4.6 Article

Analysis of the giant genomes of Fritillaria (Liliaceae) indicates that a lack of DNA removal characterizes extreme expansions in genome size

期刊

NEW PHYTOLOGIST
卷 208, 期 2, 页码 596-607

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/nph.13471

关键词

DNA deletion; Fritillaria; genome size evolution; genome turnover; Liliaceae; repetitive DNA; transposable elements (TEs)

资金

  1. Natural Environment Research Council [NE/G01724/1]
  2. Czech Science Foundation [P501/12/G090]
  3. AVCR [RVO:60077344]
  4. Catalan Government-E.U. [2011-A-00292]
  5. NERC [NE/G017247/1, NE/G020256/1, NBAF010002] Funding Source: UKRI
  6. Natural Environment Research Council [NE/G017247/1, NE/G020256/1, NBAF010002] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Plants exhibit an extraordinary range of genome sizes, varying by > 2000-fold between the smallest and largest recorded values. In the absence of polyploidy, changes in the amount of repetitive DNA (transposable elements and tandem repeats) are primarily responsible for genome size differences between species. However, there is ongoing debate regarding the relative importance of amplification of repetitive DNA versus its deletion in governing genome size. Using data from 454 sequencing, we analysed the most repetitive fraction of some of the largest known genomes for diploid plant species, from members of Fritillaria. We revealed that genomic expansion has not resulted from the recent massive amplification of just a handful of repeat families, as shown in species with smaller genomes. Instead, the bulk of these immense genomes is composed of highly heterogeneous, relatively low-abundance repeat-derived DNA, supporting a scenario where amplified repeats continually accumulate due to infrequent DNA removal. Our results indicate that a lack of deletion and low turnover of repetitive DNA are major contributors to the evolution of extremely large genomes and show that their size cannot simply be accounted for by the activity of a small number of high-abundance repeat families.

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

4.6
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