Abstract
The genetic code is the interface between the genetic information stored in DNA molecules and the proteins. Considering the hypothesis that the genetic code evolved to its current structure, some researches use optimization algorithms to find hypothetical codes to be compared to the canonical genetic code. For this purpose, a function with only one objective is employed to evaluate the codes, generally a function based on the robustness of the code against mutations. Very few random codes are better than the canonical genetic code when the evaluation function based on robustness is considered. However, most codons are associated with a few amino acids in the best hypothetical codes when only robustness is employed to evaluate the codes, what makes hard to believe that the genetic code evolved based on only one objective, i.e., the robustness against mutations. In this way, we propose here to use entropy as a second objective for the evaluation of the codes. We propose a Pareto approach to deal with both objectives. The results indicate that the Pareto approach generates codes closer to the canonical genetic code when compared to the codes generated by the approach with only one objective employed in the literature.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Crick FH (1968) The origin of the genetic code. J Mol Biol 38:367–379
Schoenauer S, Clote P (1997) How optimal is the genetic code. Proceedings of the German conference on bioinformatics (GCB’97). IEEE Press, New York, pp 65–67
Freeland SJ, Hurst LD (1998) The genetic code is one in a million. J Mol Evol 47:238–248
Di Giulio M (2005) The origin of the genetic code: theories and their relationships, a review. Biosystems 2:175–184
Di Giulio M, Capobianco MR, Medugno M (1994) On the optimization of the physicochemical distances between amino acids in the evolution of the genetic code. J Theor Biol 168:43–51
Woese CR, Dugre DH, Saxinger WC, Dugre SA (1966) The molecular basis for the genetic code. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 55:4
Venton D (2014) Highlight: Changing the canon—revisiting a classic experiment to alter the genetic code. Genome Biol Evol 6(3):642
Bernhardt HS, Patrick WM (2014) Genetic code evolution started with the incorporation of glycine, followed by other small hydrophilic amino acids. J Mol Evol 78(6):307–309
Sonneborn TM (1965) Degeneracy of the genetic code: extent, nature, and genetic implications. In: Evolving genes and proteins. Academic Press, New York, 377–397 (1965) ac
Tze-Fei Wong J (1975) A co-evolution theory of the genetic code. Natl Acad Sci 72:5
Di Giulio M (2005) The origin of the genetic code: theories and their relationships, a review. BioSystems 80:175–184
Haig D, Hurst LD (1991) A quantitative measure of error minimization in the genetic code. J Mol Biol 33:412–417
Santos J, Monteagudo Á (2010) Study of the genetic code robustness by means of a genetic algorithm. J Theor Biol 264:854–865
Santos J, Monteagudo Á (2011) Simulated evolution applied to study the genetic code optimality using a model of codon reassignments. BMC Bioinform 12:56
Oliveira LL, Tinós R (2013) Using base position errors in an entropy-based evaluation function for the study of genetic code robustness. In: Nature Inspired Cooperative Strategies for Optimization (NICSO 2013), pp 99–111 (2013)
Oliveira LL, Tinós R (2012) Entropy-based evaluation function for the investigation of genetic code robustness. In: Proceedings of the ACM conference on bioinformatics, computational biology and biomedicine (BCB ’12), pp 558–560
Landweber LF, Winfree E (2002) Evolution as computation: DIMACS Workshop. Princeton, Springer
Lehninger AL, Nelson DL, Cox MM (2005) Lehninger principles of biochemistry. W.H. Freeman, New York
Lodish H, Berk A, Krieger M, Scott MP, Bretscher A, Ploegh H, Matsudaira P (2007) Molecular cell biology. W.H. Freeman, New York
Goldman N (1993) Further results on error minimization in the genetic code. J Mol Evol 37:662–664
Motoo K (1984) The neutral theory of molecular evolution. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Deb K, Pratap A, Agarwal S, Meyarivan T (2002) A fast and elitist multi-objective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 6(2):182–197
Konak A, Coit D, Smith A (1006) multi-objective optimization using genetic algorithms: a tutorial. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 91(9):992–1007
Boussaïd I, Lepagnot J, Siarry P (2013) A survey on optimization metaheuristics. Inform Sci 237:82–117
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
The authors would like to thank Fapesp and CNPq for the financial support to this project.
Appendix
Appendix
1.1 List of symbols
- \(M_s\) :
-
The robustness measure, calculated as mean square change in some amino acid property
- \(C\) :
-
A hypothetical genetic code
- \(M_st\) :
-
The robustness measure considering base position errors
- \(S(C)\) :
-
The entropy of a genetic code \(C\)
- \(pmd\) :
-
The percentage of minimization distance
- \(pmd_i\) :
-
The pmd for objective \(i\)
- \(\bar{f}_i\) :
-
The estimated average evaluation of objective \(i\) for all possible genetic codes
- \(f_i(C)\) :
-
The evaluation of objective \(i\) for genetic code \(C\)
- \(C_\mathrm{s }\) :
-
The standard genetic code.
- \(imp_i\) :
-
The improvement for objective \(i\)
- \(pdist_i\) :
-
The partition distance for objective \(i\)
- \(X_{i}(C)\) :
-
the frequency of the \(i\)th partition of the code \(C\)
- \(X_{i}(C_\mathrm{s })\) :
-
The frequency of the \(i\)th partition of the canonical code
- \(Y_{i}(C_\mathrm{s })\) :
-
The size of the \(i\)th partition of the canonical code
- \(M\) :
-
The number of mismatches between the hypothetical code \(C_{1}\) and the canonical code
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
de Oliveira, L.L., Tinós, R. Entropy-based evaluation function in a multi-objective approach for the investigation of the genetic code robustness. Memetic Comp. 6, 157–170 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12293-014-0139-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12293-014-0139-5