4.5 Article

Inferred divergent gene regulation in archaic hominins reveals potential phenotypic differences

期刊

NATURE ECOLOGY & EVOLUTION
卷 3, 期 11, 页码 1598-1606

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41559-019-0996-x

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIH [R01GM115836, R35GM127087, T32GM080178]
  2. March of Dimes Prematurity Research Center Ohio Collaborative
  3. Burroughs Wellcome Fund
  4. Clare Hall, University of Cambridge
  5. National Human Genome Research Institute of the National Institutes of Health [R35HG010718]
  6. [R01MH101820]
  7. [R01MH090937]
  8. [R01MH113362]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Sequencing DNA derived from archaic bones has enabled genetic comparison of Neanderthals and anatomically modern humans (AMHs), and revealed that they interbred. However, interpreting what genetic differences imply about their phenotypic differences remains challenging. Here, we introduce an approach for identifying divergent gene regulation between archaic hominins, such as Neanderthals, and AMH sequences, and find 766 genes that are likely to have been divergently regulated (DR) by Neanderthal haplotypes that do not remain in AMHs. DR genes include many involved in phenotypes known to differ between Neanderthals and AMHs, such as the structure of the rib cage and supraorbital ridge development. They are also enriched for genes associated with spontaneous abortion, polycystic ovary syndrome, myocardial infarction and melanoma. Phenotypes associated with modern human variation in these genes' regulation in similar to 23,000 biobank patients further support their involvement in immune and cardiovascular phenotypes. Comparing DR genes between two Neanderthals and a Denisovan revealed divergence in the immune system and in genes associated with skeletal and dental morphology that are consistent with the archaeological record. These results establish differences in gene regulatory architecture between AMHs and archaic hominins, and provide an avenue for exploring phenotypic differences between archaic groups from genomic information alone.

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

4.5
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