Cargando…

Are Nonsynonymous Transversions Generally More Deleterious than Nonsynonymous Transitions?

It has been suggested that, due to the structure of the genetic code, nonsynonymous transitions are less likely than transversions to cause radical changes in amino acid physicochemical properties so are on average less deleterious. This view was supported by some but not all mutagenesis experiments...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zou, Zhengting, Zhang, Jianzhi
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7783172/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32805043
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msaa200
_version_ 1783632058112802816
author Zou, Zhengting
Zhang, Jianzhi
author_facet Zou, Zhengting
Zhang, Jianzhi
author_sort Zou, Zhengting
collection PubMed
description It has been suggested that, due to the structure of the genetic code, nonsynonymous transitions are less likely than transversions to cause radical changes in amino acid physicochemical properties so are on average less deleterious. This view was supported by some but not all mutagenesis experiments. Because laboratory measures of fitness effects have limited sensitivities and relative frequencies of different mutations in mutagenesis studies may not match those in nature, we here revisit this issue using comparative genomics. We extend the standard codon model of sequence evolution by adding the parameter [Formula: see text] that quantifies the ratio of the fixation probability of transitional nonsynonymous mutations to that of transversional nonsynonymous mutations. We then estimate [Formula: see text] from the concatenated alignment of all protein-coding DNA sequences of two closely related genomes. Surprisingly, [Formula: see text] ranges from 0.13 to 2.0 across 90 species pairs sampled from the tree of life, with 51 incidences of [Formula: see text] < 1 and 30 incidences of [Formula: see text] >1 that are statistically significant. Hence, whether nonsynonymous transversions are overall more deleterious than nonsynonymous transitions is species-dependent. Because the corresponding groups of amino acid replacements differ between nonsynonymous transitions and transversions, [Formula: see text] is influenced by the relative exchangeabilities of amino acid pairs. Indeed, an extensive search reveals that the large variation in [Formula: see text] is primarily explainable by the recently reported among-species disparity in amino acid exchangeabilities. These findings demonstrate that genome-wide nucleotide substitution patterns in coding sequences have species-specific features and are more variable among evolutionary lineages than are currently thought.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7783172
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-77831722021-01-08 Are Nonsynonymous Transversions Generally More Deleterious than Nonsynonymous Transitions? Zou, Zhengting Zhang, Jianzhi Mol Biol Evol Discoveries It has been suggested that, due to the structure of the genetic code, nonsynonymous transitions are less likely than transversions to cause radical changes in amino acid physicochemical properties so are on average less deleterious. This view was supported by some but not all mutagenesis experiments. Because laboratory measures of fitness effects have limited sensitivities and relative frequencies of different mutations in mutagenesis studies may not match those in nature, we here revisit this issue using comparative genomics. We extend the standard codon model of sequence evolution by adding the parameter [Formula: see text] that quantifies the ratio of the fixation probability of transitional nonsynonymous mutations to that of transversional nonsynonymous mutations. We then estimate [Formula: see text] from the concatenated alignment of all protein-coding DNA sequences of two closely related genomes. Surprisingly, [Formula: see text] ranges from 0.13 to 2.0 across 90 species pairs sampled from the tree of life, with 51 incidences of [Formula: see text] < 1 and 30 incidences of [Formula: see text] >1 that are statistically significant. Hence, whether nonsynonymous transversions are overall more deleterious than nonsynonymous transitions is species-dependent. Because the corresponding groups of amino acid replacements differ between nonsynonymous transitions and transversions, [Formula: see text] is influenced by the relative exchangeabilities of amino acid pairs. Indeed, an extensive search reveals that the large variation in [Formula: see text] is primarily explainable by the recently reported among-species disparity in amino acid exchangeabilities. These findings demonstrate that genome-wide nucleotide substitution patterns in coding sequences have species-specific features and are more variable among evolutionary lineages than are currently thought. Oxford University Press 2020-08-17 /pmc/articles/PMC7783172/ /pubmed/32805043 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msaa200 Text en © The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Medical Informatics Association. 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 Discoveries
Zou, Zhengting
Zhang, Jianzhi
Are Nonsynonymous Transversions Generally More Deleterious than Nonsynonymous Transitions?
title Are Nonsynonymous Transversions Generally More Deleterious than Nonsynonymous Transitions?
title_full Are Nonsynonymous Transversions Generally More Deleterious than Nonsynonymous Transitions?
title_fullStr Are Nonsynonymous Transversions Generally More Deleterious than Nonsynonymous Transitions?
title_full_unstemmed Are Nonsynonymous Transversions Generally More Deleterious than Nonsynonymous Transitions?
title_short Are Nonsynonymous Transversions Generally More Deleterious than Nonsynonymous Transitions?
title_sort are nonsynonymous transversions generally more deleterious than nonsynonymous transitions?
topic Discoveries
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7783172/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32805043
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msaa200
work_keys_str_mv AT zouzhengting arenonsynonymoustransversionsgenerallymoredeleteriousthannonsynonymoustransitions
AT zhangjianzhi arenonsynonymoustransversionsgenerallymoredeleteriousthannonsynonymoustransitions