Organisms can adapt to an environment by taking multiple mutational paths. This redundancy at the genetic level, where many mutations have similar phenotypic and fitness effects, can make untangling the molecular mechanisms of complex adaptations difficult. Here we use the E. coli long-term evolution experiment (LTEE) as a model to address this challenge. To understand how different genomic changes could lead to parallel fitness gains, we characterize the landscape of transcriptional and translational changes across 12 replicate populations evolving in parallel for 50,000 generations. By quantifying absolute changes in mRNA abundances, we show that not only do all evolved lines have more mRNAs but that this increase in mRNA abundance scales with cell size. We also find that despite few shared mutations at the genetic level, clones from replicate populations in the LTEE are remarkably similar in their gene expression patterns at both the transcriptional and translational levels. Furthermore, we show that the majority of the expression changes are due to changes at the transcriptional level with very few translational changes. Finally, we show how mutations in transcriptional regulators lead to consistent and parallel changes in the expression levels of downstream genes. These results deepen our understanding of the molecular mechanisms underlying complex adaptations and provide insights into the repeatability of evolution.
AnaCoDa is freely available under the Mozilla Public License 2.0 on CRAN (https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/AnaCoDa/).
Background Researchers often measure changes in gene expression across conditions to better understand the shared functional roles and regulatory mechanisms of different genes. Analogous to this is comparing gene expression across species, which can improve our understanding of the evolutionary processes shaping the evolution of both individual genes and functional pathways. One area of interest is determining genes showing signals of coevolution, which can also indicate potential functional similarity, analogous to co-expression analysis often performed across conditions for a single species. However, as with any trait, comparing gene expression across species can be confounded by the non-independence of species due to shared ancestry, making standard hypothesis testing inappropriate. Results We compared RNA-Seq data across 18 fungal species using a multivariate Brownian Motion phylogenetic comparative method (PCM), which allowed us to quantify coevolution between protein pairs while directly accounting for the shared ancestry of the species. Our work indicates proteins which physically-interact show stronger signals of coevolution than randomly-generated pairs. Interactions with stronger empirical and computational evidence also showing stronger signals of coevolution. We examined the effects of number of protein interactions and gene expression levels on coevolution, finding both factors are overall poor predictors of the strength of coevolution between a protein pair. Simulations further demonstrate the potential issues of analyzing gene expression coevolution without accounting for shared ancestry in a standard hypothesis testing framework. Furthermore, our simulations indicate the use of a randomly-generated null distribution as a means of determining statistical significance for detecting coevolving genes with phylogenetically-uncorrected correlations, as has previously been done, is less accurate than PCMs, although is a significant improvement over standard hypothesis testing. These methods are further improved by using a phylogenetically-corrected correlation metric. Conclusions Our work highlights potential benefits of using PCMs to detect gene expression coevolution from high-throughput omics scale data. This framework can be built upon to investigate other evolutionary hypotheses, such as changes in transcription regulatory mechanisms across species.
Background Codon usage bias (CUB), the non-uniform usage of synonymous codons, occurs across all domains of life. Adaptive CUB is hypothesized to result from various selective pressures, including selection for efficient ribosome elongation, accurate translation, mRNA secondary structure, and/or protein folding. Given the critical link between protein folding and protein function, numerous studies have analyzed the relationship between codon usage and protein structure. The results from these studies have often been contradictory, likely reflecting the differing methods used for measuring codon usage and the failure to appropriately control for confounding factors, such as differences in amino acid usage between protein structures and changes in the frequency of different structures with gene expression. Results Here we take an explicit population genetics approach to quantify codon-specific shifts in natural selection related to protein structure in S. cerevisiae and E. coli. Unlike other metrics of codon usage, our approach explicitly separates the effects of natural selection, scaled by gene expression, and mutation bias while naturally accounting for a region’s amino acid usage. Bayesian model comparisons suggest selection on codon usage varies only slightly between helix, sheet, and coil secondary structures and, similarly, between structured and intrinsically-disordered regions. Similarly, in contrast to prevous findings, we find selection on codon usage only varies slightly at the termini of helices in E. coli. Using simulated data, we show this previous work indicating “non-optimal” codons are enriched at the beginning of helices in S. cerevisiae was due to failure to control for various confounding factors (e.g. amino acid biases, gene expression, etc.), and rather than selection to modulate cotranslational folding. Conclusions Our results reveal a weak relationship between codon usage and protein structure, indicating that differences in selection on codon usage between structures are slight. In addition to the magnitude of differences in selection between protein structures being slight, the observed shifts appear to be idiosyncratic and largely codon-specific rather than systematic reversals in the nature of selection. Overall, our work demonstrates the statistical power and benefits of studying selective shifts on codon usage or other genomic features from an explicitly evolutionary approach. Limitations of this approach and future potential research avenues are discussed.
Variation in gene expression across lineages is thought to explain much of the observed phenotypic variation and adaptation. The protein is closer to the target of natural selection but gene expression is typically measured as the amount of mRNA. The broad assumption that mRNA levels are good proxies for protein levels has been undermined by a number of studies reporting moderate or weak correlations between the two measures across species. One biological explanation for this discrepancy is that there has been compensatory evolution between the mRNA level and regulation of translation. However, we do not understand the evolutionary conditions necessary for this to occur nor the expected strength of the corelation between mRNA and protein levels. Here we develop a theoretical model for the coevolution of mRNA and protein levels and investigate the dynamics of themodel over time. We find that compensatory evolution is widespread when there is stabilizing selection on the protein level; this observation held true across a variety of regulatory pathways. When the protein level is under directional selection, the mRNA level of a gene and the translation rate of the same gene were negatively correlated across lineages but positively correlated across genes. These findings help explain results from comparative studies of gene xpression and potentially enable researchers to disentangle biological and statistical hypotheses for the mismatch between transcriptomic and proteomic data.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.