Literature DB >> 8654963

Parametric genome rearrangement.

M Blanchette1, T Kunisawa, D Sankoff.   

Abstract

Algorithms inspired by comparative genomics calculate an edit distance between two linear orders based on elementary edit operations such as inversion, transposition and reciprocal translocation. All operations are generally assigned the same weight, simply by default, because no systematic empirical studies exist verifying whether algorithmic outputs involve realistic proportion of each. Nor do we have data on how weights should vary with the length of the inverted or transposed segment of the chromosome. In this paper, we present a rapid algorithm that allows each operation to take on a range of weights, producing an relatively tight upper bound on the distance between single-chromosome genomes, by means of a greedy search with look-ahead. The efficiency of this algorithm allows us to test random genomes for each parameter setting, to detect gene order similarity and to infer the parameter values most appropriate to the phylogenetic domain under study. We apply this method to genome segments in which the same gene order is conserved in Escherichia coli and Bacillus subtilis, as well as to the gene order in human versus Drosophila mitochondrial genomes. In both cases, we conclude that it is most appropriate to assign somewhat more than twice the weight to transpositions and inverted transpositions than to inversions. We also explore segment-length weighting for fungal mitochondrial gene orders.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8654963     DOI: 10.1016/0378-1119(95)00878-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gene        ISSN: 0378-1119            Impact factor:   3.688


  16 in total

1.  The complete mitochondrial genome of the hard clam Meretrix meretrix.

Authors:  Chong-Bo He; Jian Wang; Xiang-Gang Gao; Wen-Tao Song; Hong-Jun Li; Yun-Feng Li; Wei-Dong Liu; Hao Su
Journal:  Mol Biol Rep       Date:  2010-11-18       Impact factor: 2.316

2.  Fourfold faster rate of genome rearrangement in nematodes than in Drosophila.

Authors:  Avril Coghlan; Kenneth H Wolfe
Journal:  Genome Res       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 9.043

3.  Extent of genomic rearrangement after genome duplication in yeast.

Authors:  C Seoighe; K H Wolfe
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  1998-04-14       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  A fast algorithm for the multiple genome rearrangement problem with weighted reversals and transpositions.

Authors:  Martin Bader; Mohamed I Abouelhoda; Enno Ohlebusch
Journal:  BMC Bioinformatics       Date:  2008-12-04       Impact factor: 3.169

5.  SoRT2: a tool for sorting genomes and reconstructing phylogenetic trees by reversals, generalized transpositions and translocations.

Authors:  Yen-Lin Huang; Chen-Cheng Huang; Chuan Yi Tang; Chin Lung Lu
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2010-06-10       Impact factor: 16.971

6.  Genome rearrangements in mammalian evolution: lessons from human and mouse genomes.

Authors:  Pavel Pevzner; Glenn Tesler
Journal:  Genome Res       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 9.043

7.  Rec-DCM-Eigen: reconstructing a less parsimonious but more accurate tree in shorter time.

Authors:  Seunghwa Kang; Jijun Tang; Stephen W Schaeffer; David A Bader
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-08-24       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  A method for computing an inventory of metazoan mitochondrial gene order rearrangements.

Authors:  Matthias Bernt; Martin Middendorf
Journal:  BMC Bioinformatics       Date:  2011-10-05       Impact factor: 3.169

9.  Finding local genome rearrangements.

Authors:  Pijus Simonaitis; Krister M Swenson
Journal:  Algorithms Mol Biol       Date:  2018-05-04       Impact factor: 1.405

10.  Assembling contigs in draft genomes using reversals and block-interchanges.

Authors:  Chi-Long Li; Kun-Tze Chen; Chin Lung Lu
Journal:  BMC Bioinformatics       Date:  2013-04-10       Impact factor: 3.169

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.