Skip to content

Advertisement

You're viewing the new version of our site. Please leave us feedback.

Learn more

BMC Genetics

Open Access

A test of somatic mosaicism in the androgen receptor gene of Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis)

BMC Genetics201516:125

https://doi.org/10.1186/s12863-015-0284-y

Received: 12 August 2015

Accepted: 19 October 2015

Published: 26 October 2015

Abstract

Background

The androgen receptor, an X-linked gene, has been widely studied in human populations because it contains highly polymorphic trinucleotide repeat motifs that have been associated with a number of adverse human health and behavioral effects. A previous study on the androgen receptor gene in carnivores reported somatic mosaicism in the tissues of a number of species including Eurasian lynx (Lynx lynx). We investigated this claim in a closely related species, Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis). The presence of somatic mosaicism in lynx tissues could have implications for the future study of exonic trinucleotide repeats in landscape genomic studies, in which the accurate reporting of genotypes would be highly problematic.

Methods

To determine whether mosaicism occurs in Canada lynx, two lynx individuals were sampled for a variety of tissue types (lynx 1) and tissue locations (lynx 1 and 2), and 1,672 individuals of known sex were genotyped to further rule out mosaicism.

Results

We found no evidence of mosaicism in tissues from the two necropsied individuals, or any of our genotyped samples.

Conclusions

Our results indicate that mosaicism does not manifest in Canada lynx. Therefore, the use of hide samples for further work involving trinucleotide repeat polymorphisms in Canada lynx is warranted.

Keywords

Somatic mosaicismAndrogen receptorCanada lynxTrinucleotide repeats

Background

The X-linked androgen receptor (AR) gene codes for a transcription factor that controls the binding of androgens in different tissue types [13]. The organization and location of the AR gene on the X-chromosome has been conserved for both male and female placental, marsupial and monotreme mammals [3, 4]. Androgenic hormones including testosterone and dihydrotestosterone are integral in a number of bodily processes, most notably sexual differentiation and development [5]. The wide range of functions that the AR gene encompasses has concurrently lead to a range of disease-associated phenotypes, which have been linked to variable tandem trinucleotide repeats occurring in the first codon of the AR gene coding sequence [6]. Trinucleotide repeats are repeat structures that consist of units that are 3 nucleotides long, caused by the selection against frame-shift mutations which would alter the reading frame of the transcribed protein [7]. The natural variation of these repeats within humans indicates that these motifs have a critical role in “normal” protein function and evolutionary adaptation [8, 9]. More specifically, trinucleotide repeats are known to affect phenotype, such that disease in humans has been attributed to frequency of repeats exceeding a certain threshold, beyond which, the transcriptional activity of the AR gene is affected [10, 11]. For this reason, trinucleotide repeat fragments of the AR gene have been extensively studied in humans for their potential role in infertility [12, 13], aggressive or dominant behavior [1416], criminal activity [17, 18], personality disorders [19, 20], and the development of some cancers and other diseases [2125].

Studies of the AR gene in wildlife are rare but are likely to become more frequent in the future as the role of trinucleotide markers in mediating adaptive evolution in contemporarily short time-frames becomes more clear [26]. While it is well understood that climate change will have profound effects on wildlife [27], we are currently unable to predict whether species will be able to adapt and evolve new strategies to cope with the increasing environmental change. The characterization of exonic standing genetic variability will therefore allow for a better understanding of the adaptive capacities of populations to be resilient to the effects of stressful events including climate change. As a result, there is a recognized need to identify and characterize the genetic variability of fitness-related traits [28] and the response of genes to environmental change [29, 30]. Trinucleotide repeats are particularly desirable candidates for studies of the genomics of adaptation because they occur in as many as 20 % of human genes, have relatively higher rates of mutation than single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), and can show consistently high levels of within-population variation [6, 26]. Importantly, such high rates of mutation may facilitate adaptation to stressors (e.g., climate change) in contemporarily short timeframes. Recently, several studies have demonstrated the potential evolutionary and adaptive importance of trinucleotide repeats within clock genes in both birds [31] and fish [32]. Thus, the study of trinucleotide repeat structures in a range of other vertebrate species [8, 26, 33, 34] offers the potential to use the properties of microsatellite repeats [35] to understand the genomics of rapid adaptation.

Historically, the characterization of the AR gene has been affected by biological and technical issues, with implications for accurate genotyping. More specifically, somatic mutations and allele peak morphology issues have been encountered upon scoring size separated alleles differing in the number of exonic trinucleotide repeats [3638]. Mosaicism in biological systems can be defined as “the presence of more than one genetically distinct cell line in a single organism” in which tissue-to-tissue genetic variations occur that may not follow Mendelian rules of inheritance ([39]; p. 748). More recently, Köhler et al. (2005) [p. 106] describe somatic mosaicism as “different proportions of cells containing either mutant or wild-type proteins that are present in various tissues of the same individual [22]”. Telenius et al. (1994) provided the first report of heterogenic somatic mosaicism of CAG repeats in tissues [40]. Since then, several studies have detected tissue-specific somatic mosaicism of CAG repeats in the AR gene in both the neural and non-neural tissues of individuals with Huntington’s disease, spinal bulbar muscular atrophy, spinocerebellar ataxia type 1, denatorubural-pallidoluysian atrophy and Machado-Joseph disease [21]. For individuals with androgen insensitivity syndrome, genotype-phenotype discrepancies have been traced to somatic mosaicism of the AR gene itself [36, 37].

Much of the research conducted on the AR gene to date has involved the study of human disease. Trinucleotide repeats in the AR gene have yet to be correlated with transcriptional activity in species other than humans, and the limited number of studies that have been conducted on other species suggests lower levels of variability than in humans [41, 42]. Of particular interest is a study by Wang et al. (2012) who examined the variability of AR trinucleotide repeat in carnivores through sequencing of the first exon in the AR gene (containing three trinucleotide repeat tracts) [42]. The authors reported a change in CAG repeat number in the same tissues of a number of carnivore species, indicating tissue-specific mosaicism patterns in the AR gene of studied species. In their study, somatic mosaicism was evident in all three poly-glutamine tracts within exon 1of the AR gene, with a maximum extent of five alleles in several carnivore species. The authors concluded that the higher frequency of tissue-specific mosaicism in the AR gene of carnivores compared to other studied taxa implies that carnivores tend to exhibit mosaicism [42].

The objective of our study was to test for somatic mosaicism in a carnivore, the Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis). Canada lynx are closely related to the Eurasian lynx (Lynx lynx), one of the species shown by Wang et al. (2012) to exhibit somatic mosaicism. We consider it important to evaluate the potential for somatic mosaicism in Canada lynx before conducting further research on the AR gene. If allelic patterns of mosaicism are revealed, simple genotyping of individuals may not provide conclusive results with respect to genetic variability of individuals at this gene, which could complicate high throughput genotyping of individuals at the AR gene. Further, if mosaicism in this gene is caused by trinucleotide repeat instabilities, there will be important consequences for future studies that wish to examine trinucleotide repeat variability in wildlife species at any gene. This makes the investigation of potential somatic mutations a worthwhile goal as somatic mosaicism could significantly confound the use of trinucleotide repeat markers in the study of the adaptive genomics of wildlife. In such a case, we will need to begin considering the more dynamic nature of genes within genomes when designing studies, in particular those containing trinucleotide repeats.

We test the hypothesis that somatic mosaicism occurs in the androgen receptor gene in Canada lynx. We report AR genotypes for multiple samples taken from two necropsied lynx, as well as hide samples from lynx sampled at multiple locations across Canada.

Methods

To address the question of whether or not Canada lynx exhibit mosaicism at the AR gene, we designed a study that was composed of two levels of analysis. First, we conducted necropsies and tissue sampling of two lynx individuals (one full carcass and one hide), which allowed for multiple samples of various tissue types to be taken from one individual and a variety of sampling locations spanning the entire lynx carcasses in both individuals. Second, as we recognize that the sample size from the necropsies alone is limited, we genotyped additional samples collected across the Canada lynx range to verify our findings on a broader scale. Canada lynx are currently listed as not at risk by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC), and are legally harvested annually. Thus, we obtained our additional samples either through licensed, commercial fur harvest, or under the authority of the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (OMNRF). While sequence data would provide additional information about repeat purity (i.e., perfect vs. imperfect repeat structures) and the potential for SNPs within the flanking regions of the repeats, we conducted microsatellite genotyping on all of our samples as mosaicism can very easily be detected as size based variants. Mosaicism was evident in [42] largely based on size, indicating that if mosaicism is present in our study species, we should be able to detect it given our study used the same primers as [42] in addition to our large sample size.

Necropsy sampling

To test the hypothesis that somatic mosaicism exists in Canada lynx tissues, a necropsy was conducted for strategic sampling of two lynx individuals. The first individual (lynx 1) consisted of an entire carcass and the second (lynx 2) was a hide. The lynx carcass was a road-killed individual that was collected by the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry in 2010 and stored frozen until tissue sampling was conducted to ensure optimal preservation of high-quality tissues for DNA extraction. The lynx hide was collected in 2006 from a fur harvester in Ontario, Canada. It was important for the purpose of assessing the influence of the AR gene in different tissues, to obtain and analyze the genetic profile of a large number of different cell types. A total of 87 hide, muscle, liver and brain samples were taken from the two individuals. The liver we sampled had five lobes; two main lobes rested on top of three smaller lobes.

DNA extraction, quantification and amplification

DNA extraction and quantification was solely performed on the necropsy samples. DNA for the remaining 1,672 lynx samples (979 males and 693 females) was previously extracted from hide tissue according to the protocols outlined in [43], and was available in working concentration for PCR amplification. The availability of hide tissues from both museum specimens and fur auction houses makes this tissue type highly accessible for the genetic surveying of Canada lynx and other furbearer populations (e.g., [4447]). The hide samples in our study represent individuals trapped in Yukon, British Columbia, Alberta, Manitoba, Ontario, and Quebec, Canada, as well as Alaska, USA.

Tissues were prepared for extraction by mincing approximately 1 mm X 1 mm pieces of tissue and placing it in 500ul of 1X lysis buffer [4 M Urea, 0.2 M NaCl, 0.5 % n-lauroyl sarcosine, 10 mM 1,2-cyclohexanediaminetetraacatic acid (CDTA), 0.1 M Tris–HCl (pH 8) and 600 U/ml proteinase K (Roche Applied Science, Laval QC)]. DNA from tissues was extracted by a modified version of the MagneSil® (Promega) manufacturers protocol, in which 200ul of the prepared tissues was substituted for the suggested 60ul of whole blood, and the number of wash steps was reduced [48]. All liquid handling was carried out by a JANUS® Automated Workstation from Perkin Elmer. Extracted DNA was quantified by PicoGreen® (Invitrogen) method according to the manufacturers protocols [49, 50].

From quantification, samples were normalized to a working concentration of 2.5 ng/ul and amplified with the primers developed by [42], which capture a ~700 bp region of exon 1 containing three trinucleotide repeat tracts. Amplification was conducted in a 10ul reaction containing deionized water (Invitrogen), 1X PCR Reaction Buffer (Invitrogen), 2 mM MgCl2 (Invitrogen), 0.2 mM dNTP solution (Invitrogen), 0.2 mg/mL BSA, 0.4uM forward and reverse primers (forward primer labeled with the fluorescent dye HEX) (Integrated DNA Technologies), 0.025U Invitrogen Platinum Taq DNA Polymerase, and 5 ng of DNA. The PCR reaction was run in a Bio-Rad DNA Engine Dyad and Dyad Disciple thermocycler under the following conditions: 95 °C for 10 min; followed by 29 cycles of 94 °C for 30 s, 58 °C for 1 min, and 72 °C for 1 min, and completed with a step of 65 °C for 15 min.

Difficulties and biases in PCR amplification have been previously reported for the AR gene (e.g., [38]), most likely due to the high GC content in many exonic trinucleotide repeat fragments including AR. Many researchers have since obtained successful amplification and improved results by substituting Invitrogen Platinum Taq DNA Polymerase for the standard Invitrogen Taq DNA Polymerase (e.g., [51]). Such improvements were also evident in our study (Fig. 1).
Fig. 1

Differential peak morphologies of androgen receptor alleles resulting from DNA dilution and reagent use. Lynx positive control DNA sample amplified with Invitrogen Taq DNA Polymerase and diluted to 1:10 (a), 1:20 (b), and 1:50 (c) ratios with deionized water. Lynx positive control DNA sample amplified with Invitrogen Platinum Taq DNA Polymerase (no dilution necessary) (d)

Sexing of lynx necropsy individuals

The knowledge of sex for each individual allowed for the development of a search image for detecting mosaicism. For male lynx tissues, a homozygous genotype is expected as the AR gene is X-linked, and males should therefore only inherit a single copy of the gene. In our study, any heterozygote male individual is a candidate for exhibiting mosaicism. Female lynx can be homozygous or heterozygous at the AR gene naturally, however, the allelic diversity of lynx at this locus predicts three allele patterns should be observed if mosaicism is occurring. If mosaicism were detected in female individuals with three alleles, the extent of mosaicism in females would still be an underestimate given that heterozygous females could be undetected somatic homozygous individuals. In the necropsy analysis, mosaicism would be suggested if more than the expected number of alleles were discovered across multiple samples from the same individual (i.e., more than one allele for males and two alleles for females across all samples).

To confirm sex of necropsied lynx, two samples from each individual (one hide and one muscle from Lynx 1 and two hide samples from Lynx 2) were amplified at two sex loci. The first primer pair, SRY-Y53-3D-F and SRY-Y53-3C-R amplified a ~218 bp region of the SRY genetic marker [52]. The second locus, a ~447 bp region of the ZFX/ZFY genetic marker, was amplified with the primer pair ZFX-P3-3EZ-F and ZFX-P3-5EZ-R [53]. Amplification was conducted in a 10ul reaction containing deionized water (Invitrogen), 10X PCR Reaction Buffer (Invitrogen), 50 mM MgCl2 (Invitrogen), 100 mM dNTP solution (Invitrogen), 3 mg/mL BSA, 40uM forward and reverse primers (Integrated DNA Technologies) mentioned above (forward primers labeled with the fluorescent dye HEX), 0.0375U Invitrogen Taq DNA Polymerase, and 5 ng of DNA. The PCR reaction was run in a Bio-Rad DNA Engine Dyad and Dyad Disciple thermocycler under the following conditions: 94 °C for 15 min; followed by 29 cycles of 94 °C for 30 s, 52 °C for 1 min 30 s, and 72 °C for 1 min 30 s, and completed with a step of 60 °C for 45 min. Amplified samples were run on an 80 mL, 1.5 % agarose gel stained with ethidium bromide at 90 volts for 45 min, and visualized under ultraviolet light and to determine sex. Female individuals were identified by the presence of two bands, and males, by the presence of three bands on the gel. Controls of a known male and female lynx were included to rule out technological errors and strengthen conclusions.

Genotyping

For genotyping, 5ul of MapMarker 1000 X-Rhodamine (MM-1000-Rox) size standard (BioVentures) was mixed into 1 mL of deionized HiDi Formamide (Applied Biosystems), and 9.5ul of this product was added to 0.5ul of each amplified sample. Genotyping was performed on the Applied Biosystems 3730 DNA Analyzer. Genotypes were scored with SoftGenetics LLC GeneMarker AFLP/Genotyping Software Version 1.91. We used GenAlEx version 6.5 (Peakall & Smouse 2006, 2012) to calculate allele and genotype frequencies for both males and females.

Results & discussion

We observed ten different alleles across all genotypes samples, ranging between sizes 711–744 bp (including flanking sequence). The smallest three alleles observed were only found in a single female individual each, and no individuals with alleles 717 or 723 within the allelic range were found. The most common alleles were observed in the middle of the allelic range (Tables 1 and 2).
Table 1

Allele frequencies of the trinucleotide repeat tracts within exon 1 of the androgen receptor (AR) gene in Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis)

Allele

Frequency

Frequency

Frequency

(Males only)

(Females only)

(All samples)

711

0.000

0.001

0.000

714

0.000

0.001

0.000

720

0.000

0.001

0.000

726

0.109

0.078

0.096

729

0.401

0.379

0.392

732

0.289

0.335

0.313

735

0.100

0.119

0.108

738

0.077

0.075

0.076

741

0.007

0.009

0.008

744

0.008

0.003

0.006

Frequencies are shown for male samples only (N = 979), female samples only (N = 693), and both males and females combined (all samples; N = 1672). As the AR gene is X-linked, and all males are therefore homozygous, allele frequencies are equivalent to genotype frequencies for males. No individuals were observed with alleles 717 or 723. The two most common alleles are in bold

Table 2

Genotype frequencies of the trinucleotide repeat tract within exon 1 of the androgen receptor (AR) gene in Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis). Frequencies are shown for female samples only (N = 693)

First allele/Second allele

711

714

720

726

729

732

735

738

741

744

711

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

714

0.001

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

720

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

726

-

-

-

0.009

-

-

-

-

-

-

729

-

-

-

0.059

0.160

-

-

-

-

-

732

-

-

-

0.039

0.253

0.123

-

-

-

-

735

-

-

-

0.019

0.078

0.081

0.020

-

-

-

738

-

-

0.001

0.017

0.040

0.048

0.017

0.012

-

-

741

-

-

-

0.004

0.006

0.004

0.001

0.001

-

-

744

-

-

-

-

0.001

0.001

0.001

0.001

-

-

Sex identification indicated that the necropsied lynx represented one female (lynx 1) and one male (lynx 2) specimen. Of the tissues analyzed at the AR gene from these individuals (62 from lynx 1 and 25 from lynx 2), all resulted in a single clear genotype for each individual (a consistent homozygote and heterozygote genotype across all tissue samples for the male and female, respectively).

Additional genotyping of the 1,672 lynx samples did not detect somatic mosaicism in any of our male or female Canada lynx samples, although a single sample was removed from the data set due to contamination (see Additional file 1). All other samples fell within our search image of what is expected in a typical individual not exhibiting mosaicism (all males were homozygotes and no females exhibited more than two alleles). The absence of any evidence of mosaicism in Canada lynx does not provide conclusive evidence that it is not present in other, unanalyzed individuals, however, given the high allelic diversity of the AR gene in Canada lynx, if undetected, mosaicism would still only be present at a negligible level due to the large sample size we surveyed. For the purposes of our study, the overall lack of detection, coupled with our large sample size indicates that mosaic events do not pose a high risk of confounding large-scale analyses and genotyping in this study system, nor is an important biological mechanism within Canada lynx.

Our findings are inconsistent with those of Wang et al. (2012) who found AR mosaicism in multiple carnivore species [42]. It is possible that expression of the somatic mutation causing AR mosaicism is absent in Canada lynx in particular, but does manifest in Eurasian lynx and other carnivore tissues at a higher rate. As we evaluated a large sample of lynx hides, we suggest that lynx hide tissue can be used to study the AR gene in Canada lynx without the risk of issues caused by mosaicism.

Conclusions

The implications of somatic mosaicism within exonic trinucleotide repeat polymorphisms can have important influences on the accurate reporting and use of genotypes in studies of landscape genomics. This potential issue, however, is rarely considered in research outside of human disease studies. As the role of exonic repeat fragments in mediating adaptive evolution becomes clearer, it is likely that the prevalence of their use in wildlife genomic studies will increase. This makes the evaluation of somatic mosaicism in these repeat fragments imperative. In this study, we report no evidence of mosaicism in our two necropsied lynx individuals, or our larger screening of Canada lynx hide tissue. All males were homozygous for a single allele, and there was no evidence of more than two alleles in females, which would have been predicted if mosaicism was present given the allelic diversity of the gene in lynx. Our results indicate that even if mosaicism is present in this species, its prevalence is low given our inability to detect mosaicism in our large sample size. Therefore, the use of hide samples for further work involving trinucleotide repeat polymorphisms in Canada lynx is warranted, given that the AR gene appears to follow typical patterns of a X-linked gene in this species.

Availability of data

Genotypic data supporting the findings of this study can be found on the Dryad Digital Repository: http://dx/doi.org/10.5061/dryad.h43c1.

Abbreviations

AR: 

Androgen receptor

SNPs: 

Single nucleotide polymorphisms

COSEWIC: 

Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada

OMNRF: 

Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry

Declarations

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge the North American Fur Auctions (NAFA) for the contribution of all Canada lynx hide samples, and the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (OMNRF) for the contribution of the two lynx carcasses utilized in this study. We would also like to acknowledge Carrie Sadowski for her help in conducting the lynx necropsy sampling, and Marina Kerr and Cornelya Klutsch for help with the analytical troubleshooting of the data.

This study was funded by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (grant number STPGP 391719–10) and the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry.

Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Department of Environmental & Life Sciences, Trent University
(2)
Wildlife Research and Monitoring Section, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry
(3)
Biology Department, Trent University

References

  1. Lubahn DB, Joseph DR, Sar M, Tan J, Higgs HN, Larson RE, et al. The human androgen receptor: complementary deoxyribonucleic acid cloning, sequence analysis and gene expression in prostate. Mol Endocrinol. 1988;2:1265–75.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Colvard DS, Eriksent EF, Keetingt PE, Wilsont EM, Lubahnt DB, Frencht FS, et al. Identification of androgen receptors in normal human osteoblast-like cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1989;86:854–7.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Gelmann EP. Molecular Biology of the Androgen Receptor. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20:3001–15.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Spencer JA, Watson JM, Lubahn DB, Joseph DR, French FS, Wilson EM, et al. The androgen receptor gene is located on a highly conserved region of the X chromosomes of marsupial and monotreme as well as eutherian mammals. J Hered. 1991;82:134–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Traish AM, Goldstein I, Kim NN. Testosterone and erectile function: from basic research to a new clinical paradigm for managing men with androgen insufficiency and erectile dysfunction. Eur Urol. 2008;52:54–70.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  6. Ryan CP, Crespi BJ. Androgen receptor polyglutamine repeat number: models of selection and disease susceptibility. Evol Appl. 2013;6:180–96.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Duitama JA, Zablotskaya R, Gemayel A, Jansen S, Belet JR, Vermeech KJ, et al. Large-scale analysis of tandem repeat variability in the human genome. Nucleic Acids Res. 2014;42:5728–41.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Haerty W, Golding BG. Low-complexity sequences and single amino acid repeats: not just “junk” peptide sequences. Genome. 2010;53:753–62.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. King DG, Hannan AJ. Evolution of simple sequence repeats as mutable sites. In: Tandem Repeat Polymorphisms: Genetic Plasticity, Neural Diversity and Disease. New York: Landes Biosciences, Texas & Springer Science & Business Media; 2012. p. 10–23.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  10. Bhandari R, Brahmachari SK. Analysis of CAG/CTG triplet repeats in the human genome: Implication in transcription factor gene regulation. J Biosci. 1995;20:613–27.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  11. Buchanan G, Yang M, Cheong A, Harris JM, Irvine RA, Lambert PF, et al. Structural and functional consequences of glutamine tract variation in the androgen receptor. Hum Mol Genet. 2004;13:1677–92.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Dowsing AT, Yong EL, Clark M, Mclachlan RI, de DM K, Trounson AO. Linkage between male infertility and trinucleotide repeat expansion in the androgen-receptor gene. Lancet. 1999;354:640–3.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Mifsud A, Sim CKS, Boettger-Tong H, Moreira S, Lamb DJ, Lipshultz LI, et al. Trinucleotide (CAG) repeat polymorphisms in the androgen receptor gene: molecular markers of risk for male infertility. Fertil Steril. 2001;75:275–81.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Archer J. The influence of testosterone on human aggression. Br J Psychol. 1991;82:1–28.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Archer J. Testosterone and human aggression: an evaluation of the challenge hypothesis. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2006;30:319–45.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Scordalakes EM, Rissman EF. Aggression and arginine vasopressin immunoreactivity regulation by androgen receptor and estrogen receptor alpha. Genes Brain Behav. 2004;3:20–6.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Cheng D, Hong C-J, Liao D-L, Tsai S-J. Association study of androgen receptor CAG repeat polymorphism and male violent criminal activity. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2006;31:548–52.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Rajender S, Pandu G, Sharma JD, Gandhi KPC, Singh L, Thangaraj K. Reduced CAG repeats length in androgen receptor gene is associated with violent criminal behavior. Int J Legal Med. 2008;122:367–72.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Jönsson EG, von Gertten C, Gustavsson JP, Yuan Q-P, Lindblad-Toh K, Forslund K, et al. Androgen receptor trinucleotide repeat polymorphism and personality traits. Psychiatr Genet. 2001;11:19–23.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Seidman SN, Araujo AB, Roose SP, McKinlay JB. Testosterone level, androgen receptor polymorphism, and depressive symptoms in middle-aged men. Biol Psychiatry. 2001;50:371–6.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Ito Y, Tanaka F, Yamamoto M, Doyu M, Nagamatsu M, Riku S, et al. Somatic mosaicism of the expanded CAG trinucleotide repeat in mRNAs for the responsible gene of Machado-Joseph disease (MJD), dentatorubral-pallidoluysian atrophy (DRPLA), and spinal and bulbar muscular atrophy (SBMA). Neurochem Res. 1998;23:25–32.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Köhler B, Lumbroso S, Leger J, Audran F, Grau ES, Kurtz F, et al. Androgen insensitivity syndrome: somatic mosaicism of the androgen receptor in seven families and consequences for sex assignment and genetic counseling. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2005;90:106–11.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Song Y-N, Geng J-S, Liu T, Zhong Z-B, Liu Y, Xia B-S, et al. Long CAG repeat sequence and protein expression of androgen receptor considered as prognostic indicators in male breast carcinoma. PLoS One. 2012;7:e52271.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Summers K, Crespi B. The androgen receptor and prostate cancer: a role for sexual selection and sexual conflict? Med Hypotheses. 2008;70:435–43.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Tanaka F, Reeves MF, Ito Y, Matsumoto M, Li M, Miwa S, et al. Tissue-specific somatic mosaicism in spinal and bulbar muscular atrophy is dependent on CAG-repeat length and androgen receptor-gene expression level. Am J Hum Genet. 1999;65:966–73.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Gemayel R, Cho J, Boeynaems S, Verstrepen KJ. Beyond Junk-Variable Tandem Repeats as Facilitators of Rapid Evolution of Regulatory and Coding Sequences. Genes (Basel). 2012;3:461–80.PubMed CentralView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  27. Bellard C, Berteksmeier C, Leadley P, Thuiller W, Courchamp F. Impacts of climate change on the future of biodiversity. Ecol Lett. 2012;15:365–77.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Berteaux D, Réale D, McAdam AG, Boutin S. Keeping pace with fast climate change: Can arctic life count on evolution? Integr Comp Biol. 2004;44:140–51.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Dawson TP, Jackson ST, House JI, Prentice IC, Mace GM. Beyond predictions: biodiversity conservation in a changing climate. Science. 2011;332:53–8.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Franks S, Hoffmann A. Genetics of climate change adaptation. Annu Rev Genet. 2012;46:185–208.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Johnsen A, Fidler AE, Kuhn S, Carter KL, Hoffmann A, Barr IR, et al. Avian Clock gene polymorphism: evidence for a latitudinal cline in allele frequencies. Mol Ecol. 2007;16:4867–80.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. O’Malley KG, Ford MJ, Hard JJ. Clock polymorphisms in Pacific salmon: evidence for variable selection along a latitudinal gradient. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci. 2010;277:3703–14.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  33. Laidlaw J, Gelfand Y, Ng KW, Garner HR, Ranganathan R, Benson G, et al. Elevated basal slippage mutation rates among the Canidae. J Hered. 2007;98:452–60.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Gemayel R, Vinces MD, Legendre M, Verstrepen KJ. Variable tandem repeats accelerate evolution of coding and regulatory sequences. Annu Rev Genet. 2010;44:445–77.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Press MO, Carlson KD, Queitsch C. The overdue promise of short tandem repeat variation for heritability. Trends Genet. 2014;11:504–12.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  36. Holterhus P-M, Brüggenwirth HT, Hiort O, Kleinkauf-Houcken A, Kruse K, Sinnecker GHG, et al. Mosaicism due to a somatic mutation of the androgen receptor gene determines phenotype in androgen insensitivity syndrome. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 1997;82:3584–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Gottlieb B, Beitel LK, Trifiro MA. Somatic mosaicism and variable expressivity. Trends Genet. 2001;17:79–82.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Mutter GL, Boynton KA. PCR bias in amplification of androgen receptor alleles, a trinucleotide repeat marker used in clonality studies. Nucleic Acids Res. 1995;23:1411–18.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Youssoufian H, Pyeritz RE. Mechanisms and consequences of somatic mosaicism in humans. Nat Rev Genet. 2002;3:748–58.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Telenius H, Kremer B, Goldberg YP, Theilmann J, Andrew SE, Zeisler J, et al. Somatic and gonadal mosaicism of the Huntington disease gene CAG repeat in brain and sperm. Nat Genet. 1994;6:409–14.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Mubiru JN, Cavazos N, Hemmat P, Garcia-Forey M, Shade RE, Rogers J. Androgen receptor CAG repeat polymorphism in males of six non-human primate species. J Med Primatol. 2012;41:67–70.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Wang Q, Zhang X, Wang X, Zeng B, Jia X, Hou R, et al. Polymorphism of CAG repeats in androgen receptor of carnivores. Mol Biol Rep. 2012;39:2297–303.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Row JR, Gomez C, Koen EL, Bowman J, Murray DL, Wilson PJ. Dispersal promotes high gene flow among Canada lynx populations across mainland North America. Conserv Genet. 2012;13:1259–68.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  44. Beauclerc KB, Bowman J, Schulte-Hostedde AI. Assessing the cryptic invasion of a domestic conspecific: American mink in their native range. Ecol Evol. 2013;3:2296–309.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Zigouris J, Schaefer JA, Fortin C, Kyle CJ. Phylogeography and post-glacial recolonization in wolverines (Gulo gulo) from across their circumpolar distribution. PLoS One. 2013;8:e83837.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Koen EL, Bowman J, Lalor JL, Wilson PJ. Continental-scale assessment of the hybrid zone between bobcat and Canada lynx. Biol Conserv. 2014;178:107–15.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  47. Koen EL, Bowman J, Wilson PJ. Isolation of peripheral populations of Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis). Can J Zoolog. 2015;93:521–30.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  48. Promega: MagneSil® ONE, Fixed Yield Blood Genomic System. 2012:1–8.Google Scholar
  49. Invitrogen: Quant-iT™ PicoGreen® dsDNA Reagent and Kits. 2008:1–7.Google Scholar
  50. Ahn SJ, Costa J, Emanuel JR. PicoGreen quantitation of DNA: effective evaluation of samples pre- or post-PCR. Nucleic Acids Res. 1996;24:2623–5.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Gustafson DR, Wen MJ, Koppanati BM. Androgen receptor gene repeats and indices of obesity in older adults. Int J Obes. 2003;27:75–81.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  52. Fain S, LeMay J. Gender identification of humans and mammalian wildlife species from PCR amplified sex linked genes. Proc Am Adacemy Forensic Sci. 1995;1:34.Google Scholar
  53. Aasen E, Medrano JF. Amplification of the Zfy and Zfx genes for sex identification in humans, cattle, sheep and goats. Nat Biotechnol. 1990;8:1279–81.View ArticleGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© Prentice et al. 2015

Advertisement