21
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Gene retention, fractionation and subgenome differences in polyploid plants

      , , , , ,
      Nature Plants
      Springer Nature

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references93

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Bias in plant gene content following different sorts of duplication: tandem, whole-genome, segmental, or by transposition.

          Each mode of gene duplication (tandem, tetraploid, segmental, transpositional) retains genes in a biased manner. A reciprocal relationship exists between plant genes retained postpaleotetraploidy versus genes retained after an ancient tandem duplication. Among the models (C, neofunctionalization, balanced gene drive) and ideas that might explain this relationship, only balanced gene drive predicts reciprocity. The gene balance hypothesis explains that more "connected" genes--by protein-protein interactions in a heteromer, for example--are less likely to be retained as a tandem or transposed duplicate and are more likely to be retained postpaleotetraploidy; otherwise, selectively negative dosage effects are created. Biased duplicate retention is an instant and neutral by-product, a spandrel, of purifying selection. Balanced gene drive expanded plant gene families, including those encoding proteasomal proteins, protein kinases, motors, and transcription factors, with each paleotetraploidy, which could explain trends involving complexity. Balanced gene drive is a saltation mechanism in the mutationist tradition.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The more the better? The role of polyploidy in facilitating plant invasions.

            Biological invasions are a major ecological and socio-economic problem in many parts of the world. Despite an explosion of research in recent decades, much remains to be understood about why some species become invasive whereas others do not. Recently, polyploidy (whole genome duplication) has been proposed as an important determinant of invasiveness in plants. Genome duplication has played a major role in plant evolution and can drastically alter a plant's genetic make-up, morphology, physiology and ecology within only one or a few generations. This may allow some polyploids to succeed in strongly fluctuating environments and/or effectively colonize new habitats and, thus, increase their potential to be invasive. We synthesize current knowledge on the importance of polyploidy for the invasion (i.e. spread) of introduced plants. We first aim to elucidate general mechanisms that are involved in the success of polyploid plants and translate this to that of plant invaders. Secondly, we provide an overview of ploidal levels in selected invasive alien plants and explain how ploidy might have contributed to their success. Polyploidy can be an important factor in species invasion success through a combination of (1) 'pre-adaptation', whereby polyploid lineages are predisposed to conditions in the new range and, therefore, have higher survival rates and fitness in the earliest establishment phase; and (2) the possibility for subsequent adaptation due to a larger genetic diversity that may assist the 'evolution of invasiveness'. Alternatively, polyploidization may play an important role by (3) restoring sexual reproduction following hybridization or, conversely, (4) asexual reproduction in the absence of suitable mates. We, therefore, encourage invasion biologists to incorporate assessments of ploidy in their studies of invasive alien species.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Differentiation of the maize subgenomes by genome dominance and both ancient and ongoing gene loss.

              Ancient tetraploidies are found throughout the eukaryotes. After duplication, one copy of each duplicate gene pair tends to be lost (fractionate). For all studied tetraploidies, the loss of duplicated genes, known as homeologs, homoeologs, ohnologs, or syntenic paralogs, is uneven between duplicate regions. In maize, a species that experienced a tetraploidy 5-12 million years ago, we show that in addition to uneven ancient gene loss, the two complete genomes contained within maize are differentiated by ongoing fractionation among diverse inbreds as well as by a pattern of overexpression of genes from the genome that has experienced less gene loss. These expression differences are consistent over a range of experiments quantifying RNA abundance in different tissues. We propose that the universal bias in gene loss between the genomes of this ancient tetraploid, and perhaps all tetraploids, is the result of selection against loss of the gene responsible for the majority of total expression for a duplicate gene pair. Although the tetraploidy of maize is ancient, biased gene loss and expression continue today and explain, at least in part, the remarkable genetic diversity found among modern maize cultivars.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Nature Plants
                Nature Plants
                Springer Nature
                2055-0278
                May 2018
                April 30 2018
                May 2018
                : 4
                : 5
                : 258-268
                Article
                10.1038/s41477-018-0136-7
                29725103
                72b325a3-8e79-4b95-b431-9deacfdc2424
                © 2018

                http://www.springer.com/tdm

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article