Cargando…

Breaking Good: Accounting for Fragility of Genomic Regions in Rearrangement Distance Estimation

Models of evolution by genome rearrangements are prone to two types of flaws: One is to ignore the diversity of susceptibility to breakage across genomic regions, and the other is to suppose that susceptibility values are given. Without necessarily supposing their precise localization, we call “soli...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Biller, Priscila, Guéguen, Laurent, Knibbe, Carole, Tannier, Eric
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4898800/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27190002
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/gbe/evw083
_version_ 1782436391504838656
author Biller, Priscila
Guéguen, Laurent
Knibbe, Carole
Tannier, Eric
author_facet Biller, Priscila
Guéguen, Laurent
Knibbe, Carole
Tannier, Eric
author_sort Biller, Priscila
collection PubMed
description Models of evolution by genome rearrangements are prone to two types of flaws: One is to ignore the diversity of susceptibility to breakage across genomic regions, and the other is to suppose that susceptibility values are given. Without necessarily supposing their precise localization, we call “solid” the regions that are improbably broken by rearrangements and “fragile” the regions outside solid ones. We propose a model of evolution by inversions where breakage probabilities vary across fragile regions and over time. It contains as a particular case the uniform breakage model on the nucleotidic sequence, where breakage probabilities are proportional to fragile region lengths. This is very different from the frequently used pseudouniform model where all fragile regions have the same probability to break. Estimations of rearrangement distances based on the pseudouniform model completely fail on simulations with the truly uniform model. On pairs of amniote genomes, we show that identifying coding genes with solid regions yields incoherent distance estimations, especially with the pseudouniform model, and to a lesser extent with the truly uniform model. This incoherence is solved when we coestimate the number of fragile regions with the rearrangement distance. The estimated number of fragile regions is surprisingly small, suggesting that a minority of regions are recurrently used by rearrangements. Estimations for several pairs of genomes at different divergence times are in agreement with a slowly evolvable colocalization of active genomic regions in the cell.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4898800
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-48988002016-06-10 Breaking Good: Accounting for Fragility of Genomic Regions in Rearrangement Distance Estimation Biller, Priscila Guéguen, Laurent Knibbe, Carole Tannier, Eric Genome Biol Evol Research Article Models of evolution by genome rearrangements are prone to two types of flaws: One is to ignore the diversity of susceptibility to breakage across genomic regions, and the other is to suppose that susceptibility values are given. Without necessarily supposing their precise localization, we call “solid” the regions that are improbably broken by rearrangements and “fragile” the regions outside solid ones. We propose a model of evolution by inversions where breakage probabilities vary across fragile regions and over time. It contains as a particular case the uniform breakage model on the nucleotidic sequence, where breakage probabilities are proportional to fragile region lengths. This is very different from the frequently used pseudouniform model where all fragile regions have the same probability to break. Estimations of rearrangement distances based on the pseudouniform model completely fail on simulations with the truly uniform model. On pairs of amniote genomes, we show that identifying coding genes with solid regions yields incoherent distance estimations, especially with the pseudouniform model, and to a lesser extent with the truly uniform model. This incoherence is solved when we coestimate the number of fragile regions with the rearrangement distance. The estimated number of fragile regions is surprisingly small, suggesting that a minority of regions are recurrently used by rearrangements. Estimations for several pairs of genomes at different divergence times are in agreement with a slowly evolvable colocalization of active genomic regions in the cell. Oxford University Press 2016-05-10 /pmc/articles/PMC4898800/ /pubmed/27190002 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/gbe/evw083 Text en © The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Molecular Biology and Evolution. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
spellingShingle Research Article
Biller, Priscila
Guéguen, Laurent
Knibbe, Carole
Tannier, Eric
Breaking Good: Accounting for Fragility of Genomic Regions in Rearrangement Distance Estimation
title Breaking Good: Accounting for Fragility of Genomic Regions in Rearrangement Distance Estimation
title_full Breaking Good: Accounting for Fragility of Genomic Regions in Rearrangement Distance Estimation
title_fullStr Breaking Good: Accounting for Fragility of Genomic Regions in Rearrangement Distance Estimation
title_full_unstemmed Breaking Good: Accounting for Fragility of Genomic Regions in Rearrangement Distance Estimation
title_short Breaking Good: Accounting for Fragility of Genomic Regions in Rearrangement Distance Estimation
title_sort breaking good: accounting for fragility of genomic regions in rearrangement distance estimation
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4898800/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27190002
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/gbe/evw083
work_keys_str_mv AT billerpriscila breakinggoodaccountingforfragilityofgenomicregionsinrearrangementdistanceestimation
AT gueguenlaurent breakinggoodaccountingforfragilityofgenomicregionsinrearrangementdistanceestimation
AT knibbecarole breakinggoodaccountingforfragilityofgenomicregionsinrearrangementdistanceestimation
AT tanniereric breakinggoodaccountingforfragilityofgenomicregionsinrearrangementdistanceestimation