4.8 Article

Impacts of Neanderthal-Introgressed Sequences on the Landscape of Human Gene Expression

Journal

CELL
Volume 168, Issue 5, Pages 916-+

Publisher

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2017.01.038

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. NIH/NHGRI [5T32HG000035-22]
  2. NIH [R01GM110068]
  3. Common Fund of the Office of the Director of the NIH
  4. NCI
  5. NHGRI
  6. NHLBI
  7. NIDA
  8. NIMH
  9. NINDS
  10. NCI\SAIC-Frederick (SAIC-F) [10XS170]
  11. Roswell Park Cancer Institute [10XS171]
  12. Science Care [X10S172]
  13. Broad Institute [HHSN268201000029C]
  14. Van Andel Institute [10ST1035]
  15. SAIC-F [HHSN261200800001E]
  16. University of Miami [DA006227, DA033684]
  17. Glenview Capital
  18. [N01MH000028]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Regulatory variation influencing gene expression is a key contributor to phenotypic diversity, both within and between species. Unfortunately, RNA degrades too rapidly to be recovered from fossil remains, limiting functional genomic insights about our extinct hominin relatives. Many Neanderthal sequences survive in modern humans due to ancient hybridization, providing an opportunity to assess their contributions to transcriptional variation and to test hypotheses about regulatory evolution. We developed a flexible Bayesian statistical approach to quantify allele-specific expression (ASE) in complex RNA-seq datasets. We identified widespread expression differences between Neanderthal and modern human alleles, indicating pervasive cisregulatory impacts of introgression. Brain regions and testes exhibited significant downregulation of Neanderthal alleles relative to other tissues, consistent with natural selection influencing the tissue-specific regulatory landscape. Our study demonstrates that Neanderthal-inherited sequences are not silent remnants of ancient interbreeding but have measurable impacts on gene expression that contribute to variation in modern human phenotypes.

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