Phylogenetic tests of the hypothesis of block duplication of homologous genes on human chromosomes 6, 9, and 1

92Citations
Citations of this article
35Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

There are 10 gene families that have members on both human chromosome 6 (6p21.3, the location of the human major histocompatibility complex [MHC]) and human chromosome 9 (mostly 9q33-34). Six of these families also have members on mouse chromosome 17 (the mouse MHC chromosome) and mouse chromosome 2. In addition, four of these families have members on human chromosome 1 (1q21-25 and 1p13), and two of these have members on mouse chromosome 1. One hypothesis to explain these patterns is that members of the 10 gene families of human chromosomes 6 and 9 were duplicated simultaneously as a result of polyploidization or duplication of a chromosome segment ('block duplication'). A subsequent block duplication has been proposed to account for the presence of representatives of four of these families on human chromosome 1. Phylogenetic analyses of the 9 gene families for which data were available decisively rejected the hypothesis of block duplication as an overall explanation of these patterns. Three to five of the genes on human chromosomes 6 and 9 probably duplicated simultaneously early in vertebrate history, prior to the divergence of jawed and jawless vertebrates, and shortly after that, all four of the genes on chromosomes 1 and 9 probably duplicated as a block. However, the other genes duplicated at different times scattered over at least 1.6 billion years. Since the occurrence of these clusters of related genes cannot be explained by block duplication, one alternative explanation is that they cluster together because of shared functional characteristics relating to expression patterns.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Hughes, A. L. (1998). Phylogenetic tests of the hypothesis of block duplication of homologous genes on human chromosomes 6, 9, and 1. Molecular Biology and Evolution, 15(7), 854–870. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a025990

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free