4.8 Article

Reciprocally Retained Genes in the Angiosperm Lineage Show the Hallmarks of Dosage Balance Sensitivity

期刊

PLANT CELL
卷 29, 期 11, 页码 2766-2785

出版社

AMER SOC PLANT BIOLOGISTS
DOI: 10.1105/tpc.17.00313

关键词

-

资金

  1. Research Foundation-Flanders (FWO) [G008812N, G018915N]
  2. Ghent University
  3. Hercules Foundation
  4. Flemish Government
  5. department EWI (Tier1 Grant) [2015-024]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In several organisms, particular functional categories of genes, such as regulatory and complex-forming genes, are preferentially retained after whole-genome multiplications but rarely duplicate through small-scale duplication, a pattern referred to as reciprocal retention. This peculiar duplication behavior is hypothesized to stem from constraints on the dosage balance between the genes concerned and their interaction context. However, the evidence for a relationship between reciprocal retention and dosage balance sensitivity remains fragmentary. Here, we identified which gene families are most strongly reciprocally retained in the angiosperm lineage and studied their functional and evolutionary characteristics. Reciprocally retained gene families exhibit stronger sequence divergence constraints and lower rates of functional and expression divergence than other gene families, suggesting that dosage balance sensitivity is a general characteristic of reciprocally retained genes. Gene families functioning in regulatory and signaling processes are much more strongly represented at the top of the reciprocal retention ranking than those functioning in multiprotein complexes, suggesting that regulatory imbalances may lead to stronger fitness effects than classical stoichiometric protein complex imbalances. Finally, reciprocally retained duplicates are often subject to dosage balance constraints for prolonged evolutionary times, which may have repercussions for the ease with which genome multiplications can engender evolutionary innovation.

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