The wife of life-sentenced Oleg Mikhailov became the mother of four children
In the colony for life sentenced "Vologda Pyatak" they played a wedding: the killer of the Orekhovo-Medvedkovskaya group Oleg Mikhailov married the former investigator Victoria, the mother of four children. She told us why she decided on this marriage.
Oleg Mikhailov and Victoria
On Ognenny Island, where a life sentence is served in the Vologda Pyatak serial killers and maniacs, Oleg Mikhailov married a 43-year-old resident of Perm.
"MK" became the unwitting culprit of this, so to speak, celebration. On March 12, 2018, Mikhailov's penitential confession was published on the pages of our newspaper under the title, which was read by Victoria. She was not afraid of the killer's confessions and found a place in her heart not just for sympathy, but for love.
Suppose Mikhailov is sincere both in his remorse for what he has done and in his feelings for Victoria. But so far no one has been released from the death row colony where he is imprisoned. And how can spouses who see each other only twice a year (more often dates are not allowed by law) be happy? And in general, what normal person wants to connect his life (albeit purely officially) with a hired killer?
We asked Victoria herself about all this.
REFERENCE "MK": “Oleg Mikhailov in the 90s was a full-time killer of the Orekhovo-Medvedkovskaya group. However, before the trial, no one knew him by sight, since the leadership of the organized crime group kept the mercenary apart so that he could kill his own. It was rumored that it was he who came up with the brutal method of hiding the bodies in barrels of concrete. At the trial of the leaders of the Orekhovo-Medvedkovskaya organized criminal group, it turned out that he was actually the only one who himself came to the authorities to write a confession. Mikhailov was found guilty of 9 murders.”
"Thank you! Thanks to you, I found my love ”- these are the lines of Mikhailov’s letter to the editor. But in front of me is that same love - a very pretty, sweet woman. Victoria has two higher education one of which is legal. Woman for a long time She was an investigator-inquirer, and then she began to do business. Victoria is divorced, now she has four children, adults live separately, the youngest are 3 and 4 years old.
You will also think: they say, probably, no one needed it and therefore contacted the prisoner? she asks. - Usually everyone thinks that only unclaimed women go for such actions.
- Not. But why did you choose a convicted killer out of all the men?
Believe me, I had someone to marry. Not so long ago, a friend of mine made a marriage proposal to me. Another has been calling for marriage for several years. But I'm not interested in them. I would die of boredom. And it doesn't matter that there are four children. Before I met Oleg, I even had an idea: if you can’t fall in love with a Russian, you need to look for a foreigner.
- And then you got a newspaper in your hands?
Yes! I usually don’t read about crime, but then something happened. I read it once, twice. A lot of things struck me, especially the fact that he was the only one from the gang who wrote a confession, and the court did not take this into account, that he was asking for forgiveness from the Muscovites. I noticed that the head of the colony speaks well of him. For a long time I rummaged through the Internet in search of information about organized crime groups. I found almost nothing about him.
I don't justify it at all. But he was a killer in the bloody 90s. Back then, a lot of good boys got into gangs, no one was safe. In addition, I know that many former bandits, on whose conscience not fewer souls, then legalized, came to power or became businessmen. And now they have no questions.
In general, I began to notice that I think about this person all the time. Decided to write. At first I stopped myself: he is in prison for such terrible deeds! And then she nevertheless said to herself: “Write him a letter, since he hooked him. Write friendly. April 9, 2018 I sent email(Where to address it, I found out with the help of the Internet). I must say right away: I have never corresponded with men from places of deprivation of liberty.
Three days later I received a response. He warned me, wrote that I probably read the article in MK inattentively and that he was a bandit. Yes, here is the letter, see for yourself.
"Why do you need this, Vika?"
“Hello, Victoria-Vika! To be honest, I was very surprised by your letter. After all, I did not expect any letters after the article in Moskovsky Komsomolets about me. I did not expect any reaction to it from anyone.
Oleg Mikhailov in the cell
I have never given an interview to journalists before, it was my first experience of communication with the writing fraternity. And then the administration came to the cell, they said that the MK correspondent wanted to talk, and I, I don’t know why, agreed. Somehow it worked out. I just wanted to ask the Muscovites for forgiveness through Eva Merkacheva, the MK correspondent, for all the grief that I brought with my “activities”. It turned out what happened.
Vika, I don't think badly of you. I was not in the habit of judging anyone, and now that I myself am condemned, even more so. But why do you need this, Vika? Maybe you read something wrong about me? I'm not just a bandit, there's blood on my hands. You will need to re-read the article in "MK".
- That is, he kind of scolded you for wanting to correspond with him?
Yes! I think it's okay. I wrote to him again. And then we began to constantly exchange correspondence. And then he just wrote: "You know, I notice that I'm looking out the window and waiting for the postman with your letters."
- He, of course, has nothing more to do in prison. Well, what about you?
I was interested in him from the first moment. We have a complete coincidence in many ways: in habits, character, attitude to life. We even have one blood group - the fourth! I'm a roar like him. He recently listened on the radio while he was at work. captain's daughter” and was forced to pretend that something had fallen, while he wiped his tears under the table.
- And you believe in all this?
There are facts. We just have mystical coincidences. He divorced his first wife in the same year that I divorced my husband, and so on. Oleg, according to him, was "covered" last winter, he asked God for love. And just at that time I was making a “wish card”, and a man, a wedding were depicted there. In general, we both got what we wanted.
By the way, he perfectly feels me at such a great distance: he washed the dishes, took off the ring, and then he calls: “Vikulya, I don’t feel rings ...” We have the same size of fingers with him. After the wedding, I took him home wedding ring(not allowed in prison) and now I wear two at once.
During the interview, I photographed him from behind, so that his face was not visible. So you fell in love blindly? Did you care what he looked like?
I read in your article that he is athletic. I also found an old photo from the courtroom where members of the organized criminal group were tried. On May 25, we had our first date, and he was just worried that he would not like me outwardly.
- And how was the first date?
He wrote to me so that I would not come in until I talked with the leadership of the colony. “Listen to them and then make a decision. There are such cadres sitting here who get to know each other out of nothing to do or for the sake of parcels. I spoke to one of the bosses. He said: "Vika, Oleg is very vulnerable, don't break his heart."
Did he say so? Something not very believable, to be honest. The head of the colony told me that he spends hours discouraging potential brides who go to the local prisoners from all over Russia.
But here the case turns out to be special. He also said that Oleg never wrote to dating services that he did not correspond with any of the women. After the meeting, the boss called to himself: “So what? Did you like him?" What can you say?
I immediately felt that he was mine, completely mine. I have a shiver from his voice, and at first my legs were shaking when I picked up the phone and heard him on the other end of the wire. By the way, we are entitled to four calls a month.
May 9, Victory Day, Oleg proposed to me by phone. I didn't even think about it. But I had to go to Moscow, take a copy of his divorce certificate so that I could apply to the registry office.
Oleg at the wedding ceremony
"I was in a white dress, I brought him a suit"
- How was the wedding?
The ceremony took place on September 20. I rode with curls, they scattered in the wind, I had to collect my hair in a bun. But she was in a white dress. I brought him a suit. Everything was very fast, but solemn, in the psychologist's room. They signed, hugged once, and he was taken away.
- And it suits you that you and your husband will see each other only twice a year?
Many spouses see each other daily, and families are unhappy. They told me here: they say, Oleg “branded a woman”, deprived me of a future.
I am free and independent, I do not depend on anyone. If I decide to get a divorce, no one will stop me from doing it. But I feel that I will be with him until the end. I love him so much, although by nature I am not an amorous person.
And I will get divorced in two cases: if I find out that there are some other shura-mura with someone (at least by correspondence), and if they offend me with words and deeds. And so we want to have a child. We want to get married.
- As for the wedding ... After it, all the sins of the husband fall on the wife. And your chosen one is very heavy ...
He prays every day for the dead. I think I prayed, since God sent me to him. And the people who condemn me need to take care of their lives. Everyone goes their own way, and everyone gets what they deserve.
He provides for himself. Oleg works in the sewing industry until late every day. Himself called to go on shift at the weekend and holidays, if it's necessary. Everything he needs, he buys with his own money. So he doesn't need me to sponsor him.
I always take care of children, because I work from home.
- By the way, do the children know that you are married?
Little ones don't. And the elders know, of course. My daughter was shocked, she even thought that I had joined some kind of sect. I decided for myself: I will raise children, send them to adulthood, and I myself will settle next to the colony on an island or in the city of Belozersk. To be closer to him.
Oleg is a family man, not a lone wolf. I realized that he committed crimes mainly for the sake of his woman, her well-being. If not for this, then he would not have got into the gang in the first place.
From left to right: Andrey Pylev (sitting for life), Sergei Ananyevsky (killed), Grigory Gusyatinsky (killed), Sergei Butorin (sitting for life) - leaders of the Orekhov organized criminal group
And so he embarked on a criminal path in order to raise funds for the family. And then, when I realized that I had gotten myself into trouble, it was already dangerous to leave the gang. And he was afraid not for himself, but for her.
There was such Vladimir Gribkov, nicknamed the Baker, known for his cruelty. When he decided to leave, his wife was killed by the Pylevs, that is, their own people (the gang was headed by the Pylev brothers - Auth.). After that, he gave up the gang. Here he has 12 episodes (this is more than Oleg's), but they gave him only 13 years, and he has already been released on parole.
When Oleg was arrested, his wife left him. And I think she knew how he made money for her.
Oleg Mikhailov
Victoria, last question. Are you ready until the end of your days to love a prisoner who will never go beyond the perimeter guarded by machine gunners and dogs?
Ready. But I hope that he will be replaced with a life sentence for a specific period. There are reasons for this. According to today's legislation, if there was a confession, then they should not be given a life sentence. At the time when Oleg was tried, this was not the case. But the law is retroactive if it mitigates the fate of the prisoner. In general, I am now collecting documents with faith in the future.
It is difficult to understand a woman who connected her life with a suicide bomber. But she is not the first and not the last. In general, it has become like a tradition for Russian women to marry prisoners who, with sweet speeches and promises, find their way to their hearts.
But love story Mikhailova still, in my opinion, stands apart. Initially, during my visit to the colony, the head of the institution only found about him good words. And it was he who told the story, which later went into.
“Somehow they led us to work in formation, under escort. But the weather was good. It was very quiet, it was light, it was snowing lightly. And as if from the sky a ray of light fell on everyone. I had the feeling that the monks were going to obedience. A fleeting, but very vivid sensation.
Let there be users of the information system. Authorized users are allowed to build their models in this IS. Unauthorized people can only watch how others build these models, but they cannot do it themselves.Question: how many roles in IS?
Suppose there are two heaps of sand piled side by side.
Question:
Is it one pile, or are there still two piles, but now piled side by side?
Let there be a position of director of school No. 123. Sidorov takes this position after Ivanov.
Question:
Are these two different directors, or one director?
Today Ivanov plays the role of Princess Mary.
Question:
tomorrow, when he plays a role with the same name, will it be the same role or a different one?
Question:
Sidorov, who today plays a role with the same name, plays the same role, or a different one?
There is a clock mechanism that acts as a clock drive in the clock on the city tower. Suppose it broke and was replaced with another clock mechanism.
Question:
is the clock drive different now, or is it the same clock drive, but with a different clockwork?
All these questions (and similar ones) can be answered in the same way - everyone decides for himself, as it suits him, based on the context. This usually does not bother anyone, because there is no need to build models. As an analyst, I have to be constantly on the alert. It is necessary to understand how the client sees the subject area in order to correctly build a model. Today I want to show you the sequence of reasoning that I do.
Solution Explanation
Let there be a director of school No. 123 Sidorov. Question: is this the same role as the director of school No. 123 Ivanov? First you need to understand for whom it is being built Information system?Let her build to collect statistical reporting for the salary of school directors. For this reporting, all directors are faceless. There is no difference between Ivanov and Sidorov holding a position, but it is important to distinguish between directors different schools. It is clear that from this point of view, the role of the school principal is one.
Now let's assume that the IS is built to analyze the performance of various school directors. In such an IS, it will be important to distinguish between Ivanov as a director and Sidorov as a director. From this point of view, the roles of directors will be different.
In order to understand how to move from the first view to the second, you need to understand what a role is. I wrote about this in detail in the article Modeling accounting objects. Let me remind you briefly. A role is a certain 4-dimensional volume of space-time occupied in different time different people, or rather their temporal parts. This means that a role can be represented as a construct consisting of temporal parts of people, each of which is characterized by a start date and end date of its participation. The role itself is not a set of these temporal parts, but a gluing together of all these parts.
The concept of gluing must be explained in detail. As well as the concept of separation. If we take four legs and a tabletop, then by connecting them together, we get a table. Looking at the place that the table occupies, we can switch our attention, at different times seeing either 4 legs and a table top, or the whole table. Gluing is such a process of perception, thanks to which we can imagine a lot as a whole. Separation is such a process of perception, thanks to which we can represent the whole as a lot. Our consciousness is capable of both dividing and sticking together. But we are not always aware of these processes.
Imagine that you have several piles of sand. You put them together and you get one pile. The temporal parts are glued together in exactly the same way. You take them and glue them. Out of many small temporal parts, you get one temporal part bigger size. Thus, to obtain the role of the director of school No. 123, it is necessary to glue together the temporal parts: the role of the director of school No. 123, played by Ivanov, with the role of the director of school No. 123, played by Sidorov.
If you can combine heaps of sand, then you can divide one heap into parts. By analogy, the role can be divided into parts. Let there be the role of the director of the school, performed by Sidorov. Let's imagine it as a set of roles, each of which is the daily performance of the role of director by Sidorov from 8-00 when he comes to work, until 17-00 when he leaves. We can say that the role of the headmaster, played by Sidorov, is a gluing together of all the daily roles of Sidorov.
Let there be many daily roles performed by Sidorov. As we can see, these roles can be glued together and get one big role. You can stack them up and see what they have in common - create a typical daily role. Can do statistical analysis these daily roles. At the same time, it is important to understand what objects we are working with, and what attributes are used in this case. If there is a question about the duration of Sidorov's work as a director, then we are talking about gluing daily roles into one big role, and this duration is a property of this role. If the question is about when Sidorov USUALLY comes to work, then we are talking about Sidorov's typical daily role, and this time is a property of the typical daily role. If the question is about what time Sidorov comes to work on AVERAGE, then we are talking about a set of daily roles and this time is a property of a set of daily roles. Therefore, if we want to correctly transfer these properties to the IS, we need to create in the IS all the objects I have listed: daily roles, a glued large role, a typical role, a set of roles. At the same time, it must be remembered that a set in an IS is a separate object with its own attributes, and not just a bunch of roles.
It is possible to glue the roles of all directors of all schools, while getting such a huge role - the director of the school, which will be performed by different people at the same time in different places. Therefore, a role is not necessarily performed by one person at one time. A role can be performed by different people at the same time in different places. At the same time, this huge role should not be confused with the typical role of a school principal! This kind of confusion is quite common. In addition, a typical role is often given as a role.
I hope the answer is clear now: as much as you want. You can call the participation of the user in each session a role. You can glue all sessions related to one account, and define a role for this fusion, you can glue all sessions of authorized users and define a role for this fusion. You can glue all sessions and define a role for this gluing - this will be a merging of authorized and unauthorized users. And you can glue work sessions in this program with work sessions in other programs. Etc. and whatever. The question of expediency. It all depends on the goals of our accounting: the constructed model must satisfy the goals of our work.
The Nature of Roles and Physical Objects
After our conversation, the impression remains that the role is something ephemeral - gluing, cutting. But in fact the role is of the same nature as any other physical object. The fact that we get a role by cutting space-time, or gluing it together, does not make the role something different from any other physical object. Imagine a world where people know about the transmigration of souls from one body to another. At the same time, they not only know this, they have passports for souls, and not for bodies. They often say - I had a great rest in the role of Ivanov, or I, in the role of Sidorov, did not work well on my karma. And what you see as an object, they perceive as a role.Physical objects can also be glued and cut to create new objects. For example, a plank plus a plank makes a bench. Or the table can be cut into a tabletop and legs. or matter in solar system can be divided into a gas-dust cloud left after a supernova explosion and into planetary system, which arose later from this cloud.
As a result, you will be able to understand that everything around us is nothing more than the result of our interpretation of the real and incomprehensible world. And the fact that our consciousness distinguishes between the physical world as a reality and the world of roles as imagined by us is nothing more than egocentrism, similar to the anthropocentrism of the Ptolemaic system.
I made an explanation of how objects appear in our minds in the article
Theme 2
THEORETICAL FOUNDATIONS OF LOCAL SELF-GOVERNMENT
2.1 Formation of theories local government
2.2 Modern theories of LSG
Basic concepts
free community theory social theory, state theory, legal theory, dualism theory of municipal government, social service theories, decentralization, deconcentration, concept sustainable development, local community development concept.
2.1 Formation of theories of local government
The French scientist J.-G.Ture in 1790 in the National Assembly of France for the first time formulated and substantiated the ideas of organizing community management. He pointed out the main problem of the doctrine of local self-government - the definition of the content of concepts: 1) "own community affairs", inherent in nature municipal government and 2) “state affairs”, which are transferred by the state to local self-government bodies.
See: Kudinov O.A. municipal law Russian Federation: lecture course. - M.: Os-89, 2005. P.8.
“Communal institutions play the same role in establishing independence as primary schools for science; they open the way to freedom for the people and teach them to use this freedom, to enjoy its peaceful character. Without communal institutions, a nation can form a free government, but it will never acquire the true spirit of freedom. Transient passions, momentary interests, random circumstances can only create the appearance of independence, but despotism, driven into the social organism, will sooner or later reappear on the surface.
Tocqueville A. Democracy in America. - M., 1992. P.83.
The theory of a free (natural) community
originated in mid-nineteenth century in Belgium and France within the framework of the school of natural law and was developed in the works of German and then Russian scientists. Its authors (A. Tocqueville, N. Gerber, G. Ahrens, R. Gneist and others) believed that the right of the community to manage its own affairs is as natural and inalienable as human rights and the state must respect the freedom of community management. The community has the right to autonomy and independence from central government by its very nature, the state does not create a community, but only recognizes it.
Along with the executive, legislative and judicial powers, it was stated that it was necessary to recognize the fourth power - local (municipal, communal, communal).
Local self-government bodies are the bodies of the community, not the state, and they are elected by the members of the community. Any illegal state interference in the affairs of the community was considered a violation of its rights.
Economic theory of self-government
Its representatives (R. Mol, A. Vasilchikov) focused not only on the recognition of a self-governing community as an independent subject of law, but also on maintenance of communal activities. Local self-government was considered alien to politics, its main area is economic activity aimed at satisfying basic needs society for the maintenance of its home and everything that surrounds it.
However, economic theory, which sought to reduce all its activities to economic issues, very soon lost credibility in science. Practice testified that economic activity is not the main feature of local self-government. Almost everywhere, self-government bodies were engaged in many social issues (protection of public order, care for the poor, management of fire and sanitary measures, etc.).
Municipal management: Proc. allowance. / A.G. Gladyshev, V.N. Ivanov, E.S. Savchenko et al. M., 2002. P. 89.
Social theory or social economic theory
The main provisions were formulated by the German scientist R. Gneist in 1808 during one of the first reforms of local self-government in Prussia. The prerequisite for the reform was the deterioration of the economic condition of the country, largely due to the inefficient system of urban management.
Based on this theory, the state recognized the right to self-government as the natural right of any community and assumed obligations not to suppress the activities of public organizations.
The most prominent representatives of this theory were the German scientists R. Moll, A. Scheffle, O. Girke, G. Preuss.
R. Mol believed that the community - a cell of self-government - is one of the natural spheres of human activity. The state cannot encroach on its independence, it is called upon to assist the community in the implementation of its goals and interests. By independence, he understood the right of the community to freely determine the scope and content of the goals set in relation to the needs, means and will of an individual association and to achieve their achievement in a certain space of common life.
[1] Cited. Quoted from: Chernyak E.V. Theories of local self-government in German and Russian science XIX - early XX centuries. - Kazan, 2010. P.23.
In sexually reproducing organisms, the genes of the parents are mixed in the genome of the offspring. This allows natural selection work not with whole genomes, but with individual genes, supporting successful variants and rejecting unsuccessful ones. In bacteria, it was believed that selection works mainly at the level of whole genomes, which is much less efficient. Theoretically, horizontal gene exchange could partially replace sexual reproduction in bacteria. However, it was not clear to what extent this is characteristic of natural populations of microbes. After studying two closely related populations of marine bacteria that have recently begun to adapt to different niches, American biologists have come to the conclusion that the adaptive evolution of bacteria occurs through the spread of individual genes, not entire genomes, that is, in the same way as in sexually reproducing organisms. It follows from this that in the course of adaptation to new conditions, horizontal genetic exchange successfully replaces sexual reproduction in bacteria.
The essence of the sexual process, characteristic of most higher organisms (eukaryotes), is the mixing (recombination) of genes (more precisely, DNA sections) of different individuals. The genes that make up the genome, due to regular recombination, cease to be tightly connected with each other. The mixing of genetic material allows natural selection to work at the level of individual genes rather than whole genomes. This radically increases the efficiency of selection and promotes rapid adaptive (adaptive) evolution. For example, if an individual has a beneficial mutation in one gene and a harmful mutation in another, then due to the sexual process, the first of these mutations gets a chance to spread in the gene pool regardless of the second, and the second, most likely, will be successfully rejected by selection, regardless of the first (for more details, see the note Experiments on worms proved that males are a useful thing, "Elements", 10/23/2009).
In asexual organisms that practice clonal reproduction (for example, by budding or fission in two), selection has to work with entire genomes. At the same time, the fates of all beneficial and harmful mutations that occur in the genome are inextricably linked with each other. This imposes serious restrictions on the adaptive capabilities of organisms.
Bacteria do not have a true sexual process, like eukaryotes, that is, regular mixing of all parts of the genome. However, horizontal gene transfer (HGO; see Horizontal gene transfer) is common among them, during which some microbes borrow DNA fragments from others. Borrowed genes can either be added to those already available in the recipient bacterium, or (due to the mechanism of homologous recombination, Homologous recombination) the “own” DNA fragment is replaced by a similar “foreign” fragment.
It is known that GGO plays a huge role in the evolution of prokaryotes. However, the available data point mainly to events that can be roughly classified as "macroevolutionary": these are relatively rare cases of successful transfers between unrelated groups of microbes (see Horizontal gene transfer and evolution). It is much easier to identify a gene as borrowed if it comes from an unrelated organism. Such a gene will be very different from its counterparts in the closest relatives of this bacterium. Cases of horizontal transfer between closely related strains of microbes are more difficult to detect. However, it is precisely such a “closely related” GGO, if it is sufficiently widespread in nature, that could partially replace the real sexual process for microbes and increase the efficiency of their adaptive evolution.
It is still unclear whether GGO between closely related microbes plays a significant role in microevolutionary changes, that is, in the routine, everyday adaptation of bacteria to changing environmental conditions. The prevailing point of view is that selection in bacteria is still mainly clonal, acting at the level of entire genomes. It is this situation that is reproduced, for example, in Richard Lensky's long-term evolutionary experiment, where bacteria lacking the genes necessary for GGO evolve in test tubes (see: Selection for "evolutionary prospects" revealed in a long-term evolutionary experiment, "Elements", 03/25/2011) .
Biologists from Massachusetts Institute of Technology(MIT) attempted to clarify the issue of the microevolutionary role of GGO using the example of two populations of marine planktonic bacteria Vibrio cyclitrophicus. Previously, the authors showed that these two populations, denoted by the letters L and S, have recently separated and are currently in the process of adapting to different ecological niches. This can be seen from their confinement, respectively, to large (L) and small (S) particles filtered from sea water, and based on the results of genetic analysis (see: Hunt et al., 2008. Resource Partitioning and Sympatric Differentiation Among Closely Related Bacterioplankton, PDF, 529 Kb). Apparently, these two populations are adapting to life on different representatives zoo- or phytoplankton.
The authors decided to find out which of the two processes prevails on early stages ecological differentiation - the selection of individual genes with successful mutations that are propagated by GGO, or clonal selection that maintains or rejects entire genomes. These two situations can be distinguished by comparing the intra- and interpopulation genetic polymorphism (variability) of the studied populations.
If selection at the gene level predominates, two populations must clearly differ from each other in a small number of genes - those on which the ecological properties of populations depend. At the same time, different parts of the genome should have a reduced level of intrapopulation polymorphism in at least one of the two populations. After all, selection acted on each such site, which supported some one variant of this site, displacing its other variants from the gene pool. On the contrary, those regions of the genome that are similar in two populations should be more polymorphic, and the sets of genetic variants (alleles) may be the same in two populations (because the selection associated with adaptation to a new niche did not act on them, and they could retain the original polymorphism accumulated by the ancestral population).
If clonal selection prevailed in the process of population divergence, then both the level of polymorphism and genetic differences between populations should be more evenly distributed over the genome.
The authors sequenced the complete genomes of thirteen bacteria from population L and seven individuals from population S. Analysis of the read genomes confirmed the first version: in the recent evolution of two bacterial populations, selection at the level of individual genes clearly prevailed, which would have been impossible without intensive GGO between closely related microbes.
725 dimorphic nucleotide positions were found, in which all microbes from population L always have one nucleotide, and all microbes from population S have another. The authors named these 725 positions "ecoSNPs" because they are most likely responsible for adaptation to differing living conditions. This can also be seen from the functions of the genes to which they are confined. Ecosnips are not randomly scattered throughout the genome, but are grouped into 11 relatively compact clusters. Within each of these clusters, at least one of the two populations exhibits a reduced level of genetic polymorphism, suggesting a recent act of positive selection.
All other snips (polymorphic nucleotide positions), including 28,744 pieces, are evenly distributed throughout the genome and demonstrate a similar pattern of polymorphism in both populations. For example, at some position, the C nucleotide can be found in six, and the G nucleotide in seven bacteria from the L population, while in the S population, the C nucleotide is found in three bacteria, and G in four.
The discovered pattern of distribution of nucleotide differences is fully consistent with the assumption that, in the course of adaptation to different conditions, selection in combination with GGO (and homologous recombination) contributed to the spread of individual DNA regions with successful mutations, rather than entire genomes, while the original polymorphism was preserved in other regions of the genome. present in the ancestral population.
As for homologous recombination, that is, the replacement of “one’s own” version of a gene with a “foreign” (borrowed) one, this process is typical for the so-called central, or basic (core) part of the genome, which is very similar in all 20 studied bacteria. In the other, “plastic” (flexible) part of the genome, in which the sets of genes and their sequences can vary greatly, apparently, insertions of foreign genes in addition to the existing ones (sometimes compensated by the loss of some other DNA segments) predominated.
Another confirmation of intense GGO between closely related microbes is the fact that phylogenetic (evolutionary) trees built for 20 studied bacteria turn out to be different depending on which genome fragments are used to build them. By analyzing these trees, as well as using other methods of comparative genomics, the authors found evidence of numerous recent transfers of genetic material within each of the two populations. In particular, it was possible to show the rapid spread of an entire chromosome in the S population. In Vibrio cyclitrophicus, the genome consists of two chromosomes, denoted by the numbers I and II. One of the variants of chromosome II has recently spread under the influence of selection in the S population (it is found in 5 out of 7 bacteria). Chromosome II spread independently of chromosome I, which means that bacteria can easily exchange entire chromosomes, not just their fragments.
Another important conclusion is that the genetic exchange between populations in recent times occurs rarely compared to exchange within populations. In the past, when populations had not yet completely dispersed into ecological niches, interpopulation exchange occurred more frequently.
In sexually reproducing organisms, the genes of the parents are mixed in the genome of the offspring. This allows natural selection to work not with whole genomes, but with individual genes, supporting successful variants and rejecting unsuccessful ones. In bacteria, it was believed that selection works mainly at the level of whole genomes, which is much less efficient. Theoretically, horizontal gene exchange could partially replace sexual reproduction in bacteria. However, it was not clear to what extent this is characteristic of natural populations of microbes. After studying two closely related populations of marine bacteria that have recently begun to adapt to different niches, American biologists have come to the conclusion that the adaptive evolution of bacteria occurs through the spread of individual genes, not entire genomes, that is, in the same way as in sexually reproducing organisms. It follows from this that in the course of adaptation to new conditions, horizontal genetic exchange successfully replaces sexual reproduction in bacteria.
The essence of the sexual process, characteristic of most higher organisms (eukaryotes), is the mixing (recombination) of genes (more precisely, DNA sections) of different individuals. The genes that make up the genome, due to regular recombination, cease to be tightly connected with each other. The mixing of genetic material allows natural selection to work at the level of individual genes rather than whole genomes. This radically increases the efficiency of selection and promotes rapid adaptive (adaptive) evolution. For example, if an individual has a beneficial mutation in one gene and a harmful mutation in another, then due to the sexual process, the first of these mutations gets a chance to spread in the gene pool regardless of the second, and the second, most likely, will be successfully rejected by selection, regardless of the first (for more details, see the note Experiments on worms proved that males are a useful thing, "Elements", 10/23/2009).
In asexual organisms that practice clonal reproduction (for example, by budding or fission in two), selection has to work with entire genomes. At the same time, the fates of all beneficial and harmful mutations that occur in the genome are inextricably linked with each other. This imposes serious restrictions on the adaptive capabilities of organisms.
Bacteria do not have a true sexual process, like eukaryotes, that is, regular mixing of all parts of the genome. However, horizontal gene transfer (HGO; see Horizontal gene transfer) is common among them, during which some microbes borrow DNA fragments from others. Borrowed genes can either be added to those already available in the recipient bacterium, or (due to the mechanism of homologous recombination, Homologous recombination) the “own” DNA fragment is replaced by a similar “foreign” fragment.
It is known that GGO plays a huge role in the evolution of prokaryotes. However, the available data point mainly to events that can be roughly classified as "macroevolutionary": these are relatively rare cases of successful transfers between unrelated groups of microbes (see Horizontal gene transfer and evolution). It is much easier to identify a gene as borrowed if it comes from an unrelated organism. Such a gene will be very different from its counterparts in the closest relatives of this bacterium. Cases of horizontal transfer between closely related strains of microbes are more difficult to detect. However, it is precisely such a “closely related” GGO, if it is sufficiently widespread in nature, that could partially replace the real sexual process for microbes and increase the efficiency of their adaptive evolution.
It is still unclear whether GGO between closely related microbes plays a significant role in microevolutionary changes, that is, in the routine, daily adaptation of bacteria to changing environmental conditions. The prevailing point of view is that selection in bacteria is still mainly clonal, acting at the level of entire genomes. It is this situation that is reproduced, for example, in Richard Lensky's long-term evolutionary experiment, where bacteria lacking the genes necessary for GGO evolve in test tubes (see: Selection for "evolutionary prospects" revealed in a long-term evolutionary experiment, "Elements", 03/25/2011) .
Biologists from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) tried to clarify the question of the microevolutionary role of GGO using the example of two populations of marine planktonic bacteria. Vibrio cyclitrophicus. Previously, the authors showed that these two populations, denoted by the letters L and S, have recently separated and are currently in the process of adapting to different ecological niches. This can be seen from their confinement, respectively, to large (L) and small (S) particles filtered from sea water, and from the results of genetic analysis (see: Hunt et al., 2008. , PDF, 529 Kb). Apparently, these two populations adapt to life on different representatives of zoo- or phytoplankton.
The authors decided to find out which of the two processes prevails at the initial stages of ecological differentiation - the selection of individual genes with successful mutations that are propagated by GGO, or clonal selection that maintains or rejects entire genomes. These two situations can be distinguished by comparing the intra- and interpopulation genetic polymorphism (variability) of the studied populations.
If selection at the gene level predominates, two populations must clearly differ from each other in a small number of genes - those on which the ecological properties of populations depend. At the same time, different parts of the genome should have a reduced level of intrapopulation polymorphism in at least one of the two populations. After all, selection acted on each such site, which supported some one variant of this site, displacing its other variants from the gene pool. On the contrary, those regions of the genome that are similar in two populations should be more polymorphic, and the sets of genetic variants (alleles) may be the same in two populations (because the selection associated with adaptation to a new niche did not act on them, and they could retain the original polymorphism accumulated by the ancestral population).
If clonal selection prevailed in the process of population divergence, then both the level of polymorphism and genetic differences between populations should be more evenly distributed over the genome.
The authors sequenced the complete genomes of thirteen bacteria from population L and seven individuals from population S. Analysis of the read genomes confirmed the first version: in the recent evolution of two bacterial populations, selection at the level of individual genes clearly prevailed, which would have been impossible without intensive GGO between closely related microbes.
725 dimorphic nucleotide positions were found, in which all microbes from population L always have one nucleotide, and all microbes from population S have another. The authors named these 725 positions "ecoSNPs" because they are most likely responsible for adaptation to differing living conditions. This can also be seen from the functions of the genes to which they are confined. Ecosnips are not randomly scattered throughout the genome, but are grouped into 11 relatively compact clusters. Within each of these clusters, at least one of the two populations exhibits a reduced level of genetic polymorphism, suggesting a recent act of positive selection.
All other snips (polymorphic nucleotide positions), including 28,744 pieces, are evenly distributed throughout the genome and demonstrate a similar pattern of polymorphism in both populations. For example, at some position, the C nucleotide can be found in six, and the G nucleotide in seven bacteria from the L population, while in the S population, the C nucleotide is found in three bacteria, and G in four.
The discovered pattern of distribution of nucleotide differences is fully consistent with the assumption that, in the course of adaptation to different conditions, selection in combination with GGO (and homologous recombination) contributed to the spread of individual DNA regions with successful mutations, rather than entire genomes, while the original polymorphism was preserved in other regions of the genome. present in the ancestral population.
As for homologous recombination, that is, the replacement of “one’s own” version of a gene with a “foreign” (borrowed) one, this process is typical for the so-called central, or basic (core) part of the genome, which is very similar in all 20 studied bacteria. In the other, “plastic” (flexible) part of the genome, in which the sets of genes and their sequences can vary greatly, apparently, insertions of foreign genes in addition to the existing ones (sometimes compensated by the loss of some other DNA segments) predominated.
Another confirmation of intense GGO between closely related microbes is the fact that phylogenetic (evolutionary) trees built for 20 studied bacteria turn out to be different depending on which genome fragments are used to build them. By analyzing these trees, as well as using other methods of comparative genomics, the authors found evidence of numerous recent transfers of genetic material within each of the two populations. In particular, it was possible to show the rapid spread of the whole chromosome in the S population. Vibrio cyclitrophicus The genome consists of two chromosomes, denoted by the numbers I and II. One of the variants of chromosome II has recently spread under the influence of selection in the S population (it is found in 5 out of 7 bacteria). Chromosome II spread independently of chromosome I, which means that bacteria can easily exchange entire chromosomes, not just their fragments.
Another important conclusion is that genetic exchange between populations has recently been rare compared to exchange within populations. In the past, when populations had not yet completely dispersed into ecological niches, interpopulation exchange occurred more frequently.
The results obtained indicate the need to revise some of the established ideas about the evolution of prokaryotes.
First, the study showed that genetic level microevolutionary processes in "asexual" prokaryotes and sexually reproducing eukaryotes do not differ that much. In both cases, the selection takes place mainly at the level separate fragments DNA, not whole genomes.
Secondly, it became clear that the genetic exchange between closely related microbes (representatives of the same population) is very active, providing intensive recombination and, in fact, performing the same function as the sexual process in higher organisms. Wherein important role homologous recombination is playing, due to which the borrowed genes are not so much added to the existing ones, but replace their "old versions" that are present in the recipient's genome. In addition, the possibility of the exchange of whole chromosomes, and not just small fragments of DNA, has been shown.
Thirdly, the increased frequency of intrapopulation HGO compared to interpopulation suggests that bacteria that adapt to different ecological niches form partial reproductive isolation, just like in higher organisms in the process of sympatric speciation. This isolation seems to be based not only on the fact that microbes with different adaptations live in different places and therefore rarely occur, but also on the fact that as nucleotide differences accumulate, the probability of homologous recombination decreases. Apparently, prokaryotes still cannot be considered "a single hyperpolymorphic species" (as some theorists have suggested, based on the assumption that microbes exchange genes with anyone, regardless of the degree of relationship). In prokaryotes, as well as in higher organisms, population gene pools partially isolated from each other can exist. As for the numerous cases of HGO known to us between unrelated groups of microbes, they may represent only the tip of the iceberg - easily detectable and sometimes having very important evolutionary consequences, but still relatively rare. side effect the ability of microbes to regularly exchange genes with their closest relatives.
