小麦类Mla基因的分离与特征分析

根据大麦MLa基因的保守区域设计了4对家族性引物.通过用家族性引物对小麦(Triticum aestivum L.)抗白粉病品系TAM104R在接种和未接种两种条件下的基因差异表达进行RT-PCR分析,获得了一个在接种条件下特异表达的基因片段RJ-3-3L,并用RACE方法获得了其cDNA全长,命名为TaMla1.序列比对显示:TaMlal与大麦MLa位点的基因家族成员具有高度同源性,TaMla1编码的氨基酸功能基序扫描表明其为一个CC-NBS-LRR型抗病蛋白.用一套中国春缺-四体材料将TaMla1定位到了小麦的1A染色体上,这正是大麦MLa基因位点在小麦中的同源区段所在的染色体.这些结果表明,TaMla1为一个类MLa抗白粉病基因.同时我们还获得了一个在不接种条件下特异表达的基因片段RW-2-3L,序列分析表明它与MLa基因也高度同源,推测其可能是一个小麦白粉病的敏感基因或抗性负调控因子.     

小麦类Mla基因的分离与特征分析

根据大麦MLa基因的保守区域设计了4对家族性引物。通过用家族性引物对小麦(Triticum aestivum L.)抗白粉病品系TAM104R在接种和未接种两种条件下的基因差异表达进行RT-PCR分析,获得了一个在接种条件下特异表达的基因片段RJ-3-3L, 并用RACE方法获得了其cDNA全长,命名为TaMla1。序列比对显示: TaMla1与大麦MLa位点的基因家族成员具有高度同源性,TaMla1编码的氨基酸功能基序扫描表明其为一个CC-NBS-LRR型抗病蛋白。用一套中国春缺-四体材料将TaMla1定位到了小麦的1A染色体上,这正是大麦MLa基因位点在小麦中的同源区段所在的染色体。这些结果表明,TaMla1为一个类MLa抗白粉病基因。同时我们还获得了一个在不接种条件下特异表达的基因片段RW-2-3L,序列分析表明它与MLa 基因也高度同源,推测其可能是一个小麦白粉病的敏感基因或抗性负调控因子。     

外加紫杉醇对悬浮培养东北红豆杉细胞的诱导效应

研究表明外加紫杉醇能够诱导悬浮培养的东北红豆杉(Taxus cuspidata)细胞总DNA发生梯带化降解。利用mRNA差异显示技术比较了紫杉醇诱导凋亡与不诱导凋亡的东北红豆杉细胞基因表达的差异,得到了8个特异表达的cDNA克隆,经Northern杂交证实其中3个在不发生凋亡的细胞中表达,5个在凋亡的细胞中表达。对这8个cDNA克隆单向序列测定后,与GenBank/EMBL/DDBJ中同源序列进行了比较,结果表明：1个cDNA片段与拟南芥中ABA应答蛋白基因的保守区有86%的同源性;2个cDNA片段与番茄内切壳聚糖酶前体基因的保守区有50%的同源性;其他5个cDNA片段无明显的同源基因,可能是新基因。     

小麦TaTrxh9基因的序列特征及其对渗透胁迫的响应

硫氧还蛋白是一类广泛存在于植物中的低分子量氧化还原蛋白,在植物生长发育调控和逆境响应过程中发挥重要的调控功能。以小麦(Triticum aestivum L.)品种‘中国春’和‘洛旱2号’为材料,采用RT-RCR方法克隆了小麦硫氧还蛋白基因TaTrxh9,通过生物信息学方法分析了其染色体定位及序列特征,并利用qRT-PCR技术分析了该基因对渗透胁迫的响应模式。结果显示:(1)成功克隆到小麦TaTrxh9基因,序列分析发现TaTrxh9基因位于第1染色体群的短臂上,并将其3个部分同源基因命名为TaTrxh9-1AS、TaTrxh9-1BS和TaTrxh9-1DS。(2)TaTrxh9基因包含4个内含子,且在内含子区域3个部分同源基因间序列差异较大;3个部分同源基因的编码区序列一致性在98%以上,均编码131个氨基酸,且蛋白序列完全相同;TaTrxh9蛋白包含1个Trx-family保守域和CXXC氧化还原活性位点,三维结构预测分析显示该蛋白可形成典型的硫氧还蛋白空间结构,包括由4个α螺旋组成的外围框架和由5个反向平行的β折叠组成的中心轴。(3)qRT-PCR分析显示,TaTrxh9基因受干旱胁迫诱导在叶片中下调表达,而在根系中呈先上调后下调的表达模式;盐胁迫过程中,TaTrxh9基因在叶片中无显著响应,在根系中也仅出现短暂的诱导表达现象;在ABA处理过程中,TaTrxh9基因表达模式与其对干旱胁迫的响应模式类似。研究推测,TaTrxh9基因对干旱胁迫的响应过程可能与ABA介导的基因表达调控有关。     

水稻籼爪重组自交系PEG胁迫早期基因差异表达分析

把从籼爪重组自交系中筛选出的最耐旱材料(47-274)和最敏感材料(47-299)在五叶一心时用20%PEG处理6h,取叶片进行mRNA差异显示分析,获得10个差异表达的cDNA片段。利用反式Northern斑点杂交法去除6个假阳性片段,对4个阳性片段(DT-DF1、DT-DF2、DT-DF3、DT-DF4)测序后进行同源性分析,发现DT-DF3的蛋白产物与核酸结合位点和富亮氨酸重复结构域类蛋白B高度同源,DT-DF2与L-乳酸氧化酶部分序列有同源性,DT-DF1没有找到同源蛋白质序列,DT-DF4与一个假设蛋白高度同源。     

豆科AGAMOUS同源基因结构及功能分析

AGAMOUS(AG)基因是控制高等植物花发育的重要基因,已在20多种植物基因组中发现同源基因。作为MADS-box家族的一员,AG基因结构具有高度的保守性。AG及其同源基因在植物生长发育中的功能已经十分清晰。本文研究AG同源基因在豆科几个代表物种中的分布,对其基因结构和蛋白序列进行分析比对。结果表明,AG同源基因在不同的豆科物种中具有高度的序列同源性及结构保守性。进一步通过蒺藜苜蓿Medicago truncatula的AG同源基因表达模式分析发现,其表达是与功能相互验证的。     

小麦光温敏核雄性不育相关基因的G-box家族引物差式分析

用G-box家族引物对小麦光温敏核雄性不育系农大3338在可育与不育光温条件下进行mRNA差异显示,结果表明,在育性转换时期,这两种条件下的基因表达存在显著差异。回收了12个质的差异片段并进行反Northern印迹杂交验证,然后对5个阳性克隆片段HT1-G10、HT1-G3、HT2-G2、HT1-G4和HT2-G5进行了测序,同源比较显示：HT1-G10与小麦（Triticum aestivum）叶绿体基因rbcL和atpB的部分序列高度同源（96％）;HT1-G3与小麦（Triticum aestivum）组蛋白H2A基因高度同源（88％）;另3个片段为新基因片段。对这些基因片段的分析为揭示光温敏核雄性不育的发育机理提供了一些有效证据。     

新型小鼠淋巴组织特异性肌动蛋白结合蛋白相关序列cDNA克隆

 应用抑制性差减杂交技术 ( SSH)克隆两种不同小鼠胸腺基质细胞的差异表达基因 ,获得新基因片段 C55.通过 Gen Bank检索及 RT- PCR扩增出一个全长 1 .4kb的 c DNA.杂交分析认为它是一个完整的 c DNA序列 .c DNA序列分析表明 ,它拥有一个 636bp的开放读码框架 ,编码 2 1 2个氨基酸 .同源序列比较发现 ,它编码一个肌动蛋白相关蛋白的新成员 ,该序列与多种已知的肌动蛋白相关蛋白 SM2 2 α及其同源蛋白在氨基酸水平上有 62 %～ 95%的同源性 .Northern杂交分析显示 ,该基因 m RNA转录本在两种不同胸腺基质细胞中的表达存在显著差异 . RT- PCR分析显示 ,该基因特异表达于小鼠淋巴相关组织中 ,而在非淋巴组织中无表达 .     

小麦MBD基因家族的鉴定和特征分析

MBD蛋白是一类与甲基化DNA结合的反式作用因子,在植物生长发育调控过程中发挥重要功能。该研究以‘中国春’小麦为材料,利用生物信息学方法分析了小麦基因组中MBD基因家族成员的组成、序列特征、染色体定位和表达模式,利用qRT-PCR技术分析TaMBD6和TaMBD9基因的时空表达模式。结果显示:(1)小麦MBD基因家族包含16个成员(44个基因位点)分布于第1、2、5、6和7号染色体群;聚类分析表明,小麦MBD蛋白分别属于第Ⅰ、Ⅱ、Ⅲ、Ⅴ、Ⅶ和Ⅷ亚类,其中第Ⅱ、Ⅲ和Ⅷ亚类的MBD蛋白含有5个识别甲基化DNA的保守位点;基因结构分析显示,小麦MBD基因家族成员的内含子数目在1～10之间,启动子区域普遍存在光响应和激素应答元件,且基因组结构特征在同一亚类内高度相似。(2)RNA-Seq数据的基因表达谱分析显示,小麦MBD基因家族多数成员在穗和籽粒发育早期均有较高的表达水平,而且部分成员对干旱和热胁迫有明显响应。(3)qRT-PCR分析显示,TaMBD6和TaMBD9的3个部分同源基因在不同组织间差异表达,但均在幼穗中表达量最高。结果表明,小麦MBD基因可能在小麦发育及非生物胁迫响应过程中发挥调控功能,为进一步探讨小麦MBD基因的功能奠定了基础。     

枣树内参基因ZjH3的克隆与筛选

为了克隆和筛选适合于枣树(Ziziphus jujuba Mill.)基因表达研究用的内参基因,利用枣结果枝cDNA文库ESTs序列,克隆获得4条其它物种常用内参基因的同源基因:组蛋白H3的同源基因全长序列,命名为ZjH3(Ziziphus jujubaH3,GenBank登录号:EU916201);肌动蛋白的同源基因片段,命名为ZjAT1(Ziziphus jujubaACT,GenBank登录号:EU251882);泛素延伸蛋白同源基因全长序列,命名为ZjUBQ(Ziziphus jujubaUBQ,GenBank登录号:EU916200);翻译延伸因子的同源基因片段,命名为ZjEF1(Ziziphus jujubaEF,GenBank登录号:EU916202)。在相同的条件下,用半定量RT-PCR方法分析了这4个潜在内参基因在枣不同生长时期的结果枝及其茎尖和不同器官中的表达,结果表明,ZjAT1、ZjUBQ和ZjEF1基因的表达不恒定,不适合用作枣树内参基因;而ZjH3基因在不同发育阶段的结果枝及其茎尖、根、茎、叶、芽、花蕾、花、幼果、膨大果实和种子中均表达稳定,适合于用作枣树的内参基因。     

On the origin of the Hirudinea and the demise of the Oligochaeta

The phylogenetic relationships of the Clitellata were investigated with a data set of published and new complete 18S rRNA gene sequences of 51 species representing 41 families. Sequences were aligned on the basis of a secondary structure model and analysed with maximum parsimony and maximum likelihood. In contrast to the latter method, parsimony did not recover the monophyly of Clitellata. However, a close scrutiny of the data suggested a spurious attraction between some polychaetes and clitellates. As a rule, molecular trees are closely aligned with morphology-based phylogenies. Acanthobdellida and Euhirudinea were reconciled in their traditional Hirudinea clade and were included in the Oligochaeta with the Branchiobdellida via the Lumbriculidae as a possible link between the two assemblages. While the 18S gene yielded a meaningful historical signal for determining relationships within clitellates, the exact position of Hirudinea and Branchiobdellida within oligochaetes remained unresolved. The lack of phylogenetic signal is interpreted as evidence for a rapid radiation of these taxa. The placement of Clitellata within the Polychaeta remained unresolved. The biological reality of polytomies within annelids is suggested and supports the hypothesis of an extremely ancient radiation of polychaetes and emergence of clitellates.     

On the ontogeny of the haptor and the evolution of the Monogenea

Data on the ontogeny of the posterior haptor of monogeneans were obtained from more than 150 publications and summarised. These data were plotted into diagrams showing evolutionary capacity levels based on the theory of a progressive evolution of marginal hooks, anchors and other attachment components of the posterior haptor in the Monogenea (Malmberg, 1986). 5 + 5 unhinged marginal hooks are assumed to be the most primitive monogenean haptoral condition. Thus the diagrams were founded on a 5 + 5 unhinged marginal hook evolutionary capacity level, and the evolutionary capacity levels of anchors and other haptoral attachement components were arranged according to haptoral ontogenetical sequences. In the final plotting diagram data on hosts, type of spermatozoa, oncomiracidial ciliation, sensilla pattern and protonephridial systems were also included. In this way a number of correlations were revealed. Thus, for example, the number of 5 + 5 marginal hooks correlates with the most primitive monogenean type of spermatozoon and with few sensillae, many ciliated cells and a simple protonephridial system in the oncomiracidium. On the basis of the reviewed data it is concluded that the ancient monogeneans with 5 + 5 unhinged marginal hooks were divided into two main lines, one retaining unhinged marginal hooks and the other evolving hinged marginal hooks. Both main lines have recent representatives at different marginal hook evolutionary capacity levels, i.e. monogeneans retaining a haptor with only marginal hooks. For the main line with hinged marginal hooks the name Articulon-choinea n. subclass is proposed. Members with 8 + 8 hinged marginal hooks only are here called Proanchorea n. superord. Monogeneans with unhinged marginal hooks only are here called Ananchorea n. superord. and three new families are erected for its recent members: Anonchohapteridae n. fam., Acolpentronidae n. fam. and Anacanthoridae n. fam. (with 7 + 7, 8 + 8 and 9 + 9 unhinged marginal hooks, respectively). Except for the families of Articulonchoinea (e.g. Acanthocotylidae, Gyrodactylidae, Tetraonchoididae) Bychowsky's (1957) division of the Monogenea into the Oligonchoinea and Polyonchoinea fits the proposed scheme, i.e. monogeneans with unhinged marginal hooks form one old group, the Oligonchoinea, which have 5 + 5 unhinged marginal hooks, and the other group form the Polyonchoinea, which (with the exception of the Hexabothriidae) has a greater number (7 + 7, 8 + 8 or 9 + 9) of unhinged marginal hooks. It is proposed that both these names, Oligonchoinea (sensu mihi) and Polyonchoinea (sensu mihi), will be retained on one side and Articulonchoinea placed on the other side, which reflects the early monogenean evolution. Except for the members of Ananchorea [Polyonchoinea], all members of the Oligonchoinea and Polyonchoinea have anchors, which imply that they are further evolved, i.e. have passed the 5 + 5 marginal hook evolutionary capacity level (Malmberg, 1986). There are two main types of anchors in the Monogenea: haptoral anchors, with anlages appearing in the haptor, and peduncular anchors, with anlages in the peduncle. There are two types of haptoral anchors: peripheral haptoral anchors, ontogenetically the oldest, and central haptoral anchors. Peduncular anchors, in turn, are ontogenetically younger than peripheral haptoral anchors. There may be two pairs of peduncular anchors: medial peduncular anchors, ontogentically the oldest, and lateral peduncular anchors. Only peduncular (not haptoral) anchors have anchor bars. Monogeneans with haptoral anchors are here called Mediohaptanchorea n. superord. and Laterohaptanchorea n. superord. or haptanchoreans. All oligonchoineans and the oldest polyonchoineans are haptanchoreans. Certain members of Calceostomatidae [Polyonchoinea] are the only monogeneans with both (peripheral) haptoral and peduncular anchors (one pair). These monogeneans are here called Mixanchorea n. superord. Polyonchoineans with peduncular anchors and unhinged marginal hooks are here called the Pedunculanchorea n. superord. The most primitive pedunculanchoreans have only one pair of peduncular anchors with an anchor bar, while the most advanced have both medial and lateral peduncular anchors; each pair having an anchor bar. Certain families of the Articulonchoinea, the Anchorea n. superord., also have peduncular anchors (parallel evolution): only one family, the Sundanonchidae n. fam., has both medial and lateral peduncular anchors, each anchor pair with an anchor bar. Evolutionary lines from different monogenean evolutionary capacity levels are discussed and a new system of classification for the Monogenea is proposed.In agreeing to publish this article, I recognise that its contents are controversial and contrary to generally accepted views on monogenean systematics and evolution. I have anticipated a reaction to the article by inviting senior workers in the field to comment upon it: their views will be reported in a future issue of this journal. EditorIn agreeing to publish this article, I recognise that its contents are controversial and contrary to generally accepted views on monogenean systematics and evolution. I have anticipated a reaction to the article by inviting senior workers in the field to comment upon it: their views will be reported in a future issue of this journal. Editor