16
Table 8.3 & Alberts Fig.1.38 EVOLUTION OF GENOMES C-value paradox: - in certain cases, lack of correlation between morphological complexity and genome size “[For] some commonly cited extreme values for amoebae... considerable uncertainty about the accuracy of these measurements and the ploidy level of the species...” Gregory Nature Rev. Genet. 6:699, 2005

Table 8.3 & Alberts Fig.1.38 EVOLUTION OF GENOMES C-value paradox: - in certain cases, lack of correlation between morphological complexity and genome

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Table 8.3 & Alberts Fig.1.38 EVOLUTION OF GENOMES C-value paradox: - in certain cases, lack of correlation between morphological complexity and genome

Table 8.3 & Alberts Fig.1.38

EVOLUTION OF GENOMES

C-value paradox: - in certain cases, lack of correlation between morphological complexity and genome size

“[For] some commonly cited extreme values for amoebae... considerable uncertainty about the accuracy of these measurements and the ploidy level of the species...” Gregory Nature Rev. Genet. 6:699, 2005

Page 2: Table 8.3 & Alberts Fig.1.38 EVOLUTION OF GENOMES C-value paradox: - in certain cases, lack of correlation between morphological complexity and genome

Fig. 8.15

Genic fraction vs. genome size

Function of non-genic DNA in eukaryotes?

Gregory Nature Rev. Genet. 6:699, 2005

Composition of human genome

Page 3: Table 8.3 & Alberts Fig.1.38 EVOLUTION OF GENOMES C-value paradox: - in certain cases, lack of correlation between morphological complexity and genome

Hartwell Fig. 21.11

Genic contribution to expansion in genome size

Page 4: Table 8.3 & Alberts Fig.1.38 EVOLUTION OF GENOMES C-value paradox: - in certain cases, lack of correlation between morphological complexity and genome

Figure 8.7

Scenario showing possible events following whole genome duplication

26 genes on 2 chromosomes

36 genes on 4 chromosomes

Page 5: Table 8.3 & Alberts Fig.1.38 EVOLUTION OF GENOMES C-value paradox: - in certain cases, lack of correlation between morphological complexity and genome

Kellis Nature 428:617, 2004

Evidence for whole genome duplication in ancestor of yeast

see also Fig.8.7

~ 100 million years ago?

Page 6: Table 8.3 & Alberts Fig.1.38 EVOLUTION OF GENOMES C-value paradox: - in certain cases, lack of correlation between morphological complexity and genome

Frequency distribution of haploid chromosome numbers in dicot plants

For chromosome number >12, even numbers much more common than odd numbers

Griffiths 7th ed, Fig. 26-12

Duplication of entire genome much more common in plant evolution than in animal evolutionary history

Page 7: Table 8.3 & Alberts Fig.1.38 EVOLUTION OF GENOMES C-value paradox: - in certain cases, lack of correlation between morphological complexity and genome

Fig. 6.25

Over evolutionary timeexpect independent mutationsto accumulate

Evolution of tandem arrays of eukaryotic genes

… but often observe all copiesidentical (or nearly so)

- evolve “in concert”

Page 8: Table 8.3 & Alberts Fig.1.38 EVOLUTION OF GENOMES C-value paradox: - in certain cases, lack of correlation between morphological complexity and genome

Concerted evolution

- maintenance of homogeneous nt sequences among multi-gene family members (especially when in tandem arrays)

- eg. eukaryotic ribosomal RNA gene copies

- exchange of sequence info so members kept very similar

Fig. 6.26

Page 9: Table 8.3 & Alberts Fig.1.38 EVOLUTION OF GENOMES C-value paradox: - in certain cases, lack of correlation between morphological complexity and genome

Fig. 6.27

Possible evolutionary scenarios resulting in “homogenized” tandem array

1. Beneficial mutations fixed by positive selection

-but spacers with no known function show concerted evolution

2. Recent amplification

3. Mutation in one repeat “spreads” to others

Page 10: Table 8.3 & Alberts Fig.1.38 EVOLUTION OF GENOMES C-value paradox: - in certain cases, lack of correlation between morphological complexity and genome

Fig. 6.31

Unequal crossing over

- homologous recombination between misaligned arrays

- change in number of repeats

Page 11: Table 8.3 & Alberts Fig.1.38 EVOLUTION OF GENOMES C-value paradox: - in certain cases, lack of correlation between morphological complexity and genome

Example of unequal crossing over in human globin array

misalignment (of sister chromatidsduring mitosis in germ cell orhomologous chromosomes during meiosis…)

Page & Holmes Fig. 3.15

“Lepore” thalassemia

Page 12: Table 8.3 & Alberts Fig.1.38 EVOLUTION OF GENOMES C-value paradox: - in certain cases, lack of correlation between morphological complexity and genome

Gene conversion

- non-reciprocal recombination

- no change in gene copy number

- can occur in dispersed as well as tandem repeats

Fig. 6.29 Watson Fig. 10-21

- example of yeast mating-type switching

Page 13: Table 8.3 & Alberts Fig.1.38 EVOLUTION OF GENOMES C-value paradox: - in certain cases, lack of correlation between morphological complexity and genome

Fig. 6.33

Exon 3 Exons 1 & 2

How do you interpret these data?

Example of concerted evolution in primate globin gene cluster

... and panel 3 of Fig.6.33 ?

Page 14: Table 8.3 & Alberts Fig.1.38 EVOLUTION OF GENOMES C-value paradox: - in certain cases, lack of correlation between morphological complexity and genome

Fig. 6.33

PR pancreative ribonuclease

SR seminal ribonuclease

Resurrection of ribonuclease pseudogene by gene conversion

What is predicted status of SR gene in giraffe? or sheep?

… in some bovine species, gene conversion of SR with PR gene, so functional again

Page 15: Table 8.3 & Alberts Fig.1.38 EVOLUTION OF GENOMES C-value paradox: - in certain cases, lack of correlation between morphological complexity and genome

Factors affecting rate of concerted evolution (p. 317-320)

1. Number, arrangement, structure of repeats

2. Functional requirement

- selective advantage of high amount of same geneproduct vs. diversity

3. Population size

- non-coding regions evolve more rapidly, and ifdivergent enough may “escape” homogenization

- time for variant to be fixed or eliminated

Page 16: Table 8.3 & Alberts Fig.1.38 EVOLUTION OF GENOMES C-value paradox: - in certain cases, lack of correlation between morphological complexity and genome

Evolutionary implications of concerted evolution (p.320-322)

1. Spread of advantageous mutations (or removal of deleterious ones)

2. Retards paralogous gene divergence (preventing redundant copy from becoming non-functional)

3. Generates increased genetic variation at a particular locus within a population

“molecular drive”

Methodological implications

- degree of sequence divergence of paralogous genes undergoing concerted evolution is not correlated with evolutionary time

so gene duplications can appear younger than they really are…