3.9 Review

The evolutionary processes of mitochondrial and chloroplast genomes differ from those of nuclear genomes

Journal

NATURWISSENSCHAFTEN
Volume 91, Issue 11, Pages 505-518

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00114-004-0571-3

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper first introduces our present knowledge of the origin of mitochondria and chloroplasts, and the organization and inheritance patterns of their genomes, and then carries on to review the evolutionary processes influencing mitochondrial and chloroplast genomes. The differences in evolutionary phenomena between the nuclear and cytoplasmic genomes are highlighted. It is emphasized that varying inheritance patterns and copy numbers among different types of genomes, and the potential advantage achieved through the transfer of many cytoplasmic genes to the nucleus, have important implications for the evolution of nuclear, mitochondrial and chloroplast genomes. Cytoplasmic genes transferred to the nucleus have joined the more strictly controlled genetic system of the nuclear genome, including also sexual recombination, while genes retained within the cytoplasmic organelles can be involved in selection and drift processes both within and among individuals. Within-individual processes can be either intra- or intercellular. In the case of heteroplasmy, which is attributed to mutations or biparental inheritance, within-individual selection on cytoplasmic DNA may provide a mechanism by which the organism can adapt rapidly. The inheritance of cytoplasmic genomes is not universally maternal. The presence of a range of inheritance patterns indicates that different strategies have been adopted by different organisms. On the other hand, the variability occasionally observed in the inheritance mechanisms of cytoplasmic genomes reduces heritability and increases environmental components in phenotypic features and, consequently, decreases the potential for adaptive evolution.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.9
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available