Autoantibody genes

The review is devoted to the mechanisms of generation and coding of human and murine autoantibodies.     

Rethinking genes

The gene is the central construct of twentieth-century biology and evolution. It is a construct because, like “culture” in anthropology, “gene” is widely used and is central to the discipline's discourse, but eludes rigorous definition. Although the gene is acknowledged as a material entity, its membership criteria are unclear and its boundaries are fuzzy—indeed, more than one can occupy the same space at the same time. The purpose of this essay is to bring to light recent refinements in our conception of the gene and their implications for its use in biological anthropology.     

Pain genes

Pain, which afflicts up to 20% of the population at any time, provides both a massive therapeutic challenge and a route to understanding mechanisms in the nervous system. Specialised sensory neurons (nociceptors) signal the existence of tissue damage to the central nervous system (CNS), where pain is represented in a complex matrix involving many CNS structures. Genetic approaches to investigating pain pathways using model organisms have identified the molecular nature of the transducers, regulatory mechanisms involved in changing neuronal activity, as well as the critical role of immune system cells in driving pain pathways. In man, mapping of human pain mutants as well as twin studies and association studies of altered pain behaviour have identified important regulators of the pain system. In turn, new drug targets for chronic pain treatment have been validated in transgenic mouse studies. Thus, genetic studies of pain pathways have complemented the traditional neuroscience approaches of electrophysiology and pharmacology to give us fresh insights into the molecular basis of pain perception.     

Speciation genes

Until recently, the genes that cause reproductive isolation remained black boxes. Consequently, evolutionary biologists were unable to answer several questions about the identities and characteristics of "speciation genes". Over the past few years, however, evolutionary geneticists have finally succeeded in isolating several such genes, providing our first glimpse at factors that are thought to be representative of those underlying the origin of species. Evolutionary analysis of these genes suggests that speciation results from positive Darwinian selection within species. Molecular evolutionary study of the genes causing reproductive isolation may represent an important new phase in the study of speciation.     

Ancient origins of axial patterning genes: Hox genes and ParaHox genes in the Cnidaria

Among the bilaterally symmetrical, triploblastic animals (the Bilateria), a conserved set of developmental regulatory genes are known to function in patterning the anterior–posterior (AP) axis. This set includes the well-studied Hox cluster genes, and the recently described genes of the ParaHox cluster, which is believed to be the evolutionary sister of the Hox cluster ( Brooke et al. 1998 ). The conserved role of these axial patterning genes in animals as diverse as frogs and flies is believed to reflect an underlying homology (i.e., all bilaterians derive from a common ancestor which possessed an AP axis and the developmental mechanisms responsible for patterning the axis). However, the origin and early evolution of Hox genes and ParaHox genes remain obscure. Repeated attempts have been made to reconstruct the early evolution of Hox genes by analyzing data from the triphoblastic animals, the Bilateria ( Schubert et al. 1993 ; Zhang and Nei 1996 ). A more precise dating of Hox origins has been elusive due to a lack of sufficient information from outgroup taxa such as the phylum Cnidaria (corals, hydras, jellyfishes, and sea anemones). In combination with outgroup taxa, another potential source of information about Hox origins is outgroup genes (e.g., the genes of the ParaHox cluster). In this article, we present cDNA sequences of two Hox-like genes ( anthox2 and anthox6 ) from the sea anemone, Nematostella vectensis. Phylogenetic analysis indicates that anthox2 (=Cnox2) is homologous to the GSX class of ParaHox genes, and anthox6 is homologous to the anterior class of Hox genes. Therefore, the origin of Hox genes and ParaHox genes occurred prior to the evolutionary split between the Cnidaria and the Bilateria and predated the evolution of the anterior–posterior axis of bilaterian animals. Our analysis also suggests that the central Hox class was invented in the bilaterian lineage, subsequent to their split from the Cnidaria.     

Good genes,complementary genes and human mate preferences

The past decade has witnessed a rapidly growing interest in the biological basis of human mate choice. Here we review recent studies that demonstrate preferences for traits which might reveal genetic quality to prospective mates, with potential but still largely unknown influence on offspring fitness. These include studies assessing visual, olfactory and auditory preferences for potential good-gene indicator traits, such as dominance or bilateral symmetry. Individual differences in these robust preferences mainly arise through within and between individual variation in condition and reproductive status. Another set of studies have revealed preferences for traits indicating complementary genes, focussing on discrimination of dissimilarity at genes in the major histocompatibility complex (MHC). As in animal studies, we are only just beginning to understand how preferences for specific traits vary and inter-relate, how consideration of good and compatible genes can lead to substantial variability in individual mate choice decisions and how preferences expressed in one sensory modality may reflect those in another. Humans may be an ideal model species in which to explore these interesting complexities.     

Mammalian housekeeping genes evolve more slowly than tissue-specific genes

Do housekeeping genes, which are turned on most of the time in almost every tissue, evolve more slowly than genes that are turned on only at specific developmental times or tissues? Recent large-scale gene expression studies enable us to have a better definition of housekeeping genes and to address the above question in detail. In this study, we examined 1581 human-mouse orthologous gene pairs for their patterns of sequence evolution, contrasting housekeeping genes with tissue-specific genes. Our results show that, in comparison to tissue-specific genes, housekeeping genes on average evolve more slowly and are under stronger selective constraints as reflected by significantly smaller values of Ka/Ks. Besides stronger purifying selection, we explored several other factors that can possibly slow down nonsynonymous rates in housekeeping genes. Although mutational bias might slightly slow the nonsynonymous rates in housekeeping genes, it is unlikely to be the major cause of the rate difference between the two types of genes. The codon usage pattern of housekeeping genes does not seem to differ from that of tissue-specific genes. Moreover, contrary to the old textbook concept, we found that approximately 74% of the housekeeping genes in our study belong to multigene families, not significantly different from that of the tissue-specific genes ( approximately 70%). Therefore, the stronger selective constraints on housekeeping genes are not due to a lower degree of genetic redundancy.