Originally published as Genetics Published Articles Ahead of Print on November 1, 2004.

Genetics, Vol. 169, 709-722, February 2005, Copyright © 2005
doi:10.1534/genetics.104.032250

Genomic Heterogeneity of Background Substitutional Patterns in Drosophila melanogaster

Nadia D. Singh^*,1, Peter F. Arndt and Dmitri A. Petrov^*

^* Department of Biological Sciences, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305
Max Planck Institute for Molecular Genetics, 14195 Berlin, Germany

¹ Corresponding author: Department of Biological Sciences, Stanford University, 371 Serra Mall, Stanford, CA 94305-5020.
E-mail: ndsingh{at}stanford.edu

Mutation is the underlying force that provides the variation upon which evolutionary forces can act. It is important to understand how mutation rates vary within genomes and how the probabilities of fixation of new mutations vary as well. If substitutional processes across the genome are heterogeneous, then examining patterns of coding sequence evolution without taking these underlying variations into account may be misleading. Here we present the first rigorous test of substitution rate heterogeneity in the Drosophila melanogaster genome using almost 1500 nonfunctional fragments of the transposable element DNAREP1_DM. Not only do our analyses suggest that substitutional patterns in heterochromatic and euchromatic sequences are different, but also they provide support in favor of a recombination-associated substitutional bias toward G and C in this species. The magnitude of this bias is entirely sufficient to explain recombination-associated patterns of codon usage on the autosomes of the D. melanogaster genome. We also document a bias toward lower GC content in the pattern of small insertions and deletions (indels). In addition, the GC content of noncoding DNA in Drosophila is higher than would be predicted on the basis of the pattern of nucleotide substitutions and small indels. However, we argue that the fast turnover of noncoding sequences in Drosophila makes it difficult to assess the importance of the GC biases in nucleotide substitutions and small indels in shaping the base composition of noncoding sequences.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				P. D. Keightley, U. Trivedi, M. Thomson, F. Oliver, S. Kumar, and M. L. Blaxter Analysis of the genome sequences of three Drosophila melanogaster spontaneous mutation accumulation lines Genome Res., July 1, 2009; 19(7): 1195 - 1201. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				V. L. Bauer DuMont, N. D. Singh, M. H. Wright, and C. F. Aquadro Locus-Specific Decoupling of Base Composition Evolution at Synonymous Sites and Introns along the Drosophila melanogaster and Drosophila sechellia Lineages Gen Biol Evol, June 22, 2009; 2009(0): 67 - 74. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. Gonzalez, J. M. Macpherson, P. W. Messer, and D. A. Petrov Inferring the Strength of Selection in Drosophila under Complex Demographic Models Mol. Biol. Evol., March 1, 2009; 26(3): 513 - 526. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. Kim and M. J. Sanderson Penalized Likelihood Phylogenetic Inference: Bridging the Parsimony-Likelihood Gap Syst Biol, October 1, 2008; 57(5): 665 - 674. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. R Haddrill and B. Charlesworth Non-neutral processes drive the nucleotide composition of non-coding sequences in Drosophila Biol Lett, August 23, 2008; 4(4): 438 - 441. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. Bedford and D. L. Hartl Overdispersion of the Molecular Clock: Temporal Variation of Gene-Specific Substitution Rates in Drosophila Mol. Biol. Evol., August 1, 2008; 25(8): 1631 - 1638. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. Bullaughey, M. Przeworski, and G. Coop No effect of recombination on the efficacy of natural selection in primates Genome Res., April 1, 2008; 18(4): 544 - 554. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. M. Macpherson, G. Sella, J. C. Davis, and D. A. Petrov Genomewide Spatial Correspondence Between Nonsynonymous Divergence and Neutral Polymorphism Reveals Extensive Adaptation in Drosophila Genetics, December 1, 2007; 177(4): 2083 - 2099. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Heger and C. P. Ponting Variable Strength of Translational Selection Among 12 Drosophila Species Genetics, November 1, 2007; 177(3): 1337 - 1348. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. Nielsen, V. L. Bauer DuMont, M. J. Hubisz, and C. F. Aquadro Maximum Likelihood Estimation of Ancestral Codon Usage Bias Parameters in Drosophila Mol. Biol. Evol., January 1, 2007; 24(1): 228 - 235. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				H.-P. Yang, T.-L. Hung, T.-L. You, and T.-H. Yang Genomewide Comparative Analysis of the Highly Abundant Transposable Element DINE-1 Suggests a Recent Transpositional Burst in Drosophila yakuba Genetics, May 1, 2006; 173(1): 189 - 196. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. Thornton, D. Bachtrog, and P. Andolfatto X chromosomes and autosomes evolve at similar rates in Drosophila: No evidence for faster-X protein evolution Genome Res., April 1, 2006; 16(4): 498 - 504. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				N. Galtier, E. Bazin, and N. Bierne GC-Biased Segregation of Noncoding Polymorphisms in Drosophila Genetics, January 1, 2006; 172(1): 221 - 228. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. C. Yasuhara, C. H. DeCrease, and B. T. Wakimoto Evolution of heterochromatic genes of Drosophila PNAS, August 2, 2005; 102(31): 10958 - 10963. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				Y. T. Aminetzach, J. M. Macpherson, and D. A. Petrov Pesticide Resistance via Transposition-Mediated Adaptive Gene Truncation in Drosophila Science, July 29, 2005; 309(5735): 764 - 767. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

International Access Link

Online ISSN: 1943-2361  Print ISSN: 0016-6731
Copyright 2009 by the Genetics Society of America
phone: 412-268-1812   fax: 412-268-1813   email: genetics-gsa{at}andrew.cmu.edu