Gene dosage effects: Nonlinearities, genetic interactions, and dosage compensation

Trends in Genetics

Volumn 29, Issue 7, 2013, Pages 385-393

  Veitia, Reiner A ^a,b   Bottani, Samuel ^b,c   Birchler, James A ^d  

^a CNRS   (France)

^b UNIVERSITÉ PARIS DESCARTES   (France)

^c UNIVERSITÉ PARIS DIDEROT   (France)

^d UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI   (United States)

Author keywords

Aneuploidy; Copy number variants; Dosage compensation; Gene expression; Interactome; Whole genome duplication

Indexed keywords

DNA; MESSENGER RNA; TRANSCRIPTION FACTOR;

ALLELIC IMBALANCE; ARTICLE; CHEMICAL INTERACTION; COMPLEX FORMATION; DNA SEQUENCE; GENE DOSAGE; GENE EXPRESSION; GENE INTERACTION; GENE MUTATION; GENE PRODUCT; GENETIC TRANSCRIPTION; GENOTYPE PHENOTYPE CORRELATION; HEART MUSCLE OXYGEN CONSUMPTION; HEREDITY; HUMAN; INHERITANCE; MACROMOLECULE; MATHEMATICAL MODEL; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN CONTENT; PROTEIN DEGRADATION;

EID: 84879601595     PISSN: 01689525     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tig.2013.04.004     Document Type: Review

References (56)

1. Gonzaga-Jauregui C., et al. Human genome sequencing in health and disease. Annu. Rev. Med. 2012, 63:35-61.
2. Ng S.B., et al. Targeted capture and massively parallel sequencing of 12 human exomes. Nature 2009, 461:272-276.
3. Abecasis G.R., et al. A map of human genome variation from population-scale sequencing. Nature 2010, 467:1061-1073.
4. Wilkie A.O. The molecular basis of genetic dominance. J. Med. Genet. 1994, 31:89-98.
5. Herskowitz I. Functional inactivation of genes by dominant negative mutations. Nature 1987, 329:219-222.
6. Veitia R.A. Exploring the etiology of haploinsufficiency. Bioessays 2002, 24:175-184.
7. Stearns T., Botstein D. Unlinked noncomplementation: isolation of new conditional-lethal mutations in each of the tubulin genes of Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Genetics 1988, 119:249-260.
8. Ming J.E., Muenke M. Multiple hits during early embryonic development: digenic diseases and holoprosencephaly. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 2002, 71:1017-1032.
9. Badano J.L., et al. Dissection of epistasis in oligogenic Bardet-Biedl syndrome. Nature 2006, 439:326-330.
10. Torres E.M., et al. Aneuploidy: cells losing their balance. Genetics 2008, 179:737-746.
11. Birchler J.A., Veitia R.A. Gene balance hypothesis: connecting issues of dosage sensitivity across biological disciplines. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2012, 109:14746-14753.
12. Jansen R., et al. Relating whole-genome expression data with protein-protein interactions. Genome Res. 2002, 12:37-46.
13. Ettwiller L., Veitia R.A. Protein coevolution and isoexpression in yeast macromolecular complexes. Comp. Funct. Genomics 2007, 10.1155/2007/58721.
14. Hogan D.J., et al. Diverse RNA-binding proteins interact with functionally related sets of RNAs, suggesting an extensive regulatory system. PLoS Biol. 2008, 6:e255.
15. Keene J.D., Tenenbaum S.A. Eukaryotic mRNPs may represent posttranscriptional operons. Mol. Cell 2002, 9:1161-1167.
16. Veitia R.A. A generalized model of gene dosage and dominant negative effects in macromolecular complexes. FASEB J. 2010, 24:994-1002.
17. Dobzhansky T. Genetics of natural populations. Xiii. Recombination and variability in populations of Drosophila pseudoobscura. Genetics 1946, 31:269-290.
18. Veitia R.A. Paralogs in polyploids: one for all and all for one?. Plant Cell 2005, 17:4-11.
19. Gibson T.J., Spring J. Genetic redundancy in vertebrates: polyploidy and persistence of genes encoding multidomain proteins. Trends Genet. 1998, 14:46-49. discussion 49-50.
20. Thomas B.C., et al. Following tetraploidy in an Arabidopsis ancestor, genes were removed preferentially from one homeolog leaving clusters enriched in dose-sensitive genes. Genome Res. 2006, 16:934-946.
21. Pérez-Pérez J.M., et al. Understanding synergy in genetic interactions. Trends Genet. 2009, 25:368-376.
22. Rapp R.A., et al. Genomic expression dominance in allopolyploids. BMC Biol. 2009, 7:18.
23. Schnable J.C., et al. Differentiation of the maize subgenomes by genome dominance and both ancient and ongoing gene loss. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2011, 108:4069-4074.
24. Del Castillo I., et al. A deletion involving the connexin 30 gene in nonsyndromic hearing impairment. N. Engl. J. Med. 2002, 346:243-249.
25. Suda Y., et al. Functional equivalency between Otx2 and Otx1 in development of the rostral head. Development 1999, 126:743-757.
26. Simeone A., et al. The Otx family. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 2002, 12:409-415.
27. Chakraborty D., et al. Outer segment oligomerization of Rds: evidence from mouse models and subcellular fractionation. Biochemistry 2008, 47:1144-1156.
28. Kajiwara K., et al. Digenic retinitis pigmentosa due to mutations at the unlinked peripherin/RDS and ROM1 loci. Science 1994, 264:1604-1608.
29. Lage K., et al. A human phenome-interactome network of protein complexes implicated in genetic disorders. Nat. Biotechnol. 2007, 25:309-316.
30. Oberdorf R., Kortemme T. Complex topology rather than complex membership is a determinant of protein dosage sensitivity. Mol. Syst. Biol. 2009, 5:253.
31. Birchler J.A. A study of enzyme activities in a dosage series of the long arm of chromosome one in maize. Genetics 1979, 92:1211-1229.
32. Guo M., Birchler J.A. Trans-acting dosage effects on the expression of model gene systems in maize aneuploids. Science 1994, 266:1999-2002.
33. Veitia R.A., et al. Cellular reactions to gene dosage imbalance: genomic, transcriptomic and proteomic effects. Trends Genet. 2008, 24:390-397.
34. Birchler J.A. The genetic basis of dosage compensation of alcohol dehydrogenase-1 in maize. Genetics 1981, 97:625-637.
35. Birchler J.A., et al. Analysis of autosomal dosage compensation involving the alcohol dehydrogenase locus in Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics 1990, 124:679-686.
36. Veitia R.A. Nonlinear effects in macromolecular assembly and dosage sensitivity. J. Theor. Biol. 2003, 220:19-25.
37. Lee T-H., Maheshri N. A regulatory role for repeated decoy transcription factor binding sites in target gene expression. Mol. Syst. Biol. 2012, 8:576.
38. Schnable J.C., et al. Dose-sensitivity, conserved non-coding sequences, and duplicate gene retention through multiple tetraploidies in the grasses. Front. Plant Sci. 2011, 2:2.
39. Birchler J.A., Veitia R.A. Protein-protein and protein-DNA dosage balance and differential paralog transcription factor retention in polyploids. Front. Plant Sci. 2011, 2:64.
40. Kervestin S., Jacobson A. NMD: a multifaceted response to premature translational termination. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2012, 13:700-712.
41. Malone J.H., et al. Mediation of Drosophila autosomal dosage effects and compensation by network interactions. Genome Biol. 2012, 13:r28.
42. Stenberg P., Larsson J. Buffering and the evolution of chromosome-wide gene regulation. Chromosoma 2011, 120:213-225.
43. Kimura T., et al. Stabilization of human interferon-α1 mRNA by its antisense RNA. Cell. Mol. Life Sci. 2012, 10.1007/s00018-012-1216-x.
44. Stingele S., et al. Global analysis of genome, transcriptome and proteome reveals the response to aneuploidy in human cells. Mol. Syst. Biol. 2012, 8:608.
45. Jordan D.M., et al. Human allelic variation: perspective from protein function, structure, and evolution. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 2010, 20:342-350.
46. Veitia R.A. A sigmoidal transcriptional response: cooperativity, synergy and dosage effects. Biol. Rev. Camb. Philos. Soc. 2003, 78:149-170.
47. Ferrell J.E. How responses get more switch-like as you move down a protein kinase cascade. Trends Biochem. Sci. 1997, 22:288-289.
48. Knudson A.G. Mutation and cancer: statistical study of retinoblastoma. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1971, 68:820-823.
49. Wright S. Physiological and evolutionary theories of dominance. Am. Nat. 1934, 68:24-53.
50. Perry M.W., et al. Precision of hunchback expression in the Drosophila embryo. Curr. Biol. 2012, 22:2247-2252.
51. Bleris L., et al. Synthetic incoherent feedforward circuits show adaptation to the amount of their genetic template. Mol. Syst. Biol. 2011, 7:519.
52. McAnally A.A., Yampolsky L.Y. Widespread transcriptional autosomal dosage compensation in Drosophila correlates with gene expression level. Genome Biol. Evol. 2010, 2:44-52.
53. Gupta V., et al. Global analysis of X-chromosome dosage compensation. J. Biol. 2006, 5:3.
54. Kühl P.W., Jobmann M. Receptor-agonist interactions in service-theoretic perspective, effects of molecular timing on the shape of dose-response curves. J. Recept. Signal Transduct. Res. 2006, 26:1-34.
55. Bisswanger H. Enzyme Kinetics: Principles and Methods 2002, Wiley.
56. Yang E., et al. Decay rates of human mRNAs: correlation with functional characteristics and sequence attributes. Genome Res. 2003, 13:1863-1872.