Article

Genome sequence of the Brown Norway rat yields insights into mammalian evolution.

Human Genome Sequencing Center, Department of Molecular and Human Genetics, Baylor College of Medicine, MS BCM226, One Baylor Plaza, Houston, Texas 77030, USA <http://www.hgsc.bcm.tmc.edu>.
Nature (Impact Factor: 42.35). 05/2004; 428(6982):493-521. DOI: 10.1038/nature02426
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The laboratory rat (Rattus norvegicus) is an indispensable tool in experimental medicine and drug development, having made inestimable contributions to human health. We report here the genome sequence of the Brown Norway (BN) rat strain. The sequence represents a high-quality 'draft' covering over 90% of the genome. The BN rat sequence is the third complete mammalian genome to be deciphered, and three-way comparisons with the human and mouse genomes resolve details of mammalian evolution. This first comprehensive analysis includes genes and proteins and their relation to human disease, repeated sequences, comparative genome-wide studies of mammalian orthologous chromosomal regions and rearrangement breakpoints, reconstruction of ancestral karyotypes and the events leading to existing species, rates of variation, and lineage-specific and lineage-independent evolutionary events such as expansion of gene families, orthology relations and protein evolution.

Full-text

Available from: Austin Cooney, Apr 21, 2015
4 Followers
 · 
309 Views
  • Source
    Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience 02/2015; 9. DOI:10.3389/fnint.2015.00005
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Lipoprotein lipase (LPL) is a key enzyme in lipid metabolism and is transported by glycosylphosphatidylinositol-anchored high-density lipoprotein-binding protein 1 (GPIHBP1) from the interstitial spaces to the capillary lumen. Here, we cloned a cDNA and the genomic locus of the porcine GPIHBP1 gene, and investigated its tissue expression pattern and its genetic effects on adipose traits. Porcine GPIHBP1 exhibits a four-exon/three-intron structure, including a 543bp open reading frame that encodes 180 amino acids. The porcine GPIHBP1 protein shows 49%-65% homology and shares the major conserved structural domains of GPIHBP1 proteins in other mammals. Porcine GPIHBP1 mRNA levels were high in the adipose tissue, muscle and lung, and higher mRNA levels were observed in sows compared to boars in adipose tissues of the inner and outer layers of subcutaneous fat, abdominal fat, and suet fat. The mRNA expression pattern of porcine GPIHBP1 and LPL genes was similar in most tissues except for the lung. Thirty six single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were found in the porcine GPIHBP1 gene. Association analyses showed that the g.-255G>C and g.-626T>G SNPs are associated with intramuscular fat content, and that the g.-1557T>C and g.-1948G>A SNPs are associated with back fat thickness. In conclusion, porcine GPIHBP1 mRNA is abundantly expressed in the adipose tissue, muscle and lung, and gender affects GPIHBP1 mRNA expression levels; furthermore, four GPIHBP1 SNPs are genetic factors affecting adipose traits. Copyright © 2014. Published by Elsevier B.V.
    Gene 12/2014; 557(2). DOI:10.1016/j.gene.2014.12.017 · 2.08 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Criteria for the evaluation of most scholars' work have recently received wider attention due to high-profile cases of scientific misconduct which are perceived to be linked to these criteria. However, in the competition for career advancement and funding opportunities almost all scholars are subjected to the same criteria. Therefore these evaluation criteria act as 'switchmen', determining the tracks along which scholarly work is pushed by the dynamic interplay of interests of both scholars and their institutions. Currently one of the most important criteria is the impact of publications. In this research, the extent to which publish or perish, a long standing evaluation criterion, led to scientific misconduct is examined briefly. After this the strive for high impact publications will be examined, firstly by identifying the period in which this became an important evaluation criterion, secondly by looking at variables contributing to the impact of scholarly papers by means of a non-structured literature study, and lastly by combining these data into a quantitative analysis.
    Science and Engineering Ethics 03/2015; DOI:10.1007/s11948-015-9638-0 · 1.52 Impact Factor