Literature DB >> 25312911

Phylostratigraphic bias creates spurious patterns of genome evolution.

Bryan A Moyers1, Jianzhi Zhang2.   

Abstract

Phylostratigraphy is a method for dating the evolutionary emergence of a gene or gene family by identifying its homologs across the tree of life, typically by using BLAST searches. Applying this method to all genes in a species, or genomic phylostratigraphy, allows investigation of genome-wide patterns in new gene origination at different evolutionary times and thus has been extensively used. However, gene age estimation depends on the challenging task of detecting distant homologs via sequence similarity, which is expected to have differential accuracies for different genes. Here, we evaluate the accuracy of phylostratigraphy by realistic computer simulation with parameters estimated from genomic data, and investigate the impact of its error on findings of genome evolution. We show that 1) phylostratigraphy substantially underestimates gene age for a considerable fraction of genes, 2) the error is especially serious when the protein evolves rapidly, is short, and/or its most conserved block of sites is small, and 3) these errors create spurious nonuniform distributions of various gene properties among age groups, many of which cannot be predicted a priori. Given the high likelihood that conclusions about gene age are faulty, we advocate the use of realistic simulation to determine if observations from phylostratigraphy are explainable, at least qualitatively, by a null model of biased measurement, and in all cases, critical evaluation of results.
© The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Molecular Biology and Evolution. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Keywords:  BLAST; gene age; phylogenetic dating

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25312911      PMCID: PMC4271527          DOI: 10.1093/molbev/msu286

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


  40 in total

1.  TimeTree: a public knowledge-base of divergence times among organisms.

Authors:  S Blair Hedges; Joel Dudley; Sudhir Kumar
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2006-10-04       Impact factor: 6.937

2.  A phylostratigraphy approach to uncover the genomic history of major adaptations in metazoan lineages.

Authors:  Tomislav Domazet-Loso; Josip Brajković; Diethard Tautz
Journal:  Trends Genet       Date:  2007-11       Impact factor: 11.639

3.  A critical assessment of storytelling: gene ontology categories and the importance of validating genomic scans.

Authors:  Pavlos Pavlidis; Jeffrey D Jensen; Wolfgang Stephan; Alexandros Stamatakis
Journal:  Mol Biol Evol       Date:  2012-05-21       Impact factor: 16.240

4.  Rose: generating sequence families.

Authors:  J Stoye; D Evers; F Meyer
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  1998       Impact factor: 6.937

5.  Evolution of the mutation rate.

Authors:  Michael Lynch
Journal:  Trends Genet       Date:  2010-06-30       Impact factor: 11.639

6.  Positive Darwinian selection after gene duplication in primate ribonuclease genes.

Authors:  J Zhang; H F Rosenberg; M Nei
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  1998-03-31       Impact factor: 11.205

7.  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

8.  Temporal patterns of fruit fly (Drosophila) evolution revealed by mutation clocks.

Authors:  Koichiro Tamura; Sankar Subramanian; Sudhir Kumar
Journal:  Mol Biol Evol       Date:  2003-08-29       Impact factor: 16.240

9.  An evolutionary analysis of orphan genes in Drosophila.

Authors:  Tomislav Domazet-Loso; Diethard Tautz
Journal:  Genome Res       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 9.043

10.  FlyBase 102--advanced approaches to interrogating FlyBase.

Authors:  Susan E St Pierre; Laura Ponting; Raymund Stefancsik; Peter McQuilton
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2013-11-13       Impact factor: 16.971

View more
  49 in total

1.  Evaluating Phylostratigraphic Evidence for Widespread De Novo Gene Birth in Genome Evolution.

Authors:  Bryan A Moyers; Jianzhi Zhang
Journal:  Mol Biol Evol       Date:  2016-01-11       Impact factor: 16.240

2.  A Shift in Aggregation Avoidance Strategy Marks a Long-Term Direction to Protein Evolution.

Authors:  Scott G Foy; Benjamin A Wilson; Jason Bertram; Matthew H J Cordes; Joanna Masel
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2019-01-28       Impact factor: 4.562

3.  ORFanFinder: automated identification of taxonomically restricted orphan genes.

Authors:  Alex Ekstrom; Yanbin Yin
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2016-03-07       Impact factor: 6.937

Review 4.  Open questions in the study of de novo genes: what, how and why.

Authors:  Aoife McLysaght; Laurence D Hurst
Journal:  Nat Rev Genet       Date:  2016-07-25       Impact factor: 53.242

5.  Altered interactions between unicellular and multicellular genes drive hallmarks of transformation in a diverse range of solid tumors.

Authors:  Anna S Trigos; Richard B Pearson; Anthony T Papenfuss; David L Goode
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2017-05-08       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  A Molecular Portrait of De Novo Genes in Yeasts.

Authors:  Nikolaos Vakirlis; Alex S Hebert; Dana A Opulente; Guillaume Achaz; Chris Todd Hittinger; Gilles Fischer; Joshua J Coon; Ingrid Lafontaine
Journal:  Mol Biol Evol       Date:  2018-03-01       Impact factor: 16.240

7.  The Goddard and Saturn Genes Are Essential for Drosophila Male Fertility and May Have Arisen De Novo.

Authors:  Anna M Gubala; Jonathan F Schmitz; Michael J Kearns; Tery T Vinh; Erich Bornberg-Bauer; Mariana F Wolfner; Geoffrey D Findlay
Journal:  Mol Biol Evol       Date:  2017-05-01       Impact factor: 16.240

8.  The gene regulatory program of Acrobeloides nanus reveals conservation of phylum-specific expression.

Authors:  Philipp H Schiffer; Avital L Polsky; Alison G Cole; Julia I R Camps; Michael Kroiher; David H Silver; Vladislav Grishkevich; Leon Anavy; Georgios Koutsovoulos; Tamar Hashimshony; Itai Yanai
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2018-04-06       Impact factor: 11.205

9.  Universal and taxon-specific trends in protein sequences as a function of age.

Authors:  Jennifer E James; Sara M Willis; Paul G Nelson; Catherine Weibel; Luke J Kosinski; Joanna Masel
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2021-01-08       Impact factor: 8.140

10.  A putative de novo evolved gene required for spermatid chromatin condensation in Drosophila melanogaster.

Authors:  Emily L Rivard; Andrew G Ludwig; Prajal H Patel; Anna Grandchamp; Sarah E Arnold; Alina Berger; Emilie M Scott; Brendan J Kelly; Grace C Mascha; Erich Bornberg-Bauer; Geoffrey D Findlay
Journal:  PLoS Genet       Date:  2021-09-03       Impact factor: 5.917

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.