Cited by 67RNA and protein synthesis mechanismsEvolution and Genetic DynamicsBacterial Genetics and Biotechnology

A Major Controversy in Codon-Anticodon Adaptation Resolved by a New Codon Usage Index

Open access
Xia, Xuhua·2015·Genetics

Abstract

Two alternative hypotheses attribute different benefits to codon-anticodon adaptation. The first assumes that protein production is rate limited by both initiation and elongation and that codon-anticodon adaptation would result in higher elongation efficiency and more efficient and accurate protein production, especially for highly expressed genes. The second claims that protein production is rate limited only by initiation efficiency but that improved codon adaptation and, consequently, increased elongation efficiency have the benefit of increasing ribosomal availability for global translation. To test these hypotheses, a recent study engineered a synthetic library of 154 genes, all encoding the same protein but differing in degrees of codon adaptation, to quantify the effect of differential codon adaptation on protein production in Escherichia coli. The surprising conclusion that “codon bias did not correlate with gene expression” and that “translation initiation, not elongation, is rate-limiting for gene expression” contradicts the conclusion reached by many other empirical studies. In this paper, I resolve the contradiction by reanalyzing the data from the 154 sequences. I demonstrate that translation elongation accounts for about 17% of total variation in protein production and that the previous conclusion is due to the use of a codon adaptation index (CAI) that does not account for the mutation bias in characterizing codon adaptation. The effect of translation elongation becomes undetectable only when translation initiation is unrealistically slow. A new index of translation elongation ITE is formulated to facilitate studies on the efficiency and evolution of the translation machinery.

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 · 10.1534/genetics.114.172106

Cites

2 of 2 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?

  • Translation initiation is often the rate-limiting step.

    “Optimum codon usage without efficient translation initiation does not increase protein production [10,11] because translation initiation is often the rate-limiting step.”

    From Detailed Dissection and Critical Evaluation of the Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna mRNA Vaccines (2021) · cites this paper as [11]

    The Conceptual Framework says that inefficient initiation can limit the benefit of improved codon adaptation. But the Discussion concludes that both initiation and elongation limit translation efficiency, and notes that the low-initiation group studied is not representative of most genes. The paper therefore does not establish that initiation is often the rate-limiting step. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The codon optimization applied to BNT-162b2 and mRNA-1273 leads to a much increased CAI and ITE for the two vaccine mRNAs.

    “The codon optimization applied to BNT-162b2 and mRNA-1273 leads to a much increased codon adaptation index (CAI) [21,22] and index of translation efficiency (ITE) [11,36] for the two vaccine mRNAs.”
  • Translation elongation becomes rate-limiting when translation initiation is highly efficient.

    “Translation elongation becomes rate-limiting when translation initiation is highly efficient [10,11].”
  • Optimum codon usage without efficient translation initiation does not increase protein production.

    “Optimum codon usage without efficient translation initiation does not increase protein production [10,11] because translation initiation is often the rate-limiting step.”

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

Research works printed but not linked: 47

  1. Akashi H., 1994 Synonymous codon usage in Drosophila melanogaster: natural selection and translational accuracy. Genetics 136: 927– 935. 8005445 PMC1205897
  2. Andersson D. I. Kurland C. G., 1983 Ram ribosomes are defective proofreaders. Mol. Gen. Genet. 191: 378– 381. 6355760
  3. Bulmer M., 1990 The effect of context on synonymous codon usage in genes with low codon usage bias. Nucleic Acids Res. 18: 2869– 2873. 2190183 PMC330812
  4. Bulmer M., 1991 The selection-mutation-drift theory of synonymous codon usage. Genetics 129: 897– 907. 1752426 PMC1204756
  5. Chithambaram S. Prabhakaran R. Xia X., 2014 a Differential codon adaptation between dsDNA and ssDNA phages in Escherichia coli. Mol. Biol. Evol. 31: 1606– 1617. 24586046 PMC4032129
  6. Chithambaram S. Prabhakaran R. Xia X., 2014 b The effect of mutation and selection on codon adaptation in Escherichia coli bacteriophage. Genetics 197: 301– 315. 24583580 PMC4012488
  7. Coghlan A. Wolfe K. H., 2000 Relationship of codon bias to mRNA concentration and protein length in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Yeast 16: 1131– 1145. 10953085
  8. Comeron J. M. Aguade M., 1998 An evaluation of measures of synonymous codon usage bias. J. Mol. Evol. 47: 268– 274. 9732453
  9. Crick F. H., 1966 Codon–anticodon pairing: the wobble hypothesis. J. Mol. Biol. 19: 548– 555. 5969078
  10. dos Reis M. Savva R. Wernisch L., 2004 Solving the riddle of codon usage preferences: a test for translational selection. Nucleic Acids Res. 32: 5036– 5044 Print 2004. 15448185 PMC521650
  11. Duret L. Mouchiroud D., 1999 Expression pattern and, surprisingly, gene length shape codon usage in Caenorhabditis, Drosophila, and Arabidopsis. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 96: 4482– 4487. 10200288 PMC16358
  12. Fiers W. Grosjean H., 1979 On codon usage. Nature 277: 328. 368645
  13. Grantham R. Gautier C. Gouy M. Jacobzone M. Mercier R., 1981 Codon catalog usage is a genome strategy modulated for gene expressivity. Nucleic Acids Res. 9: r43– r79. 7208352 PMC326682
  14. Grosjean H. de Crecy-Lagard V. Marck C., 2010 Deciphering synonymous codons in the three domains of life: co-evolution with specific tRNA modification enzymes. FEBS Lett. 584: 252– 264. 19931533
  15. Grosjean H. Marck C. de Crecy-Lagard V., 2007 The various strategies of codon decoding in organisms of the three domains of life: evolutionary implications. Nucleic Acids Symp. Ser., No. 51: 15– 16. 18029563
  16. Grosjean H. Sankoff D. Jou W. M. Fiers W. Cedergren R. J., 1978 Bacteriophage MS2 RNA: a correlation between the stability of the codon:anticodon interaction and the choice of code words. J. Mol. Evol. 12: 113– 119. 368346
  17. Haas J. Park E.-C. Seed B., 1996 Codon usage limitation in the expression of HIV-1 envelope glycoprotein. Curr. Biol. 6: 315– 324. 8805248
  18. Hofacker I. L., 2003 Vienna RNA secondary structure server. Nucleic Acids Res. 31: 3429– 3431. 12824340 PMC169005
  19. Ikemura T., 1981 a Correlation between the abundance of Escherichia coli transfer RNAs and the occurrence of the respective codons in its protein genes. J. Mol. Biol. 146: 1– 21. 6167728
  20. Ikemura T., 1981 b Correlation between the abundance of Escherichia coli transfer RNAs and the occurrence of the respective codons in its protein genes: a proposal for a synonymous codon choice that is optimal for the E. coli translational system. J. Mol. Biol. 151: 389– 409. 6175758
  21. Ikemura T., 1982 Correlation between the abundance of yeast transfer RNAs and the occurrence of the respective codons in protein genes: differences in synonymous codon choice patterns of yeast and Escherichia coli with reference to the abundance of isoaccepting transfer RNAs. J. Mol. Biol. 158: 573– 597. 6750137
  22. Ikemura T., 1992 Correlation between codon usage and tRNA content in microorganisms, pp. 87– 111 in Transfer RNA in protein synthesis, edited by Hatfield D. L. Lee B. J. Pirtle R. M. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
  23. Jank P. Shindo-Okada N. Nishimura S. Gross H. J., 1977 Rabbit liver tRNA1Val. I. Primary structure and unusual codon recognition. Nucleic Acids Res. 4: 1999– 2008. 896481 PMC342537
  24. Kudla G. Murray A. W. Tollervey D. Plotkin J. B., 2009 Coding-sequence determinants of gene expression in Escherichia coli. Science 324: 255– 258. 19359587 PMC3902468
  25. Liljenstrom H. von Heijne G., 1987 Translation rate modification by preferential codon usage: intragenic position effects. J. Theor. Biol. 124: 43– 55. 2443765
  26. Lustig F. Boren T. Guindy Y. S. Elias P. Samuelsson T., 1989 Codon discrimination and anticodon structural context. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 86: 6873– 6877. 2674936 PMC297952
  27. Marck C. Grosjean H., 2002 tRNomics: analysis of tRNA genes from 50 genomes of Eukarya, Archaea, and Bacteria reveals anticodon-sparing strategies and domain-specific features. RNA 8: 1189– 1232. 12403461 PMC1370332
  28. Mitra S. K. Lustig F. Akesson B. Lagerkvist U., 1977 Codon-acticodon recognition in the valine codon family. J. Biol. Chem. 252: 471– 478. 319094
  29. Moriyama E. N. Powell J. R., 1997 Codon usage bias and tRNA abundance in Drosophila. J. Mol. Evol. 45: 514– 523. 9342399
  30. Nakamoto T., 2006 A unified view of the initiation of protein synthesis. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 341: 675– 678. 16438936
  31. Nasvall S. J. Chen P. Bjork G. R., 2007 The wobble hypothesis revisited: uridine-5-oxyacetic acid is critical for reading of G-ending codons. RNA 13: 2151– 2164. 17942742 PMC2080601
  32. Ngumbela K. C. Ryan K. P. Sivamurthy R. Brockman M. A. Gandhi R. T., 2008 Quantitative effect of suboptimal codon usage on translational efficiency of mRNA encoding HIV-1 gag in intact T cells. PLoS One 3: e2356. PMC2387063 18523584
  33. Novembre J. A., 2002 Accounting for background nucleotide composition when measuring codon usage bias. Mol. Biol. Evol. 19: 1390– 1394. 12140252
  34. Osterman I. A. Evfratov S. A. Sergiev P. V. Dontsova O. A., 2013 Comparison of mRNA features affecting translation initiation and reinitiation. Nucleic Acids Res. 41: 474– 486. 23093605 PMC3592434
  35. Palidwor G. A. Perkins T. J. Xia X., 2010 A general model of codon bias due to GC mutational bias. PLoS One 5: e13431. PMC2965080 21048949
  36. Ran W. Higgs P. G., 2012 Contributions of speed and accuracy to translational selection in bacteria. PLoS One 7: e51652. PMC3522724 23272132
  37. Rice P. Longden I. Bleasby A., 2000 EMBOSS: the European Molecular Biology Open Software Suite. Trends Genet. 16: 276– 277. 10827456
  38. Robinson M. Lilley R. Little S. Emtage J. S. Yarranton G., 1984 Codon usage can affect efficiency of translation of genes in Escherichia coli. Nucleic Acids Res. 12: 6663– 6671. 6091031 PMC320107
  39. Sorensen M. A. Kurland C. G. Pedersen S., 1989 Codon usage determines translation rate in Escherichia coli. J. Mol. Biol. 207: 365– 377. 2474074
  40. Sun X. Y. Yang Q. Xia X., 2013 An improved implementation of effective number of codons (nc). Mol. Biol. Evol. 30: 191– 196. 22915832
  41. Supek F. Smuc T., 2010 On relevance of codon usage to expression of synthetic and natural genes in Escherichia coli. Genetics 185: 1129– 1134. 20421604 PMC2900969
  42. Wright F., 1990 The “effective number of codons” used in a gene. Gene 87: 23– 29. 2110097
  43. Xia X., 1998 How optimized is the translational machinery in Escherichia coli, Salmonella typhimurium, and Saccharomyces cerevisiae? Genetics 149: 37– 44. 9584084 PMC1460137
  44. Xia X., 2007 An improved implementation of codon adaptation index. Evol. Bioinform. 3: 53– 58. PMC2684136 19461982
  45. Xia X., 2008 The cost of wobble translation in fungal mitochondrial genomes: integration of two traditional hypotheses. BMC Evol. Biol. 8: 211. 18638409 PMC2488353
  46. Xia X., 2013 DAMBE5: A comprehensive software package for data analysis in molecular biology and evolution. Mol. Biol. Evol. 30: 1720– 1728. 23564938 PMC3684854
  47. Zhang Z. Li J. Cui P. Ding F. Li A., 2012 Codon deviation coefficient: a novel measure for estimating codon usage bias and its statistical significance. BMC Bioinformatics 13: 43. 22435713 PMC3368730

Cited by

Authors
Xia, X.
Affiliations
University of Ottawa (CA)
Corresponding author
Xia, Xuhua
Venue
Genetics
Published
2014-12-05
Volume
199
Issue
2
Pages
573-579
ISSN
  • 0016-6731 (ISSN-L)
  • 1943-2631
OpenAlex
W2146837785
Cited by
67
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 4
FWCI
2.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Genetics (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • 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
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Bacterial Genetics and Biotechnology
Keywords
codon usage bias, codon adaptation index, translation initiation, protein production rate, gene expression, Escherichia coli, mutational bias
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Biological, Anticodon, Codon, Selection, Genetic, Protein Biosynthesis, 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