| Literature DB >> 24077390 |
Jin Xu1, Rui Zhang, Yang Shen, Guojing Liu, Xuemei Lu, Chung-I Wu.
Abstract
The lack of long-term evolutionary conservation of microRNA (miRNA) target sites appears to contradict many analyses of their functions. Several hypotheses have been offered, but an attractive one-that the conservation may be a function of taxonomic hierarchy (vertebrates, mammals, primates, etc.)-has rarely been discussed. For such an analysis, we cannot use evolutionary conservation as a criterion of target identification, and hence, have used high confidence target sites in the cross-linking immunoprecipitation (CLIP) data. Assuming that a proportion, p, of target sites in the CLIP data are conserved, we define the evolvability of miRNA targets as 1-p. Genomic data from vertebrate species show that the evolvability between human and fish is very high, at more than 90%. The evolvability decreases to 50% between birds and mammals, 20% among mammalian orders, and only 6% between human and chimpanzee. Within each taxonomic hierarchy, there is a set of targets that are conserved only at that level of evolution. Extrapolating the evolutionary trend, we find the evolvability in any single species to be close to 0%. Thus, all miRNA target sites identified by the CLIP method are evolutionarily conserved in one species, but the conservation is lost step by step in larger taxonomic groups. The changing evolvability of miRNA targets suggests that miRNA-target interactions may play a role in the evolution of organismal diversity.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 24077390 PMCID: PMC3814881 DOI: 10.1101/gr.148916.112
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Genome Res ISSN: 1088-9051 Impact factor: 9.043
Figure 1.The relationship between the degree of target site enrichment in the CLIP data and the expression level of the corresponding miRNAs. The latter is presented as the log2 of the sum of all reads of relevant miRNAs. The top 10 enrichment scores are marked with a black solid dot.
Total number of binding sites observed in the CLIP data and the number of such sites in 3′ UTRs (shown in parentheses) chosen for analyses
Figure 2.The impact of transfected miRNA inhibitors or miRNAs on conserved or nonconserved target sites. Cumulative distributions of log2 fold change in mRNA expression are shown for (A–G) miRNA knockdown experiments and (H) miR-16 overexpression experiments. CLIP conserved group has sites that are conserved in mouse. CLIP nonconserved group has sites that are not conserved in mouse.
Figure 3.CLIP target site evolution. (A) The conservation of target sites in 10 species of mammals which are compared with human. (B) The conservation of randomly selected 6-mer sites in 3′ UTRs. The x-axis indicates the number of nonhuman species in which the sites are conserved. (C) The observed and expected proportions of sites that are conserved between human and other vertebrates. The divergence times between human and one of the other selected species are shown in parentheses.
Estimated proportions of conserved miRNA target sites (p) between humans and other vertebrate groups
Figure 4.Cumulative distributions of the dN/dS ratio for Mst genes and the control group. Mst genes have target sites that are conserved in 10 mammalian species. The control group genes have target sites that are not conserved in mammals.
Figure 5.Other target site evolutions. (A) The conservation of another collection of target sites in 10 species of mammals which are compared with human. Lim et.al. (2005) and Selbach et al. (2008) data are from transfection experiments that monitored the levels of mRNA and protein changes, respectively, after perturbation. (B) The observed proportions of sites that are conserved between human and other vertebrates. The legend is shared by A and B. (C) The conservation of randomly selected 6-mers in CDS region of CLIP target genes in 10 species of mammals which are compared with human. (D) The observed proportions of CDS 6-mer sites that are conserved between human-mouse and human-zebrafish. The legend is shared by C and D.