| Literature DB >> 27521813 |
Wen Wei1, Yan-Ting Jin2, Meng-Ze Du2, Ju Wang3, Nini Rao2, Feng-Biao Guo4.
Abstract
The differences in evolutionary patterns of young protein-protein interactions (PPIs) among distinct species have long been a puzzle. However, based on our genome-wide analysis of available integrated experimental data, we confirm that young genes preferentially integrate into ancestral PPI networks, and that this manner is consistent in all of six model organisms with widely different levels of phenotypic complexity. We demonstrate that the level of restrictions placed on the evolution of biological networks declines with a decrease of phenotypic complexity. Compared with young PPI networks, new co-expression links have less evolutionary restrictions, so a young gene with a high possibility to be coexpressed other young genes relatively frequently emerges in the four simpler genomes among the six studied. However, it is not favorable for such young-young coexpression in terms of a young gene evolving into a coexpression hub, so the coexpression pattern could gradually decline. To explain this apparent contradiction, we suggest that young genes that are initially peripheral to networks are temporarily coexpressed with other young genes, driving functional evolution because of low selective pressure. However, as the expression levels of genes increase and they gradually develop a greater effect on fitness, young genes start to be coexpressed more with members of ancestral networks and less with other young genes. Our findings provide new insights into the evolution of biological networks.Entities:
Keywords: biological network; phenotypic complexity; young gene
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27521813 PMCID: PMC5010916 DOI: 10.1093/gbe/evw198
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Genome Biol Evol ISSN: 1759-6653 Impact factor: 3.416
. 1.—Comparison of the possibilities of “young–young” and “young–old” (A) PPIs and (B) CELs emerging in six organisms. The bars denote the mean possibilities for the “young–young” and “young–old” groups and the error bars show the SEM for each group. All “young–young” distributions are significantly different from “young–old” distributions (t-test: P < 2.2 × 10 − 16).
. 2.—Correlations of phenotypic complexity (genome size) and possibility of generating superior “young–young” (A) PPIs or (B) CELs among six organisms. The dots denote the mean possibilities for six organisms and the error bars show the SEM. The line indicates the significant regression correlation between genome sizes and possibilities.
. 3.—Trends of gene connectivity and its possibility of generating superior young CELs among six organisms. The x-axis and y-axis represent log-transformed data. The genes are classified into five groups with different orders of magnitude of possibilities (−4, −3, −2, −1 and 0). The dots denote the mean log10-transformed connectivity of each possibility group and the error bars show the SEM. The lines indicate the significant regression correlation between log10-transformed connectivity and possibility scales (P < 2.2 × 10 − 16).
. 4.—Relationships between the possibility of genes generating superior young CELs and their (A) mRNA levels, (B) essentiality, (C) Ka/Ks and (D) mutation rates in four simpler genomes. In (A–C), the y-axis represents log10-transformed data and the genes are classified into five groups with different orders of magnitude of possibilities (−4, −3, −2, −1 and 0). The dots denote the mean of (A) log10-based R(F)PKM values, (B) essentiality and (C) Ka/Ks. The error bars show the SEM. The lines indicate the significant regression correlation (P < 2.2 × 10 − 16). In (D), the genes are classified into two groups (P > 0.1 and P < 0.1). The bars denote the mean mutation rates of each possibility group and the error bars show the SEM.