Literature DB >> 8896368

Effects of RNA editing and gene processing on phylogenetic reconstruction.

L M Bowe1, C W dePamphilis.   

Abstract

RNA editing is a ubiquitous phenomenon affecting most mitochondrial and chloroplast, and some nuclear genomes, where mutations in genomic DNA are "corrected" in the mRNA during transcriptional processing. Most editing in plants and animals corrects T-to-C substitutions at nonsynonymous first or second base positions, and the overall effect is an mRNA and protein sequence that differs from that predicted by the DNA. It has been suggested that genomic sequences that undergo editing should not be used in phylogenetics. We contend that editing will have little or no effect on DNA-based phylogenetic reconstruction because it is an intrinsic transcriptional process that does not affect the historical information in the DNA sequence. The only effect of editing on protein-coding DNA should be an increase in the rate of T-to-C transitions. Here we test the effects of RNA editing on phylogenetic reconstruction, using two data sets with high levels of editing, plant coxII and coxIII. Even with high levels of editing, phylogenies based on DNA and edited mRNA are virtually identical. The two types of sequences should not be used in the same analysis, however, because the particular forms of the gene will tend to group together. We also examine the effects of processed paralogs--a term proposed for mRNA sequences that are reverse transcribed and reinserted into the genome as intact gene sequences. Processed paralogs result in a distinct and under-appreciated source of conflict among gene trees because of RNA editing. Analyses with unidentified processed paralogs may yield incorrect phylogenies, and the sequences may evolve at different rates if the gene has been transferred from one genetic compartment (nuclear, mitochondrial, chloroplast) to another. Although RNA editing itself is not a problem in phylogenetic reconstruction, analyses should not combine mRNAs with DNAs, and processed paralogs should be either excluded or analyzed with caution.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8896368     DOI: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a025680

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


  20 in total

1.  Independent and combined analyses of sequences from all three genomic compartments converge on the root of flowering plant phylogeny.

Authors:  T J Barkman; G Chenery; J R McNeal; J Lyons-Weiler; W J Ellisens; G Moore; A D Wolfe; C W dePamphilis
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2000-11-21       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  Ancient mitochondrial haplotypes and evidence for intragenic recombination in a gynodioecious plant.

Authors:  Thomas Städler; Lynda F Delph
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2002-08-21       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  Mitochondrial DNA sequences reveal the photosynthetic relatives of Rafflesia, the world's largest flower.

Authors:  Todd J Barkman; Seok-Hong Lim; Kamarudin Mat Salleh; Jamili Nais
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2004-01-08       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  Genes and processed paralogs co-exist in plant mitochondria.

Authors:  Argelia Cuenca; Gitte Petersen; Ole Seberg; Anne Hoppe Jahren
Journal:  J Mol Evol       Date:  2012-04-07       Impact factor: 2.395

5.  Pervasive RNA editing among hornwort rbcL transcripts except Leiosporoceros.

Authors:  R Joel Duff; Francisco B-G Moore
Journal:  J Mol Evol       Date:  2005-09-22       Impact factor: 2.395

6.  Phylogeny of seed plants based on all three genomic compartments: extant gymnosperms are monophyletic and Gnetales' closest relatives are conifers.

Authors:  L M Bowe; G Coat; C W dePamphilis
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2000-04-11       Impact factor: 11.205

7.  The complete plastid genome sequence of the enigmatic moss, Takakia lepidozioides (Takakiopsida, Bryophyta): evolutionary perspectives on the largest collection of genes in mosses and the intensive RNA editing.

Authors:  Atsushi Sadamitsu; Yuya Inoue; Keiko Sakakibara; Hiromi Tsubota; Tomio Yamaguchi; Hironori Deguchi; Tomoaki Nishiyama; Masaki Shimamura
Journal:  Plant Mol Biol       Date:  2021-11-24       Impact factor: 4.076

8.  Are substitution rates and RNA editing correlated?

Authors:  Argelia Cuenca; Gitte Petersen; Ole Seberg; Jerrold I Davis; Dennis W Stevenson
Journal:  BMC Evol Biol       Date:  2010-11-11       Impact factor: 3.260

9.  The complete nucleotide sequence of the cassava (Manihot esculenta) chloroplast genome and the evolution of atpF in Malpighiales: RNA editing and multiple losses of a group II intron.

Authors:  Henry Daniell; Kenneth J Wurdack; Anderson Kanagaraj; Seung-Bum Lee; Christopher Saski; Robert K Jansen
Journal:  Theor Appl Genet       Date:  2008-01-24       Impact factor: 5.699

10.  Towards a comprehensive picture of C-to-U RNA editing sites in angiosperm mitochondria.

Authors:  Alejandro A Edera; Carolina L Gandini; M Virginia Sanchez-Puerta
Journal:  Plant Mol Biol       Date:  2018-05-14       Impact factor: 4.076

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.