Sign in
BioinformaticsPLoS ONE
Peer-reviewed journal article

Analysis of computational codon usage models and their association with translationally slow codons

Gabriel S. WrightiD, Anabel RodrígueziD, Jun LiiD, Patricia L. ClarkiD, Tijana MilenkovićiD, Scott EmrichiD

Abstract

Improved computational modeling of protein translation rates, including better prediction of where translational slowdowns along an mRNA sequence may occur, is critical for understanding co-translational folding. Because codons within a synonymous codon group are translated at different rates, many computational translation models rely on analyzing synonymous codons. Some models rely on genome-wide codon usage bias (CUB), believing that globally rare and common codons are the most informative of slow and fast translation, respectively. Others use the CUB observed only in highly expressed genes, which should be under selective pressure to be translated efficiently (and whose CUB may therefore be more indicative of translation rates). No prior work has analyzed these models for their ability to predict translational slowdowns. Here, we evaluate five models for their association with slowly translated positions as denoted by two independent ribosome footprint (RFP) count experiments from S. cerevisiae, because RFP data is often considered as a "ground truth" for translation rates across mRNA sequences. We show that all five considered models strongly associate with the RFP data and therefore have potential for estimating translational slowdowns. However, we also show that there is a weak correlation between RFP counts for the same genes originating from independent experiments, even when their experimental conditions are similar. This raises concerns about the efficacy of using current RFP experimental data for estimating translation rates and highlights a potential advantage of using computational models to understand translation rates instead.

02 /Specification & Classification

Click any tag to browse matching papers
Citations
13
FWCI
0.81
Field percentile
top 33%

Reproducibility ledger

Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.

Sign in to file a reproducibility report.

Similarity Map
SelectedSame fieldCross-field
THISTunney '18Riba '18Diambra '16Gilchrist '15García '18Sharma '19
67% semantic matchGenomics
Robert J. Tunney, Nicholas J. McGlincy, Monica E. Graham+3 more·Nature Structural & Molecular Biology·Jun 27, 2018· 97 citations