Cited by 185Developmental Biology and Gene RegulationChromosomal and Genetic VariationsGenomics and Chromatin Dynamics

Evidence for 14 homeobox gene clusters in human genome ancestry

Open access
Pollard, Sophie L., Holland, Peter W.H.·2000·Current Biology

Abstract

The arrangement of Hox genes into physical clusters is fundamental to the patterning of animal body plans. Other homeobox genes are often described as dispersed, with only occasional examples of linkage reported, such as the amphioxus ParaHox and Drosophila 93D/E clusters. This clustering is unlikely to be the derived condition, as the genes of the ParaHox and 93D/E clusters are phylogenetically widespread. To assess whether clustering is retained in mammals, and to infer its history, we considered the distribution of ANTP superclass homeobox genes in human and mouse genomes. We postulate four ancient arrays of ANTP superclass genes in animal genomes, denoted 'extended Hox' (Hox, Evx and Mox), NKL (including NK1, NK3, NK4, Lbx, Tlx, Emx, Vax, Hmx, NK6, Msx), ParaHox (Cdx, Xlox, Gsx) and EHGbox (En, HB9, Gbx). Each of these duplicated in the ancestry of the human genome to yield four Hox, four NKL, four ParaHox and at least two EHGbox clusters or arrays. Two of the human NKL clusters (four in mouse) have subsequently been split by chromosome rearrangement, as has one human EHGbox array. We date all cluster duplications to early chordate evolution and infer that three clusters (Hox, NKL, EHGbox) resided on the same chromosome before duplication.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0960-9822(00)00676-x

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • A genome duplication event would, at least initially, increase the number of interactors for each protein, potentially slowing the rate of molecular evolution across the entire genome.

    “Despite the fact that gene duplication events are thought to increase rather than decrease the rate of molecular evolution (33), a genome duplication event would (at least initially) increase the number of interactors for each protein, potentially slowing the rate of molecular evolution across the entire genome (34).”

    From Estimating metazoan divergence times with a molecular clock (2004) · cites this paper as [33]

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 28 · Cited by 185

Authors
Pollard, S. L., & Holland, P. W. H.
Affiliations
University of Reading (GB)
Corresponding author
Holland, Peter W.H.
Venue
Current Biology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2000-09
Volume
10
Issue
17
Pages
1059-1062
ISSN
0960-9822 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1995022717
Cited by
185
References
28
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 2
FWCI
5.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Current Biology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Developmental Biology and Gene Regulation
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Chromosomal and Genetic Variations
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Chromatin Dynamics
Keywords
homeobox genes, gene clusters, Hox genes, ParaHox genes, gene duplication, chromosomal rearrangements, chordate evolution, mouse genome, body plan patterning
MeSH terms
Animals, Genes, Homeobox, Multigene Family, Humans, Genetic Linkage, Genome, Human, Gene Duplication, Mice

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review