4.8 Article

Towards a More Nuanced Understanding of the Relationship between Sex-Biased Gene Expression and Rates of Protein-Coding Sequence Evolution

期刊

MOLECULAR BIOLOGY AND EVOLUTION
卷 28, 期 6, 页码 1893-1900

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/molbev/msr010

关键词

Drosophila; mouse; gene expression; sexual dimorphism; reproduction

资金

  1. National Institute of Health [F32GM087611]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Genes that are differentially expressed between the sexes (sex-biased genes) are among the fastest evolving genes in animal genomes. The majority of sex-biased expression is attributable to genes that are primarily expressed in sex-limited reproductive tissues, and these reproductive genes are often rapidly evolving because of intra- and intersexual selection pressures. Additionally, studies of multiple taxa have revealed that genes with sex-biased expression are also expressed in a limited number of tissues. This is worth noting because narrowly expressed genes are known to evolve faster than broadly expressed genes. Therefore, it is not clear whether sex-biased genes are rapidly evolving because they have sexually dimorphic expression, because they are expressed in sex-limited reproductive tissues, or because they are narrowly expressed. To determine the extend to which other confounding variables can explain the rapid evolution of sex-biased genes, I analyzed the rates of evolution of sex-biased genes in Drosophila melanogaster and Mus musculus in light of tissue-specific measures of expression. I find that genes with sex-biased expression in somatic tissues shared by both sexes are often evolving faster than non-sex-biased genes, but this is best explained by the narrow expression profiles of sex-biased genes. Sex-biased genes in sex-limited tissues in D. melanogaster, however, evolve faster than other narrowly expressed genes. Therefore, the rapid evolution of sex-biased genes is limited only to those genes primarily expressed in sex-limited reproductive tissues.

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

4.8
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