Interpretation of karyotype evolution should consider chromosome structural constraints

SCHUBERT, Ingo and Martin LYSÁK. Interpretation of karyotype evolution should consider chromosome structural constraints. Trends in Genetics. Elsevier Trends Journals, 2011, vol. 27, No 6, p. 207-216. ISSN 0168-9525. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tig.2011.03.004.

Basic information

• Original name: Interpretation of karyotype evolution should consider chromosome structural constraints
• Authors: SCHUBERT, Ingo (276 Germany) and Martin LYSÁK (203 Czech Republic, guarantor, belonging to the institution).
• Edition: Trends in Genetics, Elsevier Trends Journals, 2011, 0168-9525.

Other information

• Original language: English
• Type of outcome: Article in a journal
• Field of Study: Genetics and molecular biology
• Country of publisher: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
• Confidentiality degree: is not subject to a state or trade secret
• Impact factor: Impact factor: 10.064
• RIV identification code: RIV/00216224:14740/11:00049462
• Organization unit: Central European Institute of Technology
• Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tig.2011.03.004
• UT WoS: 000291567400001
• Keywords in English: karyotype evolution; chromosome rearrangements; comparative genomics
• Tags: ok, rivok
• Tags: International impact, Reviewed

Abstract

Comparative genetics, genomics and cytogenetics provide tools to trace the evolutionary history of extant genomes. Yet, the interpretation of rapidly increasing genomic data is not always done in agreement with constraints determined by chromosome structural features and by insights obtained from chromosome mutagenesis. The terms 'non-reciprocal chromosome translocation', 'chromosome fusion' and 'centromere shift' used to explain genomic differences among organisms are misleading and often do not correctly reflect the mechanisms of chromosome rearrangements underlying the evolutionary karyotypic variation. Here, we (re)interpret evolutionary genome alterations in a parsimonious way and demonstrate that results of comparative genomics and comparative chromosome painting can be explained on the basis of known primary and secondary chromosome rearrangements. Therefore, some widespread terms used in comparative and evolutionary genomics should be either avoided or redefined.

Links

• IAA601630902, research and development project: Name: Evoluce chromosomů brukvovitých (Brassicaceae) analyzována pomocí komparativního chromosomálního paintingu

Investor: Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, Chromosome evolution in crucifers (Brassicaceae) revealed by comparative chromosome painting

• MSM0021622415, plan (intention): Name: Molekulární podstata buněčných a tkáňových regulací

Investor: Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports of the CR, Molecular basis of cell and tissue regulations