2390 Article Views
Publication Date: 15 May 2008
Journal: Evolutionary Bioinformatics 2008:4 181-191
Abstract Yunfeng Shan1,2 and Xiu-Qing Li1
1Molecular Genetics Laboratory, Potato Research Centre, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada,850 Lincoln Rd, P.O. Box 20280, Fredericton, New Brunswick, E3B 4Z7, Canada. 2Department of Natural History, Royal Ontario Museum, Toronto, Ontario M5S 2C6, Canada.
Abstract
Genomes and genes diversify during evolution; however, it is unclear to what extent genes still retain the relationship among species. Model species for molecular phylogenetic studies include yeasts and viruses whose genomes were sequenced as well as plants that have the fossil-supported true phylogenetic trees available. In this study, we generated single gene trees of seven yeast species as well as single gene trees of nine baculovirus species using all the orthologous genes among the species compared. Homologous genes among seven known plants were used for validation of the finding. Four algorithms—maximum parsimony (MP), minimum evolution (ME), maximum likelihood (ML), and neighbor-joining (NJ)—were used. Trees were reconstructed before and after weighting the DNA and protein sequence lengths among genes. Rarely a gene can always generate the “true tree” by all the four algorithms. However, the most frequent gene tree, termed “maximum gene-support tree” (MGS tree, or WMGS tree for the weighted one), in yeasts, baculoviruses, or plants was consistently found to be the “true tree” among the species. The results provide insights into the overall degree of divergence of orthologous genes of the genomes analyzed and suggest the following: 1) The true tree relationship among the species studied is still maintained by the largest group of orthologous genes; 2) There are usually more orthologous genes with higher similarities between genetically closer species than between genetically more distant ones; and 3) The maximum gene-support tree reflects the phylogenetic relationship among species in comparison.
Discussion
No comments yet...Be the first to comment.
I had an excellent experience publishing our review article in Clinical Medicine Reviews. The managing editor was very helpful and the process was very timely and transparent.Professor Jonathan A. Bernstein (University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Division of Immunology, Allergy Section, Cincinnati, OH, USA) What our authors say
Copyright © 2010 Libertas Academica Ltd (except open access articles and accompanying metadata and supplementary files.)