| Literature DB >> 27165029 |
Akhtar Rasool Asif1,2,3, Sumayyah Qadri3, Nabeel Ijaz1, Ruheena Javed1,2, Abdur Rahman Ansari3,4, Muhammd Awais1, Muhammad Younus3, Hasan Riaz5, Xiaoyong Du1,2,6.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Identification of the candidate genes that play key roles in phenotypic variations can provide new information about evolution and positive selection. Interleukin (IL)-32 is involved in many biological processes, however, its role for the immune response against various diseases in mammals is poorly understood. Therefore, the current investigation was performed for the better understanding of the molecular evolution and the positive selection of single nucleotide polymorphisms in IL-32 gene.Entities:
Keywords: Evolution; Goat; Interleukin-32; Positive Selection
Year: 2016 PMID: 27165029 PMCID: PMC5495668 DOI: 10.5713/ajas.15.0941
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Asian-Australas J Anim Sci ISSN: 1011-2367 Impact factor: 2.509
Figure 1Candidate gene interleukin-32 under positive selection keeping the 95% confidence interval. FST, fixation index; He, heterozygosity.
Locus, heterozygosity (He) and fixation index (FST) for each of 17 genotyped SNPs
| Locus | Het | p value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| IL-3 | 0.292 | 0.0087 | 0.526 |
| IL1-α | 0.487 | −0.005 | 0.251 |
| IL1-α | 0.362 | −0.001 | 0.354 |
| IL1-β | 0.479 | −0.006 | 0.236 |
| IL1-β | 0.481 | −0.006 | 0.244 |
| IL1-β | 0.412 | −0.001 | 0.334 |
| IL-4 | 0.429 | 0.04 | 0.884 |
| IL-8 | 0.517 | 0.057 | 0.92 |
| IL-8 | 0.534 | 0.013 | 0.589 |
| IL-31 | 0.497 | −0.005 | 0.251 |
| IL-33 | 0.492 | −0.009 | 0.168 |
| IL-33 | 0.201 | 0.06 | 0.951 |
| IL-33 | 0.408 | 0.013 | 0.606 |
| IL-32(1158) | 0.438 | 0.043 | 0.893 |
| IL-32(2017) | 0.465 | −0.008 | 0.154 |
| IL-32(7638) | 0.485 | 0.022 | 0.735 |
| IL-32(9375) | 0.487 | 0.0861 | 0.985* |
SNP, single nucleotide polymorphisms; IL32, interleukin. p*, simulated FST
Results of positive selection tests for interleukin-32 gene
| Model | Parameter estimates | lnL | LRTs | Positive selection sites |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model 1 | p0 = 0.638, p1 = 0.361 | −2,445.220 | 0.791 | NEB: Not allowed |
| Model 2 | p1 = 0.649, p2 = 0.287, p3 = 0.062 | −2,444.825 | BEB: | |
| Model 7 | p = 1.257, q = 1.077 | −2,443.730 | 4.318 | NEB: Not allowed |
| Model 8 | p0 = 0.875, p = 1.797, q = 2.009 (p1 = 0.124) ω = 1.628 | −2,441.571 | BEB: 2C, 6A, 10L, 11K, 23Q, 30S, 49S, 55D 75E, 89S |
LnL, log likelihood; LRT, likelihood ratio; NEB, naive empirical bayes; BEB, bayes empirical bayes.
ω, the ratio of nonsynonymous-to-synonymous substitutions; p0, purifying selection; p2, neutral selection, p3, positive selection substitution ratio for all sites; p and q, the β distribution parameters.
p>95%;
p>99%.
Figure 2Phylogenetic relationship of IL-32 gene in different species.
Coding sequences similarity analysis and values of pair wise comparison of interleukin-32 gene among different species
| Goat | Sheep | Bison | Camel | Buffalo | Human | Cat | Cow | Rabbit | Dog | Horse | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Goat | - | 96.54 | 91.97 | 58.39 | 56.50 | 56.13 | 56.59 | 55.95 | 53.41 | 50.97 | 54.04 |
| Sheep | 96.54 | - | 91.97 | 50.87 | 52.81 | 43.94 | 55.41 | 51.43 | 49.35 | 49.13 | 55.19 |
| Bison | 91.97 | 91.97 | - | 48.91 | 52.55 | 45.99 | 54.50 | 50.12 | 50.36 | 49.88 | 54.99 |
| Camel | 58.39 | 50.87 | 48.91 | - | 60.87 | 53.76 | 57.56 | 56.90 | 51.14 | 52.38 | 53.62 |
| Buffalo | 56.50 | 52.81 | 52.55 | 60.87 | 55.91 | 60.98 | 81.43 | 53.66 | 55.49 | 54.27 | |
| Human | 56.13 | 43.94 | 45.99 | 53.76 | 55.91 | - | 58.28 | 54.29 | 52.47 | 53.76 | 57.42 |
| Cat | 56.59 | 55.41 | 54.50 | 57.56 | 60.98 | 58.28 | - | 59.29 | 55.43 | 63.18 | 57.79 |
| Cow | 55.95 | 51.43 | 50.12 | 56.90 | 81.43 | 54.29 | 59.29 | - | 48.81 | 56.90 | 55.00 |
| Rabbit | 53.41 | 49.35 | 50.36 | 51.14 | 53.66 | 52.47 | 55.43 | 48.81 | - | 52.71 | 49.90 |
| Dog | 50.97 | 49.13 | 49.88 | 52.38 | 55.49 | 53.76 | 63.18 | 56.90 | 52.71 | - | 55.42 |
| Horse | 54.04 | 55.19 | 54.99 | 53.62 | 54.27 | 57.42 | 57.79 | 55.00 | 49.90 | 55.42 | - |
Similar values in the under triangle (%).
Maximum likelihood analysis of natural selection codon-by-codon
| Codon# | Codon Start | Triplet | Syn (s) | Nonsyn (n) | Syn sites (S) | Nonsyn sites (N) | dS | dN | dN-dS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18 | 871 | ACA | 1 | 6 | 0.851 | 2.128 | 1.174 | 2.818 | 1.643 |
| 20 | 892 | CGC | 1 | 6 | 0.715 | 2.176 | 1.397 | 2.756 | 1.358 |
| 22 | 898 | GTC | 1 | 5 | 0.953 | 2.046 | 1.048 | 2.443 | 1.395 |
| 33 | 967 | GAC | 1 | 5 | 0.914 | 2.085 | 1.093 | 2.397 | 1.304 |
| 35 | 973 | TCC | 0.5 | 7.5 | 0.386 | 2.362 | 1.292 | 3.174 | 1.882 |
| 41 | 994 | GAC | 0 | 4 | 0.418 | 2.553 | 0 | 1.566 | 1.566 |
| 46 | 1021 | TTC | 0 | 6 | 0.227 | 2.766 | 0 | 2.169 | 2.169 |
| 51 | 1036 | CAG | 0 | 5 | 0.325 | 2.394 | 0 | 2.088 | 2.087 |
| 67 | 1102 | CGC | 0 | 4 | 0.538 | 2.280 | 0 | 1.754 | 1.754 |
| 71 | 1114 | GAG | 0 | 3 | 0.298 | 2.354 | 0 | 1.273 | 1.273 |
| 85 | 1171 | CAG | 0 | 4 | 0.335 | 2.363 | 0 | 1.692 | 1.692 |
| 88 | 1183 | AGC | 0.7 | 7.3 | 0.468 | 2.473 | 1.423 | 2.964 | 1.540 |
| 89 | 1186 | CTC | 2 | 9 | 0.873 | 2.115 | 2.289 | 4.254 | 1.965 |
| 91 | 1192 | CAG | 0.7 | 7.3 | 0.422 | 2.338 | 1.579 | 3.135 | 1.556 |
dN, nonsynonymous; dS, synonymous. dN-dS values >1 indicating significance.
Codon-based test of neutrality for analysis among species
| Goat | Sheep | Bison | Camel | Buffalo | Human | Cat | Cow | Rabbit | Dog | Horse | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Goat | - | −0.125 | −0.466 | 0.371 | −0.347 | −0.363 | 0.137 | 0.114 | −1.688 | −0.365 | 0.144 |
| Sheep | 0.901 | - | −0.428 | −0.042 | −0.039 | −0.967 | −0.76 | −0.35 | −2.249 | −1.218 | −0.583 |
| Bison | 0.642 | 0.669 | - | −0.124 | −1.355 | −0.039 | −1.008 | −0.669 | −3.076 | −1.22 | −0.459 |
| Camel | 0.711 | 0.967 | 0.901 | - | −3.17 | −2.028 | −2.918 | −3.214 | −3.32 | 0.291 | −3.089 |
| Bifflao | 0.73 | 0.969 | 0.178 | 0.002 | - | −2.114 | −2.555 | −0.668 | −2.19 | −0.728 | −4.236 |
| Human | 0.717 | 0.335 | 0.969 | 0.045 | 0.037 | - | −2.143 | −1.681 | −2.834 | −0.939 | −3.076 |
| Cat | 0.892 | 0.449 | 0.316 | 0.004 | 0.012 | 0.034 | - | −1.127 | −1.855 | −2.257 | −3.016 |
| Cow | 0.909 | 0.727 | 0.505 | 0.002 | 0.505 | 0.095 | 0.262 | - | −2.094 | −0.996 | −2.642 |
| Rabbit | 0.094 | 0.026 | 0.003 | 0.001 | 0.03 | 0.005 | 0.066 | 0.038 | - | −0.947 | −3.419 |
| Dog | 0.716 | 0.226 | 0.225 | 0.772 | 0.468 | 0.350 | 0.026 | 0.321 | 0.345 | - | −0.594 |
| Horse | 0.886 | 0.561 | 0.647 | 0.002 | 0.00 | 0.003 | 0.003 | 0.009 | 0.001 | 0.553 | - |
Represent significance respectively.