uu.seUppsala University Publications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
The human hox-bearing chromosome regions did arise by block or chromosome (or even genome) duplications
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Medicine and Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Neuroscience. (Pharmacology)
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Medicine and Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Neuroscience. (Pharmacology)
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Medicine and Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Neuroscience, Developmental Neuroscience. (Developmental Neuroscience)
2002 (English)In: Genome Research, Vol. 12, no 12, 1910-1920 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Many chromosome regions in the human genome exist in four similar copies, suggesting that the entire genome was duplicated twice in early vertebrate evolution, a concept called the 2R hypothesis. Forty-two gene families on the four Hox-bearing chromosomes were recently analyzed by others, and 32 of these were reported to have evolutionary histories incompatible with duplications concomitant with the Hox clusters, thereby contradicting the 2R hypothesis. However, we show here that nine of the families have probably been translocated to the Hox-bearing chromosomes more recently, and that three of these belong to other chromosome quartets where they actually support the 2R hypothesis. We consider 13 families too complex to shed light on the chromosome duplication hypothesis. Among the remaining 20 families, 14 display phylogenies that support or are at least consistent with the Hox-cluster duplications. Only six families seem to have other phylogenies, but these trees are highly uncertain due to shortage of sequence information. We conclude that all relevant and analyzable families support or are consistent with block/chromosome duplications and that none clearly contradicts the 2R hypothesis.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2002. Vol. 12, no 12, 1910-1920 p.
National Category
Cell and Molecular Biology
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-63753DOI: 10.1101/gr.445702PubMedID: 12466295OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-63753DiVA: diva2:91664
Available from: 2008-10-17 Created: 2008-10-17 Last updated: 2018-01-10Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Authority records BETA

Hallböök, Finn

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Hallböök, Finn
By organisation
Department of NeuroscienceDevelopmental Neuroscience
Cell and Molecular Biology

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 597 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf