Why do sex chromosomes progressively lose recombination?

IF 13.6 2区 生物学 Q1 GENETICS & HEREDITY
Paul Jay, Daniel Jeffries, Fanny E. Hartmann, Amandine Véber, Tatiana Giraud
{"title":"Why do sex chromosomes progressively lose recombination?","authors":"Paul Jay, Daniel Jeffries, Fanny E. Hartmann, Amandine Véber, Tatiana Giraud","doi":"10.1016/j.tig.2024.03.005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Progressive recombination loss is a common feature of sex chromosomes. Yet, the evolutionary drivers of this phenomenon remain a mystery. For decades, differences in trait optima between sexes (sexual antagonism) have been the favoured hypothesis, but convincing evidence is lacking. Recent years have seen a surge of alternative hypotheses to explain progressive extensions and maintenance of recombination suppression: neutral accumulation of sequence divergence, selection of nonrecombining fragments with fewer deleterious mutations than average, sheltering of recessive deleterious mutations by linkage to heterozygous alleles, early evolution of dosage compensation, and constraints on recombination restoration. Here, we explain these recent hypotheses and dissect their assumptions, mechanisms, and predictions. We also review empirical studies that have brought support to the various hypotheses.</p>","PeriodicalId":54413,"journal":{"name":"Trends in Genetics","volume":"39 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Trends in Genetics","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tig.2024.03.005","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GENETICS & HEREDITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Progressive recombination loss is a common feature of sex chromosomes. Yet, the evolutionary drivers of this phenomenon remain a mystery. For decades, differences in trait optima between sexes (sexual antagonism) have been the favoured hypothesis, but convincing evidence is lacking. Recent years have seen a surge of alternative hypotheses to explain progressive extensions and maintenance of recombination suppression: neutral accumulation of sequence divergence, selection of nonrecombining fragments with fewer deleterious mutations than average, sheltering of recessive deleterious mutations by linkage to heterozygous alleles, early evolution of dosage compensation, and constraints on recombination restoration. Here, we explain these recent hypotheses and dissect their assumptions, mechanisms, and predictions. We also review empirical studies that have brought support to the various hypotheses.

为什么性染色体会逐渐失去重组能力?
进行性重组缺失是性染色体的一个常见特征。然而,这一现象的进化驱动因素仍然是个谜。几十年来,两性性状的差异(性拮抗)一直是最受欢迎的假说,但却缺乏令人信服的证据。近些年来,出现了许多替代假说来解释重组抑制的逐渐扩展和维持:序列差异的中性积累、选择比平均水平具有更少有害突变的非重组片段、通过与杂合等位基因的连接来保护隐性有害突变、剂量补偿的早期进化以及重组恢复的限制。在此,我们将解释这些最新假说,并剖析其假设、机制和预测。我们还回顾了支持各种假说的实证研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Trends in Genetics
Trends in Genetics 生物-遗传学
CiteScore
20.90
自引率
0.90%
发文量
160
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Launched in 1985, Trends in Genetics swiftly established itself as a "must-read" for geneticists, offering concise, accessible articles covering a spectrum of topics from developmental biology to evolution. This reputation endures, making TiG a cherished resource in the genetic research community. While evolving with the field, the journal now embraces new areas like genomics, epigenetics, and computational genetics, alongside its continued coverage of traditional subjects such as transcriptional regulation, population genetics, and chromosome biology. Despite expanding its scope, the core objective of TiG remains steadfast: to furnish researchers and students with high-quality, innovative reviews, commentaries, and discussions, fostering an appreciation for advances in genetic research. Each issue of TiG presents lively and up-to-date Reviews and Opinions, alongside shorter articles like Science & Society and Spotlight pieces. Invited from leading researchers, Reviews objectively chronicle recent developments, Opinions provide a forum for debate and hypothesis, and shorter articles explore the intersection of genetics with science and policy, as well as emerging ideas in the field. All articles undergo rigorous peer-review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信