This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Neafsey, D. E. Articles by Palumbi, S. R. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Neafsey, D. E. Articles by Palumbi, S. R. Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

LETTER

Genome Size Evolution in Pufferfish: A Comparative Analysis of Diodontid and Tetraodontid Pufferfish Genomes

¹Department of Organismic and Evolutionary Biology, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138, USA;² Hopkins Marine Lab, Stanford University, Pacific Grove, California 93950, USA

Smooth pufferfish of the family Tetraodontidae have the smallest vertebrate genomes yet measured. They have a haploid genome size of 400 million bp (Mb), which is almost eight times smaller than the human genome. Given that spiny pufferfish from the sister family Diodontidae and a fish from the outgroup Molidae have genomes twice as large as smooth puffers, it appears that the genome size of smooth puffers has contracted in the last 50–70 million years since their divergence from the spiny puffers. Here we use renaturation kinetics to compare the repetitive nature of the smooth and spiny puffer genomes. We also estimate the rates of small (<400 bp) insertions and deletions in smooth and spiny puffers using defunct non-LTR retrotransposons. We find a significantly greater abundance of a transposon-like repetitive DNA class in spiny puffers relative to smooth puffers, in addition to nearly identical indel rates. We comment on the role that large insertions may play in the evolution of genome size in these two groups.

[The sequence data from this study have been submitted to GenBank under accession nos. AY212336–AY212504.]

E-MAIL neafsey{at}oeb.harvard.edu; FAX (617) 496-5854.

Article and publication are at http://www.genome.org/cgi/doi/10.1101/gr.841703.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. C. Jost, D. M. Hillis, Y. Lu, J. W. Kyle, H. A. Fozzard, and H. H. Zakon Toxin-Resistant Sodium Channels: Parallel Adaptive Evolution across a Complete Gene Family Mol. Biol. Evol., June 1, 2008; 25(6): 1016 - 1024. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. M. Bergman and D. Bensasson Recent LTR retrotransposon insertion contrasts with waves of non-LTR insertion since speciation in Drosophila melanogaster PNAS, July 3, 2007; 104(27): 11340 - 11345. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Brandstrom and H. Ellegren The Genomic Landscape of Short Insertion and Deletion Polymorphisms in the Chicken (Gallus gallus) Genome: A High Frequency of Deletions in Tandem Duplicates Genetics, July 1, 2007; 176(3): 1691 - 1701. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J.-N. Volff, H. Lehrach, R. Reinhardt, and D. Chourrout Retroelement Dynamics and a Novel Type of Chordate Retrovirus-like Element in the Miniature Genome of the Tunicate Oikopleura dioica Mol. Biol. Evol., November 1, 2004; 21(11): 2022 - 2033. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. Vandepoele, W. De Vos, J. S. Taylor, A. Meyer, and Y. Van de Peer Major events in the genome evolution of vertebrates: Paranome age and size differ considerably between ray-finned fishes and land vertebrates PNAS, February 10, 2004; 101(6): 1638 - 1643. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]