Section on Genomic Structure and Function, Laboratory of Molecular and Cellular Biology, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
![]() |
Abstract |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
![]() |
Introduction |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
|
A subset of human L1 elements called the Ta family (Skowronski, Fanning, and Singer 1988
) is the source of 11 of 12 de novo L1 insertions identified so far (quoted in Kimberland et al. 1999
), and two active elements belonging to this family have been isolated (Dombroski et al. 1991
; Holmes et al. 1994
). In addition, several other full-length Ta elements were shown to be active in a cell culturebased retrotransposition assay (Moran et al. 1996
; Sassaman et al. 1997
). However, the evolutionary dynamics of the Ta family has yet to be examined.
Here, we show that the Ta family emerged ~4 MYA, somewhat after the divergence (6 MYA; Goodman et al. 1998
) of humans and chimpanzees. Since then, the Ta family has differentiated into two major subfamilies, Ta-0 and Ta-1, each of which spawned additional subsets. Ta-0 is older than Ta-1, and although Ta-0 retains some active elements, Ta-1 now accounts for about one half of the Ta family and has largely replaced Ta-0 as the replicatively dominant subfamily in humans. The youngest subset of Ta-1, Ta-1d, arose about 1.4 MYA and accounts for about two thirds of the Ta-1 subfamily. The extensive differentiation of the Ta L1 family, typified by the emergence of, and eventual replacement by, novel active subsets, recapitulates the active evolution typical of murine L1 elements (Adey et al. 1994
; Casavant and Hardies 1994
; Cabot et al. 1997
; Saxton and Martin 1998
; Verneau, Catzeflis, and Furano 1998
). In addition, the Ta family has been expanding at about the same rate per generation as the most active rodent L1 families. Thus, human and murine genomes are being altered to about the same extent by L1 activity.
![]() |
Materials and Methods |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
|
PCR
PCRs were performed in either an Idaho Technology Air-Thermo Cycler or an MJ Research PTC 100 thermocycler. In both cases, the reactions contained (as suggested by Idaho Technology) 50 mM Tris-Cl (pH 8.3), 2 mM MgCl2, 0.2 mM of each dNTP, 250 µg/ml bovine serum albumin, 2% sucrose, 0.1 mM Cresol Red (as an electrophoretic dye marker), and 0.5 µM primers. The primers used to determine the phylogenetic distribution of the Ta family are shown on figure 4
. The specificity of primers to amplify different L1 sequences was verified with clones of known sequence. Fifty to one hundred nanograms of genomic DNA was amplified in a total volume of 25 µl using the following conditions: denaturation at 94°C for 0 s (30 s in the MJ instrument), primer annealing at 4050°C (depending on the pair of primers used) for 0 s (30 s), and chain extension at 72°C for 10 s (40 s), for 30 cycles.
We determined the polymorphism of each L1 insert using two PCRs and the primers listed in the appendix: one included the primer pair cognate to the non-L1 flanking sequence, and the second included the primer for the 3' flank and one specific for a 3' region of open reading frame (ORF) II (oligonucleotides 2 or 5; fig. 4 ). All of the human DNAs used in this study were purchased from the Coriell Institute for Medical Research. Nonhuman primate DNAs were gifts from Dr. C. Roos.
![]() |
Results |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Figure 2
shows an alignment of all 42 full-length Ta elements (24 of the nonselected plus 18 of the selected elements), along with two "pre-Ta" elements (see below) and five ancestral non-Ta elements (Smit et al. 1995
). The 150 (of 6,048) positions (numbers given across the top of the fig. 2
) at which a character difference from the consensus is shared by three or more elements are presented. We do not show the additional 108 informative positions at which a difference is shared between just two elements, because these additional data do not change any of the conclusions and make inspection of the alignment unwieldy. We also aligned all of the nonfulllength Ta elements and found no subsets other than those revealed here (results not shown). The full alignment of all informative positions of the full-length elements is available in the file Boissinot.Ta-align and can be obtained by anonymous ftp from helix.nih.gov in pub/avf.
|
The sequence alignment of the 5' UTR, ORF I, and ORF II reveals obvious subdivisions within the Ta family. For example, the Ta family can be divided into two groups based on the nucleotide pair at positions (5557, 5560) of ORF II. One, which we call Ta-1, has (T, G) at these positions, and the second one, Ta-0, almost always has (G, C). Although some ancestral non-Ta elements contain (T, G), (G, C) is quite likely the ancestral character at these positions. First, this (G, C) was invariably found associated with the ancestral LPA2 and LPA3 non-Ta L1 families in an earlier survey of primate L1 sequences (Smit et al. 1995
; the Ta family was designated LPA1 in this study). Second, a BLAST search of GenEMBL with a 20mer sequence cognate to this region of ORF II returned 500 L1 entries containing the (G, C) ORF-II sequence (500 is the maximal number returned by BLAST) but only 50 L1 entries containing the (T, G) sequence. Of these, 44 were Ta L1 elements, which we here call Ta-1. Third, as figure 3A
shows, the (G, C)-containing Ta-0 subfamily is, on the whole, more divergent than Ta-1. Sequence divergence within an L1 subfamily is positively correlated with its age (Pascale et al. 1993
; Adey et al. 1994
; Casavant and Hardies 1994
; Furano et al. 1994
; Verneau, Catzeflis, and Furano 1998
) Therefore, the results in figure 3A
suggest that most Ta-0 elements have resided longer in the genome than have most Ta-1 elements. This would be consistent with the ancestral nature of the (G, C) character.
|
Expansion of the Ta Family in Humans
Given the correlation between sequence divergence and age, we converted the percentage of divergence of the Ta-1 and Ta-0 subfamilies into time by using a molecular clock calibrated from the ~7% average divergence between human-specific and orangutan-specific L1 subfamilies (unpublished data). Assuming that humans and orangutans diverged 14 MYA (Goodman et al. 1998
), we obtained a nucleotide substitution rate per lineage of ~0.25% per Myr, which is ~15% to ~60% higher than other estimates of the hominid pseudogene rate (e.g., Casane et al. 1997
; Easteal and Herbert 1997
). Since this difference would not materially change any of our conclusions, we used the L1-derived rate, as it is based on structurally similar sequences.
We estimated that the Ta family emerged as early as ~4 MYA but that most of the amplification occurred in the last 3 Myr (fig. 3A
). We confirmed this recent origin of the Ta family by PCR. Ta familyspecific primers generated a product only from humans but not from its closest relative, the chimpanzee, which diverged from humans ~6 MYA (Goodman et al. 1998
) (fig. 4
). In contrast, primers specific for older primate L1 families generated products in both humans and other primates (fig. 4
). The data in figure 3A
indicate that the Ta-1 subfamily first arose about 2.5 MYA, with most (75%) of the Ta-1 elements having been generated during the last ~1.6 Myr. In contrast, 80% of the Ta-0 elements had apparently already been inserted before ~1.6 MYA.
Slot blot analysis showed that the haploid human genome contains ~700 Ta elements (fig. 5 ). At the time of our search, ~13% of the human genome had been sequenced and this portion contained 73 Ta elements (after removal of the entries that had been purposely cloned). This would extrapolate to ~560 elements, which agrees reasonably well with the hybridization data (table 1 , cf. columns 2 and 5). Of these 73 "nonselected" Ta elements, 55 (75%) were long enough (fig. 1 ) to be classified as either Ta-1 or Ta-0. Applying this proportion to the ~700 Ta elements detected by hybridization gives a value of ~525 classifiable Ta elements (table 1 , column 3). Hybridization revealed ~300 sequences that hybridize to the Ta-1 (T, G) character (figs. 2, 4, and 5 and table 1 ). As mentioned above, ~12% of this hybridization may be due to non-Ta elements and correction for these yields ~265 Ta-1 elements per haploid genome (table 1 ). Thus, amplification of the Ta-1 subfamily accounts for at least half of the Ta family. This value is consistent with the proportion of these elements (counting only the nonselected ones) present in the GenEMBL database (cf. columns 3 and 6 in table 1 ).
|
|
|
Polymorphic Ta Inserts
Figures 2 and 3
show that the Ta family has a distinct subfamily structure and that these subfamilies are of different but somewhat overlapping divergence. If these differences actually reflect different ages (fig. 3
), then we would expect that the loci which contain inserts of the less divergent (younger) subfamilies would be polymorphic (for the presence or absence of the L1 insert) compared with the loci that contain inserts of the older L1 subfamilies. For brevity, we refer to these insert-containing loci as polymorphic and fixed L1 inserts, respectively. We designed oligonucleotide primers cognate to the 5' (F) and 3' (R) flanking sequences of each of 14 nonselected Ta-0 and 25 nonselected Ta-1 elements present in GenEMBL (fig. 1
). Figure 7
summarizes the results of duplicate PCR reactions with these oligonucleotides (one with the F/R pair, the second with R and an L1 (L) oligonucleotide on a single individual from each of eight populations. Whereas 17 (68%) of 25 Ta-1 inserts were polymorphic, only 3 (22%) of 14 Ta-0 inserts were. These results are consistent with the difference between the divergency (age) of the Ta-1 and Ta-0 subfamilies (fig. 3A
). Since we sampled only a single individual from each of the eight populations, it is possible that some "fixed" L1-containing loci may be absent in some individuals. However, this would not change the fact that any arbitrarily sampled Ta-1containing locus is much rarer in humans than an arbitrarily chosen Ta-0containing locus.
|
|
Figure 8
also compares our results with previous studies of Ta elements using the cell culture retrotransposition assay (Sassaman et al. 1997
; Kimberland et al. 1999
). Although the earlier failure to clone Ta-1d elements (see above) somewhat limits the comparison, there is nonetheless a generally excellent correlation between the grouping of an element within a young cluster (i.e., in Ta-1 or the "young" Ta-0 subsets) and whether the element is active in the retrotransposition assay. In particular, those elements that are among the most active in this assay (l19088, L1.3; l19092, L1.4; af148856, L1RP) are all Ta-1d elements (Sassaman et al. 1997
; Kimberland et al. 1999
).
![]() |
Discussion |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Both Ta-0 and Ta-1 harbor additional subsets of elements, and although the various Ta subgroups are clearly distinguished by a number of nucleotide characters, the alignment in figure 2 shows that determining the genealogical relationship between them could be difficult. First, while some characters are exclusively (or largely) confined to a particular subset (e.g., the deletion at position 74 or the T at position 1820), others are shared between several members of two or more subsets: the C at position 155, the G at position 1645, the G at position 2380, the T at position 5131. Furthermore, although the T at position 1820 that distinguishes Ta-1d is an apparent derived character (this T is not present in the five ancestral non-Ta elements), the diagnostic G at position 355 of Ta-1d may be an ancestral character being present in some of the ancestral non-Ta elements. This inconsistent pattern of shared characters and admixture of derived and ancestral characters will confound phylogenetic methods, like maximum parsimony or maximum likelihood, that rely on the pattern of inherited characters. Additionally, all of the Ta sequences are quite similar; most Ta-0 elements are 0.7%1.1% divergent from most Ta-1 elements. Nonetheless, the neighbor-joining method, which is a distance method and groups sequences based on their overall sequence similarity, did generate some well-supported subsets, including Ta-1d (fig. 8 ).
The different subsets within the Ta family could also be distinguished by their degree of sequence divergence (fig. 3
) and the extent to which their inserts are polymorphic in human populations (figs. 7 and 8
). The excellent correlation between the low sequence divergence of a particular Ta subset and the high degree of polymorphism of its members again validates the use of sequence divergence within an L1 subfamily as a measure of its age (Pascale et al. 1993
; Adey et al. 1994
; Casavant and Hardies 1994
; Furano et al. 1994
; Verneau, Catzeflis, and Furano 1998
). Thus, the differentiation within the Ta family was the result of the successive amplification of different L1 subfamilies over the last ~4 Myr since it first arose.
The distributions of pairwise divergence between members of the Ta-1 and Ta-0 subfamilies (fig. 3A
) suggest that the amplification of Ta-1, and particularly Ta-1d (fig. 3B
), generally coincided with a decline of transpositional activity of Ta-0 elements, despite the fact that Ta-0 still retains some active subsets (fig. 8
). This apparent replacement of a preexisting active subfamily by a more recent one recapitulates the mode of L1 evolution in rats (Cabot et al. 1997
; Hayward, Zavanelli, and Furano 1997
) and mice (Adey et al. 1994
; Casavant and Hardies 1994
; Saxton and Martin 1998
). The distributions of pairwise divergence shown in figure 3
closely resemble those expected when L1 families are the product of a single lineage of replication-competent elements (the "master model") (Clough et al. 1996
). This model, wherein novel L1 subfamilies belonging to a single dominant lineage are generated successively in time, describes L1 evolution in most of the studied mammalian taxa. Although distinct active L1 subsets may coexist for short periods, a single lineage usually prevails (Rikke, Garvin, and Hardies 1991
; Pascale et al. 1993
; Adey et al. 1994
; Casavant and Hardies 1994
; Furano et al. 1994
).
The differentiation of a single 3' UTR lineage into distinct subfamilies that have waxed and waned over the past ~4 Myr describes the evolutionary dynamics of the human Ta family. This has also been observed for a recent rat L1 family (Cabot et al. 1997
). Figure 2
shows that the Ta 3' UTR sequence has hardly changed since it first arose in hominids ~4 MYA. In contrast, significant variation has taken place in all other regions of the Ta family. Selective constraint on the 3' UTR sequence or adaptive changes in the non-3' UTR sequence (or both) could account for this difference. An essential role for the 3' UTR sequence in L1 replication, as has been demonstrated for L1-like elements in insects (Luan and Eickbush 1995
; Mathews et al. 1997
), could account both for the conservation of the Ta 3' UTR sequence shown here and for the persistence of certain sequence motifs in the 3' UTR throughout mammalian L1 evolution (Howell and Usdin 1997
). On the other hand, adaptive changes in the non-3' UTR region could have enabled the element to either evade host repression or gain replicative superiority over existing elements. Whatever the case, competition for replicative dominance could explain the successive replacement of existing L1 subfamilies by novel ones (e.g., fig. 3
) and the expansion of one L1 subfamily at the expense of another (Casavant and Hardies 1994
; Cabot et al. 1997
).
In addition to mimicking the evolutionary dynamics of murine L1 evolution, Ta has also been accumulating at about the same rate per generation as its murine counterparts. The average accumulation (haploid) rate of the Ta family since it began amplifying in earnest ~3.5 MYA (fig. 3A
) is ~0.2 elements per 1,000 years (700 ÷ 3,500; table 1
). The most recent active L1 subfamilies in murine rodents have accumulated ~12 elements per 1,000 years for the L1Rnmlvi2-rn subfamily in Rattus norvegicus (~5,600 elements per 450,000 years; Cabot et al. 1997
) and ~5 elements per 1,000 years for the mouse Mus musculus Tf subfamily (~1,825 elements per 325,000 years, the average of three published determinations; DeBerardinis et al. 1998
; Naas et al. 1998
; Saxton and Martin 1998
). Because the impact of L1 amplification would be related to the number of elements accumulating per generation, we normalized the accumulation rates using generation times of ~20 years for humans and ~0.5 years for rodents. The normalized accumulation rates are ~0.006 elements per generation in rats and ~0.0025 elements per generation in mice, as compared with ~0.004 elements per generation in humans. These accumulation rates reflect the rate of both L1 transposition and L1 elimination by either selection (in the case of deleterious or lethal insertions) or genetic drift. Although these factors could be very different between these species, our results suggest that L1 transpositional activity might play equally important roles in the genetic diversity and evolution of both human and rodent genomes.
About 90% of the Ta-1d and a smaller percentage of Ta-1nd and Ta-0 insertions are polymorphic and could be useful for gene mapping or population genetics studies. The number of polymorphic inserts due to Ta-1d alone may well number several hundred in world human populations. L1 insertions have several advantages over commonly used polymorphic markers such as microsatellites and single-nucleotide polymorphisms. Parallelism (i.e., independent retrotransposition into the same chromosomal location) is unlikely, and the ancestral state of the polymorphism is known (i.e., the absence of inserts). Therefore, Ta insertions, like Alu insertions, could be used as robust markers to root population trees (e.g., Batzer et al. 1994
; Novick et al. 1998
) or allele phylogenies (e.g., Hammer 1994
).
![]() |
Conclusions |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
|
![]() |
Acknowledgements |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
![]() |
Footnotes |
---|
1 Keywords: L1/LINE-1
human
evolution
polymorphism
retrotransposon
1 Present address: Institut des Sciences de l'Evolution, Case courrier 064, Université Montpellier II, Montpellier, France.
3 Address for correspondence and reprints: Anthony V. Furano, National Institutes of Health, Building 8, Room 203, 8 Center Drive MSC 0830, Bethesda, Maryland 20892-0830. E-mail: avf{at}helix.nih.gov
![]() |
literature cited |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Adey, N. B., S. A. Schichman, D. K. Graham, S. N. Peterson, M. H. Edgell, and C. A. I. Hutchison. 1994. Rodent L1 evolution has been driven by a single dominant lineage that has repeatedly acquired new transcriptional regulatory sequences. Mol. Biol. Evol. 11:778789.
Altschul, S. F., W. Gish, W. Miller, E. W. Myers, and D. J. Lipman. 1990. Basic local alignment search tool. J. Mol. Biol. 215:403410.[ISI][Medline]
Batzer, M. A., P. L. Deininger, U. Hellmann-Blumberg, J. Jurka, D. Labuda, C. M. Rubin, C. W. Schmid, E. Zietkiewicz, and E. Zuckerkandl. 1996. Standardized nomenclature for Alu repeats. J. Mol. Evol. 42:36.[ISI][Medline]
Batzer, M. A., M. Stoneking, M. Alegria-Hartman et al. (11 co-authors). 1994. African origin of human-specific polymorphic Alu insertions. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 91:1228812292.
Cabot, E. L., B. Angeletti, K. Usdin, and A. V. Furano. 1997. Rapid evolution of a young L1 (LINE-1) clade in recently speciated Rattus taxa. J. Mol. Evol. 45:412423.[ISI][Medline]
Casane, D., S. Boissinot, B. H. Chang, L. C. Shimmin, and W. Li. 1997. Mutation pattern variation among regions of the primate genome. J. Mol. Evol. 45:216226.[ISI][Medline]
Casavant, N. C. 1994. Dynamics of LINE-1 amplification in the mouse. Ph.D. thesis, University of Texas Health Science Center, San Antonio.
Casavant, N. C., and S. C. Hardies. 1994. The dynamics of murine LINE-1 subfamily amplification. J. Mol. Biol. 241:390397.[ISI][Medline]
Clough, J. E., J. A. Foster, M. Barnett, and H. A. Wichman. 1996. Computer simulation of transposable element evolution: random template and strict master models. J. Mol. Evol. 42:5258.[ISI][Medline]
D'Ambrosio, E., S. D. Waitzkin, F. R. Witney, A. Salemme, and A. V. Furano. 1986. Structure of the highly repeated, long interspersed DNA family (LINE or L1Rn) of the rat. Mol. Cell. Biol. 6:411424.[ISI][Medline]
DeBerardinis, R. J., J. L. Goodier, E. M. Ostertag, and H. H. Kazazian Jr. 1998. Rapid amplification of a retrotransposon subfamily is evolving the mouse genome. Nat. Genet. 20:288290.[ISI][Medline]
Dombroski, B. A., S. L. Mathias, E. Nanthakumar, A. F. Scott, and H. H. J. Kazazian. 1991. Isolation of an active human transposable element. Science 254:18051808.
Dombroski, B. A., A. F. Scott, and H. H. J. Kazazian. 1993. Two additional potential retrotransposons isolated from a human L1 subfamily that contains an active retrotransposable element. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 90:65136517.
Easteal, S., and G. Herbert. 1997. Molecular evidence from the nuclear genome for the time frame of human evolution. J. Mol. Evol. 44:S121S132.
Fanning, T., and M. Singer. 1987a. The LINE-1 DNA sequences in four mammalian orders predict proteins that conserve homologies to retrovirus proteins. Nucleic Acids Res. 15:22512260.
. 1987b. LINE-1: a mammalian transposable element. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 910:203212.
Furano, A. V. 2000. The biological properties and evolutionary dynamics of mammalian LINE-1 retrotransposons. Prog. Nucleic Acids Res. Mol. Biol. 64:255294.[ISI][Medline]
Furano, A. V., B. E. Hayward, P. Chevret, F. Catzeflis, and K. Usdin. 1994. Amplification of the ancient murine Lx family of long interspersed repeated DNA occurred during the murine radiation. J. Mol. Evol. 38:1827.[ISI][Medline]
Goodman, M., C. A. Porter, J. Czelusniak, S. L. Page, H. Schneider, J. Shoshani, G. Gunnell, and C. P. Groves. 1998. Toward a phylogenetic classification of primates based on DNA evidence complemented by fossil evidence. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 9:585598.[ISI][Medline]
Hammer, M. F. 1994. A recent insertion of an alu element on the Y chromosome is a useful marker for human population studies. Mol. Biol. Evol. 11:749761.
Hardies, S. C., S. L. Martin, C. F. Voliva, C. A. Hutchison III, and M. H. Edgell. 1986. An analysis of replacement and synonymous changes in the rodent L1 repeat family. Mol. Biol. Evol. 3:109125.[Abstract]
Hattori, M., S. Kuhara, O. Takenaka, and Y. Sakaki. 1986. L1 family of repetitive DNA sequences in primates may be derived from a sequence encoding a reverse transcriptase-related protein. Nature 321:625628.
Hayward, B. E., M. Zavanelli, and A. V. Furano. 1997. Recombination creates novel L1 (LINE-1) elements in Rattus norvegicus. Genetics 146:641654.
Hillis, D. M., and J. J. Bull. 1993. An empirical test of bootstrapping as a method for assessing confidence in phylogenetic analysis. Syst. Biol. 42:182192.[ISI]
Holmes, S. E., B. A. Dombroski, C. M. Krebs, C. D. Boehm, and H. H. J. Kazazian. 1994. A new retrotransposable human L1 element from the LRE2 locus on chromosome 1q produces a chimaeric insertion. Nat. Genet. 7:143148.[ISI][Medline]
Howell, R., and K. Usdin. 1997. The ability to form intrastrand tetraplexes is an evolutionarily conserved feature of the 3' end of L1 retrotransposons. Mol. Biol. Evol. 14:144155.[Abstract]
Hutchison, C. A. III, S. C. Hardies, D. D. Loeb, W. R. Shehee, and M. H. Edgell. 1989. LINEs and related retroposons: long interspersed repeated sequences in the eucaryotic genome. Pp. 593617 in D. E. Berg and M. M. Howe, eds. Mobile DNA. American Society for Microbiology, Washington, D.C.
Kazazian, H. H. Jr., and J. V. Moran. 1998. The impact of L1 retrotransposons on the human genome. Nat. Genet. 19:1924.[ISI][Medline]
Kazazian, H. H. J., C. Wong, H. Youssoufian, A. F. Scott, D. G. Phillips, and S. E. Antonarakis. 1988. Haemophilia A resulting from de novo insertion of L1 sequences represents a novel mechanism for mutation in man. Nature 332:164166.
Kimberland, M. L., V. Divoky, J. Prchal, U. Schwahn, W. Berger, and H. H. Kazazian Jr. 1999. Full-length human L1 insertions retain the capacity for high frequency retrotransposition in cultured cells. Hum. Mol. Genet. 8:15571560.
Luan, D. D., and T. H. Eickbush. 1995. RNA template requirements for target DNA-primed reverse transcription by the R2 retransposable element. Mol. Cell. Biol. 15:38823891.[Abstract]
Mathews, D. H., A. R. Banerjee, D. D. Luan, T. H. Eickbush, and D. H. Turner. 1997. Secondary structure model of the RNA recognized by the reverse transcriptase from the R2 retrotransposable element. RNA 3:116.
Mathias, S. L., A. F. Scott, H. H. J. Kazazian, J. D. Boeke, and A. Gabriel. 1991. Reverse transcriptase encoded by a human transposable element. Science 254:18081810.
Moran, J. V., R. J. DeBerardinis, and H. H. Kazazian Jr. 1999. Exon shuffling by L1 retrotransposition. Science 283:15301534.
Moran, J. V., S. E. Holmes, T. P. Naas, R. J. DeBerardinis, J. D. Boeke, and H. H. Kazazian Jr. 1996. High frequency retrotransposition in cultured mammalian cells. Cell 87:917927.
Naas, T. P., R. J. DeBerardinis, J. V. Moran, E. M. Ostertag, S. F. Kingsmore, M. F. Seldin, Y. Hayashizaki, S. L. Martin, and H. H. Kazazian. 1998. An actively retrotransposing, novel subfamily of mouse L1 elements. EMBO J. 17:590597.
Novick, G. E., C. C. Novick, J. Yunis et al. (11 co-authors). 1998. Polymorphic Alu insertions and the Asian origin of Native American populations. Hum. Biol. 70:2339.[ISI][Medline]
Pascale, E., C. Liu, E. Valle, K. Usdin, and A. V. Furano. 1993. The evolution of long interspersed repeated DNA (L1, LINE 1) as revealed by the analysis of an ancient rodent L1 DNA family. J. Mol. Evol. 36:920.[ISI][Medline]
Rikke, B. A., L. D. Garvin, and S. C. Hardies. 1991. Systematic identification of LINE-1 repetitive DNA sequence differences having species specificity between Mus spretus and Mus domesticus. J. Mol. Biol. 219:635643.[ISI][Medline]
Rogers, J. H. 1985. The origin and evolution of retroposons. Int. Rev. Cytol. 93:187279.[ISI][Medline]
Saitou, N., and M. Nei. 1987. The neighbor-joining method: a new method for reconstructing phylogenetic trees. Mol. Biol. Evol. 4:406425.[Abstract]
Sassaman, D. M., B. A. Dombroski, J. V. Moran, M. L. Kimberland, T. P. Naas, R. J. DeBerardinis, A. Gabriel, G. D. Swergold, and H. H. Kazazian Jr. 1997. Many human L1 elements are capable of retrotransposition. Nat. Genet. 16:3743.[ISI][Medline]
Saxton, J. A., and S. L. Martin. 1998. Recombination between subtypes creates a mosaic lineage of LINE-1 that is expressed and actively retrotransposing in the mouse genome. J. Mol. Biol. 280:611622.[ISI][Medline]
Schwartz, A., D. C. Chan, L. G. Brown, R. Alagappan, D. Pettay, C. Disteche, B. McGillivray, A. de la Chapelle, and D. C. Page. 1998. Reconstructing hominid Y evolution: X-homologous block, created by X-Y transposition, was disrupted by Yp inversion through LINE-LINE recombination. Hum. Mol. Genet. 7:111.
Skowronski, J., T. G. Fanning, and M. F. Singer. 1988. Unit-length line-1 transcripts in human teratocarcinoma cells. Mol. Cell. Biol. 8:13851397.[ISI][Medline]
Smit, A. F. A. 1999. Interspersed repeats and other mementos of transposable elements in mammalian genomes. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 9:657663.[ISI][Medline]
Smit, A. F. A., G. Tóth, A. D. Riggs, and J. Jurka. 1995. Ancestral, mammalian-wide subfamilies of LINE-1 repetitive sequences. J. Mol. Biol. 246:401417.[ISI][Medline]
Swofford, D. L. 1998. PAUP*. Phylogenetic analysis using parsimony (*and other methods). Version 4. Sinauer, Sunderland, Mass.
Usdin, K., and A. V. Furano. 1989. Insertion of L1 elements into sites that can form non-B DNA. Interactions of non-B DNA-forming sequences. J. Biol. Chem. 264:2073620743.
Verneau, O., F. Catzeflis, and A. V. Furano. 1997. Determination of the evolutionary relationships in Rattus sensu lato (Rodentia: Muridae) using L1 (LINE-1) amplification events. J. Mol. Evol. 45:424436.[ISI][Medline]
. 1998. Determining and dating recent rodent speciation events by using L1 (LINE-1) retrotransposons. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 95:1128411289.
Voliva, C. F., C. L. Jahn, M. B. Comer, C. A. Hutchison III, and M. H. Edgell. 1983. The L1Md long interspersed repeat family in the mouse: almost all examples are truncated at one end. Nucleic Acids Res. 11:88478859.[Abstract]
Voliva, C. F., S. L. Martin, C. A. Hutchison III, and M. H. Edgell. 1984. Dispersal process associated with the L1 family of interspersed repetitive DNA sequences. J. Mol. Biol. 178:795813.[ISI][Medline]
Wade, D. P., L. H. Puckey, B. L. Knight, F. Acquati, A. Mihalich, and R. Taramelli. 1997. Characterization of multiple enhancer regions upstream of the apolipoprotein(a) gene J. Biol. Chem. 272:3038730399 [published erratum appears in J. Biol. Chem. 273:3798].
Yang, Z., D. Boffelli, N. Boonmark, K. Schwartz, and R. Lawn. 1998. Apolipoprotein(a) gene enhancer resides within a LINE element. J. Biol. Chem. 273:891897.