ArticleBiology direct2007
Evolution of the genetic code: partial optimization of a random code for robustness to translation error in a rugged fitness landscape.
Article in Biology direct, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 47 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
47 citing papers in PubMed.
- The genetic code at the balance point of error and demand.PLoS computational biology · 2026Article
- Article
- Molecular Complexity Constrained Early Amino Acid Recruitment into the Genetic Code.Genome biology and evolution · 2026Article
- The Role of Mutations, Addition of Amino Acids, and Exchange of Genetic Information in the Coevolution of Primitive Coding Systems.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- A comprehensive analysis of translational misdecoding pattern and its implication on genetic code evolution.Nucleic acids research · 2023Article
- The modular biochemical reaction network structure of cellular translation.NPJ systems biology and applications · 2023Article
- Self-similarity and the maximum entropy principle in the genetic code.Theory in biosciences = Theorie in den Biowissenschaften · 2023Article
- Symmetrical distributions of aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases during the evolution of the genetic code.Theory in biosciences = Theorie in den Biowissenschaften · 2023Article
- Nontriplet feature of genetic code inProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023Article
- Rare-event sampling analysis uncovers the fitness landscape of the genetic code.PLoS computational biology · 2023Article
- The Influence of the Selection at the Amino Acid Level on Synonymous Codon Usage from the Viewpoint of Alternative Genetic Codes.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- A crescendo of competent coding (c3) contains the Standard Genetic Code.RNA (New York, N.Y.) · 2022Article
- Emergent properties as by-products of prebiotic evolution of aminoacylation ribozymes.Nature communications · 2022Article
- Model of Genetic Code Structure Evolution under Various Types of Codon Reading.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Article
- Little Evidence the Standard Genetic Code Is Optimized for Resource Conservation.Molecular biology and evolution · 2021Article
- On the Origin of Frameshift-Robustness of the Standard Genetic Code.Molecular biology and evolution · 2021Article
- Article
- Basic principles of the genetic code extension.Royal Society open science · 2020Article
- The influence of different types of translational inaccuracies on the genetic code structure.BMC bioinformatics · 2019Article
- Genetic codes optimized as a traveling salesman problem.PloS one · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe standard genetic code table has a distinctly non-random structure, with similar amino acids often encoded by codons series that differ by a single nucleotide substitution, typically, in the third or the first position of the codon. It has been repeatedly argued that this structure of the code results from selective optimization for robustness to translation errors such that translational misreading has the minimal adverse effect. Indeed, it has been shown in several studies that the standard code is more robust than a substantial majority of random codes. However, it remains unclear how much evolution the standard code underwent, what is the level of optimization, and what is the likely starting point.
resultsWe explored possible evolutionary trajectories of the genetic code within a limited domain of the vast space of possible codes. Only those codes were analyzed for robustness to translation error that possess the same block structure and the same degree of degeneracy as the standard code. This choice of a small part of the vast space of possible codes is based on the notion that the block structure of the standard code is a consequence of the structure of the complex between the cognate tRNA and the codon in mRNA where the third base of the codon plays a minimum role as a specificity determinant. Within this part of the fitness landscape, a simple evolutionary algorithm, with elementary evolutionary steps comprising swaps of four-codon or two-codon series, was employed to investigate the optimization of codes for the maximum attainable robustness. The properties of the standard code were compared to the properties of four sets of codes, namely, purely random codes, random codes that are more robust than the standard code, and two sets of codes that resulted from optimization of the first two sets. The comparison of these sets of codes with the standard code and its locally optimized version showed that, on average, optimization of random codes yielded evolutionary trajectories that converged at the same level of robustness to translation errors as the optimization path of the standard code; however, the standard code required considerably fewer steps to reach that level than an average random code. When evolution starts from random codes whose fitness is comparable to that of the standard code, they typically reach much higher level of optimization than the standard code, i.e., the standard code is much closer to its local minimum (fitness peak) than most of the random codes with similar levels of robustness. Thus, the standard genetic code appears to be a point on an evolutionary trajectory from a random point (code) about half the way to the summit of the local peak. The fitness landscape of code evolution appears to be extremely rugged, containing numerous peaks with a broad distribution of heights, and the standard code is relatively unremarkable, being located on the slope of a moderate-height peak.
conclusionThe standard code appears to be the result of partial optimization of a random code for robustness to errors of translation. The reason the code is not fully optimized could be the trade-off between the beneficial effect of increasing robustness to translation errors and the deleterious effect of codon series reassignment that becomes increasingly severe with growing complexity of the evolving system. Thus, evolution of the code can be represented as a combination of adaptation and frozen accident.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.