Literature DB >> 10742043

Early fixation of an optimal genetic code.

S J Freeland1, R D Knight, L F Landweber, L D Hurst.   

Abstract

The evolutionary forces that produced the canonical genetic code before the last universal ancestor remain obscure. One hypothesis is that the arrangement of amino acid/codon assignments results from selection to minimize the effects of errors (e.g., mistranslation and mutation) on resulting proteins. If amino acid similarity is measured as polarity, the canonical code does indeed outperform most theoretical alternatives. However, this finding does not hold for other amino acid properties, ignores plausible restrictions on possible code structure, and does not address the naturally occurring nonstandard genetic codes. Finally, other analyses have shown that significantly better code structures are possible. Here, we show that if theoretically possible code structures are limited to reflect plausible biological constraints, and amino acid similarity is quantified using empirical data of substitution frequencies, the canonical code is at or very close to a global optimum for error minimization across plausible parameter space. This result is robust to variation in the methods and assumptions of the analysis. Although significantly better codes do exist under some assumptions, they are extremely rare and thus consistent with reports of an adaptive code: previous analyses which suggest otherwise derive from a misleading metric. However, all extant, naturally occurring, secondarily derived, nonstandard genetic codes do appear less adaptive. The arrangement of amino acid assignments to the codons of the standard genetic code appears to be a direct product of natural selection for a system that minimizes the phenotypic impact of genetic error. Potential criticisms of previous analyses appear to be without substance. That known variants of the standard genetic code appear less adaptive suggests that different evolutionary factors predominated before and after fixation of the canonical code. While the evidence for an adaptive code is clear, the process by which the code achieved this optimization requires further attention.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10742043     DOI: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a026331

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mol Biol Evol        ISSN: 0737-4038            Impact factor:   16.240


  76 in total

1.  Testing a biosynthetic theory of the genetic code: fact or artifact?

Authors:  T A Ronneberg; L F Landweber; S J Freeland
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2000-12-05       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  On the evolution of primitive genetic codes.

Authors:  Günter Weberndorfer; Ivo L Hofacker; Peter F Stadler
Journal:  Orig Life Evol Biosph       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 1.950

Review 3.  The case for an error minimizing standard genetic code.

Authors:  Stephen J Freeland; Tao Wu; Nick Keulmann
Journal:  Orig Life Evol Biosph       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 1.950

4.  Codon usage decreases the error minimization within the genetic code.

Authors:  Chen-Tseh Zhu; Xiao-Bin Zeng; Wei-Da Huang
Journal:  J Mol Evol       Date:  2003-11       Impact factor: 2.395

5.  No accident: genetic codes freeze in error-correcting patterns of the standard genetic code.

Authors:  David H Ardell; Guy Sella
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2002-11-29       Impact factor: 6.237

6.  The rules of variation: amino acid exchange according to the rotating circular genetic code.

Authors:  Fernando Castro-Chavez
Journal:  J Theor Biol       Date:  2010-04-03       Impact factor: 2.691

7.  Does the Ribosome Challenge our Understanding of the RNA World?

Authors:  Anthony M Poole; Daniel C Jeffares; Marc P Hoeppner; David Penny
Journal:  J Mol Evol       Date:  2015-11-18       Impact factor: 2.395

8.  A unified model of codon reassignment in alternative genetic codes.

Authors:  Supratim Sengupta; Paul G Higgs
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2005-03-21       Impact factor: 4.562

9.  Error minimization and coding triplet/binding site associations are independent features of the canonical genetic code.

Authors:  J Gregory Caporaso; Michael Yarus; Rob Knight
Journal:  J Mol Evol       Date:  2005-10-06       Impact factor: 2.395

10.  A new classification scheme of the genetic code.

Authors:  Thomas Wilhelm; Svetlana Nikolajewa
Journal:  J Mol Evol       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 2.395

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.