4.7 Article

Alternative splicing level related to intron size and organism complexity

期刊

BMC GENOMICS
卷 22, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s12864-021-08172-2

关键词

RNA-Seq; Protein disorder; Intron density; Splicing factor; Conservation; Gene family

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31771452]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study found a strong positive correlation between ASP/L and OC in eukaryotes, which is not affected by the mean intron size of species. Splicing factors related to ASP/L may play a significant role in the evolution of OC.
Background Alternative splicing is the process of selecting different combinations of splice sites to produce variably spliced mRNAs. However, the relationships between alternative splicing prevalence and level (ASP/L) and variations of intron size and organism complexity (OC) remain vague. Here, we developed a robust protocol to analyze the relationships between ASP/L and variations of intron size and OC. Approximately 8 Tb raw RNA-Seq data from 37 eumetazoan species were divided into three sets of species based on variations in intron size and OC. Results We found a strong positive correlation between ASP/L and OC, but no correlation between ASP/L and intron size across species. Surprisingly, ASP/L displayed a positive correlation with mean intron size of genes within individual genomes. Moreover, our results revealed that four ASP/L-related pathways contributed to the differences in ASP/L that were associated with OC. In particular, the spliceosome pathway displayed distinct genomic features, such as the highest gene expression level, conservation level, and fraction of disordered regions. Interestingly, lower or no obvious correlations were observed among these genomic features. Conclusions The positive correlation between ASP/L and OC ubiquitously exists in eukaryotes, and this correlation is not affected by the mean intron size of these species. ASP/L-related splicing factors may play an important role in the evolution of OC.

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

4.7
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