Which could be considered biochemical evidence of an evolutionary relationship?

If you're seeing this message, it means we're having trouble loading external resources on our website.

If you're behind a web filter, please make sure that the domains *.kastatic.org and *.kasandbox.org are unblocked.

journal article

Science Progress in the Twentieth Century (1919-1933)

Vol. 26, No. 104 (APRIL 1932)

, pp. 626-642 (17 pages)

Published By: Sage Publications, Ltd.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/43431028

This is a preview. Log in through your library.

Publisher Information

SAGE Publications is an academic and professional publisher. We publish books, journals and software under the SAGE, Corwin Press, Paul Chapman Publishing, Pine Forge Press, SAGE Reference, SAGE Science and Scolari (US and Europe websites) imprints.

Rights & Usage

This item is part of a JSTOR Collection.
For terms and use, please refer to our Terms and Conditions
Science Progress in the Twentieth Century (1919-1933) © 1932 Sage Publications, Ltd.
Request Permissions

1. Anfinsen C. Molecular Basis of Evolution. John Wiley & Sons; 1959. [Google Scholar] This is a prescient early attempt by a Nobel-prize-winning biochemist to consider how chemistry might shape protein evolution.

2. Florkin M. Biochemical Evolution. Academic Press; 1949. [Google Scholar]

3. Zuckerkandl E, Pauling L. Molecules as documents of evolutionary history. J. Theor. Biol. 1965;8:357–366. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

4. Zuckerkandl E, Pauling L. Evolving Genes and Proteins. Bryson; 1965. [Google Scholar] Two chemists defend the potential contributions of biochemistry to evolutionary knowledge at a 1964 conference that brought molecular biologists and classical evolutionary biologists together.

5. Pauling L, Zuckerkandl E. Chemical paleogenetics: molecular ‘restoration studies’ of extinct forms of life. Acta Chem. Scand. 1963;17:S9–S16. [Google Scholar]

6. Ingram VM. Gene evolution and the haemoglobins. Nature. 1961;189:704–708. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

7. Wald G. Phylogeny and ontogeny at the molecular level. Evol. Biochem. 1963;3:12–51. [Google Scholar]

8. Dietrich MR. Paradox and persuasion: negotiating the place of molecular evolution within evolutionary biology. J. Hist. Biol. 1998;31:85–111. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

9. Morgan GJ. Emile Zuckerkandl, Linus Pauling, and the molecular evolutionary clock, 1959-1965. J. Hist. Biol. 1998;31:155–178. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

10. Aronson JD. ‘Molecules and monkeys’: George Gaylord Simpson and the challenge of molecular evolution. Hist. Philos. Life Sci. 2002;24:441–465. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

11. Simpson GG. The status of the study of organisms. Am. Scientist. 1962;50:36–45. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

12. Simpson G. Organisms and molecules in evolution. Science. 1964;146:1535–1538. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

13. Dobzhansky T. Biology, molecular and organismic. Am. Zool. 1964;4:443–452. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

14. Fitch WM. Homology: a personal view on some of the problems. Trends Genet. 2000;16:227–231. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

15. Gould SJ, Lewontin RC. The spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian paradigm: a critique of the adaptationist programme. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B. 1979;205:581–598. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

16. Baum DA, Smith SD, Donovan SSS. The tree-thinking challenge. Science. 2005;310:979–980. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

17. Watt WB. Allozymes in evolutionary genetics: self-imposed burden or extraordinary tool? Genetics. 1994;136:11–16. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

18. Dean AM, Thornton JW. Mechanistic approaches to the study of evolution: the functional synthesis. Nature Rev. Genet. 2007;8:675–688. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

20. Blundell TL, Wood SP. Is the evolution of insulin Darwinian or due to selectively neutral mutation? Nature. 1975;257:197–203. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

21. Perutz MF. Species adaptation in a protein molecule. Mol. Biol. Evol. 1983;1:1–28. [PubMed] [Google Scholar] This is the first article in the inaugural issue of Molecular Biology and Evolution. It lays out an agenda for experimental studies of protein evolution, using biochemical and structural studies of haemoglobin in a phylogenetic context as a template.

22. Malcolm BA, Wilson KP, Matthews BW, Kirsch JF, Wilson AC. Ancestral lysozymes reconstructed, neutrality tested, and thermostability linked to hydrocarbon packing. Nature. 1990;345:86–89. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

23. Serrano L, Day AG, Fersht AR. Step-wise mutation of barnase to binase. A procedure for engineering increased stability of proteins and an experimental analysis of the evolution of protein stability. J. Mol. Biol. 1993;233:305–312. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

24. Golding GB, Dean AM. The structural basis of molecular adaptation. Mol. Biol. Evol. 1998;15:355–369. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

25. Romero PA, Arnold FH. Exploring protein fitness landscapes by directed evolution. Nature Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2009;10:866–876. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

26. Peisajovich SG, Tawfik DS. Protein engineers turned evolutionists. Nature Meth. 2007;4:991–994. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

27. Hietpas RT, Jensen JD, Bolon DNA. Experimental illumination of a fitness landscape. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 2011;108:7896–7901. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] A high-throughput experimental evolution study is presented that directly characterizes the distribution of fitness effects of a very large number of possible mutations in heat shock protein 90 (HSP90).

28. Yokoyama S, Yang H, Starmer WT. Molecular basis of spectral tuning in the red- and green-sensitive (M/LWS) pigments in vertebrates. Genetics. 2008;179:2037–2043. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

29. Harms MJ, Thornton JW. Analyzing protein structure and function using ancestral gene reconstruction. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 2010;20:360–366. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

30. Brustad EM, Arnold FH. Optimizing non-natural protein function with directed evolution. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 2011;15:201–210. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

31. Storz JF, et al. Evolutionary and functional insights into the mechanism underlying high-altitude adaptation of deer mouse hemoglobin. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 2009;106:14450–14455. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] This multifaceted study links ecological context and population-level variation in haemoglobin allele frequencies to the experimentally measured oxygen affinity of those alleles.

32. Yokoyama S, Tada T, Zhang H, Britt L. Elucidation of phenotypic adaptations: molecular analyses of dim-light vision proteins in vertebrates. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 2008;105:13480–13485. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

33. Da Silva J, Coetzer M, Nedellec R, Pastore C, Mosier DE. Fitness epistasis and constraints on adaptation in a human immunodeficiency virus type 1 protein region. Genetics. 2010;185:293–303. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

34. Lunzer M, Golding GB, Dean AM. Pervasive cryptic epistasis in molecular evolution. PLoS Genet. 2010;6:e1001162. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] This elegant experiment demonstrates that functionally equivalent, orthologous proteins can have different tolerances for identical mutations.

35. Miller SP, Lunzer M, Dean AM. Direct demonstration of an adaptive constraint. Science. 2006;314:458–461. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

36. Ortlund EA, Bridgham JT, Redinbo MR, Thornton JW. Crystal structure of an ancient protein: evolution by conformational epistasis. Science. 2007;317:1544–1548. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

37. Bridgham JT, Ortlund EA, Thornton JW. An epistatic ratchet constrains the direction of glucocorticoid receptor evolution. Nature. 2009;461:515–519. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] References 36 and 37 describe the first experimental identification of permissive and restrictive mutations, which open and close evolutionary trajectories despite being functionally neutral themselves; this paper also reports the first X-ray crystallographic structures of reconstructed ancestral proteins.

38. Berkhout B, Klaver B, Das A. Forced evolution of a regulatory RNA helix in the HIV-1 genome. Nucl. Acids Res. 1997;25:940–947. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

39. Burch CL, Chao L. Evolvability of an RNA virus is determined by its mutational neighbourhood. Nature. 2000;406:625–628. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

40. Hayden EJ, Ferrada E, Wagner A. Cryptic genetic variation promotes rapid evolutionary adaptation in an RNA enzyme. Nature. 2011;474:92–95. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

41. Cheng N, Mao Y, Shi Y, Tao S. Coevolution in RNA molecules driven by selective constraints: evidence from 5S rRNA. PLoS ONE. 2012;7:e44376. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

42. Goldstein RA. The structure of protein evolution and the evolution of protein structure. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 2008;18:170–177. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

43. Zeldovich KB, Shakhnovich EI. Understanding protein evolution: from protein physics to Darwinian selection. Annu. Rev. Phys. Chem. 2008;59:105–127. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

44. Wright S. Proceedings of the Sixth International Congress of Genetics; 1932.pp. 356–366. [Google Scholar]

45. Dobzhansky T. Genetics and the Origin of Species. Columbia Univ. Press; 1937. [Google Scholar]

46. Smith JM. Natural selection and the concept of a protein space. Nature. 1970;225:563–564. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

47. Gavrilets S. Evolution and speciation on holey adaptive landscapes. Trends Ecol. Evol. 1997;12:307–312. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

48. McGhee GR. The Geometry of Evolution: Adaptive Landscapes and Theoretical Morphospaces. Cambridge Univ. Press; 2006. [Google Scholar]

49. Carneiro M, Hartl DL. Colloquium paper: adaptive landscapes and protein evolution. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 2009;107:1747–1751. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

50. Fowler DM, et al. High-resolution mapping of protein sequence-function relationships. Nature Meth. 2010;7:741–746. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

51. Harms MJ, et al. Biophysical mechanisms for large-effect mutations in the evolution of steroid hormone receptors. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 2013 http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1303930110. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] This paper presents an evolutionary biochemical study that uses ancestral reconstruction to identify two historical substitutions that cause a massive historical shift in binding specificity in the steroid receptors. It then follows up with detailed biophysical investigations of the mechanism of the transition.

52. Gruebele M. Downhill protein folding: evolution meets physics. Comp. Rend. Biol. 2005;328:701–712. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

53. Rose GD, Fleming PJ, Banavar JR, Maritan A. A backbone-based theory of protein folding. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 2006;103:16623. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

54. Drummond DA, Bloom JD, Adami C, Wilke CO, Arnold FH. Why highly expressed proteins evolve slowly. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 2005;102:14338–14343. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

55. Geiler-Samerotte KA, et al. Misfolded proteins impose a dosage-dependent fitness cost and trigger a cytosolic unfolded protein response in yeast. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 2011;108:680–685. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

56. Serohijos AWR, Rimas Z, Shakhnovich EI. Protein biophysics explains why highly abundant proteins evolve slowly. Cell Rep. 2012;2:249–256. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

57. Hughes AL. Looking for Darwin in all the wrong places: the misguided quest for positive selection at the nucleotide sequence level. Heredity. 2007;99:364–373. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

58. Barrett RDH, Hoekstra HE. Molecular spandrels: tests of adaptation at the genetic level. Nature Rev. Genet. 2011;12:767–780. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

59. Lewontin RC. Genetic Basis of Evolutionary Change. Columbia Univ. Press; 1974. [Google Scholar]

60. Eyre-Walker A. Changing effective population size and the McDonald-Kreitman test. Genetics. 2002;162:2017–2024. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

61. Nielsen R. Molecular signatures of natural selection. Annu. Rev. Genet. 2005;39:197–218. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

62. Timpson N, Heron J, Smith GD, Enard W. Comment on papers by Evans et al. and Mekel-Bobrov et al. on evidence for positive selection of MCPH1 and ASPM. Science. 2007;317:1036–1036. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

63. Zhuang H, Chien M-S, Matsunami H. Dynamic functional evolution of an odorant receptor for sex-steroid-derived odors in primates. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 2009;106:21247–21251. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

64. Hopkins R, Levin DA, Rausher MD. Molecular signatures of selection on reproductive character displacement of flower color in Phlox drummondii. Evolution. 2012;66:469–485. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

65. Pace CN. The stability of globular proteins. Crit. Rev. Biochem. 1975;3:1–43. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

66. Fersht AR, Serrano L. Principles of protein stability derived from protein engineering experiments. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 1993;3:75–75. [Google Scholar]

67. Tang KES, Dill KA. Native protein fluctuations: the conformational-motion temperature and the inverse correlation of protein flexibility with protein stability. J. Biomol. Struct. Dynam. 1998;16:397–411. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

68. Dunker AK, Obradovic Z. The protein trinity— linking function and disorder. Nature Biotech. 2001;19:805–806. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

69. DePristo MA, Weinreich DM, Hartl DL. Missense meanderings in sequence space: a biophysical view of protein evolution. Nature Rev. Genet. 2005;6:678–687. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

70. Giver L, Gershenson A, Freskgard PO, Arnold FH. Directed evolution of a thermostable esterase. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 1998;95:12809–12813. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

71. Arnold FH, Wintrode PL, Miyazaki K, Gershenson A. How enzymes adapt: lessons from directed evolution. Trends Biochem. Sci. 2001;26:100–106. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

72. Taverna DM, Goldstein RA. Why are proteins marginally stable? Proteins Struct. Function Genet. 2002;46:105–109. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

73. Goldstein RA. Computational Science — ICCS 2004. 2004. pp. 718–727. [Google Scholar]

74. Bloom JD, Raval A, Wilke CO. Thermodynamics of neutral protein evolution. Genetics. 2007;175:255–266. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

75. Godoy-Ruiz R, Perez-Jimenez R, Ibarra-Molero B, Sanchez-Ruiz JM. Relation between protein stability, evolution and structure, as probed by carboxylic acid mutations. J. Mol. Biol. 2004;336:313–318. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

76. Bloom JD, Labthavikul ST, Otey CR, Arnold FH. Protein stability promotes evolvability. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 2006;103:5869–5874. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] A directed evolution experiment is presented here that shows how increasing the stability of a protein makes it more ‘evolvable’ by offsetting the destabilizing effects of function-switching mutations.

77. Bershtein S, Segal M, Bekerman R, Tokuriki N, Tawfik DS. Robustness-epistasis link shapes the fitness landscape of a randomly drifting protein. Nature. 2006;444:929–932. [PubMed] [Google Scholar] This is a direct demonstration in a laboratory evolution experiment that epistasis can arise directly from stability thresholds.

78. Couñago R, Wilson CJ, Peña MI, Wittung-Stafshede P, Shamoo Y. An adaptive mutation in adenylate kinase that increases organismal fitness is linked to stability-activity trade-offs. Protein Eng. Des. Sel. 2008;21:19–27. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

79. Tokuriki N, Stricher F, Serrano L, Tawfik DS. How protein stability and new functions trade off. PLoS Comput. Biol. 2008;4:e1000002. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

80. Wilke CO, Drummond DA. Signatures of protein biophysics in coding sequence evolution. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 2010;20:385–389. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

81. Godoy-Ruiz R, et al. Natural selection for kinetic stability is a likely origin of correlations between mutational effects on protein energetics and frequencies of amino acid occurrences in sequence alignments. J. Mol. Biol. 2006;362:966–978. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

82. Worth CL, Gong S, Blundell TL. Structural and functional constraints in the evolution of protein families. Nature Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2009;10:709–720. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

83. Schreiber G, Buckle AM, Fersht AR. Stability and function: two constraints in the evolution of barstar and other proteins. Structure. 1994;2:945–951. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

84. Zeldovich KB, Chen P, Shakhnovich EI. Protein stability imposes limits on organism complexity and speed of molecular evolution. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 2007;104:16152–16157. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

85. Gould SJ. Wonderful Life: The Burgess Shale and the Nature of History. W. W. Norton & Company; 1990. [Google Scholar]

86. Losos JB, Jackman TR, Larson A, Queiroz K, de Rodriguez-Schettino L. Contingency and determinism in replicated adaptive radiations of island lizards. Science. 1998;279:2115–2118. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

87. Blount ZD, Borland CZ, Lenski RE. Historical contingency and the evolution of a key innovation in an experimental population of Escherichia coli. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 2008;105:7899–7906. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

88. Rokas A, Carroll SB. Frequent and widespread parallel evolution of protein sequences. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2008;25:1943–1953. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

89. McCracken KG, et al. Parallel evolution in the major haemoglobin genes of eight species of Andean waterfowl. Mol. Ecol. 2009;18:3992–4005. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

90. Pelz H-J, et al. The genetic basis of resistance to anticoagulants in rodents. Genetics. 2005;170:1839–1847. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

91. Menéndez-Arias L. Molecular basis of human immunodeficiency virus drug resistance: an update. Antiviral Res. 2010;85:210–231. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

92. Martin RE, et al. Chloroquine transport via the malaria parasite’s chloroquine resistance transporter. Science. 2009;325:1680–1682. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

93. Powles SB, Yu Q. Evolution in action: plants resistant to herbicides. Annu. Rev. Plant Biol. 2010;61:317–347. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

94. Weinreich DM, Delaney NF, DePristo MA, Hartl DL. Darwinian evolution can follow only very few mutational paths to fitter proteins. Science. 2006;312:111–114. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

95. Lozovsky ER, et al. Stepwise acquisition of pyrimethamine resistance in the malaria parasite. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 2009;106:12025–12030. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

96. Brown KM, et al. Compensatory mutations restore fitness during the evolution of dihydrofolate reductase. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2010;27:2682–2690. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

97. Costanzo MS, Brown KM, Hartl DL. Fitness trade-offs in the evolution of dihydrofolate reductase and drug resistance in Plasmodium falciparum. PLoS ONE. 2011;6:e19636. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

98. Counago R, Chen S, Shamoo Y. In vivo molecular evolution reveals biophysical origins of organismal fitness. Mol. Cell. 2006;22:441–449. [PubMed] [Google Scholar] This is a laboratory demonstration of the capacity of biophysical constraints to cause the parallel accumulation of identical mutations in independent lineages.

99. Miller C, et al. Experimental evolution of adenylate kinase reveals contrasting strategies toward protein thermostability. Biophys. J. 2010;99:887–896. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

100. Davis BH, Poon AFY, Whitlock MC. Compensatory mutations are repeatable and clustered within proteins. Proc. R. Soc. B. 2009;276:1823–1827. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

102. Field SF, Matz MV. Retracing evolution of red fluorescence in GFP-like proteins from faviina corals. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2010;27:225–233. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

103. Tokuriki N, et al. Diminishing returns and tradeoffs constrain the laboratory optimization of an enzyme. Nature Commun. 2012;3:1257. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

104. Nijhuis M, et al. Increased fitness of drug resistant HIV-1 protease as a result of acquisition of compensatory mutations during suboptimal therapy. AIDS. 1999;13:2349–2359. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

105. Maisnier-Patin S, Andersson DI. Adaptation to the deleterious effects of antimicrobial drug resistance mutations by compensatory evolution. Res. Microbiol. 2004;155:360–369. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

106. Alexander PA, He Y, Chen Y, Orban J, Bryan PN. A minimal sequence code for switching protein structure and function. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 2009;106:21149–21154. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] This is an amazing demonstration of epistasis in protein folding, in which a mutation that is merely destabilizing in some genetic backgrounds drives a transition to an entirely different fold in another background.

107. Lynch VJ, May G, Wagner GP. Regulatory evolution through divergence of a phosphoswitch in the transcription factor CEBPB. Nature. 2011;480:383–386. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

108. Green SM, Shortle D. Patterns of nonadditivity between pairs of stability mutations in staphylococcal nuclease. Biochemistry. 1993;32:10131–10139. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

109. LiCata VJ, Ackers GK. Long-range, small magnitude nonadditivity of mutational effects in proteins. Biochemistry. 1995;34:3133–3139. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

110. O’Maille PE, et al. Quantitative exploration of the catalytic landscape separating divergent plant sesquiterpene synthases. Nature Chem. Biol. 2008;4:617–623. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

111. Süel GM, Lockless SW, Wall MA, Ranganathan R. Evolutionarily conserved networks of residues mediate allosteric communication in proteins. Nature Struct. Mol. Biol. 2002;10:59–69. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

112. Lee J, et al. Surface sites for engineering allosteric control in proteins. Science. 2008;322:438–442. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

113. Poelwijk FJ, de Vos MGJ, Tans SJ. Tradeoffs and optimality in the evolution of gene regulation. Cell. 2011;146:462–470. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

114. Bloom JD, Gong LI, Baltimore D. Permissive secondary mutations enable the evolution of influenza oseltamivir resistance. Science. 2010;328:1272–1275. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] This analysis of historical viral evolution data unequivocally identifies permissive mutations that preceded function-switching mutations.

115. Tungtur S, Meinhardt S, Swint-Kruse L. Comparing the functional roles of nonconserved sequence positions in homologous transcription repressors: implications for sequence/function analyses. J. Mol. Biol. 2010;395:785–802. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

116. Skerker JM, et al. Rewiring the specificity of two-component signal transduction systems. Cell. 2008;133:1043–1054. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

117. Bloom JD, Romero P, Lu Z, Arnold F. Neutral genetic drift can alter promiscuous protein functions, potentially aiding functional evolution. Biol. Direct. 2007;2:17. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

118. Aharoni A, et al. The ‘evolvability’ of promiscuous protein functions. Nature Genet. 2005;37:73–76. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

119. Thomas VL, McReynolds AC, Shoichet BK. Structural bases for stability-function tradeoffs in antibiotic resistance. J. Mol. Biol. 2010;396:47–59. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

120. Bloom JD, Arnold FH, Wilke CO. Breaking proteins with mutations: threads and thresholds in evolution. Mol. Syst. Biol. 2007;3:76. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

121. Shoichet BK, Baase WA, Kuroki R, Matthews BWA. Relationship between protein stability and protein function. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 1995;92:452–456. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

122. Beadle BM, Shoichet BK. Structural bases of stability-function tradeoffs in enzymes. J. Mol. Biol. 2002;321:285–296. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

123. Peña MI, Davlieva M, Bennett MR, Olson JS, Shamoo Y. Evolutionary fates within a microbial population highlight an essential role for protein folding during natural selection. Mol. Syst. Biol. 2010;6:387. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

124. Russell RJ, et al. The structure of H5N1 avian influenza neuraminidase suggests new opportunities for drug design. Nature. 2006;443:45–49. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

125. Ives JAL, et al. The H274Y mutation in the influenza A/H1N1 neuraminidase active site following oseltamivir phosphate treatment leave virus severely compromised both in vitro and in vivo. Antiviral Res. 2002;55:307–317. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

126. Gong LI, Suchard MA, Bloom JD. Stability-mediated epistasis constrains the evolution of an influenza protein. eLife. 2013;2:e00631. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

127. Shortle D, Lin B. Genetic analysis of staphylococcal nuclease: identification of three intragenic ‘global’ suppressors of nuclease-minus mutations. Genetics. 1985;110:539–555. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

128. Shortle D, Meeker AK. Mutant forms of staphylococcal nuclease with altered patterns of guanidine hydrochloride and urea denaturation. Proteins. 1986;1:81–89. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

129. Wagner A. Neutralism and selectionism: a network-based reconciliation. Nature Rev. Genet. 2008;9:965–974. [PubMed] [Google Scholar] This is a thoughtful Review of how the vast neutral networks accessible to evolving biological molecules shape the mode and tempo of molecular evolution.

130. Grutter MG, Weaver LH, Matthews BW. Goose lysozyme structure: an evolutionary link between hen and bacteriophage lysozymes? Nature. 1983;303:828–831. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

131. Neidhart DJ, Kenyon GL, Gerlt JA, Petsko GA. Mandelate racemase and muconate lactonizing enzyme are mechanistically distinct and structurally homologous. Nature. 1990;347:692–694. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

132. Nagano N, Orengo CA, Thornton JM. One fold with many functions: the evolutionary relationships between TIM barrel families based on their sequences, structures and functions. J. Mol. Biol. 2002;321:741–765. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

133. Tie J-K, Jin D-Y, Stafford DW. Mycobacterium tuberculosis vitamin K epoxide reductase homologue supports vitamin K-dependent carboxylation in mammalian cells. Antioxid. Redox Signal. 2012;16:329–338. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

134. Loeb DD, et al. Complete mutagenesis of the HIV-1 protease. Nature. 1989;340:397–400. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

135. Shortle D, Stites WE, Meeker AK. Contributions of the large hydrophobic amino acids to the stability of staphylococcal nuclease. Biochemistry. 1990;29:8033–8041. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

136. Sun D, et al. Cumulative site-directed charge-change replacements in bacteriophage T4 lysozyme suggest that long-range electrostatic interactions contribute little to protein stability. J. Mol. Biol. 1991;221:873–887. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

137. Meeker AK, Garcia-Moreno B, Shortle D. Contributions of the ionizable amino acids to the stability of staphylococcal nuclease. Biochemistry. 1996;35:6443–6449. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

138. Guo HH, Choe J, Loeb LA. Protein tolerance to random amino acid change. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 2004;101:9205–9210. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

139. Li W, et al. Structure of a bacterial homologue of vitamin K epoxide reductase. Nature. 2010;463:507–512. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

140. Dutton RJ, et al. Inhibition of bacterial disulfide bond formation by the anticoagulant warfarin. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 2010;107:297–301. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

141. Ariyoshi K, et al. Patterns of point mutations associated with antiretroviral drug treatment failure in CRF01_AE (subtype E) infection differ from subtype B infection. J. Acquir. Immune Def. Syndr. 2003;33:335–342. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

142. Bandaranayake RM, et al. The effect of clade-specific sequence polymorphisms on HIV-1 protease activity and inhibitor resistance pathways. J. Virol. 2010;84:9995–10003. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

143. Jessen TH, Weber RE, Fermi G, Tame J, Braunitzer G. Adaptation of bird hemoglobins to high altitudes: demonstration of molecular mechanism by protein engineering. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 1991;88:6519–6522. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

144. Page CC, Moser CC, Chen X, Dutton PL. Natural engineering principles of electron tunnelling in biological oxidation-reduction. Nature. 1999;402:47–52. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

145. Kollmann M, Løvdok L, Bartholomé K, Timmer J, Sourjik V. Design principles of a bacterial signalling network. Nature. 2005;438:504–507. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

146. Brzezinski P, Ädelroth P. Design principles of proton-pumping haem-copper oxidases. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 2006;16:465–472. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

147. Jacob F. Evolution and tinkering. Science. 1977;196:1161–1166. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

148. Colosimo PF, et al. Widespread parallel evolution in sticklebacks by repeated fixation of ectodysplasin alleles. Science. 2005;307:1928–1933. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

149. Hoekstra HE, Hirschmann RJ, Bundey RA, Insel PA, Crossland JPA. Single amino acid. mutation contributes to adaptive beach mouse color pattern. Science. 2006;313:101–104. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

150. Jeong S, et al. The evolution of gene regulation underlies a morphological difference between two Drosophila sister species. Cell. 2008;132:783–793. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

151. Manceau M, Domingues VS, Mallarino R, Hoekstra HE. The developmental role of agouti in color pattern evolution. Science. 2011;331:1062–1065. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

152. Hopkins R, Rausher MD. Identification of two genes causing reinforcement in the Texas wildflower Phlox drummondii. Nature. 2011;469:411–414. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

153. Hoffmann FG, Storz JF, Gorr TA, Opazo JC. Lineage-specific patterns of functional diversification in the α- and β-globin gene families of tetrapod vertebrates. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2010;27:1126–1138. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

154. Thornton JW. Resurrecting ancient genes: experimental analysis of extinct molecules. Nature Rev. Genet. 2004;5:366–375. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

155. Bershtein S, Goldin K, Tawfik DS. Intense neutral drifts yield robust and evolvable consensus proteins. J. Mol. Biol. 2008;379:1029–1044. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

156. Esvelt KM, Carlson JC, Liu DR. A system for the continuous directed evolution of biomolecules. Nature. 2011;472:499–503. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

157. Dickinson BC, Leconte AM, Allen B, Esvelt KM, Liu DR. Experimental interrogation of the path dependence and stochasticity of protein evolution using phage-assisted continuous evolution. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 2013;110:9007–9012. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] An ultra-high-throughput directed evolution study is discussed here that reveals how epistasis can lead to stochastic and irreproducible outcomes in protein evolution.

158. Hietpas R, Roscoe B, Jiang L, Bolon DNA. Fitness analyses of all possible point mutations for regions of genes in yeast. Nature Protoc. 2012;7:1382–1396. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

160. Roscoe BP, Thayer KM, Zeldovich KB, Fushman D, Bolon DNA. Analyses of the effects of all ubiquitin point mutants on yeast growth rate. J. Mol. Biol. 2013;425:1363–1377. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

161. Babajide A, Hofacker IL, Sippl MJ, Stadler PF. Neutral networks in protein space: a computational study based on knowledge-based potentials of mean force. Fold Des. 1997;2:261–269. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

162. Broser M, et al. Structural basis of cyanobacterial photosystem II inhibition by the herbicide terbutryn. J. Biol. Chem. 2011;286:15964–15972. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Which could be considered biochemical evidence of an evolutionary relationships?

Which could be considered the best evidence of an evolutionary relationship?

What is biochemical or molecular evidence of evolution?