Evolutionary Optimization at the Molecular Level Peter Schuster - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Evolutionary Optimization at the Molecular Level

Peter Schuster

Institut für Theoretische Chemie, Universität Wien, Austria and The Santa Fe Institute, Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA

Physikalisches Kolloquium TU Wien, 28.11.2005

Web-Page for further information: http://www.tbi.univie.ac.at/~pks

Genotype, Genome Phenotype

Unfolding of the genotype

Highly specific environmental conditions Developmental program

Collection of genes

Evolution explains the origin of species and their interactions

Genotype, Genome

GCGGATTTAGCTCAGTTGGGAGAGCGCCAGACTGAAGATCTGGAGGTCCTGTGTTCGATCCACAGAATTCGCACCA

Phenotype

Unfolding of the genotype

Highly specific environmental conditions

James D. Watson und Francis H.C. Crick

Biochemistry molecular biology structural biology molecular evolution molecular genetics systems biology bioinfomatics

Hemoglobin sequence Gerhard Braunitzer The exciting RNA story evolution of RNA molecules, ribozymes and splicing, the idea of an RNA world, selection of RNA molecules, RNA editing, the ribosome is a ribozyme, small RNAs and RNA switches.

Omics

‘the new biology is the chemistry of living matter’ Molecular evolution Linus Pauling and Emile Zuckerkandl Manfred Eigen Max Perutz John Kendrew

Three necessary conditions for Darwinian evolution are: 1. Multiplication, 2. Variation, and 3. Selection. Variation through mutation and recombination operates on the genotype whereas the phenotype is the target of selection. One important property of the Darwinian scenario is that variations in the form of mutations or recombination events occur uncorrelated with their effects on the selection process. All conditions can be fulfilled not only by cellular organisms but also by nucleic acid molecules in suitable cell-free experimental assays.

Generation time Selection and adaptation 10 000 generations Genetic drift in small populations 106 generations Genetic drift in large populations 107 generations RNA molecules 10 sec 1 min 27.8 h = 1.16 d 6.94 d 115.7 d 1.90 a 3.17 a 19.01 a Bacteria 20 min 10 h 138.9 d 11.40 a 38.03 a 1 140 a 380 a 11 408 a Multicelluar organisms 10 d 20 a 274 a 200 000 a 27 380 a 2 × 107 a 273 800 a 2 × 108 a

Time scales of evolutionary change

RNA

RNA as scaffold for supramolecular complexes

ribosome ? ? ? ? ? RNA as transmitter of genetic information

DNA

...AGAGCGCCAGACUGAAGAUCUGGAGGUCCUGUGUUC...

messenger-RNA protein transcription translation RNA as

• f genetic information

working copy

RNA is modified by epigenetic control RNA RNA editing Alternative splicing of messenger

Functions of RNA molecules

RNA is the catalytic subunit in supramolecular complexes

RNA as regulator of gene expression Gene silencing by small interfering RNAs Allosteric control of transcribed RNA

Riboswitches metabolites controlling transcription and translation through

The world as a precursor of the current + biology RNA DNA protein

RNA as catalyst Ribozyme RNA as adapter molecule

G A C . . . C U G . . .

leu genetic code

RNA as carrier of genetic information

RNA viruses and retroviruses RNA evolution in vitro Evolutionary biotechnology RNA aptamers, artificial ribozymes, allosteric ribozymes

1. RNA sequences and structures 2. Neutral networks 3. Evolutionary optimization of structure 4. Suboptimal structures and kinetic folding 5. Comparison of kinetic folding and evolution

• 1. RNA sequences and structures

2. Neutral networks 3. Evolutionary optimization of structure 4. Suboptimal structures and kinetic folding 5. Comparison of kinetic folding and evolution

O CH2 OH O O P O O O

N1

O CH2 OH O P O O O

N2

O CH2 OH O P O O O

N3

O CH2 OH O P O O O

N4

N A U G C

k =

, , ,

3' - end 5' - end Na Na Na Na

5'-end 3’-end

GCGGAU AUUCGC UUA AGUUGGGA G CUGAAGA AGGUC UUCGAUC A ACCA GCUC GAGC CCAGA UCUGG CUGUG CACAG

Definition of RNA structure

A symbolic notation of RNA secondary structure that is equivalent to the conventional graphs

N = 4n NS < 3n Criterion: Minimum free energy (mfe) Rules: _ ( _ ) _ {AU,CG,GC,GU,UA,UG} A symbolic notation of RNA secondary structure that is equivalent to the conventional graphs

Conventional definition of RNA secondary structures

j n n j j n n

S S S S

− − = − +

⋅ + =

∑

1 1 1 1

Counting the numbers of structures of chain length n n+1

M.S. Waterman, T.F. Smith (1978) Math.Bioscience 42:257-266

Restrictions on physically acceptable mfe-structures: 3 and 2

Size restriction of elements: (i) hairpin loop (ii) stack

σ λ ≥ ≥

stack loop

n n

⎣ ⎦

∑ ∑

+ − − = + − + − − + = + − + − + +

Ξ = Φ ⋅ Φ + = Ξ Φ + Ξ =

2 / ) 1 ( 1 1 2 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 λ σ σ λ m k k m m m k k m k m m m m m

S S S Sn # structures of a sequence with chain length n

Recursion formula for the number of physically acceptable stable structures

I.L.Hofacker, P.Schuster, P.F. Stadler. 1998. Discr.Appl.Math. 89:177-207

RNA sequence RNA structure

• f minimal free

energy

RNA folding: Structural biology, spectroscopy of biomolecules, understanding molecular function Empirical parameters Biophysical chemistry: thermodynamics and kinetics

Sequence, structure, and design

G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G U U U U U U U U U U U A A A A A A A A A A A A U C C C C C C C C C C C C 5’-end 3’-end

S1

(h)

S9

(h)

F r e e e n e r g y G

• Minimum of free energy

Suboptimal conformations

S0

(h) S2

(h)

S3

(h)

S4

(h)

S7

(h)

S6

(h)

S5

(h)

S8

(h)

The minimum free energy structures on a discrete space of conformations

Sequence space

CGTCGTTACAATTTA GTTATGTGCGAATTC CAAATT AAAA ACAAGAG..... CGTCGTTACAATTTA GTTATGTGCGAATTC CAAATT AAAA ACAAGAG..... G A G T A C A C

Hamming distance d (I ,I ) =

H 1 2

4 d (I ,I ) = 0

H 1 1

d (I ,I ) = d (I ,I )

H H 1 2 2 1

d (I ,I ) d (I ,I ) + d (I ,I )

H H H 1 3 1 2 2 3

• (i)

(ii) (iii)

The Hamming distance between sequences induces a metric in sequence space

Sequence space and structure space

Two measures of distance in shape space: Hamming distance between structures, dH(Si,Sj) and base pair distance, dP(Si,Sj)

1. RNA sequences and structures

• 2. Neutral networks

3. Evolutionary optimization of structure 4. Suboptimal structures and kinetic folding 5. Comparison of kinetic folding and evolution 6. How to model evolution of kinetic folding?

RNA sequence RNA structure

• f minimal free

energy

RNA folding: Structural biology, spectroscopy of biomolecules, understanding molecular function Inverse Folding Algorithm Iterative determination

• f a sequence for the

given secondary structure

Sequence, structure, and design

Inverse folding of RNA: Biotechnology, design of biomolecules with predefined structures and functions

UUUAGCCAGCGCGAGUCGUGCGGACGGGGUUAUCUCUGUCGGGCUAGGGCGC GUGAGCGCGGGGCACAGUUUCUCAAGGAUGUAAGUUUUUGCCGUUUAUCUGG UUAGCGAGAGAGGAGGCUUCUAGACCCAGCUCUCUGGGUCGUUGCUGAUGCG CAUUGGUGCUAAUGAUAUUAGGGCUGUAUUCCUGUAUAGCGAUCAGUGUCCG GUAGGCCCUCUUGACAUAAGAUUUUUCCAAUGGUGGGAGAUGGCCAUUGCAG

Minimum free energy criterion Inverse folding

1st 2nd 3rd trial 4th 5th

The inverse folding algorithm searches for sequences that form a given RNA secondary structure under the minimum free energy criterion.

A mapping and its inversion

• Gk =

( ) | ( ) =

• 1

U

• S

I S

k j j k

I

( ) = I S

j k Space of genotypes: = { I

S I I I I I S S S S S

1 2 3 4 N 1 2 3 4 M

, , , , ... , } ; Hamming metric Space of phenotypes: , , , , ... , } ; metric (not required) N M = {

Degree of neutrality of neutral networks and the connectivity threshold

A multi-component neutral network formed by a rare structure: < cr

A connected neutral network formed by a common structure: > cr

Reference for postulation and in silico verification of neutral networks

Properties of RNA sequence to secondary structure mapping

• 1. More sequences than structures

Properties of RNA sequence to secondary structure mapping

• 1. More sequences than structures

Properties of RNA sequence to secondary structure mapping 1. More sequences than structures 2. Few common versus many rare structures

Properties of RNA sequence to secondary structure mapping 1. More sequences than structures 2. Few common versus many rare structures

n = 100, stem-loop structures n = 30

RNA secondary structures and Zipf’s law

Properties of RNA sequence to secondary structure mapping 1. More sequences than structures 2. Few common versus many rare structures 3. Shape space covering of common structures

Properties of RNA sequence to secondary structure mapping 1. More sequences than structures 2. Few common versus many rare structures 3. Shape space covering of common structures

Properties of RNA sequence to secondary structure mapping 1. More sequences than structures 2. Few common versus many rare structures 3. Shape space covering of common structures 4. Neutral networks of common structures are connected

Properties of RNA sequence to secondary structure mapping 1. More sequences than structures 2. Few common versus many rare structures 3. Shape space covering of common structures 4. Neutral networks of common structures are connected

RNA 9:1456-1463, 2003

Evidence for neutral networks and shape space covering

Evidence for neutral networks and

intersection of apatamer functions

AUGC, n = 100

Degree of neutrality λ Mean length of path h Unconstrained fold 0.33 > 95 Cofold with one sequence 0.32 75 Cofold with two sequences 0.18 40

Folding constraints, degree of neutrality and lengths of neutral path

1. RNA sequences and structures 2. Neutral networks

• 3. Evolutionary optimization of structure

4. Suboptimal structures and kinetic folding 5. Comparison of kinetic folding and evolution

Evolution in silico

• W. Fontana, P. Schuster,

Science 280 (1998), 1451-1455

Replication rate constant: fk = / [ + dS

(k)]

dS

(k) = dH(Sk,S)

Selection constraint: Population size, N = # RNA molecules, is controlled by the flow Mutation rate: p = 0.001 / site replication N N t N ± ≈ ) ( The flowreactor as a device for studies of evolution in vitro and in silico

Phenylalanyl-tRNA as target structure Randomly chosen initial structure

S{ = ( ) I{ f S

{ {

ƒ = ( )

S{ f{ I{

Mutation Genotype-Phenotype Mapping Evaluation of the Phenotype

Q{

j

I1 I2 I3 I4 I5 In

Q

f1 f2 f3 f4 f5 fn

I1 I2 I3 I4 I5 I{ In+1 f1 f2 f3 f4 f5 f{ fn+1

Q

Evolutionary dynamics including molecular phenotypes

In silico optimization in the flow reactor: Evolutionary Trajectory

28 neutral point mutations during a long quasi-stationary epoch Transition inducing point mutations change the molecular structure Neutral point mutations leave the molecular structure unchanged

Neutral genotype evolution during phenotypic stasis

Evolutionary trajectory Spreading of the population

• n neutral networks

Drift of the population center in sequence space

Spreading and evolution of a population on a neutral network: t = 150

Spreading and evolution of a population on a neutral network : t = 170

Spreading and evolution of a population on a neutral network : t = 200

Spreading and evolution of a population on a neutral network : t = 350

Spreading and evolution of a population on a neutral network : t = 500

Spreading and evolution of a population on a neutral network : t = 650

Spreading and evolution of a population on a neutral network : t = 820

Spreading and evolution of a population on a neutral network : t = 825

Spreading and evolution of a population on a neutral network : t = 830

Spreading and evolution of a population on a neutral network : t = 835

Spreading and evolution of a population on a neutral network : t = 840

Spreading and evolution of a population on a neutral network : t = 845

Spreading and evolution of a population on a neutral network : t = 850

Spreading and evolution of a population on a neutral network : t = 855

Mount Fuji

Example of a smooth landscape on Earth

Dolomites Bryce Canyon

Examples of rugged landscapes on Earth

Genotype Space Fitness

Start of Walk End of Walk

Evolutionary optimization in absence of neutral paths in sequence space

Genotype Space F i t n e s s

Start of Walk End of Walk Random Drift Periods Adaptive Periods

Evolutionary optimization including neutral paths in sequence space

Grand Canyon

Example of a landscape on Earth with ‘neutral’ ridges and plateaus

1. RNA sequences and structures 2. Neutral networks 3. Evolutionary optimization of structure

• 4. Suboptimal structures and kinetic folding

5. Comparison of kinetic folding and evolution

The Folding Algorithm

A sequence I specifies an energy ordered set of compatible structures S(I):

S(I) = {S0 , S1 , … , Sm , O}

A trajectory Tk(I) is a time ordered series of structures in S(I). A folding trajectory is defined by starting with the open chain O and ending with the global minimum free energy structure S0 or a metastable structure Sk which represents a local energy minimum:

T0(I) = {O , S (1) , … , S (t-1) , S (t) , S (t+1) , … , S0} Tk(I) = {O , S (1) , … , S (t-1) , S (t) , S (t+1) , … , Sk}

Master equation

( )

1 , , 1 , ) ( ) (

1 1 1

+ = − = − =

∑ ∑ ∑

+ = + = + =

m k k P P k t P t P dt dP

m i ki k i m i ik m i ki ik k

K

Transition probabilities Pij(t) = Prob{Si→Sj} are defined by

Pij(t) = Pi(t) kij = Pi(t) exp(-∆Gij/2RT) / Σi Pji(t) = Pj(t) kji = Pj(t) exp(-∆Gji/2RT) / Σj exp(-∆Gki/2RT)

The symmetric rule for transition rate parameters is due to Kawasaki (K. Kawasaki, Diffusion constants near the critical point for time depen-dent Ising models. Phys.Rev. 145:224-230, 1966).

∑

+ ≠ =

= Σ

2 , 1 m i k k k

Formulation of kinetic RNA folding as a stochastic process

Corresponds to base pair distance: dP(S1,S2) Base pair formation and base pair cleavage moves for nucleation and elongation of stacks

Base pair closure, opening and shift corresponds to Hamming distance: dH(S1,S2) Base pair shift move of class 1: Shift inside internal loops or bulges

Two measures of distance in shape space: Hamming distance between structures, dH(Si,Sj) and base pair distance, dP(Si,Sj)

Sh S1

(h)

S6

(h)

S7

(h)

S5

(h)

S2

(h)

S9

(h)

Free energy G

• Local minimum

Suboptimal conformations

Search for local minima in conformation space

F r e e e n e r g y G

• "Reaction coordinate"

Sk S{ Saddle point T

{ k

F r e e e n e r g y G

• Sk

S{ T

{ k

"Barrier tree"

Definition of a ‚barrier tree‘

CUGCGGCUUUGGCUCUAGCC ....((((........)))) -4.30 (((.(((....))).))).. -3.50 (((..((....))..))).. -3.10 ..........(((....))) -2.80 ..(((((....)))...)). -2.20 ....(((..........))) -2.20 ((..(((....)))..)).. -2.00 ..((.((....))....)). -1.60 ....(((....)))...... -1.60 .....(((........))). -1.50 .((.(((....))).))... -1.40 ....((((..(...).)))) -1.40 .((..((....))..))... -1.00 (((.(((....)).)))).. -0.90 (((.((......)).))).. -0.90 ....((((..(....))))) -0.80 .....((....))....... -0.80 ..(.(((....))))..... -0.60 ....(((....)).)..... -0.60 (((..(......)..))).. -0.50 ..(((((....)).)..)). -0.50 ..(.(((....))).).... -0.40 ..((.......))....... -0.30 ..........((......)) -0.30 ...........((....)). -0.30 (((.(((....)))).)).. -0.20 ....(((.(.......)))) -0.20 ....(((..((....))))) -0.20 ..(..((....))..).... 0.00 .................... 0.00 .(..(((....)))..)... 0.10

M.T. Wolfinger, W.A. Svrcek-Seiler, C. Flamm, I.L. Hofacker, P.F. Stadler. 2004. J.Phys.A: Math.Gen. 37:4731-4741.

CUGCGGCUUUGGCUCUAGCC ....((((........)))) -4.30 (((.(((....))).))).. -3.50 (((..((....))..))).. -3.10 ..........(((....))) -2.80 ..(((((....)))...)). -2.20 ....(((..........))) -2.20 ((..(((....)))..)).. -2.00 ..((.((....))....)). -1.60 ....(((....)))...... -1.60 .....(((........))). -1.50 .((.(((....))).))... -1.40 ....((((..(...).)))) -1.40 .((..((....))..))... -1.00 (((.(((....)).)))).. -0.90 (((.((......)).))).. -0.90 ....((((..(....))))) -0.80 .....((....))....... -0.80 ..(.(((....))))..... -0.60 ....(((....)).)..... -0.60 (((..(......)..))).. -0.50 ..(((((....)).)..)). -0.50 ..(.(((....))).).... -0.40 ..((.......))....... -0.30 ..........((......)) -0.30 ...........((....)). -0.30 (((.(((....)))).)).. -0.20 ....(((.(.......)))) -0.20 ....(((..((....))))) -0.20 ..(..((....))..).... 0.00 .................... 0.00 .(..(((....)))..)... 0.10

M.T. Wolfinger, W.A. Svrcek-Seiler, C. Flamm, I.L. Hofacker, P.F. Stadler. 2004. J.Phys.A: Math.Gen. 37:4731-4741.

Arrhenius kinetics M.T. Wolfinger, W.A. Svrcek-Seiler, C. Flamm, I.L. Hofacker, P.F. Stadler. 2004. J.Phys.A: Math.Gen. 37:4731-4741.

Arrhenius kinetic Exact solution of the master equation M.T. Wolfinger, W.A. Svrcek-Seiler, C. Flamm, I.L. Hofacker, P.F. Stadler. 2004. J.Phys.A: Math.Gen. 37:4731-4741.

S0 S1 Kinetic structures Free Energy

S0 S0 S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 S8 S10 S9

Minimum free energy structure Suboptimal structures One sequence - one structure Many suboptimal structures Partition function Metastable structures Conformational switches

RNA secondary structures derived from a single sequence

Gk Neutral Network

Structure S

k

Gk C

• k

Compatible Set Ck

The compatible set Ck of a structure Sk consists of all sequences which form Sk as its minimum free energy structure (the neutral network Gk) or one of its suboptimal structures.

Structure S Structure S

1

The intersection of two compatible sets is always non empty: C0 C1

Reference for the definition of the intersection and the proof of the intersection theorem

JN1LH

1D 1D 1D 2D 2D 2D R R R

G GGGUGGAAC GUUC GAAC GUUCCUCCC CACGAG CACGAG CACGAG

• 28.6 kcal·mol
• 1

G/

• 31.8 kcal·mol
• 1

G G G G G G C C C C C C A A U U U U G G C C U U A A G G G C C C A A A A G C G C A A G C /G

• 28.2 kcal·mol
• 1

G G G G G G GG CCC C C C C C U G G G G C C C C A A A A A A A A U U U U U G G C C A A

• 28.6 kcal·mol
• 1

3 3 3 13 13 13 23 23 23 33 33 33 44 44 44

5' 5' 3’ 3’

J.H.A. Nagel, C. Flamm, I.L. Hofacker, K. Franke, M.H. de Smit, P. Schuster, and C.W.A. Pleij. Structural parameters affecting the kinetic competition of RNA hairpin formation, Nucleic Acids Res., in press 2005.

An RNA switch

4 5 8 9 11

1 9 2 2 4 2 5 2 7 3 3 3 4

36

38 39 41 46 47

3

49

1

2 6 7 10

1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 2 1 22 2 3 2 6 2 8 2 9 3 3 1 32 3 5 3 7

40

4 2 4 3 44 45 48 50

• 26.0
• 28.0
• 30.0
• 32.0
• 34.0
• 36.0
• 38.0
• 40.0
• 42.0
• 44.0
• 46.0
• 48.0
• 50.0

2.77 5.32 2 . 9 3.4 2.36 2 . 4 4 2.44 2.44 1.46 1.44 1.66

1.9

2.14

2.51 2.14 2.51

2 . 1 4 1 . 4 7

1.49

3.04 2.97 3.04 4.88 6.13 6 . 8 2.89

Free energy [kcal / mole]

J1LH barrier tree

A ribozyme switch

E.A.Schultes, D.B.Bartel, Science 289 (2000), 448-452

Two ribozymes of chain lengths n = 88 nucleotides: An artificial ligase (A) and a natural cleavage ribozyme of hepatitis--virus (B)

The sequence at the intersection: An RNA molecules which is 88 nucleotides long and can form both structures

Two neutral walks through sequence space with conservation of structure and catalytic activity

1. RNA sequences and structures 2. Neutral networks 3. Evolutionary optimization of structure 4. Suboptimal structures and kinetic folding

• 5. Comparison of kinetic folding and evolution

Kinetic Folding

Compatible structures: Set of stuctures compatible with a given sequence stability restriction Conformation space Folding trajectory in conformation space: Time ordered series of structures Folding process: Average of trajectories on the ensemble level Criterium: minimizing free energy

Evolutionary optimization

Compatible sequences: Set of sequences compatible with a given structure mfe restriction Neutral network Genealogy on a neutral network: Time ordered series of sequences Optimization process: Average over genealogies on the population level Criterium: maximizing fitness

Universität Wien

Acknowledgement of support

Fonds zur Förderung der wissenschaftlichen Forschung (FWF) Projects No. 09942, 10578, 11065, 13093 13887, and 14898 Wiener Wissenschafts-, Forschungs- und Technologiefonds (WWTF) Project No. Mat05 Jubiläumsfonds der Österreichischen Nationalbank Project No. Nat-7813 European Commission: Contracts No. 98-0189, 12835 (NEST) Austrian Genome Research Program – GEN-AU: Bioinformatics Network (BIN) Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften Berlin-Brandenburgische Akademie der Wissenschaften Siemens AG, Austria Universität Wien and the Santa Fe Institute

Coworkers

Peter Stadler, Bärbel M. Stadler, Universität Leipzig, GE Paul E. Phillipson, University of Colorado at Boulder, CO Heinz Engl, Philipp Kügler, James Lu, Stefan Müller, RICAM Linz, AT Jord Nagel, Kees Pleij, Universiteit Leiden, NL Walter Fontana, Harvard Medical School, MA Christian Reidys, Christian Forst, Los Alamos National Laboratory, NM Ulrike Göbel, Walter Grüner, Stefan Kopp, Jaqueline Weber, Institut für Molekulare Biotechnologie, Jena, GE Ivo L.Hofacker, Christoph Flamm, Andreas Svrček-Seiler, Universität Wien, AT Kurt Grünberger, Michael Kospach , Andreas Wernitznig, Stefanie Widder, Michael Wolfinger, Stefan Wuchty, Universität Wien, AT Jan Cupal, Stefan Bernhart, Lukas Endler, Ulrike Langhammer, Rainer Machne, Ulrike Mückstein, Hakim Tafer, Thomas Taylor, Universität Wien, AT

Universität Wien

Web-Page for further information: http://www.tbi.univie.ac.at/~pks