4.5 Article

Genome analysis of Hibiscus syriacus provides insights of polyploidization and indeterminate flowering in woody plants

期刊

DNA RESEARCH
卷 24, 期 1, 页码 71-80

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/dnares/dsw049

关键词

Hibiscus syriacus; Whole Genome Duplication; Diploidization; Multivoltinism; Homeolog

资金

  1. Korean Research Institute of Bioscience and Biotechnology initiative programme of the Rural Development Administration, Republic of Korea
  2. Agricultural Genome Center of the Next Generation Biogreen 21 Programme of the Rural Development Administration, Republic of Korea [PJ011275, PJ011088, PJ011100]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Hibiscus syriacus (L.) (rose of Sharon) is one of the most widespread garden shrubs in the world. We report a draft of the H. syriacus genome comprised of a 1.75Gb assembly that covers 92% of the genome with only 1.7% (33Mb) gap sequences. Predicted gene modeling detected 87,603 genes, mostly supported by deep RNA sequencing data. To define gene family distribution among relatives of H. syriacus, orthologous gene sets containing 164,660 genes in 21,472 clusters were identified by OrthoMCL analysis of five plant species, including H. syriacus, Arabidopsis thaliana, Gossypium raimondii, Theobroma cacao and Amborella trichopoda. We inferred their evolutionary relationships based on divergence times among Malvaceae plant genes and found that gene families involved in flowering regulation and disease resistance were more highly divergent and expanded in H. syriacus than in its close relatives, G. raimondii (DD) and T. cacao. Clustered gene families and gene collinearity analysis revealed that two recent rounds of whole-genome duplication were followed by diploidization of the H. syriacus genome after speciation. Copy number variation and phylogenetic divergence indicates that WGDs and subsequent diploidization led to unequal duplication and deletion of flowering-related genes in H. syriacus and may affect its unique floral morphology.

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