4.7 Article

Loss of protein interactions and regulatory divergence in yeast whole-genome duplicates

期刊

GENOMICS
卷 93, 期 6, 页码 534-542

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.ygeno.2009.02.004

关键词

Polyploidy; Gene duplication; Gene deletion; Gene dosage; Genes fungal; Genome fungal; Molecular evolution; Systems biology

资金

  1. Russian Foundation for Basic Research (RFBR)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Whole-genome duplications are important for the growth of genome complexity. We investigated various factors involved in the evolution of yeast whole-genome duplicates (ohnologs) making emphasis on the analysis of protein interactions. We found that ohnologs have a lower number of protein interactions compared with small-scale duplicates and singletons (by about -40%). The loss of interactions was proportional to their initial number and independent of ohnolog position in the protein interaction network. A faster evolving member of an ohnolog pair has a lower number of interactions compared to its counterpart. The Gene Ontology mapping of non-overlapping and overlapping interactants of paired ohnologs reveals a sharp asymmetry in GO terms related to regulation. The fraction of these terms is much higher in non-overlapping interactants (compared to overlapping interactants and total dataset). Network clustering coefficient is lower in ohnologs, yet they show an increased density of protein interactions restricted within the whole ohnologs set. These facts suggest that subfunctionalization (or subneofunctionalization) reflected in the loss of protein interactions was a prevailing process in the divergence of ohnologs, which distinguishes them from small-scale duplicates. The loss of protein interactions was associated with the regulatory divergence between the members of an ohnolog pair. A small-scale modularity (reflected in clustering coefficient) probably was not important for ohnologs retention, yet a larger-scale modularity could be involved in their evolution. (C) 2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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