4.8 Article

Genome evolution and developmental constraint in Caenorhabditis elegans

期刊

MOLECULAR BIOLOGY AND EVOLUTION
卷 19, 期 5, 页码 728-735

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a004131

关键词

comparative genomics; genome evolution; microarray analysis; developmental constraint; gene duplication; gene expression; molecular evolution

资金

  1. NIGMS NIH HHS [GM 58423, GM 0035] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

It has been hypothesized that evolutionary changes will be more frequent in later ontogeny than early ontogeny because of developmental constraint. To test this hypothesis, a genomewide examination of molecular evolution through ontogeny was carried out using comparative genomic data in Caenorhabditis elegans and Caenorhabditis briggsae. We found that the mean rate of amino acid replacement is not significantly different between genes expressed during and after embryogenesis. However, synonymous substitution rates differed significantly between these two classes. A genomewide survey of correlation between codon bias and expression level found codon bias to be significantly correlated with mRNA expression (r(s) = -0.30 and P < 10-(131)) but does not alone explain difference, in dS between classes. Surprisingly. it was found that genes expressed after embryogenesis have a significantly greater number of duplicates in both the C. elegans and C briggsae genomes (P < 10(-20) and P < 10(-13)) when compared with early-expressed and nonmodulated genes. A similarity in the distribution of duplicates of nonmodulated and early-expressed genes, as well as a disproportionately higher number of early pseudogenes, lend support to the hypothesis that this difference in duplicate number is caused by selection against gene duplicates of early-expressed genes. reflecting developmental constraint. Developmental constraint at the level of gene duplication may have important implications for macroevolutionary change.

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