2019
DOI: 10.1111/nph.16148
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Divergence of duplicated genes by repeated partitioning of splice forms and subcellular localization

Abstract: Summary Gene duplication is a prominent and recurrent process in plant genomes. Among the possible fates of duplicated genes, subfunctionalization refers to duplicates taking on different parts of the function or expression pattern of the ancestral gene. This partitioning could be accompanied by changes in subcellular localization of the protein products. When alternative splicing of gene products leads to protein products with different subcellular localizations, we propose that after gene duplication there… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

3
22
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 21 publications
(25 citation statements)
references
References 46 publications
3
22
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Of course, whether or not subgenome conflicts exist may be partly a question of the preexisting differences between the parental species, and a more general survey of allopolyploidies that includes estimates of the subgenome divergence prior to the polyploidy events would be most enlightening. If the pattern holds, however, the implications could be significant: hybridization represents a potentially important means of adaption (Paterson 2005;Hollister 2015;Alix et al 2017;Blanc-Mathieu et al 2017;Smukowski Heil et al 2017), and if we combine this factor with the propensity for polyploidies to generate evolutionary innovations (Edger et al 2015) and the value of holding dosage sensitive genes in duplicate long enough to allow such innovations (Blanc and Wolfe 2004;Conant and Wolfe 2008b;Conant et al 2014;Zhao et al 2017;Liang and Schnable 2018;Qiu et al 2020), we can find ourselves in a position to strongly support Ohno's arguments on the power of polyploidy.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…Of course, whether or not subgenome conflicts exist may be partly a question of the preexisting differences between the parental species, and a more general survey of allopolyploidies that includes estimates of the subgenome divergence prior to the polyploidy events would be most enlightening. If the pattern holds, however, the implications could be significant: hybridization represents a potentially important means of adaption (Paterson 2005;Hollister 2015;Alix et al 2017;Blanc-Mathieu et al 2017;Smukowski Heil et al 2017), and if we combine this factor with the propensity for polyploidies to generate evolutionary innovations (Edger et al 2015) and the value of holding dosage sensitive genes in duplicate long enough to allow such innovations (Blanc and Wolfe 2004;Conant and Wolfe 2008b;Conant et al 2014;Zhao et al 2017;Liang and Schnable 2018;Qiu et al 2020), we can find ourselves in a position to strongly support Ohno's arguments on the power of polyploidy.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…As a product of gene duplication, 1B is subject to selection pressure and is not retained in all accessions of Arabidopsis, although loss was correlated with disruption of the promoter (Schwarte and Tiedemann, 2011). Retention of 1B may be linked to sublocalization (Qiu et al, 2019). Differential expression patterns of rbcS genes in different organs have also been observed in other plant species including tomato, maize, tobacco, and rice (Wanner and Gruissem, 1991;Ewing et al, 1998;Morita, et al, 2014;Laterre et al, 2017).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Single cell tools already exist for addressing these issues by assaying chromatin accessibility ( Farmer et al, 2020 ) and mapping the epigenomic landscape of the cell ( Zhou et al, 2019 ). For understanding functional differences between paralogs, and for even finer scale “sub-localization” of gene action within cells that may be a driver of paralog retention ( Qiu et al, 2019 ), a host of other single cell-omics tools exist or are under development ( Macaulay et al, 2017 ; Hasle et al, 2020 ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%