MBE Advance Access originally published online on December 5, 2003
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mol. Biol. Evol. 21(2):374-383. 2004
DOI: 10.1093/molbev/msh026
© 2004 by the Society for Molecular Biology and Evolution. ISSN: 0737-4038
Inference of Positive and Negative Selection on the 5' Regulatory Regions of Drosophila Genes

* Department of Ecology & Evolution, The University of Chicago
Institute of Zoology, Academia Sinica, Nankang, Taipei, Taiwan, Republic of China
E-mail: mkohn{at}uchicago.edu.
Both positive selection and negative selection have been shown to drive the evolution of coding regions. It is of interest to know if the corresponding 5' regions of genes may be subjected to selection of comparable intensities. For such a comparison, we chose the
cessory gland
rotein (Acp) genes as our test case. About 700 bp and 600 bp for the 5' and coding regions, respectively, of eight previously unstudied genes were sequenced from 21 isogenic lines of D. melanogaster and one line from D. simulans. The ratio of divergence at the amino-acid replacement sites (A) over that at the synonymous sites (S) was twice the ratio for common polymorphism. Interestingly, the 5' region shows the same trend, with the 5'/S divergence ratio being 1.8 times higher than the 5'/S ratio for common polymorphism. There are several possible explanations for the 5'/S ratios, including demography, negative selection, and positive selection. Under normal conditions, positive selection is the most likely explanation. If that is true, about 45 to 50 percent of all fixed differences at both the replacement and 5' sites were adaptive, even though the substitution rate in the former is only half that of the latter (KA/KS
0.3 vs. K5'/KS
0.6). As previous analyses have indicated, the inclusion of slightly deleterious polymorphism confounds the inference of positive selection. The analysis of published polymorphism data covering 97 verified 5' regions of Drosophila suggests more pronounced selective constraint on the 5' untranslated region and the core promoter (together corresponding to
200 bp in this data set) when compared to the more distal portion of the 5' region of genes.
Key Words: promoter molecular evolution selection Acp genes accessory gland
![]()
CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
P. R. Haddrill, D. Bachtrog, and P. Andolfatto Positive and Negative Selection on Noncoding DNA in Drosophila simulans Mol. Biol. Evol., September 1, 2008; 25(9): 1825 - 1834. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. Egea, S. Casillas, and A. Barbadilla Standard and generalized McDonald-Kreitman test: a website to detect selection by comparing different classes of DNA sites Nucleic Acids Res., July 1, 2008; 36(suppl_2): W157 - W162. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
H.-Y. Wang, Y. Fu, M. S. McPeek, X. Lu, S. Nuzhdin, A. Xu, J. Lu, M.-L. Wu, and C.-I Wu Complex genetic interactions underlying expression differences between Drosophila races: Analysis of chromosome substitutions PNAS, April 29, 2008; 105(17): 6362 - 6367. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. A. Shapiro, W. Huang, C. Zhang, M. J. Hubisz, J. Lu, D. A. Turissini, S. Fang, H.-Y. Wang, R. R. Hudson, R. Nielsen, et al. Adaptive genic evolution in the Drosophila genomes PNAS, February 13, 2007; 104(7): 2271 - 2276. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
V. Mustonen and M. Lassig Adaptations to fluctuating selection in Drosophila PNAS, February 13, 2007; 104(7): 2277 - 2282. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. Bachtrog and P. Andolfatto Selection, Recombination and Demographic History in Drosophila miranda Genetics, December 1, 2006; 174(4): 2045 - 2059. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
N. Osada, M. H. Kohn, and C.-I Wu Genomic Inferences of the cis-Regulatory Nucleotide Polymorphisms Underlying Gene Expression Differences between Drosophila melanogaster Mating Races Mol. Biol. Evol., August 1, 2006; 23(8): 1585 - 1591. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
N. Osada, M. Hirata, R. Tanuma, J. Kusuda, M. Hida, Y. Suzuki, S. Sugano, T. Gojobori, C.-K. J. Shen, C.-I Wu, et al. Substitution Rate and Structural Divergence of 5'UTR Evolution: Comparative Analysis Between Human and Cynomolgus Monkey cDNAs Mol. Biol. Evol., October 1, 2005; 22(10): 1976 - 1982. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. L. Mueller, K. R. Ram, L. A. McGraw, M. C. Bloch Qazi, E. D. Siggia, A. G. Clark, C. F. Aquadro, and M. F. Wolfner Cross-Species Comparison of Drosophila Male Accessory Gland Protein Genes Genetics, September 1, 2005; 171(1): 131 - 143. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. C. Fay and J. A. Benavides Hypervariable Noncoding Sequences in Saccharomyces cerevisiae Genetics, August 1, 2005; 170(4): 1575 - 1587. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. L. Hughes and R. Friedman Patterns of Sequence Divergence in 5' Intergenic Spacers and Linked Coding Regions in 10 Species of Pathogenic Bacteria Reveal Distinct Recombinational Histories Genetics, December 1, 2004; 168(4): 1795 - 1803. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
G. P. Wagner, C. Fried, S. J. Prohaska, and P. F. Stadler Divergence of Conserved Non-Coding Sequences: Rate Estimates and Relative Rate Tests Mol. Biol. Evol., November 1, 2004; 21(11): 2116 - 2121. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||



