Structural Dynamics of Eukaryotic Chromosome Evolution
Abstract
Large-scale genome sequencing is providing a comprehensive view of the complex evolutionary forces that have shaped the structure of eukaryotic chromosomes. Comparative sequence analyses reveal patterns of apparently random rearrangement interspersed with regions of extraordinarily rapid, localized genome evolution. Numerous subtle rearrangements near centromeres, telomeres, duplications, and interspersed repeats suggest hotspots for eukaryotic chromosome evolution. This localized chromosomal instability may play a role in rapidly evolving lineage-specific gene families and in fostering large-scale changes in gene order. Computational algorithms that take into account these dynamic forces along with traditional models of chromosomal rearrangement show promise for reconstructing the natural history of eukaryotic chromosomes.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References and Notes
1
S. J. O'Brien et al., Science286, 458 (1999).
2
Arabidopsis Genome Initiative, Nature408, 796 (2000).
3
S. Aparicio et al., Science297, 1301 (2002).
4
J. H. Nadeau, B. A. Taylor, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.81, 814 (1984).
5
International Human Genome Sequencing Consortium, Nature409, 860 (2001).
6
Mouse Genome Sequencing Consortium, Nature420, 520 (2002).
7
J. Ehrlich, D. Sankoff, J. H. Nadeau, Genetics147, 289 (1997).
8
D. W. Burt et al., Nature402, 411 (1999).
9
I. V. Sharakhov et al., Science298, 182 (2002).
10
A. Coghlan, K. H. Wolfe, Genome Res.12, 857 (2002).
11
F. Grutzner et al., Genome Res.12, 1316 (2002).
12
H. Skaletsky et al., Nature423, 825 (2003).
13
N. Archidiacono et al., Chromosoma107, 241 (1998).
14
M. A. Huynen, B. Snel, P. Bork, Trends Genet.17, 304 (2001).
15
C. Seoighe et al., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.97, 14433 (2000).
16
M. Kellis, N. Patterson, M. Endrizzi, B. Birren, E. S. Lander, Nature423, 241 (2003).
17
E. M. Zdobnov et al., Science298, 149 (2002).
18
P. Pevzner, G. Tesler, RECOMB 2003: The Seventh Annual International Conference on Research in Computational Molecular Biology, organized by the Max Planck Institute for Molecular Genetics and the Berlin Center for Genome-Based Bioinformatics, 10-13 April 2003, Berlin, Germany.
19
P. Pevzner, G. Tesler, Genome Res.13, 37 (2003).
20
S. Kumar, S. R. Gadagkar, A. Filipski, X. Gu, Genetics157, 1387 (2001).
21
J. E. Horvath, J. A. Bailey, D. P. Locke, E. E. Eichler, Hum. Mol. Genet.10, 2215 (2001).
22
R. A. Hoskins et al., Genome Biol.3, 85 (2002).
23
M. G. Schueler, A. W. Higgins, M. K. Rudd, K. Gustashaw, H. F. Willard, Science294, 109 (2001).
24
G. P. Copenhaver et al., Science286, 2468 (1999).
25
H. C. Riethman et al., Nature409, 948 (2001).
26
M. Ventura, N. Archidiacono, M. Rocchi, Genome Res.11, 595 (2001).
27
D. J. Amor, K. H. Choo, Am. J. Hum. Genet.71, 695 (2002).
28
J. S. Kaminker et al., Genome Biol.3, 84 (2002).
29
N. Jiang et al., Nature421, 163 (2003).
30
R. A. Holt et al., Science298, 129 (2002).
31
G. Glockner et al., Nature418, 79 (2002).
32
J. Guy et al., Genome Res.13, 159 (2003).
33
J. A. Bailey et al., Science297, 1003 (2002).
34
H. C. Mefford, B. J. Trask, Nature Rev. Genet.3, 95 (2002).
35
E. E. Eichler, Trends Genet.17, 661 (2001).
36
B. Trask et al., Hum. Mol. Genet.7, 13 (1998).
37
J. M. Carlton et al., Nature419, 512 (2002).
38
M. J. Gardner et al., Nature419, 498 (2002).
39
D. Durand, Trends Genet.19, 2 (2003).
40
S. P. Otto, J. Whitton, Annu. Rev. Genet.34, 401 (2000).
41
R. Friedman, A. L. Hughes, Mol. Biol. Evol.20, 154 (2003).
42
J. E. Bowers, B. A. Chapman, J. Rong, A. H. Paterson, Nature422, 433 (2003).
43
K. Wolfe, D. Shields, Nature387, 708 (1997).
44
A. McLysaght, K. Hokamp, K. H. Wolfe, Nature Genet.31, 200 (2002).
45
X. Gu, Y. Wang, J. Gu, Nature Genet.31, 205 (2002).
46
N. El-Mabrouk, D. Sankoff, SIAM (Soc. Industr. Appl. Math.) J. Comput.32, 745 (2003).
47
D. Sankoff, Bioinformatics15, 909 (1999).
48
L. Zhang, B. Ma, L. Wang, Y. Xu, Bioinformatics19, in press.
49
W. Ramakrishna et al., Genetics162, 1389 (2002).
50
H. Ranson et al., Science298, 179 (2002).
51
P. Dehal et al., Science293, 104 (2001).
52
P. Stankiewicz, J. R. Lupski, Trends Genet.18, 74 (2002).
53
M. Lynch, J. S. Conery, Science290, 1151 (2000).
54
G. Liu et al., Genome Res.13, 358 (2003).
55
M. A. Batzer, P. L. Deininger, Nature Rev. Genet.3, 370 (2002).
56
R. J. Mural et al., Science296, 1661 (2002).
57
P. SanMiguel, B. S. Gaut, A. Tikhonov, Y. Nakajima, J. L. Bennetzen, Nature Genet.20, 43 (1998).
58
B. S. Gaut, M. Le Thierry d'Ennequin, A. S. Peek, M. C. Sawkins, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.97, 7008 (2000).
59
K. M. Devos, J. K. Brown, J. L. Bennetzen, Genome Res.12, 1075 (2002).
60
B. Charlesworth, C. H. Langley, W. Stephan, Genetics112, 947 (1986).
61
See www.genome.ucsc.edu.
62
L. W. Hillieret al., Nature424, 157 (2003).
63
See www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=Genome.
64
We thank our colleagues for access to unpublished data in the preparation of this review and R. Clark for technical assistance in the preparation of display items. E.E.E. is supported by NIH grants (HG02385, GM58815, and HD43569). D.S. holds the Canada Research Chair in Mathematical Genomics and is a Fellow of the Canadian Institute for Advanced Research. We apologize to all colleagues whose work we could not cite because of space constraints.
(0)eLetters
eLetters is a forum for ongoing peer review. eLetters are not edited, proofread, or indexed, but they are screened. eLetters should provide substantive and scholarly commentary on the article. Embedded figures cannot be submitted, and we discourage the use of figures within eLetters in general. If a figure is essential, please include a link to the figure within the text of the eLetter. Please read our Terms of Service before submitting an eLetter.
Log In to Submit a ResponseNo eLetters have been published for this article yet.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Science
Volume 301 | Issue 5634
8 August 2003
8 August 2003
Copyright
American Association for the Advancement of Science.
Submission history
Published in print: 8 August 2003
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Article Usage
Altmetrics
Citations
Cite as
- Evan E. Eichler,
- David Sankoff
Export citation
Select the format you want to export the citation of this publication.
Cited by
- Phylogenomic analyses provide insights into primate evolution, Science, 380, 6648, (913-924), (2023)./doi/10.1126/science.abn6919
- Genome-wide characterization of Alfin-like (AL) genes in apple and functional identification of MdAL4 in response to drought stress, Plant Cell Reports, (2023).https://doi.org/10.1007/s00299-022-02966-8
- Cell Compartment-Specific Folding of Ty1 Long Terminal Repeat Retrotransposon RNA Genome, Viruses, 14, 9, (2007), (2022).https://doi.org/10.3390/v14092007
- Genome-Wide Analysis and Expression Profiles of Ethylene Signal Genes and Apetala2/Ethylene-Responsive Factors in Peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.), Frontiers in Plant Science, 13, (2022).https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2022.828482
- Karyotype Evolution of Talking Thorny Catfishes Anadoras (Doradidae, Astrodoradinae): A Process Mediated by Structural Rearrangements and Intense Reorganization of Repetitive DNAs, Cytogenetic and Genome Research, 162, 1-2, (64-75), (2022).https://doi.org/10.1159/000523747
- Chromosome‐level genome assembly for takin ( Budorcas taxicolor ) provides insights into its taxonomic status and genetic diversity , Molecular Ecology, 32, 6, (1323-1334), (2022).https://doi.org/10.1111/mec.16483
- A chromosome-level genome assembly and intestinal transcriptome of Trypoxylus dichotomus (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae) to understand its lignocellulose digestion ability , GigaScience, 11, (2022).https://doi.org/10.1093/gigascience/giac059
- Decay of homologous chromosome pairs and discovery of males in the thelytokous fungus-growing ant Mycocepurus smithii, Scientific Reports, 12, 1, (2022).https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-08537-x
- Temperature acclimation in hot-spring snakes and the convergence of cold response, The Innovation, 3, 5, (100295), (2022).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xinn.2022.100295
- The Complexity of Finding Common Partitions of Genomes with Predefined Block Sizes, Comparative Genomics, (105-123), (2022).https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-06220-9_7
- See more
Loading...
View Options
Check Access
Log in to view the full text
AAAS login provides access to Science for AAAS Members, and access to other journals in the Science family to users who have purchased individual subscriptions.
- Become a AAAS Member
- Activate your AAAS ID
- Purchase Access to Other Journals in the Science Family
- Account Help
Log in via OpenAthens.
Log in via Shibboleth.
More options
Purchase digital access to this article
Download and print this article for your personal scholarly, research, and educational use.
Buy a single issue of Science for just $15 USD.