Significant selective constraint at 4-fold degenerate sites in the avian genome and its consequence for detection of positive selection

Genome Biology and Evolution

Volumn 3, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 1381-1389

  Künstner, Axel ^a   Nabholz, Benoit ^a   Ellegren, Hans ^a  

^a UPPSALA UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

4 fold degenerate sites; Chicken; Comparative genomics; Nearly neutral theory; Purifying selection; Turkey; Zebra finch

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL; ARTICLE; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; CHICKEN; CODON; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DNA SEQUENCE; FINCH; GENE EXPRESSION; GENETIC SELECTION; GENETICS; GENOME; GENOMICS; METHODOLOGY; MOLECULAR EVOLUTION; MUTATION; PHYLOGENY; SINGLE NUCLEOTIDE POLYMORPHISM; TURKEY (BIRD);

ANIMALS; CHICKENS; CODON; EVOLUTION, MOLECULAR; FINCHES; GENE EXPRESSION; GENOME; GENOMICS; MODELS, GENETIC; MUTATION; PHYLOGENY; POLYMORPHISM, SINGLE NUCLEOTIDE; SELECTION, GENETIC; SEQUENCE ANALYSIS, DNA; TURKEYS;

AVES; MAMMALIA; TAENIOPYGIA GUTTATA; VERTEBRATA;

EID: 84859135149     PISSN: None     EISSN: 17596653     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/gbe/evr112     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Aleshin A, Zhi D. 2010. Recombination-associated sequence homoge-nization of neighboring Alu elements: signature of nonallelic gene conversion. Mol Biol Evol. 27:2300-2311.
2. Axelsson E, Webster MT, Smith NGC, Burt DW, Ellegren H. 2005. Comparison of the chicken and turkey genomes reveals a higher rate of nucleotide divergence on micro chromosomes than macro chromosomes. Genome Res. 15:120-125.
3. Bejerano G, et al. 2004. Ultraconserved elements in the human genome. Science 304:1321-1325. (Pubitemid 38697428)
4. Brest P, et al. 2011. A synonymous variant in IRGM alters a binding site for miR-196 and causes deregulation of IRGM-dependent xenoph-agy in Crohn's disease. Nat Genet. 43:242-245.
5. Castresana J. 2000. Selection of conserved blocks from multiple alignments for their use in phylogenetic analysis. Mol Biol Evol. 17:540-552. (Pubitemid 30210700)
6. Chamary JV, Hurst L. 2005. Evidence for selection on synonymous mutations affecting stability of mRNA secondary structure in mammals. Genome Biol. 6:R75.
7. Chamary JV, Parmley JL, Hurst LD. 2006. Hearing silence: non-neutral evolution at synonymous sites in mammals. Nat Rev Genet. 7:98-108. (Pubitemid 43128905)
8. Chan ET, et al. 2009. Conservation of core gene expression in vertebrate tissues. J Biol. 8:33.
9. Dermitzakis ET, Reymond A, Antonarakis SE. 2005. Conserved non-genic sequences-an unexpected feature of mammalian genomes. Nat Rev Genet. 6:151-157. (Pubitemid 40179538)
10. Dobzhansky T. 1970. Genetics of the evolutionary process. New York: Columbia University Press.
11. Drummond DA, Wilke CO. 2008. Mistranslation-induced protein misfolding as a dominant constraint on coding-sequence evolution. Cell 134:341-352. (Pubitemid 352010328)
12. Duret L. 2002. Evolution of synonymous codon usage in metazoans. Curr Opin Genet Dev. 12:640-649. (Pubitemid 35335981)
13. Ellegren H. 2009. A selection model of molecular evolution incorporating the effective population size. Evolution 63:301-305.
14. Eory L, Halligan DL, Keightley PD. 2010. Distributions of selectively constrained sites and deleterious mutation rates in the hominid and murid genomes. Mol Biol Evol. 27:177-192.
15. Eyre-Walker A, Keightley PD. 1999. High genomic deleterious mutation rates in hominids. Nature 397:344-347.
16. Hackett SJ, et al. 2008. A phylogenomic study of birds reveals their evolutionary history. Science 320:1763-1768. (Pubitemid 351931288)
17. Halligan DL, Keightley PD. 2006. Ubiquitous selective constraints in the Drosophila genome revealed by a genome-wide interspecies comparison. Genome Res. 16:875-884. (Pubitemid 43992911)
18. Hershberg R, Petrov DA. 2008. Selection on codon bias. Annu Rev Genet. 42:287-299.
19. Hillier LW, et al. 2004. Sequence and comparative analysis of the chicken genome provide unique perspectives on vertebrate evolution. Nature 432:695-716.
20. Holliday R, Grigg GW. 1993. DNA methylation and mutation. Mutat Res. 285:61-67. (Pubitemid 23029555)
21. Hopkinson DA, Spencer N, Harris H. 1963. Red cell acid phosphatase variants: a new human polymorphism. Nature 199:969-971.
22. Hurst LD. 2002. The Ka/Ks ratio: diagnosing the form of sequence evolution. Trends Genet. 18:486-487.
23. Posada D, editor New York: Humana Press Katoh K, Asimenos G, Toh H. 2009. Multiple alignment of DNA sequences with mafft. In: Posada D, editor. Bioinformatics for DNA sequence analysis. New York: Humana Press. p. 39-64.
24. Katzman S, et al. 2007. Human genome ultraconserved elements are ultraselected. Science 317:915. (Pubitemid 47301312)
25. Keightley PD, Gaffney DJ. 2003. Functional constraints and frequency of deleterious mutations in noncoding DNA of rodents. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 100:13402-13406. (Pubitemid 37444754)
26. Kimura M. 1968. Evolutionary rate at the molecular level. Nature 217:624-626.
27. Kondrashov AS, Crow JF. 1993. A molecular approach to estimating the human deleterious mutation rate. Hum Mutat. 2:229-234. (Pubitemid 23205197)
28. Lercher MJ, Chamary JV, Hurst LD. 2004. Genomic regionality in rates of evolution is not explained by clustering of genes of comparable expression profile. Genome Res. 14:1002-1013. (Pubitemid 38811536)
29. Lewontin RC, Hubby JL. 1966. A molecular approach to the study of genic heterozygosity in natural populations. II. Amount of variation and degree of heterozygosity in natural populations of Drosophila pseudoobscura. Genetics 54:595-609.
30. Lunter G, Ponting CP, Hein J. 2006. Genome-wide identification of human functional DNA using a neutral indel model. PLoS Comput Biol. 2:e5.
31. Meader S, Ponting CP, Lunter G. 2010. Massive turnover of functional sequence in human and other mammalian genomes. Genome Res. 20:1335-1343.
32. Mugal CF, Ellegren H. 2011. Substitution rate variation at human CpG sites correlates with non-CpG divergence, methylation level and GC content. Genome Biol. 12:R58.
33. Nachman MW, Crowell SL. 2000. Estimate of the mutation rate per nucleotide in humans. Genetics 156:297-304.
34. Nam K, et al. 2010. Molecular evolution of genes in avian genomes. Genome Biol. 11:R68.
35. Ohta T. 1973. Slightly deleterious mutant substitutions in evolution. Nature 246:96-98.
36. Pacheco MA, et al. 2011. Evolution of modern birds revealed by mitogenomics: timing the radiation and origin of major orders. Mol Biol Evol. 28:1927-1942.
37. Parmley JL, Hurst LD. 2007. Exonic splicing regulatory elements skew synonymous codon usage near intron-exon boundaries in mammals. Mol Biol Evol. 24:1600-1603. (Pubitemid 47236703)
38. Pheasant M, Mattick JS. 2007. Raising the estimate of functional human sequences. Genome Res. 17:1245-1253. (Pubitemid 47360899)
39. Pollard KS, Hubisz MJ, Rosenbloom KR, Siepel A. 2010. Detection of nonneutral substitution rates on mammalian phylogenies. Genome Res. 20:110-121.
40. R Development Core Team. 2008. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna (Austria): R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
41. Rocha EPC. 2004. Codon usage bias from tRNA's point of view: redundancy, specialization, and efficient decoding for translation optimization. Genome Res. 14:2279-2286. (Pubitemid 39517335)
42. Rubin C-J, et al. 2010. Whole-genome resequencing reveals loci under selection during chicken domestication. Nature 464:587-591.
43. Schwartz S, et al. 2009. Alu exonization events reveal features required for precise recognition of exons by the splicing machinery. PLoS Comput Biol. 5:e1000300.
44. Sharp PM, Li WH. 1987. The codon adaptation index-a measure of directional synonymous codon usage bias, and its potential applications. Nucleic Acids Res. 15:1281-1295.
45. Shen S, et al. 2011. Widespread establishment and regulatory impact of Alu exons in human genes. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 108:2837-2842.
46. Siepel A, et al. 2005. Evolutionarily conserved elements in vertebrate, insect, worm, and yeast genomes. Genome Res. 15:1034-1050. (Pubitemid 41126859)
47. Smit A, Hubley R, Green P. 2010. RepeatMasker open-3.0. [cited 15 Mar 2011]. Available from: http://www.repeatmasker.org/.
48. Smith NGC, Brandström M, Ellegren H. 2004. Evidence for turnover of functional noncoding DNA in mammalian genome evolution. Genomics 84:806-813. (Pubitemid 39314440)
49. Spencer N, Hopkinson DA, Harris H. 1964. Phosphoglucomutase polymorphism in man. Nature 204:742-745.
50. Thomas JW, et al. 2003. Comparative analyses of multi-species sequences from targeted genomic regions. Nature 424:788-793. (Pubitemid 37021709)
51. van Tuinen M, Hedges SB. 2001. Calibration of avian molecular clocks. Mol Biol Evol. 18:206-213. (Pubitemid 32118865)
52. Webster MT, Smith NGC, Lercher MJ, Ellegren H. 2004. Gene expression, synteny, and local similarity in human noncoding mutation rates. Mol Biol Evol. 21:1820-1830. (Pubitemid 39331630)
53. S) substitution rates affects inference of selection. Genome Biol Evol. 1:308-319.
54. Wright SI, Andolfatto P. 2008. The impact of natural selection on the genome: emerging patterns in Drosophila and Arabidopsis. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst. 39:193-213.
55. Yanai I, et al. 2005. Genome-wide midrange transcription profiles reveal expression level relationships in human tissue specification. Bioinformatics 21:650-659. (Pubitemid 40424791)
56. Yang Z. 2007. PAML 4: phylogenetic analysis by maximum likelihood. Mol Biol Evol. 24:1586-1591. (Pubitemid 47236688)
57. Yoder JA, Walsh CP, Bestor TH. 1997. Cytosine methylation and the ecology of intragenomic parasites. Trends Genet. 13:335-340. (Pubitemid 27309911)
58. Zhang J, Nielsen R, Yang Z. 2005. Evaluation of an improved branch-site likelihood method for detecting positive selection at the molecular level. Mol Biol Evol. 22:2472-2479. (Pubitemid 41661383)