Exonic splice regulation imposes strong selection at synonymous sites

  1. Laurence D. Hurst
  1. The Milner Centre for Evolution, Department of Biology and Biochemistry, University of Bath, Bath BA2 7AY, United Kingdom
  • Corresponding author: r.savisaar{at}bath.ac.uk
  • Abstract

    What proportion of coding sequence nucleotides have roles in splicing, and how strong is the selection that maintains them? Despite a large body of research into exonic splice regulatory signals, these questions have not been answered. This is because, to our knowledge, previous investigations have not explicitly disentangled the frequency of splice regulatory elements from the strength of the evolutionary constraint under which they evolve. Current data are consistent both with a scenario of weak and diffuse constraint, enveloping large swaths of sequence, as well as with well-defined pockets of strong purifying selection. In the former case, natural selection on exonic splice enhancers (ESEs) might primarily act as a slight modifier of codon usage bias. In the latter, mutations that disrupt ESEs are likely to have large fitness and, potentially, clinical effects. To distinguish between these scenarios, we used several different methods to determine the distribution of selection coefficients for new mutations within ESEs. The analyses converged to suggest that ∼15%–20% of fourfold degenerate sites are part of functional ESEs. Most of these sites are under strong evolutionary constraint. Therefore, exonic splice regulation does not simply impose a weak bias that gently nudges coding sequence evolution in a particular direction. Rather, the selection to preserve these motifs is a strong force that severely constrains the evolution of a substantial proportion of coding nucleotides. Thus synonymous mutations that disrupt ESEs should be considered as a potentially common cause of single-locus genetic disorders.

    Footnotes

    • [Supplemental material is available for this article.]

    • Article published online before print. Article, supplemental material, and publication date are at http://www.genome.org/cgi/doi/10.1101/gr.233999.117.

    • Freely available online through the Genome Research Open Access option.

    • Received January 11, 2018.
    • Accepted July 31, 2018.

    This article, published in Genome Research, is available under a Creative Commons License (Attribution 4.0 International), as described at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

    | Table of Contents
    OPEN ACCESS ARTICLE

    Preprint Server