PreprintCited by 30Evolution and Genetic DynamicsGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesRNA and protein synthesis mechanisms

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

Evaluation of methods to detect shifts in directional selection at the genome scale

Open access
Duchemin, Louis, Lanore, Vincent, Veber, Philippe, Boussau, Bastien·2022·Molecular Biology and Evolution

Preprint — published as 10.1093/molbev/msac247

Abstract

Identifying the footprints of selection in coding sequences can inform about the importance and function of individual sites. Analyses of the ratio of non-synonymous to synonymous sub-stitutions ( d N /d S ) have been widely used to pinpoint changes in the intensity of selection, but cannot distinguish them from changes in the direction of selection, i . e ., changes in the fitness of specific amino acids at a given position. A few methods that rely on amino acid profiles to detect changes in directional selection have been designed, but their performance have not been well characterized. In this paper, we investigate the performance of 6 of these methods. We evaluate them on simulations along empirical phylogenies in which transition events have been annotated, and compare their ability to detect sites that have undergone changes in the direction or intensity of selection to that of a widely used d N /d S approach, codeml ’s branch-site model A. We show that all methods have reduced performance in the presence of biased gene conversion but not CpG hypermutability. The best profile method, Pelican, a new implementation of [Tamuri et al., 2009], performs as well as codeml in a range of conditions except for detecting relaxations of selection, and performs better when tree length increases, or in the presence of persistent positive selection. It is fast, enabling genome-scale searches for site-wise changes in the direction of selection associated with phenotypic changes.

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 · 10.1101/2022.06.22.497174

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: 67

  1. Anderson, E. , Bai, Z. , Bischof, C. , Blackford, S. , Demmel, J. , Dongarra, J. , Du Croz, J. , Greenbaum, A. , Hammarling, S. , McKenney, A. , and Sorensen, D. (1999). LAPACK Users’ Guide. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, Philadelphia, PA, third edition. · DOI
  2. 10.1093/molbev/msp103 · DOI
  3. 10.1093/molbev/msu220 · DOI
  4. 2017, Identification of positive selection in genes is greatly improved by using experimentally informed site-specific models, Biology Direct, 12, 1, 10.1186/s13062-016-0172-z · DOI
  5. 10.1186/s13059-018-1613-z · DOI
  6. 2013, Advanced Information Systems Engineering, 7908, 451, 10.1007/978-3-642-40994-3_29 · DOI
  7. 10.1126/science.1123348 · DOI
  8. 10.1093/molbev/msw112 · DOI · Paper page
  9. 2007, C4 Photosynthesis evolved in grasses via parallel adaptive genetic changes, Current biology : CB, 17, 1241, 10.1016/j.cub.2007.06.036 · DOI
  10. 10.1093/molbev/msz048 · DOI
  11. 2015, How to calculate the non-synonymous to synonymous rate ratio of protein-coding genes under the Fisher–Wright mutation–selection framework, Biology Letters, 11, 20141031, 10.1098/rsbl.2014.1031 · DOI
  12. 10.1007/BF01734359 · DOI · Paper page
  13. 10.1016/0021-9991(76)90041-3 · DOI · Paper page
  14. 10.1101/gr.185488.114 · DOI
  15. 10.1073/pnas.0402177101 · DOI
  16. 10.1093/molbev/msx308 · DOI
  17. 2021, A Codon Model for Associating Phenotypic Traits with Altered Selective Patterns of Sequence Evolution, Systematic Biology, 70, 608, 10.1093/sysbio/syaa087 · DOI · Paper page
  18. 10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a025995 · DOI
  19. Jones, C. T. , Susko, E. , and Bielawski, J. P. (2019). Looking for Darwin in Genomic Sequences: Validity and Success Depends on the Relationship Between Model and Data. In Anisimova, M. , editor, Evolutionary Genomics: Statistical and Computational Methods, Methods in Molecular Biology, pages 399–426. Springer, New York, NY. · DOI
  20. 10.1371/journal.pone.0052974 · DOI
  21. Kimura, M. (1983). The Neutral Theory of Molecular Evolution. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. · DOI
  22. 10.1016/j.cell.2020.06.043 · DOI · Paper page
  23. 10.1093/molbev/msr125 · DOI · Paper page
  24. Kosiol, C. and Anisimova, M. (2019). Selection Acting on Genomes. In Anisimova, M. , editor, Evolutionary Genomics: Statistical and Computational Methods, pages 373–397. Springer New York, New York, NY. · DOI
  25. 2008, Patterns of positive selection in six Mammalian genomes, PLoS genetics, 4, e1000144, 10.1371/journal.pgen.1000144 · DOI · Paper page
  26. 2021, The ocaml system: Documentation and user’s manual, INRIA, 3, 42
  27. 10.1016/j.cub.2009.11.042 · DOI
  28. 10.1073/pnas.1818532116 · DOI
  29. 10.1093/molbev/msaa077 · DOI
  30. 10.1073/pnas.0408986102 · DOI
  31. 2019, Hypothesis testing near singularities and boundaries, Electronic journal of statistics, 13, 2150
  32. 10.1093/nar/gkt1065 · DOI
  33. on behalf of the Southern African Treatment and Resistance Network (SATuRN) Consortium, 2012, Modeling HIV-1 Drug Resistance as Episodic Directional Selection, PLoS Computational Biology, 8, e1002507, 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002507 · DOI
  34. 10.1093/molbev/msv035 · DOI
  35. 10.1093/comjnl/7.4.308 · DOI · Paper page
  36. 10.1371/journal.pbio.0030170 · DOI
  37. 10.1093/molbev/msz107 · DOI · Paper page
  38. 10.1371/journal.pone.0192697 · DOI
  39. 2019, Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 32, 8024
  40. 10.1093/gbe/evw165 · DOI
  41. 10.1098/rstb.2010.0007 · DOI
  42. 10.1093/molbev/msy114 · DOI · Paper page
  43. 10.1098/rstb.2018.0234 · DOI
  44. 2017, De novo active sites for resurrected Precambrian enzymes, Nature Communications, 8, 16113, 10.1038/ncomms16113 · DOI
  45. 10.1073/pnas.0910915107 · DOI
  46. 10.1093/molbev/msy243 · DOI
  47. 10.1093/molbev/msm190 · DOI
  48. 10.1093/molbev/msz015 · DOI
  49. 10.1093/molbev/msv003 · DOI
  50. 10.1093/molbev/msw171 · DOI
  51. 10.1101/gr.076992.108 · DOI · Paper page
  52. 10.1093/molbev/msp133 · DOI
  53. Tamuri, A. U. and dos Reis, M. (2021). A mutation-selection model of protein evolution under persistent positive selection. preprint, Evolutionary Biology. · DOI
  54. 10.1534/genetics.111.136432 · DOI
  55. 2009, Identifying changes in selective constraints: Host shifts in influenza, PLoS Computational Biology, 5, e1000564, 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000564 · DOI
  56. Tamuri, A. U. , Goldman, N. , and Reis, M. d. (2014). A Penalized Likelihood Method for Estimating the Distribution of Selection Coefficients from Phylogenetic Data. Genetics, page genetics.114.162263. · DOI
  57. 2017, Finding Direction in the Search for Selection, Journal of Molecular Evolution, 84, 39, 10.1007/s00239-016-9765-5 · DOI
  58. Wickham, H. (2016). ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis. Springer-Verlag New York. · DOI
  59. 10.1093/molbev/msi097 · DOI
  60. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198567028.001.0001 · DOI
  61. 10.1093/molbev/msm088 · DOI · Paper page
  62. 10.1093/molbev/msm284 · DOI
  63. 10.1002/CPBI.96 · DOI
  64. 10.1126/science.1251385 · DOI · Paper page
  65. 10.1093/molbev/msi237 · DOI · Paper page
  66. 10.1126/science.1226630 · DOI · Paper page
  67. 10.1038/ng.2310 · DOI · Paper page

Metadata

Authors
Duchemin, L., Lanore, V., Veber, P., & Boussau, B.
Affiliations
Lyon 1 Université (FR)
Corresponding author
  • Duchemin, Louis
  • Boussau, Bastien
Venue
Molecular Biology and Evolution
Publisher
openRxiv
Published
2022-06-22
Volume
40
Issue
2
ISSN
0737-4038 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4311286332
Cited by
30
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 5
FWCI
3.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc
Locations
  • Molecular Biology and Evolution (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Institut national de recherche en informatique et en automatique (INRIA)
  • University of Cambridge
  • Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR-15-CE32-0005)
Topics
  • 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
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › RNA and protein synthesis mechanisms
Keywords
directional selection, amino acid composition, dN/dS ratio, branch-site model, codeml, biased gene conversion, pelicans, relaxed selection, positive selection, protein-coding sequences
MeSH terms
Amino Acids, Codon, Models, Genetic, Phylogeny, Selection, Genetic, 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