Abstract
In addition to multiple, complete genome sequences, genome-wide data on biological properties of genes, such as knockout effect, expression levels, protein-protein interactions, and others, are rapidly accumulating. Numerous attempts were made by many groups to examine connections between these properties and quantitative measures of gene evolution. The questions addressed pertain to the most fundamental aspects of biology: what determines the effect of the knockout of a given gene on the phenotype (in particular, is it essential or not) and the rate of a gene’s evolution and how are the phenotypic properties and evolution connected? Many significant correlations were detected, e.g., positive correlation between the tendency of a gene to be lost during evolution and sequence evolution rate, and negative correlations between each of the above measures of evolutionary variability and expression level or the phenotypic effect of gene knockout. However, most of these correlations are relatively weak and explain a small fraction of the variation present in the data. We propose that the majority of the relationships between the phenotypic (“input”) and evolutionary (“output”) variables can be described with a single, composite variable, the genes “social status in the genomic community”, which reflects the biological role of the gene and its mode of evolution. “High-status” genes, involved in house-keeping processes, are more likely to be higher and broader expressed, to have more interaction partners, and to produce lethal or severely impaired knockout mutants. These genes also tend to evolve slower and are less prone to gene loss across various taxonomic groups. “Low-status” genes are expected to be weakly expressed, have fewer interaction partners, and exhibit narrower (and less coherent) phyletic distribution. On average, these genes evolve faster and are more often lost during evolution than high-status genes. The “gene status” notion may serve as a generator of null hypotheses regarding the connections between phenotypic and evolutionary parameters associated with genes. Any deviation from the expected pattern calls for attention—to the quality of the data, the nature of the analyzed relationship, or both.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Steinmetz LM, Davis RW. High-density arrays and insights into genome function. Biotechnol Genet Eng Rev 2000; 17:109–146.
Steinmetz LM, Davis RW. Maximizing the potential of functional genomics. Nat Rev Genet 2004; 5(3):190–201.
Hurst LD, Pal C, Lercher MJ. The evolutionary dynamics of eukaryotic gene order. Nat Rev Genet 2004; 5(4):299–310.
Wolfe KH, Li WH. Molecular evolution meets the genomics revolution. Nat Genet 2003; 33(Suppl):255–265.
Fraser HB, Hirsh AE, Steinmetz LM et al. Evolutionary rate in the protein interaction network. Science 2002; 296(5568):750–752.
Jordan IK, Wolf YI, Koonin EV. No simple dependence between protein evolution rate and the number of protein-protein interactions: Only the most prolific interactors tend to evolve slowly. BMC Evol Biol 2003; 3(1):1.
Fraser HB, Wall DP, Hirsh AE. A simple dependence between protein evolution rate and the number of protein-protein interactions. BMC Evol Biol 2003; 3(1):11.
Fraser HB, Hirsh AE. Evolutionary rate depends on number of protein-protein interactions independently of gene expression level. BMC Evol Biol 2004; 4(1):13.
Bloom JD, Adami C. Apparent dependence of protein evolutionary rate on number of interactions is linked to biases in protein-protein interactions data sets. BMC Evol Biol 2003; 3(1):21.
Bloom JD, Adami C. Evolutionary rate depends on number of protein-protein interactions independently of gene expression level: Response. BMC Evol Biol 2004; 4(1):14.
Duret L, Mouchiroud D. Determinants of substitution rates in mammalian genes: Expression pattern affects selection intensity but not mutation rate. Mol Biol Evol 2000; 17(1):68–74.
Pal C, Papp B, Hurst LD. Highly expressed genes in yeast evolve slowly. Genetics 2001; 158(2):927–931.
Zhang P, Gu Z, Li WH. Different evolutionary patterns between young duplicate genes in the human genome. Genome Biol 2003; 4(9):R56.
Zhang L, Li WH. Mammalian housekeeping genes evolve more slowly than tissue-specific genes. Mol Biol Evol 2004; 21(2):236–239.
Krylov DM, Wolf YI, Rogozin IB et al. Gene loss, protein sequence divergence, gene dispensability, expression level, and interactivity are correlated in eukaryotic evolution. Genome Res 2003; 13(10):2229–2235.
Jordan IK, Marino-Ramirez L, Wolf YI et al. Conservation and coevolution in the scale-free human gene coexpression network. Mol Biol Evol 2004; 21(11):2058–2070.
Novichkov PS, Omelchenko MV, Gelfand MS et al. Genome-wide molecular clock and horizontal gene transfer in bacterial evolution. J Bacteriol 2004; 186(19):6575–6585.
Hirsh AE, Fraser HB. Protein dispensability and rate of evolution. Nature 2001; 411(6841):1046–1049.
Jordan IK, Rogozin IB, Wolf YI et al. Essential genes are more evolutionarily conserved than are nonessential genes in bacteria. Genome Res 2002; 12(6):962–968.
Yang J, Gu Z, Li WH. Rate of protein evolution versus fitness effect of gene deletion. Mol Biol Evol 2003; 20(5):772–774.
Fisher RA. The possible modification of the response of the wild type to recurrent mutations. Am Nat 1928; 62:115–126.
Haldane JBS. The part played by recurrent mutation in evolution. Am Nat 1933; 67:5–19.
Ohno S. Evolution by gene duplication. Berlin-Heidelberg-New York: Springer-Verlag, 1970.
Lynch M, Force A. The probability of duplicate gene preservation by subfunctionalization. Genetics 2000; 154(1):459–473.
Kondrashov FA, Rogozin IB, Wolf YI et al. Selection in the evolution of gene duplications. Genome Biol 2002; 3(2):RESEARCH0008.
Rodin SN, Riggs AD. Epigenetic silencing may aid evolution by gene duplication. J Mol Evol 2003; 56(6):718–729.
Moore RC, Purugganan MD. The early stages of duplicate gene evolution. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2003; 100(26):15682–15687.
Albert VA, Oppenheimer DG, Lindqvist C. Pleiotropy, redundancy and the evolution of flowers. Trends Plant Sci 2002; 7(7):297–301.
Lynch M, Conery JS. The evolutionary fate and consequences of duplicate genes. Science 2000; 290(5494):1151–1155.
Nembaware V, Crum K, Kelso J et al. Impact of the presence of paralogs on sequence divergence in a set of mouse-human orthologs. Genome Res 2002; 12(9):1370–1376.
Jordan IK, Wolf YI, Koonin EV. Duplicated genes evolve slower than singletons despite the initial rate increase. BMC Evol Biol 2004; 4(1):22.
Conant GC, Wagner A. Asymmetric sequence divergence of duplicate genes. Genome Res 2003; 13(9):2052–2058.
Kellis M, Birren BW, Lander ES. Proof and evolutionary analysis of ancient genome duplication in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Nature 2004; 428(6983):617–624.
Wagner A. Asymmetric functional divergence of duplicate genes in yeast. Mol Biol Evol 2002; 19(10):1760–1768.
Davis JC, Petrov DA. Preferential duplication of conserved proteins in eukaryotic genomes. PLoS Biol 2004; 2(3):E55.
Gu Z, Steinmetz LM, Gu X et al. Role of duplicate genes in genetic robustness against null mutations. Nature 2003; 421(6918):63–66.
Hahn MW, Conant GC, Wagner A. Molecular evolution in large genetic networks: Does connectivity equal constraint? J Mol Evol 2004; 58(2):203–211.
Rocha EP, Danchin A. An analysis of determinants of amino acids substitution rates in bacterial proteins. Mol Biol Evol 2004; 21(1):108–116.
Kimura M. The neutral theory of molecular evolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983.
Cover TM, Thomas JA. Elements of information theory. Boston: Wiley-Interscience, 1991.
Kamath RS, Fraser AG, Dong Y et al. Systematic functional analysis of the Caenorhabditis elegans genome using RNAi. Nature 2003; 421(6920):231–237.
Giaever G, Chu AM, Ni L et al. Functional profiling of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae genome. Nature 2002; 418(6896):387–391.
Koonin EV, Fedorova ND, Jackson JD et al. A comprehensive evolutionary classification of proteins encoded in complete eukaryotic genomes. Genome Biol 2004; 5(2):R7.
Duda RO, Hart PE, Stork DG. Pattern classification. Boston: Wiley-Interscience, 2000.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2006 Landes Bioscience and Springer Science+Business Media
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Wolf, Y.I., Carmel, L., Koonin, E.V. (2006). Correlations between Quantitative Measures of Genome Evolution, Expression and Function. In: Discovering Biomolecular Mechanisms with Computational Biology. Molecular Biology Intelligence Unit. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-36747-0_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-36747-0_12
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-0-387-34527-7
Online ISBN: 978-0-387-36747-7
eBook Packages: Biomedical and Life SciencesBiomedical and Life Sciences (R0)