Keywords
Increasing Functional Variation hypothesis, Maximum Genetic Diversity theory, Neutral theory, Evolution, Genome architecture, Gene regulation
Increasing Functional Variation hypothesis, Maximum Genetic Diversity theory, Neutral theory, Evolution, Genome architecture, Gene regulation
The structure and function of the genome have been a major question that all researchers want to solve. The current popular view of the genomic structure is represented by the neutral theory. The neutral theory states that the majority of the genome is variable and neutral1. The variable property of these genomic regions would not change as the complexity of species increases (Figure 1).
While the neutral theory and MGD theory analyze genome structure as bipartite, the IFV hypothesis adds an additional region which is the variable and functional gene regulatory region. As species complexity increases, the variable region of the genome would stay as variable according to neutral theory. While in MGD theory, as species complexity increases there would be less variable region. Unlike MGD theory, IFV hypothesis states that the functional variable region which contains gene regulatory elements would also increase with species complexity.
While in recent years, another theory called Maximum Genetic Diversity (MGD) provided unprecedented insights into the genome structure2–5. The MGD theory originated from blasting some conserved proteins such as cytochrome C and hemoglobin of different species. By computing the changeable sites of each species3, Huang found that more complex species have less changeable sites in certain regions of the genome. Thus, MGD theory states that as the complexity of species increases, the genome would have more invariable regions and less variable regions (Figure 1).
Here we proposed the Increasing Functional Variation (IFV) hypothesis inspired by both the MGD theory2 and our recent work on human genome architecture6. Recently, based on co-localization of various genomic features we divided the human genome into three parts, referred to as gene enriched (Genic) zones, gene regulatory elements enriched (Proximal) zones and non-functional features enriched (Distal) zones6. We regard the Genic zones as mainly functional and invariable, and the Distal zones as mainly non-functional and variable. The Proximal zones that compose 31% of human genome contain the majority of gene regulatory elements including transcriptional factor binding sites (TFBSs) and are at the same time enriched with conserved indels. These features make Proximal zones functional and variable. It has been proven that as the complexity of species increase, there would be more gene regulatory region in the genome. Based on these two points, we propose that as the complexity of species increases, this variable part of the genome which contains functional regulatory elements would also increase. We call it the Increasing Functional Variation (IFV) hypothesis. Besides the variable gene regulatory region, the other part of the genome can be divided into two parts, the functional and invariable region and the non-functional and variable region. The alteration of these two parts with species complexity can be explained by MGD theory (Figure 1). What the MGD theory lacks and IVF hypothesis complements is the existence of the variable and functional gene regulatory region in the genome. And according to the IFV hypothesis, as species complexity increases, the variable part of the genome would not simply decrease as stated by MGD theory. The differences between IVF hypothesis and MGD theory have been illustrated in Table 1.
MGD theory has refuted the idea stated by the neutral theory that the majority of the genome is neutral and variable among all species. Instead, it proved that the variable region of the genome would decrease as species become more complex.
However, MGD theory has its own limitation as pointed out by Ho shortly after the publication of MGD. As Ho has mentioned in her book7, more complex species have more sequence diversity, which is needed for precise regulation of local somatic expression. Ho also stated that although MGD theory solved the paradoxes in molecular evolution, the diversity of complex species at somatic level can’t be explained by it. Our recent study6 on human genome architecture discovered not only variable but also functional regions of the human genome. In an attempt to provide a more comprehensive view of genome structure and molecular evolution, we developed the IFV hypothesis based on our discovery of the variable property of the gene regulatory region.
Why would we develop this tripartite model of genome architecture across all species? As the ancient Chinese philosopher Lao Tzu stated in Tao Te Ching thousands of years ago that “three engenders the myriad things”, which means “three” is the root of all things. If the truth of the universe is universal, we believe that the consistency between our tripartite genome architecture of all species and Lao Tzu’s philosophical thinking is not a coincidence.
MPL & TBH are recipients of MD-PhD scholarship from Hong Kong University of Science and Technology. This work was supported by the grant to TBH from Central South University, China (2282013bks118).
I confirm that the funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Views | Downloads | |
---|---|---|
F1000Research | - | - |
PubMed Central
Data from PMC are received and updated monthly.
|
- | - |
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.
Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article:
Invited Reviewers | |||
---|---|---|---|
1 | 2 | 3 | |
Version 1 19 Feb 16 |
read | read | read |
Provide sufficient details of any financial or non-financial competing interests to enable users to assess whether your comments might lead a reasonable person to question your impartiality. Consider the following examples, but note that this is not an exhaustive list:
Sign up for content alerts and receive a weekly or monthly email with all newly published articles
Already registered? Sign in
The email address should be the one you originally registered with F1000.
You registered with F1000 via Google, so we cannot reset your password.
To sign in, please click here.
If you still need help with your Google account password, please click here.
You registered with F1000 via Facebook, so we cannot reset your password.
To sign in, please click here.
If you still need help with your Facebook account password, please click here.
If your email address is registered with us, we will email you instructions to reset your password.
If you think you should have received this email but it has not arrived, please check your spam filters and/or contact for further assistance.
Comments on this article Comments (0)