53
1 The 3 genomic paradoxes 3c K N C

8c C-Value Paradox

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: 8c C-Value Paradox

1

The 3 genomic

paradoxes

3c

KN

C

Page 2: 8c C-Value Paradox

2

K-value paradox:

Complexity does not

correlate with chromosome

number.

46 250

Ophioglossum reticulatumHomo sapiens Lysandra atlantica

~1260

Page 3: 8c C-Value Paradox

3

C-value paradox:

Complexity does not

correlate with genome size.

3.4 109 bp

Homo sapiens

6.8 1011 bp

Amoeba dubia1.5 1010 bp

Allium cepa

Page 4: 8c C-Value Paradox

4

N-value paradox:

Complexity does not

correlate with gene number.

~21,000 genes~25,000 genes~60,000 genes

Page 5: 8c C-Value Paradox

5

Possible

solutions:

Page 6: 8c C-Value Paradox

6

What is

complexity?

Page 7: 8c C-Value Paradox

7

Solution 1 to the N-

value paradox:

Many protein-encoding

genes produce more than

one protein product (e.g., by

alternative splicing or by

RNA editing).

Page 8: 8c C-Value Paradox

8

RNA editing

Alternative

splicing

Page 9: 8c C-Value Paradox

9

The combinatorial use of RNA

editing and alternative

splicing probably causes the

human proteome to be 5-10

times larger than that of

Drosophila or Caenorhabditis.

Page 10: 8c C-Value Paradox

10

959 cells 1,031 cells

19,000 genes 13,600 genes

~108 cells

Page 11: 8c C-Value Paradox

11

Solution 2 to the N-

value paradox:

We are counting the wrong

things, we should count

other genetic elements

(e.g., small RNAs).

Page 12: 8c C-Value Paradox

12

Solution 3 to the N-

value paradox:

We should look at

connectivity rather than at

nodes.

Page 13: 8c C-Value Paradox

13

L. Mendoza and E. R. Alvarez-Buylla. 1998. Dynamics of the genetic

regulatory network for Arabidopsis thaliana flower morphogenesis. J. Theor.

Biol. 193:307-319.

Page 14: 8c C-Value Paradox

14

Solution 4 to the N-

value paradox:

The numbers provided by

the various genome

annotations are wrong!

Page 15: 8c C-Value Paradox

15

Comparison of three databses

Hogenesch JB, Ching KA, Batalov S, Su AI, Walker JR, Zhou Y, Kay SA, Schultz PG, & Cooke MP. 2001. A

comparison of the Celera and Ensembl predicted gene sets reveals little overlap in novel genes. Cell

106:413-415.

Page 16: 8c C-Value Paradox

16

Range of C-values in various eukaryotic taxa_______________________________________________________________

Taxon Genome size range Ratio

(Kb) (highest/lowest)

_______________________________________________________________

Eukaryotes 2,300 - 686,000,000 298,261

Amoebae 35,300 - 686,000,000 19,433

Fungi 8,800 - 1,470,000 167

Animals 49,000 - 139,000,000 2,837

Sponges 49,000 - 53,900 1

Molluscs 421,000 - 5,290,000 13

Crustaceans 686,000 - 22,100,000 32

Insects 98,000 - 7,350,000 75

Bony fishes 340,000 - 139,000,000 409

Amphibians 931,000 - 84,300,000 91

Reptiles 1,230,000 - 5,340,000 4

Birds 1,670,000 - 2,250,000 1

Mammals 1,700,000 - 6,700,000 4

Plants 50,000 - 307,000,000 6,140

_______________________________________________________________

Page 17: 8c C-Value Paradox

17

If the variation in C-values is

attributed to genes, it can be due

to interspecific differences in

(1) the number of protein-coding

genes

(2) the size of proteins

(3) the size of protein-coding

genes

(4) the number and sizes of

genes other than protein-

Page 18: 8c C-Value Paradox

18

The number of protein-

coding genes in

eukaryotes is thought to

vary over a 50-fold range.

This variation is

insufficient to explain the

300,000-fold variation in

nuclear-DNA content.

Page 19: 8c C-Value Paradox

19

Page 20: 8c C-Value Paradox

20

The bigger the genome, the smaller the genic fraction

Page 21: 8c C-Value Paradox

21

Nongenic DNA

is the sole

culprit for the

C-value

paradox!

99.998%

Page 22: 8c C-Value Paradox

22

MECHANISMS FOR

GLOBAL INCREASES

IN GENOME SIZE

Genome increase:(1) global increases, i.e., the entire

genome or a major part of it is

duplicated

(2) regional increases, i.e., a particular

sequence is multiplied to

generate repetitive DNA.

Page 23: 8c C-Value Paradox

23

Polyploidization = the

addition of one or more

complete sets of

chromosomes to the original

set.

An organism with an odd

number of autosomes cannot

undergo meiosis or

reproduce sexually. Musa acuminata

Page 24: 8c C-Value Paradox

24

allopolyploidy

Page 25: 8c C-Value Paradox

25

Triticum urartu (AA) Aegilops speltoides

(BB)

T. turgidum (AABB) T. tauschii

(DD)

`

T. aestivum

(AABBDD)

Page 26: 8c C-Value Paradox

26

autopolyploidy

Page 27: 8c C-Value Paradox

27

Following

polyploidization, a

very rapid process

of duplicate-gene

loss ensues.

Page 28: 8c C-Value Paradox

28

Allohexaploid Triticum aestivum

originated about 10,000 years ago.

In this very short time, many of its

triplicated loci have been silenced.

The proportion of enzymes

produced by triplicate, duplicate,

and single loci is 57%, 25%, and

18%, respectively.

Page 29: 8c C-Value Paradox

29

During evolution

autopolyploidy

&

allopolyploidy

becomes

cryptopolyploidy.

Page 30: 8c C-Value Paradox

30Genome sizes in 80 grass species

(Poaceae).

Page 31: 8c C-Value Paradox

31

Page 32: 8c C-Value Paradox

32

Page 33: 8c C-Value Paradox

33

It has been suggested that the

emergence of vertebrates was

made possible by two rounds of

tetraploidization.

Two cryptooctoploids?

Page 34: 8c C-Value Paradox

34

Does chromosome

number increase due

to polyploidy affect

the phenotype?

Chrysanthemum species have 9 to 90

chromosomes in haploid cells.

Page 35: 8c C-Value Paradox

35

54 duplicated regions.

Page 36: 8c C-Value Paradox

36

2 possible explanations:

(1) the duplicated regions were formed

independently by regional duplications

occurring at different times.

(2) the duplicated regions have been

produced simultaneously by a single

tetraploidization event, followed by

genome rearrangement and loss of

many redundant duplicates.

Page 37: 8c C-Value Paradox

37

50/54 duplicated regions have

maintained the same

orientation with respect to the

centromere.

54 independent regional

duplications are expected to

result in ~7 triplicated regions

(i.e., duplicates of duplicates),

but none was observed.

Page 38: 8c C-Value Paradox

38

Loss of 92%

of the

duplicate

genes.

Occurrence

of 70-100

map

disruptions.

Page 39: 8c C-Value Paradox

39

Arabidopsis thaliana: regional duplications

Page 40: 8c C-Value Paradox

40

What about polysomy?

Page 41: 8c C-Value Paradox

41

Polysomy is usually deleterious.

trisomy 21

Page 42: 8c C-Value Paradox

42

An exception?

Page 43: 8c C-Value Paradox

43

MAINTENANCE OF NONGENIC

DNA: HYPOTHESES

(1) The selectionist

hypothesis.

(2) The neutralist hypothesis

(junk DNA).

(3) The intragenomic

selectionist hypothesis

(selfish DNA).

(4) The nucleotypic

Page 44: 8c C-Value Paradox

44

Page 45: 8c C-Value Paradox

45

Page 46: 8c C-Value Paradox

46

Page 47: 8c C-Value Paradox

47

Page 48: 8c C-Value Paradox

48

3.5

3

2.5

2

log nuclear volume (mm3)

log DNA per cell ()1 1.5 2

Correlation between nuclear volume and nuclear

DNA content in apical meristem cells of 30

herbaceous species. Regression slope = 0.826

fitted by least squares.

Page 49: 8c C-Value Paradox

49

Page 50: 8c C-Value Paradox

50

MAINTENANCE OF NONGENIC

DNA: EVIDENCE

(1) The selectionist

hypothesis.

(2) The neutralist hypothesis

(junk DNA).

(3) The intragenomic

selectionist hypothesis

(selfish DNA).

(4) The nucleotypic

Page 51: 8c C-Value Paradox

51

Even whole chromosomes

may be junk.

A person

needs an Y,

like a fish

needs

bicycles.

Page 52: 8c C-Value Paradox

52with apologies to Irina Dunn, Australian feminist

(1970).

Page 53: 8c C-Value Paradox

53

Nature (2004) 431:988-993.