4.7 Article

Comparative mitogenomics of Hymenoptera reveals evolutionary differences in structure and composition

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL MACROMOLECULES
Volume 144, Issue -, Pages 460-472

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2019.12.135

Keywords

Mitochondrial genome architecture; Gene rearrangements; European pine sawfly

Funding

  1. TUBITAK (The Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey) [112T418]
  2. Sivas Cumhuriyet University [CUBAP F-396]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The rapidly growing number of mitogenomes in Hymenoptera have mostly been used to explain higher level phylogeny, however, there are inadequate studies that focused on the shared and distinctive patterns of mitogenome evolution. Here, the complete mitogenome of Neodiprion sertifer (Symphyta: Diprionidae) was reported for the first time and it was found to be the most rearranged mitogenome in Symphyta, with five rearrangement events. The mitogenome architectures and features were also investigated in 73 hymenopteran species. The observation of positive GC skews may be related with selective forces acting on mitogenomes with the high number of transversions than transitions. The number of rearrangements exhibited negative correlation with T% and positive with C% content, indicating a tight relation between the number of rearrangements and deamination mutations. The rearrangements also displayed a significant increment from Symphyta to Aculeate and transpositions were found to be the most common type. The rrnS-nd2 was the most rearranged gene cluster, revealing the frequent occurrence of illegitimate recombination via duplications. The nucleotide bias was more important in the codon and anticodon interactions than the expected exact-match pattern. The conservation rate of tRNAs seems to be unrelated to that of strand location, amino acid composition, codon family degeneracy. (C) 2019 Elsevier B.V. All tights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available