2004
DOI: 10.1016/j.gene.2004.06.001
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evolution of ancient satellite DNAs in sturgeon genomes

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

11
101
0

Year Published

2006
2006
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 105 publications
(115 citation statements)
references
References 27 publications
11
101
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In this case, the BIV160 satDNA family may be about 540 million years old, thus representing the oldest described satDNA. Among ancient satDNAs, the PstI family in sturgeons is thought to be 4100 million years old (Robles et al, 2004), whereas the identification of sequences related to the primate-specific a-satDNAs in the transcriptome of zebrafish moved the age of this sequence back to the origin of bonefishes, about 400 million years ago (Li and Kirby, 2003). The observed distribution of the three Mytilus satellites shared with species from the subclass Pteriomorphia indicates that an expansion should have occurred about 150 million years ago, at the onset of the genus (Martinez-Lage et al, 2005).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In this case, the BIV160 satDNA family may be about 540 million years old, thus representing the oldest described satDNA. Among ancient satDNAs, the PstI family in sturgeons is thought to be 4100 million years old (Robles et al, 2004), whereas the identification of sequences related to the primate-specific a-satDNAs in the transcriptome of zebrafish moved the age of this sequence back to the origin of bonefishes, about 400 million years ago (Li and Kirby, 2003). The observed distribution of the three Mytilus satellites shared with species from the subclass Pteriomorphia indicates that an expansion should have occurred about 150 million years ago, at the onset of the genus (Martinez-Lage et al, 2005).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Consequently, variability profiles of these monomers do not allow linking variants to the species of origin. Although it is difficult to understand the real causes and consequences of this phenomenon, at present there are two plausible explanations: (a) once established, a mutational profile is favoured because of constraints imposed on the sequence in the heterochromatic environment (Ohta and Dover, 1984;Dover, 1987;Mravinac et al, 2002Mravinac et al, , 2005Meštrović et al, 2006a;Plohl et al, 2008) and (b) accumulation and spread of new mutations in a repetitive family is slow owing to biological aspects of DNA sequence evolution in these organisms (Luchetti et al, , 2006Robles et al, 2004).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The rapid changes in copy number and nucleotide sequence of satDNAs may result in the evolution of genus and species-specific repeats (Pons and Gillepsie, 2004;Mravinac and Plohl, 2010), as these repetitive units are usually highly homogenized within a species due to concerted evolution. Although satDNA has been occasionally considered as phylogenetically informative of different under-species hierarchical ranks, such as ecotype-specific variants (Hall et al, 2003), populations (Feliciello et al, 2011) or phylogeographic clades (Robles et al, 2004), detailed studies on sequence variation at the intraspecific level are still very scarce.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The phylogenetic relationships among extant acipenseriform groups has been the subject of numerous, detailed works (e.g., Grande and Bemis, 1991;Birstein and DeSalle, 1998;Ludwig et al, 2001;Robles et al, 2004). With a robust hypothesis on the relationships among these groups being available, it is of much interest to date the origin of these groups since this is crucial, in fact, for clarifying acipenseriform evolution and historical biogeography.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%