Skip Navigation



DNA Research Advance Access published online on October 21, 2008
DNA Research, doi:10.1093/dnares/dsn028
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Supplementary Data
Right arrowOA All Versions of this Article:
15/6/357    most recent
dsn028v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Suzuki, H.
Right arrow Articles by Top, E. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Suzuki, H.
Right arrow Articles by Top, E. M.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2008. Kazusa DNA Research Institute
The online version of this article has been published under an open access model. Users are entitled to use, reproduce, disseminate, or display the open access version of this article for non-commercial purposes provided that: the original authorship is properly and fully attributed; the Journal and Oxford University Press are attributed as the original place of publication with the correct citation details given; if an article is subsequently reproduced or disseminated not in its entirety but only in part or as a derivative work this must be clearly indicated. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Comparison of Correspondence Analysis Methods for Synonymous Codon Usage in Bacteria

Haruo Suzuki*, Celeste J. Brown, Larry J. Forney and Eva M. Top

Department of Biological Sciences and Initiative for Bioinformatics and Evolutionary Studies, University of Idaho, PO Box 443051, Moscow, Idaho 83844-3051

Received 21 June 2008 ; accepted 24 September 2008.

Synonymous codon usage varies both between organisms and among genes within a genome, and arises due to differences in G + C content, replication strand skew, or gene expression levels. Correspondence analysis (CA) is widely used to identify major sources of variation in synonymous codon usage among genes and provides a way to identify horizontally transferred or highly expressed genes. Four methods of CA have been developed based on three kinds of input data: absolute codon frequency, relative codon frequency, and relative synonymous codon usage (RSCU) as well as within-group CA (WCA). Although different CA methods have been used in the past, no comprehensive comparative study has been performed to evaluate their effectiveness. Here, the four CA methods were evaluated by applying them to 241 bacterial genome sequences. The results indicate that WCA is more effective than the other three methods in generating axes that reflect variations in synonymous codon usage. Furthermore, WCA reveals sources that were previously unnoticed in some genomes; e.g. synonymous codon usage related to replication strand skew was detected in Rickettsia prowazekii. Though CA based on RSCU is widely used, our evaluation indicates that this method does not perform as well as WCA.

Key words: correspondence analysis; synonymous codon usage; horizontal gene transfer; strand-specific mutational bias; translational selection

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. Tel. +1 208-885-8858. Fax. +1 208-885-7905. E-mail: hsuzuki{at}uidaho.edu

Edited by Hiroyuki Toh


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J R Soc InterfaceHome page
M. Welch, A. Villalobos, C. Gustafsson, and J. Minshull
You're one in a googol: optimizing genes for protein expression
J R Soc Interface, August 6, 2009; 6(Suppl_4): S467 - S476.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.