneficial mutations in one strain's fitness is amplified or suppressed by neighboring microbes' interactions with the host immune system.[99] These findings emphasize the holobiont perspective, where mutation outcomes are co-determined by tripartite host-microbe-environment networks.
Applications in Research and Medicine
Genetic Engineering and Therapy
Genetic engineering involves the deliberate introduction of mutations into an organism's genome to achieve specific therapeutic or research outcomes, with CRISPR-Cas9 representing a cornerstone technology. Developed from bacterial immune systems, CRISPR-Cas9 uses a guide RNA (gRNA) to direct the Cas9nuclease to a precise DNA sequence, where it creates a double-strand break (DSB) that can be repaired via non-homologous end joining (NHEJ) or homology-directed repair (HDR), enabling insertions, deletions, or substitutions. This site-specific mutagenesis has revolutionized genome editing by allowing targeted alterations with high efficiency in various cell types. However, off-target effects remain a significant risk, as the Cas9nuclease can cleave unintended genomic sites with sequence similarities to the target, potentially leading to harmful mutations or oncogenic transformations.In therapeutic applications, CRISPR-Cas9 has advanced gene therapy by correcting disease-causing mutations, particularly in monogenic disorders. A landmark example is the 2023 U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of Casgevy (exagamglogene autotemcel), developed by CRISPR Therapeutics and Vertex Pharmaceuticals, for treating sickle cell disease (SCD) in patients aged 12 and older. This ex vivo therapy involves extracting hematopoietic stem cells from patients, editing the BCL11A gene with CRISPR-Cas9 to reactivate fetal hemoglobin production and alleviate sickle cell symptoms, then reinfusing the modified cells; clinical trials demonstrated that 94% of patients were free of severe vaso-occlusive crises after one year. Such approvals mark the transition of CRISPR from research to clinical practice, though challenges like delivery efficiency and long-term safety persist.[100]Advancements beyond standard CRISPR-Cas9 include prime editing, introduced in 2019 by David Liu's laboratory, which enables precise insertions, deletions, and base substitutions without DSBs by fusing a reverse transcriptase to a catalytically impaired Cas9 and using a prime editing guide RNA (pegRNA) to specify the edit. This "search-and-replace" approach reduces off-target risks and indels compared to DSB-based methods, with efficiencies reaching up to 50% for certain edits in human cells; by 2025, optimized versions like enhanced prime editors have improved versatility for therapeutic applications, earning Liu the BreakthroughPrize in Life Sciences. Multiplex editing, which simultaneously targets multiple sites using arrays of gRNAs or engineered Cas variants, holds promise for polygenic diseases involving variants across several genes, such as cardiovascular conditions or diabetes; for instance, strategies like paired prime editing have demonstrated simultaneous correction of up to 10 loci with minimal interference, paving the way for complex trait modification.[101][102]Ethical considerations in genetic engineering, particularly germline editing that affects heritable mutations, have intensified following the 2018 controversy involving Chinese scientist He Jiankui, who used CRISPR-Cas9 to edit CCR5 genes in human embryos to confer HIV resistance, resulting in the birth of twin girls without informed consent or regulatory approval. This act violated international guidelines, such as those from the World Health Organization, due to risks of mosaicism, off-target effects, and unintended societal impacts like eugenics concerns, leading to He's imprisonment and global calls for moratoriums on heritable edits until safety and equity are ensured. Somatic therapies, like those for SCD, face fewer ethical hurdles but still require oversight to address access disparities and potential long-term consequences.
Evolutionary and Population Studies
Whole-genome sequencing has revolutionized the study of mutation spectra in populations by enabling the detection of nucleotide substitutions across entire genomes, allowing researchers to quantify the ratio of nonsynonymous to synonymous substitutions, known as dN/dS, to infer selective pressures.[103] This metric, where dN/dS > 1 indicates positive selection favoring adaptive mutations, dN/dS = 1 suggests neutrality, and dN/dS < 1 reflects purifying selection against deleterious variants, has been applied in within-species analyses to map mutation patterns and evolutionary constraints in protein-coding genes.[104] For instance, tools like GenomegaMap integrate whole-genome data to estimate dN/dS while accounting for demographic history and recombination, revealing localized signals of selection in bacterial and eukaryotic populations.[104]Experimental evolution provides direct observation of mutation accumulation and their fitness effects in controlled populations. The long-term evolution experiment (LTEE) with Escherichia coli, initiated by Richard Lenski in 1988 and ongoing as of 2025, has propagated 12 replicate populations for over 80,000 generations, enabling the tracking of beneficial mutations through daily transfers and periodic sequencing.[105] In this setup, mutations conferring advantages, such as improved resource utilization, arise stochastically and sweep to fixation, with analyses showing that core genes accumulate nonsynonymous changes at higher rates than expected under neutrality, highlighting constraints on protein evolution.[106] Recent extensions of the LTEE, including 2025 studies on adaptive genetics, have identified constraints on protein structure-function relationships by quantifying insertion mutations across all genes, demonstrating diminishing returns in fitness gains over time as beneficial mutation effects weaken.[107]Population genetics employs coalescent theory to trace the origins of mutations by modeling the genealogy of alleles backward in time, coalescing lineages to a common ancestor under assumptions of genetic drift, mutation, and selection.[108] Developed from seminal work in the 1980s, this framework simulates mutation coalescence times to estimate parameters like effective population size and mutation rates from polymorphism data, facilitating inferences about historical events such as bottlenecks.[109] Complementing this, genome-wide association studies (GWAS) link specific genetic variants, often mutations, to phenotypic traits by scanning millions of single nucleotide polymorphisms across large cohorts.[110] GWAS have identified thousands of trait-associated loci, such as those influencing height or disease risk, by detecting allele frequency differences, though they primarily capture common variants and require follow-up to pinpoint causal mutations.[110]Recent analyses of ancient DNA in 2025 have refined estimates of mutation rates in human evolution, leveraging high-coverage genomes from diverse time periods to calibrate germline mutation accumulation.[111] These studies reveal a human de novo mutation rate of approximately 1.2 × 10^{-8} per base pair per generation, with variations influenced by parental age and ancestry, providing a baseline for interpreting evolutionary divergence.[112] In the context of Neanderthalintrogression, ancient DNA from Eurasian fossils has quantified archaic admixture contributing 1-4% of non-African genomes, with introgressed haplotypes showing elevated mutation rates in immune-related genes, underscoring adaptive roles in human evolution.[113] Such findings, from catalogs of Neanderthal ancestry across 500+ ancient individuals, illustrate how introgression events around 50,000 years ago introduced beneficial mutations that persisted despite purifying selection against deleterious ones.[113]