Talk:Codon usage bias

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Molecular Biology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Molecular Biology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Molecular BiologyWikipedia:WikiProject Molecular BiologyTemplate:WikiProject Molecular BiologyMolecular Biology articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Genetics task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Evolutionary biology Low‑importance

	Evolutionary biology portal This article is part of WikiProject Evolutionary biology, an attempt at building a useful set of articles on evolutionary biology and its associated subfields such as population genetics, quantitative genetics, molecular evolution, phylogenetics, and evolutionary developmental biology. It is distinct from the WikiProject Tree of Life in that it attempts to cover patterns, process and theory rather than systematics and taxonomy. If you would like to participate, there are some suggestions on this page (see also Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ for more information) or visit WikiProject Evolutionary biologyEvolutionary biologyWikipedia:WikiProject Evolutionary biologyTemplate:WikiProject Evolutionary biologyEvolutionary biology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Comment edit

Latest comment: 7 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

It should start with a definition for codon usage bias, with the words in boldface. I can't see why this isn't possible. Richard001 (talk) 08:29, 14 August 2008 (UTC)Reply

The codons are redundant and degenerate. This is because each unique codon, encodes a SINGLE amino acid; but most of the 20 amino acids are coded for by more than one codon. Enzymes-GMU (talk) 17:20, 18 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

There is no mention here of histone wrapping as another factor in codon selection. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:242:C201:7890:D13D:D071:2DCC:9F77 (talk) 05:15, 23 January 2017 (UTC)Reply

External links modified edit

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Codon usage bias. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101102210801/http://miracle.igib.res.in/gasco/ to http://miracle.igib.res.in/gasco/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:31, 10 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

extraneous logo edit

Latest comment: 4 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

There was a sequence logo from a methods paper by Dutihl, et al https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3129529/ that is completely extraneous to this article. The logo condenses a lot of amino acid profiles from an automated gene-identification system. It has nothing to do with codon usage bias. Dabs (talk) 18:07, 29 August 2019 (UTC)Reply

Updates needed to theory section edit

Latest comment: 4 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

This article does not mention biased gene conversion anywhere. The theory section does not reflect the literature from the past 15 years. The mutation-selection-drift model ^[1] was a prevailing view until the late 1990s when evidence for biased gene conversion began to accumulate. Dabs (talk) 18:38, 29 August 2019 (UTC)Reply

Suggested revision

begin with Bulmer's mut-sel-drift model as a baseline. this allows both mutational and selective effects. Shah and Gilchrist ^[2] as exemplar
explain how Hershberg and Petrov ^[3] undermined the mutationist hypothesis for genome composition by showing that mutation is generally AT-biased
introduce the idea of biased gene conversion via key source ^[4] and more recent sources such as ^[5] and ^[6]
restate synopsis of current thinking on causes (should also appear earlier in this article), and explain some of the taxonomically variable factors important in these models. Fold in the content of "contributing factors" section which can be deleted.
- population size
- diploidy and sex
- tRNA repertoire

Some sources

Galtier N, Roux C, Rousselle M, Romiguier J, Figuet E, Glémin S, Bierne N,

Duret L. Codon Usage Bias in Animals: Disentangling the Effects of Natural Selection, Effective Population Size, and GC-Biased Gene Conversion. Mol Biol Evol. 2018 May 1;35(5):1092-1103. doi: 10.1093/molbev/msy015. PubMed PMID: 29390090.

Rousselle M, Laverré A, Figuet E, Nabholz B, Galtier N. Influence of

Recombination and GC-biased Gene Conversion on the Adaptive and Nonadaptive Substitution Rate in Mammals versus Birds. Mol Biol Evol. 2019 Mar 1;36(3):458-471. doi: 10.1093/molbev/msy243. PubMed PMID: 30590692; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC6389324.

Behura SK, Severson DW. Codon usage bias: causative factors, quantification

methods and genome-wide patterns: with emphasis on insect genomes. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 2013 Feb;88(1):49-61. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-185X.2012.00242.x. Epub 2012 Aug 14. Review. PubMed PMID: 22889422.

Kaiser CM, Liu K. Folding up and Moving on-Nascent Protein Folding on the

Ribosome. J Mol Biol. 2018 Oct 26;430(22):4580-4591. doi: 10.1016/j.jmb.2018.06.050. Epub 2018 Jul 5. Review. PubMed PMID: 29981746; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC6384192.

References

^ M. Bulmer (1991). "The selection-mutation-drift theory of synonymous codon usage". Genetics. 129: 897–907.
^ P. Shah and M. A. Gilchrist (2011). "Explaining complex codon usage patterns with selection for translational efficiency, mutation bias, and genetic drift". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 108: 10231–6. doi:10.1073/pnas.1016719108.
^ R. Hershberg and D. A. Petrov (2010). "Evidence that mutation is universally biased towards AT in bacteria". PLoS Genet. 6: e1001115. doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1001115.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)
^ L. Duret and N. Galtier (2009). "Biased gene conversion and the evolution of mammalian genomic landscapes". Annu Rev Genomics Hum Genet. 10: 285–311. doi:10.1146/annurev-genom-082908-150001.
^ N. Galtier, C. Roux, M. Rousselle, J. Romiguier, E. Figuet, S. Glemin, N. Bierne and L. Duret (2018). "Codon Usage Bias in Animals: Disentangling the Effects of Natural Selection, Effective Population Size, and GC-Biased Gene Conversion". Mol Biol Evol. 35: 1092–1103. doi:10.1093/molbev/msy015.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
^ M. Rousselle, A. Laverre, E. Figuet, B. Nabholz and N. Galtier (2019). "Influence of Recombination and GC-biased Gene Conversion on the Adaptive and Nonadaptive Substitution Rate in Mammals versus Birds". Mol Biol Evol. 36: 458–471. doi:10.1093/molbev/msy243.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)

Add topic

[Bulmer1991-1] M. Bulmer (1991). "The selection-mutation-drift theory of synonymous codon usage". Genetics. 129: 897–907.

[ShahGilchrist2011-2] P. Shah and M. A. Gilchrist (2011). "Explaining complex codon usage patterns with selection for translational efficiency, mutation bias, and genetic drift". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 108: 10231–6. doi:10.1073/pnas.1016719108.

[HershbergPetrov2010-3] R. Hershberg and D. A. Petrov (2010). "Evidence that mutation is universally biased towards AT in bacteria". PLoS Genet. 6: e1001115. doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1001115.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)

[DuretGaltier2009-4] L. Duret and N. Galtier (2009). "Biased gene conversion and the evolution of mammalian genomic landscapes". Annu Rev Genomics Hum Genet. 10: 285–311. doi:10.1146/annurev-genom-082908-150001.

[Galtier2018-5] N. Galtier, C. Roux, M. Rousselle, J. Romiguier, E. Figuet, S. Glemin, N. Bierne and L. Duret (2018). "Codon Usage Bias in Animals: Disentangling the Effects of Natural Selection, Effective Population Size, and GC-Biased Gene Conversion". Mol Biol Evol. 35: 1092–1103. doi:10.1093/molbev/msy015.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)

[Rousselle2019-6] M. Rousselle, A. Laverre, E. Figuet, B. Nabholz and N. Galtier (2019). "Influence of Recombination and GC-biased Gene Conversion on the Adaptive and Nonadaptive Substitution Rate in Mammals versus Birds". Mol Biol Evol. 36: 458–471. doi:10.1093/molbev/msy243.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]