Cargando…
Recurring cluster and operon assembly for Phenylacetate degradation genes
BACKGROUND: A large number of theories have been advanced to explain why genes involved in the same biochemical processes are often co-located in genomes. Most of these theories have been dismissed because empirical data do not match the expectations of the models. In this work we test the hypothesi...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2009
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2653477/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19208251 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2148-9-36 |
_version_ | 1782165275625390080 |
---|---|
author | Martin, Fergal J McInerney, James O |
author_facet | Martin, Fergal J McInerney, James O |
author_sort | Martin, Fergal J |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: A large number of theories have been advanced to explain why genes involved in the same biochemical processes are often co-located in genomes. Most of these theories have been dismissed because empirical data do not match the expectations of the models. In this work we test the hypothesis that cluster formation is most likely due to a selective pressure to gradually co-localise protein products and that operon formation is not an inevitable conclusion of the process. RESULTS: We have selected an exemplar well-characterised biochemical pathway, the phenylacetate degradation pathway, and we show that its complex history is only compatible with a model where a selective advantage accrues from moving genes closer together. This selective pressure is likely to be reasonably weak and only twice in our dataset of 102 genomes do we see independent formation of a complete cluster containing all the catabolic genes in the pathway. Additionally, de novo clustering of genes clearly occurs repeatedly, even though recombination should result in the random dispersal of such genes in their respective genomes. Interspecies gene transfer has frequently replaced in situ copies of genes resulting in clusters that have similar content but very different evolutionary histories. CONCLUSION: Our model for cluster formation in prokaryotes, therefore, consists of a two-stage selection process. The first stage is selection to move genes closer together, either because of macromolecular crowding, chromatin relaxation or transcriptional regulation pressure. This proximity opportunity sets up a separate selection for co-transcription. |
format | Text |
id | pubmed-2653477 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2009 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-26534772009-03-10 Recurring cluster and operon assembly for Phenylacetate degradation genes Martin, Fergal J McInerney, James O BMC Evol Biol Research Article BACKGROUND: A large number of theories have been advanced to explain why genes involved in the same biochemical processes are often co-located in genomes. Most of these theories have been dismissed because empirical data do not match the expectations of the models. In this work we test the hypothesis that cluster formation is most likely due to a selective pressure to gradually co-localise protein products and that operon formation is not an inevitable conclusion of the process. RESULTS: We have selected an exemplar well-characterised biochemical pathway, the phenylacetate degradation pathway, and we show that its complex history is only compatible with a model where a selective advantage accrues from moving genes closer together. This selective pressure is likely to be reasonably weak and only twice in our dataset of 102 genomes do we see independent formation of a complete cluster containing all the catabolic genes in the pathway. Additionally, de novo clustering of genes clearly occurs repeatedly, even though recombination should result in the random dispersal of such genes in their respective genomes. Interspecies gene transfer has frequently replaced in situ copies of genes resulting in clusters that have similar content but very different evolutionary histories. CONCLUSION: Our model for cluster formation in prokaryotes, therefore, consists of a two-stage selection process. The first stage is selection to move genes closer together, either because of macromolecular crowding, chromatin relaxation or transcriptional regulation pressure. This proximity opportunity sets up a separate selection for co-transcription. BioMed Central 2009-02-10 /pmc/articles/PMC2653477/ /pubmed/19208251 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2148-9-36 Text en Copyright © 2009 Martin and McInerney; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Martin, Fergal J McInerney, James O Recurring cluster and operon assembly for Phenylacetate degradation genes |
title | Recurring cluster and operon assembly for Phenylacetate degradation genes |
title_full | Recurring cluster and operon assembly for Phenylacetate degradation genes |
title_fullStr | Recurring cluster and operon assembly for Phenylacetate degradation genes |
title_full_unstemmed | Recurring cluster and operon assembly for Phenylacetate degradation genes |
title_short | Recurring cluster and operon assembly for Phenylacetate degradation genes |
title_sort | recurring cluster and operon assembly for phenylacetate degradation genes |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2653477/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19208251 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2148-9-36 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT martinfergalj recurringclusterandoperonassemblyforphenylacetatedegradationgenes AT mcinerneyjameso recurringclusterandoperonassemblyforphenylacetatedegradationgenes |