» Articles » PMID: 20333215

Population Genomics of Intron Splicing in 38 Saccharomyces Cerevisiae Genome Sequences

Overview
Date 2010 Mar 25
PMID 20333215
Citations 13
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Introns are a ubiquitous feature of eukaryotic genomes, and the dynamics of intron evolution between species has been extensively studied. However, comparatively few analyses have focused on the evolutionary forces shaping patterns of intron variation within species. To better understand the population genetic characteristics of introns, we performed an extensive population genetics analysis on key intron splice sequences obtained from 38 strains of Saccharomyces cerevisiae. As expected, we found that purifying selection is the dominant force governing intron splice sequence evolution in yeast, formally confirming that intron-containing alleles are a mutational liability. In addition, through extensive coalescent simulations, we obtain quantitative estimates of the strength of purifying selection (2N(e)s approximately 19) and use diffusion approximations to provide insights into the evolutionary dynamics and sojourn times of newly arising splice sequence mutations in natural yeast populations. In contrast to previous functional studies, evolutionary analyses comparing the prevalence of introns in essential and nonessential genes suggest that introns in nonribosomal protein genes are functionally important and tend to be actively maintained in natural populations of S. cerevisiae. Finally, we demonstrate that heritable variation in splicing efficiency is common in intron-containing genes with splice sequence polymorphisms. More generally, our study highlights the advantages of population genomics analyses for exploring the forces that have generated extant patterns of genome variation and for illuminating basic biological processes.

Citing Articles

Evolutionary trade-off and mutational bias could favor transcriptional over translational divergence within paralog pairs.

Aube S, Nielly-Thibault L, Landry C PLoS Genet. 2023; 19(5):e1010756.

PMID: 37235586 PMC: 10275480. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1010756.


Phylogenomics of a cocoa strain reveals adaptation to a West African fermented food population.

Diaz-Munoz C, Verce M, De Vuyst L, Weckx S iScience. 2022; 25(11):105309.

PMID: 36304120 PMC: 9593892. DOI: 10.1016/j.isci.2022.105309.


Analysis of Fungal Genomes Reveals Commonalities of Intron Gain or Loss and Functions in Intron-Poor Species.

Lim C, Weinstein B, Roy S, Brown C Mol Biol Evol. 2021; 38(10):4166-4186.

PMID: 33772558 PMC: 8476143. DOI: 10.1093/molbev/msab094.


The Contribution of Purifying Selection, Linkage, and Mutation Bias to the Negative Correlation between Gene Expression and Polymorphism Density in Yeast Populations.

Marek A, Tomala K Genome Biol Evol. 2018; 10(11):2986-2996.

PMID: 30321329 PMC: 6250307. DOI: 10.1093/gbe/evy225.


Selection on Position of Nonsense Codons in Introns.

Behringer M, Hall D Genetics. 2016; 204(3):1239-1248.

PMID: 27630196 PMC: 5105854. DOI: 10.1534/genetics.116.189894.


References
1.
Fink G . Pseudogenes in yeast?. Cell. 1987; 49(1):5-6. DOI: 10.1016/0092-8674(87)90746-x. View

2.
Newman A, Lin R, Cheng S, Abelson J . Molecular consequences of specific intron mutations on yeast mRNA splicing in vivo and in vitro. Cell. 1985; 42(1):335-44. DOI: 10.1016/s0092-8674(85)80129-x. View

3.
Teem J, Abovich N, Kaufer N, Schwindinger W, Warner J, Levy A . A comparison of yeast ribosomal protein gene DNA sequences. Nucleic Acids Res. 1984; 12(22):8295-312. PMC: 320358. DOI: 10.1093/nar/12.22.8295. View

4.
Liti G, Carter D, Moses A, Warringer J, Parts L, James S . Population genomics of domestic and wild yeasts. Nature. 2009; 458(7236):337-41. PMC: 2659681. DOI: 10.1038/nature07743. View

5.
Doniger S, Kim H, Swain D, Corcuera D, Williams M, Yang S . A catalog of neutral and deleterious polymorphism in yeast. PLoS Genet. 2008; 4(8):e1000183. PMC: 2515631. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1000183. View