Questioning the Ubiquity of Neofunctionalization
Author Information
Author(s): Gibson Todd A., Goldberg Debra S.
Primary Institution: University of Colorado Denver
Hypothesis
Is neofunctionalization a significant factor in protein interaction network evolution?
Conclusion
The study suggests that subfunctionalization and self-interactions better explain protein interaction evolution than neofunctionalization.
Supporting Evidence
- Self-interacting proteins are underreported in interaction data due to assay limitations.
- Evolutionary inferences often ignore concurrent gene duplications.
- Theoretical models of neofunctionalization fail to reproduce empirical network clustering.
Takeaway
When genes duplicate, they can either take on new functions or share the old ones. This study says that sharing is more common than we thought.
Methodology
The study reviews existing data and models regarding protein interactions and gene duplication, analyzing biases in experimental assays and theoretical models.
Potential Biases
The conclusions may be influenced by the limitations of high-throughput assays that fail to capture self-interactions.
Limitations
The study relies on existing data, which may be biased due to underreporting of self-interacting proteins.
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website