4.8 Article

Patterns of sequence loss and cytosine methylation within a population of newly resynthesized Brassica napus allopolyploids

期刊

PLANT PHYSIOLOGY
卷 140, 期 1, 页码 336-348

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1104/pp.105.066308

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Allopolyploid formation requires the adaptation of two nuclear genomes within a single cytoplasm, which may involve programmed genetic and epigenetic changes during the initial generations following genome fusion. To study the dynamics of genome change, we synthesized 49 isogenic Brassica napus allopolyploids and surveyed them with 76 restriction fragment length polymorphism ( RFLP) probes and 30 simple sequence repeat ( SSR) primer pairs. Here, we report on the types and distribution of genetic and epigenetic changes within the S 1 genotypes. We found that insertion/deletion (indel) events were rare, but not random. Of the 57,710 ( 54,383 RFLP and 3,327 SSR) parental fragments expected among the amphidiploids, we observed 56,676 or 99.9%. Three loci derived from Brassica rapa had indels, and one indel occurred repeatedly across 29% (14/49) of the lines. Loss of one parental fragment was due to the 400-bp reduction of a guanine-adenine dinucleotide repeat-rich sequence. In contrast to the 4% (3/76) RFLP probes that detected indels, 48% ( 35/73) detected changes in the CpG methylation status between parental genomes and the S 1 lines. Some loci were far more likely than others to undergo epigenetic change, but the number of methylation changes within each synthetic polyploid was remarkably similar to others. Clear de novo methylation occurred at a much higher frequency than de novo demethylation within allopolyploid sequences derived from B. rapa. Our results suggest that there is little genetic change in the S 0 generation of resynthesized B. napus polyploids. In contrast, DNA methylation was altered extensively in a pattern that indicates tight regulation of epigenetic changes.

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