4.3 Article

Genomic Analysis of the Pacific Oyster (Crassostrea gigas) Reveals Possible Conservation of Vertebrate Sex Determination in a Mollusc

期刊

G3-GENES GENOMES GENETICS
卷 4, 期 11, 页码 2207-2217

出版社

GENETICS SOCIETY AMERICA
DOI: 10.1534/g3.114.013904

关键词

sex determination; doublesex; Sry; FoxL2; oyster; Mollusca

资金

  1. Rutgers University
  2. Taishan Oversea Scholar Program of Shandong
  3. 973 National Basic Research Program of China [2010CB126402]
  4. USDA [2009-35205-05052, NJ32108]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Despite the prevalence of sex in animal kingdom, we have only limited understanding of how sex is determined and evolved in many taxa. The mollusc Pacific oyster Crassostrea gigas exhibits complex modes of sexual reproduction that consists of protandric dioecy, sex change, and occasional hermaphroditism. This complex system is controlled by both environmental and genetic factors through unknown molecular mechanisms. In this study, we investigated genes related to sex-determining pathways in C. gigas through transcriptome sequencing and analysis of female and male gonads. Our analysis identified or confirmed novel homologs in the oyster of key sex-determining genes (SoxH or Sry-like and FoxL2) that were thought to be vertebrate-specific. Their expression profile in C. gigas is consistent with conserved roles in sex determination, under a proposed model where a novel testis-determining CgSoxH may serve as a primary regulator, directly or indirectly interacting with a testis-promoting CgDsx and an ovary-promoting CgFoxL2. Our findings plus previous results suggest that key vertebrate sex-determining genes such as Sry and FoxL2 may not be inventions of vertebrates. The presence of such genes in a mollusc with expression profiles consistent with expected roles in sex determination suggest that sex determination may be deeply conserved in animals, despite rapid evolution of the regulatory pathways that in C. gigas may involve both genetic and environmental factors.

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

4.3
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