bioRxivGenomicsPreprint
Sequence features do not drive karyotypic evolution: what are the missing correlates of genome evolution?
Thomas D. BrekkeiD, Alexander S. T. PapadopulosiD, Martin SwainiD, John F. MulleyiD
Abstract
Genome rearrangements are prevalent across the tree of life and even within species. After two decades of research, various suggestions have been proposed to explain which features of the genome are associated with rearrangements and the breakpoints between rearranged regions. These include: recombination rate, GC content, repetitive DNA content, gene density, and markers of chromatin conformation. Here, we use a set of six aligned rodent genomes to identify regions that have not been rearranged and characterize the breakpoint regions where rearrangements have occurred. We found no strong support for any of the expected correlations between breakpoint regions and a variety of genomic features previously identified. These results call into question the utility and repeatability of identifying chromatin characteristics associated with rearranged regions of the genome and suggest that perhaps a different explanation is in order. We analyzed rates of karyotypic evolution in each of the six lineages and found that the Mongolian gerbil genome has had the most rearrangements. That gerbils exhibit very rapid sequence evolution at a number of key DNA repair genes suggests an alternative hypothesis for patterns of genome rearrangement: karyotypic evolution may be driven by variation at a few genes that control the repair pathway used to fix double-stranded DNA breaks. Such variation may explain the heterogeneity in the rates of karyotypic evolution across species. While currently only supported by circumstantial evidence, a systematic survey of this hypothesis is now warranted.
- organism: mouse
- assay: whole-genome sequencing
- research focus: benchmarking
- approach: statistical model
- Citations
- 0
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- The genomic false shuffle: epigenetic maintenance of topological domains in the rearranged gibbon genome
Nathan H. Lazar, Kimberly A. Nevonen, … Lucia Carbone·Genome ResearchPeer-reviewed·Jul 1, 2018
- Topological mixing and irreversibility in animal chromosome evolution
Darrin T. Schultz, Arno Blümel, … Oleg Simakov·Science AdvancesPeer-reviewed·Aug 19, 2026
- A chromosome-assigned Mongolian gerbil genome with sequenced centromeres provides evidence of a new chromosome
Thomas D. Brekke, Alexander S. T. Papadopulos, … John F. Mulley·bioRxiv·Sep 21, 2022
- 338 coleopteran genomes reveal exceptional rearrangement variation compared to other insect orders
Arif Maulana, Aleksandra Bliznina, … Joana I. Meier·bioRxiv·Jul 22, 2026
- Shift and adapt: the costs and benefits of karyotype variations
Aleeza C Gerstein, Judith Berman·bioRxiv·Aug 20, 2015
- Repeat associated mechanisms of genome evolution and function revealed by the Mus caroli and Mus pahari genomes
David Thybert, Maša Roller, … Paul Flicek·Genome ResearchPeer-reviewed·Apr 1, 2018