Genomes in flux: The evolution of Archaeal and Proteobacterial gene content

Berend Snel, Peer Bork, Martijn A. Huynen

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

In the course of evolution, genomes are shaped by processes like gene loss, gene duplication, horizontal gene transfer, and gene genesis (the de novo origin of genes). Here we reconstruct the gene content of ancestral Archaea and Proteobacteria and quantify the processes connecting them to their present day representatives based on the distribution of genes in completely sequenced genomes. We estimate that the ancestor of the Proteobacteria contained around 2500 genes, and the ancestor of the Archaea around 2050 genes. Although it is necessary to invoke horizontal gene transfer to explain the content of present day genomes, gene loss, gene genesis, and simple vertical inheritance are quantitatively the most dominant processes in shaping the genome. Together they result in a turnover of gene content such that even the lineage leading from the ancestor of the Proteobacteria to the relatively large genome of Escherichia coli has lost at least 950 genes. Gene loss, unlike the other processes, correlates fairly well with time. This clock-like behavior suggests that gene loss is under negative selection, while the processes that add genes are under positive selection.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)17-25
Number of pages9
JournalGenome Research
Volume12
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 13 Oct 2002

Keywords

  • archaeon
  • article
  • bacterial genome
  • controlled study
  • Escherichia coli
  • gene construct
  • gene duplication
  • gene loss
  • gene sequence
  • genetic line
  • genetic selection
  • Gram negative bacterium
  • horizontal gene transfer
  • inheritance
  • molecular evolution
  • nonhuman
  • priority journal
  • quantitative genetics

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Genomes in flux: The evolution of Archaeal and Proteobacterial gene content'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this