4.4 Review

Sequencing and comparative analysis of a conserved syntenic segment in the solanaceae

Journal

GENETICS
Volume 180, Issue 1, Pages 391-408

Publisher

GENETICS SOCIETY AMERICA
DOI: 10.1534/genetics.108.087981

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Science Foundation [DBI-0116076, 0421634]
  2. National Institutes of Health [T32 GM007617-27]
  3. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF GENERAL MEDICAL SCIENCES [T32GM007617] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Comparative genomics is a powerful tool for gaining insight into genomic function and evolution. However, in plants, sequence data that would enable detailed comparisons of both coding and noncoding regions have been limited in availability. Here we report the generation and analysis of sequences for an unduplicated conserved syntenic segment (CSS) in the genomes of five memebers of the agriculturally important plant family Solanaceae. This CSS includes a 105-kb region of tomato chromosome 2 and orthologous regions of the potato, eggplant, pepper, and petunia genomes. With a total neutral divergence of 0.73-0.78 substitutions/site, these sequences are similar enough that most noncoding regions can be aligned, yet divergent enough to be informative about evolutionary dynamics and selective pressures. The CSS contains 17 distinct genes with generally conserved order and orientation, but with numerous smallscale differences between species. Our analysis indicates that the last common ancestor of these species lived similar to 27-36 million years ago, that more than one-third of short genomic segments (5-15 bp) are under selection, and that more than two-thirds of selected bases fall in noncoding regions. In addition, we identify genes under positive selection and analyze hundreds of conserved noncoding elements. This analysis provides a window into 30 million years of plant evolution in the absence of polyploidization.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available