DOCSLIB.ORG

Sibling Rivalry Among Paralogs Promotes Evolution of the Human Brain

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Sibling Rivalry Among Paralogs Promotes Evolution of the Human Brain The new work from Shan and via distinct mechanisms, one might ex- and Shaw, D.E. (2012). Cell 149, this issue, colleagues demonstrates the expanding pect that, in combination, they would yield 860–870. reach of molecular dynamics simulations higher levels of activity, further shifting the Sharma, S.V., Bell, D.W., Settleman, J., and Haber, and sets the stage for future investiga- equilibrium toward dimerization. Finally, D.A. (2007). Nat. Rev. Cancer 7, 169–181. tions of EGFR regulation, its oncogenic the prediction that phosphorylation of Shaw, D.E., Maragakis, P., Lindorff-Larsen, K., activation, and inhibitor binding proper- Tyr845 in the EGFR activation loop acti- Piana, S., Dror, R.O., Eastwood, M.P., Bank, J.A., ties. For example, it will be interesting to vates the kinase and stabilizes the EGFR Jumper, J.M., Salmon, J.K., Shan, Y., and Wrig- know what effect inclusion of Mg2+ and dimer may motivate the field to re- gers, W. (2010). Science 330, 341–346. ATP in the molecular dynamics calcula- examine the role of this phosphorylation Sok, J.C., Coppelli, F.M., Thomas, S.M., Lango, tions has on the observed conformational event in EGFR signaling. M.N., Xi, S., Hunt, J.L., Freilino, M.L., Graner, rearrangements. Additionally, the present M.W., Wikstrand, C.J., Bigner, D.D., et al. (2006). simulations do not reveal the transition to Clin. Cancer Res. 12, 5064–5073. the inactive conformation targeted by REFERENCES Stamos, J., Sliwkowski, M.X., and Eigenbrot, C. lapatinib. Though it may be no small (2002). J. Biol. Chem. 277, 46265–46272. Corcoran, R.B., Ebi, H., Turke, A.B., Coffee, E.M., matter to extend the simulation timescale Nishino, M., Cogdill, A.P., Brown, R.D., Pelle, Wood, E.R., Truesdale, A.T., McDonald, O.B., sufficiently to observe this transition, it will P.D., Dias-Santagata, D., Hung, K.E., et al. Yuan, D., Hassell, A., Dickerson, S.H., Ellis, B., be of interest to computationally charac- (2012). Cancer Discov. 2, 227–235. Pennisi, C., Horne, E., Lackey, K., et al. (2004). terize the relative stability of the active, Cancer Res. 64, 6652–6659. Prahallad, A., Sun, C., Huang, S., Di Nicolantonio, disordered, and fully inactive states. F., Salazar, R., Zecchin, D., Beijersbergen, R.L., Yun, C.H., Boggon, T.J., Li, Y., Woo, M.S., Greu- This study also provides a few testable Bardelli, A., and Bernards, R. (2012). Nature 483, lich, H., Meyerson, M., and Eck, M.J. (2007). hypotheses that may move the field 100–103. Cancer Cell 11, 217–227. forward. For instance, if different acti- Shan, Y., Eastwood, M.P., Zhang, X., Kim, E.T., Zhang, X., Gureasko, J., Shen, K., Cole, P.A., and vating mutations stabilize the active state Arkhipov, A., Dror, R.O., Jumper, J., Kuriyan, J., Kuriyan, J. (2006). Cell 125, 1137–1149. Sibling Rivalry among Paralogs Promotes Evolution of the Human Brain Chris Tyler-Smith1,* and Yali Xue1 1The Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Wellcome Trust Genome Campus, Hinxton, Cambridge CB10 1SA, UK *Correspondence: [email protected] DOI 10.1016/j.cell.2012.04.020 Geneticists have long sought to identify the genetic changes that made us human, but pinpointing the functionally relevant changes has been challenging. Two papers in this issue suggest that partial duplication of SRGAP2, producing an incomplete protein that antagonizes the original, contributed to human brain evolution. Humans differ from the other great apes in the fossil record. Brain size increased outgroup—a species external to the many ways, one of the more obvious being throughout this period, although unevenly chimpanzee-human branch, such as our larger, more complex brains. These (Figure 1A and 1B), but fossil details of gorilla (Scally et al., 2012). But there are human-specific characteristics have internal brain structure are sparse. In a around 20 million genetic changes that evolved in the last 6–7 million years since complementary way, we can catalog the are specific to humans, most of which we split from our common ancestor with genetic differences between humans probably have no functional impact what- chimpanzees and bonobos. We can and chimpanzees from their genome soever. How do we pick out the few func- catalog the phenotypic differences sequences (Chimpanzee Sequencing tionally relevant changes and link them between humans and other great apes, and Analysis Consortium, 2005) and to their phenotypic consequences? Two and in some cases, we can determine identify which differences arose on the papers in this issue of Cell now show one when they evolved, using evidence in human lineage by comparison with an way that this can be accomplished Cell 149, May 11, 2012 ª2012 Elsevier Inc. 737 (Charrier et al., 2012; Dennis the general population, sug- et al., 2012). The authors char- gests that it is unlikely to play acterize a series of partial any important role (Figure 1E). duplications of the single Interest thus focuses on ancestral SRGAP2 gene. SRGAP2B and C, which are They make a strong case for extremely similar in sequence. the duplicates leading to Their expression patterns are a higher density of spines on also similar, but again there dendritic cells in the brain are simplifying factors: the and contributing to the neote- level of SRGAP2B transcripts nous development character- is low, and it is also absent istic of humans. from some normal indi- How do you sift through 20 viduals (Figure 1E). Thus, the million genetic differences? A main player is SRGAP2C, and good starting point is the its interaction with SRGAP2A. subset of changes that have This cannot have always major effects on protein- been true during the evolution coding genes, which includes of humans; later in this duplications and deletions. A Preview, we will discuss the previous systematic survey more important role that of such copy number changes SRGAP2B must have played in great apes had identified earlier in evolutionary history. 140 events that are specific Previous work on the mouse to the human lineage (Fortna ortholog of SRGAP2A (srGAP2 et al., 2004), including several or Srgap2) had shown that it that are implicated in neuronal Figure 1. Evolutionary Context of SRGAP2 Duplications on the induced filipodia formation in function. These should be en- Human Lineage the developing cortex through (A–D) The vertical axis shows evolutionary time from the present (0, bottom) to riched for functionally impor- 7 million years ago (top). Horizontal dotted lines represent times of SRGAP2 its F-BAR domain; in addition, tant changes. Among them duplications with their uncertainty indicated by gray shading. decreasing the levels of was SRGAP2, which was (A) Brain volume estimates of fossils and living humans, colored according to SRGAP2A reduced axonal shown in mice to regulate genus. and dendritic branching and (B) Timescales of genera thought to include human ancestors. neuronal migration and mor- (C) Sequence of duplication events of SRGAP2 copies. increased the rate of neuronal phology (Guerrier et al., (D) Inferred SRGAP2 activity as a consequence of duplication of antagonistic migration (Guerrier et al., 2009). SRGAP2 was therefore paralogs and the decay of SRGAP2B. 2009). Now, Charrier and col- (E) Levels of protein (schematic) and copy number of paralogs in modern an excellent candidate for humans. leagues (2012) use mouse more detailed investigation and cultured cell models to of the link between a genetic understand the functional change and evolution of the human brain. of the duplication events, A > B > C > D, consequences of the human-specific Investigations of gene duplicates (i.e., with C and D independently derived from SRGAP2 duplications. The authors further paralogs) can face substantial obstacles. B (Figure 1C). These findings are fully characterize the phenotypes resulting Copies recently duplicated remain similar consistent with the less detailed con- from Srgap2 knockdown or knockout in sequence—almost as similar as clusions of the accompanying study and compare them with the effects alleles—and often confuse genome (Charrier et al., 2012). Furthermore, com- of SRGAP2C expression. Srgap2 knock- assemblies; indeed, the SRGAP2 gene parisons of the SRGAP2 sequences down leads to neurons with increased family was grossly misassembled in the suggest that the duplication events densities of immature-looking dendritic human reference sequence. Now, Dennis occurred 3.4, 2.4, and 1.0 million spines in juveniles. Knockout mice are et al. (2012) present an approach to years ago. The first event duplicated only viable even as homozygotes, retaining characterize the paralogs that should 9 of the 22 exons, truncating SRGAP2 in 10% of Srgap2 expression, and be widely applicable: use DNA from its F-BAR domain; therefore, all of the show continued growth of spine heads a haploid source, a complete hydatidiform other duplicated copies are also trun- during development, with the result that mole (the product of fertilization of an cated, with key functional consequences. spine head size in adults is close to wild- enucleated oocyte by a single sperm) in The duplicates are all expressed, and, type, but spines are more numerous and which there are no allelic variants to given their similarity, sorting out their necks are longer. SRGAP2C can dimerize confound assembly, and sequence large- specific roles is challenging. The first with SRGAP2A through its truncated F- insert clones. This allows the authors simplification comes because there is an BAR domain and decrease SRGAP2A to identify four copies: the parental additional deletion within SRGAP2D, activity. Strikingly, the simple conclusion SRGAP2A and its three duplicates removing exons 2 and 3; this, together is that SRGAP2C expression closely SRGAP2B–D, and also to infer the order with its absence from some individuals in mimics the Srgap2 knockdown and 738 Cell 149, May 11, 2012 ª2012 Elsevier Inc.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Human Intelligence: Does It Depend on a Genetic Error?
    This page was exported from - TheologyPlus Export date: Fri Sep 24 4:32:48 2021 / +0000 GMT Human Intelligence: Does It Depend on a Genetic Error? What makes humans different from the great apes? What makes our brains larger and more complex? We know that our DNA is remarkable similar to other mammals. What subtle genetic changes can explain such huge behavioral differences? One surprising possibility is that our brains are bigger and more complex not so much because of new genes but because of gene duplication. One gene in particular?SRGAP2?plays a role in how brain cells migrate. It is found widely in mammals of all sorts, from mice to humans. In the great apes, the more archaic form of SRGAP2 results in a relatively slow spread of neurons throughout the brain. Twice in the ancient past, however, SRGAP2 was duplicated, first about 3.4 million years ago and then again around 2.4 million years ago. The second duplication occurred right around the time when the genus Homo separated from Australopithecus. It appears that as a result of these duplications, brains in the Homo lineage?including our own as Homo sapiens?are both large and complex in their number of neuronal connections and in their ability to process information. A key piece of supporting evidence comes from recent discoveries of the role of SRGAP2 in the development of the human neocortex. When the distinctly human SRGAP2 variants are missing, normal human brain development is impaired. This research appears in two papers appearing May 3, 2012 in the journal Cell.
    [Show full text]
  • Polleux SRGAP2 Qanda 09-19-16 FINAL
    This Gene May Underpin Our Brain’s Extraordinary Abilities Scientists at Columbia’s Zuckerman Institute have shed light on how a single change to our genome had a significant impact on the evolution of the human brain To say that evolution is complex would be an understatement. But every once in a while, it can also be elegant in its simplicity. In a study published this June in Neuron, Zuckerman Institute Principal Investigator Franck Polleux, PhD, and colleagues described a stunning example of human evolution — one that may have guided the development of the human brain. We spoke with Dr. Polleux, the paper’s co-senior author, about his discovery. What propelled you to study human evolution? I have long been interested in understanding the genetic changes that drove the evolution of the human brain. It’s one of the biggest questions in biology: How did our brains develop the ability to create a piece of music or learn a language? Ultimately, the answers to these questions are encoded in our DNA — we just have to know where to find them. Within the last decade, researchers began to notice peculiarities in the human genome that we found intriguing. We called them human-specific gene duplications. What is a gene duplication? A gene duplication occurs when a single piece of DNA is copied and then inserted elsewhere in the genome. Gene duplications occur in all living organisms. But scientists have recently identified more than 30 gene duplications that are unique to humans. Early on, we speculated that because these particular duplications are found only in the human genome, they might be tied to some of our uniquely human traits — both of brain development and function — that ultimately allow for the emergence of cognitive abilities such creativity, language and problem-solving.
    [Show full text]
  • Palmitic Acid Effects on Hypothalamic Neurons
    bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.08.03.454666; this version posted August 4, 2021. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under aCC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license. Running title: Oleic and palmitic acid effects on hypothalamic neurons Concentration-dependent change in hypothalamic neuronal transcriptome by the dietary fatty acids: oleic and palmitic acids Fabiola Pacheco Valencia1^, Amanda F. Marino1^, Christos Noutsos1, Kinning Poon1* 1Department of Biological Sciences, SUNY Old Westbury, Old Westbury NY, United States ^Authors contributed equally to this work *Corresponding Author: Kinning Poon 223 Store Hill Rd Old Westbury, NY 11568, USA 1-516-876-2735 [email protected] bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.08.03.454666; this version posted August 4, 2021. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under aCC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license. Abstract Prenatal high-fat diet exposure increases hypothalamic neurogenesis events in embryos and programs offspring to be obesity-prone. The molecular mechanism involved in these dietary effects of neurogenesis are unknown. This study investigated the effects of oleic and palmitic acids, which are abundant in a high-fat diet, on the hypothalamic neuronal transcriptome and how these changes impact neurogenesis events. The results show differential effects of low and high concentrations of oleic or palmitic acid treatment on differential gene transcription.
    [Show full text]
  • Genetic Changes Shaping the Human Brain.Pdf
    Developmental Cell Review Genetic Changes Shaping the Human Brain Byoung-Il Bae,1 Divya Jayaraman,1 and Christopher A. Walsh1,* 1Division of Genetics and Genomics, Manton Center for Orphan Disease, and Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Boston Children’s Hospital, Boston, MA 02115, USA; Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Boston, MA 02115, USA; and Departments of Pediatrics and Neurology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115, USA *Correspondence: [email protected] http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.devcel.2015.01.035 The development and function of our brain are governed by a genetic blueprint, which reflects dynamic changes over the history of evolution. Recent progress in genetics and genomics, facilitated by next-gener- ation sequencing and single-cell sorting, has identified numerous genomic loci that are associated with a neuroanatomical or neurobehavioral phenotype. Here, we review some of the genetic changes in both pro- tein-coding and noncoding regions that affect brain development and evolution, as well as recent progress in brain transcriptomics. Understanding these genetic changes may provide novel insights into neurological and neuropsychiatric disorders, such as autism and schizophrenia. All life forms develop, reproduce, and age based on their genetic changes affecting the development and evolution of the human blueprint. The human genetic blueprint is written in approximately neocortex. three billion base pairs (bp) and contains protein-coding genes (estimated at 21,000 or fewer), RNA genes (e.g., microRNAs,
    [Show full text]
  • The Influence of Evolutionary History on Human Health and Disease
    REVIEWS The influence of evolutionary history on human health and disease Mary Lauren Benton 1,2, Abin Abraham3,4, Abigail L. LaBella 5, Patrick Abbot5, Antonis Rokas 1,3,5 and John A. Capra 1,5,6 ✉ Abstract | Nearly all genetic variants that influence disease risk have human-specific origins; however, the systems they influence have ancient roots that often trace back to evolutionary events long before the origin of humans. Here, we review how advances in our understanding of the genetic architectures of diseases, recent human evolution and deep evolutionary history can help explain how and why humans in modern environments become ill. Human populations exhibit differences in the prevalence of many common and rare genetic diseases. These differences are largely the result of the diverse environmental, cultural, demographic and genetic histories of modern human populations. Synthesizing our growing knowledge of evolutionary history with genetic medicine, while accounting for environmental and social factors, will help to achieve the promise of personalized genomics and realize the potential hidden in an individual’s DNA sequence to guide clinical decisions. In short, precision medicine is fundamentally evolutionary medicine, and integration of evolutionary perspectives into the clinic will support the realization of its full potential. Genetic disease is a necessary product of evolution These studies are radically changing our understanding (BOx 1). Fundamental biological systems, such as DNA of the genetic architecture of disease8. It is also now possi- replication, transcription and translation, evolved very ble to extract and sequence ancient DNA from remains early in the history of life. Although these ancient evo- of organisms that are thousands of years old, enabling 1Department of Biomedical lutionary innovations gave rise to cellular life, they also scientists to reconstruct the history of recent human Informatics, Vanderbilt created the potential for disease.
    [Show full text]
  • A Duplicated Gene Shaped Human Brain Evolution… and Why The
    http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2012/05/04/a-duplicated-gene-shaped-human-brain-evolution…-and-why-the-genome-project-mis... « Male water striders evolved antennae to grab females by the eyes Carl Zimmer and me and mutant flu and feathery dinosaurs, oh my! » The Human Genome Project was officially completed in 2003, but our version of the genome is far from truly complete. Scientists are still finishing the last parts, correcting errors in the official sequence, and discovering new genes. These new genes did not go unnoticed because they are useless or insignificant. Some of them may be key players in our evolutionary story. Two groups led by Evan Eichler and Franck Polleux have found that humans, alone among all animals, have three extra copies of a gene called SRGAP2, which is involved in brain development. The second of these copies, SRGAP2C, is particularly interesting because it affects the development of neurons, and produces features that are distinctively human. It also emerged between 2 and 3 million years ago, during the time when our brains became much bigger. Genes are often duplicated by mistake when DNA is copied or shuffled around. These duplications provide raw fuel for fast evolution. Suddenly, genes get back-up copies. Either the original or the duplicate can mutate with impunity and take on new roles. But duplications also cause big problems for scientists who are trying to sequence genomes. Early sequencing attempts relied on ‘shotgun’ techniques that read small fragments of DNA and assembled them into a whole. But this method is blind to genes that have been recently duplicated.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Segmental Duplications and Their Variation in A
    bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.05.26.445678; this version posted May 26, 2021. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under aCC-BY 4.0 International license. SEGMENTAL DUPLICATIONS AND THEIR VARIATION IN A COMPLETE HUMAN GENOME Mitchell R. Vollger1, Xavi Guitart1, Philip C. Dishuck1, Ludovica Mercuri2, William T. Harvey1, Ariel Gershman3, Mark Diekhans4, Arvis Sulovari1, Katherine M. Munson1, Alexandra M. Lewis1, Kendra Hoekzema1, David Porubsky1, Ruiyang Li1, Sergey Nurk5, Sergey Koren5, Karen H. Miga4, Adam M. Phillippy5, Winston Timp3, Mario Ventura2, Evan E. Eichler1,6 1. Department of Genome Sciences, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, USA 2. Department of Biology, University of Bari, Aldo Moro, Bari 70125, Italy 3. Department of Molecular Biology and Genetics, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA 4. UC Santa Cruz Genomics Institute, University of California Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz, CA, USA 5. Genome Informatics Section, Computational and Statistical Genomics Branch, National Human Genome Research Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA 6. Howard Hughes Medical Institute, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA 1 bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.05.26.445678; this version posted May 26, 2021. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under aCC-BY 4.0 International license.
    [Show full text]
  • Branching Out
    Issue 143, October 2012 www.proteinspotlight.org branching out Vivienne Baillie Gerritsen Humans are unique. Whichever way you look at it. We can talk. We can write. We can build skyscrapers, make art, design weapons and be a general nuisance to many other life forms. About 2.5 million years ago however, our ancestors could not. So what happened? Something was needed to modify brain structure and spark off another form of intelligence. Genetic mutations are the answer to this. And natural selection of course. There is a gene, known as SRGAP2, which is found in the brain tissues of humans and our closest relatives – chimpanzees, gorillas and orang-utans. It so happens that SRGAP2 has a duplicate – SRGAP2C – which seems to be found only in humans. SRGAP2C is thought to have appeared at about the time the Homo genus emerged from the ancestral Australopithecus genus, around 2.5 million years ago. This would suggest that SRGAP2C had a pivotal role in forging the human brain, and was engaged in shifting our ancestors’ somewhat rudimentary behaviour to more sophisticated ways. and events which fashioned such an extraordinary and intricate organ, as they track down those that are part of abilities specific to humans – for example FOXP2, without which our faculty of speech would be impeded. It is a known fact in evolutionary geneticists’ circles that mutations such as the duplication of genes provide excellent substrates on which time and natural selection can tango when it comes to human brain development. There are in fact four versions of the SRGAP2 gene in humans – SRGAP2A, B, C and D – all found on the same chromosome and the result of three subsequent duplications of the same original gene.
    [Show full text]
  • Table S1. 103 Ferroptosis-Related Genes Retrieved from the Genecards
    Table S1. 103 ferroptosis-related genes retrieved from the GeneCards. Gene Symbol Description Category GPX4 Glutathione Peroxidase 4 Protein Coding AIFM2 Apoptosis Inducing Factor Mitochondria Associated 2 Protein Coding TP53 Tumor Protein P53 Protein Coding ACSL4 Acyl-CoA Synthetase Long Chain Family Member 4 Protein Coding SLC7A11 Solute Carrier Family 7 Member 11 Protein Coding VDAC2 Voltage Dependent Anion Channel 2 Protein Coding VDAC3 Voltage Dependent Anion Channel 3 Protein Coding ATG5 Autophagy Related 5 Protein Coding ATG7 Autophagy Related 7 Protein Coding NCOA4 Nuclear Receptor Coactivator 4 Protein Coding HMOX1 Heme Oxygenase 1 Protein Coding SLC3A2 Solute Carrier Family 3 Member 2 Protein Coding ALOX15 Arachidonate 15-Lipoxygenase Protein Coding BECN1 Beclin 1 Protein Coding PRKAA1 Protein Kinase AMP-Activated Catalytic Subunit Alpha 1 Protein Coding SAT1 Spermidine/Spermine N1-Acetyltransferase 1 Protein Coding NF2 Neurofibromin 2 Protein Coding YAP1 Yes1 Associated Transcriptional Regulator Protein Coding FTH1 Ferritin Heavy Chain 1 Protein Coding TF Transferrin Protein Coding TFRC Transferrin Receptor Protein Coding FTL Ferritin Light Chain Protein Coding CYBB Cytochrome B-245 Beta Chain Protein Coding GSS Glutathione Synthetase Protein Coding CP Ceruloplasmin Protein Coding PRNP Prion Protein Protein Coding SLC11A2 Solute Carrier Family 11 Member 2 Protein Coding SLC40A1 Solute Carrier Family 40 Member 1 Protein Coding STEAP3 STEAP3 Metalloreductase Protein Coding ACSL1 Acyl-CoA Synthetase Long Chain Family Member 1 Protein
    [Show full text]
  • Integrated Transcriptome and in Vitro Analysis Revealed Anti-Proliferative
    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN Integrated transcriptome and in vitro analysis revealed anti-proliferative efect of citral Received: 26 November 2018 Accepted: 5 March 2019 in human stomach cancer through Published: xx xx xxxx apoptosis Sri Renukadevi Balusamy1, Sivasubramanian Ramani 1, Sathishkumar Natarajan 2, Yeon Ju Kim3 & Haribalan Perumalsamy3 Cancer is the second leading cause of death globally, particularly stomach cancer is third most common causes of cancer death worldwide. Citral possesses anti-tumor activity in various cancer cell lines, However its efect toward stomach cancer and its mechanism of action is have yet to be elucidated. The goal of the present study is to elucidate the role of citral in stomach cancer using transcriptome and in vitro approaches. We performed transcriptome analysis using RNA-seq and explored its capability to persuade apoptosis in AGS human stomach cancer cell lines in vitro. Furthermore, the enrichment and KEGG pathway results suggested that there are several genes involved to induce apoptosis pathway. Furthermore, our study also demonstrated that citral arrested colony formation and migration of cancer cells signifcantly than that of untreated cells. RNA-seq revealed a total of 125 million trimmed reads obtained from both control and citral treated groups respectively. A total number of 612 diferentially expressed genes (DEGs) were identifed which includes 216 genes up-regulated and 396 genes down- regulated genes after treatment. The enrichment analysis identifed DEGs genes from transcriptome libraries including cell death, cell cycle, apoptosis and cell growth. The present study showed the signifcant inhibition efect upon citral by regulating various genes involved in signaling pathways, inhibits metastasis, colony formation and induced apoptosis both in silico and in vitro.
    [Show full text]
  • Pervasive Compartment-Specific Regulation of Gene Expression During Homeostatic Synaptic Scaling
    bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.08.31.274993; this version posted August 31, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder. All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission. Pervasive compartment-specific regulation of gene expression during homeostatic synaptic scaling David Colameo1,7*, Marek Rajman2*#, Michael Soutschek1,7*, Silvia Bicker1,7, Lukas von Ziegler3,7, Johannes Bohacek3,7, Pierre-Luc Germain4, 5, Christoph Dieterich6 and Gerhard Schratt1,7§ 1Lab of Systems Neuroscience, Institute for Neuroscience, Department of Health Science and Technology, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology ETH, 8057 Zurich, Switzerland 2Institute for Physiological Chemistry, Biochemical-Pharmacological Center Marburg, Philipps-University of Marburg, 35032 Marburg, Germany 3Lab of Behavioural and Molecular Neuroscience, Institute for Neuroscience, Department of Health Science and Technology, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology ETH, 8057 Zurich, Switzerland 4Institute for Neuroscience, Department of Health Science and Technology, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology ETH, 8057 Zurich, Switzerland 5Lab of Statistical Bioinformatics, Department of Molecular Life Sciences, University of Zürich, 8057 Zurich, Switzerland 6Section of Bioinformatics and Systems Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine III and Klaus Tschira Institute for Integrative Computational Cardiology, University of Heidelberg, Germany 7Neuroscience Center Zurich, ETH Zurich and University of Zurich, Switzerland # present address: Neuroscience Therapeutic Area, UCB Pharma, Braine l’Alleud, Belgium § corresponding author: [email protected] *equal contribution Keywords: homeostatic plasticity, synaptic scaling, local translation, cellular compartment, RNA-binding protein, microRNA 1 bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.08.31.274993; this version posted August 31, 2020.
    [Show full text]
  • Human Brain Shaped by Duplicate Genes : Nature News & Comment
    http://www.nature.com/news/human-brain-shaped-by-duplicate-genes-1.10584 NATURE | NEWS Multiple copies of a gene may have boosted the computational power of our ancestors' brains. Ewen Callaway 03 May 2012 Humans walk on two feet and (mostly) lack hair-covered bodies, but the feature that sets us furthest apart from other apes is a brain capable of language, art, science, and other trappings of civilisation. Now, two studies published online today in Cell 1, 2 suggest that DNA duplication errors that happened millions of years ago might have had a pivotal role in the evolution of the complexity of the human brain. The duplications — which created new versions of a gene active in the brains of other mammals — may have endowed humans with brains that could create more neuronal connections, perhaps leading to greater computational power. The enzymes that copy DNA sometimes slip extra copies of a gene into a chromosome, and scientists estimate that such genetic replicas make up about 5% of the human genome. However, gene duplications are notoriously difficult to study because the new genes differ little from their forebears, and tend to be overlooked. Evan Eichler, a geneticist at the University of Washington in Seattle, and lead author of one of the Cell papers, previously found that humans have four copies of a gene called SRGAP2, and he and his colleagues decided to investigate. Could duplicated genes explain why you can read this? In their new paper, they report that the three duplicated versions of ANN CUTTING / GETTY IMAGES SRGAP2 sit on chromosome 1, along with the original ancestral gene, but they are not exact copies.
    [Show full text]