4.7 Article

Dosage compensation in the process of inactivation/reactivation during both germ cell development and early embryogenesis in mouse

Journal

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
Volume 7, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-03829-z

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Basic Research Program of China [2013CB967401]
  2. National Nature Science Foundation of China [81370675, 81421061]
  3. Shanghai Jiao Tong University Medicine-Engineering Fund [YG2013ZD08]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Ohno proposed that dosage compensation in mammals evolved as a two-step mechanism involving X-inactivation and X-upregulation. While X-inactivation is well characterized, it remains to further analysis whether upregulation of the single activated X chromosome in mammals occurs. We obtained RNA-seq data, including single-cell RNA-seq data, from cells undergoing inactivation/reactivation in both germ cell development and early embryogenesis stages in mouse and calculated the X: A ratio from the gene expression. Our results showed that the X: A ratio is always 1, regardless of the number of X chromosomes being transcribed for expressed genes. Furthermore, the single-cell RNA-seq data across individual cells of mouse preimplantation embryos of mixed backgrounds indicated that strainspecific SNPs could be used to distinguish transcription from maternal and paternal chromosomes and further showed that when the paternal was inactivated, the average gene dosage of the active maternal X chromosome was increased to restore the balance between the X chromosome and autosomes. In conclusion, our analysis of RNA-seq data (particularly single-cell RNA-seq) from cells undergoing the process of inactivation/reactivation provides direct evidence that the average gene dosage of the single active X chromosome is upregulated to achieve a similar level to that of two active X chromosomes and autosomes present in two copies.

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