| Literature DB >> 24020371 |
Hua Bao1, Arun Kommadath, Xu Sun, Yan Meng, Adriano S Arantes, Graham S Plastow, Le Luo Guan, Paul Stothard.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Understanding how species-specific microRNAs (miRNAs) contribute to species-specific phenotypes is a central topic in biology. This study aimed to elucidate the role of ruminant-specific miRNAs in shaping mRNA expression divergence between ruminant and non-ruminant species.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 24020371 PMCID: PMC3847189 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2164-14-609
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Genomics ISSN: 1471-2164 Impact factor: 3.969
Numbers of miRNAs identified from cattle and pigs
| bta-1064 | 245 | 48 | 293 |
| bta-1146 | 258 | 53 | 311 |
| bta-1151 | 250 | 51 | 301 |
| All miRNAs* | 228 | 33 | 261 |
| ssc-404 F | 169 | 94 | 263 |
| ssc-406 F | 166 | 112 | 278 |
| ssc-422 F | 153 | 70 | 223 |
| All miRNAs* | 148 | 54 | 202 |
Refers to miRNAs with greater than 5 reads in all 3 samples.
Conservation of cattle miRNAs across vertebrate species
| Cattle-specific miRNAs | 46 | 25 | 71 |
| Non-cattle-specific miRNAs | 182 | 8 | 190 |
Figure 1Evolution of the miR-2284 family by seed shifting and point mutation. Alignment of the mature cattle miRNA sequences in the mir-2284 family shows the presence of sequence substitutions and differences in the position of the seed region (positions 2–8, boxed).
Figure 2Expression of cattle-specific versus non-cattle-specific miRNAs. Box plots summarizing the expression levels of cattle-specific miRNAs and non-cattle-specific miRNAs in cattle blood. The y-axis represents the log2-transformed expression in counts per million mapped reads per sample (cpm).
Targets of cattle-specific and non-cattle-specific miRNAs
| Cattle-specific | 6937 (60%) | 4535 | 11472 |
| Non-cattle-specific | 13425 (49%) | 13969 | 27394 |
The predicted targets information is available from TargetScan for only the major miRNA sequences (not for the minor (star) sequences) i.e. 65 of the 71 cattle-specific and 183 of the 190 non-cattle-specific miRNAs.
Figure 3The distribution of normalized divergence rates of miRNA target sites. Density plots of the normalized target site divergence rates between cattle and human for cattle-specific (blue line) and non-cattle-specific miRNAs (red line). The targets of the cattle-specific miRNAs show a greater normalized divergence rate than the targets of the non-cattle-specific miRNAs (p = 2.2e-16, Kolmogorov-Smirnov test).
Figure 4Comparison of target mRNA expression between cattle and pigs. Cumulative distribution function (CDF) plots and boxplots of log2-transformed gene expression (cpm) ratios. Each ratio is calculated as the expression of a bovine mRNA divided by the expression of its porcine orthologue. (A) The CDFs for targets of highly expressed cattle-specific miRNAs (n = 1699) and all orthologous genes (n = 8680) are significantly different (p = 1.014e-15) by the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. Genes that are targeted by both conserved and cattle-specific miRNAs were excluded from this analysis. (B) The CDFs for targets of highly expressed cattle-specific miRNAs with conserved target sites (n = 757) and all orthologous genes (n = 8680) are significantly different (p = 1.118e-11) by the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, as are the CDFs for targets of highly expressed cattle-specific miRNAs with cattle-specific target sites (n = 1096) and all orthologous genes (p = 1.124e-10). Target genes containing both conserved and cattle-specific target sites were excluded. (C) Boxplot of expression ratios for targets of the highly expressed cattle-specific miRNAs (median logFC = −1.73) and all orthologous genes (median logFC = −1.60). (D) Boxplot of expression ratios for target genes of highly expressed cattle-specific miRNAs having conserved target sites (median logFC = −1.77), having cattle-specific target sites (median logFC = −1.77), and target genes of conserved miRNAs (median logFC = −1.60).