4.5 Article

Splice Sites Seldom Slide: Intron Evolution in Oomycetes

期刊

GENOME BIOLOGY AND EVOLUTION
卷 8, 期 8, 页码 2340-2350

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/gbe/evw157

关键词

gene structure; intron sliding; ancestral reconstruction; Phytophthora

资金

  1. European Community [PIIF-GA-2013-626035]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We examine exon junctions near apparent amino acid insertions and deletions in alignments of orthologous protein-coding genes. In 1,917 ortholog families across nine oomycete genomes, 10-20% of introns are near an alignment gap, indicating at first sight that splice-site displacements are frequent. We designed a robust algorithmic procedure for the delineation of intron-containing homologous regions, and combined it with a parsimony-based reconstruction of intron loss, gain, and splice-site shift events on a phylogeny. The reconstruction implies that 12% of introns underwent an acceptor-site shift, and 10% underwent a donor-site shift. In order to offset gene annotation problems, we amended the procedure with the reannotation of intron boundaries using alignment evidence. The corresponding reconstruction involves much fewer intron gain and splice-site shift events. The frequency of acceptor-and donor-side shifts drops to 4% and 3%, respectively, which are not much different from what one would expect by random codon insertions and deletions. In other words, gaps near exon junctions are mostly artifacts of gene annotation rather than evidence of sliding intron boundaries. Our study underscores the importance of using well-supported gene structure annotations in comparative studies. When transcription evidence is not available, we propose a robust ancestral reconstruction procedure that corrects misannotated intron boundaries using sequence alignments. The results corroborate the view that boundary shifts and complete intron sliding are only accidental in eukaryotic genome evolution and have a negligible impact on protein diversity.

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