4.7 Article

A Solution to the C-Value Paradox and the Function of Junk DNA: The Genome Balance Hypothesis

期刊

MOLECULAR PLANT
卷 8, 期 6, 页码 899-910

出版社

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.molp.2015.02.009

关键词

junk DNA; transposons; C-value; paradox; gene regulation; balance

资金

  1. NSF [IOS1248106, IOS1237931]
  2. China Scholarship Council
  3. Direct For Biological Sciences [1248106] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  4. Direct For Biological Sciences
  5. Division Of Integrative Organismal Systems [GRANTS:13906220, 1237931] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  6. Division Of Integrative Organismal Systems [1248106] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The Genome Balance Hypothesis originated from a recent study that provided a mechanism for the phenomenon of genome dominance in ancient polyploids: unique 24nt RNA coverage near genes is greater in genes on the recessive subgenome irrespective of differences in gene expression. 24nt RNAs target transposons. Transposon position effects are now hypothesized to balance the expression of networked genes and provide spring-like tension between pericentromeric heterochromatin and microtubules. The balance (coordination) of gene expression and centromere movement is under selection. Our hypothesis states that this balance can be maintained by many or few transposons about equally well. We explain known balanced distributions of junk DNA within genomes and between subgenomes in allopolyploids (and our hypothesis passes the onion test'' for any so-called solution to the C-value paradox). Importantly, when the allotetraploid maize chromosomes delete redundant genes, their nearby transposons are also lost; this result is explained if transposons near genes function. The Genome Balance Hypothesis is hypothetical because the position effect mechanisms implicated are not proved to apply to all junk DNA, and the continuous nature of the centromeric and gene position effects have not yet been studied as a single phenomenon.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据