4.8 Article

Elucidation of Codon Usage Signatures across the Domains of Life

期刊

MOLECULAR BIOLOGY AND EVOLUTION
卷 36, 期 10, 页码 2328-2339

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/molbev/msz124

关键词

codon usage; codon autocorrelation; tRNA; evolution

资金

  1. long-term postdoctoral fellowship from the Human Frontier Science Program [LT000307/2013L]
  2. Australian Research Council [DE170100506]
  3. GENCODE Wellcome Trust [U41 HG007234]
  4. [R01 HG004037]
  5. Australian Research Council [DE170100506] Funding Source: Australian Research Council

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Because of the degeneracy of the genetic code, multiple codons are translated into the same amino acid. Despite being synonymous, these codons are not equally used. Selective pressures are thought to drive the choice among synonymous codons within a genome, while GC content, which is typically attributed to mutational drift, is the major determinant of variation across species. Here, we find that in addition to GC content, interspecies codon usage signatures can also be detected. More specifically, we show that a single amino acid, arginine, is the major contributor to codon usage bias differences across domains of life. We then exploit this finding and show that domain-specific codon bias signatures can be used to classify a given sequence into its corresponding domain of life with high accuracy. We then wondered whether the inclusion of codon usage codon autocorrelation patterns, which reflects the nonrandom distribution of codon occurrences throughout a transcript, might improve the classification performance of our algorithm. However, we find that autocorrelation patterns are not domain-specific, and surprisingly, are unrelated to tRNA reusage, in contrast to previous reports. Instead, our results suggest that codon autocorrelation patterns are a by-product of codon optimality throughout a sequence, where highly expressed genes display autocorrelated optimal codons, whereas lowly expressed genes display autocorrelated nonoptimal codons.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据