4.8 Article

Extensive interallelic polymorphisms drive meiotic recombination into a crossover pathway

期刊

PLANT CELL
卷 14, 期 5, 页码 1173-1183

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1105/tpc.001271

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Recombinants isolated from most meiotic intragenic recombination experiments in maize, but not in yeast, are borne principally on crossover chromosomes. This excess of crossovers is not explained readily by the canonical double-strand break repair model of recombination, proposed to account for a large body of yeast data, which predicts that crossovers (COs) and noncrossovers (NCOs) should be recovered equally. An attempt has been made here to identify general rules governing the recovery of the CO and NCO classes of intragenic recombinants in maize. Recombination was analyzed in bz heterozygotes between a variety of mutations derived from the same or different progenitor alleles. The mutations include point mutations, transposon insertions, and transposon excision footprints. Consequently, the differences between the bz heteroallelles ranged from just two nucleotides to many nucleotides, indels, and insertions. In this article, allelic pairs differing at only two positions are referred to as dimorphic to distinguish them from polymorphic pairs, which differ at multiple positions. The present study has revealed the following effects at these bz heteroalleles: (1) recombination between polymorphic heteroalleles produces mostly CO chromosomes; (2) recombination between dimorphic heteroalleles produces both CO and NCO chromosomes, in ratios apparently dependent on the nature of the heteroalleles; and (3) in dimorphic heterozygotes, the two NCO classes are recovered in approximately equal numbers when the two mutations are point mutations but not when one or both mutations are insertions. These observations are discussed in light of a recent version of the double-strand break repair model of recombination that postulates separate pathways for the formation of CO and NCO products.

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