, Volume 134, Issue 2, pp 181–186 | Cite as

Alternative splicing, gene duplication and connectivity in the genetic interaction network of the nematode worm Caenorhabditis elegans

  • Austin L. HughesEmail author
  • Robert Friedman


We examined the relationship between gene duplication, alternative splicing, and connectedness in a predicted genetic interaction network using published data from the nematode worm Caenorhabditis elegans. Similar to previous results from mammals, genes belonging to families with only one member (“singletons”) were significantly more likely to lack alternative splicing than were members of large multi-gene families. Genes belonging to multi-gene families lacking alternative splicing tended to have higher connectedness in the genetic interaction network than did genes in families that included one or more alternatively spliced members. Moreover, alternatively spliced genes were significantly more likely to interact with other alternatively spliced genes. These results support the hypothesis that certain key proteins with high degrees of network connectedness are subject to selection opposing the occurrence of alternatively spliced forms.


Alternative splicing Caenorhabditis elegans Genetic interaction network 



This research was supported by grant GM43940 from the National Institutes of Health.


  1. Altschul SF, Madden TL, Schaffer AA, Zhang J, Zhang Z, Miller W, Lipman DJ (1997) Gapped BLAST and PSI-BLAST: a new generation of protein database search programs. Nucleic Acids Res 25:3389–3402PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ast G (2004) How did alternative splicing evolve? Nat Rev Genet 5:773–782PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barabási AL, Albert R (1999) Emergence of scaling in random networks. Science 286:509–512PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Batagelj V, Mrvar A (2006) Pajek: program for analysis and visualization of large networks. LjubljanaGoogle Scholar
  5. Blencowe BJ (2006) Alternative splicing: new insights from global analyses. Cell 126:37–47PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Byrne AB, Weinrauch MT, Wong V, Koeva M, Dixon SJ, Stuart JM, Roy PJ (2007) A global analysis of genetic interactions in Caenorhabditis elegans. J Biol 6:8Google Scholar
  7. Hollander M, Wolfe DA (1973) Nonparametric statistical methods. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  8. Hughes AL, Friedman R (2005) Gene duplication and the properties of biological networks. J Mol Evol 61:758–764PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kim E, Magen A, Ast G (2007) Different levels of alternative splicing among eukaryotes. Nucleic Acids Res 35:125–131PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kopelman NM, Lancet D, Yanai I (2005) Alternative splicing and gene duplication are inversely correlated evolutionary mechanisms. Nat Genet 37:588–589PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Lareau LF, Green RE, Bhatnagar RS, Brenner SE (2004) The evolving roles of alternative splicing. Curr Opin Struct Biol 14:273–282PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Papp B, Pál C, Hurst LD (2003) Dosage sensitivity and the evolution of gene families in yeast. Nature 424:194–197PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ravasz E, Somera AL, Mongru DA, Oltvai ZN, Barabási AL (2002) Hierarchical organization of modularity in metabolic networks. Science 297:1551–1555PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Rukov JL, Irimia M, Mørk S, Lund VK, Vinther J, Arctander P (2007) High qualitative and quantitative splicing in Caenorhabditis elegans and Caenorhabdidtis briggsiae. Mol Biol Evol 24:909–917PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Stetefeld J, Ruegg MA (2005) Structural and functional diversity generated by alternative mRNA splicing. Trends Biochem Sci 30:515–521PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Su Z, Wang J, Yu J, Huang X, Gu X (2006) Evolution of alternative splicing after gene duplication. Genome Res 16:182–189PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Wagner A (2001) The yeast protein interaction network evolves rapidly and contains few redundant duplicated genes. Mol Biol Evol 18:1283–1292PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Wagner A (2003) How the global structure of protein interaction networks evolves. Proc R Soc Lond B 270:457–460CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Zhong W, Sternberg PW (2006) Genome-wide prediction of C. elegans genetic interactions. Science 311:1481–1484PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Zhu X, Gerstein M, Snyder M (2007) Getting connected: analysis and principles of biological networks. Genes Dev 21:1010–1024PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Biological SciencesUniversity of South CarolinaColumbiaUSA

Personalised recommendations