نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 دانشجوی دکتری، گروه علوم دامی، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه زابل، زابل، ایران
2 دانشیار ژنتیک و اصلاح دام، گروه علوم دامی،دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه زابل
3 استادیار،بخش پژوهش‌های بیوتکنولوژی،موسسه تحقیقات علوم دامی کشور،سازمان تحقیقات،آموزش و ترویج کشاورزی،کرج،ایران
4 دانشیار، گروه علوم دامی،دانشکده کشاورزی،دانشگاه زابل،زابل،ایران
چکیده
هدف از پژوهش حاضر، بررسی الگوی ترجیح کدونی و ارتباط آن‌ها با بیان ژن برای ژن‌های با بیان متفاوت در بین نژادهای خالص و آمیخته سیستانی و مونت‌بیلیارد بود. در این مطالعه، از نتایج تجزیه بیان ژن افتراقی با استفاده از فن‌آوری RNA-Seq مربوط به نژادهای خالص و آمیخته سیستانی و مونت‌بیلیارد (دو تیمار و هر تیمار دو تکرار بیولوژیک) استفاده شد. به همین منظور پس از تعیین نواحی ORF برای این ژن‌ها، از نرم‌افزار CodonW جهت برآورد شاخص‌های الگوی ترجیح کدونی ازجمله CAI، ENC، GC و GC3s استفاده شد. تجزیه ترجیح کدونی برای نواحی ORF ژن‌های با بیان متفاوت، وجود همبستگی بالا و معنی‌داری (0/74) بین مقادیر شاخص GC کل و GC3s نشان داد. هم‌چنین همبستگی بالا و معنی‌داری بین مقادیر ENC با GC کل و GC3sTو (0/65و0/77) مشاهده شد که نشان‌دهنده‌ی نقش جهش در شکل‌گیری کدون‌ها می‌باشد. بر اساس نتایج بدست آمده در این پژوهش، عواملی ازجمله مقدار GC، جهش و سطح بیان ژن نقش مهمی در شکل‌گیری کدون‌ها در ژن‌های موردمطالعه در این تحقیق داشتند. این مطالعه اولین مقایسه بین گاوهای خالص و آمیخته سیستانی و مونت‌بیلیارد می‌باشد که به درک بهتر ساز وکارهای تکاملی شکل‌گیری الگوی ترجیح کدونی و نیز بررسی ارتباط آن با بیان ژن کمک می‌کند.
کلیدواژه‌ها
عنوان مقاله [English]
Evaluation of Codon usage pattern and its relation with differentially expressed genes between two populations of purebred and crossbreed Sistani and Montbeliarde cows
نویسندگان [English]
- batol asghari esfedan 1
- Gholam Dashab 2
- mohammadhossein banabazi 3
- mohammad Rokouei 4
1
2 Associate Professor of Animal Breeding and Genetic, Department of Animal Science, University of Zabol, Zabol, Iran
3 Assistant Professor, Department of Biotechnology, Animal Science Research Institute of IRAN (ASIR), Agriculture Research, Education and Extension Organization (AREEO), Karaj, Iran
4 2 Associate Professor, Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Zabol, Zabol, Iran
چکیده [English]
The aim of the present study was to investigate the codon usage pattern and their relationship with gene expression for genes with different expression between pure and crossbreed Sistani and Montbeliared breed. In this study, the results of differential gene expression analysis using RNA-Seq technology between pure and crossbreed Sistani and Montbeliared breed (two pure and two its crossbreed) were used. For this purpose, after determining the ORF regions for these genes, CodonW software was used to estimate codon usage pattern indices including CAI, ENC, GC and GC3s. Results showed that there was a significant correlation between total GC and GC3s (0.74). There was also a significant correlation between ENC and GC and GC3s (0.65, 0.77), indicating the role of mutation in codon formation. Based on the results of this study, the factors such as nucleotide composition (GC content), mutation, and gene expression level played important roles in codon formation in the genes studied in this study. This study is the first comparison between pure and crossbreed Sistani and Monti-billiard samples, which helps to better understand the evolutionary mechanisms of codon usage pattern formation and its association with gene expression.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
- Codon usage pattern
- Crossbreed of Sistani and Montbeliarde Cow
- Differential expression gene (DEG)
- RNA-Seq
- Sistani cow
2. Brandis G and Hughes D (2016) The selective advantage of synonymous codon usage bias in Salmonella. PLoS Genetics, 12: e926-1005.
3. Bulmer M (1991) The selection-mutation-drift theory of synonymous codon usage. Genetics, 129: 897-907.
4. Hajjari M, Sadeghi I, Salavaty A, Nasiri H and Birgani MT (2016) Tissue specific expression
levels of apoptosis involved genes have correlations with codon and amino acid usage. Genomics and Informatics, 14: 234.
5. Hasanzadeh S, Askari H and Sadeghnejad E (2011) Relationship between codon usage and gene expression. (in Persian)
6. Hiraoka Y, Kawamata K, Haraguchi T and Chikashige Y (2009) Codon usage bias is correlated with gene expression levels in the fission yeast Schizosaccharomyces pombe. Genes to Cells, 14: 499-509.
7. Jalali P, Rahimi Mianji GH, Gholizadeh M, Pakdin Pariz A (2018) Codon usage deviations and bioinformatics analysis of encoding sequence of Calpastatin gene in some mammalian species. J. of Ruminant Research, 6: 3. (in Persian)
8. Kurland C (1991) Codon bias and gene expression. FEBS Letters, 285: 165-169.
9. Lesecque Y, Mouchiroud D and Duret L (2013) GC-biased gene conversion in yeast is specifically associated with crossovers: molecular mechanisms and evolutionary significance. Molecular Biology and Evolution, 30: 1409-1419.
10. Misawa K and Kikuno RF (2011) Relationship between amino acid composition and gene expression in the mouse genome. BMC Research Notes, 20: 4.
11. Makedonka M, Michael CW, John M, Todd W, Yong Y, Allan L, John P, Robert HW, James PM(2006) Codon usage patterns in Nematoda: analysis based on over 25 million codons in thirty-two species. Genome Biology, 7(8): R75.
12. Novoa EM, Pavon-Eternod M, Pan T, de Pouplana LR (2012) A role for tRNA modifications in genome structure and codon usage. Cell, 149: 202-213.
13. Pasandideh M, Mohammadabadi M, Esmailizadeh A and Tarang A (2015) Association of bovine PPARGC1A and OPN genes with milk production and composition in Holstein cattle. Czech Journal of Animal Science, 60: 97-104.
14. Plotkin JB and Kudla G (2011) Synonymous but not the same: the causes and consequences of codon bias. Nature Reviews Genetics, 12: 32.
15. Sahoo S, Das SS and Rakshit R (2019) Codon usage pattern and predicted gene expression in Arabidopsis thaliana. Gene, X2:100012.
16. Sharp PM and Li WH (1986) An evolutionary perspective on synonymous codon usage in unicellular organisms. Journal of Molecular Evolution, 24: 28-38.
17. Stenico M, Lloyd AT and Sharp PM (1994) Codon usage in Caenorhabditis elegans: delineation of translational selection and mutational biases. Nucleic Acids Research, 22: 2437-2446.
18. Sueoka N and Kawanishi Y (2000) DNA G+ C content of the third codon position and codon usage biases of human genes. Gene, 261: 53-62.
19. Wei Y, Wang J and Xia X (2016) Coevolution between stop codon usage and release factors in bacterial species. J. Mol. Biol. Evol. 33-9: 2357-2367.
20. Wright F (1990) The ‘effective number of codons’ used in a gene. Gene, 87: 23-29.
21. Wu Y, Zhao D and Tao J (2015) Analysis of codon usage patterns in herbaceous peony (Paeonia lactiflora Pall) based on transcriptome data. Genes, 6:1125-1139.
22. Yang X, Luo X and Cai X (2014) Analysis of codon usage pattern in Taenia saginata based on a transcriptome dataset. Parasites and Vectors, 7: 527.
)