the dynamics of evolution depend an organism s  fitness landscape " , the mapping from genotypes to reproductive capacity .
knowledge of the fitness landscape can help resolve questions such as how quickly a pathogen will acquire drug resistance , or by what pattern of mutations . but direct measurement of a fitness landscape is impossible because of the vast number of genotypes .
here we critically examine regression techniques used to approximate fitness landscapes from data .
we find that such regressions are subject to two inherent biases that distort the biological quantities of greatest interest , often making evolution appear less predictable than it actually is .
we discuss methods that may mitigate these biases in some cases .
an organism s fitness , or expected reproductive output , is determined by its genotype , environment , and possibly the frequencies of other genotypes in the population . in the simplified setting of a fixed environment , and disregarding frequency - dependent effects , which is typical in many experimental populations @xcite ,
fitnesses are described by a map from genotypes to reproductive rates , called the _ fitness landscape_. the dynamics of an adapting population fundamentally depend on characteristics of the organism s fitness landscape @xcite . however , mapping out an organism s fitness landscape is virtually impossible in practice because of the coarse resolution of fitness measurements , and because of _ epistasis _ : the fitness contribution of one locus may depend on the states of other loci . to account for all possible forms of epistasis ,
a fitness landscape must assign a potentially different fitness to each genotype , and the number of genotypes increases exponentially with the number of loci .    as a result of these practical difficulties ,
fitness landscapes have been directly measured in only very limited cases , such as for individual proteins , rna molecules , or viruses . even in these limited cases
genetic variation was restricted to a handful of genetic sites @xcite .
alternatively , one might try to infer properties of a fitness landscape from a time - series of samples from a reproducing population . despite considerable effort along these lines
@xcite , this approach is difficult and such inferences from times - series can be subject to systematic biases @xcite . as a result ,
very little is known about fitness landscapes in nature , despite their overwhelming importance in shaping the course of evolution .
technological developments now allow researchers to assay growth rates of microbes or enzymatic activities of individual proteins and rnas for millions of variants @xcite . as a result
, researchers are now beginning to sample and measure larger portions of the fitness landscapes than previously possible .
nonetheless , even in these cases , the set of sampled genotypes still represents a tiny proportion of all genotypes , and likely also a tiny proportion of all viable genotypes .    in order to draw conclusions from the limited number of genotypes
whose fitnesses can be assayed , researchers fit statistical models , notably by penalized regression , that approximate the fitness landscape based on the data available .
this situation is perhaps best illustrated by recent studies of fitness for the hiv-1 virus , based on the measured reproductive capacity of hiv - derived amplicons inserted into a resistance test vector @xcite .
these hiv genotypes were sampled from infected patients .
( an alternative approach , often used for measuring activities of an individual enzyme , is to introduce mutations randomly into a wild - type sequence @xcite ) . whereas the entire fitness landscape of hiv-1 consists of reproductive values for roughly @xmath0 genotypes ,
only @xmath1 genotypes were assayed in the experiment @xcite .
researchers therefore approximated the fitness landscape by penalized regression , based on the measured data , using an expansion in terms of main effects of loci and epistatic interactions between loci .
the principal goal of estimating the underlying fitness landscape was to assess the extent and form of epistasis @xcite , and , more generally , to understand how adaptation would proceed on such a landscape @xcite .
these @xcite and other high - throughput fitness measurement studies @xcite produce massive amounts of data , but not nearly enough to determine an entire fitness landscape .
this presents the field with several pressing questions : do statistical approximations based on available data faithfully reproduce the relevant aspects of the true fitness landscape and accurately predict the dynamics of adaptation ? or , do biases arising from statistical fits or measurement noise influence the conclusions we draw from such data ?    here , we begin to address these fundamental questions about empirical fitness measurements and how they inform our understanding of the underlying fitness landscape and evolution on the landscape .
we study the effects of approximating a fitness landscape from data in terms of main and epistatic effects of loci .
we demonstrate that such approximations , which are required to draw any general conclusions from a limited sample of genotypes , are subject to two distinct sources of biases .
although these biases are known features of linear regressions , they have important consequences for the biological quantities inferred from such fitness landscapes . these biases
systematically alter the form of epistasis in the inferred fitness landscape compared to the true underlying landscape .
in particular , the inferred fitness landscape will typically exhibit less local ruggedness than the true landscape , and it will suggest that evolutionary trajectories are less predictable than they actually are in the true landscape .
most of our analysis is based on samples from mathematically constructed fitness landscapes .
but we argue that the types of biases we identify apply generally , and in more biologically realistic situations . indeed
, we show that the same types of biases occur in rna - folding landscapes as well as empirically measured regulatory sequence binding landscapes .
although it may be impossible to completely remove these biases , we conclude by suggesting steps to mitigate the biases in some cases .
a function that maps genotype to fitness may be written as an expansion in terms of main effects and interactions between loci @xcite : @xmath2 where @xmath3 represents a genetic variant at locus @xmath4 , @xmath5 is the fitness ( typically the logarithm of growth rate ) , and @xmath6 is the number of loci .
the nucleotides atgc , or any number of categorical variables , may be encoded by dummy variables , represented by @xmath3 , which equal either @xmath7 or @xmath8 in this study ( see methods ) .
the term @xmath9 represents a sum over all pairs of interactions between loci , and the elipses represent higher - order terms , such as three - way interactions .
since the statistical model is linear in the coefficients @xmath10 and @xmath11 , etc , the best - fit coefficients can be inferred by linear regression .
experimental data are now sufficiently extensive that both the additive and pairwise epistatic coefficients , @xmath10 and @xmath11 , can often be estimated , whereas three - way and higher - order interactions are typically omitted from the statistical model of the fitness landscape .
we refer to a statistical model with only additive and pairwise interactions as a quadratic model . even in the quadratic case
, the statistical model may involve more free coefficients than empirical observations , so that over - fitting could become a problem .
techniques to accommodate this problem , and the biases they introduce , are discussed below .
the first type of bias we study arises from the use of penalized regressions  which are required when a large number of parameters must be inferred from a limited amount of data . under standard linear regression with limited data , overfitting can cause the magnitudes of inferred coefficients to be large , resulting in positive and negative effects that cancel out to fit the observed fitness measurements .
the standard remedy for overfitting is a so - called
penalized least - squares regression " , such as ridge or lasso regression @xcite , which constrains the complexity of the inferred model by limiting the magnitudes of the inferred coefficients .
for example , in fitting a quadratic landscape to sampled hiv-1 fitness measurements , hinkley et al . employed a form of penalized linear regression in order to avoid overfitting their data @xcite .
although often required when fitting complex fitness landscapes to data , the penalized least square regression has some drawbacks . in general , the mean square error of any regression can be decomposed into a bias and a variance .
the gauss - markov theorem guarantees that the standard least - squares linear regression produces the lowest possible mean squared error ( mse ) that has no bias , whereas penalized least squares can reduce the mse further by adding bias in exchange for a reduction in variance @xcite .
thus , in order to provide predictive power for the fitnesses of un - observed genotypes , these regressions necessarily produce biased fits .
while the accuracy of predicting unobserved fitnesses may be improved by such a biased fit , other quantities of biological interest derived from these predictions , such as measures of epistasis , may be distorted by the bias .    in order to quantify the biases introduced by penalized least square regression , we compared mathematically constructed fitness landscapes to the landscapes inferred from a quadratic model fit by ridge regression ( similar results hold for lasso regressions , see discussion ) .
our analyses are based on two types of mathematical fitness landscapes .
the widely used @xmath12-landscapes of kauffman et al @xcite comprise a family of landscapes that range from additive to highly epistatic , depending upon the parameter @xmath13 , which determines the number of ( typically sparse ) interactions between sites .
we also study  polynomial " landscapes , which consist of additive effects and all possible pairwise and three - way interactions . in these landscapes ,
the amount of epistasis can be tuned by controlling the proportion of fitness variation that arises from the additive contributions , pairwise interactions , and three - way interactions ( see methods ) .
we constructed @xmath12 and polynomial landscapes with only additive and pairwise effects , we sampled genotypes and fitness from these landscapes , and we fit a quadratic model of the landscape based on the sampled  data " using penalized least square regression . for both @xmath12 and polynomial landscapes , we found that the inferred landscape tends to overestimate the fitnesses of low - fitness genotypes and underestimate the fitnesses of high - fitness genotypes ( polynomial landscape fig .
[ fig : regbias ] , @xmath12 landscape fig .
[ fig : regbias_nk ] ) .
thus , there is a fitness - dependent bias in the inferred landscape compared to the true underlying landscape .
the extent of this bias depends on the amount of penalization used , which in turn depends on the amount of data sampled relative the number of free coefficients in the statistical model .
when the number of independent samples equals the number of free coefficients these biases disappear ( fig .
[ fig : regbias ] , red curve ) , but whenever data are in short supply these biases arise and they can be substantial in magnitude ( fig .  [
fig : regbias ] ) .
the only way to avoid this bias entirely is to obtain at least as many independent observations as model parameters , which is typically unfeasible for realistic protein lengths or genome sizes .
furthermore , as we will discuss below , these inherent biases have important consequences for our understanding of epistasis in the fitness landscape and for our ability to predict the dynamics of adaptation .
, towards the average value , so that the high fitnesses are underestimated and low fitnesses are overestimated .
the plot shows the mean ( solid line ) and standard deviation ( shaded area ) , of the distribution of residuals at a given true fitness value @xmath5 , smoothed by a gaussian moving window ( see methods ) .
the fewer the observations ( i.e.  the smaller the number of genotypes sampled for fitting the statistical model ) , the stronger the effect of this bias , as seen by comparing fits to training datasets of different sizes : 250 sampled genotypes ( red ) , 200 sampled genotypes ( green ) , and 150 sampled genotypes ( blue ) . genotypes were sampled randomly from a quadratic polynomial fitness landscape , which lacks any three - way interactions ( parameters @xmath14 , @xmath15 , @xmath16 , @xmath17 , and @xmath18 sites ; see methods ) .
the training data were fit to a quadratic model , which has @xmath19 parameters , so that the statistical model is well - specified . a test set of 5,000 random genotypes was used to compare the predicted ( @xmath20 ) and true ( @xmath5 ) fitnesses of genotypes . with sufficient sampled data ,
no penalization is required and the resulting statistical fit contains no bias ( red ) . [
fig : regbias ] ]      even when there is sufficient data so that a penalized regression is unnecessary , there is another source of potential bias in the inferred fitness landscape due to variables that are omitted from the statistical model but present in the true landscape , e.g.  higher - order interactions between loci @xcite . in this case , the estimated coefficients of the statistical model will be biased in proportion to the amount of correlation between the omitted variables and the included variables @xcite .
uncorrelated omitted variables , by contrast , may be regarded as noise , as we discuss below .
interactions of different orders , e.g.  three - way and pairwise interactions , are generally correlated with each other , unless the genotypes are sampled randomly and encoded as @xmath21 forming an orthogonal basis @xcite . in this case , which rarely applies to samples drawn from an evolving population , the omitted interactions may be regarded as noise and the estimated coefficients are guaranteed to be unbiased .
however , even in this case the inferred @xmath5 values may still be biased .    fig .
[ fig : modelbias ] illustrates the biases arising from model mis - specification . to produce this figure we fit quadratic models to fitness landscapes that contain higher - order interactions . in both the cubic polynomial ( fig .  [ fig : modelbias ] ) and @xmath12 ( fig .
[ fig : modelbias_nk ] ) landscapes , fitnesses that are very high or very low are likely to contain contributions from higher - order interactions with positive or negative effects , respectively . but
these higher - order interactions are not estimated by the statistical model , and so the inferred model overestimates low fitnesses and underestimates high fitnesses .
bias arising from model mis - specification is qualitatively similar to bias arising form penalized regression , discussed above .
bias from a mis - specified model can be large , but it would be not be visible in a plot of residuals versus _ inferred _ fitnesses .    the mis - specified model bias shown in figure [ fig : modelbias ] is a form of _ regression towards the mean _ , and it is present even in a simple univariate regression with a large amount of noise @xcite .
the slope in figure [ fig : modelbias ] , which plots true fitness @xmath5 against the residual @xmath22 , arises because the quadratic statistical model can not estimate the higher - order ( cubic ) interactions , which effectively act as noise in the regression .
in fact , the slope in the figure equals @xmath23 , where @xmath24 denotes the coefficient of determination of the original regression ( see material and methods for a derivation ) .
whether regression towards the mean is viewed as bias depends on the interpretation of the statistical model .
if one assumes that the model can not be improved by adding any more predictor variables , i.e.  that the noise is caused by purely random factors , as opposed to unknown systematic factors , then the regression results are unbiased and the observed negative slope between @xmath22 and @xmath5 simply reflects the fact that the regression can not estimate the noise . however , in situations when there is a systematic signal that is missing from the statistical model , such as when fitting a quadratic model to a fitness landscape that contains higher - order interactions , then the regression is biased towards the mean in proportion to the amount of variance that is not explained by the model .
this phenomenon is not caused by measurement noise but by the omission of relevant variables . in the experiments summarized in fig .
[ fig : modelbias ] there is no measurement noise in the fitnesses , and so the negative slope shown in figure [ fig : modelbias ] reflects a true bias : the mis - specified model over - estimates low fitnesses and under - estimates high fitnesses .    with carefully tuned parameters , other forms of mis - specified model bias
are also possible , see fig .
[ fig : modelbias2 ] . in any case , whatever form it takes
, mis - specified model bias has consequences for how accurately the landscape inferred from an experiment will reflect the amount of epistasis in the true landscape or predict the dynamics of adaptation , as we will demonstrate below .
parameters ) to 5,000 randomly sampled individuals from three different cubic - polynomial landscapes each with with @xmath18 sites and @xmath17 : @xmath25 , @xmath15 , @xmath16 ( red ) , @xmath26 , @xmath27 , @xmath28 ( green ) , and @xmath25 , @xmath29 , @xmath30 ( blue ) . the larger the value of @xmath31 , the greater the amount of model mis - specification and the stronger the bias .
a test set of 5,000 random genotypes was used to compare the predicted ( @xmath20 ) and true ( @xmath5 ) fitnesses of individuals .
[ fig : modelbias ] ]      a third difficulty that arises when fitting a statistical model to measured fitnesses is the presence of correlations between observed states of loci in sampled genotypes .
an adapting population does not explore sequence space randomly , but rather is guided by selection towards higher - fitness genotypes .
sequences sampled from a population under selection will thus tend to have correlated loci , due either to shared ancestry or due to epistasis .
correlated variables do not themselves bias inferred coefficients ( at least , when the model is specified correctly ) , but they can inflate the variance of those estimates @xcite .
predictions from the inferred model are not affected , in expectation , provided the new data have the same correlations as in the original training data . however , in the context of the expansion in eq .
[ eq : quad ] , if there are correlations between the included variables , then there are also correlations between the omitted higher - order interactions and the included variables .
thus , sampling from a wright - fisher ( wf ) population will exacerbate the mis - specified model bias . as a result ,
the inferred @xmath10 s and @xmath11 s will be further biased and so too will the inferred fitnesses .    to illustrate biases that arise from sampling a population under selection
, we simulated wright - fisher populations for 100 generations on cubic polynomial and @xmath12 landscapes .
we used large population sizes and mutation rates to produce a large amount of standing genetic diversity for sampling genotypes ( see methods ) .
the resulting fits exhibit very high @xmath24 values , in many cases even larger than fits to randomly sampled genotypes .
but the large @xmath24 values and apparent lack of bias in the training data are very misleading when the model is misspecified , i.e.   when the true landscape contains higher - order interactions . when predicting fitnesses of genotypes just one or two mutations away from the training data we find again large biases and large variance ( polynomial landscape fig .
[ fig : wfsample2 ] and @xmath12 landscape fig .
[ fig : wfsample_nk ] ) .
as before , the resulting bias tends towards intermediate fitness values .    )
were computed from cross - validated training data ( red ) , for genotypes sampled one mutation away from the training data ( purple ) , and for genotypes sampled two mutations away from the training data ( cyan ) .
the true fitnesses ( @xmath5 ) are determined by a cubic polynomial fitness landscape on @xmath18 sites with @xmath26 , @xmath27 , @xmath28 , and @xmath32 .
genotypes for fitting the quadratic statistical model were sampled from the population after 100 generations of wright - fisher evolution , with mutation rate @xmath33 and population size @xmath34 ( see methods ) .
[ fig : wfsample2 ] ]      one of the motivations for fitting a statistical model of a fitness landscape is to predict the fitnesses of genotypes that were not sampled or assayed in the original experiment .
this immediately raises the question , how much predictive power do such statistical fits have , and how does their power depend upon the form of the underlying landscape from which genotypes have been sampled , as well as the form of the fitting procedure ?    although extrapolation is easy to visualize in a linear regression with one component of @xmath35 , it can not be plotted as easily in high dimensions , where it is sometimes called _ hidden extrapolation _ @xcite . in the discrete , high - dimensional space of genotypes , no genotype is between any two other genotypes , so that every prediction is in some sense an extrapolation rather than an interpolation .    given experimental data , it may be hard to determine if a model is extrapolating accurately or not @xcite . here
, we quantify the accuracy of extrapolation explicitly using mathematical fitness landscapes .
[ fig : wfsample3 ] illustrates the ability of statistical fits to predict fitnesses of genotypes that were not sampled in the training data , for a range of models and for regressions with varying degrees of mis - specification .
this figure quantifies the amount of error when predicting the fitnesses of genotypes that are one or two mutations from the training data , as well as for predicting fitness of random , unsampled genotypes .
away from the training data , the bias and variance increase with each mutation , as reflected by the lower squared correlation coefficients between true and inferred values .
the predictions are progressively worse as the amount of model mis - specification increases .
a statistical model that has a good fit to the training data , i.e.  a high @xmath24 , does not necessarily imply that the model can make accurate predictions , especially if there is over - fitting .
in fact , fig .  [
fig : wfsample3 ] shows that even a high _ cross - validated _ @xmath24 can be misleading in the context of predicting unobserved fitnesses when the model is mis - specified .
it is interesting to compare the extrapolative power of landscapes fitted to genotypes sampled from a wright - fisher population , versus genotypes sampled randomly .
the dashed line in fig .  [ fig : wfsample3 ] indicates the expected @xmath24 for regressions fitted to randomly sampled genotypes .
on the one hand , predictions that are local , i.e.  within a few mutations from the training data , typically have a higher @xmath24 for a model trained on wf - sampled genotypes compared to a model trained on random genotypes . on the other hand , predictions that are far from the training data ( i.e.  predictions for random genotypes ) , typically have much lower @xmath24 for a model trained on wf - sampled genotypes compared to a model trained on random genotypes .
thus , samples from a wright - fisher population produce a more biased model , even of the training data , but may nonetheless produce better predictions for local unsampled genotypes , compared to a model fitted to random genotypes @xcite .    ) and true fitnesses ( @xmath5 ) , for sequences that are one mutation away from the training data ( purple ) , two mutations away from the training data ( cyan ) , and for random sequences ( black ) .
genotypes used as training data were sampled from a wf population after 100 generations of evolution with mutation rates @xmath33 and population size @xmath34 ( see methods ) .
landscapes were each instances of a cubic polynomial form , with @xmath31 values ranging from zero to one ( @xmath35-axis ) , with @xmath36 drawn uniformly in range @xmath37 , and with @xmath38 .
the number of unique sequences sampled from each wf population varied from 34 to 603 ( not shown ) .
[ fig : wfsample3 ] ]      the dynamics of an adapting population depend fundamentally on the form of epistasis , that is , the way in which fitness contributions from one locus depend upon the status of other loci .
indeed , one of the primary goals in fitting a fitness landscape to empirical data is to quantify the amount and form of its epistasis , in order to understand how adaptation will proceed .
given the two sources of biases discussed above , which are inherent to fitting fitness landscapes to empirical data and exacerbated by sampling from populations under selection , the question arises : how do these inferential biases influence the apparent form of epistasis in the fitted landscape ? in this section we address this question by comparing the form of epistasis in the true , underlying fitness landscape to the form of epistasis in the inferred landscape obtained from fitting a quadratic model to sampled genotypes .
there are several measures of epistasis known to influence the dynamics of adaptation .
we will focus on three measures commonly used in the experimental literature on epistasis .
one measure of epistasis , which reflects the degree of predictability in adaptation , is to reconstruct all the possible genetic paths between a low - fitness ancestral genotype and a high - fitness derived genotype sampled from an experimental population @xcite the proportion of such paths that are `` accessible '' , or monotonically increasing in fitness , is then a natural measure of epistasis .
when this proportion is high , many possible routes of adaptation are allowable , suggesting that the evolutionary trajectory can not be easily predicted in advance .
whereas when this proportion is small , it suggests that the evolutionary trajectory is more predictable , at least in a large population .    to generate data similar to what would arise in an evolution experiment , we ran wright - fisher simulations on mathematical fitness landscapes ( see methods ) .
each population began monomorphic and the most populated genotype at the end of the simulation was taken as the derived genotype , which typically contained between 5 to 7 mutations compared to the ancestral genotype .
genotypes and their associated fitnesses were sampled from the population after 100 generations and used to fit a quadratic model of the landscape .
figure [ fig : paths2]a shows an example of all the mutational paths between the ancestral and derived genotypes separated by 5 mutations , for both the true and the inferred fitnesses . since low fitnesses are likely to be overestimated , and high fitnesses are likely to be underestimated , the bias in the inferred landscape tends to eliminate fitness valleys . as a result , the number of accessible paths is higher in the inferred landscape than it is in the true underlying landscape ( fig .
[ fig : paths2]a ) .
epistasis appears to be less severe , and adaptation appears able to take more paths , than it actually is .
this effect occurs systematically , as we have observed it over many realizations of different underlying fitness landscapes ( fig .
[ fig : paths2]b ) .
-axis ) and inferred ( @xmath5-axis ) landscapes .
the inferred landscapes tend to over - estimate the proportion of accessible paths , compared to the true landscape : the proportion of accessible paths was overestimated 3.9-times more often than it was underestimated . in all cases the true landscape was cubic polynomial with @xmath25 , @xmath29 , @xmath30 , and @xmath39 . wf simulation parameters : @xmath33 , @xmath40 , with 500 generated landscapes and simulations .
[ fig : paths2 ] ]    we also investigated two other measures of epistasis : the number of local maxima in the fitness landscape @xcite , and the prevalence of sign epistasis between pairs of mutations @xcite .
both of these quantities are global measures of epistasis , which depend upon the entire landscape , as opposed to the local measure of accessible paths between an ancestral and a derived genotype .
generally speaking , local maxima tend to slow adaptation towards very high fitnesses , even though valley - crossing can occur in large populations @xcite .
sign epistasis occurs when the fitness effect of a mutation at one site changes sign depending upon the status of a second site .
reciprocal sign epistasis is a subset of sign epistasis , and it occurs when the second site also has sign epistasis on the first site .
[ fig : max_signep ] compares the true and inferred amounts of these two global measures of epistasis .
both quantities can be either underestimated or overestimated by the inferred landscape , depending on the circumstances . when the model is miss - specified ( fig .
[ fig : max_signep ] bottom row ) , and without penalization or local sampling of genotypes , both measures of epistasis are heavily underestimated , since the model is unable to capture the local maxima and sign epistasis caused by three - way interactions .
but when genotypes are sampled locally ( fig .
[ fig : max_signep ] top row ) , i.e.  sampled within a few mutations around a focal genotype , and penalized regression is applied , then the inferred landscape is influenced both by penalization bias and extrapolation error .
the penalization bias tends to smooth the inferred landscape and eliminate local maxima ; wherease extrapolation adds noise to the estimated fitnesses and it may create spurious local maxima . which of these two effects dominates depends on the amount of data sampled and how it is distributed .
sign epistasis appears to be less sensitive to extrapolation and bias when the model is well - specified , presumably because it depends only on the signs of effects and not magnitudes . in all cases considered , however , the inferred landscapes exhibit systematically biased global measures of epistasis .
to complement the studies above , which are based on mathematically constructed fitness landscapes , we also investigated more realistic landscapes : computational rna - folding landscapes and empirical data relating regulatory sequences and expression levels ( i.e.  a regulatory sequence binding landscape , see methods ) .
the rna - folding landscape and the regulatory sequence binding landscape ( fig .  [ fig : rnakinney ] ) both exhibit the same form of bias that we observed in the mathematical fitness landscapes .    in the case of the rna - folding landscape ( see fig .  [
fig : rnakinney]a ) there is no measurement error and sufficient data to avoid the need for penalized regression .
thus , the bias towards the mean fitness seen in fig .
[ fig : rnakinney]a with @xmath41 is due entirely to model misspecification : the quadratic model does not capture some higher - order interactions that influence rna folding .
the regulatory sequence expression level data ( fig .
[ fig : rnakinney]b ) , on the other hand , contain some measurement noise which comprises about 10 - 24% of the variance @xcite , whereas the @xmath24 for statistical model is @xmath42 .
these numbers suggest that higher - order interactions bias the predictions made from the statistical model of the regulatory sequence binding landscape , as well , at least to some extent .
the form of the biases observed when fitting a quadratic model to these realistic fitness landscapes ( fig .
[ fig : rnakinney ] ) are similar to the biases observed when fitting quadratic models to @xmath12 landscapes or to polynomial landscapes .
therefore we expect that these biases will have similar consequences for measures of epistasis .
bias arising in a quadratic fit to ( a ) computational rna - folding landscape ( see methods ) , and ( b ) regulatory sequence binding landscape from kinney et al .
@xcite ( see methods ) .
the data are discrete in true fitnesses , @xmath5 .
circles indicate means of distributions of residuals within each bin , and error bars indicate standard deviations .
the quadratic fit exhibits the same type of bias towards the mean fitness as observed in @xmath12 and polynomial fitness landscapes . ]
bias arising from a mis - specified model may be reduced by adding relevant missing variables . in the context of the expansion in eq .
[ eq : quad ] this requires adding higher - order interactions such as triplets of sites , quartets , etc . in practice , this approach is often infeasible because the number of such interactions is extremely large and relatively few of them may be present in the data . in fig .
[ fig : unbias]a we show that the bias in the statistical model can be reduced by fitting a model that includes three - way interactions .
however , there is still some residual bias , due to penalized regression .
thus , incorporating additional predictor variables effectively trades bias due to model mis - specification for bias due to a more severe penalized regression .
it is not always necessary to use penalized regression , especially when higher - order interactions are sparse . in such cases
it may be appropriate first to select a limited number of relevant variables , and then to use standard regression that avoids the bias associated with penalization .
selecting the variables to use in the statistical model may be done `` by hand '' based on prior knowledge , or by statistical methods such as lasso @xcite ( see methods ) .
this approach is expected to perform well only when a relatively small number of variables / interactions are in fact present in the true fitness landscape .    as a proof of principle ,
we have shown how lasso followed by standard unpenalized regression reduces bias in fits to the cubic polynomial and @xmath12 landscapes . notably , lasso is a form of penalized regression that favors sparse solutions .
we do not use lasso in this procedure to make predictions , but rather to select the variables to retain for the eventual unpenalized regression .
the cubic polynomial landscape contains interactions between all triplets of sites , and so the variables retained by lasso are expected to omit some important variables , leaving some bias . by contrast , the @xmath12 landscape has sparse interactions and the resulting fit of this two - step procedure is therefore expected to be far less biased . both of these expectations
are confirmed in fig .
[ fig : unbias ] .
although this approach may have the benefit of reducing bias in the inferred fitnesses , it will not improve the overall @xmath24 of the fit , or the extrapolative power .     reducing bias when fitting a statistical model to ( a ) cubic polynomial landscape , and ( b ) @xmath12 landscape .
bias in the inferred fitnesses can be reduced by adding third - order interactions to the statistical model ( quadratic fit in red , compared to cubic fit in green ) .
although the green model is correctly specified , some bias still remains due to the penalized regression ( @xmath43 parameters fit with @xmath44 data points ) .
further reduction of bias can be achieved by selecting model variables with lasso @xcite , and then performing an unpenalized regression only the selected variables ( blue ) .
the variable selection step may omit some important variables , especially when the true landscapes includes a large number of higher - order interactions , as in the cubic polynomial case ( a ) . if the true landscape has a sparse set of interactions ( e.g.  the @xmath12 landscape , panel b ) , then bias can be removed almost entirely by this two - step procudure .
( a ) : cubic polynomial landscape with @xmath25 , @xmath29 , @xmath30 .
( b ) : @xmath12 landscape with @xmath45 .
a test set of 5,000 random genotypes was used to compare the predicted ( @xmath20 ) and true ( @xmath5 ) fitnesses . ]
our ability to measure the genotype - fitness relationship directly in experimental populations is advancing at a dramatic pace .
and yet we can never hope to measure but a tiny fraction of an entire fitness landscape , even for individual proteins . as a result , there is increasing need to fit statistical models of landscapes to sampled data . here
we have shown that such statistical fits can warp our view of epistasis in the landscape and , in turn , our expectations for the dynamics of an evolving population .
we have identified two distinct sources of biases : penalized regression and model mis - specification .
our analysis of the effects of penalized regression have been performed using ridge regression , but the same qualitative results hold for lasso regressions ( figs . [
fig : regbias_poly_lasso ] , [ fig : regbias_nk_lasso ] , [ fig : wf_poly_lasso ] , [ fig : wf_nk_lasso ] , [ fig : paths_all_lasso ] analogous to figs .
[ fig : regbias ] , [ fig : regbias_nk ] , [ fig : wfsample3 ] , [ fig : wfsample_nk ] , [ fig : paths2]b ) , and also , we expect , for other forms of penalization such as elastic net or the generalized kernel ridge regression in @xcite . notably , the bias arising from penalized regression has a slightly different form depending upon whether genotypes are encoded in the @xmath46 basis relative to the wild - type , in which case inferences will be biased towards the wild - type fitness , or the @xmath47 basis , used here , in which case inferences will be biased towards the average fitness .    aside from these biases , we have also shown that statistical fits have poor predictive power .
even when a fitted landscape exhibits a large cross - validated @xmath24 value , the fitted landscape generally has poor power to predict the fitnesses of unsampled genotypes , including genotypes within only a single mutation of the genotypes used to fit the landscape .
common measures of epistasis may be grossly distorted by statistical fits to sampled data .
interestingly , different measures of epistasis can be affected differently .
for example , the number of paths accessible between an ancestal and derived genotype will be systematically over estimated in such fits , suggesting that evolution is less predictable than it actually is
. the number of local maxima in the inferred landscape can be severly over- or under - estimated , whereas the prevalence of sign epistasis is less prone to bias ( fig .
[ fig : max_signep ] ) .
estimates of pairwise sign epistasis may be more robust because quadratic fits capture pairwise interactions , whereas the number of local maxima can depend on higher - order interactions .
the problems of bias towards smoothness due to penalized regression and ruggedness due to extrapolation error can co - exist in the same dataset , as observed in a recent study of regulatory sequence binding data @xcite . which of these two effects will dominate is unclear , in general , as it depends upon the underlying landscape and the form of sampling . as a result , it is difficult to interpret the predictions made by quadratic fits to fitness landscapes , such as fits made to hiv data @xcite .
nevertheless , it is often possible to at least deduce the presence of epistatic interactions from sampled data @xcite .    in some cases , such as
when the true landscape has sparse high - order interactions between loci , a combination of variable selection followed by unpenalized regression may ameliorate the biases we have identified .
however , the degree to which this approach will reduce bias will surely depend upon the biological context .
thus researchers should incorporate as much prior biological knowledge as possible when choosing a statistical model and fitting procedure . at the very least
, it is important that researchers be aware of the biases inherent in fitting statistical of fitness landscapes to data .
in order to build a statistical model with linear and interacting terms ( eq [ eq : quad ] ) , genetic sequences must be encoded as dummy variables , @xmath3 .
if there is a well - defined wild - type sequence , then a natural parameterization is using zeros and ones , with the wild - type denoted as all zeros .
the coefficients @xmath10 are the effect of single mutations , @xmath11 are the effects of pairs of mutations , and the constant term @xmath48 is the inferred wild - type fitness . in the case of a population with large diversity and no well - defined reference sequence ,
the reference - free parameterization with @xmath49 may be more appropriate , with @xmath48 then denoting the inferred average fitness @xcite . in this work we used the @xmath49 basis , because a wild - type was not defined , and the polynomial landscapes ( see below ) are defined in the @xmath49 basis .
we constructed `` polynomial landscapes '' by terminating the expansion ( eq . [ eq : quad ] ) at the third - order and specifying the coefficients in such a way as to control the contributions to the total variation in log fitness that arise from interactions of each order .
in particular , the variance of @xmath5 is @xmath50 where @xmath51 denotes an average over all genotypes in the orthogonal ( @xmath49 ) basis , and the sums are taken overal all sites , pairs of sites , and triplets .
the coefficients @xmath10 , @xmath11 , and @xmath52 are chosen from normal distributions with mean zero and variances : @xmath53 @xmath54 @xmath55 where @xmath56 is the fraction of total variance determined by the @xmath4th order , @xmath6 is the number of loci , and the total variance is @xmath57 . for our numerical investigations using the cubic polynomial landscapes we chose @xmath18 .
@xmath58 makes no contribution to the variance or the evolutionary dynamics , and was set to zero .
we followed a standard @xcite procedure for constructing @xmath12 fitness landscapes .
the parameter @xmath59 denotes the length of the binary string defining the genotype ( @xmath60 throughout our analyses ) the logarithm of the fitness of a genotype is calculated as the mean of contributions from each site , which are themselves determined by a table of values each drawn independently from a uniform probability distribution .
when @xmath61 , the contribution of a site depends only on its own state : 0 or 1 , and not on the state of other sites . when @xmath62 , the contribution of a site depends on its own ( binary ) allele as well as the states of k other sites , yielding a lookup table with @xmath63 entries
thus , there are in general @xmath59 lookup tables each with @xmath63 independently drawn entries , which together determine the contribution of each locus , based on the status of all other loci . under such @xmath12 models ,
the fitness effect of a substitution depends strongly and randomly on some fraction of the genetic background , determined by @xmath13 .
@xmath13 is constant across sites and genotypes for a particular landscape , and the identifies of the @xmath13 sites upon which a given locus depends are drawn uniformly from the @xmath64 possibilities .
notably , @xmath61 is an additive landscape , and @xmath65 is additive with sparse pairwise interactions .
the amount of total variance in fitness due to the @xmath66th - order interactions is proportional to @xmath67 @xcite .
the rna - folding landscape was generated by the vienna rna software @xcite .
the target secondary structure was chosen as the most common structure observed in a sample of 10,000 structures generated from random genotypes of length 15 .
the fitness function was defined as @xmath68 , where @xmath69 is hamming distance to the target in the tree - edit metric .
training data consisted of @xmath70 random genotypes .
the data consisted of 129,000 sequences of the _ e. coli _
lac promoter and associated gene expression levels .
each sequence contained 75 nucleotides and contained roughly 7 mutations relative to the wild type .
_ e. coli _ were facs sorted by expression levels into 9 bins , and the bin numbers serves as the phenotype for fitting the quadratic model . in this case ,
lasso was used for regression . for more details
see @xcite .
a quadratic fit with ridge regression was used ( unless otherwise stated ) , which identifies the coefficients that minimize @xmath71 where the last sum is taken over all coefficients denoted as @xmath72 .
the first term is the mean squared error , and the last term is the penalization which biases coefficients towards zero .
the free parameter @xmath73 was determined by choosing the largest @xmath73 within one standard deviation of the smallest ten - fold cross - validated mean squared error .
an alternative form of penalization is lasso @xcite , which has a penalization term of the form @xmath74 .
lasso favors sparse solutions of coefficients , and is useful for picking out important variables .
ridge and lasso regression were done by matlab version r2013b .
monte - carlo simulations of adaptation were based on standard wright - fisher dynamics @xcite .
a population consists of @xmath59 individuals , each with a genotype consisting of a bit string of length 20 .
the population replaces itself in discrete generations , such that each individual has a random number of offspring in proportion to its fitness , which is determined by its genotype via the fitness landscape . in practice , this is done efficiently with a multinomial random number generator .
mutations are defined as bit flips , and they are introduced in every individual at each generation with probability @xmath75 per genome .
the number of individuals receiving a mutation is thus binomially distributed , as double mutations are not allowed .
the populations were initialized as monomorphic for a low - fitness genotype , chosen by generating 100 random genotypes and picking the one with the lowest fitness .
simulations were run for 100 generations , and the resulting population was reduced to unique genotypes , and those genotypes , with the corresponding fitnesses , were used as the training data for regressions .
the number of unique genotypes in the population is sensitive to @xmath75 , @xmath59 , the number of generations , and @xmath76 .
these parameters were chosen such that there were at least a few hundred unique genotypes , representing substantial diversity in the population .
the figures plotting true fitness versus residuals were produced using a gaussian moving window applied to the raw data . for each value of true fitness , @xmath5 ,
a mean and standard deviation was calculated by weighting all the data points by a gaussian with a width @xmath77 , and normalized by the sum of all the weights for the given @xmath5 value .
this procedure provides a sense of the distribution at a given @xmath5 , without regard to the density of points .
areas on the extremes of @xmath5 had few points to estimate a mean and variance , and they were excluded if the sum of weights was smaller than the 10% percentile of the distribution of all normalization factors .
we used the smoothing parameter @xmath78 for figures [ fig : regbias ] , [ fig : modelbias ] , [ fig : unbias]a , [ fig : modelbias2 ] , and [ fig : regbias_poly_lasso ] ; @xmath79 for figures [ fig : unbias]b , [ fig : regbias_nk ] , [ fig : modelbias_nk ] , and [ fig : regbias_nk_lasso ] ; @xmath80 for figures [ fig : wfsample2 ] and [ fig : wf_poly_lasso ] ; and @xmath81 for figures [ fig : wfsample_nk ] and [ fig : wf_nk_lasso ] .
a scatter plot of true fitnesses , @xmath5 , versus estimated fitnesses inferred by regression , @xmath20 , reflects the quality of the statistical fit .
one can calculate the slope of @xmath5 versus @xmath20 by using a second regression : @xmath82 where @xmath83 denotes the slope , found by minimizing the mean squared error @xmath84 @xmath85 @xmath86 recall that @xmath87 , where @xmath88 is the residual from the initial regression , and @xmath89 because residuals are uncorrelated with @xmath20 . as a result , we conclude that @xmath90 , which simply reflects the properties of the original linear regression .
this result is analogous to plotting residuals on the @xmath5 axis and inferred values on the @xmath35-axis , and observing no relationship . in the main text , by contrast , we show plots of the true values @xmath5 versus the residuals @xmath22 . in this case
we observe a `` bias '' , in that genotypes with large @xmath5 are underestimated , and genotypes with small @xmath5 are overestimated .
this type of bias is a form of regression towards the mean .
we can calculate the slope of @xmath5 versus @xmath20 as follows : @xmath91 and with a similar calculation we find @xmath92 if we have mean - centered data ( @xmath93 ) , then this slope equals the coefficient of determination of the initial regression , denoted @xmath24 .
equivalently , the slope in plots of @xmath5 versus @xmath22 equals @xmath94 .
we thank a. feder , j. draghi , d. mccandlish for constructive input ; and p. chesson for clarifying the usage of the word between .
j.b.p . acknowledges funding from the burroughs wellcome fund , the david and lucile packard foundation , the u.s .
department of the interior ( d12ap00025 ) , the u.s .
army research office ( w911nf-12 - 1 - 0552 ) , and the foundational questions in evolutionary biology fund ( rfp-12 - 16 ) .
lenski re , travisano m ( 1994 ) dynamics of adaptation and diversification : a 10,000-generation experiment with bacterial populations .
_ proceedings of the national academy of sciences of the united states of america _ 91:68086814 .
blount zd , borland cz , lenski re ( 2008 ) historical contingency and the evolution of a key innovation in an experimental population of escherichia coli .
_ proceedings of the national academy of sciences of the united states of america _ 105:7899906 .
lee yh , dsouza l , fox ge ( 1993 ) experimental investigation of an rna sequence space .
_ origins of life and evolution of the biosphere : the journal of the international society for the study of the origin of life _ 23:36572 .
schlosser k ,
li y ( 2005 ) diverse evolutionary trajectories characterize a community of rna - cleaving deoxyribozymes : a case study into the population dynamics of in vitro selection .
_ journal of molecular evolution _ 61:192206 .
jimnez ji , xulvi - brunet r , campbell gw , turk - macleod r , chen ia ( 2013 ) comprehensive experimental fitness landscape and evolutionary network for small rna . _ proceedings of the national academy of sciences of the united states of america _ 110:149849 .
kinney jb , murugan a , callan cg , cox ec ( 2010 ) using deep sequencing to characterize the biophysical mechanism of a transcriptional regulatory sequence . _
proceedings of the national academy of sciences of the united states of america _ 107:915863 .
maharjan rp , ferenci t ( 2013 ) epistatic interactions determine the mutational pathways and coexistence of lineages in clonal escherichia coli populations .
_ evolution ; international journal of organic evolution _
67:27628 .          covert aw , lenski re , wilke co , ofria c ( 2013 ) experiments on the role of deleterious mutations as stepping stones in adaptive evolution .
_ proceedings of the national academy of sciences of the united states of america _ 110:e31718 .
a quadratic model was fit to a cubic polynomial landscape with large negative additive effects , small mean - zero pairwise effects , and positive 3-way effects .
the result is a complicated bias in the inferred landscape , with very low fitnesses being underestimated and very high fitnesses being overestimated . nevertheless , the bias from missing , higher - order interactions as in fig .
[ fig : modelbias ] may be a generic feature .
when the distribution of interaction effects is centered around zero , the model tends to be biased towards the average fitness . ]
the inferred number of local maxima and the prevalence of sign epistasis may be under- or over - estimated by a statistical model of the fitness landscape fit to sampled data .
in the top row the genotypes were sampled  locally " , so that they are close together in hamming distance .
the sampled genotypes consist of a focal genotype plus all sequences within one and two mutations , totaling 211 sampled sequences .
the true landscape was a quadratic polynomial ( @xmath14 , @xmath15 , @xmath16 ) , and it was fit with a quadratic model by ridge regression ( 211 coefficients ) .
this fit did not require a penalized regression , but we imposed some arbitrary values of the penalization parameter , @xmath73 , to demonstrate its effects .
when @xmath98 , there is no bias ( not shown ) , but when the penalization is modest @xmath99 , purple dots ) , the number of local maxima is over - estimated .
the spurious local maxima are likely due to large extrapolation errors , away from the sampled genotypes .
when the penalization is yet larger ( @xmath100 , pink ) , the penalization bias smooths out the inferred landscape and thus under - estimates the number of local maxima .
the fraction of inferred sign epistasis ( pluses , upper right cluster ) and reciprocal sign epistasis ( crosses , cluster in the lower left ) , is typically overestimated for locally sampled genotypes . in the bottom row ,
5000 genotypes are sampled randomly so that no penalization is required . however , the true landscape in these cases is cubic polynomial ( @xmath25 , @xmath29 , @xmath30 ) , whereas the statistical model is quadratic , resulting in bias from model mis - specification . in these cases ,
the number of local maxima and the prevalence of sign epistasis are both under - estimated . in all cases , @xmath17 and dashed line indicates the line @xmath101 . ]