4.5 Article

Evolution of Olfactory Receptor Genes in Primates Dominated by Birth-and-Death Process

期刊

GENOME BIOLOGY AND EVOLUTION
卷 1, 期 -, 页码 258-264

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/gbe/evp026

关键词

olfactory receptor; birth-and-death evolution; accelerated evolution; primates

资金

  1. University of Toronto

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Olfactory receptor (OR) is a large family of G protein-coupled receptors that can detect odorant in order to generate the sense of smell. They constitute one of the largest multiple gene families in animals including primates. To better understand the variation in odor perception and evolution of OR genes among primates, we computationally identified OR gene repertoires in orangutans, marmosets, and mouse lemurs and investigated the birth-and-death process of OR genes in the primate lineage. The results showed that 1) all the primate species studied have no more than 400 intact OR genes, fewer than rodents and canine; 2) Despite the similar number of OR genes in the genome, the makeup of the OR gene repertoires between different primate species is quite different as they had undergone dramatic birth-and-death evolution with extensive gene losses in the lineages leading to current species; 3) Apes and Old World monkey (OWM) have similar fraction of pseudogenes, whereas New World monkey (NWM) have fewer pseudogenes. To measure the selective pressure that had affected the OR gene repertoires in primates, we compared the ratio of nonsynonymous with synonymous substitution rates by using 70 one-to-one orthologous quintets among five primate species. We found that OR genes showed relaxed selective constraints in apes (humans, chimpanzees, and orangutans) than in OWMs (macaques) and NWMs (marmosets). We concluded that OR gene repertoires in primates have evolved in such a way to adapt to their respective living environments. Differential selective constraints might play important role in the primate OR gene evolution in each primate species.

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