4.8 Article

Neofunctionalization of tandem duplicate genes encoding putative β-l-arabinofuranosidases in Arabidopsis

期刊

PLANT PHYSIOLOGY
卷 192, 期 4, 页码 2855-2870

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/plphys/kiad169

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In Arabidopsis, tandem duplicate genes AT5G12950 and AT5G12960 have developed divergent biological functions and contributed to phenotypic evolution. These genes originated within the last 16 million years and are putative beta-l-arabinofuranosidase encoding genes in Arabidopsis. Comprehensive transcriptomic and proteomic analyses showed divergent expression patterns and phenotypic effects between the two duplicate genes.
Tandem duplicate genes encoding putative beta-l-arabinofuranosidase developed divergent biological functions and contributed to the phenotypic evolution in Arabidopsis. Tandem duplication, one of the major types of duplication, provides the raw material for the evolution of divergent functions. In this study, we identified 1 pair of tandem duplicate genes (AT5G12950 and AT5G12960) in Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) that originated within the last 16 million years after the split of Arabidopsis from the Capsella-Boechera ancestor. We systematically used bioinformatic tools to redefine their putative biochemical function as beta-l-arabinofuranosidases that release l-Arabinose from the beta-l-Araf-containing molecules in Arabidopsis. Comprehensive transcriptomic and proteomic analyses using various datasets showed divergent expression patterns among tissues between the 2 duplicate genes. We further collected phenotypic data from 2 types of measurements to indicate that AT5G12950 and AT5G12960 have different roles resulting in divergent phenotypic effects. Overall, AT5G12950 and AT5G12960 represent putative beta-l-arabinofuranosidase encoding genes in Arabidopsis. After duplication, 1 duplicate copy developed diverged biological functions and contributed to a different phenotypic evolution in Arabidopsis.

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

4.8
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