Journal of Molecular Evolution

, Volume 68, Issue 3, pp 248–255 | Cite as

Low Contents of Carbon and Nitrogen in Highly Abundant Proteins: Evidence of Selection for the Economy of Atomic Composition

Article

Abstract

Proteins that assimilate particular elements were found to avoid using amino acids containing the element, which indicates that the metabolic constraints of amino acids may influence the evolution of proteins. We suspected that low contents of carbon, nitrogen, and sulfur may also be selected for economy in highly abundant proteins that consume large amounts of the resources of cells. By analyzing recently available proteomic data in Escherichia coli, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, and Schizosaccharomyces pombe, we found that at least the carbon and nitrogen contents in amino acid side chains are negatively correlated with protein abundance. An amino acid with a high number of carbon atoms in its side chain generally requires relatively more energy for its synthesis. Thus, it may be selected against in highly abundant proteins either because of economy in building blocks or because of economy in energy. Previous studies showed that highly abundant proteins preferentially use cheap (in terms of energy) amino acids. We found that the carbon content is still negatively correlated with protein abundance after controlling for the energetic cost of the amino acids. However, the negative correlation between protein abundance and energetic cost disappeared after controlling for carbon content. Building blocks seem to be more restricted than energy. It seems that the amino acid sequences of highly abundant proteins have to compromise between optimization for their biological functions and reducing the consumption of limiting resources. By contrast, the amino acid sequences of weakly expressed proteins are more likely to be optimized for their biological functions.

Keywords

Atomic content Energetic cost Amino acid usage Resource availability Protein abundance Protein turnover rate 

Supplementary material

239_2009_9199_MOESM1_ESM.doc (244 kb)
(DOC 243 kb)

References

  1. Akashi H (2003) Translational selection and yeast proteome evolution. Genetics 164:1291–1303PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Akashi H, Gojobori T (2002) Metabolic efficiency and amino acid composition in the proteomes of Escherichia coli and Bacillus subtilis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 99:3695–3700PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ashburner M, Ball CA, Blake JA, Botstein D, Butler H, Cherry JM, Davis AP, Dolinski K, Dwight SS, Eppig JT, Harris MA, Hill DP, Issel-Tarver L, Kasarskis A, Lewis S, Matese JC, Richardson JE, Ringwald M, Rubin GM, Sherlock G (2000) Gene ontology: tool for the unification of biology. The Gene Ontology Consortium. Nature Genet 25:25–29PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baudouin-Cornu P, Surdin-Kerjan Y, Marliere P, Thomas D (2001) Molecular evolution of protein atomic composition. Science 293:297–300PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Baudouin-Cornu P, Schuerer K, Marliere P, Thomas D (2004) Intimate evolution of proteins—proteome atomic content correlates with genome base composition. J Biol Chem 279:5421–5428PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Belle A, Tanay A, Bitincka L, Shamir R, O’Shea EK (2006) Quantification of protein half-lives in the budding yeast proteome. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 103:13004–13009PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Beyer A, Hollunder J, Nasheuer HP, Wilhelm T (2004) Post-transcriptional expression regulation in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae on a genomic scale. Mol Cell Proteomics 3:1083–1092PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Boer VM, de Winde JH, Pronk JT, Piper MDW (2003) The genome-wide transcriptional responses of Saccharomyces cerevisiae grown on glucose in aerobic chemostat cultures limited for carbon, nitrogen, phosphorus, or sulfur. J Biol Chem 278:3265–3274PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bragg JG, Wagner A (2007) Protein carbon content evolves in response to carbon availability and may influence the fate of duplicated genes. Proc R Soc B 274:1063–1070PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bragg JG, Wagner A (2009) Protein material costs: single atoms can make an evolutionary difference. Trends Genet 25:5–8. (doi:10.1016/j.tig.2008.10.007)PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Brockmann R, Beyer A, Heinisch JJ, Wilhelm T (2007) Posttranscriptional expression regulation: what determines translation rates? PLoS Comput Biol 3:531–539CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Craig CL, Weber RS (1998) Selection costs of amino acid substitutions in ColE1 and ColIa gene clusters harbored by Escherichia coli. Mol Biol Evol 15:774–776PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Cuhel RL, Taylor CD, Jannasch HW (1981) Assimilatory sulfur metabolism in marine microorganisms: Sulfur metabolism, growth, and protein synthesis of Pseudomonas halodurans and Alteromonas luteo-violaceus during sulfate limitation. Arch Microbiol 130:1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Elser JJ, Fagan WF, Subramanian S, Kumar S (2006) Signatures of ecological resource availability in the animal and plant proteomes. Mol Biol Evol 23:1946–1951PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fauchon M, Lagniel G, Aude JC, Lombardia L, Soularue P, Petat C, Marguerie G, Sentenac A, Werner M, Labarre J (2002) Sulfur sparing in the yeast proteome in response to sulfur demand. Mol Cell 9:713–723PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Futcher B, Latter GI, Monardo P, McLaughlin CS, Garrels JI (1999) A sampling of the yeast proteome. Mol Cell Biol 19:7357–7368PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Ghaemmaghami S, Huh W, Bower K, Howson RW, Belle A, Dephoure N, O’Shea EK, Weissman JS (2003) Global analysis of protein expression in yeast. Nature 425:737–741PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Greenbaum D, Jansen R, Gerstein M (2002) Analysis of mRNA expression and protein abundance data: an approach for the comparison of the enrichment of features in the cellular population of proteins and transcripts. Bioinformatics 18:585–596PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Griffin TJ, Gygi SP, Ideker T, Rist B, Eng J, Hood L, Aebersold R (2002) Complementary profiling of gene expression at the transcriptome and proteome levels in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Mol Cell Proteomics 1:323–333PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gygi SP, Rochon Y, Franza BR, Aebersold R (1999) Correlation between protein and mRNA abundance in yeast. Mol Cell Biol 19:1720–1730PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Heizer EM Jr, Raiford DW, Raymer ML, Doom TE, Miller RV, Krane DE (2006) Amino acid cost and codon-usage biases in 6 prokaryotic genomes: a whole-genome analysis. Mol Biol Evol 23:1670–1680PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hertz-Fowler C, Peacock CS, Wood V, Aslett M, Kerhornou A, Mooney P, Tivey A, Berriman M, Hall N, Rutherford K, Parkhill J, Ivens AC, Rajandream MA, Barrell B (2004) GeneDB: a resource for prokaryotic and eukaryotic organisms. Nucleic Acids Res. 32:D339–D343PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hong EL, Balakrishnan R, Dong Q, Christie KR, Park J, Binkley G, Costanzo MC, Dwight SS, Engel SR, Fisk DG, Hirschman JE, Hitz BC, Krieger CJ, Livstone MS, Miyasato SR, Nash RS, Oughtred R, Skrzypek MS, Weng S, Wong ED, Zhu KK, Dolinski K, Botstein D, Cherry JM (2008) Gene Ontology annotations at SGD: new data sources and annotation methods. Nucleic Acids Res 36:D577–D581PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ishihama Y, Schmidt T, Rappsilber J, Mann M, Hartl FU, Kerner M, Frishman D (2008) Protein abundance profiling of the Escherichia coli cytosol. BMC Genomics 9:102PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kaplan R, Apirion D (1975) The fate of ribosomes in Escherichia coli cells starved for a carbon source. J Biol Chem 250:1854–1863PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Kolkman A, Daran-Lapujade P, Fullaondo A, Olsthoorn MMA, Pronk JT, Slijper M, Heck AJR (2006) Proteome analysis of yeast response to various nutrient limitations. Mol Syst Biol 2:2006.0026Google Scholar
  27. Kraft C, Deplazes A, Sohrmann M, Peter M (2008) Mature ribosomes are selectively degraded upon starvation by an autophagy pathway requiring the Ubp3p/Bre5p ubiquitin protease. Nat Cell Biol 10:602–610PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Liu HB, Sadygov RG, Yates JR (2004) A model for random sampling and estimation of relative protein abundance in shotgun proteomics. Anal Chem 76:4193–4201PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lobry JR, Gautier C (1994) Hydrophobicity, expressivity and aromaticity are the major trends of amino-acid usage in 999 Escherichia coli chromosome-encoded genes. Nucleic Acids Res 22:3174–3180PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lv J, Li N, Niu D-K (2008) Association between the availability of environmental resources and the atomic composition of organismal proteomes: evidence from Prochlorococcus strains living at different depths. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 375:241–246PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Mazel D, Marliere P (1989) Adaptive eradication of methionine and cysteine from cyanobacterial light-harvesting proteins. Nature 341:245–248PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Nakatogawa H, Ohsumi Y (2008) Starved cells eat ribosomes. Nature Cell Biol 10:505–507PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Nie L, Wu G, Zhang W (2006) Correlation between mRNA and protein abundance in Desulfovibrio vulgaris: a multiple regression to identify sources of variations. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 339:603–610PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Pardee AB (1966) Purification and properties of a sulfate-binding protein from Salmonella typhimurium. J Biol Chem 241:5886–5892PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Schmidt MW, Houseman A, Ivanov AR, Wolf DA (2007) Comparative proteomic and transcriptomic profiling of the fission yeast Schizosaccharomyces pombe. Mol Syst Biol 3:79PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Swire J (2007) Selection on synthesis cost affects interprotein amino acid usage in all three domains of life. J Mol Evol 64:558–571PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. The UniProt Consortium (2008) The Universal Protein Resource (UniProt). Nucleic Acids Res 36:D190–D195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Wagner A (2005) Energy constraints on the evolution of gene expression. Mol Biol Evol 22:1365–1374PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Wu XM, Zhu L, Guo J, Fu C, Zhou HJ, Dong D, Li ZB, Zhang DY, Lin K (2006) SPIDer: Saccharomyces protein-protein interaction database. BMC Bioinformatics 7:S16PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.MOE Key Laboratory for Biodiversity Science and Ecological Engineering, College of Life SciencesBeijing Normal UniversityBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations