Evolutionary dynamics of grass genomes

• Published in: The New phytologist Vol. 154; no. 1; pp. 15 - 28
• Main Author: Gaut, Brandon S.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Oxford, UK Blackwell Science Ltd 01.04.2002; Blackwell
• Subjects: Agronomy. Soil science and plant productions; Biological and medical sciences; chromosome mapping; chromosome number; Classical and quantitative genetics. Population genetics. Molecular genetics; comparative map; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology; Generalities. Genetics. Plant material; Genes. Genome; Genetics and breeding of economic plants; genome; genome size; genomics; interspecific variation; microsynteny; Molecular and cellular biology; Molecular genetics; nucleotide sequences; paleobotany; phylogeny; Poaceae; synteny; Genetic mapping; Monocotyledones; Nucleotide sequence; Repeated sequence; Phylogenetic tree; Interspecific comparison; Biological evolution; Synteny; Review; Chromosomic number; Gramineae; Angiospermae; Spermatophyta; Genome
• ISSN: 0028-646X; 1469-8137
• DOI: 10.1046/j.1469-8137.2002.00352.x

Summary The grass family (Poaceae) has been the subject of intense research over the past decade. Although other angiosperm families contain more species and more genera, the Poaceae exceed all other families in ecological dominance and economic importance. Research has focused on the evolutionary relationships among grasses as well as the structure of grass genomes. Here I examine the evolutionary dynamics of grass genomes in a phylogenetic framework. It is clear that grass genomes are evolutionarily labile for many characteristics, including genome size and chromosome number. Variation in genome size among grasses probably reflects fluctuations in the amount of repetitive DNA per genome, but the history and causes of chromosome number changes remain unclear. Despite substantial variation among genomes, comparative maps suggest that grass genomes retain extensive regions of colinearity. By reanalyzing some comparative map data and also by reviewing comparative sequence data, I argue that the current colinearity paradigm requires reassessment.