pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Exploring the differences in evolutionary rates between monogenic and polygenic disease genes in human - PubMed

Exploring the differences in evolutionary rates between monogenic and polygenic disease genes in human

Soumita Podder et al. Mol Biol Evol. 2010 Apr.

Erratum in

Mol Biol Evol. 2011 Sep;28(9):2719

Abstract

Comparative analyses on disease and nondisease (ND) genes have greatly facilitated the understanding of human diseases. However, most studies have grouped all the disease genes together and have performed comparative analyses with other ND genes. Thus, the molecular mechanism of disease on which disease genes can be separated into monogenic and polygenic diseases (MDs and PDs) has been ignored in earlier studies. Here, we report a comprehensive study of PD and MD genes with respect to ND genes. Our work shows that MD genes are more conserved than PD genes and that ND genes are themselves more conserved than both classes of disease genes. By separating the ND genes into housekeeping and other genes, it was found that housekeeping genes are the most conserved among all categories of genes, whereas other ND genes show an evolutionary rate intermediate between MD and PD genes. Although PD genes have a higher number of interacting partners than MD and ND genes, the reasons for their higher evolutionary rate require explanation. We provide evidences that the faster evolutionary rate of PD genes is influenced by 1) the predominance of date hubs in protein-protein interaction network, 2) the higher number of disorder residues, 3) the lower expression level, and 4) the involvement with more regulatory processes. Logistic regression analysis suggests that the relative importance of the four individual factors in determining the evolutionary rate variation among the four classes of proteins is in the order of mRNA expression level > presence of party/date hubs > disorder > involvement of proteins in core/regulatory processes.

PubMed Disclaimer

Cited by

Young proteins experience more variable selection pressures than old proteins.
Vishnoi A, Kryazhimskiy S, Bazykin GA, Hannenhalli S, Plotkin JB. Vishnoi A, et al. Genome Res. 2010 Nov;20(11):1574-81. doi: 10.1101/gr.109595.110. Epub 2010 Oct 4. Genome Res. 2010. PMID: 20921233 Free PMC article.
Enrichment of intrinsically disordered residues in ohnologs facilitates abiotic stress resilience in Brassica rapa.
Das Laha S, Das D, Ghosh T, Podder S. Das Laha S, et al. J Plant Res. 2023 Mar;136(2):239-251. doi: 10.1007/s10265-022-01432-6. Epub 2023 Jan 6. J Plant Res. 2023. PMID: 36607467
Phylomedicine: an evolutionary telescope to explore and diagnose the universe of disease mutations.
Kumar S, Dudley JT, Filipski A, Liu L. Kumar S, et al. Trends Genet. 2011 Sep;27(9):377-86. doi: 10.1016/j.tig.2011.06.004. Epub 2011 Jul 20. Trends Genet. 2011. PMID: 21764165 Free PMC article. Review.
Evolution-informed modeling improves outcome prediction for cancers.
Liu L, Chang Y, Yang T, Noren DP, Long B, Kornblau S, Qutub A, Ye J. Liu L, et al. Evol Appl. 2016 Oct 21;10(1):68-76. doi: 10.1111/eva.12417. eCollection 2017 Jan. Evol Appl. 2016. PMID: 28035236 Free PMC article.
Extreme evolutionary disparities seen in positive selection across seven complex diseases.
Corona E, Dudley JT, Butte AJ. Corona E, et al. PLoS One. 2010 Aug 17;5(8):e12236. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0012236. PLoS One. 2010. PMID: 20808933 Free PMC article.

Exploring the differences in evolutionary rates between monogenic and polygenic disease genes in human - PubMed