↓ Skip to main content

Global expression differences and tissue specific expression differences in rice evolution result in two contrasting types of differentially expressed genes

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Genomics, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
15 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Global expression differences and tissue specific expression differences in rice evolution result in two contrasting types of differentially expressed genes
Published in
BMC Genomics, December 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12864-015-2319-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Youko Horiuchi, Yoshiaki Harushima, Hironori Fujisawa, Takako Mochizuki, Masahiro Fujita, Hajime Ohyanagi, Nori Kurata

Abstract

Since the development of transcriptome analysis systems, many expression evolution studies characterized evolutionary forces acting on gene expression, without explicit discrimination between global expression differences and tissue specific expression differences. However, different types of gene expression alteration should have different effects on an organism, the evolutionary forces that act on them might be different, and different types of genes might show different types of differential expression between species. To confirm this, we studied differentially expressed (DE) genes among closely related groups that have extensive gene expression atlases, and clarified characteristics of different types of DE genes including the identification of regulating loci for differential expression using expression quantitative loci (eQTL) analysis data. We detected differentially expressed (DE) genes between rice subspecies in five homologous tissues that were verified using japonica and indica transcriptome atlases in public databases. Using the transcriptome atlases, we classified DE genes into two types, global DE genes and changed-tissues DE genes. Global type DE genes were not expressed in any tissues in the atlas of one subspecies, however changed-tissues type DE genes were expressed in both subspecies with different tissue specificity. For the five tissues in the two japonica-indica combinations, 4.6 ± 0.8 and 5.9 ± 1.5 % of highly expressed genes were global and changed-tissues DE genes, respectively. Changed-tissues DE genes varied in number between tissues, increasing linearly with the abundance of tissue specifically expressed genes in the tissue. Molecular evolution of global DE genes was rapid, unlike that of changed-tissues DE genes. Based on gene ontology, global and changed-tissues DE genes were different, having no common GO terms. Expression differences of most global DE genes were regulated by cis-eQTLs. Expression evolution of changed-tissues DE genes was rapid in tissue specifically expressed genes and those rapidly evolved changed-tissues DE genes were regulated not by cis-eQTLs, but by complicated trans-eQTLs. Global DE genes and changed-tissues DE genes had contrasting characteristics. The two contrasting types of DE genes provide possible explanations for the previous controversial conclusions about the relationships between molecular evolution and expression evolution of genes in different species, and the relationship between expression breadth and expression conservation in evolution.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 15 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 27%
Researcher 3 20%
Student > Bachelor 2 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 7%
Student > Master 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Unknown 3 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 47%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 33%
Unknown 3 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 December 2015.
All research outputs
#14,830,609
of 22,836,570 outputs
Outputs from BMC Genomics
#6,142
of 10,655 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#216,955
of 390,595 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Genomics
#218
of 317 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,836,570 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,655 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 390,595 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 317 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.