Skip to main content

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering ((LNEE,volume 6))

  • 801 Accesses

Important insights into evolutionary processes can be determined by the rates of substitution in protein-coding sequences. Increase in the availability of coding sequence data has enabled researchers to estimate more accurately the coding sequence divergence of pairs of organisms. The use of different data sources, alignment protocols, and methods to estimate the substitution rates leads to widely varying estimates of key parameters that define the coding sequence of orthologous genes.

The rates of molecular evolution generally vary among lineages. Different studies have predicted that the source of this variation has differential effects on the synonymous and nonsynonymous substitution rates [3]. Changes in generation length or mutation rates are likely to have an impact on both the synonymous and nonsynonymous substitution rates. Hence, the number of substitutions per site between nucleotide sequences has become one of the most fundamental quantities for molecular evolution studies. It provides a valuable means for characterizing the evolutionary divergence of homologues. Thus accurate quantification of genetic evolutionary distances in terms of number of nucleotide substitutions between two homologous DNA sequences is an essential goal in evolutionary genetics. When two coding regions are analyzed, it is important to distinguish between the numbers of synonymous and nonsynonymous nucleotide substitutions per site. Estimation of calculation of these rates is not very simple; several methods have been developed to obtain these estimates from a comparison of two sequences [4, 5]. The early methods have been improved or simplified by many authors [1, 6–9]. Those methods follow almost the same strategy. The numbers of synonymous (S) and nonsynonymous (N) sites in the sequence and the numbers of synonymous (Sd) and nonsynonymous (Nd) differences between the two sequences are counted. Corrections for multiple substitutions are then applied to calculate the numbers of synonymous (ds) and nonsynonymous substitutions per site (dn) between two sequences. These methods assume an equal base and codon frequencies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Nei M, Gojobori T (1986) Molecular Biology and Evolution 3:418–426.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Jukes TH, Cantor CR (1969) Evolution of Protein Molecules. Mammalian Protein Metabolism, Academic Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Seo TK, Kishino H, Thorne JL (2004) Molecular Biology and Evolution 21:1201–1213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Miyata T, Yasunaga T (1980) Journal of Molecular Evolution 16:23–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Li WH, Wu CI, Luo CC (1985) Molecular Biology and Evolution 2:150–174.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Yorozu Y, Hirano M, Oka K, Tagawa Y (1982) IEEE Translation Journal on Magnetics in Japan 2:740–741.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Li WH (1993) Journal of Molecular Evolution 36:96–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Pamilo P, Bianchi NO (1993) Molecular Biology and Evolution 10:271–281.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Comeron JM (1995) Journal of Molecular Evolution 41:1152–1159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Waterston RH, et al. (2002) Nature 420:520–562.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Lamder ES, et al. (2001) Nature 409:860–921.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Li WH (1997) Molecular Evolution. Sinauer, Sunderland, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Makalowski W, Boguski MS (1998) Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences U.S.A 95:9407–9412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Nekrutenko A, Wu WY, Li WH (2003) Trends in Genetics 19:306–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Yang Z (1997) Computer Applications in the Biosciences 13:555–556.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Graur D, Li WH (2000) Fundamentals of Molecular Evolution. 2nd edn. Sinauer, Sunderland, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Liou CY, Wu JM (1996) Neural Networks 9:671–684.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Liou CY, Yuan SK (1999) Biological Cybernetics 81:331–342.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. Liou CY, Lin SL (2006) Natural Computing 5:15–42.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  20. Liou CY (2006) The 16th International Conference on Artificial Neural Networks, LNCS 4131:688–697, Springer, New York.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2008 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Manna, S., Liou, CY. (2008). Pseudo-Reverse Approach in Genetic Evolution. In: Castillo, O., Xu, L., Ao, SI. (eds) Trends in Intelligent Systems and Computer Engineering. Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering, vol 6. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-74935-8_17

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-74935-8_17

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA

  • Print ISBN: 978-0-387-74934-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-0-387-74935-8

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics