The De Novo Emergence of Two Brain Genes in the Human Lineage Appears to be Unsupported

Recently, certain studies have claimed that cognitive features and pathologies unique to humans can be traced to certain changes in the nervous system. These are caused by genes that have likely evolved "from scratch," not having any coding precursors. The translated proteins would not appear outside of the human lineage and any orthologs in other species should be non-coding. This contrasts with research that has identified a decisive role for duplication, and modifications to regulatory sequences, for such phenotypic traits. Closer examination, however, reveals that the inferred lineage-specific emergence of at least two of these genes is likely a misinterpretation owing to a lack of peptide verification, experimental oversights, and insufficient species comparisons. A possible pseudogenic origin is proposed for one of them. The implications of these claims for the study of molecular evolution are discussed.

Four classic "de novo" genes all have plausible homologs and likely evolved from retro-duplicated or pseudogenic sequences

Despite being previously regarded as extremely unlikely, the idea that entirely novel protein-coding genes can emerge from non-coding sequences has gradually become accepted over the past two decades. Examples of "de novo origination", resulting in lineage-specific "orphan" genes, lacking coding orthologs, are now produced every year. However, many are likely cases of duplicates that are difficult to recognize. Here, I re-examine the claims and show that four very well-known examples of genes alleged to have emerged completely "from scratch"- FLJ33706 in humans, Goddard in fruit flies, BSC4 in baker's yeast and AFGP2 in codfish-may have plausible evolutionary ancestors in pre-existing genes. The first two are likely highly diverged retrogenes coding for regulatory proteins that have been misidentified as orphans. The antifreeze glycoprotein, moreover, may not have evolved from repetitive non-genic sequences but, as in several other related cases, from an apolipoprotein that could have become pseudogenized before later being reactivated. These findings detract from various claims made about de novo gene birth and show there has been a tendency not to invest the necessary effort in searching for homologs outside of a very limited syntenic or phylostratigraphic methodology. A robust approach is used for improving detection that draws upon similarities, not just in terms of statistical sequence analysis, but also relating to biochemistry and function, to obviate notable failures to identify homologs.