Advertisement

Journal of Molecular Evolution

, Volume 33, Issue 5, pp 412–417 | Cite as

A quantitative measure of error minimization in the genetic code

  • David Haig
  • Laurence D. Hurst
Article

Summary

We have calculated the average effect of changing a codon by a single base for all possible single-base changes in the genetic code and for changes in the first, second, and third codon positions separately. Such values were calculated for an amino acid's polar requirement, hydropathy, molecular volume, and isoelectric point. For each attribute the average effect of single-base changes was also calculated for a large number of randomly generated codes that retained the same level of redundancy as the natural code. Amino acids whose codons differed by a single base in the first and third codon positions were very similar with respect to polar requirement and hydropathy. The major differences between amino acids were specified by the second codon position. Codons with U in the second position are hydrophobic, whereas most codons with A in the second position are hydrophilic. This accounts for the observation of complementary hydropathy. Single-base changes in the natural code had a smaller average effect on polar requirement than all but 0.02% of random codes. This result is most easily explained by selection to minimize deleterious effects of translation errors during the early evolution of the code.

Key words

Genetic code Complementary hydropathy Translation 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Alff-Steinberger C (1969) The genetic code and error transmission. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 64:584–591CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. Blalock JE, Smith EM (1984) Hydropathic anti-complementarity of amino acids based on the genetic code. Biochem Biophys Res Comm 121:203–207CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Brentani RR (1988) Biological implications of complementary hydropathy of amino acids. J Theor Biol 135:495–499CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Brentani RR (1990) Complementary hydropathy and the evolution of interacting peptides. J Mol Evol 31:239–243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bulmer M (1988) Evolutionary aspects of protein synthesis. Oxf Surv Evol Biol 5:1–40Google Scholar
  6. Crick FHC (1968) The origin of the genetic code. J Mol Biol 38:367–379CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Di Giulio M (1989a) Some aspects of the organization and evolution of the genetic code. J Mol Evol 29:191–201CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Di Giulio M (1989b) The extension reached by the minimization of the polarity distances during the evolution of the genetic code. J Mol Evol 29:288–293CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Epstein CJ (1966) Role of the amino-acid ‘code’ and of selection for conformation in the evolution of proteins. Nature 210:25–28CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Garel JP, Filliol D, Mandel P (1973) Coéfficients de partage d'aminoacides, nucléobases, nucléosides et nucléotides dans un système solvant salin. J Chromatography 78:381–391CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gibson TJ, Lamond AI (1990) Metabolic complexity in the RNA world and implications for the origin of protein synthesis. J Mol Evol 30:7–15CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Goldberg AL, Wittes RE (1966) Genetic code: aspects of organization. Science 153:420–424CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Grantham R (1974) Amino acid difference formula to help explain protein evolution. Science 185:862–864CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Kurland CG (1987) Strategies for efficiency and accuracy in gene expression. 2. Growth optimized ribosomes. Trends Biochem Sci 12:169–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kyte J, Doolittle RF (1982) A simple method for displaying the hydropathic character of a protein. J Mol Biol 157:105–132CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Lagerkvist U (1980) Codon misreading: a restriction operative in the evolution of the genetic code. Am Sci 68:192–198Google Scholar
  17. Salemme FR, Miller MD, Jordan SR (1977) Structural convergence during protein evolution. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 74:2820–2824CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. Sjöström M, Wold S (1985) A multivariate study of the relationship between the genetic code and the physical-chemical properties of amino acids. J Mol Evol 22:272–277CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Sonneborn TM (1965) Degeneracy of the genetic code: extent, nature, and genetic implications. In: Bryson V, Vogel HJ (eds) Evolving genes and proteins. Academic Press, New York, pp 377–397CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Weber AL, Lacey JC (1978) Genetic code correlations: amino acids and their anticodon nucleotides. J Mol Evol 11:199–210CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Woese CR (1965) On the evolution of the genetic code. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 54:1546–1552CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  22. Woese CR (1973) Evolution of the genetic code. Naturwissenschaften 60:447–459CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Woese CR, Dugre DH, Dugre SA, Kondo M, Saxinger WC (1966) On the fundamental nature and evolution of the genetic code. Cold Spring Harbor Symp Quant Biol 31:723–736CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Wong JT-F (1980) Role of minimization of chemical distances between amino acids in the evolution of the genetic code. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 77:1083–1086CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York Inc 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • David Haig
    • 1
  • Laurence D. Hurst
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Plant SciencesUniversity of OxfordOxfordUK
  2. 2.Department of ZoologyUniversity of OxfordOxfordUK

Personalised recommendations