4.7 Article

The pattern of Phosphate transporter 1 genes evolutionary divergence in Glycine max L.

期刊

BMC PLANT BIOLOGY
卷 13, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2229-13-48

关键词

Phosphate transporter 1; Gene duplication; Gene divergence; Phosphorus homeostasis; Evolution; Glycine max L.

资金

  1. Transgenic program [2009ZX08009-133B]
  2. Chinese National Key Basic Research Program 973 [2010CB125906]
  3. National High Technology Research and Development Program 863 [2013AA102602]
  4. National Natural Science Founds [31000680]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: The Phosphate transporter 1 (PHT1) gene family has crucial roles in phosphate uptake, translocation, remobilization, and optimization of metabolic processes using of Pi. Gene duplications expand the size of gene families, and subfunctionalization of paralog gene pairs is a predominant tendency after gene duplications. To date, experimental evidence for the evolutionary relationships among different paralog gene pairs of a given gene family in soybean is limited. Results: All potential Phosphate transporter 1 genes in Glycine max L. (GmPHT1) were systematically analyzed using both bioinformatics and experimentation. The soybean PHT1 genes originated from four distinct ancestors prior to the Gamma WGT and formed 7 paralog gene pairs and a singleton gene. Six of the paralog gene pairs underwent subfunctionalization, and while GmPHT1; 4 paralog gene experienced pseudogenization. Examination of long-term evolutionary changes, six GmPHT1 paralog gene pairs diverged at multiple levels, in aspects of spatio-temporal expression patterns and/ or quanta, phosphates affinity properties, subcellular localization, and responses to phosphorus stress. Conclusions: These characterized divergences occurred in tissue-and/ or development-specific modes, or conditional modes. Moreover, they have synergistically shaped the evolutionary rate of GmPHT1 family, as well as maintained phosphorus homeostasis at cells and in the whole plant.

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

4.7
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