4.7 Article

Ecological adaptation determines functional mammalian olfactory subgenomes

期刊

GENOME RESEARCH
卷 20, 期 1, 页码 1-9

出版社

COLD SPRING HARBOR LAB PRESS, PUBLICATIONS DEPT
DOI: 10.1101/gr.099416.109

关键词

-

资金

  1. Science Foundation Ireland PIYRA [06/YI3/B932]
  2. Embark IRCSET
  3. NSF [EF0629849]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The ability to smell is governed by the largest gene family in mammalian genomes, the olfactory receptor (OR) genes. Although these genes are well annotated in the finished human and mouse genomes, we still do not understand which receptors bind specific odorants or how they fully function. Previous comparative studies have been taxonomically limited and mostly focused on the percentage of OR pseudogenes within species. No study has investigated the adaptive changes of functional OR gene families across phylogenetically and ecologically diverse mammals. To determine the extent to which OR gene repertoires have been influenced by habitat, sensory specialization, and other ecological traits, to better understand the functional importance of specific OR gene families and thus the odorants they bind, we compared the functional OR gene repertoires from 50 mammalian genomes. We amplified more than 2000 OR genes in aquatic, semi-aquatic, and flying mammals and coupled these data with 48,000 OR genes from mostly terrestrial mammals, extracted from genomic projects. Phylogenomic, Bayesian assignment, and principle component analyses partitioned species by ecotype (aquatic, semi-aquatic, terrestrial, flying) rather than phylogenetic relatedness, and identified OR families important for each habitat. Functional OR gene repertoires were reduced independently in the multiple origins of aquatic mammals and were significantly divergent in bats. We reject recent neutralist views of olfactory subgenome evolution and correlate specific OR gene families with physiological requirements, a preliminary step toward unraveling the relationship between specific odors and respective OR gene families.

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