4.5 Article

Retrogenes in Rice (Oryza sativa L. ssp japonica) Exhibit Correlated Expression with Their Source Genes

期刊

GENOME BIOLOGY AND EVOLUTION
卷 3, 期 -, 页码 1357-1368

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/gbe/evr111

关键词

retroposition; gene expression; gene duplication

资金

  1. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) of Japan [20710149]
  2. Genomics for Agricultural Innovation from the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (MAFF) of Japan [RTR0001]
  3. National Science Foundation [DEB-0723860]
  4. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [20710149] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Gene duplication occurs by either DNA- or RNA-based processes; the latter duplicates single genes via retroposition of messenger RNA. The expression of a retroposed gene copy (retrocopy) is expected to be uncorrelated with its source gene because upstream promoter regions are usually not part of the retroposition process. In contrast, DNA-based duplication often encompasses both the coding and the intergenic (promoter) regions; hence, expression is often correlated, at least initially, between DNA-based duplicates. In this study, we identified 150 retrocopies in rice (Oryza sativa L. ssp japonica), most of which represent ancient retroposition events. We measured their expression from high-throughput RNA sequencing (RNAseq) data generated from seven tissues. At least 66% of the retrocopies were expressed but at lower levels than their source genes. However, the tissue specificity of retrogenes was similar to their source genes, and expression between retrocopies and source genes was correlated across tissues. The level of correlation was similar between RNA-and DNA-based duplicates, and they decreased over time at statistically indistinguishable rates. We extended these observations to previously identified retrocopies in Arabidopsis thaliana, suggesting they may be general features of the process of retention of plant retrogenes.

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