Single nucleotide mapping of trait space reveals Pareto fronts that constrain adaptation


Trade-offs constrain the improvement of performance of multiple traits simultaneously. Such trade-offs define Pareto fronts, which represent a set of optimal individuals that cannot be improved in any one trait without reducing performance in another. Surprisingly, experimental evolution often yields genotypes with improved performance in all measured traits, perhaps indicating an absence of trade-offs at least in the short term. Here we densely sample adaptive mutations in Saccharomyces cerevisiae to ask whether first-step adaptive mutations result in trade-offs during the growth cycle. We isolated thousands of adaptive clones evolved under carefully chosen conditions and quantified their performances in each part of the growth cycle. We too find that some first-step adaptive mutations can improve all traits to a modest extent. However, our dense sampling allowed us to identify trade-offs and establish the existence of Pareto fronts between fermentation and respiration, and between respiration and stationary phases. Moreover, we establish that no single mutation in the ancestral genome can circumvent the detected trade-offs. Finally, we sequenced hundreds of these adaptive clones, revealing new targets of adaptation and defining the genetic basis of the identified trade-offs.

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.


All prices are NET prices.

Fig. 1: Evolutionary constraints in trait-performance space.
Fig. 2: Experimental design and observation of local adaptation and trade-offs.
Fig. 3: Mapping of the evolutionarily accessible trait space.
Fig. 4: Pareto front geometry and potential changes over longer-term evolution.

Data availability

All sequencing data are deposited in Short Read Archive under Bioproject ID PRJNA515761. The remaining data are available in either the main text or the Supplementary tables. Figures 2 and 3 have associated raw data. All strains are readily available from the authors upon request.

Code availability

All code used in this manuscript is deposited in GitHub. The source code for computing these fitness estimates can be found at The source code for variant calling and annotation can be found at


  1. 1.

    Loschiavo, S. R. Effect of oviposition sites on egg production and longevity of Trogoderma parabile (Coleoptera: Dermestidae)1. Can. Entomol. 100, 86–89 (1968).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Tinkle, D. W. The concept of reproductive effort and its relation to the evolution of life histories of lizards. Am. Nat. 103, 501–516 (1969).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Reznick, D. A., Bryga, H. & Endler, J. A. Experimentally induced life-history evolution in a natural population. Nature 346, 357–359 (1990).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Stearns, S. C. The Evolution of Life Histories (Oxford Univ. Press, 1992).

  5. 5.

    Camargo, A., Sarroca, M. & Maneyro, R. Reproductive effort and the egg number vs. size trade-off in Physalaemus frogs (Anura: Leiuperidae). Acta Oecologica 34, 163–171 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Cunningham, J. T. Degenerative mutations. Nature 130, 203–204 (1932).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Wang, Y. et al. Contribution of both positive selection and relaxation of selective constraints to degeneration of flyability during geese domestication. PLoS ONE 12, e0185328 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Darwin, C. The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex (introduction by Bonner, J.T. & May, R.M.) (Princeton Univ. Press, 1981).

  9. 9.

    Shoval, O. et al. Evolutionary trade-offs, Pareto optimality, and the geometry of phenotype space. Science 336, 1157–1160 (2012).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Tendler, A., Mayo, A. & Alon, U. Evolutionary tradeoffs, Pareto optimality and the morphology of ammonite shells. BMC Syst. Biol. 9, 12 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Mooney, K. A., Halitschke, R., Kessler, A. & Agrawal, A. A. Evolutionary trade-offs in plants mediate the strength of trophic cascades. Science 327, 1642–1644 (2010).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Fraebel, D. T. et al. Environment determines evolutionary trajectory in a constrained phenotypic space. eLife 6, e24669 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Nidelet, T. & Kaltz, O. Direct and correlated responses to selection in a host–parasite system: testing for the emergence of genotype specificity. Evol. Int. J. Org. Evol. 61, 1803–1811 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Buckling, A., Brockhurst, M. A., Travisano, M. & Rainey, P. B. Experimental adaptation to high and low quality environments under different scales of temporal variation. J. Evol. Biol. 20, 296–300 (2007).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Bono, L. M., Smith, L. B., Pfennig, D. W. & Burch, C. L. The emergence of performance trade-offs during local adaptation: insights from experimental evolution. Mol. Ecol. 26, 1720–1733 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    McGee, L. W. et al. Synergistic pleiotropy overrides the costs of complexity in viral adaptation. Genetics 202, 285–295 (2016).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Jasmin, J.-N. & Kassen, R. On the experimental evolution of specialization and diversity in heterogeneous environments. Ecol. Lett. 10, 272–281 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Bennett, A. F. & Lenski, R. E. An experimental test of evolutionary trade-offs during temperature adaptation. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 104, 8649–8654 (2007).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Satterwhite, R. S. & Cooper, T. F. Constraints on adaptation of Escherichia coli to mixed-resource environments increase over time. Evolution 69, 2067–2078 (2015).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Levy, S. F. et al. Quantitative evolutionary dynamics using high-resolution lineage tracking. Nature 519, 181–186 (2015).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Venkataram, S. et al. Development of a comprehensive genotype-to-fitness map of adaptation-driving mutations in yeast. Cell 166, 1585–1596.e22 (2016).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Li, Y. et al. Hidden complexity of yeast adaptation under simple evolutionary conditions. Curr. Biol. 28, 515–525.e6 (2018).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Seedorf, M. & Silver, P. A. Importin/karyopherin protein family members required for mRNA export from the nucleus. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 94, 8590–8595 (1997).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Rosenblum, J. S., Pemberton, L. F. & Blobel, G. A nuclear import pathway for a protein involved in tRNA maturation. J. Cell Biol. 139, 1655–1661 (1997).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Baccarini, L., Martínez-Montañés, F., Rossi, S., Proft, M. & Portela, P. PKA-chromatin association at stress responsive target genes from Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Biochim. Biophys. Acta Gene Regul. Mech. 1849, 1329–1339 (2015).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Yona, A. H. et al. Chromosomal duplication is a transient evolutionary solution to stress. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 109, 21010–21015 (2012).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Natesuntorn, W. et al. Genome-wide construction of a series of designed segmental aneuploids in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Sci. Rep. 5, 12510 (2015).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Sunshine, A. B. et al. The fitness consequences of aneuploidy are driven by condition-dependent gene effects. PLoS Biol. 13, e1002155 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Garay, E. et al. High-resolution profiling of stationary-phase survival reveals yeast longevity factors and their genetic interactions. PLoS Genet. 10, e1004168 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Levins, R. Theory of fitness in a heterogeneous environment. I. The fitness set and adaptive function. Am. Nat. 96, 361–373 (1962).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Ehrlich, E., Kath, N. J. & Gaedke, U. The shape of a defense-growth trade-off governs seasonal trait dynamics in natural phytoplankton. Preprint at bioRxiv (2018).

  32. 32.

    Jessup, C. M. & Bohannan, B. J. M. The shape of an ecological trade-off varies with environment. Ecol. Lett. 11, 947–959 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. 33.

    Maharjan, R. et al. The form of a trade-off determines the response to competition. Ecol. Lett. 16, 1267–1276 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. 34.

    Roff, D. A. & Fairbairn, D. J. The evolution of trade-offs: where are we? J. Evol. Biol. 20, 433–447 (2007).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  35. 35.

    Yi, X. & Dean, A. M. Phenotypic plasticity as an adaptation to a functional trade-off. eLife 5, e19307 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. 36.

    Sexton, J. P., Montiel, J., Shay, J. E., Stephens, M. R. & Slatyer, R. A. Evolution of ecological niche breadth. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 48, 183–206 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. 37.

    Zhao, L., Liu, Z., Levy, S. F. & Wu, S. Bartender: a fast and accurate clustering algorithm to count barcode reads. Bioinformatics 34, 739–747 (2018).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  38. 38.

    Kryazhimskiy, S., Rice, D. P., Jerison, E. R. & Desai, M. M. Global epistasis makes adaptation predictable despite sequence-level stochasticity. Science 344, 1519–1522 (2014).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  39. 39.

    Martin, M. Cutadapt removes adapter sequences from high-throughput sequencing reads. EMBnet. J. 17, 10–12 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. 40.

    Li, H. Aligning sequence reads, clone sequences and assembly contigs with BWA-MEM. Preprint at (2013).

  41. 41.

    Freed, D. N., Aldana, R., Weber, J. A. & Edwards, J. S. The Sentieon genomics tools – a fast and accurate solution to variant calling from next-generation sequence data. Preprint at bioRxiv (2017).

  42. 42.

    Cingolani, P. et al. A program for annotating and predicting the effects of single nucleotide polymorphisms, SnpEff. Fly (Austin) 6, 80–92 (2012).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references


We thank A. Agarwala, G. Kinsler, C. McFarland and D. Fisher for discussions. We thank J. Blundell, K. Geiler-Samerotte, O. Kolodny, S. Kryazhimskiy, C. Li, F. Rosenzweig and S. Venkataram for comments on the manuscript. We thank all members in the Sherlock and Petrov labs for helpful suggestions. Y.L. is supported by the Stanford Center for Computational, Human and Evolutionary Genomics Predoctoral Fellowship. The work was supported by NIH grants (nos. R01 GM110275 and R35 GM131824), a NASA grant (no. NNX17AG79G to G.S.) and a NIH grant (no. R35GM118165 to D.A.P.).

Author information




Y.L., G.S. and D.A.P. were responsible for conceptualization. Y.L. performed the methodology. Formal analysis was carried out by Y.L. Investigation was performed by Y.L. Y.L. wrote the original draft. Y.L., D.A.P. and G.S. undertook the writing, review and editing. Supervision was carried out by D.A.P. and G.S.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Dmitri A. Petrov or Gavin Sherlock.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Supplementary information

Supplementary Figs. 1–5.

Reporting Summary

Supplementary Table 1

Barcode counts of all lineages during the course of evolution.

Supplementary Table 2

Fitness measurements of isolated clones.

Supplementary Table 3

Genetic basis of genome-wide sequenced clones.

Supplementary Table 4

Viability measurement of FPK1 mutants and wild-type strains.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Li, Y., Petrov, D.A. & Sherlock, G. Single nucleotide mapping of trait space reveals Pareto fronts that constrain adaptation. Nat Ecol Evol 3, 1539–1551 (2019).

Download citation

Further reading


Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing