| Literature DB >> 25505518 |
Michael D Kessler1, Matthew D Dean1.
Abstract
Synonymous codons are not used at equal frequency throughout the genome, a phenomenon termed codon usage bias (CUB). It is often assumed that interspecific variation in the intensity of CUB is related to species differences in effective population sizes (N e), with selection on CUB operating less efficiently in species with small N e. Here, we specifically ask whether variation in N e predicts differences in CUB in mammals and report two main findings. First, across 41 mammalian genomes, CUB was not correlated with two indirect proxies of N e (body mass and generation time), even though there was statistically significant evidence of selection shaping CUB across all species. Interestingly, autosomal genes showed higher codon usage bias compared to X-linked genes, and high-recombination genes showed higher codon usage bias compared to low recombination genes, suggesting intraspecific variation in N e predicts variation in CUB. Second, across six mammalian species with genetic estimates of N e (human, chimpanzee, rabbit, and three mouse species: Mus musculus, M. domesticus, and M. castaneus), N e and CUB were weakly and inconsistently correlated. At least in mammals, interspecific divergence in N e does not strongly predict variation in CUB. One hypothesis is that each species responds to a unique distribution of selection coefficients, confounding any straightforward link between N e and CUB.Entities:
Keywords: Codon usage bias; effective population size; selection
Year: 2014 PMID: 25505518 PMCID: PMC4242573 DOI: 10.1002/ece3.1249
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ecol Evol ISSN: 2045-7758 Impact factor: 2.912
Evidence that selection affects codon usage bias in humans. Before (After) controlling for potential CpG mis-polarization.
| Polymorphic | Fixed | Chisq | Chisq/ | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Exons | ||||||
| Preferred→unpreferred | 10,249 (10,249) | 7729 (7729) | 0.43 (0.43) | |||
| Unpreferred→preferred | 3957 (2859) | 3731 (2487) | 0.49 (0.47) | 66.62 (20.71) | 10−15 (10−5) | 2.60 (0.89) |
| Intron | ||||||
| Preferred→unpreferred | 690,248 (690,248) | 366,993 (366,993) | 0.35 (0.35) | |||
| Unpreferred→preferred | 609,530 (521,822) | 345,218 (285,076) | 0.36 (0.35) | 458.46 (76.7) | 10−15 (10−15) | 0.23 (0.04) |
Polarized by comparison of human segregating sites to chimpanzee + gorilla genomes.
Figure 1Median genome-wide effective ENCp estimated across 41 mammalian species. Values of ENCp were estimated on internal branches using the maximum-likelihood ace function in the ape package of R (Paradis et al. 2004).
Figure 2Between species, log effective number of codons Prime (ENCp) did not correlate with two different proxies of species’ effective population sizes: (A) log10 generation time or (B) log10 body mass. Taxa numbered alphabetically: 1-Alpaca, 2-Armadillo, 3-Bush baby, 4-Cat, 5-Chimp, 6-Cow, 7-(Tasmanian) Devil, 8-Dog, 9-Dolphin, 10-Elephant, 11-Ferret, 12-Gibbon, 13-Gorilla, 14-Guinea Pig, 15-Hedgehog, 16-Horse, 17-Human, 18-Hyrax, 19-Kangaroo Rat, 20-Macaque, 21-Marmoset, 22-Megabat, 23-Microbat, 24-Mouse, 25-Mouse Lemur, 26-Opossum, 27-Orangutan, 28-Panda, 29-Pig, 30-Pika, 31-Platypus, 32-Rabbit, 33-Rat, 34-Sheep, 35-Shrew, 36-Sloth, 37-Squirrel, 38-Tarsier, 39-Tenrec, 40-Treeshrew, 41-Wallaby.
Figure 3Within species, ENCp differed across genomic compartments predicted to have different effective population sizes: X versus autosomes (A and B) or centromeric versus telomeric regions (C and D). Species numbered as in Figure2. Bars represent 95% confidence intervals of medians estimated by bootstrapping the dataset 10,000 times.