| Literature DB >> 20617318 |
Michael Lee Salmans1, Shu-Miaw Chaw, Ching-Ping Lin, Arthur Chun-Chieh Shih, Yu-Wei Wu, R Michael Mulligan.
Abstract
Sequence analysis of organelle genomes and comprehensive analysis of C-to-U editing sites from flowering and non-flowering plants have provided extensive sequence information from diverse taxa. This study includes the first comprehensive analysis of RNA editing sites from a gymnosperm mitochondrial genome, and utilizes informatics analyses to determine conserved features in the RNA sequence context around editing sites. We have identified 565 editing sites in 21 full-length and 4 partial cDNAs of the 39 protein-coding genes identified from the mitochondrial genome of Cycas taitungensis. The information profiles and RNA sequence context of C-to-U editing sites in the Cycas genome exhibit similarity in the immediate flanking nucleotides. Relative entropy analyses indicate that similar regions in the 5' flanking 20 nucleotides have information content compared to angiosperm mitochondrial genomes. These results suggest that evolutionary constraints exist on the nucleotide sequences immediately adjacent to C-to-U editing sites, and similar regions are utilized in editing site recognition.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2010 PMID: 20617318 PMCID: PMC2943580 DOI: 10.1007/s00294-010-0312-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Curr Genet ISSN: 0172-8083 Impact factor: 3.886
RNA editing site distribution in Cycas, Arabidopsis, Beta, and Oryza genes and gene loss from the mitochondrial genomes
| Function | Gene |
|
|
|
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Est. editing sites | # ES | # ES | # ES | # ES | ||||
| 1.0 | 0.8 | 0.6 | ||||||
| Complex I |
| 38 | 44 | 47 | – | 24 | 20 | 23 |
|
| 37 | 44 | 52 | – | 31 | 24 | 30 | |
|
| 15 | 28 | 29 | 31 | 12 | 12 | 15 | |
|
| 63 | 77 | 89 | – | 32 | 19 | 20 | |
|
| 10 | 14 | 15 | 17 | 9 | 10 | 10 | |
|
| 66 | 82 | 86 | – | 27 | 17 | 11 | |
|
| 21 | 25 | 32 | – | 10 | 11 | 18 | |
|
| 23 | 30 | 31 | – | 28 | 20 | 32 | |
|
| 8 | 16 | 17 | 24 | 7 | 5 | 12 | |
| Complex II |
| 6 | 8 | 11 | 27 | (t) | (t) | (t) |
|
| (t) | (Ψ) | (Ψ) 4 | (t) | ||||
| Complex III |
| 46 | 49 | 51 | 54 | 7 | 13 | 19 |
| Complex IV |
| 55 | 57 | 62 | 44 (p) | 0 | 0 | 4 |
|
| 18 | 21 | 21 | – | 15 | 9 | 19 | |
|
| 19 | 26 | 29 | 28 | 8 | 4 | 1 | |
| Complex V |
| 26 | 34 | 39 | 22 (p) | 5 | 3 | 5 |
|
| 6 | 7 | 9 | 15 | 8 | 12 | 9 | |
|
| 38 | 41 | 47 | 54 (p) | 1 | 12 | 17 | |
|
| 11 | 11 | 11 | 15 | 0 | 2 | 4 | |
|
| 10 | 12 | 12 | 14 | 4 | 5 | 8 | |
| Cytochrome biogenesis |
| 21 | 32 | 42 | 37 (p) | 39 | 30 | 35 |
|
| 23 | 25 | 38 | 6 | 28 | 28 | 36 | |
|
| 27 | 32 | 34 | – | 16 | 13 | 27 | |
|
| 35 | 40 | 47 | – | 22 | 23 | 31 | |
|
| 12 | – | – | |||||
| Ribosomal proteins |
| 5 | 5 | 9 | 17 | (t) | (t) | 3 |
|
| 6 | 8 | 11 | 17 | (t) | (t) | 10 | |
|
| 9 | 17 | 21 | – | 10 | 6 | 10 | |
|
| 15 | 26 | 31 | – | 15 | 11 | 15 | |
|
| 5 | 7 | 14 | 10 | 0 | 3 | 2 | |
|
| 4 | 5 | 6 | – | (t) | (t) | (t) | |
|
| 4 | 4 | 4 | 14 | (t) | (t) | (Ψ) 4 | |
|
| 4 | 14 | 14 | 16 | 8 | 6 | 0 | |
|
| 2 | 7 | 9 | 8 | (t) | 2 | 8 | |
|
| 4 | 4 | 7 | 8 | (Ψ) | (t) | (Ψ) 0 | |
|
| 6 | 7 | 8 | 11 | (Ψ) | (t) | 6 | |
|
| 6 | 6 | 10 | – | 1 | 1 | ||
|
| 8 | 13 | 14 | 11 | 10 | 5 | 1 | |
|
| 4 | 6 | 7 | 13 | 8 | (t) | 12 | |
| Other |
| 21 | 25 | 30 | – | 9 | 9 | (nt) |
|
| 13 | 25 | 38 | 52 | 24 | 19 | 33 | |
| Total | 738 | 934 | 1,084 | 565 | 441 | 357 | 491 | |
The number of editing sites in Cycas mitochondria is estimated based on computational prediction utilizing cutoff scores of 1.0, 0.8 and 0.6 (Mower 2005), with 0.6 as the recommended score to balanced false negative and false positive. The actual number of editing sites for 21 Cycas mitochondrial genes is shown in column 6. Partial cDNAs are presented for atp1, atp6, coxI, and ccmB, and these are noted with “(p)”. The number of editing sites for Arabidopsis, Beta, and Oryza mtDNAs is obtained from the literature (Giege and Brennicke 1999; Notsu et al. 2002; Mower and Palmer 2006). Pseudogenes are represented with “(Ψ)”, and the number of reported editing sites. Genes that are not transcribed are indicated with “(nt)”, and those have been transferred to the nuclear genome are indicated with “(t)”
Editing site distribution within codons in the Cycas mitochondrial genome
| Original codon | Edited codon | Editing sites confirmed | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Codon | Amino acid | Codon | Amino acid | |
| ACA | Thr (T) | ATA | Ile (I) | 2 |
| ACC | Thr(T) | ACT | Thr (T) | 4 |
| ACC | Thr(T) | ATC | Ile (I) | 2 |
| ACG | Thr (T) | ATG | Met (M) | 7 |
| ACT | Thr (T) | ATT | Ile (I) | 5 |
| ATC | Ile (I) | ATT | Ile (I) | 13 |
| CAA | Gln (Q) | TAA | Stop | 3 |
| CAC | His (H) | TAC | Tyr (Y) | 4 |
| CAG | Gln (Q) | TAG | Stop | 1 |
| CAT | His (H) | TAT | Tyr (Y) | 17 |
| CCA | Pro (P) | CTA | Leu (L) | 42 |
| CCA | Pro (P) | TCA | Ser (S) | 12 |
| CCC | Pro (P) | CCT | Pro (P) | 5 |
| CCC | Pro (P) | CTC | Leu (L) | 19 |
| CCC | Pro (P) | TCC | Ser (S) | 13 |
| CCC | Pro (P) | TTC | Phe (F) | 12 |
| CCG | Pro (P) | CTG | Leu (L) | 39 |
| CCG | Pro (P) | TCG | Ser (S) | 10 |
| CCT | Pro (P) | CTT | Leu (L) | 22 |
| CCT | Pro (P) | TCT | Ser (S) | 16 |
| CCT | Pro (P) | TTT | Phe (F) | 4 |
| CGA | Arg (R) | TGA | Stop | 3 |
| CGC | Arg (R) | CGT | Arg (R) | 1 |
| CGC | Arg (R) | TGC | Cys (C) | 8 |
| CGG | Arg (R) | TGG | Trp (W) | 33 |
| CGT | Arg (R) | TGT | Cys (C) | 23 |
| CTC | Leu (L) | CTT | Leu (L) | 1 |
| CTC | Leu (L) | TTC | Phe (F) | 5 |
| CTG | Leu (L) | TTG | Leu (L) | 3 |
| CTT | Leu (L) | TTT | Phe (F) | 6 |
| GCA | Ala (A) | GTA | Val (V) | 1 |
| GCC | Ala (A) | GTC | Val (V) | 1 |
| GCG | Ala (A) | GTG | Val (V) | 7 |
| GCT | Ala (A) | GTT | Val (V) | 1 |
| GTC | Val (V) | GTT | Val (V) | 1 |
| TCA | Ser (S) | TTA | Leu (L) | 60 |
| TCC | Ser (S) | TCT | Ser (S) | 11 |
| TCC | Ser (S) | TTC | Phe (F) | 35 |
| TCG | Ser (S) | TTG | Leu (L) | 47 |
| TCT | Ser (S) | TTT | Phe (F) | 55 |
| TTC | Phe (F) | TTT | Phe (F) | 8 |
| Total | 562 | |||
The distribution of confirmed editing sites in the Cycas mitochondria transcriptome is shown within codons
Fig. 1The relative entropy around C-to-U editing sites in Cycas mitochondria. The relative entropy for the distribution of nucleotides is plotted for 30 nucleotides flanking RNA editing sites in 1, 2, or 3 nucleotide sliding windows (a, b, c, respectively). Random editing site assignment is used to reassign editing sites in the same codon position, and relative entropy analysis of 1,000 editing site reassignments is used to determine a mean relative entropy value and a 95% confidence interval. d The effect of codon position on relative entropy in Cycas mitochondrial editing sites determined in a one nucleotide window for editing sites in the first or second codon position (CPA1, CPA2). The number of editing sites analyzed in the first and second codon position is 173 and 376. Only 29 editing sites are present in the third codon position and these data are not presented
Selectivity ratios at −2/−1 around C-to-U editing sites in cpDNAs and mtDNAs
| mtDNA | cpDNA | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| UU | 2.19 | 2.26 | 2.26 | 2.39 | 1.95 | 1.98 | 3.10 | 2.64 |
| UC | 2.12 | 1.96 | 2.38 | 1.59 | 2.29 | 1.89 | 1.96 | 1.14 |
| CU | 2.82 | 1.99 | 2.35 | 1.29 | 1.96 | 1.32 | 0.64 | 1.52 |
| AU | 1.46 | 1.82 | 1.50 | 1.48 | 1.28 | 1.05 | 2.26 | 2.23 |
| CC | 1.09 | 1.18 | 1.37 | 0.82 | 1.35 | 1.21 | 2.50 | 1.84 |
| GU | 1.28 | 0.97 | 1.23 | 0.72 | 1.18 | 1.71 | 0 | 2.02 |
| AC | 0.94 | 1.26 | 0.57 | 1.62 | 0.65 | 1.47 | 0.66 | 0.79 |
| GC | 0.81 | 0.82 | 0.47 | 0.57 | 0.39 | 0.76 | 0 | 0 |
| UA | 0.34 | 0.28 | 0.30 | 0.79 | 0.60 | 0.60 | 0 | 0.52 |
| UG | 0.28 | 0.31 | 0.28 | 0.27 | 0.33 | 0.51 | 0 | 0 |
| CA | 0.07 | 0.11 | 0.22 | 0.56 | 0.39 | 0.65 | 0 | 0 |
| GA | 0.17 | 0.05 | 0.06 | 0.05 | 0.40 | 0.79 | 0 | 0 |
| CG | 0.32 | 0.13 | 0.07 | 0.34 | 0.16 | 0.23 | 0 | 0 |
| AA | 0.08 | 0.12 | 0.04 | 0.09 | 0.14 | 0.36 | 0 | 0 |
| AG | 0.12 | 0.04 | 0 | 0.11 | 0.11 | 0.33 | 0 | 0 |
| GG | 0 | 0.05 | 0.16 | 0.12 | 0.21 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
The distribution of dinucleotides around C-to-U editing sites at position −2/−1 is compared in three mtDNAs and five cpDNAs. The frequency of dinucleotides adjacent to an edited or unedited cytidine (P or Q, respectively) is the number of times that a dinucleotide is observed divided by the total number of edited or unedited cytidines. The selectivity ratio is the ratio of the frequencies for the dinucleotide around an edited and unedited cytidines (P/Q)
Fig. 2Selectivity ratios around C-to-U editing sites are similar in chloroplasts and mitochondria in non-flowering and flowering plants. The selectivity ratios (P/Q) for dinucleotides in the −2/−1 window (a, b) are compared in a scatter plot. Each point represents the selectivity ratios for a specific dinucleotide in the two species. a Compares the selectivity ratios for C-to-U editing sites in Cycas and angiosperm mitochondria genomes in the −2/−1 window. Linear regression analysis for the Cycas selectivity ratios plotted against the Arabidopsis, Oryza, and Beta selectivity ratios indicates a strong congruence with slopes near 1, y-intercepts near zero, and large coefficients of determination (Arabidopsis: slope = 0.88, intercept = 0.06, R 2 = 0.91; Beta: slope = 0.96, intercept = 0.00, R 2 = 0.95; Oryza: slope = 0.0.97, intercept = 0.02, R 2 = 0.94). b Compares the selectivity ratios of C-to-U editing sites in Takakia chloroplasts with plant mitochondrial genomes in the −2/−1 window. Linear regression analysis Takakia selectivity ratios plot against the Cycas, Arabidopsis, Oryza, and Beta selectivity ratios indicates a strong congruence in the selectivity ratios (Cycas: slope = 1.14, intercept = −0.07, R 2 = 0.89; Arabidopsis: slope = 1.03, intercept = −0.03, R 2 = 0.85; Beta: slope = 1.12, intercept = −0.09, R 2 = 0.91; Oryza: slope = 1.20, intercept = −0.02, R 2 = 0.97)