1. Genetics and Genomics
Download icon

Divergence in alternative polyadenylation contributes to gene regulatory differences between humans and chimpanzees

  1. Briana E Mittleman
  2. Sebastian Pott
  3. Shane Warland
  4. Kenneth Barr
  5. Claudia Cuevas
  6. Yoav Gilad  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of Chicago, United States
Research Article
  • Cited 0
  • Views 747
  • Annotations
Cite this article as: eLife 2021;10:e62548 doi: 10.7554/eLife.62548

Abstract

While comparative functional genomic studies have shown that inter-species differences in gene expression can be explained by corresponding inter-species differences in genetic and epigenetic regulatory mechanisms, co-transcriptional mechanisms, such as alternative polyadenylation (APA), have received little attention. We characterized APA in lymphoblastoid cell lines from six humans and six chimpanzees by identifying and estimating usage for 44,432 polyadenylation sites (PAS) in 9,518 genes. Although APA is largely conserved, 1,705 genes showed significantly different PAS usage (FDR 0.05) between species. Genes with divergent APA also tend to be differentially expressed, are enriched among genes showing differences in protein translation, and can explain a subset of observed inter-species protein expression differences that do not differ at the transcript level. Finally, we found that genes with a dominant PAS, which is used more often than other PAS, are particularly enriched for differentially expressed genes.

Data availability

Sequencing data available on GEO under accession GSE155245.

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Briana E Mittleman

    Genetics, Genomics, and Systems Biology, University of Chicago, Chicago, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-4979-4652
  2. Sebastian Pott

    Department of Human Genetics, University of Chicago, Chicago, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-4118-6150
  3. Shane Warland

    Section of Genetic Medicine, University of Chicago, Chicago, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Kenneth Barr

    Section of Genetic Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Chicago, Chicago, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-0769-7053
  5. Claudia Cuevas

    Department of Human Genetics, University of Chicago, Chicago, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Yoav Gilad

    Department of Medicine, University of Chicago, Chicago, United States
    For correspondence
    gilad@uchicago.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-8284-8926

Funding

National Institutes of Health (T32GM09197)

  • Briana E Mittleman

National Institutes of Health (F31HL149259)

  • Briana E Mittleman

National Institutes of Health (R01HG010772)

  • Yoav Gilad

National Institutes of Health (R35GM13172)

  • Yoav Gilad

National Institutes of Health (K12HL119995)

  • Sebastian Pott

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Graham Coop, University of California, Davis, United States

Publication history

  1. Received: August 28, 2020
  2. Accepted: February 12, 2021
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: February 17, 2021 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: March 12, 2021 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2021, Mittleman et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 747
    Page views
  • 107
    Downloads
  • 0
    Citations

Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Crossref, PubMed Central, Scopus.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Download citations (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Further reading

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Genetics and Genomics
    Krishna S Ghanta et al.
    Research Article

    Nuclease-directed genome editing is a powerful tool for investigating physiology and has great promise as a therapeutic approach to correct mutations that cause disease. In its most precise form, genome editing can use cellular homology-directed repair (HDR) pathways to insert information from an exogenously supplied DNA repair template (donor) directly into a targeted genomic location. Unfortunately, particularly for long insertions, toxicity and delivery considerations associated with repair template DNA can limit HDR efficacy. Here, we explore chemical modifications to both double-stranded and single-stranded DNA-repair templates. We describe 5′-terminal modifications, including in its simplest form the incorporation of triethylene glycol (TEG) moieties, that consistently increase the frequency of precision editing in the germlines of three animal models (Caenorhabditis elegans, zebrafish, mice) and in cultured human cells.

    1. Genetics and Genomics
    2. Neuroscience
    Zachary Werkhoven et al.
    Research Article

    Individual animals vary in their behaviors. This is true even when they share the same genotype and were reared in the same environment. Clusters of covarying behaviors constitute behavioral syndromes, and an individual’s position along such axes of covariation is a representation of their personality. Despite these conceptual frameworks, the structure of behavioral covariation within a genotype is essentially uncharacterized and its mechanistic origins unknown. Passing hundreds of inbred Drosophila individuals through an experimental pipeline that captured hundreds of behavioral measures, we found sparse but significant correlations among small sets of behaviors. Thus, the space of behavioral variation has many independent dimensions. Manipulating the physiology of the brain, and specific neural populations, altered specific correlations. We also observed that variation in gene expression can predict an individual’s position on some behavioral axes. This work represents the first steps in understanding the biological mechanisms determining the structure of behavioral variation within a genotype.