Back

Genomic expression responses in sensu stricto Saccharomyces yeast to DNA damage induced by methyl methanesulfonate

Ramachandran, V.; Hatlestad, G.; White, T.

2022-06-09 genomics
10.1101/2022.06.07.495055 bioRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundOne way single-celled eukaryotes respond to DNA damage stress is by modifying their gene expression, facilitating genomic repair. Gene expression responses to DNA damage induced by methyl methanesulfonate (MMS) have been studied in the model organism Saccharomyces cerevisiae. However, lacking are investigations of the MMS stress responses in evolutionarily-related sensu stricto Saccharomyces species, including Saccharomyces cerevisiae. MethodsNext-generation Illumina RNA-sequencing was to characterize the entire transcriptomes of four evolutionarily-related species of yeast, S. cerevisiae, S. paradoxus, S. mikatae, and S. bayanus, under control and experimental (MMS) conditions. Subsequent genomic studies included gene set enrichment analysis, promoter analysis, and concentration gradient studies. ResultsS. mikitae and S. paradoxus grew well in light of MMS while S. bayanus showed no growth. While there was fair overlap in induced and repressed genes, overall each species had unique expression responses. S. paradoxus and S. bayanus showed the most distinct changes with the former greatly inhibiting a large segment of its genome while the latter induced such segments. Gene set enrichment analysis revealed significantly modulated biologic, cellular, and molecular processes in each species. Promoter analysis revealed sets of induced/repressed transcription factors for genes highly modulated in the stress response. Concentration gradient studies of S. cerevisiae showed linear increase in gene expression of RAD54, DIN7, and IRC19 in response to increasing concentrations of MMS. ConclusionOverall, we depict the transcriptome changes of four evolutionarily-related sensu stricto yeast species and several functional genomic analyses to provide a novel understanding of their responses to MMS.

Matching journals

The top 9 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 8%
19.1%
2
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 11%
7.3%
3
Molecular Genetics and Genomics
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
7.3%
4
BMC Genomics
328 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
3.7%
5
G3
33 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.7%
6
Frontiers in Genetics
197 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.7%
7
Microorganisms
101 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.8%
8
BMC Cancer
52 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.7%
9
F1000Research
79 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
50% of probability mass above
10
Frontiers in Microbiology
375 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.7%
11
BMC Bioinformatics
383 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.7%
12
Genes
126 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
1.7%
13
Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal
216 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.4%
14
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 9%
1.4%
15
Archives of Clinical and Biomedical Research
28 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.4%
16
Gene Reports
13 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.4%
17
Genomics
60 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.3%
18
Heliyon
146 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.3%
19
Oncotarget
15 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.0%
20
Molecular Biology Reports
19 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.9%
21
BMC Microbiology
35 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
22
Gene
41 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
23
Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA) - General Subjects
16 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.8%
24
International Journal of Molecular Sciences
453 papers in training set
Top 14%
0.8%
25
Journal of Bioinformatics and Systems Biology
14 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.8%
26
Biology
43 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
27
BMC Biology
248 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.8%
28
G3: Genes, Genomes, Genetics
222 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.8%
29
Epigenetics
43 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.8%
30
Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology
218 papers in training set
Top 9%
0.8%