Quantitative Biology > Genomics
[Submitted on 11 Dec 2010]
Title:Weighted genomic distance can hardly impose a bound on the proportion of transpositions
View PDFAbstract:Genomic distance between two genomes, i.e., the smallest number of genome rearrangements required to transform one genome into the other, is often used as a measure of evolutionary closeness of the genomes in comparative genomics studies. However, in models that include rearrangements of significantly different "power" such as reversals (that are "weak" and most frequent rearrangements) and transpositions (that are more "powerful" but rare), the genomic distance typically corresponds to a transformation with a large proportion of transpositions, which is not biologically adequate.
Weighted genomic distance is a traditional approach to bounding the proportion of transpositions by assigning them a relative weight {\alpha} > 1. A number of previous studies addressed the problem of computing weighted genomic distance with {\alpha} \leq 2.
Employing the model of multi-break rearrangements on circular genomes, that captures both reversals (modelled as 2-breaks) and transpositions (modelled as 3-breaks), we prove that for {\alpha} \in (1,2], a minimum-weight transformation may entirely consist of transpositions, implying that the corresponding weighted genomic distance does not actually achieve its purpose of bounding the proportion of transpositions. We further prove that for {\alpha} \in (1,2), the minimum-weight transformations do not depend on a particular choice of {\alpha} from this interval. We give a complete characterization of such transformations and show that they coincide with the transformations that at the same time have the shortest length and make the smallest number of breakages in the genomes.
Our results also provide a theoretical foundation for the empirical observation that for {\alpha} < 2, transpositions are favored over reversals in the minimum-weight transformations.
Current browse context:
cs
References & Citations
Bibliographic and Citation Tools
Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)
Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)
Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)
scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)
Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article
alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?)
CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)
DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)
Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)
Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?)
Papers with Code (What is Papers with Code?)
ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)
Demos
Recommenders and Search Tools
Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)
CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)
arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.