Molecular evolution, mutation size and gene pleiotropy: A geometric reexamination

Genetics

Volumn 187, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 877-885

  Razeto Barry, Pablo ^a,b   Díaz, Javier ^a   Cotoras, Darko ^a   Vásquez, Rodrigo A ^a,b  

^a Instituto de Filosofía y Ciencias de la Complejidad IFICC Los Alerces 3024 Ñuñoa   (Chile)

^b INSTITUTO DE ECOLOGÍA Y BIODIVERSIDAD IEB   (Chile)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; GENE MUTATION; GEOMETRY; MOLECULAR EVOLUTION; NONHUMAN; ORGANISM; PHENOTYPE; PLEIOTROPY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REPRODUCTIVE FITNESS;

EID: 79953196888     PISSN: 00166731     EISSN: 00166731     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1534/genetics.110.125195     Document Type: Article

References (68)

1. BACHTROG, D., 2008 Similar rates of protein adaptation in Drosophila miranda and D. melanogaster, two species with different current effective population sizes. BMC Evol. Biol. 8: 334.
2. BIERNE, N., and A. EYRE-WALKER, 2004 The genomic rate of adaptive amino acid substitution in Drosophila. Mol. Biol. Evol. 21: 1350-1360.
3. BLOOM, J. D., and C. ADAMI, 2003 Apparent dependence of protein evolutionary rate on number of interactions is linked to biases in protein-protein interactions data sets. BMC Evol. Biol. 3: 21.
4. CAMPS, M., H. ASAEL and A. L. LAWRENCE, 2007 Genetic constraints on protein evolution. Crit. Rev. Biochem. Mol. 42: 313-326.
5. CASTILLO-DAVIS, C. I., and D. L. HARTL, 2003 Conservation, relocation and duplication in genome evolution. Trends Genet. 19: 593-597.
6. CHEN, Y., and D. XU, 2005 Understanding protein dispensability through machine-learning analysis of high-throughput data. Bio-informatics 21: 575-581.
7. CLARKE, B., 1971 Natural selection and the evolution of proteins. Nature 232: 487.
8. CLARKE, B., 2001 A reply to Orr. Evol. Dev. 3: 124.
9. COOPER, T. F., E. A. OSTROWSKI and M. TRAVISANO, 2007 A negative relationship between mutation pleiotropy and fitness effect in yeast. Evolution 61: 1495-1499.
10. CROW, J. F., and M. KIMURA, 1970 An Introduction to Population Genetics Theory. Harper & Row, New York.
11. DICKERSON, R. E., 1971 The structure of cytochrome c and the rates of molecular evolution. J. Mol. Evol. 1: 26-45.
12. DUDLEY, A. M., D. M. JANSE, A. TANAY, R. SHAMIR and G. M. CHURCH, 2005 A global view of pleiotropy and phenotypically derived gene function in yeast. Mol. Syst. Biol. 1: 0001.
13. ERICSON, E., I. PYLVÄNÄINEN, L. FERNANDEZ-RICAUD, O. NERMAN, J. WARRINGER et al., 2006 Genetic pleiotropy in Saccharomyces cer-visiae quantified by high-resolution phenotypic profiling. Mol. Gen. Genomics 275: 605-614.
14. EYRE-WALKER, A., 2006 The genomic rate of adaptive evolution. Trends Ecol. Evol. 21: 569-575.
15. FAY, J. C., G. J. WYCKOFF and C. I. WU, 2002 Testing the neutral theory of molecular evolution with genomic data from Drosophila. Nature 415: 1024-1026.
16. FISHER, R. A., 1930 Genetical Theory of Natural Selection. Clarendon Press, Oxford.
17. FRASER, H., A. HIRSH, L. STEINMETZ, C. SCHARFE and M. FELDMAN, 2002 Evolutionary rate in the protein interaction network. Science 296: 751-752.
18. FRASER, H. B., 2005 Modularity and evolutionary constraint on proteins. Nature 37: 351-352.
19. GENE ONTOLOGY CONSORTIUM 2002 Gene ontology: tool for the unification of biology. Nat. Genet. 25: 25-29.
20. GILLESPIE, J. H., 1994 Substitution processes in molecular evolution III. Deleterious alleles. Genetics 138: 943-952.
21. GILLESPIE, J. H., 1995 On Ohta's hypothesis: most amino acid substitutions are deleterious. J. Mol. Evol. 40: 64-69.
22. GU, X., 2007a Stabilizing selection of protein function and distribution of selection coefficient among sites. Genetica 130: 93-97.
23. GU, X., 2007b Evolutionary framework for protein sequence evolution and gene pleiotropy. Genetics 175: 1813-1822.
24. HAHN, M., G. CONANT and A. WAGNER, 2004 Molecular evolution in large genetic networks: Does connectivity equal constraint? J. Mol. Evol. 58: 203-211.
25. HAHN, M. W., and A. D. KERN, 2005 Comparative genomics of centrality and essentiality in three eukaryotic protein-interaction networks. Mol. Biol. Evol. 22(4): 803-806.
26. HARTL,D., andC. H. TAUBES, 1996 Compensatory nearly neutral mu-tations: selection without adaptation. J. Theor. Biol. 182: 303-309.
27. HARTL, D., and C. H. TAUBES, 1998 Towards a theory of evolutionary adaptation. Genetica 103: 525-533.
28. HARTL, D., D. E. DYKHUIZEN and A. M. DEAN, 1985 Limits of adapta-tion: the evolution of selective neutrality. Genetics 111: 655-674.
29. HE, X., and J. ZHANG, 2006 Toward a molecular understanding of pleiotropy. Genetics 173: 1885-1891.
30. HUGHES, A. L., 2007 Looking for Darwin in all the wrong places: the misguided quest for positive selection at the nucleotide sequence level. Heredity 99: 364-373.
31. JORDAN, I. K., Y. I. WOLF and E.V. KOONIN, 2003 No simple dependence between protein evolution rate and the number of protein-protein interactions: only the most prolific interactors tend to evolve slowly. BMC Evol. Biol. 3: 1.
32. JOVELIN, R., and P. C. PHILLIPS, 2009 Evolutionary rates and centrality in the yeast gene regulatory network. Genome Biol. 10: R35.
33. JUKES, T. H., and J. L. KING, 1971 Deleterious mutations and neutral substitutions. Nature 231: 114.
34. KEIGHTLEY, P. D., 1994 The distribution of mutation effects on viability in Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics 138: 1315-1322.
35. KIMURA, M., 1979 Model of effectively neutral mutations in which selective constraint is incorporated. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 76: 3440-3444.
36. KIMURA, M., 1983 The Neutral Theory ofMolecular Evolution. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
37. KIMURA, M., and T. OHTA, 1974 On some principles governing molecular evolution. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 71: 2848-2852.
38. LYNCH, M., J. BLANCHARD, D. HOULE, T. KIBOTA, S. SCHULTZ et al., 1999 Perspective: spontaneous deleterious mutation. Evolution 53: 645-663.
39. MAKINO, T., and T. GOJOBORI, 2006 The evolutionary rate of a protein is influenced by features of the interacting partners. Mol. Biol. Evol. 23: 784-789.
40. MARTIN, G., and T. LENORMAND, 2006 A general multivariate extension of Fisher's geometrical model and the distribution of mutation fitness effects across species. Evolution 60: 893-907.
41. OHTA, T., 1977 Extension of the neutral mutation drift hypothesis, pp. 148-167 in Molecular Evolution and Polymorphism, edited by M. KIMURA. National Institute of Genetics, Mishima, Japan.
42. OHTA, T., 1992 The nearly neutral theory of molecular evolution. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 23: 263-286.
43. OHTA, T., and J. H. GILLESPIE, 1996 Development of neutral and nearly neutral theories. Theor. Popul. Biol. 49: 128-142.
44. OHTA, T., and H. TACHIDA, 1990 Theoretical study of near neutrality. I. Heterozygosity and rate of mutant substitution. Genetics 126: 219-229.
45. ORR, A. H., 1998 The population genetics of adaptation: the distribution of factors fixed during adaptive evolution. Evolution 52: 935-949.
46. ORR, A. H., 1999 The evolutionary genetics of adaptation: a simulation study. Genet. Res. 74: 207-214.
47. ORR, A. H., 2000 Adaptation and the cost of complexity. Evolution 54: 13-20.
48. ORR, A. H., 2005a Theories of adaptation: what they do and don't say. Genetica 123: 3-13.
49. ORR, A. H., 2005b The genetics theory of adaptation: a brief history. Nat. Rev. Genet. 6: 119-127.
50. OTTO, S. P., 2004 Two steps forward, one step back: the pleiotropic effects of favoured alleles. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. B 271: 705-714.
51. PÁL, C., B. PAPP and L. HURST, 2001 Highly expressed genes in yeast evolve slowly. Genetics 158: 927-931.
52. PÁL, C., B. PAPP and M. J. LERCHER, 2006 An integrated view of protein evolution. Nat. Rev. Genet. 7: 337-348.
53. PODDER, S., P. MUKHOPADHYAY and T. C. GHOSH, 2009 Multifunc-tionality dominantly determines the rate of human housekeeping and tissue specific interacting protein evolution. Gene 439: 11-16.
54. POON, A., and S. P. OTTO, 2000 Compensating for our load of mu-tations: freezing the meltdown of small populations. Evolution 54: 1467-1479.
55. SALATHÉ, M., M. ACKERMANN and S. BONHOEFFER, 2006 The effect of multifunctionality on the rate of evolution in yeast. Mol. Biol. Evol. 23: 721-722.
56. SELLA, G., 2009 An exact steady state solution of Fisher's geometric model and other models. Theor. Popul. Biol. 75: 30-34.
57. SELLA, G., andA. E.HIRSH, 2005 The application of statistical physics to evolutionary biology. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 102: 9541-9546.
58. SU, Z., Y. ZENG and X. GU, 2010 A preliminary analysis of gene plei-otropy estimated from protein sequences. J. Exp. Zool. B Mol. Dev. Evol. 314: 115-122.
59. SUBRAMANIAN, S., and S. KUMAR, 2004 Gene expression intensity shapes evolutionary rates of the proteins encoded by the vertebrate genome. Genetics 168: 373-381.
60. TACHIDA, H., 1991 A study on a nearly neutral mutation model in finite population. Genetics 128: 183-192.
61. TACHIDA, H., 1996 Effects of the shape of distribution of mutant effect in nearly neutral mutation models. J. Genet. 75: 33-48.
62. TACHIDA, H., 2000 Molecular evolution in a multisite nearly neutral mutation model. J. Mol. Evol. 50: 69-81.
63. TENAILLON, O., O. K. SILANDER, J. P. UZAN and L. CHAO, 2007 Quantifying organismal complexity using a population genetic approach. PLoS One 2: e217.
64. THATCHER, J. W., J. M. SHAW and W. J. DICKINSON, 1998 Marginal fitness contributions of nonessential genes in yeast. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 95: 253-257.
65. WAGNER, G. P., J.P.KENNEY-HUNT,M. PAVLICEV, J.R. PECK, D.WAXMANN et al., 2008 Pleiotropic scaling of gene effects and the 'cost of complexity'. Nature 452: 470-473.
66. WALL, D., A. HIRSH, H. FRASER, J. KUMM, G. GIAEVER et al., 2005 Functional genomic analysis of the rates of protein evolution. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 102: 5483-5488.
67. WELCH, J. J., and D. WAXMAN, 2003 Modularity and the cost of complexity. Evolution 57(8): 1723-1734.
68. ZHANG, J., and X. HE, 2005 Significant impact of protein dispensability on the instantaneous rate of protein evolution. Mol. Biol. Evol. 22: 1147-1155.