This Article Full Text (PDF) Supplemental Research Data All Versions of this Article: gr.7113408v1 18/1/30    most recent Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted 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 Kelkar, Y. D. Articles by Makova, K. D. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Kelkar, Y. D. Articles by Makova, K. D. Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

Letter

The genome-wide determinants of human and chimpanzee microsatellite evolution

¹ Department of Biology, Penn State University, University Park, Pennsylvania, 16802, USA; ² Center for Comparative Genomics and Bioinformatics, Penn State University, University Park, Pennsylvania, 16802, USA; ³ Department of Statistics, Penn State University, University Park, Pennsylvania, 16802, USA

Mutation rates of microsatellites vary greatly among loci. The causes of this heterogeneity remain largely enigmatic yet are crucial for understanding numerous human neurological diseases and genetic instability in cancer. In this first genome-wide study, the relative contributions of intrinsic features and regional genomic factors to the variation in mutability among orthologous human–chimpanzee microsatellites are investigated with resampling and regression techniques. As a result, we uncover the intricacies of microsatellite mutagenesis as follows. First, intrinsic features (repeat number, length, and motif size), which all influence the probability and rate of slippage, are the strongest predictors of mutability. Second, mutability increases nonuniformly with length, suggesting that processes additional to slippage, such as faulty repair, contribute to mutations. Third, mutability varies among microsatellites with different motif composition likely due to dissimilarities in secondary DNA structure formed by their slippage intermediates. Fourth, mutability of mononucleotide microsatellites is impacted by their location on sex chromosomes vs. autosomes and inside vs. outside of Alu repeats, the former confirming the importance of replication and the latter suggesting a role for gene conversion. Fifth, transcription status and location in a particular isochore do not influence microsatellite mutability. Sixth, compared with intrinsic features, regional genomic factors have only minor effects. Finally, our regression models explain 90% of variation in microsatellite mutability and can generate useful predictions for the studies of human diseases, forensics, and conservation genetics.

E-mail kdm16{at}psu.edu; fax (814) 865-9131.

[Supplemental material is available online at www.genome.org.]

Article published online before print. Article and publication date are at http://www.genome.org/cgi/doi/10.1101/gr.7113408

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

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A. Merkel and N. Gemmell Detecting short tandem repeats from genome data: opening the software black box Brief Bioinform, July 10, 2008; (2008) bbn028v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]