4.5 Article

Diversification of hAT transposase paralogues in the sugarcane genome

期刊

MOLECULAR GENETICS AND GENOMICS
卷 287, 期 3, 页码 205-219

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s00438-011-0670-8

关键词

Sugarcane; Transposon; hAT transposase; Domesticated transposase

资金

  1. FAPESP
  2. CNPq

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Transposons are abundant components of eukaryotic genomes, and play important role in genome evolution. The knowledge about these elements should contribute to the understanding of their impact on the host genomes. The hAT transposon superfamily is one of the best characterized superfamilies in diverse organisms, nevertheless, a detailed study of these elements was never carried in sugarcane. To address this question we analyzed 32 cDNAs similar to that of hAT superfamily of transposons previously identified in the sugarcane transcriptome. Our results revealed that these hAT-like transposases cluster in one highly homogeneous and other more heterogeneous lineage. We present evidences that support the hypothesis that the highly homogeneous group is a domesticated transposase while the remainder of the lineages are composed of transposon units. The first is common to grasses, clusters significantly with domesticated transposases from Arabidopsis, rice and sorghum and is expressed in different tissues of two sugarcane cultivars analyzed. In contrast, the more heterogeneous group represents at least two transposon lineages. We recovered five genomic versions of one lineage, characterizing a novel transposon family with conserved DDE motif, named SChAT. These results indicate the presence of at least three distinct lineages of hAT-like transposase paralogues in sugarcane genome, including a novel transposon family described in Saccharum and a domesticated transposase. Taken together, these findings permit to follow the diversification of some hAT transposase paralogues in sugarcane, aggregating knowledge about the co-evolution of transposons and their host genomes.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据