Are There Rearrangement Hotspots in the Human Genome?
Open Access
- 9 November 2007
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Public Library of Science (PLoS) in PLoS Computational Biology
- Vol. 3 (11) , e209
- https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.0030209
Abstract
In a landmark paper, Nadeau and Taylor [18] formulated the random breakage model (RBM) of chromosome evolution that postulates that there are no rearrangement hotspots in the human genome. In the next two decades, numerous studies with progressively increasing levels of resolution made RBM the de facto theory of chromosome evolution. Despite the fact that RBM had prophetic prediction power, it was recently refuted by Pevzner and Tesler [4], who introduced the fragile breakage model (FBM), postulating that the human genome is a mosaic of solid regions (with low propensity for rearrangements) and fragile regions (rearrangement hotspots). However, the rebuttal of RBM caused a controversy and led to a split among researchers studying genome evolution. In particular, it remains unclear whether some complex rearrangements (e.g., transpositions) can create an appearance of rearrangement hotspots. We contribute to the ongoing debate by analyzing multi-break rearrangements that break a genome into multiple fragments and further glue them together in a new order. In particular, we demonstrate that (1) even if transpositions were a dominant force in mammalian evolution, the arguments in favor of FBM still stand, and (2) the “gene deletion” argument against FBM is flawed. Rearrangements are genomic “earthquakes” that change the chromosomal architectures. The fundamental question in molecular evolution is whether there exist “chromosomal faults” (rearrangement hotspots) where rearrangements are happening over and over again. The random breakage model (RBM) postulates that rearrangements are “random,” and thus there are no rearrangement hotspots in mammalian genomes. RBM was proposed by Susumo Ohno in 1970 and later was formalized by Nadeau and Taylor in 1984. It was embraced by biologists from the very beginning due to its prophetic prediction power, and only in 2003 was refuted by Pevzner and Tesler, who suggested an alternative fragile breakage model (FBM) of chromosome evolution. However, the rebuttal of RBM caused a controversy, and in 2004, Sankoff and Trinh gave a rebuttal of the rebuttal of RBM. This led to a split among researchers studying chromosome evolution: while most recent studies support the existence of rearrangement hotspots, others feel that further analysis is needed to resolve the validity of RBM. In this paper, we develop a theory for analyzing complex rearrangements (including transpositions) and demonstrate that even if transpositions were a dominant evolutionary force, there are still rearrangement hotspots in mammalian genomes.Keywords
This publication has 48 references indexed in Scilit:
- Genomic regulatory blocks encompass multiple neighboring genes and maintain conserved synteny in vertebratesGenome Research, 2007
- Analysis of segmental duplications reveals a distinct pattern of continuation-of-synteny between human and mouse genomesHuman Genetics, 2006
- Reconstructing contiguous regions of an ancestral genomeGenome Research, 2006
- The Signal in the GenomesPLoS Computational Biology, 2006
- The Fragile Breakage versus Random Breakage Models of Chromosome EvolutionPLoS Computational Biology, 2006
- Comparing DNA Damage-Processing Pathways by Computer Analysis of Chromosome Painting DataJournal of Computational Biology, 2004
- Quantitative analysis of radiation-induced chromosome aberrationsCytogenetic and Genome Research, 2004
- Proof and evolutionary analysis of ancient genome duplication in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiaeNature, 2004
- Efficient algorithms for multichromosomal genome rearrangementsJournal of Computer and System Sciences, 2002
- Signed genome rearrangement by reversals and transpositions: models and approximationsTheoretical Computer Science, 2001