4.8 Article

Homoplasy and Distribution of AFLP Fragments: An Analysis In Silico of the Genome of Different Species

Journal

MOLECULAR BIOLOGY AND EVOLUTION
Volume 27, Issue 5, Pages 1139-1151

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/molbev/msq001

Keywords

AFLP; fragment length distribution; homoplasy; isochores; DNA compositional heterogeneity; genomic signature

Funding

  1. Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovacion and Fondos Feder [CGL2006-13445-C02/BOS, CGL2009-13278-C02]
  2. Plan Estrategico del INIA [CPE03-004-C2]
  3. Xunta de Galicia

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We carried out an in silico analysis of the complete genome sequences of 14 species, including eukaryotes, prokaryotes, and archaea, to investigate the proportion of amplified fragment length polymorphism bands that are homoplasious for the different species, as well as the distribution of fragment lengths. We investigated several possible reasons for the disagreement, previously observed in Arabidopsis thaliana, between the observed fragment length distribution and the null random sequence distribution, which occurs in the direction of a deficit of fragments of small length and an excess of those of large length with respect to the null distribution. We made the following findings: 1) The positive relationship previously found between the percentage of homoplasy and genome size is a direct consequence of the number of observed bands and the GC content. For the same number of observed bands, the percentage of homoplasy is independent of the genome size of the species. 2) The disagreement between the observed fragment length distribution and the null random sequence distribution observed in A. thaliana is a phenomenon that also occurs in other species. 3) This disagreement is due neither to the structure of the genomes in isochores nor the possible impact of indels in reducing the number of restriction sites, two hypotheses discussed in the literature. 4) Nor is the disagreement eliminated by using restriction enzymes with balanced motifs. 5) The discrepancy seems to be caused, rather, by the nonrandom distribution of restriction enzyme motifs.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available