4.6 Article

Sensitive detection of pre-integration intermediates of long terminal repeat retrotransposons in crop plants

期刊

NATURE PLANTS
卷 5, 期 1, 页码 26-33

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41477-018-0320-9

关键词

-

资金

  1. European Research Council (EVOBREED) [322621]
  2. Gatsby Fellowship [AT3273/GLE]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Retrotransposons have played an important role in the evolution of host genomes(1,2). Their impact is mainly deduced from the composition of DNA sequences that have been fixed over evolutionary time(2). Such studies provide important 'snapshots' reflecting the historical activities of transposons but do not predict current transposition potential. We previously reported sequence-independent retrotransposon trapping (SIRT) as a method that, by identification of extrachromosomal linear DNA (eclDNA), revealed the presence of active long terminal repeat (LTR) retrotransposons in Arabidopsis(3). However, SIRT cannot be applied to large and transposonrich genomes, as found in crop plants. We have developed an alternative approach named ALE-seq (amplification of LTR of eclDNAs followed by sequencing) for such situations. ALE-seq reveals sequences of 5' LTRs of eclDNAs after two-step amplification: in vitro transcription and subsequent reverse transcription. Using ALE-seq in rice, we detected eclDNAs for a novel Copia family LTR retrotransposon, Go-on, which is activated by heat stress. Sequencing of rice accessions revealed that Go-on has preferentially accumulated in Oryza sativa ssp. indica rice grown at higher temperatures. Furthermore, ALE-seq applied to tomato fruits identified a developmentally regulated Gypsy family of retrotransposons. A bioinformatic pipeline adapted for ALE-seq data analyses is used for the direct and reference-free annotation of new, active retroelements. This pipeline allows assessment of LTR retrotransposon activities in organisms for which genomic sequences and/or reference genomes are either unavailable or of low quality.

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

4.6
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