4.1 Article

Gene expression profiling of Dunaliella sp acclimated to different salinities

期刊

PHYCOLOGICAL RESEARCH
卷 58, 期 1, 页码 17-28

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1440-1835.2009.00554.x

关键词

cDNA microarray; Dunaliella sp; reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction; salinity acclimation

资金

  1. Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs, Republic of Korea [20088033-1]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

P>To investigate which genes may be important for growth under extreme conditions such as very low or high salinities, a survey of the Dunaliella sp. transcriptome was performed with a cDNA microarray which had been generated previously representing 778 expressed sequence tags. The comparative microarray analysis indicated that 142 genes differed in expression levels by more than twofold in cells grown at extreme salinities (0.08 M and 4.5 M NaCl) when compared with cells grown at intermediate salinity (1.5 M NaCl). Of these genes, 28 had increased expression and 57 were suppressed in cells grown at low salinity. In cells grown at high salinity, 43 genes showed increased expression and 69 genes showed suppressed expression. However, we did observe a large overlap in the expression of extreme salinity-responsive genes based on Venn diagram analysis, which found 55 genes that responded to both of the two extreme salinity conditions. Further, we found that several genes had similar expression levels under low and high salinities, including some general stress response genes that were upregulated in both extreme salinity conditions. For confirmation of the validity of the cDNA microarray analysis, expression of several genes was independently confirmed by the use of gene-specific primers and real-time polymerase chain reaction. The present study is the first large-scale comparative survey of the transcriptome from the microalga Dunaliella sp. acclimated to extreme salinities, thus providing a platform for further functional investigation of differentially expressed genes in Dunaliella.

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

4.1
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