Extended Data Fig. 7: Additional comparisons of beneficial substitutions and ω between yeast experimental evolution in constant and changing environments.

a–b, The fraction of beneficial substitutions is significantly lower in changing environments than in corresponding constant environments. Same as Fig. 5c, except that only non-synonymous SNVs, nonsense SNVs, and frame shifting indels (a), or only non-synonymous SNVs (b) are considered in identifying beneficial substitutions. c, The fraction of beneficial substitutions in a changing environment increases with the similarity among the 10 media making up the changing environment. Each dot represents one of the 10 changing environments. Spearman’s correlation and associated one-tailed P-value are presented. d–f, Same as Fig. 5c except that the 12 potentially contaminated populations are excluded. Results are obtained when all substitution types (d), only non-synonymous SNVs, nonsense SNVs, and frame shifting indels (e), or only non-synonymous SNVs (f) are considered in identifying beneficial substitutions. g, ω is significantly lower in changing environments than in constant environments, as in Fig. 5d, except that the 12 potentially contaminated populations are excluded.