ArticleBMC genomics2022
Comparison of meiotic transcriptomes of three maize inbreds with different origins reveals differences in cell cycle and recombination.
Article in BMC genomics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCellular events during meiosis can differ between inbred lines in maize. Substantial differences in the average numbers of chiasmata and double-strand breaks (DSBs) per meiotic cell have been documented among diverse inbred lines of maize: CML228, a tropical maize inbred line, B73 and Mo17, temperate maize lines. To determine if gene expression might explain these observed differences, an RNA-Seq experiment was performed on CML228 male meiocytes which was compared to B73 and Mo17 male meiocytes, where plants were grown in the same controlled environment.
resultsWe found that a few DSB-repair/meiotic genes which promote class I crossovers (COs) and the Zyp1 gene which limits newly formed class I COs were up-regulated, whereas Mus81 homolog 2 which promotes class II COs was down-regulated in CML228. Although we did not find enriched gene ontology (GO) categories directly related to meiosis, we found that GO categories in membrane, localization, proteolysis, energy processes were up-regulated in CML228, while chromatin remodeling, epigenetic regulation, and cell cycle related processes including meiosis related cell cycle processes were down-regulated in CML228. The degree of similarity in expression patterns between the three maize lines reflect their genetic relatedness: B73 and Mo17 had similar meiotic expressions and CML228 had a more distinct expression profile.
conclusionsWe found that meiotic related genes were mostly conserved among the three maize inbreds except for a few DSB-repair/meiotic genes. The findings that the molecular players in limiting class I CO formation (once CO assurance is achieved) were up-regulated and those involved in promoting class II CO formation were down-regulated in CML228 agree with the lower chiasmata number observed in CML228 previously. In addition, epigenetics such as chromatin remodeling and histone modification might play a role. Transport and energy-related processes was up-regulated and Cyclin13 was down-regulated in CML228. The direction of gene expression of these processes agree with that previously found in meiotic tissues compared with vegetative tissues. In summary, we used different natural maize inbred lines from different climatic conditions and have shown their differences in expression landscape in male meiocytes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.