Systemic factors dominate mammal protein evolution

Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences

Volumn 277, Issue 1686, 2010, Pages 1403-1408

  Vinogradov, Alexander E ^a  

^a INSTITUTE OF CYTOLOGY   (Russian Federation)

Author keywords

Cell integrity; Coevolution; Gene expression; Protein evolution

Indexed keywords

COEVOLUTION; CORRELATION; EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY; GENE EXPRESSION; MAMMAL; PROTEIN; TOXICITY;

MAMMALIA; METAZOA;

EID: 77952261765     PISSN: 09628452     EISSN: 14712970     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2009.1865     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Batada, N. N., Reguly, T., Breitkreutz, A., Boucher, L., Breitkreutz, B. J., Hurst, L. D. & Tyers, M. 2006 Stratus not altocumulus: a new view of the yeast protein interaction network. PLoS Biol. 4, e317. (doi:10.1371/ journal.pbio.0040317)
2. Castillo-Davis, C. I., Mekhedov, S. L., Hard, D. L., Koonin, E. V. & Kondrashov, F. A. 2002 Selection for short introns in highly expressed genes. Nat. Genet. 31, 415-418.
3. Drummond, D. A. & Wilke, C. O. 2008 Mistranslationinduced protein misfolding as a dominant constraint on coding-sequence evolution. Cell 134, 341-352. (doi:10. 1016/j.cell.2008.05.042)
4. Drummond, D. A., Raval, A. & Wilke, C. O. 2006 A single determinant dominates the rate of yeast protein evolution. Mol Biol. Evol. 23, 327-337. (doi:10.1093/molbev/ msj038) (Pubitemid 43100047)
5. Eisenberg, E. & Levanon, E. Y. 2003 Human housekeeping genes are compact. Trends Genet. 19, 362-365. (doi:10. 1016/S0168-9525(03)00140-9) (Pubitemid 36794535)
6. Fraser, H. B., Hirsh, A. E., Steinmetz, L. M., Scharfe, C. & Feldman, M. W. 2002 Evolutionary rate in the protein interaction network. Science 296, 750-752. (doi:10.1126/science.1068696) (Pubitemid 34442006)
7. Fraser, H. B., Hirsh, A. E., Wall, D. P. & Eisen, M. B. 2004 Coevolution of gene expression among interacting proteins. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci USA 101, 9033-9038. (doi:10.1073/pnas.0402591101)
8. Hakes, L., Lovell, S. C., Oliver, S. G. & Robertson, D. L. 2007 Specificity in protein interactions and its relationship with sequence diversity and coevolution. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci USA 104, 7999-8004. (doi:10.1073/pnas. 0609962104)
9. Jensen, L. J. et al. 2009 STRING 8-a global view on proteins and their functional interactions in 630 organisms. Nucleic Acids Res. 37, D412-D416. (doi:10.1093/nar/ gkn760)
10. Jordan, I. K., Marino-Ramirez, L., Wolf, Y. I. & Koonin, E. V. 2004 Conservation and coevolution in the scalefree human gene coexpression network. Mol. Biol. Evol. 21, 2058-2070. (doi:10.1093/molbev/msh222) (Pubitemid 39391982)
11. Julenius, K. & Pedersen, A. G. 2006 Protein evolution is faster outside the cell. Mol Biol. Evol. 23, 2039-2048. (doi: 10.109 3/molbev/ms1081 ) (Pubitemid 44536813)
12. Kawahara, Y. & Imanishi, T. 2007 A genome-wide survey of changes in protein evolutionary rates across four closely related species of Saccharomyces sensu stricto group. BMC Evol. Biol. 7, 9.
13. Koonin, E. V. & Wolf, Y. I. 2006 Evolutionary systems biology: links between gene evolution and function. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 17, 481-487. (doi:10.1016/j.copbio.2006.08.003)
14. Koonin, E. V. et al. 2004 A comprehensive evolutionary classification of proteins encoded in complete eukaryotic genomes. Genome Biol. 5, R7. (doi:10.1186/gb-2004-52-r7)
15. Larkin, M. A. et al. 2007 CLUSTAL Wand CLUSTAL X version 2.0. Bioinformatics 23, 2947-2948. (doi: 10.1093/ bioinformatics/btm404)
16. Makino, T. & Gojobori, T 2006 The evolutionary rate of a protein is influenced by features of the interacting partners. Mol. Biol. Evol. 23, 784-789. (doi: 10.1093/ molbev/msj090)
17. Pearson, W. R. 1999 Flexible similarity searching with the FASTA3 program package. In Bioinformatics methods and protocols (eds S. Misener & S. A. Krawetz), pp. 185-219. Totowa, NJ: Humana Press.
18. Powers, E. T. & Balch, W. E. 2008 Costly mistakes: translational infidelity and protein homeostasis. Cell 134, 204-206. (doi:10.1016/j.cell.2008. 07.005)
19. Sayers, E. W. et al. 2009 Database resources of the National Center for Biotechnology Information. Nucleic Acids Res. 37, D5-D15. (doi:10.1093/nar/ gkn741)
20. Sironi, M., Menozzi, G., Comi, G. P., Bresolin, N., Cagliani, R. & Pozzoli, U. 2005a Fixation of conserved sequences shapes human intron size and influences transposon-insertion dynamics. Trends Genet. 21, 484-488. (doi:10.1016/j.tig.2005.06.009) (Pubitemid 41132580)
21. Sironi, M., Menozzi, G., Comi, G. P., Cagliani, R., Bresolin, N. & Pozzoli, U. 2005 b Analysis of intronic conserved elements indicates that functional complexity might represent a major source of negative selection on non-coding sequences. Hum. Mol. Genet. 14, 2533-2546. (doi:10.1093/hmg/ddi257) (Pubitemid 41236066)
22. Su, A. I. et al. 2004 A gene atlas of the mouse and human protein-encoding transcriptomes. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 101, 6062-6067. (doi:10.1073/pnas. 0400782101)
23. Subramanian, A., Kuehn, H., Gould, J., Tamayo, P. & Mesirov, J. P. 2007 GSEA-P: a desktop application for gene set enrichment analysis. Bioinformatics 23, 3251-3253. (doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btm369) (Pubitemid 350187532)
24. Urrutia, A. O. & Hurst, L. D. 2003 The signature of selection mediated by expression on human genes. Genome Res. 13, 2260-2264. (doi:10.1101/gr. 641103)
25. Vinogradov, A. E. 2004 Compactness of human housekeeping genes: selection for economy or genomic design? Trends Genet. 20, 248-253. (doi:10.1016/j.tig. 2004. 03.006)
26. Vinogradov, A. E. 2006 'Genome design' model: evidence from conserved intronic sequence in human-mouse comparison. Genome Res. 16, 347-354. (doi:10.1101/gr. 4318206)
27. Vinogradov, A. E. 2009 Global versus local centrality in evolution of yeast protein network. J. Mol. Evol. 68, 192-196. (doi: 10.1007/S00239-008-9185- 2)
28. Wernersson, R. & Pedersen, A. G. 2003 RevTrans: multiple alignment of coding DNA from aligned amino acid sequences. Nucleic Acids Res. 31, 3537-3539. (doi: 10. 1093/nar/gkg609) (Pubitemid 37442193)
29. Wolf, Y. I. 2006 Coping with the quantitative genomics 'elephant': The correlation between the gene dispensability and evolution rate. Trends Genet. 22, 354-357. (doi: 10. 1016/j.tig.2006.04.009)
30. Wolf, M. Y., Wolf, Y. I. & Koonin, E. V. 2008 Comparable contributions of structural-functional constraints and expression level to the rate of protein sequence evolution. Biol. Direct. 3, 40. (doi:10.1186/1745-6150- 3-40)
31. Yang, Z. 2007 PAML 4: a program package for phylogenetic analysis likelihood. Mol. Biol. Evol. 24, 1586-1591. (doi:10.1093/molbev/msm088) (Pubitemid 47236688)