SpringerProtocols: Abstract: 13. Modeling Sequence Evolution

13. Modeling Sequence Evolution

By: Pietro Liò³, Martin Bishop⁴

Abstract

Full Text

Download PDF (1928K)

DNA and amino acid sequences contain information about both the phylogenetic relationships among species and the evolutionary processes that caused the sequences to divergence. Mathematical and statistical methods try to detect this information to determine how and why DNA and protein molecules work the way they do. This chapter describes some of the models of evolution of biological sequences most widely used. It first focuses on single nucleotide/amino acid replacement rate models. Then it discusses the modelling of evolution at gene and protein module levels. The chapter concludes with speculations about the future use of molecular evolution studies using genomic and proteomic data.

Affiliation(s): (3) Computer Laboratory, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
(4) CNR-ITB Institute of Biomedical Technologies, Segrate, Milano, Italy

Book Title: Bioinformatics: Data, Sequence Analysis and Evolution

Series: Methods in Molecular Biology | Volume: 452 | Pub. Date: May-01-2008 | Page Range: 255-285 | DOI: 10.1007/978-1-60327-159-2_13

Subject: Bioinformatics

Key Words: Models of evolution - DNA mutations - amino acid substitution - Markov property - human genome evolution - ALU

References

Download References

1.	Hein, J. (1994) TreeAlign. Methods Mol Biol 25, 349–364.

2.	Whelan, S., Goldman, N. (2001) A general empirical model of protein evolution derived from multiple protein families using a maximum-likelihood approach. Mol Biol Evol 18, 691–699.

3.	Liò, P., Vannucci, M. (2003) Investigating the evolution and structure of chemokine receptors. Gene 317, 29–37.

4.	Glusman, G., Yanai, I., Rubin, I., et al. (2001) The complete human olfactory subgenome. Genome Res 11, 685–702.

5.	Weiner, A. M. (2002) SINEs and LINEs: the art of biting the hand that feeds you. Curr Opin Cell Biol 14, 343–350.

6.	Li, W. H. (2006) Molecular Evolution. Sin-auer Associates, Sunderland, MA.

7.	Jukes, T. H., Cantor, C. R. (1969), Evolution of protein molecules in (Munro, H. N., ed.). Mammalian Protein Metabolism. Academic Press, New York.

8.	Kimura, M. (1980) Estimation of evolutionary distances between homologous nucleotide sequences. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 78, 454–458.

9.	Blaisdell, J. (1985) A method of estimating from two aligned present-day DNA sequences their ancestral composition and subsequent rates of substitution, possibly different in the two lineages, corrected for multiple and parallel substitutions at the same site. J Mol Evol 22, 69–81.

10.	Felsenstein, J. (1981) Evolutionary trees from DNA sequences: a maximum likelihood approach. J Mol Evol 17, 368–376.

11.	Hasegawa, M., Kishino, H., Yano, T. (1985) Dating of the human-ape splitting by a molecular clock of mitochondrial DNA. J Mol Evol 22, 160–174.

12.	Lanave, C., Preparata, G., Saccone, C., et al. (1984) A new method for calculating evolutionary substitution rates. J Mol Evol 20, 86–93.

13.	Zarkikh, A. (1994) Estimation of evolutionary distances between nucleotide sequences. J Mol Evol 39, 315–329.

14.	Li, W.-H. (1997) Molecular Evolution. Sin-auer Associates, Sunderland, MA.

15.	Yang, Z. (1994) Maximum likelihood phy-logenetic estimation from DNA sequences with variable rates over sites: approximate methods. J Mol Evol 39, 306–314.

16.	Hasegawa, M., Di Rienzo, A., Kocher, T. D., et al. (1993) Toward a more accurate time scale for the human mitochondrial DNA tree. J Mol Evol 37, 347–354.

17.	Yang, Z., Goldman, N., Friday, A. (1995) Maximum likelihood trees from DNA sequences: a peculiar statistical estimation problem. Syst Biol 44, 384–399.

18.	Felsenstein, J., Churchill, G. A. (1996) A Hidden Markov Model approach to variation among sites in rate of evolution. Mol Biol Evol 13, 93–104.

19.	Rabiner, L. R. (1989) A tutorial on hidden Markov models and selected applications in speech recognition. Proc IEEE 77, 257–286.

20.	Eddy, S. (1996) Hidden Markov models. Curr Opinion Struct Biol 6, 361–365.

21.	Averof, M., Rokas, A., Wolfe, K. H., et al. (2000) Evidence for a high frequency of simultaneous double-nucleotide substitutions. Science 287, 1283–1286.

22.	Siepel, A., Haussler, D. (2003) Combining phylogenetic and hidden Markov models in biosequence analysis. Proceedings of the Seventh Annual international Conference on Research in Computational Molecular Biology (RECOMB'03). ACM Press, Berlin, Germany, 10–13 April. pp. 277–286.

23.	Siepel, A., Haussler, D. (2004) Phyloge-netic estimation of context dependent substitution rates by maximum likelihood. Mol Biol Evol 21, 468–488.

24.	Whelan, S., Goldman, N. (2004) Estimating the frequency of events that cause multiple-nucleotide changes. Genetics 167, 2027–2043.

25.	Goldman, N., Yang, Z. (1994) A codon-based model of nucleotide substitution for protein-coding DNA sequences. Mol Biol Evol 11, 725–736.

26.	Yang, Z., Nielsen, R. (1998) Estimating synonymous and nonsynonymous substitution rates under realistic evolutionary models. Mol Biol Evol 46, 409–418.

27.	Grantham, R. (1974) Amino acid difference formula to help explain protein evolution. Science 185(4154), 862–864.

28.	Yang, Z., Nielsen, R., Goldman, N., et al. (2000) Codon-substitution models for heterogeneous selection pressure at amino acid sites. Genetics 155, 431–449.

29.	Pedersen, A.M. K., Wiuf, C., Christiansen, F. B. (1998) A codon-based model designed to describe lentiviral evolution. Mol Biol Evol 15, 1069–1081.

30.	Yang, Z., Nielsen, R., Goldman, N., et al. (2000) Codon-substitution models for heterogeneous selection pressure at amino acid sites. Genetics 155, 431–449.

31.	Dayhoff, M. O., Eck, R. V., Park, C. M. (1972) A model of evolutionary change in proteins, in (Dayhoff, M. O., ed.), Atlas of Protein Sequence and Structure. vol. 5. National Biomedical Research Foundation, Washington, DC.

32.	Dayhoff, M. O., Schwartz, R. M., Orcutt, B. C. (1978) A model of evolutionary change in proteins, in (Dayhoff, M. O., ed.), Atlas of Protein Sequence and Structure. vol. 5. National Biomedical Research Foundation, Washington, DC.

33.	Jones, D. T., Taylor, W. R., Thornton, J. M. (1992). The rapid generation of mutation data matrices from protein sequence. CABIOS 8, 275–282.

34.	Gonnet, G. H., Cohen, M. A., Benner, S. A. (1992). Exhaustive matching of the entire protein sequence database. Science 256, 1443–1445.

35.	Henikoff, S., Henikoff, J. G. (1992) Amino acid substitution matrices from protein blocks. Proc Natl Acad U S A 89, 10915–10919.

36.	Claverie, J. M. (1993) Detecting frame shifts by amino acid sequence comparison. J Mol Biol 234, 1140–1157.

37.	Altschul, S. F. (1993) A protein alignment scoring system sensitive at all evolutionary distances. J Mol Evol 36, 290–300.

38.	Naylor, G., Brown, W. M. (1997) Structural biology and phylogenetic estimation. Nature 388, 527–528.

39.	Rzhetsky, A. (1995) Estimating substitution rates in ribosomal RNA genes. Genetics 141, 771–783.

40.	Goldman, N., Thorne, J. L., Jones, D. T. (1996) Using evolutionary trees in protein secondary structure prediction and other comparative sequence analyses. J Mol Biol 263, 196–208.

41.	Thorne, J. L., Goldman, N., Jones, D. T. (1996) Combining protein evolution and secondary structure. Mol Biol Evol 13, 666–673.

42.	Goldman, N., Thorne, J. L., Jones, D. T. (1998) Assessing the impact of secondary structure and solvent accessibility on protein evolution. Genetics 149, 445–458.

43.	Liò, P., Goldman, N., Thorne, J. L., et al. (1998) PASSML: combining evolutionary inference and protein secondary structure prediction. Bioinformatics 14, 726–733.

44.	Liò, P., Goldman, N. (1999) Using protein structural information in evolutionary inference: transmembrane proteins. Mol Biol Evol 16, 1696–1710.

45.	Fornasari, M. S., Parisi, G., Echave, J. (2002) Site-specific amino acid replacement matrices from structurally constrained protein evolution simulations. Mol Biol Evol 19, 352–356.

46.	Sippl, M. J. (1993) Recognition of errors in three-dimensional structures of proteins. Proteins 17, 355–362.

47.	Bastolla, U., Porto, M., Roman, H. E., et al. (2005) The principal eigenvector of contact matrices and hydrophobicity profiles in proteins. Proteins 58, 22–30.

48.	Pollock, D. D., Taylor, W. R., Goldman, N. (1999) Coevolving protein residues: maximum likelihood identification and relationship to structure. J Mol Biol 287, 187–198.

49.	Pagel, M. (1994) Detecting correlated evolution on phylogenies: a general method for the comparative analysis of discrete characters. Proc R Soc (B) 255, 37–45.

50.	Rzhetsky, A. (1995) Estimating substitution rates in ribosomal RNA genes. Genetics 141, 771–783.

51.	Telford, M. J., Wise, M. J., Gowri-Shankar, V. (2005) Consideration of RNA secondary structure significantly improves likelihood-based estimates of phylogeny: examples from the Bilateria. Mol Biol Evol 22, 1129–1136.

52.	Hudelot, C., Gowri-Shankar, V., Jow, H., et al. (2003) RNA-based phylogenetic methods: application to mammalian mitochondrial RNA sequences. Mol Phyl Evol 28, 241–252.

53.	Dermitzakis, E. T., Clark, A. G. (2001) Differential selection after duplication in mammalian developmental genes. Mol Biol Evol 18, 557–562.

54.	Walsh, J. B. (1995) How often do duplicated genes evolve new functions? Genetics 139, 421–428.

55.	Nadeau, J. H., Sankoff, D. (1997) Comparable rates of gene loss and functional divergence after genome duplications early in vertebrate evolution. Genetics 147, 1259–1266.

56.	Force, A., Cresko, W. A., Pickett, F. B., et al. (2005) The origin of sub-functions and modular gene regulation. Genetics 170, 433–446.

57.	Lynch, M., O'Hely, M., Walsh, B., et al. (2001) The probability of preservation of a newly arisen gene duplicate. Genetics 159, 1789–1804.

58.	He, X., Zhang, J. (2005) Rapid sub-func-tionalization accompanied by prolonged and substantial neo-functionalization in duplicate gene evolution. Genetics 169, 1157.

59.	von Mering, C., Krause, R., Snel, B., et al. (2002) Comparative assessment of large-scale datasets of protein-protein interactions. Nature 417(6887), 399–403.

60.	Tang, H., Lewontin, R. C. (1999) Locating regions of differential variability in DNA and protein sequences. Genetics 153, 485–495.

61.	Gu, X. (1999) Statistical methods for testing functional divergence after gene duplication. Mol Biol Evol 16, 1664–1674.

62.	Gu, X. (2001) Maximum-likelihood approach for gene family evolution under functional divergence. Mol Biol Evol 18, 453.

63.	Karev, G. P, Wolf, Y. I., Koonin, E. V. (2003) Simple stochastic birth and death models of genome evolution: was there enough time for us to evolve? Bioinformatics 19, 1889–1900.

64.	Karev, G., et al. (2002) Birth and death of protein domains: a simple model of evolution explains power law behavior. BMC Evol Biol 2, 18–24.

65.	Rzhetsky, A., Ayala, F. J., Hsu, L. C., et al. (1997) Exon/intron structure of aldehyde dehydrogenase genes supports the “introns-late” theory. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 94, 6820–6825.

66.	Piazza, F., Liò, P. Statistical analysis of simple repeats in the human genome. Physica A 347, 472–488.

67.	Odom, G. L., Robichaux, J. L., Deininger, P. L. (2004) Predicting mammalian SINE subfamily activity from A-tail length. Mol Biol Evol 21, 2140–2148.

68.	Roy-Engel, A. M., Salem, A. H., Oyeniran, O. O., et al. (2002) Active Alu element “A-tails”: size does matter. Genome Res 12, 1333–1344.

Comments (Loading...)

Post comment/View all comments