4.4 Article

Comparative study of satellite sequences and phylogeny of five species from the genus Palorus (Insecta, Coleoptera)

期刊

GENOME
卷 43, 期 5, 页码 776-785

出版社

NATL RESEARCH COUNCIL CANADA
DOI: 10.1139/gen-43-5-776

关键词

satellite DNA; evolution; mitochondrial cytochrome oxidase I; DNA curvature

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Major satellite sequences are analysed in the three tenebrionid beetles Palorus cerylonoides, P. genalis, and P. ficicola, and compared with the ones from P. ratzeburgii and P. subdepressus reported elsewhere. All of them are A+T rich, pericentromerically located, and with lengths of about 150 bp, either in the form of monomers or formed by more complex repeating units. A preliminary phylogenetic analysis of Palorus species using the 3' end of the mitochondrial Cytochrome Oxidase I gene shows that the five Palorus species have been diverging for a considerable amount of evolutionary time, with the pair P. ratzeburgii and P. genalis being the most closely related. Only these two taxa showed some similarity between their respective high-copy-number satellite sequences, while other satellites are mutually unrelated and might have originated independently. However, all the satellites have in common tertiary structure induced by intrinsic DNA curvature, a characteristic which is conserved within the genus. Palorus major satellites were previously detected in the genomes of congeneric species as low-copy-number clusters (Meutrovic et al., Mol. Biol. Evol. 15: 1062-1068. 1998). Given the divergences between the analysed species, the substitution rate deduced from high- and low-copy-number repeats is unexpectedly low. The presence of sequence-induced DNA curvature in all Palorus satellites and similar satellite DNAs in the species pair P. ratzeburgii and P. genalis suggest (i) that constraints are at the tertiary structure; and (ii) that the satellite DNA evolutionary turnover can be dependant on the history of the taxa under study, resulting in retention of similar satellites in related taxa.

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

4.4
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