4.6 Article

Evolution of the RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) genes: Duplications and possible losses before and after the divergence of major eukaryotic groups

Journal

GENE
Volume 447, Issue 1, Pages 29-39

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.gene.2009.07.004

Keywords

RNA-dependent RNA polymerase; RdRP; Early eukaryotic duplicates; Protists

Funding

  1. Ministry of Science and Technology, P. R. China [2007CB108700]
  2. National 863 High-Tech [2006AA10A102]
  3. National Natural Science Foundation of China [30725022, 90717109]
  4. Shanghai Leading Academic Discipline [B205]
  5. School of life Sciences, Fudan University
  6. Biology Department
  7. Huck Institutes of the Life Sciences

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Eukaryotic RNA-dependent RNA polymerases (RdRPs, encoded by RDR genes) play critical roles in developmental regulation, maintenance of genome integrity, and defense against foreign nucleic acids. However, the phylogenetic relationship of RDRs remains unclear. From available genome sequences, we identified 161 putative RDR genes from 56 eukaryotes, ranging from protists to multicellular organisms, including plants, fungi and invertebrate animals, such as nematodes, lancelet and sea anemone. On the other hand, we did not detect RDR homologs in vertebrates and insects, even though RNA interference functions in these organisms. Our phylogenetic analysis of the RDR genes suggests that the eukaryotic ancestor might have had three copies, i.e. RDR alpha, RDR beta and RDR gamma. These three ancient copies were also supported by the patterns of protein sequence motifs. Further duplication events after the divergence of major eukaryotic groups were supported by the phylogenetic analyses, including some that likely occurred before the separation of subgroups within each kingdom. We present a model for a possible evolutionary history of RDR genes in eukaryotes. (C) 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights 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

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available