↓ Skip to main content

Analysis of a mechanistic Markov model for gene duplicates evolving under subfunctionalization

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Ecology and Evolution, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
17 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Analysis of a mechanistic Markov model for gene duplicates evolving under subfunctionalization
Published in
BMC Ecology and Evolution, January 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12862-016-0848-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tristan L. Stark, David A. Liberles, Barbara R. Holland, Małgorzata M. O’Reilly

Abstract

Gene duplication has been identified as a key process driving functional change in many genomes. Several biological models exist for the evolution of a pair of duplicates after a duplication event, and it is believed that gene duplicates can evolve in different ways, according to one process, or a mix of processes. Subfunctionalization is one such process, under which the two duplicates can be preserved by dividing up the function of the original gene between them. Analysis of genomic data using subfunctionalization and related processes has thus far been relatively coarse-grained, with mathematical treatments usually focusing on the phenomenological features of gene duplicate evolution. Here, we develop and analyze a mathematical model using the mechanics of subfunctionalization and the assumption of Poisson rates of mutation. By making use of the results from the literature on the Phase-Type distribution, we are able to derive exact analytical results for the model. The main advantage of the mechanistic model is that it leads to testable predictions of the phenomenological behavior (instead of building this behavior into the model a priori), and allows for the estimation of biologically meaningful parameters. We fit the survival function implied by this model to real genome data (Homo sapiens, Mus musculus, Rattus norvegicus and Canis familiaris), and compare the fit against commonly used phenomenological survival functions. We estimate the number of regulatory regions, and rates of mutation (relative to silent site mutation) in the coding and regulatory regions. We find that for the four genomes tested the subfunctionalization model predicts that duplicates most-likely have just a few regulatory regions, and the rate of mutation in the coding region is around 5-10 times greater than the rate in the regulatory regions. This is the first model-based estimate of the number of regulatory regions in duplicates. Strong agreement between empirical results and the predictions of our model suggest that subfunctionalization provides a consistent explanation for the evolution of many gene duplicates.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 17 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 35%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 6%
Student > Bachelor 1 6%
Professor > Associate Professor 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 5 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 41%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 6%
Design 1 6%
Unknown 6 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 February 2017.
All research outputs
#19,951,180
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#3,171
of 3,714 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#306,443
of 424,113 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#63
of 75 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,714 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 424,113 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 75 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.