Comparing Analysis Methods for Mutation-Accumulation Data: A Simulation Study

Corresponding author: Aurora García-Dorado, Facultad de Biología, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, 28040 Madrid, Spain., augardo{at}bio.ucm.es (E-mail)

Communicating editor: S. P. OTTO

We simulated single-generation data for a fitness trait in mutation-accumulation (MA) experiments, and we compared three methods of analysis. Bateman-Mukai (BM) and maximum likelihood (ML) need information on both the MA lines and control lines, while minimum distance (MD) can be applied with or without the control. Both MD and ML assume gamma-distributed mutational effects. ML estimates of the rate of deleterious mutation had larger mean square error (MSE) than MD or BM had due to large outliers. MD estimates obtained by ignoring the mean decline observed from comparison to a control are often better than those obtained using that information. When effects are simulated using the gamma distribution, reducing the precision with which the trait is assayed increases the probability of obtaining no ML or MD estimates but causes no appreciable increase of the MSE. When the residual errors for the means of the simulated lines are sampled from the empirical distribution in a MA experiment, instead of from a normal one, the MSEs of BM, ML, and MD are practically unaffected. When the simulated gamma distribution accounts for a high rate of mild deleterious mutation, BM detects only 30% of the true deleterious mutation rate, while MD or ML detects substantially larger fractions. To test the robustness of the methods, we also added a high rate of common contaminant mutations with constant mild deleterious effect to a low rate of mutations with gamma-distributed deleterious effects and moderate average. In that case, BM detects roughly the same fraction as before, regardless of the precision of the assay, while ML fails to provide estimates. However, MD estimates are obtained by ignoring the control information, detecting 70% of the total mutation rate when the mean of the lines is assayed with good precision, but only 15% for low-precision assays. Contaminant mutations with only tiny deleterious effects could not be detected with acceptable accuracy by any of the above methods.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				G. I. Lang and A. W. Murray Estimating the Per-Base-Pair Mutation Rate in the Yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae Genetics, January 1, 2008; 178(1): 67 - 82. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				V. Avila, D. Chavarrias, E. Sanchez, A. Manrique, C. Lopez-Fanjul, and A. Garcia-Dorado Increase of the Spontaneous Mutation Rate in a Long-Term Experiment With Drosophila melanogaster Genetics, May 1, 2006; 173(1): 267 - 277. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				B. C. Ajie, S. Estes, M. Lynch, and P. C. Phillips Behavioral Degradation Under Mutation Accumulation in Caenorhabditis elegans Genetics, June 1, 2005; 170(2): 655 - 660. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Garcia-Dorado and A. Gallego Maximum Likelihood vs. Minimum Distance: Searching for Hills in the Plain Genetics, October 1, 2004; 168(2): 1085 - 1086. [Full Text] [PDF]

				B. Charlesworth, H. Borthwick, C. Bartolome, and P. Pignatelli Estimates of the Genomic Mutation Rate for Detrimental Alleles in Drosophila melanogaster Genetics, June 1, 2004; 167(2): 815 - 826. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. D. Keightley Comparing Analysis Methods for Mutation-Accumulation Data Genetics, May 1, 2004; 167(1): 551 - 553. [Full Text] [PDF]