Why Transcription Factor Binding Sites are Ten Nucleotides Long.
ABSTRACT Gene expression is controlled primarily by transcription factors, whose DNA binding sites are typically 10 nucleotides long. We develop a population-genetic model to understand how the length and information content of such binding sites evolve. Our analysis is based on an inherent tradeoff between specificity, which is greater in long binding sites, and robustness to mutation, which is greater in short binding sites. The evolutionary stable distribution of binding site lengths predicted by the model agrees with the empirical distribution (5 nt to 31 nt, with mean 9.9 nt for eukaryotes), and it is remarkably robust to variation in the underlying parameters of population size, mutation rate, number of transcription factor targets, and strength of selection for proper binding and selection against improper binding. In a systematic dataset of eukaryotic and prokaryotic transcription factors we also uncover strong relationships between the length of a binding site and its information content per nucleotide, as well as between the number of targets a transcription factor regulates and the information content in its binding sites. Our analysis explains these features as well as the remarkable conservation of binding site characteristics across diverse taxa.
- SourceAvailable from: europepmc.org[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: A recent slew of ENCODE Consortium publications, specifically the article signed by all Consortium members, put forward the idea that more than 80% of the human genome is functional. This claim flies in the face of current estimates according to which the fraction of the genome that is evolutionarily conserved through purifying selection is under 10%. Thus, according to the ENCODE Consortium, a biological function can be maintained indefinitely without selection, which implies that at least 80 - 10 = 70% of the genome is perfectly invulnerable to deleterious mutations, either because no mutation can ever occur in these "functional" regions, or because no mutation in these regions can ever be deleterious. This absurd conclusion was reached through various means, chiefly (1) by employing the seldom used "causal role" definition of biological function and then applying it inconsistently to different biochemical properties, (2) by committing a logical fallacy known as "affirming the consequent," (3) by failing to appreciate the crucial difference between "junk DNA" and "garbage DNA," (4) by using analytical methods that yield biased errors and inflate estimates of functionality, (5) by favoring statistical sensitivity over specificity, and (6) by emphasizing statistical significance rather than the magnitude of the effect. Here, we detail the many logical and methodological transgressions involved in assigning functionality to almost every nucleotide in the human genome. The ENCODE results were predicted by one of its authors to necessitate the rewriting of textbooks. We agree, many textbooks dealing with marketing, mass-media hype, and public relations may well have to be rewritten.Genome Biology and Evolution 02/2013; · 4.76 Impact Factor