Comparative analysis of processed pseudogenes in the mouse and human genomes

Trends in Genetics

Volumn 20, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 62-67

  Zhang, Zhaolei ^a   Carriero, Nick ^b   Gerstein, Mark ^a,b  

^a YALE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b Yale University   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

RIBOSOME PROTEIN;

AGE; CELL LINEAGE; CHROMOSOME; COMPARATIVE STUDY; GENE EXPRESSION; GENE IDENTIFICATION; GENETIC VARIABILITY; GENOME; GENOME ANALYSIS; GENOMICS; GERM LINE; HOUSEKEEPING GENE; HUMAN; HUMAN GENOME; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN PROCESSING; PSEUDOGENE; REVIEW;

MAMMALIA;

EID: 1642473033     PISSN: 01689525     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tig.2003.12.005     Document Type: Short Survey

References (36)

1. Mighell A.J., et al. Vertebrate pseudogenes. FEBS Lett. 468:2000;109-114.
2. Maestre J., et al. mRNA retroposition in human cells: processed pseudogene formation. EMBO J. 14:1995;6333-6338.
3. Feng Q., et al. Human L1 retrotransposon encodes a conserved endonuclease required for retrotransposition. Cell. 87:1996;905-916.
4. Esnault C., et al. Human LINE retrotransposons generate processed pseudogenes. Nat. Genet. 24:2000;363-367.
5. Petrov D.A., et al. High intrinsic rate of DNA loss in Drosophila. Nature. 384:1996;346-349.
6. Petrov D.A., et al. Evidence for DNA loss as a determinant of genome size. Science. 287:2000;1060-1062.
7. Zhang Z., Gerstein M. The human genome has 49 cytochrome c pseudogenes, including a relic of a primordial gene that still functions in mouse. Gene. 312:2003;61-72.
8. Zhang Z., Gerstein M. Patterns of nucleotide substitution, insertion and deletion in the human genome inferred from pseudogenes. Nucleic Acids Res. 31:2003;5338-5348.
9. Guo N., et al. The human ortholog of rhesus mannose-binding protein-A gene is an expressed pseudogene that localizes to chromosome 10. Mamm. Genome. 9:1998;246-249.
10. Ruud P., et al. Identification of a novel cytokeratin 19 pseudogene that may interfere with reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction assays used to detect micrometastatic tumor cells. Int. J. Cancer. 80:1999;119-125.
11. Mounsey A., et al. Evidence suggesting that a fifth of annotated Caenorhabditis elegans genes may be pseudogenes. Genome Res. 12:2002;770-775.
12. Harrison P.M., et al. Digging for dead genes: an analysis of the characteristics of the pseudogene population in the Caenorhabditis elegans genome. Nucleic Acids Res. 29:2001;818-830.
13. Harrison P., et al. A small reservoir of disabled ORFs in the yeast genome and its implications for the dynamics of proteome evolution. J. Mol. Biol. 316:2002;409-419.
14. Harrison P.M., et al. Molecular fossils in the human genome: identification and analysis of processed and non-processed pseudogenes in chromosomes 21 and 22. Genome Res. 12:2002;272-280.
15. Harrison P.M., et al. Identification of pseudogenes in the drosophila melanogaster genome. Nucleic Acids Res. 31:2003;1033-1037.
16. Homma K., et al. A systematic investigation identifies a significant number of probable pseudogenes in the Escherichia coli genome. Gene. 294:2002;25-33.
17. Cole S.T., et al. Massive gene decay in the leprosy bacillus. Nature. 409:2001;1007-1011.
18. Zhang Z., et al. Identification and analysis of over 2000 ribosomal protein pseudogenes in the human genome. Genome Res. 12:2002;1466-1482.
19. Zhang Z., et al. Millions of years of evolution preserved: a comprehensive catalogue of the processed pseudogenes in the human genome. Genome Res. 13:2003;2541-2558.
20. Birney E., et al. Mining the draft human genome. Nature. 409:2001;827-828.
21. Hubbard T., et al. The Ensembl genome database project. Nucleic Acids Res. 30:2002;38-41.
22. Boeckmann B., et al. The SWISS-PROT protein knowledgebase and its supplement TrEMBL in 2003. Nucleic Acids Res. 31:2003;365-370.
23. Wool I.G., et al. Structure and evolution of mammalian ribosomal proteins. Biochem. Cell Biol. 73:1995;933-947.
24. Glusman G., et al. The complete human olfactory subgenome. Genome Res. 11:2001;685-702.
25. Woischnik M., Moraes C.T. Pattern of organization of human mitochondrial pseudogenes in the nuclear genome. Genome Res. 12:2002;885-893.
26. Tourmen Y., et al. Structure and chromosomal distribution of human mitochondrial pseudogenes. Genomics. 80:2002;71-77.
27. Graur D., et al. Deletions in processed pseudogenes accumulate faster in rodents than in humans. J. Mol. Evol. 28:1989;279-285.
28. Waterston R.H., et al. Initial sequencing and comparative analysis of the mouse genome. Nature. 420:2002;520-562.
29. Jurka J. Sequence patterns indicate an enzymatic involvement in integration of mammalian retroposons. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 94:1997;1872-1877.
30. Initial sequencing and analysis of the human genome. Nature. 409:2001;860-921.
31. Pavlicek A., et al. Similar integration but different stability of Alus and LINEs in the human genome. Gene. 276:2001;39-45.
32. Kent W.J., et al. The human genome browser at UCSC. Genome Res. 12:2002;996-1006.
33. Goncalves I., et al. Nature and structure of human genes that generate retropseudogenes. Genome Res. 10:2000;672-678.
34. Ashburner M., et al. Gene ontology: tool for the unification of biology. The gene ontology consortium. Nat. Genet. 25:2000;25-29.
35. Kimura M. A simple method for estimating evolutionary rates of base substitutions through comparative studies of nucleotide sequences. J. Mol. Evol. 16:1980;111-120.
36. Wu C.I., Li W.H. Evidence for higher rates of nucleotide substitution in rodents than in man. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 82:1985;1741-1745.