2015
DOI: 10.1101/gr.185488.114
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Quantification of GC-biased gene conversion in the human genome

Abstract: Much evidence indicates that GC-biased gene conversion (gBGC) has a major impact on the evolution of mammalian genomes. However, a detailed quantification of the process is still lacking. The strength of gBGC can be measured from the analysis of derived allele frequency spectra (DAF), but this approach is sensitive to a number of confounding factors. In particular, we show by simulations that the inference is pervasively affected by polymorphism polarization errors and by spatial heterogeneity in gBGC strength… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

17
181
1

Year Published

2015
2015
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 139 publications
(199 citation statements)
references
References 69 publications
17
181
1
Order By: Relevance
“…We assumed that such processes also affected the nonsynonymous uSFS and would lead to upwardly biased estimates of positive selection parameters if not corrected. In a similar manner to that described by Glémin et al (2015), which follows the approach of Eyre-Walker et al(2006), we therefore corrected elements of the nonsynonymous uSFS N j using the deviations of the observed elements S j from the fitted elements E j of the synonymous uSFS:We assessed goodness of fit by comparing fitted uSFSs to observed uSFSs using a x 2 statistic, but because the numbers of sites in derived class j and ancestral class n 2 j are nonindependent, we did not perform formal significance tests. Conditioning on the values of the parameters fitted to the synonymous SFS, parameters specifying the effects and relative frequencies of deleterious and advantageous mutations were fitted by ML to the corrected nonsynonymous uSFS.…”
mentioning
confidence: 60%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…We assumed that such processes also affected the nonsynonymous uSFS and would lead to upwardly biased estimates of positive selection parameters if not corrected. In a similar manner to that described by Glémin et al (2015), which follows the approach of Eyre-Walker et al(2006), we therefore corrected elements of the nonsynonymous uSFS N j using the deviations of the observed elements S j from the fitted elements E j of the synonymous uSFS:We assessed goodness of fit by comparing fitted uSFSs to observed uSFSs using a x 2 statistic, but because the numbers of sites in derived class j and ancestral class n 2 j are nonindependent, we did not perform formal significance tests. Conditioning on the values of the parameters fitted to the synonymous SFS, parameters specifying the effects and relative frequencies of deleterious and advantageous mutations were fitted by ML to the corrected nonsynonymous uSFS.…”
mentioning
confidence: 60%
“…Inference of the uSFS is potentially compromised, however, by misassignment of the ancestral state, and this tends to affect high-frequency elements of the SFS disproportionately (Fay and Wu 2000;Baudry and Depaulis 2003;Hernandez et al 2007;Glémin et al 2015). Current methods for inferring the uSFS rely on a single outgroup (Hernandez et al 2007).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Moreover, the patterns of substitution within the phylogeny indicate that GC-biased gene conversion has remained a consistent, localized force around MNase HS regions. This situation differs from that in humans, where the high conversion sites are inconsistent between populations and species (18), likely because of the rapid evolution of PRDM9 motifs (30). Because GC-biased gene conversion imposes a fitness-independent selective force, slightly deleterious alleles may become fixed if their selective disadvantages are sufficiently less extreme than their conversion advantages (31).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 88%
“…2F). We hypothesize this observation may be due to the interaction of recombination rate heterogeneity between populations, strength of gBGC, and genomic contexts (Galtier et al 2009;Glemin et al 2015), but additional work is necessary to fully interpret patterns of deleterious variation at P → U gBGC synonymous sites. A schematic summary of the context-dependent effects observed in estimates of f for synonymous SNVs is shown in Figure 2G.…”
Section: Influence Of Codon Bias and Chromatin Accessibility On The Bmentioning
confidence: 99%