Literature DB >> 17194784

Background selection in single genes may explain patterns of codon bias.

Laurence Loewe1, Brian Charlesworth.   

Abstract

Background selection involves the reduction in effective population size caused by the removal of recurrent deleterious mutations from a population. Previous work has examined this process for large genomic regions. Here we focus on the level of a single gene or small group of genes and investigate how the effects of background selection caused by nonsynonymous mutations are influenced by the lengths of coding sequences, the number and length of introns, intergenic distances, neighboring genes, mutation rate, and recombination rate. We generate our predictions from estimates of the distribution of the fitness effects of nonsynonymous mutations, obtained from DNA sequence diversity data in Drosophila. Results for genes in regions with typical frequencies of crossing over in Drosophila melanogaster suggest that background selection may influence the effective population sizes of different regions of the same gene, consistent with observed differences in codon usage bias along genes. It may also help to cause the observed effects of gene length and introns on codon usage. Gene conversion plays a crucial role in determining the sizes of these effects. The model overpredicts the effects of background selection with large groups of nonrecombining genes, because it ignores Hill-Robertson interference among the mutations involved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17194784      PMCID: PMC1840058          DOI: 10.1534/genetics.106.065557

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Genetics        ISSN: 0016-6731            Impact factor:   4.562


  54 in total

1.  The effects of Hill-Robertson interference between weakly selected mutations on patterns of molecular evolution and variation.

Authors:  G A McVean; B Charlesworth
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 4.562

Review 2.  Genetic linkage and molecular evolution.

Authors:  I Gordo; B Charlesworth
Journal:  Curr Biol       Date:  2001-09-04       Impact factor: 10.834

3.  Gene conversion and different population histories may explain the contrast between polymorphism and linkage disequilibrium levels.

Authors:  L Frisse; R R Hudson; A Bartoszewicz; J D Wall; J Donfack; A Di Rienzo
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2001-08-29       Impact factor: 11.025

4.  DNA evolution under weak selection.

Authors:  H Tachida
Journal:  Gene       Date:  2000-12-30       Impact factor: 3.688

5.  Intragenic spatial patterns of codon usage bias in prokaryotic and eukaryotic genomes.

Authors:  Hong Qin; Wei Biao Wu; Josep M Comeron; Martin Kreitman; Wen-Hsiung Li
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 4.562

6.  Linkage disequilibria and the site frequency spectra in the su(s) and su(w(a)) regions of the Drosophila melanogaster X chromosome.

Authors:  C H Langley; B P Lazzaro; W Phillips; E Heikkinen; J M Braverman
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2000-12       Impact factor: 4.562

7.  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

8.  Patterns of genetic variation at a chromosome 4 locus of Drosophila melanogaster and D. simulans.

Authors:  Mark A Jensen; Brian Charlesworth; Martin Kreitman
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 4.562

9.  The correlation between intron length and recombination in drosophila. Dynamic equilibrium between mutational and selective forces.

Authors:  J M Comeron; M Kreitman
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 4.562

10.  The genome sequence of Drosophila melanogaster.

Authors:  M D Adams; S E Celniker; R A Holt; C A Evans; J D Gocayne; P G Amanatides; S E Scherer; P W Li; R A Hoskins; R F Galle; R A George; S E Lewis; S Richards; M Ashburner; S N Henderson; G G Sutton; J R Wortman; M D Yandell; Q Zhang; L X Chen; R C Brandon; Y H Rogers; R G Blazej; M Champe; B D Pfeiffer; K H Wan; C Doyle; E G Baxter; G Helt; C R Nelson; G L Gabor; J F Abril; A Agbayani; H J An; C Andrews-Pfannkoch; D Baldwin; R M Ballew; A Basu; J Baxendale; L Bayraktaroglu; E M Beasley; K Y Beeson; P V Benos; B P Berman; D Bhandari; S Bolshakov; D Borkova; M R Botchan; J Bouck; P Brokstein; P Brottier; K C Burtis; D A Busam; H Butler; E Cadieu; A Center; I Chandra; J M Cherry; S Cawley; C Dahlke; L B Davenport; P Davies; B de Pablos; A Delcher; Z Deng; A D Mays; I Dew; S M Dietz; K Dodson; L E Doup; M Downes; S Dugan-Rocha; B C Dunkov; P Dunn; K J Durbin; C C Evangelista; C Ferraz; S Ferriera; W Fleischmann; C Fosler; A E Gabrielian; N S Garg; W M Gelbart; K Glasser; A Glodek; F Gong; J H Gorrell; Z Gu; P Guan; M Harris; N L Harris; D Harvey; T J Heiman; J R Hernandez; J Houck; D Hostin; K A Houston; T J Howland; M H Wei; C Ibegwam; M Jalali; F Kalush; G H Karpen; Z Ke; J A Kennison; K A Ketchum; B E Kimmel; C D Kodira; C Kraft; S Kravitz; D Kulp; Z Lai; P Lasko; Y Lei; A A Levitsky; J Li; Z Li; Y Liang; X Lin; X Liu; B Mattei; T C McIntosh; M P McLeod; D McPherson; G Merkulov; N V Milshina; C Mobarry; J Morris; A Moshrefi; S M Mount; M Moy; B Murphy; L Murphy; D M Muzny; D L Nelson; D R Nelson; K A Nelson; K Nixon; D R Nusskern; J M Pacleb; M Palazzolo; G S Pittman; S Pan; J Pollard; V Puri; M G Reese; K Reinert; K Remington; R D Saunders; F Scheeler; H Shen; B C Shue; I Sidén-Kiamos; M Simpson; M P Skupski; T Smith; E Spier; A C Spradling; M Stapleton; R Strong; E Sun; R Svirskas; C Tector; R Turner; E Venter; A H Wang; X Wang; Z Y Wang; D A Wassarman; G M Weinstock; J Weissenbach; S M Williams; K C Worley; D Wu; S Yang; Q A Yao; J Ye; R F Yeh; J S Zaveri; M Zhan; G Zhang; Q Zhao; L Zheng; X H Zheng; F N Zhong; W Zhong; X Zhou; S Zhu; X Zhu; H O Smith; R A Gibbs; E W Myers; G M Rubin; J C Venter
Journal:  Science       Date:  2000-03-24       Impact factor: 47.728

View more
  41 in total

Review 1.  Genetic hitchhiking versus background selection: the controversy and its implications.

Authors:  Wolfgang Stephan
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2010-04-27       Impact factor: 6.237

Review 2.  Mutation and the evolution of recombination.

Authors:  N H Barton
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2010-04-27       Impact factor: 6.237

3.  The effects of demography and linkage on the estimation of selection and mutation parameters.

Authors:  Kai Zeng; Brian Charlesworth
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2010-10-05       Impact factor: 4.562

4.  Natural selection shapes nucleotide polymorphism across the genome of the nematode Caenorhabditis briggsae.

Authors:  Asher D Cutter; Jae Young Choi
Journal:  Genome Res       Date:  2010-05-27       Impact factor: 9.043

5.  Coalescence with Background and Balancing Selection in Systems with Bi- and Uniparental Reproduction: Contrasting Partial Asexuality and Selfing.

Authors:  Aneil F Agrawal; Matthew Hartfield
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2015-11-19       Impact factor: 4.562

6.  Evolution of exceptionally large genes in prokaryotes.

Authors:  Min-Chieh Kuo; Li-Fang Chou; Hwan-You Chang
Journal:  J Mol Evol       Date:  2008-03-06       Impact factor: 2.395

7.  No effect of recombination on the efficacy of natural selection in primates.

Authors:  Kevin Bullaughey; Molly Przeworski; Graham Coop
Journal:  Genome Res       Date:  2008-01-16       Impact factor: 9.043

Review 8.  Fundamental concepts in genetics: effective population size and patterns of molecular evolution and variation.

Authors:  Brian Charlesworth
Journal:  Nat Rev Genet       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 53.242

9.  Lineage-specific differences in the amino acid substitution process.

Authors:  Snehalata Huzurbazar; Grigory Kolesov; Steven E Massey; Katherine C Harris; Alexander Churbanov; David A Liberles
Journal:  J Mol Biol       Date:  2010-01-15       Impact factor: 5.469

10.  Gene genealogies strongly distorted by weakly interfering mutations in constant environments.

Authors:  Jon Seger; Wendy A Smith; Jarom J Perry; Jessalynn Hunn; Zofia A Kaliszewska; Luciano La Sala; Luciana Pozzi; Victoria J Rowntree; Frederick R Adler
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2009-12-04       Impact factor: 4.562

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.