Table 1 Comparison of mutation bias in B. cenocepacia with the mutation bias of seven other species with large mutation datasets and intact mismatch repair (two prokaryotes, five eukaryotes)
Organism (%GC)TransitionsTransversionsAT biasReference
A:T > G:CG:C > A:TA:T > T:AG:C > T:AA:T > C:GG:C > C:G
B. cenocepacia (0.67)6.887.512.672.445.352.380.81This study
E. coli (0.51)a8.7413.712.805.086.642.881.22Lee et al. (2012)
M. florum (0.27)a50.93640.8315.67360.1411.75185.3615.97Sung et al. (2012a)
H. sapiens (0.45)429.00961.00129.00258.00152.00295.002.10Lynch (2010)
D. melanogaster (0.42)a101.13513.1998.06130.7648.0174.524.32Schrider et al. (2013)
S. cerevisiae (0.38)a7.1317.863.039.695.307.822.22Zhu et al. (2014)
A. thaliana (0.36)a104.54896.3043.56139.0860.98123.636.26Ossowski et al. (2010)
C. elegans (0.35)a16.4757.2317.5044.097.7216.894.19Denver et al. (2012)
  • The strength of the AT-mutation bias, calculated as the ratio of the conditional mutation rates in the G:C > A:T direction to the conditional mutation rates in the A:T > G:C direction, is substantially higher in all other species than in B. cenocepacia.

  • a Conditional mutation rates (×1011) are calculated as the number of each mutation type, divided by the product of the number of generations and the total A:T or G:C sites in each respective reference genome if the raw data are not directly available in the cited reference (Wei et al. 2014).