4.5 Article

Peeling Back the Evolutionary Layers of Molecular Mechanisms Responsive to Exercise-Stress in the Skeletal Muscle of the Racing Horse

期刊

DNA RESEARCH
卷 20, 期 3, 页码 287-298

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/dnares/dst010

关键词

horse; exercise; evolution; RNA sequencing; re-sequencing

资金

  1. Next-Generation BioGreen 21 Program [11008106, PJ008191]
  2. Rural Development Administration, Republic of Korea
  3. Korea Racing Authority (KRA) [0569-20110008]
  4. BBSRC [BBS/E/D/05191130] Funding Source: UKRI
  5. Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council [BBS/E/D/05191130] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The modern horse (Equus caballus) is the product of over 50 million yrs of evolution. The athletic abilities of the horse have been enhanced during the past 6000 yrs under domestication. Therefore, the horse serves as a valuable model to understand the physiology and molecular mechanisms of adaptive responses to exercise. The structure and function of skeletal muscle show remarkable plasticity to the physical and metabolic challenges following exercise. Here, we reveal an evolutionary layer of responsiveness to exercise-stress in the skeletal muscle of the racing horse. We analysed differentially expressed genes and their co-expression networks in a large-scale RNA-sequence dataset comparing expression before and after exercise. By estimating genome-wide d(N)/d(S) ratios using six mammalian genomes, and F-ST and iHS using re-sequencing data derived from 20 horses, we were able to peel back the evolutionary layers of adaptations to exercise-stress in the horse. We found that the oldest and thickest layer (d(N)/d(S)) consists of system-wide tissue and organ adaptations. We further find that, during the period of horse domestication, the older layer (F-ST) is mainly responsible for adaptations to inflammation and energy metabolism, and the most recent layer (iHS) for neurological system process, cell adhesion, and proteolysis.

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

4.5
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