Model parameters of molecular evolution explain genomic correlations

One long-standing research focus in evolutionary genomics is trying to resolve how biological variables (expression, essentiality, protein-protein interaction, structural stability, etc.) determine the rate of protein evolution. While these studies have considerably deepened our understanding of molecular evolution, many issues remain unsolved. In this opinion article, after having a brief survey of literatures, we establish relationships between model parameters of molecular evolution and genomic variables, based on which, most-observed genomic correlations and confounds can be explained by model parameter combinations under different conditions, which include the strength of stabilizing selection, mutational variance, expression sufficiency, gene pleiotropy, as well as the effective population size. We suggest that the problem to discern biological variable(s) that may determine the rate of protein evolution can be tackled at two levels. The first level, as discussed here, is to demonstrate how the model of molecular evolution can predict potential genomic correlations under various conditions. And the second level is to estimate genome-wide variations of model parameters (or combinations) that help to identify canonical biological variables that may underlie the rate variation among genes that ranges up to at least three magnitudes.

[1]  Michael Lynch,et al.  The Origins of Genome Architecture , 2007 .

[2]  X. Gu Stabilizing selection of protein function and distribution of selection coefficient among sites , 2007, Genetica.

[3]  J. Bloom,et al.  Mutational effects on stability are largely conserved during protein evolution , 2013, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[4]  X. Gu,et al.  Genepleio Software for Effective Estimation of Gene Pleiotropy from Protein Sequences , 2015, BioMed research international.

[5]  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.

[6]  Mike Tyers,et al.  Evolutionary and Physiological Importance of Hub Proteins , 2006, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[7]  Wen-Hsiung Li,et al.  Rate of protein evolution versus fitness effect of gene deletion. , 2003, Molecular biology and evolution.

[8]  Mark Gerstein,et al.  The Importance of Bottlenecks in Protein Networks: Correlation with Gene Essentiality and Expression Dynamics , 2007, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[9]  A. E. Hirsh,et al.  Evolutionary Rate in the Protein Interaction Network , 2002, Science.

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

[11]  X. Gu Evolutionary Framework for Protein Sequence Evolution and Gene Pleiotropy , 2007, Genetics.

[12]  S. Hannenhalli,et al.  Three Independent Determinants of Protein Evolutionary Rate , 2013, Journal of Molecular Evolution.

[13]  Hunter B. Fraser,et al.  Modularity and evolutionary constraint on proteins , 2005, Nature Genetics.

[14]  Lucy J. Colwell,et al.  The interface of protein structure, protein biophysics, and molecular evolution , 2012, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[15]  Tong Zhou,et al.  Translationally optimal codons associate with structurally sensitive sites in proteins. , 2009, Molecular biology and evolution.

[16]  L. Duret,et al.  Determinants of substitution rates in mammalian genes: expression pattern affects selection intensity but not mutation rate. , 2000, Molecular biology and evolution.

[17]  Eugene I Shakhnovich,et al.  Understanding protein evolution: from protein physics to Darwinian selection. , 2008, Annual review of physical chemistry.

[18]  Edwin Wang,et al.  Protein evolution on a human signaling network , 2009, BMC Systems Biology.

[19]  A. E. Hirsh,et al.  Functional genomic analysis of the rates of protein evolution. , 2005, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[20]  A. E. Hirsh,et al.  Protein dispensability and rate of evolution , 2001, Nature.

[21]  Laurence D. Hurst,et al.  Do essential genes evolve slowly? , 1999, Current Biology.

[22]  Richard A Goldstein,et al.  The structure of protein evolution and the evolution of protein structure. , 2008, Current opinion in structural biology.

[23]  Yuri I Wolf,et al.  Coping with the quantitative genomics 'elephant': the correlation between the gene dispensability and evolution rate. , 2006, Trends in genetics : TIG.

[24]  Sudhir Kumar,et al.  Gene Expression Intensity Shapes Evolutionary Rates of the Proteins Encoded by the Vertebrate Genome , 2004, Genetics.

[25]  C. Pál,et al.  Genomic function: Rate of evolution and gene dispensability. , 2003, Nature.

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

[27]  C. Pál,et al.  An integrated view of protein evolution , 2006, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[28]  Philip M. Kim,et al.  Relating Three-Dimensional Structures to Protein Networks Provides Evolutionary Insights , 2006, Science.

[29]  Adrian W. R. Serohijos,et al.  Positively Selected Sites in Cetacean Myoglobins Contribute to Protein Stability , 2013, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[30]  N. Barton,et al.  Pleiotropic models of quantitative variation. , 1990, Genetics.

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

[32]  X. Gu,et al.  A note on gene pleiotropy estimation from phylogenetic analysis of protein sequences , 2013 .

[33]  X. Gu,et al.  A preliminary analysis of gene pleiotropy estimated from protein sequences. , 2010, Journal of experimental zoology. Part B, Molecular and developmental evolution.

[34]  T. Dobzhansky,et al.  Evolution and the Genetics of Populations, Vol. 1, Genetic and Biometric Foundations , 1969 .

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

[36]  Matthew W. Hahn,et al.  Comparative genomics of centrality and essentiality in three eukaryotic protein-interaction networks. , 2005, Molecular biology and evolution.

[37]  T J White,et al.  Biochemical evolution. , 1977, Annual review of biochemistry.

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

[39]  X. Gu,et al.  Genome factor and gene pleiotropy hypotheses in protein evolution , 2010, Biology Direct.

[40]  Annalise B. Paaby,et al.  The many faces of pleiotropy. , 2013, Trends in Genetics.

[41]  X. Gu Pleiotropy Can Be Effectively Estimated Without Counting Phenotypes Through the Rank of a Genotype–Phenotype Map , 2014, Genetics.

[42]  M. Kimura,et al.  The neutral theory of molecular evolution. , 1983, Scientific American.

[43]  E. Ostrowski,et al.  A NEGATIVE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN MUTATION PLEIOTROPY AND FITNESS EFFECT IN YEAST , 2007, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[44]  Liran Carmel,et al.  Unifying measures of gene function and evolution , 2006, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[45]  Jian-Rong Yang,et al.  Determinants of the rate of protein sequence evolution , 2015, Nature Reviews Genetics.