Hydrophobic bulk conservation and genetic code determine the pattern of prokaryotic genome organization
Teng, W.; Zhou, Y.; Zheng, L.; Xu, Y.; Rao, Y.; Chen, S.; Xia, T.; Shu, W.; Chen, M.
Show abstract
Prokaryotic genomes in general exhibit marked organizational asymmetry, and differ substantially in GC-skew, AT-skew, and GS-bias (gene strand bias). Despite enigmatic origins, these organizational features and genomic GC-content have been described to be widely associated with each other recently, providing an opportunity to probe the evolutionary mechanisms. By analyzing sequence data of 4,012 leading strands from all available representative genomes, we found that the unusual nucleotide usage of coding genes under low GC-content contributed to a shift between two organizational patterns in the context of mutational biases. Analysis of artificially established neutral and natural models further suggests that in genes both GC-skew and AT-skew increase with decreasing GC-content, mostly contributed by synonymous substitutions because of genetic code, and by nonsynonymous substitutions because of hydrophobic bulk conservation in amino acid usage, respectively. This novel mechanistic framework in our study highlights the importance of evolutionary processes "operating at lower levels of organization" in the microbial world.
Matching journals
The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Compensatory Relationship between Low Complexity Regions and Gene Paralogy in the Evolution of Prokaryotes 97%
- Revealing 29 sets of independently modulated genes in Staphylococcus aureus, their regulators and role in key physiological responses 94%
- Versatile NTP recognition and domain fusions expand the functional repertoire of the ParB-CTPase fold beyond chromosome segregation 93%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.