1999
DOI: 10.1016/s1369-5274(99)00015-6
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Yeast genome evolution in the post-genome era

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

9
139
0
1

Year Published

2000
2000
2013
2013

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 156 publications
(152 citation statements)
references
References 43 publications
9
139
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…High expression is therefore a genuine effect in duplicate retention, whether or not the protein belongs to a complex. This correlation has already been observed on a smaller scale in the yeast genome duplication 30 , indicating that it might be a general trait of WGD.…”
Section: Retention and Evolution Of Duplicate Genessupporting
confidence: 55%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…High expression is therefore a genuine effect in duplicate retention, whether or not the protein belongs to a complex. This correlation has already been observed on a smaller scale in the yeast genome duplication 30 , indicating that it might be a general trait of WGD.…”
Section: Retention and Evolution Of Duplicate Genessupporting
confidence: 55%
“…4b). Most pathways are still significantly overamplified with respect to the recent duplication, an effect that has not been observed in WGDs analysed in other organisms 21,30 . As with protein complexes, the genes involved in a common metabolic pathway show a tendency to covary across the duplications, behaviour that can probably be attributed to stoichiometry, because imbalance in metabolic pathways may have a similar negative effect to that in multiprotein complexes.…”
Section: Retention and Evolution Of Duplicate Genesmentioning
confidence: 73%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In addition to the discovery that WGD duplicated genes are functionally biased (Blanc and Wolfe, 2004;Seoighe and Gehring, 2004;Aury et al, 2006;Freeling, 2008;Wu et al, 2008;Schnable et al, 2009), several gene features were identified to associate with their retention probability, such as gene complexity (He and Zhang, 2005), gene length , essentiality (He and Zhang, 2006), expression level (Seoighe and Wolfe, 1999), evolutionary rates , number of protein interactions (Guan et al, 2007;Hakes et al, 2007), functional category (Blanc and Wolfe, 2004), alternative splicing status (Kopelman et al, 2005), protein structure (Papp et al, 2003;Liang et al, 2008), position in the protein-protein interaction network Wu and Qi, 2010), and number of phosphorylation sites (Amoutzias et al, 2010). However, it is unlikely that merely one or two features alone can account for the evolutionary process of duplicated genes, as many of these features are correlated to each other.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(d) TFs were more likely to be preserved in duplicate after WGD than genes in the genome at large An overabundance of surviving duplicated TFs after WGD was observed in several species (Blanc & Wolfe 2004;Maere et al 2005;Aury et al 2006), but not initially in yeast (Seoighe & Wolfe 1999). However, more recent work has confirmed that the WGD-produced duplicates are indeed enriched for TFs (Chen et al 2008;Conant & Wolfe 2008 (f) Duplicated TF genes may be slightly more dispensable than other TF genes Given the excess of shared target genes among the WGD TFs, it is reasonable to ask if the WGD-produced redundancy in target genes reduces the importance of these duplicated TFs in the regulatory network.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%