Literature DB >> 11606699

Local similarity in evolutionary rates extends over whole chromosomes in human-rodent and mouse-rat comparisons: implications for understanding the mechanistic basis of the male mutation bias.

M J Lercher1, E J Williams, L D Hurst.   

Abstract

The sex chromosomes and autosomes spend different times in the germ line of the two sexes. If cell division is mutagenic and if the sexes differ in number of cell divisions, then we expect that sequences on the X and Y chromosomes and autosomes should mutate at different rates. Tests of this hypothesis for several mammalian species have led to conflicting results. At the same time, recent evidence suggests that the chromosomal location of genes on autosomes affects their rate of evolution at synonymous sites. This suggests a mutagenic source different from germ cell replication. To correctly interpret the previous estimates of male mutation bias, it is crucial to understand the degree and range of this local similarity. With a carefully chosen randomization protocol, local similarity in synonymous rates of evolution can be detected in human-rodent and mouse-rat comparisons. However, the synonymous-site similarity in the mouse-rat comparison remains weak. Simulations suggest that this difference between the mouse-human and the mouse-rat comparisons is not artifactual and that there is therefore a difference between humans and rodents in the local patterns of mutation or selection on synonymous sites (conversely, we show that the previously reported absence of a local similarity in nonsynonymous rates of evolution in the human-rodent comparison was a methodological artifact). We show that linkage effects have a long-range component: not one in a million random genomes shows such levels of autosomal heterogeneity. The heterogeneity is so great that more autosomes than expected by chance have rates of synonymous evolution comparable with that of the X chromosome. As autosomal heterogeneity cannot be owing to different times spent in the germ line, this demonstrates that the dominant determiner of synonymous rates of evolution is not, as has been conjectured, the time spent in the male germ line.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11606699     DOI: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a003744

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mol Biol Evol        ISSN: 0737-4038            Impact factor:   16.240


  41 in total

1.  Modeling DNA base substitution in large genomic regions from two organisms.

Authors:  Von Bing Yap; Terence P Speed
Journal:  J Mol Evol       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 2.395

2.  Divergence in the spatial pattern of gene expression between human duplicate genes.

Authors:  Kateryna D Makova; Wen-Hsiung Li
Journal:  Genome Res       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 9.043

3.  Clustering of genes coding for DNA binding proteins in a region of atypical evolution of the human genome.

Authors:  Jose Castresana; Roderic Guigó; M Mar Albà
Journal:  J Mol Evol       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 2.395

4.  Insertions and deletions are male biased too: a whole-genome analysis in rodents.

Authors:  Kateryna D Makova; Shan Yang; Francesca Chiaromonte
Journal:  Genome Res       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 9.043

Review 5.  Variation in the mutation rate across mammalian genomes.

Authors:  Alan Hodgkinson; Adam Eyre-Walker
Journal:  Nat Rev Genet       Date:  2011-10-04       Impact factor: 53.242

6.  Comparison of the chicken and turkey genomes reveals a higher rate of nucleotide divergence on microchromosomes than macrochromosomes.

Authors:  Erik Axelsson; Matthew T Webster; Nick G C Smith; David W Burt; Hans Ellegren
Journal:  Genome Res       Date:  2004-12-08       Impact factor: 9.043

7.  Evolutionary constraints in conserved nongenic sequences of mammals.

Authors:  Peter D Keightley; Gregory V Kryukov; Shamil Sunyaev; Daniel L Halligan; Daniel J Gaffney
Journal:  Genome Res       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 9.043

8.  The scale of mutational variation in the murid genome.

Authors:  Daniel J Gaffney; Peter D Keightley
Journal:  Genome Res       Date:  2005-07-15       Impact factor: 9.043

Review 9.  Characteristics, causes and evolutionary consequences of male-biased mutation.

Authors:  Hans Ellegren
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2007-01-07       Impact factor: 5.349

10.  Substitution rate heterogeneity and the male mutation bias.

Authors:  Sofia Berlin; Mikael Brandström; Niclas Backström; Erik Axelsson; Nick G C Smith; Hans Ellegren
Journal:  J Mol Evol       Date:  2006-02-10       Impact factor: 2.395

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.