PreprintCited by 27Bacterial Genetics and BiotechnologyEvolution and Genetic DynamicsGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Ancestral reconstruction of duplicated signaling proteins reveals the evolution of signaling specificity

Open access

Preprint — published as 10.7554/elife.77346 · Paper page

Abstract

Gene duplication is crucial to generating novel signaling pathways during evolution. However, it remains unclear how the redundant proteins produced by gene duplication ultimately acquire new interaction specificities to establish insulated paralogous signaling pathways. Here, we used ancestral sequence reconstruction to resurrect and characterize a bacterial two-component signaling system that duplicated in α-proteobacteria. We determined the interaction specificities of the signaling proteins that existed before and immediately after this duplication event and then identified key mutations responsible for establishing specificity in the two systems. Just three mutations, in only two of the four interacting proteins, were sufficient to establish specificity of the extant systems. Some of these mutations weakened interactions between paralogous systems to limit crosstalk. However, others strengthened interactions within a system, indicating that the ancestral interaction, although functional, had the potential to be strengthened. Our work suggests that protein-protein interactions with such latent potential may be highly amenable to duplication and divergence.

Overview

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 · 10.1101/2022.02.11.480122

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 43

  1. 10.1371/journal.pcbi.0020143 · DOI
  2. 10.7554/eLife.07864 · DOI
  3. 10.1126/science.1240810 · DOI
  4. 10.7554/elife.02304 · DOI
  5. 10.1371/journal.pbio.3000341 · DOI
  6. 10.1126/science.1123348 · DOI
  7. 10.1038/nature08249 · DOI
  8. 10.1146/annurev-micro-091018-054627 · DOI
  9. 10.1074/jbc.M110715200 · DOI
  10. 10.1146/annurev-micro-092611-150039 · DOI · Paper page
  11. 10.1371/journal.pgen.1001220 · DOI
  12. 10.1016/j.cell.2012.05.033 · DOI
  13. 10.1016/j.cub.2016.04.038 · DOI
  14. 10.1093/molbev/msz189 · DOI
  15. 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002195 · DOI · Paper page
  16. 10.1093/nar/gkh340 · DOI · Paper page
  17. 10.1371/journal.pgen.1003072 · DOI
  18. 10.1093/molbev/msp230 · DOI
  19. 10.1038/nature10624 · DOI
  20. 10.1186/1471-2180-5-35 · DOI
  21. 10.1093/sysbio/syq010 · DOI · Paper page
  22. 10.1038/s41586-020-3021-2 · DOI · Paper page
  23. 10.1146/annurev-biophys-070816-033631 · DOI
  24. 10.7554/elife.04126 · DOI
  25. 10.1038/nmicrobiol.2016.48 · DOI · Paper page
  26. 10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a026297 · DOI
  27. 10.1093/molbev/msaa198 · DOI
  28. 10.1038/s41586-019-1639-8 · DOI
  29. 10.1016/j.cell.2014.09.003 · DOI · Paper page
  30. 10.1093/nar/gkw989 · DOI
  31. 10.1093/nar/gkz1002 · DOI
  32. 10.1016/S0092-8674(03)01077-8 · DOI
  33. 10.1038/s41586-020-2292-y · DOI
  34. 10.1093/molbev/msp077 · DOI · Paper page
  35. 10.1111/j.1365-2958.2008.06426.x · DOI
  36. 10.1016/j.cell.2008.04.040 · DOI
  37. 10.1371/journal.pbio.0030334 · DOI
  38. 10.1038/nature23902 · DOI
  39. 10.1371/journal.pbio.1001446 · DOI
  40. 10.1038/s41467-021-23645-4 · DOI
  41. 10.1126/science.aaa1823 · DOI
  42. 10.1093/molbev/msm088 · DOI · Paper page
  43. 10.1038/nature02178 · DOI

Metadata

Authors
Nocedal, I., & Laub, M. T.
Affiliations
  • Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)
  • Howard Hughes Medical Institute (US)
Corresponding author
Laub, Michael T.
Venue
eLife
Publisher
openRxiv
Published
2022-02-11
Volume
11
ISSN
2050-084X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4282940566
Cited by
27
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 3
FWCI
3.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • eLife (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • DSpace@MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
Funders
  • Howard Hughes Medical Institute
  • National Institutes of Health (1f32gm126765-01)
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (1F32GM126765, F32 GM126765)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Bacterial Genetics and Biotechnology
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Evolution and Genetic Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Keywords
gene duplication, ancestral sequence reconstruction, two-component systems, protein-protein interaction specificity, crosstalk, Alphaproteobacteria, bacterial signal transduction
MeSH terms
Mutation, Phylogeny, Signal Transduction, Evolution, Molecular, Gene Duplication, Alphaproteobacteria

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