Browse
Submit Data
Databases
API
Help

Dataset Information

22 Views

0 Connections

0 Citations

0 Reanalyses

0 Downloads

Omics score: 0

Homoeolog Inference Methods Requiring Bidirectional Best Hits or Synteny Miss Many Pairs.

ABSTRACT: Homoeologs are pairs of genes or chromosomes in the same species that originated by speciation and were brought back together in the same genome by allopolyploidization. Bioinformatic methods for accurate homoeology inference are crucial for studying the evolutionary consequences of polyploidization, and homoeology is typically inferred on the basis of bidirectional best hit (BBH) and/or positional conservation (synteny). However, these methods neglect the fact that genes can duplicate and move, both prior to and after the allopolyploidization event. These duplications and movements can result in many-to-many and/or nonsyntenic homoeologs-which thus remain undetected and unstudied. Here, using the allotetraploid upland cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) as a case study, we show that conventional approaches indeed miss a substantial proportion of homoeologs. Additionally, we found that many of the missed pairs of homoeologs are broadly and highly expressed. A gene ontology analysis revealed a high proportion of the nonsyntenic and non-BBH homoeologs to be involved in protein translation and are likely to contribute to the functional repertoire of cotton. Thus, from an evolutionary and functional genomics standpoint, choosing a homoeolog inference method which does not solely rely on 1:1 relationship cardinality or synteny is crucial for not missing these potentially important homoeolog pairs.

SUBMITTER: Glover N

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8214411 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Json Xml

Similar Datasets

Bidirectional best hits miss many orthologs in duplication-rich clades such as plants and animals.

Project description:Bidirectional best hits (BBH), which entails identifying the pairs of genes in two different genomes that are more similar to each other than either is to any other gene in the other genome, is a simple and widely used method to infer orthology. A recent study has analyzed the link between BBH and orthology in bacteria and archaea and concluded that, given the very high consistency in BBH they observed among triplets of neighboring genes, a high proportion of BBH are likely to be bona fide orthologs. However, limited by their analysis setup, the previous study could not easily test the reverse question: which proportion of orthologs are BBH? In this follow-up study, we consider this question in theory and answer it based on conceptual arguments, simulated data, and real biological data from all three domains of life. Our analyses corroborate the findings of the previous study, but also show that because of the high rate of gene duplication in plants and animals, as much as 60% of orthologous relations are missed by the BBH criterion.

| S-EPMC3814191 | biostudies-literature

Quickly finding orthologs as reciprocal best hits with BLAT, LAST, and UBLAST: how much do we miss?

Project description:Reciprocal Best Hits (RBH) are a common proxy for orthology in comparative genomics. Essentially, a RBH is found when the proteins encoded by two genes, each in a different genome, find each other as the best scoring match in the other genome. NCBI's BLAST is the software most usually used for the sequence comparisons necessary to finding RBHs. Since sequence comparison can be time consuming, we decided to compare the number and quality of RBHs detected using algorithms that run in a fraction of the time as BLAST. We tested BLAT, LAST and UBLAST. All three programs ran in a hundredth to a 25th of the time required to run BLAST. A reduction in the number of homologs and RBHs found by the faster algorithms compared to BLAST becomes apparent as the genomes compared become more dissimilar, with BLAT, a program optimized for quickly finding very similar sequences, missing both the most homologs and the most RBHs. Though LAST produced the closest number of homologs and RBH to those produced with BLAST, UBLAST was very close, with either program producing between 0.6 and 0.8 of the RBHs as BLAST between dissimilar genomes, while in more similar genomes the differences were barely apparent. UBLAST ran faster than LAST, making it the best option among the programs tested.

| S-EPMC4094424 | biostudies-literature

GenFamClust: an accurate, synteny-aware and reliable homology inference algorithm.

Project description:BackgroundHomology inference is pivotal to evolutionary biology and is primarily based on significant sequence similarity, which, in general, is a good indicator of homology. Algorithms have also been designed to utilize conservation in gene order as an indication of homologous regions. We have developed GenFamClust, a method based on quantification of both gene order conservation and sequence similarity.ResultsIn this study, we validate GenFamClust by comparing it to well known homology inference algorithms on a synthetic dataset. We applied several popular clustering algorithms on homologs inferred by GenFamClust and other algorithms on a metazoan dataset and studied the outcomes. Accuracy, similarity, dependence, and other characteristics were investigated for gene families yielded by the clustering algorithms. GenFamClust was also applied to genes from a set of complete fungal genomes and gene families were inferred using clustering. The resulting gene families were compared with a manually curated gold standard of pillars from the Yeast Gene Order Browser. We found that the gene-order component of GenFamClust is simple, yet biologically realistic, and captures local synteny information for homologs.ConclusionsThe study shows that GenFamClust is a more accurate, informed, and comprehensive pipeline to infer homologs and gene families than other commonly used homology and gene-family inference methods.

| S-EPMC4893229 | biostudies-literature

Reciprocal best structure hits: using AlphaFold models to discover distant homologues.

Project description:MotivationThe conventional methods to detect homologous protein pairs use the comparison of protein sequences. But the sequences of two homologous proteins may diverge significantly and consequently may be undetectable by standard approaches. The release of the AlphaFold 2.0 software enables the prediction of highly accurate protein structures and opens many opportunities to advance our understanding of protein functions, including the detection of homologous protein structure pairs.ResultsIn this proof-of-concept work, we search for the closest homologous protein pairs using the structure models of five model organisms from the AlphaFold database. We compare the results with homologous protein pairs detected by their sequence similarity and show that the structural matching approach finds a similar set of results. In addition, we detect potential novel homologs solely with the structural matching approach, which can help to understand the function of uncharacterized proteins and make previously overlooked connections between well-characterized proteins. We also observe limitations of our implementation of the structure-based approach, particularly when handling highly disordered proteins or short protein structures. Our work shows that high accuracy protein structure models can be used to discover homologous protein pairs, and we expose areas for improvement of this structural matching approach.Availability and implementationInformation to the discovered homologous protein pairs can be found at the following URL: https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.87873. The code can be accessed here: https://github.com/VivianMonzon/Reciprocal_Best_Structure_Hits.Supplementary informationSupplementary data are available at Bioinformatics Advances online.

| S-EPMC9666668 | biostudies-literature

Unveiling new biological relationships using shared hits of chemical screening assay pairs.

Project description:MotivationAlthough the integration and analysis of the activity of small molecules across multiple chemical screens is a common approach to determine the specificity and toxicity of hits, the suitability of these approaches to reveal novel biological information is less explored. Here, we test the hypothesis that assays sharing selective hits are biologically related.ResultsWe annotated the biological activities (i.e. biological processes or molecular activities) measured in assays and constructed chemical hit profiles with sets of compounds differing on their selectivity level for 1640 assays of ChemBank repository. We compared the similarity of chemical hit profiles of pairs of assays with their biological relationships and observed that assay pairs sharing non-promiscuous chemical hits tend to be biologically related. A detailed analysis of a network containing assay pairs with the highest hit similarity confirmed biological meaningful relationships. Furthermore, the biological roles of predicted molecular targets of the shared hits reinforced the biological associations between assay pairs.Supplementary informationSupplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

| S-EPMC4147921 | biostudies-literature

Quantitative synteny scoring improves homology inference and partitioning of gene families.

Project description:BackgroundClustering sequences into families has long been an important step in characterization of genes and proteins. There are many algorithms developed for this purpose, most of which are based on either direct similarity between gene pairs or some sort of network structure, where weights on edges of constructed graphs are based on similarity. However, conserved synteny is an important signal that can help distinguish homology and it has not been utilized to its fullest potential.ResultsHere, we present GenFamClust, a pipeline that combines the network properties of sequence similarity and synteny to assess homology relationship and merge known homologs into groups of gene families. GenFamClust identifies homologs in a more informed and accurate manner as compared to similarity based approaches. We tested our method against the Neighborhood Correlation method on two diverse datasets consisting of fully sequenced genomes of eukaryotes and synthetic data.ConclusionsThe results obtained from both datasets confirm that synteny helps determine homology and GenFamClust improves on Neighborhood Correlation method. The accuracy as well as the definition of synteny scores is the most valuable contribution of GenFamClust.

| S-EPMC3852004 | biostudies-literature

syntenet: an R/Bioconductor package for the inference and analysis of synteny networks.

Project description:SummaryInterpreting and visualizing synteny relationships across several genomes is a challenging task. We previously proposed a network-based approach for better visualization and interpretation of large-scale microsynteny analyses. Here, we present syntenet, an R package to infer and analyze synteny networks from whole-genome protein sequence data. The package offers a simple and complete framework, including data preprocessing, synteny detection and network inference, network clustering and phylogenomic profiling, and microsynteny-based phylogeny inference. Graphical functions are also available to create publication-ready plots. Synteny networks inferred with syntenet can highlight taxon-specific gene clusters that likely contributed to the evolution of important traits, and microsynteny-based phylogenies can help resolve phylogenetic relationships under debate.Availability and implementationsyntenet is available on Bioconductor (https://bioconductor.org/packages/syntenet), and the source code is available on a GitHub repository (https://github.com/almeidasilvaf/syntenet).Supplementary informationSupplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

| S-EPMC9825758 | biostudies-literature

From pairs of most similar sequences to phylogenetic best matches.

Project description:BackgroundMany of the commonly used methods for orthology detection start from mutually most similar pairs of genes (reciprocal best hits) as an approximation for evolutionary most closely related pairs of genes (reciprocal best matches). This approximation of best matches by best hits becomes exact for ultrametric dissimilarities, i.e., under the Molecular Clock Hypothesis. It fails, however, whenever there are large lineage specific rate variations among paralogous genes. In practice, this introduces a high level of noise into the input data for best-hit-based orthology detection methods.ResultsIf additive distances between genes are known, then evolutionary most closely related pairs can be identified by considering certain quartets of genes provided that in each quartet the outgroup relative to the remaining three genes is known. A priori knowledge of underlying species phylogeny greatly facilitates the identification of the required outgroup. Although the workflow remains a heuristic since the correct outgroup cannot be determined reliably in all cases, simulations with lineage specific biases and rate asymmetries show that nearly perfect results can be achieved. In a realistic setting, where distances data have to be estimated from sequence data and hence are noisy, it is still possible to obtain highly accurate sets of best matches.ConclusionImprovements of tree-free orthology assessment methods can be expected from a combination of the accurate inference of best matches reported here and recent mathematical advances in the understanding of (reciprocal) best match graphs and orthology relations.AvailabilityAccompanying software is available at https://github.com/david-schaller/AsymmeTree.

| S-EPMC7147060 | biostudies-literature

Classifying pairs with trees for supervised biological network inference.

Project description:Networks are ubiquitous in biology, and computational approaches have been largely investigated for their inference. In particular, supervised machine learning methods can be used to complete a partially known network by integrating various measurements. Two main supervised frameworks have been proposed: the local approach, which trains a separate model for each network node, and the global approach, which trains a single model over pairs of nodes. Here, we systematically investigate, theoretically and empirically, the exploitation of tree-based ensemble methods in the context of these two approaches for biological network inference. We first formalize the problem of network inference as a classification of pairs, unifying in the process homogeneous and bipartite graphs and discussing two main sampling schemes. We then present the global and the local approaches, extending the latter for the prediction of interactions between two unseen network nodes, and discuss their specializations to tree-based ensemble methods, highlighting their interpretability and drawing links with clustering techniques. Extensive computational experiments are carried out with these methods on various biological networks that clearly highlight that these methods are competitive with existing methods.

| S-EPMC4601289 | biostudies-literature

Progress in quickly finding orthologs as reciprocal best hits: comparing blast, last, diamond and MMseqs2.

Project description:BackgroundFinding orthologs remains an important bottleneck in comparative genomics analyses. While the authors of software for the quick comparison of protein sequences evaluate the speed of their software and compare their results against the most usual software for the task, it is not common for them to evaluate their software for more particular uses, such as finding orthologs as reciprocal best hits (RBH). Here we compared RBH results obtained using software that runs faster than blastp. Namely, lastal, diamond, and MMseqs2.ResultsWe found that lastal required the least time to produce results. However, it yielded fewer results than any other program when comparing the proteins encoded by evolutionarily distant genomes. The program producing the most similar number of RBH to blastp was diamond ran with the "ultra-sensitive" option. However, this option was diamond's slowest, with the "very-sensitive" option offering the best balance between speed and RBH results. The speeding up of the programs was much more evident when dealing with eukaryotic genomes, which code for more numerous proteins. For example, lastal took a median of approx. 1.5% of the blastp time to run with bacterial proteomes and 0.6% with eukaryotic ones, while diamond with the very-sensitive option took 7.4% and 5.2%, respectively. Though estimated error rates were very similar among the RBH obtained with all programs, RBH obtained with MMseqs2 had the lowest error rates among the programs tested.ConclusionsThe fast algorithms for pairwise protein comparison produced results very similar to blast in a fraction of the time, with diamond offering the best compromise in speed, sensitivity and quality, as long as a sensitivity option, other than the default, was chosen.

| S-EPMC7585182 | biostudies-literature

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

OmicsDI is an Elixir interoperability service. Learn more ›

Tweets

OmicsDI Databases

PRIDE
PeptideAtlas
MassIVE
JPOST Repository
Physiome Model Repository

EGA
EVA
ENA
LINCS
PAXDB
Cell Collective

MetaboLights
Metabolomics Workbench
MetabolomeExpress
GNPS
BioModels
FAIRDOMHub

ArrayExpress
dbGaP
ExpressionAtlas
GEO
NODE

Information

Databases
Help
API
Contact us
Code on GitHub
Terms of use
Submit Data