Applied Bioinformatics

, Volume 3, Issue 4, pp 219–228 | Cite as

Genomic Conflict Settled in Favour of the Species Rather Than the Gene at Extreme GC Percentage Values

  • Shang-Jung Lee
  • James R. Mortimer
  • Donald R. ForsdykeEmail author
Original Research


Wada and colleagues have shown that, whether prokaryotic or eukaryotic, each gene has a ‘homostabilising propensity’ to adopt a relatively uniform GC percentage (GC%). Accordingly, each gene can be viewed as a ‘microisochore’ occupying a discrete GC% niche of relatively uniform base composition amongst its fellow genes. Although first, second and third codon positions usually differ in GC%, each position tends to maintain a uniform, gene-specific GC% value. Thus, within a genome, genic GC% values can cover a wide range. This is most evident at third codon positions, which are least constrained by amino acid encoding needs. In 1991, Wada and colleagues further noted that, within a phylogenetic group, genomic GC% values can also cover a wide range. This is again most evident at third codon positions. Thus, the dispersion of GC% values among genes within a genome matches the dispersion of GC% values among genomes within a phylogenetic group. Wada described the context-independence of plots of different codon position GC% values against total GC% as a ‘universal’ characteristic. Several studies relate this to recombination. We have confirmed that third codon positions usually relate more to the genes that contain them than to the species. However, in genomes with extreme GC% values (low or high), third codon positions tend to maintain a constant GC%, thus relating more to the species than to the genes that contain them. Genes in an extreme-GC% genome collectively span a smaller GC% range, and mainly rely on first and second codon positions for differentiation as ‘microisochores’. Our results are consistent with the view that differences in GC% serve to recombinationally isolate both genome sectors (facilitating gene duplication) and genomes (facilitating genome duplication, e.g. speciation). In intermediate-GC% genomes, conflict between the needs of the species and the needs of individual genes within that species is minimal. However, in extreme-GC% genomes there is a conflict, which is settled in favour of the species (i.e. group selection) rather than in favour of the gene (genic selection).


Codon Position Prokaryotic Genome Mutational Bias Codon Usage Table Thermal Denaturation Study 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



Queen’s University hosts the webpages of DRF where full-text versions of some of the cited references may be found ( ). No sources of funding were used to assist in the preparation of this study. The authors have no conflicts of interest that are directly relevant to the content of this article.


  1. 1.
    Williams GC. Adaptation and natural selection. Princeton (NJ): Princeton University Press, 1966Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Skalka A, Burgi E, Hershey AD. Segmental distribution of nucleotides in the DNA of bacteriophage lambda. J Mol Biol 1968; 34: 1–16PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Vizard DL, Ansevin AT. High resolution thermal denaturation of DNA: thermalites of bacteriophage DNA. Biochemistry 1976; 15: 741–50PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wada A, Tachibana H, Gotoh O, et al. Long range homogeneity of physical stability in double-stranded DNA. Nature 1976; 263: 439–40PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bibb MJ, Findlay PR, Johnson MW. The relationship between base composition and codon usage in bacterial genes and its use for the simple and reliable identification of protein-coding sequences. Gene 1984; 30: 157–66PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wada A, Suyama A. Third letters in codons counterbalance the (G + C) content of their first and second letters. FEBS Lett 1985; 188: 291–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Suyama A, Wada A. Correlation between thermal stability maps and genetic maps of double-stranded DNAs. J Theor Biol 1983; 105: 133–45PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wada A, Suyama A. Local stability of DNA and RNA secondary structure and its relation to biological functions. Prog Biophys Mol Biol 1986; 47: 113–57PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Clay O, Douady CJ, Carels N, et al. Using analytical ultracentrifugation to study compositional variation in vertebrate genomes. Eur Biophys J 2003; 32: 418–26PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Efstratiadis A, Posakony JW, Maniatis T, et al. The structure and evolution of the human β-globin gene family. Cell 1980; 21: 653–68PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Matsuo K, Clay O, Kunzler P, et al. Short introns interrupting the Oct-2 POU domain may prevent recombination between the POU family genes without interfering with potential POU domain ‘shuffling’ in evolution. Biol Chem Hoppe Seyler 1994; 375: 675–83PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Montoya-Burgos JI, Boursot P, Galtier N. Recombination explains isochores in mammalian genomes. Trends Genet 2003; 19: 128–30PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Iwase M, Satta Y, Hirai Y, et al. The amelogenin loci span an ancient pseudoautosomal boundary in diverse mammalian species. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2003; 100: 5258–63PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Nomura M, Sor F, Yamagishi M, et al. Heterogeneity of GC content within a single bacterial genome and its implications for evolution. Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol 1987; 52: 658–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sueoka N. Directional mutation pressure, selective constraints, and genetic equilibria. J Mol Evol 1992; 34: 95–114PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Li W. Delineating relative homogenous G + C domains in DNA sequences. Gene 2001; 276: 57–72PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Forsdyke DR. Percentage G + C determines frequencies of complementary trinucleotide pairs: implications for speciation. Proceedings of the Canadian Federation of Biological Societies; 1994 Jun; Montreal, Canada. Ottawa: Canadian Federation of Biological Societies, 1994; 37: 152Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Forsdyke DR. Relative roles of primary sequence and (G + C)% in determining the hierarchy of frequencies of complementary trinucleotide pairs in DNAs of different species. J Mol Evol 1995; 41: 573–81PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Forsdyke DR, Mortimer JR. Chargaff’s legacy. Gene 2000; 261: 127–37PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mortimer JR, Forsdyke DR. Comparison of responses by bacteriophages and bacteria to pressures on the base composition of open reading frames. Appl Bioinformatics 2003; 2: 47–62PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Nakamura Y, Gojobori T, Ikemura T. Codon usage tabulated from the international DNA sequence databases: status for the year 2000. Nucleic Acids Res 2000; 28: 292PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lambros RJ, Mortimer JR, Forsdyke DR. Optimum growth temperature and the base composition of open reading frames in prokaryotes. Extremophiles 2003; 7: 443–50PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Paz A, Mester D, Baca I, et al. Adaptive role of increased frequency of polypurine tracts in mRNA sequences of thermophilic prokaryotes. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2004; 101:2951–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Muto A, Osawa S. The guanine and cytosine content of genomic DNA and bacterial evolution. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1987; 84: 166–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Wada A, Suyama A, Hanai R. Phenomenological theory of GC/AT pressure on DNA base composition. J Mol Evol 1991; 32: 374–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    D’Onofrio G, Bernardi G. A universal compositional correlation among codon positions. Gene 1992; 110: 81–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Gardner MJ, Tettelin H, Carucci DJ, et al. Chromosome 2 sequence of the human malaria parasite, Plasmodium falciparum. Science 1998; 282: 1126–32PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Yu J, Hu S, Wang J, et al. A draft sequence of the rice genome (Oryza sativa L. ssp. indica). Science 2002; 296: 79–92PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Khinchin AI. Mathematical foundations of information theory. New York: Dover Publications, 1957Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Wan H, Wootton JC. A global compositional complexity measure for biological sequences: AT-rich and GC-rich genomes encode less complex proteins. Comput Chem 2000; 24: 71–94PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Forsdyke DR. Selective pressures that decrease synonymous mutations in Plasmodium falciparum. Trends Parasitol 2002; 18: 411–7Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Forsdyke DR, Madill CA, Smith SD. Immunity as a function of the unicellular state: implications of emerging genomic data. Trends Immunol 2002; 23: 575–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Xue HY, Forsdyke DR. Low complexity segments in Plasmodium falciparum are primarily nucleic acid level adaptations. Mol Biochem Parasitol 2003; 128: 21–32PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Bernaola-Galvan P, Oliver JL, Carpena P, et al. Quantifying intrachromosomal GC heterogeneity in prokaryotic genomes. Gene 2004; 333: 121–33PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Filipski J. Evolution of DNA sequence: contributions of mutational bias and selection to the origin of chromosomal compartments. Adv Mutagen Res 1990; 2: 1–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Sharp PM, Stenico M, Peden JF, et al. Codon usage: mutational bias, translation selection, or both? Biochem Soc Trans 1993; 21: 835–41PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Eyre-Walker A, Hurst L. The evolution of isochores. Nat Rev Genet 2001; 2: 549–55PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Galtier N. Gene conversion drives GC content evolution in mammalian histones. Trends Genet 2003; 19: 65–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Bernardi G. Isochores and the evolutionary genomics of vertebrates. Gene 2000; 241: 3–17PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Bernardi G. Misunderstandings about isochores: part 1. Gene 2001; 276: 3–13PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Forsdyke DR. Different biological species ‘broadcast’ their DNAs at different (G+C)% ‘wavelengths’. J Theor Biol 1996; 178: 405–17PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Forsdyke DR. An alternative way of thinking about stem-loops in DNA: a case study of the G0S2 gene. J Theor Biol 1998; 192: 489–504PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Forsdyke DR. Two levels of information in DNA: relationship of Romanes’ ‘intrinsic’ variability of the reproductive system, and Bateson’s ‘residue’ to the species-dependent component of the base composition, (C+G)%. J Theor Biol 1999; 201: 47–61PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Forsdyke DR. Haldane’s rule: hybrid sterility affects the heterogametic sex first because sexual differentiation is on the path to species differentiation. J Theor Biol 2000; 204: 443–52PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Forsdyke DR. The origin of species, revisited. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2001Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Forsdyke DR. William Bateson, Richard Goldschmidt, and non-genic modes of speciation. J Biol Syst 2003; 11: 341–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Forsdyke DR. Chromosomal speciation: a reply. J Theor Biol 2004; 230: 189–96PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Sueoka N. Compositional correlation between deoxyribonucleic acid and protein. Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol 1961; 26: 35–43PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Bellgard M, Schibeci D, Trifonov E, et al. Early detection of G + C differences in bacterial species inferred from the comparative analysis of the two completely sequenced Helicobacter pylori strains. J Mol Evol 2001; 53: 465–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Zhang Z, Kishino H. Genomic background drives the divergence of duplicated amylase genes at synonymous sites in Drosophila. Mol Biol Evol 2004; 21: 222–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Moore RC, Purugganan MD. The early stages of duplicate gene evolution. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2003; 100: 15682–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Forsdyke DR. Regions of relative GC% uniformity are recombinational isolators. J Biol Syst 2004; 12: 261–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Adis Data Information BV 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shang-Jung Lee
    • 1
  • James R. Mortimer
    • 2
  • Donald R. Forsdyke
    • 3
    Email author
  1. 1.Genetics Graduate ProgramUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouverCanada
  2. 2.Merck-Frosst CanadaMontrealCanada
  3. 3.Department of BiochemistryQueen’s UniversityKingstonCanada

Personalised recommendations