请输入您要查询的百科知识：

　

词条 Robustness (evolution)
释义

  1. Classification

     Mutational robustness  Environmental robustness 

  2. Genetic and molecular causes

     Organism mutational robustness  Protein mutational robustness 

  3. Evolutionary consequences

     Emergent mutational robustness   Robustness and evolvability  

  4. Methods and model systems

  5. See also

  6. References

{{short description|The persistence of a certain characteristic or trait in a system under perturbations or conditions of uncertainty}}

Robustness of a biological system (also called biological or genetic robustness[1]) is the persistence of a certain characteristic or trait in a system under perturbations or conditions of uncertainty.[2][3] Robustness in development is known as canalization.[4][5] According to the kind of perturbation involved, robustness can be classified as mutational, environmental, recombinational, or behavioral robustness etc.[6][7][8] Robustness is achieved through the combination of many genetic and molecular mechanisms and can evolve by either direct or indirect selection. Several model systems have been developed to experimentally study robustness and its evolutionary consequences.

Classification

Mutational robustness

Mutational robustness (also called mutation tolerance) describes the extent to which an organism’s phenotype remains constant in spite of mutation.[9] Robustness can be empirically measured for several genomes[9][10] and individual genes[11] by inducing mutations and measuring what proportion of mutants retain the same phenotype, function or fitness. More generally this is known as the distribution of fitness effects of mutation (i.e. the frequencies of different fitnesses of mutants). Proteins so far investigated have shown a tolerance to mutations of roughly 66% (i.e. two thirds of mutations are neutral).[12]

Conversely, measured mutational robustnesses of organisms vary widely. For example, >95% of point mutations in C. elegans have no detectable effect[13] and even 90% of single gene knockouts in E. coli are non-lethal.[14] Viruses, however, only tolerate 20-40% of mutations and hence are much more sensitive to mutation.[9]

Environmental robustness

In varying environments, perfect adaptation to one condition may come at the expense of adaptation to another. Consequently, the total selection pressure on an organism is the average selection across all environments weighted by the percentage time spent in that environment. Variable environment can therefore select for environmental robustness where organisms can function across a wide range of conditions with little change in phenotype or fitness (biology). Some organisms show adaptations to tolerate large changes in temperature, water availability, salinity or food availability. Plants, in particular, are unable to move when the environment changes and so show a range of mechanisms for achieving environmental robustness. Similarly, this can be seen in proteins as tolerance to a wide range of solvents, ion concentrations or temperatures.

Genetic and molecular causes

Genomes mutate by environmental damage and imperfect replication, yet they display remarkable tolerance. This comes from robustness both at the genome level and protein level.

Organism mutational robustness

There are many mechanisms that provide genome robustness. For example, genetic redundancy reduces the effect of mutations in any one copy of a multi-copy gene.[15] Additionally the flux through a metabolic pathway is typically limited by only a few of the steps, meaning that changes in function of many of the enzymes have little effect on fitness.[16][17] Similarly metabolic networks have multiple alternate pathways to produce many key metabolites.[18]

Protein mutational robustness

Protein mutation tolerance is the product of two main features: the structure of the genetic code and protein structural robustness.[19][20] Proteins are resistant to mutations because many sequences can fold into highly similar structural folds.[21] A protein adopts a limited ensemble of native conformations because those conformers have lower energy than unfolded and mis-folded states (ΔΔG of folding).[22][23] This is achieved by a distributed, internal network of cooperative interactions (hydrophobic, polar and covalent).[24] Protein structural robustness results from few single mutations being sufficiently disruptive to compromise function. Proteins have also evolved to avoid aggregation[25] as partially folded proteins can combine to form large, repeating, insoluble protein fibrils and masses.[26] There is evidence that proteins show negative design features to reduce the exposure of aggregation-prone beta-sheet motifs in their structures.[27]

Additionally, there is some evidence that the genetic code itself may be optimised such that most point mutations lead to similar amino acids (conservative).[28][29] Together these factors create a distribution of fitness effects of mutations that contains a high proportion of neutral and nearly-neutral mutations.[11]

Evolutionary consequences

Since organisms are constantly exposed to genetic and non-genetic perturbations, robustness is important to ensure the stability of phenotypes. Also, under mutation-selection balance, mutational robustness can allow cryptic genetic variation to accumulate in a population. While phenotypically neutral in a stable environment, these genetic differences can be revealed as trait differences in an environment-dependent manner (see evolutionary capacitance), thereby allowing for the expression of a greater number of heritable phenotypes in populations exposed to a variable environment.[30]

Being robust may even be a favoured at the expense of total fitness as an evolutionarily stable strategy (also called survival of the flattest).[31] A high but narrow peak of a fitness landscape confers high fitness but low robustness as most mutations lead to massive loss of fitness. High mutation rates may favour population of lower, but broader fitness peaks. More critical biological systems may also have greater selection for robustness as reductions in function are more damaging to fitness.[32] Mutational robustness is thought to be one driver for theoretical viral quasispecies formation.

Emergent mutational robustness

{{see also|Neutral network}}Natural selection can select directly or indirectly for robustness. When mutation rates are high and population sizes are large, populations are predicted to move to more densely connected regions of neutral network as less robust variants have fewer surviving mutant descendants.[33] The conditions under which selection could act to directly increase mutational robustness in this way are restrictive, and therefore such selection is thought to be limited to only a few viruses[34] and microbes[35] having large population sizes and high mutation rates. Such emergent robustness has been observed in experimental evolution of cytochrome P450s[36] and B-lactamase.[37] Conversely, mutational robustness may evolve as a byproduct of natural selection for robustness to environmental perturbations.[38][39][40][41][42]

Robustness and evolvability

{{see also|Evolvability}}

Mutational robustness has been thought to have a negative impact on evolvability because it reduces the mutational accessibility of distinct heritable phenotypes for a single genotype and reduces selective differences within a genetically diverse population.{{Citation needed|date=March 2014}} Counter-intuitively however, it has been hypothesized that phenotypic robustness towards mutations may actually increase the pace of heritable phenotypic adaptation when viewed over longer periods of time.[43][44][45][46]

One hypothesis for how robustness promotes evolvability in asexual populations is that connected networks of fitness-neutral genotypes result in mutational robustness which reduce accessibility of new heritable phenotypes over short timescales. Over longer periods of time, neutral mutation and genetic drift causes the population to spread out over a larger neutral network in genotype space. This genetic diversity gives the population mutational access to a greater number of distinct heritable phenotypes that can be reached from different points of the neutral network.[43][44][46][47][48][49][50] However, this mechanism may be limited to phenotypes dependent on a single genetic locus; for polygenic traits, genetic diversity in asexual populations does not significantly increase evolvability.[51]

In the case of proteins, robustness promotes evolvability in the form of an excess free energy of folding.[52] Since most mutations reduce stability, an excess folding free energy allows toleration of mutations that are beneficial to activity but would otherwise destabilise the protein.

In sexual populations, robustness leads to the accumulation of cryptic genetic variation with high evolutionary potential.[53][54]

Evolvability may be high when robustness is reversible, with evolutionary capacitance allowing a switch between high robustness in most circumstances and low robustness at times of stress.[55]

Methods and model systems

There are many systems that have been used to study robustness. In silico models have been used to model RNA secondary structure, protein lattice models, or gene networks. Experimental systems for individual genes include enzyme activity of cytochrome P450,[36] B-lactamase,[37] RNA polymerase,[12] and LacI[12] have all been used. Whole organism robustness has been investigated in RNA virus fitness,[9] bacterial chemotaxis, Drosophila fitness,[14] segment polarity network, neurogenic network and bone morphogenetic protein gradient, C. elegans fitness[13] and vulval development, and mammalian circadian clock.[56]

See also

  • Distribution of fitness effects
  • Evolvability
  • Canalization
  • Neutral network (evolution)
  • Epistasis
  • Evolutionary capacitance
  • Fitness landscape
  • Evolutionary developmental biology

References

1. ^{{cite journal |doi=10.1038/nrg1471 |title=Biological robustness |year=2004 |last1=Kitano |first1=Hiroaki |journal=Nature Reviews Genetics |volume=5 |issue=11 |pages=826–37 |pmid=15520792}}
2. ^{{cite journal |doi=10.1016/j.cell.2004.09.008 |title=Robustness of Cellular Functions |year=2004 |last1=Stelling |first1=Jörg |last2=Sauer |first2=Uwe |last3=Szallasi |first3=Zoltan |last4=Doyle |first4=Francis J. |author4link=Francis J. Doyle III|last5=Doyle |first5=John |journal=Cell |volume=118 |issue=6 |pages=675–85 |pmid=15369668}}
3. ^{{cite journal |doi=10.1038/sj.hdy.6800915 |title=Robustness and evolution: Concepts, insights and challenges from a developmental model system |year=2006 |last1=Félix |first1=M-A |last2=Wagner |first2=A |journal=Heredity |volume=100 |issue=2 |pages=132–40 |pmid=17167519}}
4. ^{{cite journal |doi=10.1038/150563a0 |title=Canalization of Development and the Inheritance of Acquired Characters |year=1942 |last1=Waddington |first1=C. H. |journal=Nature |volume=150 |issue=3811 |pages=563–5 |bibcode=1942Natur.150..563W}}
5. ^{{cite journal |jstor=3448871 |pmid=14575319 |year=2003 |last1=De Visser |first1=JA |last2=Hermisson |first2=J |last3=Wagner |first3=GP |last4=Ancel Meyers |first4=L |last5=Bagheri-Chaichian |first5=H |last6=Blanchard |first6=JL |last7=Chao |first7=L |last8=Cheverud |first8=JM |last9=Elena |first9=SF |last10=Fontana |first10=W |last11=Gibson |first11=G |last12=Hansen |first12=T. F. |last13=Krakauer |first13=D |last14=Lewontin |first14=R. C. |last15=Ofria |first15=C |last16=Rice |first16=S. H. |last17=von Dassow |first17=G |last18=Wagner |first18=A |last19=Whitlock |first19=M. C. |title=Perspective: Evolution and detection of genetic robustness |volume=57 |issue=9 |pages=1959–72 |journal=Evolution; international journal of organic evolution|display-authors=8 }}
6. ^{{cite journal |doi=10.1016/j.biosystems.2011.07.003 |title=Evolving cognitive-behavioural dependencies in situated agents for behavioural robustness |year=2011 |last1=Fernandez-Leon |first1=Jose A. |journal=Biosystems |volume=106 |issue=2–3 |pages=94–110 |pmid=21840371}}
7. ^{{cite journal |doi=10.1016/j.biosystems.2011.03.006 |title=Behavioural robustness: A link between distributed mechanisms and coupled transient dynamics |year=2011 |last1=Fernandez-Leon |first1=Jose A. |journal=Biosystems |volume=105 |pages=49–61 |pmid=21466836 |issue=1}}
8. ^{{cite journal |doi=10.1016/j.biosystems.2010.09.010 |title=Evolving experience-dependent robust behaviour in embodied agents |year=2011 |last1=Fernandez-Leon |first1=Jose A. |journal=Biosystems |volume=103 |pages=45–56 |pmid=20932875 |issue=1}}
9. ^1 2 {{cite journal|last=Sanjuán|first=R|title=Mutational fitness effects in RNA and single-stranded DNA viruses: common patterns revealed by site-directed mutagenesis studies.|journal=Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences|date=Jun 27, 2010|volume=365|issue=1548|pages=1975–82|pmid=20478892|doi=10.1098/rstb.2010.0063|pmc=2880115}}
10. ^{{cite journal|last=Eyre-Walker|first=A|author2=Keightley, PD |title=The distribution of fitness effects of new mutations.|journal=Nature Reviews Genetics|date=Aug 2007|volume=8|issue=8|pages=610–8|pmid=17637733|doi=10.1038/nrg2146}}
11. ^1 {{cite journal|last=Hietpas|first=RT|author2=Jensen, JD |author3=Bolon, DN |title=Experimental illumination of a fitness landscape.|journal=Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America|date=May 10, 2011|volume=108|issue=19|pages=7896–901|pmid=21464309|doi=10.1073/pnas.1016024108|pmc=3093508|bibcode=2011PNAS..108.7896H}}
12. ^1 2 {{cite journal|last=Guo|first=HH|author2=Choe, J |author3=Loeb, LA |title=Protein tolerance to random amino acid change.|journal=Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America|date=Jun 22, 2004|volume=101|issue=25|pages=9205–10|pmid=15197260|doi=10.1073/pnas.0403255101|pmc=438954|bibcode=2004PNAS..101.9205G}}
13. ^1 {{cite journal|last=Davies|first=E. K.|title=High Frequency of Cryptic Deleterious Mutations in Caenorhabditis elegans|journal=Science|date=10 September 1999|volume=285|issue=5434|pages=1748–1751|doi=10.1126/science.285.5434.1748|pmid=10481013|last2=Peters|first2=A. D.|last3=Keightley|first3=P. D.}}
14. ^1 {{cite journal|last=Baba|first=T|author2=Ara, T |author3=Hasegawa, M |author4=Takai, Y |author5=Okumura, Y |author6=Baba, M |author7=Datsenko, KA |author8=Tomita, M |author9=Wanner, BL |author10= Mori, H |title=Construction of Escherichia coli K-12 in-frame, single-gene knockout mutants: the Keio collection.|journal=Molecular Systems Biology|year=2006|volume=2|pages=2006.0008|pmid=16738554|doi=10.1038/msb4100050|pmc=1681482|issue=1}}
15. ^{{cite journal|last=Gu|first=Z|author2=Steinmetz, LM |author3=Gu, X |author4=Scharfe, C |author5=Davis, RW |author6= Li, WH |title=Role of duplicate genes in genetic robustness against null mutations.|journal=Nature|date=Jan 2, 2003|volume=421|issue=6918|pages=63–6|pmid=12511954|doi=10.1038/nature01198|bibcode=2003Natur.421...63G}}
16. ^{{cite journal|last=Kauffman|first=Kenneth J|author2=Prakash, Purusharth |author3=Edwards, Jeremy S |title=Advances in flux balance analysis|journal=Current Opinion in Biotechnology|date=October 2003|volume=14|issue=5|pages=491–496|doi=10.1016/j.copbio.2003.08.001|pmid=14580578}}
17. ^{{cite journal|last=Nam|first=H|author2=Lewis, NE |author3=Lerman, JA |author4=Lee, DH |author5=Chang, RL |author6=Kim, D |author7= Palsson, BO |title=Network context and selection in the evolution to enzyme specificity.|journal=Science|date=Aug 31, 2012|volume=337|issue=6098|pages=1101–4|pmid=22936779|doi=10.1126/science.1216861 |pmc=3536066|bibcode=2012Sci...337.1101N}}
18. ^{{cite journal|last=Krakauer|first=DC|author2=Plotkin, JB |title=Redundancy, antiredundancy, and the robustness of genomes.|journal=Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America|date=Feb 5, 2002|volume=99|issue=3|pages=1405–9|pmid=11818563|doi=10.1073/pnas.032668599|pmc=122203|bibcode=2002PNAS...99.1405K}}
19. ^{{cite journal|last=Taverna|first=DM|author2=Goldstein, RA |title=Why are proteins so robust to site mutations?|journal=Journal of Molecular Biology|date=Jan 18, 2002|volume=315|issue=3|pages=479–84|pmid=11786027|doi=10.1006/jmbi.2001.5226}}
20. ^{{cite journal|last=Tokuriki|first=N|author2=Tawfik, DS |title=Stability effects of mutations and protein evolvability.|journal=Current Opinion in Structural Biology|date=Oct 2009|volume=19|issue=5|pages=596–604|pmid=19765975|doi=10.1016/j.sbi.2009.08.003}}
21. ^{{cite journal|last=Meyerguz|first=L|author2=Kleinberg, J |author3=Elber, R |title=The network of sequence flow between protein structures.|journal=Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America|date=Jul 10, 2007|volume=104|issue=28|pages=11627–32|pmid=17596339|doi=10.1073/pnas.0701393104|pmc=1913895|bibcode=2007PNAS..10411627M}}
22. ^{{cite journal|last=Karplus|first=M|title=Behind the folding funnel diagram.|journal=Nature Chemical Biology|date=Jun 17, 2011|volume=7|issue=7|pages=401–4|pmid=21685880|doi=10.1038/nchembio.565}}
23. ^{{cite journal|last=Tokuriki|first=N|author2=Stricher, F |author3=Schymkowitz, J |author4=Serrano, L |author5= Tawfik, DS |title=The stability effects of protein mutations appear to be universally distributed.|journal=Journal of Molecular Biology|date=Jun 22, 2007|volume=369|issue=5|pages=1318–32|pmid=17482644|doi=10.1016/j.jmb.2007.03.069}}
24. ^{{cite journal|last=Shakhnovich|first=BE|author2=Deeds, E |author3=Delisi, C |author4= Shakhnovich, E |title=Protein structure and evolutionary history determine sequence space topology.|journal=Genome Research|date=Mar 2005|volume=15|issue=3|pages=385–92|pmid=15741509|doi=10.1101/gr.3133605 |pmc=551565|arxiv=q-bio/0404040}}
25. ^{{cite journal|last=Monsellier|first=E|author2=Chiti, F |title=Prevention of amyloid-like aggregation as a driving force of protein evolution.|journal=EMBO Reports|date=Aug 2007|volume=8|issue=8|pages=737–42|pmid=17668004|doi=10.1038/sj.embor.7401034|pmc=1978086}}
26. ^{{cite journal|last=Fink|first=AL|title=Protein aggregation: folding aggregates, inclusion bodies and amyloid.|journal=Folding & Design|year=1998|volume=3|issue=1|pages=R9–23|pmid=9502314|doi=10.1016/s1359-0278(98)00002-9}}
27. ^{{cite journal|last=Richardson|first=JS|author2=Richardson, DC |title=Natural beta-sheet proteins use negative design to avoid edge-to-edge aggregation.|journal=Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America|date=Mar 5, 2002|volume=99|issue=5|pages=2754–9|pmid=11880627|doi=10.1073/pnas.052706099|pmc=122420|bibcode=2002PNAS...99.2754R}}
28. ^{{cite journal|vauthors=Müller MM, Allison JR, Hongdilokkul N, Gaillon L, Kast P, van Gunsteren WF, Marlière P, Hilvert D |title=Directed evolution of a model primordial enzyme provides insights into the development of the genetic code.|journal=PLOS Genetics|year=2013|volume=9|issue=1|pages=e1003187|pmid=23300488|doi=10.1371/journal.pgen.1003187|pmc=3536711}} {{open access}}
29. ^{{cite journal|last=Firnberg|first=E|author2=Ostermeier, M |title=The genetic code constrains yet facilitates Darwinian evolution.|journal=Nucleic Acids Research|date=Aug 2013|volume=41|issue=15|pages=7420–8|pmid=23754851|doi=10.1093/nar/gkt536|pmc=3753648}}
30. ^{{cite journal |doi=10.1016/j.tig.2009.07.005 |author=Masel J Siegal ML |title=Robustness: mechanisms and consequences |journal=Trends in Genetics|volume=25 |issue=9 |pages=395–403 |year=2009 |pmid=19717203 |pmc=2770586}}
31. ^{{cite journal|last=Wilke|first=CO|author2=Wang, JL |author3=Ofria, C |author4=Lenski, RE |author5= Adami, C |title=Evolution of digital organisms at high mutation rates leads to survival of the flattest.|journal=Nature|date=Jul 19, 2001|volume=412|issue=6844|pages=331–3|pmid=11460163|doi=10.1038/35085569}}
32. ^{{cite journal | author = Van Dijk | title = Mutational Robustness of Gene Regulatory Networks | journal = PLoS ONE | year = 2012 | volume = 7 | issue = 1 | pages = e30591 | id = | url = http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0030591 | accessdate = 2013-06-10| doi = 10.1371/journal.pone.0030591 | pmid = 22295094 | last2 = Van Mourik | first2 = Simon | last3 = Van Ham | first3 = Roeland C. H. J. | pmc=3266278|display-authors=etal| bibcode = 2012PLoSO...730591V }} {{open access}}
33. ^{{cite journal | vauthors=van Nimwegen E, Crutchfield JP, Huynen M | title = Neutral evolution of mutational robustness | journal = PNAS | year = 1999| volume = 96 | issue = 17 | pages = 9716–9720| pmid = 10449760 | pmc = 22276 | doi=10.1073/pnas.96.17.9716| bibcode =1999PNAS...96.9716V| arxiv =adap-org/9903006}}
34. ^{{cite journal |vauthors=Montville R, Froissart R, Remold SK, Tenaillon O, Turner PE | title = Evolution of mutational robustness in an RNA virus | journal = PLoS Biology | year = 2005 | volume = 3| issue = 11| pages = 1939–1945 | doi=10.1371/journal.pbio.0030381}} {{open access}}
35. ^{{cite journal | author = Masel J, Maughan H| title = Mutations Leading to Loss of Sporulation Ability in Bacillus subtilis Are Sufficiently Frequent to Favor Genetic Canalization | journal = Genetics | year = 2007 | volume = 175| issue = 1 | pages = 453–457 | doi=10.1534/genetics.106.065201| pmid = 17110488 | last2 = Maughan | pmc = 1775008 }}
36. ^1 {{cite journal|last=Bloom|first=JD|author2=Lu, Z |author3=Chen, D |author4=Raval, A |author5=Venturelli, OS |author6= Arnold, FH |title=Evolution favors protein mutational robustness in sufficiently large populations.|journal=BMC Biology|date=Jul 17, 2007|volume=5|pages=29|pmid=17640347|doi=10.1186/1741-7007-5-29 |pmc=1995189}} {{open access}}
37. ^1 {{cite journal|last=Bershtein|first=Shimon|author2=Goldin, Korina |author3=Tawfik, Dan S. |title=Intense Neutral Drifts Yield Robust and Evolvable Consensus Proteins|journal=Journal of Molecular Biology|date=June 2008|volume=379|issue=5|pages=1029–1044|doi=10.1016/j.jmb.2008.04.024|pmid=18495157}}
38. ^{{cite journal |vauthors=Meiklejohn CD, Hartl DL |title=A single mode of canalization|journal=Trends in Ecology & Evolution|volume=17 |pages=e9035 |year=2002 |doi=10.1016/s0169-5347(02)02596-x}}
39. ^{{cite journal |doi=10.1002/1097-010X(20001015)288:3<242::AID-JEZ5>3.0.CO;2-O |vauthors=Ancel LW, Fontana W |title=Plasticity, evolvability, and modularity in RNA|journal=Journal of Experimental Zoology|volume=288 |issue=3 |pages=242–283 |year=2000 |pmid=11069142}}
40. ^{{cite journal |doi=10.1093/molbev/msp008 |vauthors=Szöllősi GJ, Derényi I |title=Congruent Evolution of Genetic and Environmental Robustness in Micro-RNA|journal=Molecular Biology & Evolution|volume=26 |issue=4 |pages=867–874 |year=2009 |pmid=19168567 }}
41. ^{{cite journal |doi=10.2307/2411105 |vauthors=Wagner GP, Booth G, Bagheri-Chaichian H | title=A population genetic theory of canalization | journal=Evolution|volume=51 |issue=2 |pages=329–347|year=1997 |jstor=2411105}}
42. ^{{cite journal |author=Lehner B |title=Genes Confer Similar Robustness to Environmental, Stochastic, and Genetic Perturbations in Yeast|journal=PLoS ONE |volume=5 |issue=2 |pages=468–473 |year=2010 |pmid=20140261 |pmc=2815791 |doi=10.1371/journal.pone.0009035 |url=http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0009035|bibcode=2010PLoSO...5.9035L}} {{open access}}
43. ^1 {{cite journal |doi=10.1038/nature08694 |title=Mutational robustness can facilitate adaptation |year=2010 |last1=Draghi |first1=Jeremy A. |last2=Parsons |first2=Todd L. |last3=Wagner |first3=Günter P. |last4=Plotkin |first4=Joshua B. |journal=Nature |volume=463 |issue=7279 |pages=353–5 |pmid=20090752 |pmc=3071712|bibcode = 2010Natur.463..353D }}
44. ^1 {{cite journal |doi=10.1098/rspb.2007.1137 |title=Robustness and evolvability: A paradox resolved |year=2008 |last1=Wagner |first1=A. |journal=Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences |volume=275 |issue=1630 |pages=91–100 |pmid=17971325 |pmc=2562401 |jstor=25249473}}
45. ^{{cite journal |doi=10.1016/j.tig.2010.06.002 |vauthors=Masel J, Trotter MV |title=Robustness and evolvability |journal=Trends in Genetics|volume=26 |issue=9 |pages=406–414 |year=2010 |pmid=20598394 |pmc=3198833}}
46. ^1 {{cite journal | author = Aldana | title = Robustness and evolvability in genetic regulatory networks | journal = Journal of Theoretical Biology | year = 2007 | volume = 245 | issue = 3 | pages = 433–448 | id = | url = | pmid = 17188715 | author2 = Balleza, E | author3 = Kauffman, S | author4 = Resendiz, O | doi = 10.1016/j.jtbi.2006.10.027 |display-authors=etal}}
47. ^{{cite journal | author = Babajide | title = Neutral networks in protein space: A computational study based on knowledge-based potentials of mean force | journal = Folding & Design | year = 1997 | volume = 2 | issue = 5 | pages = 261–269 | id = | url = | pmid = 9261065 | author2 = Hofacker, I. L. | author3 = Sippl, M. J. | author4 = Stadler, P. F. | doi=10.1016/s1359-0278(97)00037-0|display-authors=etal}}
48. ^{{cite journal | author = van Nimwegen and Crutchfield | title = Metastable evolutionary dynamics: Crossing fitness barriers or escaping via neutral paths? | journal = Bulletin of Mathematical Biology | year = 2000 | volume = 62 | issue = 5 | pages = 799–848 | id = | url = | pmid = 11016086 | doi = 10.1006/bulm.2000.0180 }}
49. ^{{cite journal | author = Ciliberti| title = Innovation and robustness in complex regulatory gene networks | journal = Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA | year = 2007 | volume = 104 | issue = 34 | pages = 13591–13596 | id = | url = | doi=10.1073/pnas.0705396104|display-authors=etal|bibcode =2007PNAS..10413591C}}
50. ^{{cite journal | author = Andreas Wagner | title = Neutralism and selectionism: a network-based reconciliation | journal = Nature Reviews Genetics | year = 2008 | volume = 9 | pages=965–974 |doi=10.1038/nrg2473 | issue=12 | pmid=18957969}}
51. ^{{cite journal|last=Rajon|first=E.|author2=Masel, J. |title=Compensatory Evolution and the Origins of Innovations|journal=Genetics|date=18 January 2013|volume=193|issue=4|pages=1209–1220|doi=10.1534/genetics.112.148627|pmid=23335336|pmc=3606098}}
52. ^{{cite journal | author = Bloom| title = Protein stability promotes evolvability | journal = Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences | year = 2006 | volume = 103 | issue = 15 | pages = 5869–74 | id = | url = | doi=10.1073/pnas.0510098103 | pmid=16581913 | pmc=1458665|display-authors=etal| bibcode=2006PNAS..103.5869B}}
53. ^{{cite book|author=Waddington CH |title=The strategy of the genes |year=1957 |publisher=George Allen & Unwin}}
54. ^{{cite journal|last=Masel|first=J.|title=Cryptic Genetic Variation Is Enriched for Potential Adaptations|journal=Genetics|date=30 December 2005|volume=172|issue=3|pages=1985–1991|doi=10.1534/genetics.105.051649|pmid=16387877|pmc=1456269}}
55. ^{{cite journal|last=Masel|first=J|title=Q&A: Evolutionary capacitance.|journal=BMC Biology|date=Sep 30, 2013|volume=11|pages=103|doi=10.1186/1741-7007-11-103|pmid=24228631|pmc=3849687}} {{open access}}
56. ^1 {{cite book |author=Wagner A |title=Robustness and evolvability in living systems |publisher = Princeton University Press |series=Princeton Studies in Complexity |year=2005 |isbn=0-691-12240-7}}{{page needed|date=July 2013}}
{{genarch}}{{DEFAULTSORT:Robustness (Evolution)}}

2 : Evolutionary biology|Genetics
随便看

　

开放百科全书收录14589846条英语、德语、日语等多语种百科知识，基本涵盖了大多数领域的百科知识，是一部内容自由、开放的电子版国际百科全书。

　

Copyright © 2023 OENC.NET All Rights Reserved
京ICP备2021023879号 更新时间：2024/9/23 3:18:43