Cited by 2,849Genomics and Phylogenetic StudiesRNA and protein synthesis mechanismsEvolution and Genetic Dynamics

A General Empirical Model of Protein Evolution Derived from Multiple Protein Families Using a Maximum-Likelihood Approach

Open access
Whelan, Simon, Goldman, Nick·2001·Molecular Biology and Evolution

Abstract

Phylogenetic inference from amino acid sequence data uses mainly empirical models of amino acid replacement and is therefore dependent on those models. Two of the more widely used models, the Dayhoff and JTT models, are estimated using similar methods that can utilize large numbers of sequences from many unrelated protein families but are somewhat unsatisfactory because they rely on assumptions that may lead to systematic error and discard a large amount of the information within the sequences. The alternative method of maximum-likelihood estimation may utilize the information in the sequence data more efficiently and suffers from no systematic error, but it has previously been applicable to relatively few sequences related by a single phylogenetic tree. Here, we combine the best attributes of these two methods using an approximate maximum-likelihood method. We implemented this approach to estimate a new model of amino acid replacement from a database of globular protein sequences comprising 3,905 amino acid sequences split into 182 protein families. While the new model has an overall structure similar to those of other commonly used models, there are significant differences. The new model outperforms the Dayhoff and JTT models with respect to maximum-likelihood values for a large majority of the protein families in our database. This suggests that it provides a better overall fit to the evolutionary process in globular proteins and may lead to more accurate phylogenetic tree estimates. Potentially, this matrix, and the methods used to generate it, may also be useful in other areas of research, such as biological sequence database searching, sequence alignment, and protein structure prediction, for which an accurate description of amino acid replacement is required.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a003851

Cites

17 of 17 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Models previously used to study animal phylogeny (WAG+G, LG+G, GTR+G, PF-schemes, CAT-GTR+G) fell short of adequately describing among-site amino acid preferences in both WhelanD20 and Chang datasets.

    “We showed that for both datasets, models that have previously been used to study the animal phylogeny fell short, to various degrees, of adequately describing among-site amino acid preferences”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 18 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. DAYHOFF, M. O., R. V. ECK, and C. M. PARK. 1972. A model of evolutionary change in proteins. Pp. 89-99 in M. O. DAYHOFF, ed. Atlas of protein sequence and structure. Vol. 5. National Biomedical Research Foundation, Washington, D.C.
  2. DAYHOFF, M. O., R. M. SCHWARTZ, and B. C. ORCUTT. 1978. A model of evolutionary change in proteins. Pp. 345-352 in M. O. DAYHOFF, ed. Atlas of protein sequence and structure. Vol. 5, suppl. 3. National Biomedical Research Foundation, Washington, D.C.
  3. LINDGREN, B. W. 1976. Statistical theory. 3rd edition. Macmillan, New York.
  4. SWOFFORD, D. L., G. J. OLSEN, P . J. WADDELL, and D. M. HILLIS. 1996. Phylogenetic inference. Pp. 407-514 in D. M. HILLIS, C. MORITZ, and B. K. MABLE, eds. Molecular systematics. Sinauer, Sunderland, Mass.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Whelan, S., & Goldman, N.
Affiliations
University of Cambridge (GB)
Venue
Molecular Biology and Evolution
Published
2001-05
Volume
18
Issue
5
Pages
691-699
ISSN
  • 0737-4038 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-1719
OpenAlex
W2062018285
Cited by
2,849
References
18
Citations by year
2026: 66 · 2025: 95 · 2024: 114 · 2023: 113 · 2022: 138 · 2021: 184 · 2020: 153 · 2019: 143 · 2018: 123 · 2017: 131 · 2016: 111 · 2015: 145 · 2014: 175 · 2013: 142 · 2012: 150
FWCI
11.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Molecular Biology and Evolution (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Wellcome Trust
  • Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › RNA and protein synthesis mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Evolution and Genetic Dynamics
Keywords
protein evolution, amino acid substitution models, maximum likelihood estimation, globular proteins, protein families, phylogenetic inference, sequence alignment
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Amino Acid Sequence, Amino Acids, Computer Simulation, Models, Biological, Phylogeny, Probability, Proteins, Likelihood Functions, Sequence Alignment, Evolution, Molecular

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review