MOTIVATION: In genome-wide analyses, the relative age of gene duplications is often estimated by measuring the rate of synonymous substitutions (dS) between paralogous sequences. On the other hand, recent studies have shown the feasibility of inferring, at genomic scales, the relative age of duplication events from the topology of gene family trees. This represents a promising alternative for large surveys requiring an automatic methodology to establish a timeline of duplication events and that are usually limited to the use of dS, which presents known limitations such as a fast saturation of the signal. However, both measures have never been compared in a common framework. RESULTS: Topology-based placement of duplications on a relative time scale corresponding to periods between speciation events were found to be highly consistent, providing the same placement for 67-84% of a reliable set of gene pairs duplicated in a single event. For recent evolutionary periods, dS and topological measures showed a strong correlation. We conclude that the topology-based approach is more appropriate for assigning duplications to temporal scales when analyses need to include ancient events, and that the study of recent duplications may benefit from a combination of dS and topology information.
MOTIVATION: In genome-wide analyses, the relative age of gene duplications is often estimated by measuring the rate of synonymous substitutions (dS) between paralogous sequences. On the other hand, recent studies have shown the feasibility of inferring, at genomic scales, the relative age of duplication events from the topology of gene family trees. This represents a promising alternative for large surveys requiring an automatic methodology to establish a timeline of duplication events and that are usually limited to the use of dS, which presents known limitations such as a fast saturation of the signal. However, both measures have never been compared in a common framework. RESULTS: Topology-based placement of duplications on a relative time scale corresponding to periods between speciation events were found to be highly consistent, providing the same placement for 67-84% of a reliable set of gene pairs duplicated in a single event. For recent evolutionary periods, dS and topological measures showed a strong correlation. We conclude that the topology-based approach is more appropriate for assigning duplications to temporal scales when analyses need to include ancient events, and that the study of recent duplications may benefit from a combination of dS and topology information.
Authors: Jordi Garcia-Mas; Andrej Benjak; Walter Sanseverino; Michael Bourgeois; Gisela Mir; Víctor M González; Elizabeth Hénaff; Francisco Câmara; Luca Cozzuto; Ernesto Lowy; Tyler Alioto; Salvador Capella-Gutiérrez; Jose Blanca; Joaquín Cañizares; Pello Ziarsolo; Daniel Gonzalez-Ibeas; Luis Rodríguez-Moreno; Marcus Droege; Lei Du; Miguel Alvarez-Tejado; Belen Lorente-Galdos; Marta Melé; Luming Yang; Yiqun Weng; Arcadi Navarro; Tomas Marques-Bonet; Miguel A Aranda; Fernando Nuez; Belén Picó; Toni Gabaldón; Guglielmo Roma; Roderic Guigó; Josep M Casacuberta; Pere Arús; Pere Puigdomènech Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2012-07-02 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Luis M Corrochano; Alan Kuo; Marina Marcet-Houben; Silvia Polaino; Asaf Salamov; José M Villalobos-Escobedo; Jane Grimwood; M Isabel Álvarez; Javier Avalos; Diane Bauer; Ernesto P Benito; Isabelle Benoit; Gertraud Burger; Lola P Camino; David Cánovas; Enrique Cerdá-Olmedo; Jan-Fang Cheng; Angel Domínguez; Marek Eliáš; Arturo P Eslava; Fabian Glaser; Gabriel Gutiérrez; Joseph Heitman; Bernard Henrissat; Enrique A Iturriaga; B Franz Lang; José L Lavín; Soo Chan Lee; Wenjun Li; Erika Lindquist; Sergio López-García; Eva M Luque; Ana T Marcos; Joel Martin; Kevin McCluskey; Humberto R Medina; Alejandro Miralles-Durán; Atsushi Miyazaki; Elisa Muñoz-Torres; José A Oguiza; Robin A Ohm; María Olmedo; Margarita Orejas; Lucila Ortiz-Castellanos; Antonio G Pisabarro; Julio Rodríguez-Romero; José Ruiz-Herrera; Rosa Ruiz-Vázquez; Catalina Sanz; Wendy Schackwitz; Mahdi Shahriari; Ekaterina Shelest; Fátima Silva-Franco; Darren Soanes; Khajamohiddin Syed; Víctor G Tagua; Nicholas J Talbot; Michael R Thon; Hope Tice; Ronald P de Vries; Ad Wiebenga; Jagjit S Yadav; Edward L Braun; Scott E Baker; Victoriano Garre; Jeremy Schmutz; Benjamin A Horwitz; Santiago Torres-Martínez; Alexander Idnurm; Alfredo Herrera-Estrella; Toni Gabaldón; Igor V Grigoriev Journal: Curr Biol Date: 2016-05-26 Impact factor: 10.834
Authors: Richard E Green; Edward L Braun; Joel Armstrong; Dent Earl; Ngan Nguyen; Glenn Hickey; Michael W Vandewege; John A St John; Salvador Capella-Gutiérrez; Todd A Castoe; Colin Kern; Matthew K Fujita; Juan C Opazo; Jerzy Jurka; Kenji K Kojima; Juan Caballero; Robert M Hubley; Arian F Smit; Roy N Platt; Christine A Lavoie; Meganathan P Ramakodi; John W Finger; Alexander Suh; Sally R Isberg; Lee Miles; Amanda Y Chong; Weerachai Jaratlerdsiri; Jaime Gongora; Christopher Moran; Andrés Iriarte; John McCormack; Shane C Burgess; Scott V Edwards; Eric Lyons; Christina Williams; Matthew Breen; Jason T Howard; Cathy R Gresham; Daniel G Peterson; Jürgen Schmitz; David D Pollock; David Haussler; Eric W Triplett; Guojie Zhang; Naoki Irie; Erich D Jarvis; Christopher A Brochu; Carl J Schmidt; Fiona M McCarthy; Brant C Faircloth; Federico G Hoffmann; Travis C Glenn; Toni Gabaldón; Benedict Paten; David A Ray Journal: Science Date: 2014-12-11 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Michael H Perlin; Joelle Amselem; Eric Fontanillas; Su San Toh; Zehua Chen; Jonathan Goldberg; Sebastien Duplessis; Bernard Henrissat; Sarah Young; Qiandong Zeng; Gabriela Aguileta; Elsa Petit; Helene Badouin; Jared Andrews; Dominique Razeeq; Toni Gabaldón; Hadi Quesneville; Tatiana Giraud; Michael E Hood; David J Schultz; Christina A Cuomo Journal: BMC Genomics Date: 2015-06-16 Impact factor: 3.969