Difference between revisions of "Tomato genome"

From CoGepedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(Further comparisons using CoGe: Lack of evidence for a solanum specific hexaploidy)
(Further comparisons using CoGe: Lack of strong evidence for a solanum specific hexaploidy)
 
(6 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 2: Line 2:
 
[[File:Screen Shot 2012-06-01 at 7.40.54 AM.png]]
 
[[File:Screen Shot 2012-06-01 at 7.40.54 AM.png]]
  
# Issue: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v485/n7400/
+
* Issue: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v485/n7400/
# Nature Commentary: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v485/n7400/full/485547a.html
+
* Nature Commentary: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v485/n7400/full/485547a.html
# Nature Article: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v485/n7400/full/nature11119.html
+
* Nature Article: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v485/n7400/full/nature11119.html
## '''The tomato genome sequence provides insights into fleshy fruit evolution'''
+
** '''The tomato genome sequence provides insights into fleshy fruit evolution'''
  
 
=Solanum-specific paleohexaploidy (whole genome triplication)=
 
=Solanum-specific paleohexaploidy (whole genome triplication)=
Line 12: Line 12:
 
"Comparison with the grape genome also reveals a more recent triplication in tomato and potato. Whereas few individual tomato/potato genes remain triplicated (Supplementary Tables 10 and 11), 73% of tomato gene models are in blocks that are orthologous to one grape region, collectively covering 84% of the grape gene space. Among these grape genomic regions, 22.5% have one orthologous region in tomato, 39.9% have two, and 21.6% have three, indicating that a whole-genome triplication occurred in the Solanum lineage, followed by widespread gene loss. This triplication, also evident in potato (Supplementary Fig. 11), is estimated at 71 (±19.4) Myr on the basis of the Ks of paralogous genes (Supplementary Fig. 10), and therefore predates the ~7.3 Myr tomato–potato divergence."
 
"Comparison with the grape genome also reveals a more recent triplication in tomato and potato. Whereas few individual tomato/potato genes remain triplicated (Supplementary Tables 10 and 11), 73% of tomato gene models are in blocks that are orthologous to one grape region, collectively covering 84% of the grape gene space. Among these grape genomic regions, 22.5% have one orthologous region in tomato, 39.9% have two, and 21.6% have three, indicating that a whole-genome triplication occurred in the Solanum lineage, followed by widespread gene loss. This triplication, also evident in potato (Supplementary Fig. 11), is estimated at 71 (±19.4) Myr on the basis of the Ks of paralogous genes (Supplementary Fig. 10), and therefore predates the ~7.3 Myr tomato–potato divergence."
  
=Further comparisons using CoGe: Lack of evidence for a solanum specific hexaploidy=
+
=Further comparisons using CoGe: evidence for a solanum specific hexaploidy or tetraploidy event=
 +
 
 +
These analyses do not provide a clear-cut explanation of the evolutionary history of tomato.  Please join a discussion and share your throughts on these results on CoGe's Forums (hosted by iPlant): https://forums.iplantcollaborative.org/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=92
 +
 
 +
==Tomato versus tomato (itself)==
 +
If tomato has a lineage specific hexaploidy, comparison to iself should show a strong 3:3 syntenic signal in the [[syntenic dotplot]] if its genome to itself.  This should be readily apparent [[Ks]] value calculations.  However, the [[syntenic dotplot]] of tomato versus itself shows a strong 2:2 [[syntenic depth]] (one additional syntenic region to each region of its genome).
 +
* [[Tomato v. tomato]]
  
 
==Tomato versus potato==
 
==Tomato versus potato==
Line 19: Line 25:
  
 
==Tomato versus grape==
 
==Tomato versus grape==
If tomato has a lineage specific hexaploidy, comparison to the grape genome (which only has the eudicot [[paleohexaploidy]])) should show a 1:3 [[syntenic depth]] of orthologous regions, and a might weaker signal for their shared eudicot [[paleohexaploidy]].  However, analysis of the syntenic dotplot of these genomes (with Ks coloration), shows a strong 1:2 syntenic mapping of orthologous regions.
+
If tomato has a lineage-specific hexaploidy, comparison to the grape genome (which only has the eudicot [[paleohexaploidy]])) should show a 1:3 [[syntenic depth]] of orthologous regions, and a might weaker signal for their shared eudicot [[paleohexaploidy]].  However, analysis of the syntenic dotplot of these genomes (with Ks coloration), shows a strong 1:2 syntenic mapping of orthologous regions.
  
 
* [[Tomato v. grapevine]]
 
* [[Tomato v. grapevine]]
 +
 +
==High-resolution analysis using [[GEvo]] for comparing a tomato triplicate region with grape as an outgroup==
 +
 +
If a region in tomato was triplicated, it should show the classic pattern of [[fractionation]] among [[homeologous]] genes when compared to an outgroup region from a genome without the polyploidy event.  This is the exact pattern observed using grape as an outgroup.
 +
 +
[[High-resolution syntenic analysis of tomato v. grapevine]]

Latest revision as of 10:13, 1 June 2012

Tomato genome published in Nature

Screen Shot 2012-06-01 at 7.40.54 AM.png

Solanum-specific paleohexaploidy (whole genome triplication)

From: tomato genome sequence provides insights into fleshy fruit evolution

"Comparison with the grape genome also reveals a more recent triplication in tomato and potato. Whereas few individual tomato/potato genes remain triplicated (Supplementary Tables 10 and 11), 73% of tomato gene models are in blocks that are orthologous to one grape region, collectively covering 84% of the grape gene space. Among these grape genomic regions, 22.5% have one orthologous region in tomato, 39.9% have two, and 21.6% have three, indicating that a whole-genome triplication occurred in the Solanum lineage, followed by widespread gene loss. This triplication, also evident in potato (Supplementary Fig. 11), is estimated at 71 (±19.4) Myr on the basis of the Ks of paralogous genes (Supplementary Fig. 10), and therefore predates the ~7.3 Myr tomato–potato divergence."

Further comparisons using CoGe: evidence for a solanum specific hexaploidy or tetraploidy event

These analyses do not provide a clear-cut explanation of the evolutionary history of tomato. Please join a discussion and share your throughts on these results on CoGe's Forums (hosted by iPlant): https://forums.iplantcollaborative.org/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=92

Tomato versus tomato (itself)

If tomato has a lineage specific hexaploidy, comparison to iself should show a strong 3:3 syntenic signal in the syntenic dotplot if its genome to itself. This should be readily apparent Ks value calculations. However, the syntenic dotplot of tomato versus itself shows a strong 2:2 syntenic depth (one additional syntenic region to each region of its genome).

Tomato versus potato

If tomato and potato share a common recent hexaploidy, there should be a strong 1:3 syntenic signal in the syntenic dotplot of these genomes. With Ks value calculations, we would expect to see a strong orthologous region and two out-paralogous regions of approximately equal ages. However, analysis of these genomes in SynMap reveals one strong orthologous region and one out-paralogous region, which supports a shared tetraploidy. Interestingly, there are a couple of regions that show two out-paralogous regions.

Tomato versus grape

If tomato has a lineage-specific hexaploidy, comparison to the grape genome (which only has the eudicot paleohexaploidy)) should show a 1:3 syntenic depth of orthologous regions, and a might weaker signal for their shared eudicot paleohexaploidy. However, analysis of the syntenic dotplot of these genomes (with Ks coloration), shows a strong 1:2 syntenic mapping of orthologous regions.

High-resolution analysis using GEvo for comparing a tomato triplicate region with grape as an outgroup

If a region in tomato was triplicated, it should show the classic pattern of fractionation among homeologous genes when compared to an outgroup region from a genome without the polyploidy event. This is the exact pattern observed using grape as an outgroup.

High-resolution syntenic analysis of tomato v. grapevine