This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Supplementary Research Data All Versions of this Article: gr.4318206v1 16/3/347    most recent 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 Vinogradov, A. E. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Vinogradov, A. E. Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

Letter

"Genome design" model: Evidence from conserved intronic sequence in human–mouse comparison

Institute of Cytology, Russian Academy of Sciences, St. Petersburg 194064, Russia

Introns are shorter in housekeeping genes than in tissue- or development-specific genes. Differing explanations have been offered for this phenomenon: selection for economy (in housekeeping genes), mutation bias or "genomic design." The large-scale implementation in this present paper of a rigorous local sequence alignment algorithm revealed an unprecedented fraction of evolutionarily conserved DNA in human–mouse introns (60% of human and 70% of mouse intron length remained after masking for lineage-specific repeats). The length distributions of both conserved and nonconserved regions are very broad but show peaks close to nucleosomal and dinucleosomal DNA. Both the fraction of conserved sequence and its absolute length were higher in introns of tissue-specific genes than housekeeping genes. This difference remained after control for between-species identity of the conserved fraction, mutation rate, and GC content. In a more direct control, the product of the conserved sequence fraction and the between-species identity of this fraction (which can be considered to be the fraction of conserved nucleotides) was greater in introns of tissue-specific genes than housekeeping genes. Neither the fraction of intron length covered by repeats nor the balance of small insertions and deletions (indels) can explain the greater length of introns in tissue-specific genes. The length of the conserved intronic DNA in a gene is correlated with the number of functional domains in the protein encoded by that gene. These results suggest that the greater length of introns in tissue-specific genes is not due to selection for economy or mutation bias but instead is related to functional complexity (probably mediated by chromatin condensation), and that the evolution of the bulk of noncoding DNA is not completely neutral.

E-mail aevin{at}mail.cytspb.rssi.ru; fax 07 812 247 0341.

Article published online ahead of print. Article and publication date are at http://www.genome.org/cgi/doi/10.1101/gr.4318206.

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

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A. E. Vinogradov and O. V. Anatskaya Organismal complexity, cell differentiation and gene expression: human over mouse Nucleic Acids Res., October 8, 2007; 35(19): 6350 - 6356. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. F. Mehler and J. S. Mattick Noncoding RNAs and RNA Editing in Brain Development, Functional Diversification, and Neurological Disease Physiol Rev, July 1, 2007; 87(3): 799 - 823. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. E. Vinogradov 'Genome design' model and multicellular complexity: golden middle Nucleic Acids Res., November 6, 2006; 34(20): 5906 - 5914. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				H. Sun, G. Skogerbo, and R. Chen Conserved distances between vertebrate highly conserved elements Hum. Mol. Genet., October 1, 2006; 15(19): 2911 - 2922. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]