The tangled bank of amino acids

Protein Science

Volumn , Issue , 2016, Pages 1354-1362

  Goldstein, Richard A ^a   Pollock, David D ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

epistasis; epistatic interactions; evolutionary process; evolutionary Stokes shift; molecular evolution; phylogenetics; protein evolution; substitution matrices; substitution rates

Indexed keywords

AMINO ACID; ASPARTIC ACID; ISOLEUCINE; VALINE;

AMINO ACID SUBSTITUTION; ARTICLE; BIOPHYSICS; CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK; GENE MUTATION; GENETIC CODE; MATHEMATICAL COMPUTING; MOLECULAR BIOLOGY; MOLECULAR EVOLUTION; PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN ANALYSIS; PROTEIN INTERACTION; PROTEIN POLYMORPHISM; SPATIOTEMPORAL ANALYSIS;

EID: 84976565071     PISSN: 09618368     EISSN: 1469896X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/pro.2930     Document Type: Article

References (57)

1. Darwin C (1859) On the origin of species by means of natural selection. London: John Murray.
2. Kendrew JC, Bodo G, Dintzis HM, Parrish RG, Wyckoff H, Phillips DC (1958) A three-dimensional model of the myoglobin molecule obtained by X-ray analysis. Nature 181:662–666.
3. Perutz MF, Rossmann MG, Cullis AF, Muirhead H, Will G, North AC (1960) Structure of haemoglobin: a three-dimensional Fourier synthesis at 5.5-A. resolution, obtained by X-ray analysis. Nature 185:416–422.
4. Pollock DD, Thiltgen G, Goldstein RA (2012) Amino acid coevolution induces an evolutionary Stokes shift. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 109:E1352–E1359.
5. Pollock DD, Goldstein RA (2014) Strong evidence for protein epistasis, weak evidence against it. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 111:E1450.
6. Muse SV, Gaut BS (1994) A likelihood approach for comparing synonymous and nonsynonymous nucleotide substitution rates, with application to the chloroplast genome. Mol Biol E 11:715–724.
7. Nielsen R, Yang Z (1998) Likelihood models for detecting positively selected amino acid sites and applications to the HIV-1 envelope gene. Genetics 148:929–936.
8. Tamuri AU, dos Reis M, Hay AJ, Goldstein RA (2009) Identifying changes in selective constraints: Host shifts in influenza. Plos Comput Biol 5:e1000564.
9. Taylor WR, Hamilton RS, Sadowski MI (2013) Prediction of contacts from correlated sequence substitutions. Curr Opin Struct Biol 23:473–479.
10. Goldstein RA, Pollard ST, Shah SD, Pollock DD (2015) Nonadaptive amino acid convergence rates decrease over time. Mol Biol E 32:1373–1381.
11. Dayhoff MO, Eck RV, A model of evolutionary change in proteins. In: Dayhoff MO, Eck RV, Eds. (1968) Atlas of protein sequence and structure. National biomedical research foundation. Maryland: Silver Spring, pp 33–41.
12. Henikoff S, Henikoff JG (1992) Amino acid substitution matrices from protein blocks. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 89:10915–10919.
13. Jones DT, Taylor WR, Thornton JM (1992) The rapid generation of mutation data matrices from protein sequences. Comput Appl Biosci 8:275–282.
14. Whelan S, Goldman N (2001) A general empirical model of protein evolution derived from multiple protein families using a maximum-likelihood approach. Mol Biol E 18:691–699.
15. Le SQ, Gascuel O (2008) An improved general amino acid replacement matrix. Mol Biol E 25:1307–1320.
16. Fisher R (1930) The genetic theory of natural selection. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
17. Yang Z (2014) Molecular evolution: a statistical approach. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
18. Baldi P, Chauvin Y, Hunkapiller T, McClure MA (1994) Hidden Markov models of biological primary sequence information. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 91:1059–1063.
19. Eddy SR (1995) Multiple alignment using hidden Markov models. Proc Int Conf Intell Syst Mol Biol 3:114–120.
20. Eddy SR, Mitchison G, Durbin R (1995) Maximum discrimination hidden Markov models of sequence consensus. J Comput Biol 2:9–23.
21. Uzzell T, Corbin KW (1971) Fitting discrete probability distributions to evolutionary events. Science 172:1089–1096.
22. Yang Z (1993) Maximum-likelihood estimation of phylogeny from DNA sequences when substitution rates differ over sites. Mol Biol E 10:1396–1401.
23. Halpern AL, Bruno WJ (1998) Evolutionary distances for protein-coding sequences: modeling site-specific residue frequencies. Mol Biol E 15:910–917.
24. Yang ZH, Nielsen R (2008) Mutation-selection models of codon substitution and their use to estimate selective strengths on codon usage. Mol Biol E 25:568–579.
25. Rodrigue N, Philippe H, Lartillot N (2010) Mutation-selection models of coding sequence evolution with site-heterogeneous amino acid fitness profiles. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 107:4629–4634.
26. Tamuri AU, dos Reis M, Goldstein RA (2012) Estimating the distribution of selection coefficients from phylogenetic data using sitewise mutation-selection models. Genetics 190:1101–1115.
27. dos Reis M, Tamuri AU, Hay A, Goldstein RA (2010) Charting the host adaptation of influenza viruses. Mol Biol E 28:1755–1767.
28. Kimura M (1962) On the probability of fixation of mutant genes in a population. Genetics 47:713–719.
29. Felsenstein J (1981) Evolutionary trees from DNA sequences: a maximum likelihood approach. J Mol E 17:368–376.
30. Finn RD, Bateman A, Clements J, Coggill P, Eberhardt RY, Eddy SR, Heger A, Hetherington K, Holm L, Mistry J, Sonnhammer EL, Tate J, Punta M (2014) Pfam: the protein families database. Nucleic Acids Res 42:D222–D230.
31. Strait BJ, Dewey TG (1996) The Shannon information entropy of protein sequences. Biophys J 71:148–155.
32. Encode Project Consortium (2007) Identification and analysis of functional elements in 1% of the human genome by the ENCODE pilot project. Nature 447:799–816.
33. Goldman N, Yang Z (1994) A codon-based model of nucleotide substitution for protein-coding DNA sequences. Mol Biol E 11:725–736.
34. Koshi JM, Goldstein RA (1998) Models of natural mutations including site heterogeneity. Proteins 32:289–295.
35. Soyer OS, Dimmic MW, Neubig RR, Goldstein RA (2003) Dimerization in aminergic G-protein-coupled receptors: application of a hidden-site class model of evolution. Biochemistry 42:14522–14531.
36. Quang le S, Gascuel O, Lartillot N (2008) Empirical profile mixture models for phylogenetic reconstruction. Bioinformatics 24:2317–2323.
37. Breen MS, Kemena C, Vlasov PK, Notredame C, Kondrashov FA (2012) Epistasis as the primary factor in molecular evolution. Nature 490:535–538.
38. McCandlish DM, Rajon E, Shah P, Ding Y, Plotkin JB (2013) The role of epistasis in protein evolution. Nature 497:E1–E2 (discussion E2–E3).
39. Pollock DD, Taylor WR (1997) Effectiveness of correlation analysis in identifying protein residues undergoing correlated evolution. Protein Eng 10:647–657.
40. Pollock DD, Taylor WR, Goldman N (1999) Coevolving protein residues: maximum likelihood identification and relationship to structure. J Mol Biol 287:187–198.
41. Morcos F, Pagnani A, Lunt B, Bertolino A, Marks DS, Sander C, Zecchina R, Onuchic JN, Hwa T, Weigt M (2011) Direct-coupling analysis of residue coevolution captures native contacts across many protein families. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 108:E1293–E1301.
42. Williams PD, Pollock DD, Blackburne BP, Goldstein RA (2006) Assessing the accuracy of ancestral protein reconstruction methods. PLoS Comput Biol 2:e69.
43. Ashenberg O, Gong LI, Bloom JD (2013) Mutational effects on stability are largely conserved during protein evolution. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 110:21071–21076.
44. Bazykin GA (2015) Changing preferences: deformation of single position amino acid fitness landscapes and evolution of proteins. Biol Lett 11. DOI: 10.1098/rsbl.2015.0315.
45. Kondrashov DA, Kondrashov FA (2015) Topological features of rugged fitness landscapes in sequence space. Trends Genet 31:24–33.
46. Risso VA, Manssour-Triedo F, Delgado-Delgado A, Arco R, Barroso-delJesus A, Ingles-Prieto A, Godoy-Ruiz R, Gavira JA, Gaucher EA, Ibarra-Molero B, Sanchez-Ruiz JM (2015) Mutational studies on resurrected ancestral proteins reveal conservation of site-specific amino acid preferences throughout evolutionary history. Mol Biol E 32:440–455.
47. Shah P, McCandlish DM, Plotkin JB (2015) Contingency and entrenchment in protein evolution under purifying selection. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 112:E3226–E3235.
48. Huelsenbeck JP, Nielsen R, Bollback JP (2003) Stochastic mapping of morphological characters. Syst Biol 52:131–158.
49. Mateiu L, Rannala B (2006) Inferring complex DNA substitution processes on phylogenies using uniformization and data augmentation. Syst Biol 55:259–269.
50. de Koning AP, Gu W, Pollock DD (2010) Rapid likelihood analysis on large phylogenies using partial sampling of substitution histories. Mol Biol E 27:249–265.
51. de Koning AP, Gu W, Castoe TA, Pollock DD (2012) Phylogenetics, likelihood, evolution and complexity. Bioinformatics 28:2989–2990.
52. Tuffley C, Steel M (1998) Modeling the covarion hypothesis of nucleotide substitution. Math Biosci 147:63–91.
53. Whelan S (2008) Spatial and temporal heterogeneity in nucleotide sequence evolution. Mol Biol E 25:1683–1694.
54. Henikoff S, Henikoff JG (1994) Position-based sequence weights. J Mol Biol 243:574–578.
55. Kimura M (1980) A simple method for estimating evolutionary rates of base substitutions through comparative studies of nucleotide sequences. J Mol E 16:111–120.
56. Lindqvist Y, Johansson E, Kaija H, Vihko P, Schneider G (1999) Three-dimensional structure of a mammalian purple acid phosphatase at 2.2\AA resolution with a μ-(hydr) oxo bridged di-iron center. J Mol Biol 291:135–147.
57. Miyazawa S, Jernigan R (1985) Estimation of effective interresidue contact energies from protein crystal structures: quasi-chemical approximation. Macromolecules 18:534–552.