Literature DB >> 15553093

Selection on codon usage for error minimization at the protein level.

Marco Archetti1.   

Abstract

Given the structure of the genetic code, synonymous codons differ in their capacity to minimize the effects of errors due to mutation or mistranslation. I suggest that this may lead, in protein-coding genes, to a preference for codons that minimize the impact of errors at the protein level. I develop a theoretical measure of error minimization for each codon, based on amino acid similarity. This measure is used to calculate the degree of error minimization for 82 genes of Drosophila melanogaster and 432 rodent genes and to study its relationship with CG content, the degree of codon usage bias, and the rate of nucleotide substitution. I show that (i) Drosophila and rodent genes tend to prefer codons that minimize errors; (ii) this cannot be merely the effect of mutation bias; (iii) the degree of error minimization is correlated with the degree of codon usage bias; (iv) the amino acids that contribute more to codon usage bias are the ones for which synonymous codons differ more in the capacity to minimize errors; and (v) the degree of error minimization is correlated with the rate of nonsynonymous substitution. These results suggest that natural selection for error minimization at the protein level plays a role in the evolution of coding sequences in Drosophila and rodents.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15553093     DOI: 10.1007/s00239-004-2634-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Mol Evol        ISSN: 0022-2844            Impact factor:   2.395


  40 in total

1.  Codon usage tabulated from international DNA sequence databases: status for the year 2000.

Authors:  Y Nakamura; T Gojobori; T Ikemura
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2000-01-01       Impact factor: 16.971

Review 2.  Evolution of synonymous codon usage in metazoans.

Authors:  Laurent Duret
Journal:  Curr Opin Genet Dev       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 5.578

3.  Does recombination improve selection on codon usage? Lessons from nematode and fly complete genomes.

Authors:  G Marais; D Mouchiroud; L Duret
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2001-04-24       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  Environment-specific amino acid substitution tables: tertiary templates and prediction of protein folds.

Authors:  J Overington; D Donnelly; M S Johnson; A Sali; T L Blundell
Journal:  Protein Sci       Date:  1992-02       Impact factor: 6.725

5.  Complementary base pairing and the origin of substitution mutations.

Authors:  M D Topal; J R Fresco
Journal:  Nature       Date:  1976-09-23       Impact factor: 49.962

6.  Correlation between the abundance of yeast transfer RNAs and the occurrence of the respective codons in protein genes. Differences in synonymous codon choice patterns of yeast and Escherichia coli with reference to the abundance of isoaccepting transfer RNAs.

Authors:  T Ikemura
Journal:  J Mol Biol       Date:  1982-07-15       Impact factor: 5.469

7.  Nonrandom patterns of codon usage and of nucleotide substitutions in human alpha- and beta-globin genes: an evolutionary strategy reducing the rate of mutations with drastic effects?

Authors:  G Modiano; G Battistuzzi; A G Motulsky
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  1981-02       Impact factor: 11.205

8.  Role of the amino-acid "code" and of selection for conformation in the evolution of proteins.

Authors:  C J Epstein
Journal:  Nature       Date:  1966-04-02       Impact factor: 49.962

9.  Inferring parameters of mutation, selection and demography from patterns of synonymous site evolution in Drosophila.

Authors:  G A McVean; J Vieira
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2001-01       Impact factor: 4.562

10.  Synonymous codon usage in Drosophila melanogaster: natural selection and translational accuracy.

Authors:  H Akashi
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  1994-03       Impact factor: 4.562

View more
  21 in total

1.  The tri-frame model.

Authors:  Elsje Pienaar; Hendrik J Viljoen
Journal:  J Theor Biol       Date:  2007-12-14       Impact factor: 2.691

Review 2.  Experimental solutions to problems defining the origin of codon-directed protein synthesis.

Authors:  Charles W Carter; Peter R Wills
Journal:  Biosystems       Date:  2019-06-06       Impact factor: 1.973

Review 3.  Decoding mechanisms by which silent codon changes influence protein biogenesis and function.

Authors:  Vedrana Bali; Zsuzsanna Bebok
Journal:  Int J Biochem Cell Biol       Date:  2015-03-26       Impact factor: 5.085

4.  Selection shapes the robustness of ligand-binding amino acids.

Authors:  Tugce Bilgin; Isil Aksan Kurnaz; Andreas Wagner
Journal:  J Mol Evol       Date:  2013-05-21       Impact factor: 2.395

5.  Specialization versus adaptation: two strategies employed by cyanophages to enhance their translation efficiencies.

Authors:  Keren Limor-Waisberg; Asaf Carmi; Avigdor Scherz; Yitzhak Pilpel; Itay Furman
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2011-04-05       Impact factor: 16.971

6.  Codon usage is associated with the evolutionary age of genes in metazoan genomes.

Authors:  Yosef Prat; Menachem Fromer; Nathan Linial; Michal Linial
Journal:  BMC Evol Biol       Date:  2009-12-08       Impact factor: 3.260

7.  Modeling compositional dynamics based on GC and purine contents of protein-coding sequences.

Authors:  Zhang Zhang; Jun Yu
Journal:  Biol Direct       Date:  2010-11-08       Impact factor: 4.540

Review 8.  The evolutionary consequences of erroneous protein synthesis.

Authors:  D Allan Drummond; Claus O Wilke
Journal:  Nat Rev Genet       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 53.242

9.  Selection for minimization of translational frameshifting errors as a factor in the evolution of codon usage.

Authors:  Yang Huang; Eugene V Koonin; David J Lipman; Teresa M Przytycka
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2009-09-10       Impact factor: 16.971

10.  Differential selective constraints shaping codon usage pattern of housekeeping and tissue-specific homologous genes of rice and arabidopsis.

Authors:  Pamela Mukhopadhyay; Surajit Basak; Tapash Chandra Ghosh
Journal:  DNA Res       Date:  2008-09-30       Impact factor: 4.458

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.