Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Entropy-based evaluation function in a multi-objective approach for the investigation of the genetic code robustness

  • Regular research paper
  • Published:
Memetic Computing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Crick FH (1968) The origin of the genetic code. J Mol Biol 38:367–379

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 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

    Google Scholar 

  3. Freeland SJ, Hurst LD (1998) The genetic code is one in a million. J Mol Evol 47:238–248

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Di Giulio M (2005) The origin of the genetic code: theories and their relationships, a review. Biosystems 2:175–184

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 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

  6. Woese CR, Dugre DH, Saxinger WC, Dugre SA (1966) The molecular basis for the genetic code. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 55:4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Venton D (2014) Highlight: Changing the canon—revisiting a classic experiment to alter the genetic code. Genome Biol Evol 6(3):642

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 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

  10. Tze-Fei Wong J (1975) A co-evolution theory of the genetic code. Natl Acad Sci 72:5

    Google Scholar 

  11. Di Giulio M (2005) The origin of the genetic code: theories and their relationships, a review. BioSystems 80:175–184

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Haig D, Hurst LD (1991) A quantitative measure of error minimization in the genetic code. J Mol Biol 33:412–417

    Google Scholar 

  13. Santos J, Monteagudo Á (2010) Study of the genetic code robustness by means of a genetic algorithm. J Theor Biol 264:854–865

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  14. Santos J, Monteagudo Á (2011) Simulated evolution applied to study the genetic code optimality using a model of codon reassignments. BMC Bioinform 12:56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 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)

  16. 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

  17. Landweber LF, Winfree E (2002) Evolution as computation: DIMACS Workshop. Princeton, Springer

    Book  Google Scholar 

  18. Lehninger AL, Nelson DL, Cox MM (2005) Lehninger principles of biochemistry. W.H. Freeman, New York

  19. Lodish H, Berk A, Krieger M, Scott MP, Bretscher A, Ploegh H, Matsudaira P (2007) Molecular cell biology. W.H. Freeman, New York

  20. Goldman N (1993) Further results on error minimization in the genetic code. J Mol Evol 37:662–664

    Google Scholar 

  21. Motoo K (1984) The neutral theory of molecular evolution. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  22. 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Konak A, Coit D, Smith A (1006) multi-objective optimization using genetic algorithms: a tutorial. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 91(9):992–1007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Boussaïd I, Lepagnot J, Siarry P (2013) A survey on optimization metaheuristics. Inform Sci 237:82–117

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lariza Laura de Oliveira.

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

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

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

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12293-014-0139-5

Keywords

Navigation