IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nat/nature/v433y2005i7023d10.1038_nature03223.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Codon volatility does not detect selection

Author

Listed:
  • Ying Chen

    (University of Chicago)

  • J. J. Emerson

    (University of Chicago)

  • Todd M. Martin

    (Committee on Genetics, University of Chicago)

Abstract

Arising from: J. B. Plotkin, J. Dushoff & H. B. Fraser Nature 428, 942–945 (2004); see also communication from Hahn et al.; Nielsen et al.; Plotkin et al. reply Plotkin et al.1 introduce a method to detect selection that is based on an index called codon volatility and that uses only the sequence of a single genome, claiming that this method is applicable to a large range of sequenced organisms1. Volatility for a given codon is the ratio of non-synonymous codons to all sense codons accessible by one point mutation. The significance of each gene's volatility is assessed by comparison with a simulated distribution of 106 synonymous versions of each gene, with synonymous codons drawn randomly from average genome frequencies. Here we re-examine their method and data and find that codon volatility does not detect selection, and that, even if it did, the genomes of Mycobacterium tuberculosis and Plasmodium falciparum, as well as those of most sequenced organisms, do not meet the assumptions necessary for application of their method.

Suggested Citation

  • Ying Chen & J. J. Emerson & Todd M. Martin, 2005. "Codon volatility does not detect selection," Nature, Nature, vol. 433(7023), pages 6-7, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:nat:nature:v:433:y:2005:i:7023:d:10.1038_nature03223
    DOI: 10.1038/nature03223
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.nature.com/articles/nature03223
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1038/nature03223?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nat:nature:v:433:y:2005:i:7023:d:10.1038_nature03223. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.nature.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.