Abstract:Evolution is driven by mutations, which lead to new protein functions but come at a cost to protein stability. Non-conservative substitutions are of interest in this regard because they may most profoundly affect both function and stability. Accordingly, organisms must balance the benefit of accepting advantageous substitutions with the possible cost of deleterious effects on protein folding and stability. We here examine factors that systematically promote non-conservative mutations at the proteome level. Intrinsically disordered regions in proteins play pivotal roles in protein interactions, but many questions regarding their evolution remain unanswered. Similarly, whether and how molecular chaperones, which have been shown to buffer destabilizing mutations in individual proteins, generally provide robustness during proteome evolution remains unclear. To this end, we introduce an evolutionary parameter λ that directly estimates the rate of non-conservative substitutions. Our analysis of λ in Escherichia coli, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, and Homo sapiens sequences reveals how co- and post-translationally acting chaperones differentially promote non-conservative substitutions in their substrates, likely through buffering of their destabilizing effects. We further find that λ serves well to quantify the evolution of intrinsically disordered proteins even though the unstructured, thus generally variable regions in proteins are often flanked by very conserved sequences. Crucially, we show that both intrinsically disordered proteins and highly re-wired proteins in protein interaction networks, which have evolved new interactions and functions, exhibit a higher λ at the expense of enhanced chaperone assistance. Our findings thus highlight an intricate interplay of molecular chaperones and protein disorder in the evolvability of protein networks. Our results illuminate the role of chaperones in enabling protein evolution, and underline the importance of the cellular context and integrated approaches for understanding proteome evolution. We feel that the development of λ may be a valuable addition to the toolbox applied to understand the molecular basis of evolution.

Proteins with greater influence on network dynamics evolve more slowly but are not more essential

Functional optimization in distinct tissues and conditions constrains the rate of protein evolution

Determinants of the rate of protein sequence evolution

A single determinant for the rate of yeast protein evolution

Protein Evolution on a Human Signaling Network

Why highly expressed proteins evolve slowly

Protein Misinteraction Avoidance Causes Highly Expressed Proteins to Evolve Slowly.

The Influence of Codon Usage, Protein Abundance, and Protein Stability on Protein Evolution Vary by Evolutionary Distance and the Type of Protein

Causes of evolutionary rate variation among protein sites

Protein evolution speed depends on its stability and abundance and on chaperone concentrations

Functional Organization and Its Implication in Evolution of the Human Protein-Protein Interaction Network.

Transcriptional Abundance is Not the Single Force Driving the Evolution of Bacterial Proteins

Selection maintaining protein stability at equilibrium

Interplay between Chaperones and Protein Disorder Promotes the Evolution of Protein Networks

Comparative Analysis of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae and Caenorhabditis elegans Protein Interaction Network

Protein Interactions Limit the Rate of Evolution of Photosynthetic Genes in Cyanobacteria.

How Life Works: Darwinian Evolution of Proteins

Survival of the cheapest: How proteome cost minimization drives evolution

Physical principles underpinning molecular-level protein evolution

Upstream plasticity and downstream robustness in evolution of molecular networks

Evolutionary Rate Covariation is a reliable predictor of co-functional interactions but not necessarily physical interactions