Homology.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
D5: Phylogeny & Systematics 5 hours. D.5.1Outline the value of classifying organisms. This refers to natural classification: How organisms truly grouped.
Advertisements

Evidence of Evolution Evolution is a continuous process of gradual modifications or changes in organisms. Patterns of evolution can be detected by viewing.
1 Orthologs: Two genes, each from a different species, that descended from a single common ancestral gene Paralogs: Two or more genes, often thought of.
Homology Review Human arm Lobed-fin fish fin Bat wing Bird wing Insect wing Homologous forelimbs not homologous as forelimbs or wings Definition: Structures.
Lecture 4: Phylogeny and the Tree of Life Campbell: Chapter 26
 Species evolve with significantly different morphological and behavioural traits due to genetic drift and other selective pressures.  Example – Homologous.
GENE TREES Abhita Chugh. Phylogenetic tree Evolutionary tree showing the relationship among various entities that are believed to have a common ancestor.
Tree of Life Chapter 26.
Phylogenetic Trees Systematics, the scientific study of the diversity of organisms, reveals the evolutionary relationships between organisms. Taxonomy,
Orthology, paralogy and GO annotation Paul D. Thomas SRI International.
Phylogenetic reconstruction
Reconstructing and Using Phylogenies
Chapter 20 Cladograms.
Building Phylogenies Parsimony 1. Methods Distance-based Parsimony Maximum likelihood.
Macroevolution Part I:
What Is Phylogeny? The evolutionary history of a group.
D.5: Phylogeny and Systematics
Molecular Systematics
An (OBO) ontology is NOT a model of language, it is a model of reality. Words are ambiguous – especially in isolation. Take the word 'wing' what type of.
Chapter 26: Phylogeny and the Tree of Life Objectives 1.Identify how phylogenies show evolutionary relationships. 2.Phylogenies are inferred based homologies.
Taxonomy. Taxonomy: Defining groups of organisms based on similar characteristics. The result is a branching structure called the phylogenetic tree 4.
© 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. Lecture by Edward J. Zalisko PowerPoint Lectures for Campbell Biology: Concepts & Connections, Seventh Edition Reece, Taylor,
Phylogenetic Trees: Common Ancestry and Divergence 1B1: Organisms share many conserved core processes and features that evolved and are widely distributed.
 Read Chapter 4.  All living organisms are related to each other having descended from common ancestors.  Understanding the evolutionary relationships.
Phylogeny and the Tree of Life Chapter 26. Systematics: Discipline focused on classification of organisms.
Introduction to Phylogenetics
The “über-ontology” (Uberon) Melissa Häendel, Chris Müngall, George Gkoütos Cell Ontology Workshop May, 2010.
GENE 3000 Fall 2013 slides wiki. wiki. wiki.
Phylogenies Reconstructing the Past. The field of systematics Studies –the mechanisms of evolution evolutionary agents –the process of evolution speciation.
Phylogeny & the Tree of Life
Globins. Globin diversity Hemoglobins ( , etc) Myoglobins (muscle) Neuroglobins (in CNS) Invertebrate globins Leghemoglobins flavohemoglobins.
Principles of Plant Systematics
All life is interconnected by descent
{ Early Earth and the Origin of Life Chapter 15.  The Earth formed 4.6 billion years ago  Earliest evidence for life on Earth  Comes from 3.5 billion-year-old.
Chapter 26 Phylogeny and Systematics. Tree of Life Phylogeny – evolutionary history of a species or group - draw information from fossil record - organisms.
PHYOGENY & THE Tree of life Represent traits that are either derived or lost due to evolution.
Cladograms or Phylogenetic Trees. Phylogenetic Trees or Cladograms By studying inherited species' characteristics and other historical evidence, we can.
This refers to natural classification: How organisms truly grouped together in nature  Identifying unknown organisms, using.
Chapter 26 Phylogeny and the Tree of Life
Section 2: Modern Systematics
Phylogeny and the Tree of Life
Phylogeny and the Tree of Life
Reconstructing Evolutionary Trees
The Teleost Anatomy Ontology: computable evolutionary morphology for teleost fishes Wasila Dahdul University of South Dakota & National Evolutionary Synthesis.
Phylogeny & the Tree of Life
Reconstructing and using phylogenies
The Common Anatomy Reference Ontology (CARO) and queries across species Melissa Haendel ZFIN.
Section 2: Modern Systematics
5.4 Cladistics.
Warm-Up Contrast adaptive radiation vs. convergent evolution? Give an example of each. What is the correct sequence from the most comprehensive to least.
Warm-Up Contrast adaptive radiation vs. convergent evolution? Give an example of each. What is the correct sequence from the most comprehensive to least.
Endeavour to reconstruct the characters of each hypothetical ancestor.
Unit 7: Evidence for Evolution
Bio Do Now Get out natural selection lab
D.5: Phylogeny and Systematics
Phylogeny and Systematics
18.2 Modern Systematics I. Traditional Systematics
Chapter 20 Phylogenetic Trees.
Chapter 20 Phylogenetic Trees. Chapter 20 Phylogenetic Trees.
Lab3 – Vertebrate Phylogeny
LECTURE 1: Phylogeny and Systematics
18.2 Modern Systematics I. Traditional ______________
Chapter 26- Phylogeny and Systematics
Phylogeny: Reconstructing Evolutionary Trees
Classification Notes B-5.7
Chapter 26 Phylogeny and the Tree of Life
Chapter 20 Phylogeny and the Tree of Life
Phylogeny and the Tree of Life
1 2 Biology Warm Up Day 6 Turn phones in the baskets
Evolution Biology Mrs. Johnson.
Presentation transcript:

Homology

Homology Review Which of the following structures are homologous? Definition: Structures (including genes) are homologous if they evolved from some structure in a common ancestor Human arm Lobed-fin fish fin Bat wing Bird wing Insect wing Homologous forelimbs not homologous as wings not homologous as forelimbs or wings Wings are functionally classified, and are analagous structures

Why do we care about homology when building an anatomy ontology? Consider an anatomy ontology of vertebrates: skeletal system cranial skeletal system parietal bone (in_organism human) parietal bone (in_organism zebrafish) frontal bone (in_organism human) frontal bone (in_organism zebrafish) f pa Homologous : frontal bone (zebrafish) and parietal bone (human) Different genes and developmental processes may underlie the development of the zebrafish frontal and the human frontal, even though they have the same name and are similarly located

Homologous_to A1 in B1 homologous_to A2 in B2 iff exists A3, B3: A1 in B1 descends_from A3 in B3 & A2 in B2 descends_from A3 in B3 (Note B1 and B2 must both be subclades of the clade descending* from D) (*In the genealogical sense) Note: Do we need to include time (exists & existed)? FN – just to be on the safe side we can include time – it's not useful but it could stop the some people complaining and it won't affect the logic at all. [edit] relation to what is in RO proposed

Directly_descends_from x1 directly_descends_from x2 iff there are y1, y2 such that: - y1 is an organism - x1 is an anatomical structure - x1 part_of y1 - y2 is an organism - x2 is an anatomical structure - x2 part_of y2 - y2 is a parent of y1 the genetic sequence that determined the morphology of x1 is partially a copy of the genetic sequence that determined the morphology of x2. descends_from is the instance level relation which is the transitive closure over directly_descends_from

Descends_from A in B descends_from C in D : For all A(a) -> exists b, d, c: B(b) & C(c) & D(d) a part_of b a descends_from c c part_of d (Note – B must be a subclade of the clade descending* from D)

Note that there are a number of synonyms for descended_from, including 'evolutionarily_derived_from' which is currently in ROproposed as follows: id: OBO_REL:evolutionarily_derived_from name: evolutionarily_derived_from def: "Instance 3-ary relation: x edf y as T iff x specified_by gx and gx ancestral_copy_of gy and gy specifies y" [] synonym: "derived_from" RELATED [] synonym: "descended_from" RELATED [] synonym: "evolved_from" RELATED [] is_transitive: true

What are Characters? a,b - symphysial bone margins straight c - anterior symphysial bone margin concave, resulting in oval gap between bone halves

Character “optimization” Method to infer ancestral conditions (features) Inferred ancestral condition dependent on phylogenetic tree I.e. different trees may imply differently reconstructed ancestors

Ancestral uncertainty Species A B C D E Feature + - + + - +/- +/- + Tree #1 +/-

Ancestral certainty Species A C B D E Feature + + + - - +/- - Tree #2

I. Bilaterians Heart presence/absence optimized on Bilaterian tree + + +/- + _ +/- No heart in ancestor of Bilateria +/- + _ No +/- + _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ + _ _ _ +/- _ _ _ + _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Phylogeny from Garey, 1999

Character Optimization Tree - including an ‘out group’ Character Matrix - states for taxa at tips of tree Assign values from column of matrix to tree ‘Polarize’ the state at the root using the outgroup

Homology Evidence Codes Inferred from morphological similarity Inferred from positional similarity Inferred from developmental similarity Inferred from compositional similarity Inferred from gene expression similarity Inferred from phylogeny

Use case: Query for phenotypes affecting the human frontal bone and its homologous structure in other species. Homologs = Synonyms How and where should homology information be captured? Homology between genes is already determined and recorded by the model organism community

Gene homology Types of gene homology: Genes that diverged due to a speciation event are termed orthologs Genes that diverged due to a duplication within a species are termed paralogs Gene orthology is recorded using different types of evidence: FuguA Conserved location: mouse HOXB Kim et al., 1999

Homology between anatomical structures is already determined and but not yet captured in a database the evolutionary community Homology assignments are based on specific kinds of evidence IP: Inferred from Position ID: Inferred from Development IC: Inferred from Composition Each homology assignment is associated with reference to a physical piece of evidence, a person, or literature. Homology statements include evidence and citations, and different homology statements are used to create and refine phylogenies.

Homologous structures are already implicit within MODs ontologies

Discussion points Do we need a relationship in OBO-REL to define homology? This is a symmetric relation between sisters and it is the relationship that requires evidence and attribution. Should homology assignments be a top-down or bottom up approach?eg. Pairs of taxa vs. CARO-centric assignments? RE:domain experts are required. It might be easier to enlist help in a pairwise manner. Homology needs to be captured for similarity searches. Text or synonym searches are insufficient. Does CARO take into account homology or is it a separate data set? If two structures are deemed homologous, how does this information transfer down is_a chains? Need use cases.

Entity (AO): Ceratobranchial 5 teeth Attribute (PATO): Is_present Entity (AO): Ceratobranchial 5 teeth Attribute (PATO): Is_absent