limitations of binfo approach to minial genome
hard to identify all orthologs, especially for distantly related species
same function can be performed by different genes/ functional analogs = NODs
(Non-Ortologous gene Displacement)
-> results were prone to change as more species were sequenced and no evidence that this set alone is enough
Binfo approach to finding minimal set of protein coding genes requiered for life under lab conditions
what were the results?
Mushegian/ Koonin 1996
Find all genes conserved among the 3 complete bacterial genomes available at the time:
H. influenzae, M. genitalium, E. coli)
256 genes in the minimal set
what is the cluster of orthologous genes? what did it reveal?
63 genes are common to all of life (Archaea, Bacteria, Eukaryotes)
91 genes are common to Archaea and Bacteria
217 genes are common to Bacteria (less than found by the bioinfo approach from ‘96)
COG:
It is a database that groups proteins from different organisms according to shared evolutionary origin and usually shared function.
For example, if several bacterial species contain genes descended from the same ancestral gene, those genes may be placed in the same COG.
which free living organism has smallest genome
M. genitalium, 580kbp, 480 protein coding genes
What was Craig Venters experimental approach in 1999? (TIGR)
try to knock out genes from species with already little genes
use 2 species to estimate #genes not hit by chance vs #genes essential and led to death
start from:
M. genitalium: 580kbp — 480 prot coding genes
M. pneunomiae: 816kb — 480 orthologs + 197 genes (=677)
TE insertional mutagenesis to randomly knock out genes in both species, die if essential was hit
observed hits = non-essential genes
M. genitalium: 93 hits -> 480 -93 = 387 not observed hit (overestimation, some not hit by chance, no saturation screen)
M. pneunomiae: 57 ortholog, + 93 unique hits
final estimate: 265-350 essential genes
111 genes of unknown function undisrupted, many of these might be essential
limitations of craig venters knock out estimation of minimal genome
functional analogs: also some of the genes specific to a species can be essential
synthetic lethals were not regarded
what are synthetic lethals
cases where two genes can be knocked out individually with no effect, but the cell dies if both genes are knocked out together
explain experimental approach by Kobayashi 2003. what did they find?
begin with bacillus subtilis, 4100 genes
knock out individually with targeted homologous recombination (not random knockout like craig venter)
combine with craig venters findings
271 genes (6% of total) were essential for growth under optimal laboratory conditions.
The remaining 3,830 (94%) were non-essential
BUT STILL only individual knock outs, synthetic lethals not regarded
what were the functional annotations of the essentail genes found by kobayashi in 2003?
50% DNA/ RNA synthesis or Protein Metabolism
more than 50% of these encode ribosomal proteins
conservation of the 271 genes found by kobayashi in 2003 across species
not all were completely conserved over all known genomes or even over all known bacterial genomes
-> these essential genes would not show up
as part of the minimal genome by the bioinformatic approach.
well-conserved in other bacterial species
-> Of the essential genes, ≈30% were conserved across 54 bacterial species
many are also found in Archaea and/or Eukaryotes
-> ≈20% were conserved across 18 Archaea and Eukaryotic
2016: hutchison: a synthetic strain of microplasma, how many genes? which method?
473 genes
ransplant entire bacterial genomes and engineer
synthetic life (paper 2008,2010)
how is percentage of essentail genes and total #genes related?
negative correlation
few genes-> high percentage essential
many genes -> low percentage essentail
Zuletzt geändertvor 8 Tagen