Abstract
Shenhav and Zeevi conclude in a recent article (Science 370:683-687) that the universal genetic code (UGC) is optimized for resource conservation because mutations are less likely to increase proteomic nitrogen and carbon uses under the UGC than under random genetic codes (RGCs). Their finding results from miscalculating mutational effects and benchmarking against biased RGCs. Our reanalysis refutes their conclusion.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Copyright
The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license.
Posted February 16, 2021.
