The estimation of genetic divergence

Consideration is given to the criticism of Nei and Tateno (1978) of the REH (random evolutionary hits) theory of genetic divergence in nucleic acids and proteins, and to their proposed alternative estimator of total fixed mutations designated X2. It is argued that the assumption of nonuniform amino acid or nucleotide substitution will necessarily increase REH estimates relative to those made for a model where each locus has an equal likelihood of fixing mutations, thus the resulting value will not be an overestimation. The relative values of X2 and measures calculated on the basis of the PAM and REH theories for the number of nucleotide substitutions necessary to explain a given number of observed amino acid differences between two homologous proteins are compared, and the smaller values of X2 are attributed to (1) a mathematical model based on the incorrect assumption that an entire structural gene is free to fix mutations and (2) the assumptions of different numbers of variable codons for the X2 and REH calculations. Results of a repeat of the computer simulations of Nei and Tateno are presented which, in contrast to the original results, confirm the REH theory. It is pointed out that while a negative correlation is observed between estimations of the fixation intensity per varion and the number of varions for a given pair of sequences, the correlation between the two fixation intensities and varion numbers of two different pairs of sequences need not be negative. Finally, REH theory is used to resolve a paradox concerning the high rate of covarion turnover and the nature of general function sites as permanent covarions.