The comparative method rules! Codon volatility cannot detect positive Darwinian selection using a single genome sequence.

All established methods for detecting positive selection at the molecular level rely on comparisons between nucleotide sequences. An exceptional method that purports to detect selection on the basis of a single genomic sequence has recently been proposed. This method uses a measure called "codon volatility," defined for each codon as the ratio between the number of nonsynonymous codons that differ from the codon under study at a single nucleotide position and the number of sense codons that differ from the codon under study at a single nucleotide position. Here, we examine various properties of codon volatility and its derivatives and use simulation of evolutionary processes to determine whether they can be used to detect selective pressures. Codons for only four amino acids (glycine, leucine, arginine, and serine) show any variation in codon volatility. Thus, codon volatility is mainly a proxy for amino acid usage, rather than for codon usage, with 65% of all synonymous changes and 27% of all nonsynonymous changes being undetectable by this measure. Genes identified by the volatility method as being subject to positive selection tend to have idiosyncratic amino acid compositions (e.g., they are glycine rich or arginine poor). An additional property of codon volatility is the near zero variance of its mean expectation, which translates into overestimated statistical significance estimates, especially in the absence of corrections for multiple comparisons. A comparison with measures of selection inferred through comparative methodology reveals no relationship between the results of the two methods. Finally, we show that codon volatility can increase in the absence of positive Darwinian selection; that is, increased codon volatility is not indicative of positive selection.

[1]  S T Cole,et al.  Analysis of the proteome of Mycobacterium tuberculosis in silico. , 1999, Tubercle and lung disease : the official journal of the International Union against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease.

[2]  Joshua B. Plotkin,et al.  Detecting selection using a single genome sequence of M. tuberculosis and P. falciparum , 2004, Nature.

[3]  T Gojobori,et al.  Large-scale search for genes on which positive selection may operate. , 1996, Molecular biology and evolution.

[4]  Jonathan Dushoff,et al.  Codon bias and frequency-dependent selection on the hemagglutinin epitopes of influenza A virus , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[5]  R. Durbin,et al.  GeneWise and Genomewise. , 2004, Genome research.

[6]  Ziheng Yang,et al.  PAML: a program package for phylogenetic analysis by maximum likelihood , 1997, Comput. Appl. Biosci..

[7]  R. Grantham Amino Acid Difference Formula to Help Explain Protein Evolution , 1974, Science.

[8]  J. McInerney,et al.  Fatty acid biosynthesis in Mycobacterium tuberculosis: Lateral gene transfer, adaptive evolution, and gene duplication , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.