The majority of the human genome consists of repeated sequences. An important type of repeated sequences common in the human genome are tandem repeats, where identical copies appear next to each other. For example, in the sequence <inline-formula> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$AGTC\underline {TGTG}C$ </tex-math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$TGTG$ </tex-math></inline-formula> is a tandem repeat, that may be generated from <inline-formula> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$AGTCTGC$ </tex-math></inline-formula> by a tandem duplication of length 2. In this paper, we investigate the possibility of generating a large number of sequences from a <italic>seed</italic>, i.e. a small initial string, by tandem duplications of bounded length. We study the capacity of such a system, a notion that quantifies the system’s generating power. Our results include <italic>exact capacity</italic> values for certain tandem duplication string systems. In addition, motivated by the role of DNA sequences in expressing proteins via RNA and the genetic code, we define the notion of the <italic>expressiveness</italic> of a tandem duplication system as the capability of expressing arbitrary substrings. We then <italic>completely</italic> characterize the expressiveness of tandem duplication systems for general alphabet sizes and duplication lengths. In particular, based on a celebrated result by Axel Thue from 1906, presenting a construction for ternary squarefree sequences, we show that for alphabets of size 4 or larger, bounded tandem duplication systems, regardless of the seed and the bound on duplication length, are not fully expressive, i.e. they cannot generate all strings even as substrings of other strings. Note that the alphabet of size 4 is of particular interest as it pertains to the genomic alphabet. Building on this result, we also show that these systems do not have full capacity. In general, our results illustrate that duplication lengths play a more significant role than the seed in generating a large number of sequences for these systems.
[1]
Noga Alon,et al.
On the duplication distance of binary strings
,
2016,
2016 IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory (ISIT).
[2]
Jehoshua Bruck,et al.
Duplication-correcting codes for data storage in the DNA of living organisms
,
2016,
2016 IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory (ISIT).
[3]
Jehoshua Bruck,et al.
The Capacity of String-Duplication Systems
,
2016,
IEEE Transactions on Information Theory.
[4]
Jehoshua Bruck,et al.
The Capacity of String-Replication Systems
,
2014,
ArXiv.
[5]
Jeffrey Shallit,et al.
A Second Course in Formal Languages and Automata Theory
,
2008
.
[6]
Karen Usdin,et al.
The biological effects of simple tandem repeats: lessons from the repeat expansion diseases.
,
2008,
Genome research.
[7]
Victor Mitrana,et al.
Uniformly bounded duplication languages
,
2005,
Discret. Appl. Math..
[8]
H. Garner,et al.
Molecular origins of rapid and continuous morphological evolution
,
2004,
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.
[9]
A. Helbig,et al.
Origin and Evolution of Tandem Repeats in the Mitochondrial DNA Control Region of Shrikes (Lanius spp.)
,
2004,
Journal of Molecular Evolution.
[10]
Schouhamer Immink,et al.
Codes for mass data storage systems
,
2004
.
[11]
Victor Mitrana,et al.
Formal Languages Arising from Gene Repeated Duplication
,
2004,
Aspects of Molecular Computing.
[12]
Victor Mitrana,et al.
Operations and language generating devices suggested by the genome evolution
,
2002,
Theor. Comput. Sci..
[13]
International Human Genome Sequencing Consortium.
Initial sequencing and analysis of the human genome
,
2001,
Nature.
[14]
Victor Mitrana,et al.
On the Regularity of Duplication Closure
,
1999,
Bull. EATCS.
[15]
Douglas Lind,et al.
An Introduction to Symbolic Dynamics and Coding
,
1995
.
[16]
Jeffrey D. Ullman,et al.
Introduction to Automata Theory, Languages and Computation
,
1979
.