Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2016 Nov 28;17(12):1991.
doi: 10.3390/ijms17121991.

Pseudogenes and Their Genome-Wide Prediction in Plants

Affiliations
Review

Pseudogenes and Their Genome-Wide Prediction in Plants

Jin Xiao et al. Int J Mol Sci. .

Abstract

Pseudogenes are paralogs generated from ancestral functional genes (parents) during genome evolution, which contain critical defects in their sequences, such as lacking a promoter, having a premature stop codon or frameshift mutations. Generally, pseudogenes are functionless, but recent evidence demonstrates that some of them have potential roles in regulation. The majority of pseudogenes are generated from functional progenitor genes either by gene duplication (duplicated pseudogenes) or retro-transposition (processed pseudogenes). Pseudogenes are primarily identified by comparison to their parent genes. Bioinformatics tools for pseudogene prediction have been developed, among which PseudoPipe, PSF and Shiu's pipeline are publicly available. We compared these three tools using the well-annotated Arabidopsis thaliana genome and its known 924 pseudogenes as a test data set. PseudoPipe and Shiu's pipeline identified ~80% of A. thaliana pseudogenes, of which 94% were shared, while PSF failed to generate adequate results. A need for improvement of the bioinformatics tools for pseudogene prediction accuracy in plant genomes was thus identified, with the ultimate goal of improving the quality of genome annotation in plants.

Keywords: bioinformatics tools; duplicated; genome-wide; plants; processed; pseudogenes.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Illustration of pseudogenes formation. Note: 1: Repeats associated with retro-transposition; 2: The hashtag symbol (#) indicates deleterious mutations; 3: The dashed box indicates truncation.
Figure 2
Figure 2
The emergence of processed or duplicated pseudogenes. Functional pseudogenes are indicated in the green framework. Solid arrows represent reference supports for the paths while dotted arrows show predicted paths. HBBP1: Hemoglobin Subunit Beta Pseudogene 1.
Figure 3
Figure 3
A flow chart of genome-wide pseudogene prediction methods.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Comparisons of three bioinformatics tools for pseudogene prediction using the A. thaliana genome with its 924 known pseudogenes. (A) Identified known pseudogenes; (B) all identified pseudogenes.

References

    1. Jacq C., Miller J.R., Brownlee G.G. A pseudogene structure in 5S DNA of Xenopus laevis. Cell. 1977;12:109–120. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(77)90189-1. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Torrents D., Suyama M., Zdobnov E., Bork P. A genome-wide survey of human pseudogenes. Genome Res. 2003;13:2559–2567. doi: 10.1101/gr.1455503. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ding W., Lin L., Chen B., Dai J. L1 elements, processed pseudogenes and retrogenes in mammalian genomes. IUBMB Life. 2006;58:677–685. doi: 10.1080/15216540601034856. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Tutar Y. Pseudogenes. Comp. Funct. Genom. 2012;2012:424526. doi: 10.1155/2012/424526. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Harrison P.M., Hegyi H., Balasubramanian S., Luscombe N.M., Bertone P., Echols N., Johnson T., Gerstein M. Molecular fossils in the human genome: Identification and analysis of the pseudogenes in chromosomes 21 and 22. Genome Res. 2002;12:272–280. doi: 10.1101/gr.207102. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

MeSH terms