Are There Laws of Genome Evolution?

Research in quantitative evolutionary genomics and systems biology led to the discovery of several universal regularities connecting genomic and molecular phenomic variables. These universals include the log-normal distribution of the evolutionary rates of orthologous genes; the power law–like distributions of paralogous family size and node degree in various biological networks; the negative correlation between a gene's sequence evolution rate and expression level; and differential scaling of functional classes of genes with genome size. The universals of genome evolution can be accounted for by simple mathematical models similar to those used in statistical physics, such as the birth-death-innovation model. These models do not explicitly incorporate selection; therefore, the observed universal regularities do not appear to be shaped by selection but rather are emergent properties of gene ensembles. Although a complete physical theory of evolutionary biology is inconceivable, the universals of genome evolution might qualify as “laws of evolutionary genomics” in the same sense “law” is understood in modern physics.

[1]  I. King Jordan,et al.  Natural selection governs local, but not global, evolutionary gene coexpression networks in Caenorhabditis elegans , 2008, BMC Syst. Biol..

[2]  M. Huynen,et al.  The frequency distribution of gene family sizes in complete genomes. , 1998, Molecular biology and evolution.

[3]  Andreas Albrecht,et al.  From Eternity to Here: The Quest for the Ultimate Theory of Time , 2010 .

[4]  E. Koonin,et al.  The structure of the protein universe and genome evolution , 2002, Nature.

[5]  C. Wilke,et al.  A single determinant dominates the rate of yeast protein evolution. , 2006, Molecular biology and evolution.

[6]  Michael W. Gray,et al.  Irremediable Complexity? , 2010, Science.

[7]  Erik van Nimwegen,et al.  Scaling laws in functional genome content across prokaryotic clades and lifestyles. , 2009, Trends in genetics : TIG.

[8]  Eugene V Koonin,et al.  The universal distribution of evolutionary rates of genes and distinct characteristics of eukaryotic genes of different apparent ages , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[9]  C. Wilke,et al.  Why highly expressed proteins evolve slowly. , 2005, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[10]  Albert,et al.  Emergence of scaling in random networks , 1999, Science.

[11]  A. Barabasi,et al.  Network biology: understanding the cell's functional organization , 2004, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[12]  B. Bassetti,et al.  Joint scaling laws in functional and evolutionary categories in prokaryotic genomes , 2011, Nucleic acids research.

[13]  M. Lynch.  The frailty of adaptive hypotheses for the origins of organismal complexity , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[14]  N. Grishin,et al.  From complete genomes to measures of substitution rate variability within and between proteins. , 2000, Genome research.

[15]  M. Lynch,et al.  The Origins of Genome Complexity , 2003, Science.

[16]  A. Stoltzfus.  On the Possibility of Constructive Neutral Evolution , 1999, Journal of Molecular Evolution.

[17]  Eugene V Koonin,et al.  Evolutionary systems biology: links between gene evolution and function. , 2006, Current opinion in biotechnology.

[18]  Eugene V. Koonin,et al.  Constraints and plasticity in genome and molecular-phenome evolution , 2010, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[19]  C. Pál,et al.  Highly expressed genes in yeast evolve slowly. , 2001, Genetics.

[20]  E. Koonin.  The Logic of Chance: The Nature and Origin of Biological Evolution , 2011 .

[21]  M. Strauss,et al.  Book ReviewChance and Necessity: An essay on the natural philosophy of modern biology. , 1972 .

[22]  R. Watson,et al.  PERSPECTIVE: SIGN EPISTASIS AND GENETIC COSTRAINT ON EVOLUTIONARY TRAJECTORIES , 2005, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[23]  Eugene V Koonin,et al.  Universal distribution of protein evolution rates as a consequence of protein folding physics , 2010, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[24]  Cyrus Chothia,et al.  The SUPERFAMILY database in 2007: families and functions , 2006, Nucleic Acids Res..

[25]  D. M. Krylov,et al.  Gene loss, protein sequence divergence, gene dispensability, expression level, and interactivity are correlated in eukaryotic evolution. , 2003, Genome research.

[26]  Manjunatha Kogenaru,et al.  Revealing evolutionary pathways by fitness landscape reconstruction , 2009, Critical reviews in biochemistry and molecular biology.

[27]  F. Jacob,et al.  Evolution and tinkering. , 1977, Science.

[28]  V. Pande,et al.  On the application of statistical physics to evolutionary biology. , 2009, Journal of theoretical biology.

[29]  E. Nimwegen.  Scaling Laws in the Functional Content of Genomes , 2003, physics/0307001.

[30]  Jianzhi Zhang,et al.  In Search of the Biological Significance of Modular Structures in Protein Networks , 2007, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[31]  Claus O. Wilke,et al.  Mistranslation-Induced Protein Misfolding as a Dominant Constraint on Coding-Sequence Evolution , 2008, Cell.

[32]  C. Wilke,et al.  The evolutionary consequences of erroneous protein synthesis , 2009, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[33]  E. Koonin,et al.  Birth and death of protein domains: A simple model of evolution explains power law behavior , 2002, BMC Evolutionary Biology.

[34]  S. Gould,et al.  The spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian paradigm: a critique of the adaptationist programme , 1979, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B. Biological Sciences.