4.7 Article

Comparative genomics of protoploid Saccharomycetaceae

期刊

GENOME RESEARCH
卷 19, 期 10, 页码 1696-1709

出版社

COLD SPRING HARBOR LAB PRESS, PUBLICATIONS DEPT
DOI: 10.1101/gr.091546.109

关键词

-

资金

  1. Consortium National de Recherche en Genomique (CNRG)
  2. CNRS [GDR 2354]
  3. ANR [ANR-05-BLAN-0331]
  4. ARC [3738]
  5. Region Aquitaine [20051306001AB]
  6. Bureau des ressources genetiques [347]
  7. National Human Genome Research Institute of the U.S. National Institutes of Health
  8. James S. McDonnell Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Our knowledge of yeast genomes remains largely dominated by the extensive studies on Saccharomyces cerevisiae and the consequences of its ancestral duplication, leaving the evolution of the entire class of hemiascomycetes only partly explored. We concentrate here on five species of Saccharomycetaceae, a large subdivision of hemiascomycetes, that we call protoploid because they diverged from the S. cerevisiae lineage prior to its genome duplication. We determined the complete genome sequences of three of these species: Kluyveromyces (Lachancea) thermotolerans and Saccharomyces (Lachancea) kluyveri (two members of the newly described Lachancea clade), and Zygosaccharomyces rouxii. We included in our comparisons the previously available sequences of Kluyveromyces lactis and Ashbya (Eremothecium) gossypii. Despite their broad evolutionary range and significant individual variations in each lineage, the five protoploid Saccharomycetaceae share a core repertoire of approximately 3300 protein families and a high degree of conserved synteny. Synteny blocks were used to define gene orthology and to infer ancestors. Far from representing minimal genomes without redundancy, the five protoploid yeasts contain numerous copies of paralogous genes, either dispersed or in tandem arrays, that, altogether, constitute a third of each genome. Ancient, conserved paralogs as well as novel, lineage-specific paralogs were identified.

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