<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!DOCTYPE article  PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v3.0 20080202//EN" "http://dtd.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/3.0/journalpublishing3.dtd"><article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" dtd-version="3.0" xml:lang="en" article-type="research article"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">AJMB</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>American Journal of Molecular Biology</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">2161-6620</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Scientific Research Publishing</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4236/ajmb.2017.73011</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">AJMB-77807</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Articles</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="Discipline-v2"><subject>Biomedical&amp;Life Sciences</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>
 
 
  Identification and Characterization of Reverse Transcriptase Fragments of Long Interspersed Nuclear Elements (LINEs) in the &lt;i&gt;Morus notabilis&lt;/i&gt; Genome
 
</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Bi</surname><given-names>Ma</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Youchao</surname><given-names>Xin</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Lulu</surname><given-names>Kuang</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Fei</surname><given-names>Hou</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Ningjia</surname><given-names>He</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib></contrib-group><aff id="aff1"><addr-line>State Key Laboratory of Silkworm Genome Biology, Southwest University, Chongqing, China</addr-line></aff><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>13</day><month>06</month><year>2017</year></pub-date><volume>07</volume><issue>03</issue><fpage>138</fpage><lpage>152</lpage><history><date date-type="received"><day>May</day>	<month>1,</month>	<year>2017</year></date><date date-type="rev-recd"><day>Accepted:</day>	<month>July</month>	<year>17,</year>	</date><date date-type="accepted"><day>July</day>	<month>21,</month>	<year>2017</year></date></history><permissions><copyright-statement>&#169; Copyright  2014 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc. </copyright-statement><copyright-year>2014</copyright-year><license><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY). http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</license-p></license></permissions><abstract><p>
 
 
  Reverse transcriptase (
  rt) fragments from LINE retrotransposons in the mulberry genome were analyzed in terms of heterogeneity, phylogeny, and chromosomal distribution. We amplified and characterized conserved domains of the 
  rt using degenerate primer pairs. Sequence analyses indicated that the 
  rt fragments were highly heterogeneous and rich in A/T bases. The sequence identity ranged from 31.8% to 99.4%. Based on sequence similarities, the 
  rt fragments were categorized into eight groups. Furthermore, similar stop codon distribution patterns among a series of clones in the same group indicated that they underwent a similar evolutionary process. Interestingly, phylogenetic analyses of the 
  rt fragments isolated from mulberry and 13 other plant species revealed that two distantly related taxa (mulberry and 
  Paeonia suffruticosa) grouped together. It does not appear that this phenomenon resulted from horizontal transposable element transfer. Fluorescence 
  in situ hybridization analysis revealed that most of the 
  rt fragments were concentrated in the subtelomeric and pericentromeric regions of the mulberry chromosomes, but that these elements were not abundant in the mulberry genome. Future studies will focus on the potential roles of these elements in the subtelomeric and pericentromeric regions of the mulberry genome.
 
</p></abstract><kwd-group><kwd>&lt;i&gt;iMorus notabilis&lt;/i&gt;</kwd><kwd> LINE Retrotransposons</kwd><kwd> Reverse Transcriptase</kwd><kwd> Characterization</kwd><kwd> Fluorescence in site Hybridization</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><body><sec id="s1"><title>1. Introduction</title><p>Transposable elements (TEs), which were first discovered in maize by Barbara McClintock, are also known as “jumping genes” because of their ability to replicate and move to new genomic locations [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref1">1</xref>] . They are ubiquitous and abundant components of all eukaryotic genomes, and play important roles in the structural organization and evolution of genes and genomes [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref2">2</xref>] - [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref7">7</xref>] . Based on their mechanism of transposition, TEs are classified as retrotransposons (Class I) or DNA transposons (Class II) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref8">8</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref9">9</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref10">10</xref>] . Class I retrotransposons move to new chromosomal locations via an RNA intermediate (i.e., “copy and paste” mechanism). In contrast, Class II DNA transposons move via a DNA intermediate (i.e., “cut and paste” mechanism) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref6">6</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref8">8</xref>] . Depending on whether or not they are flanked by long terminal repeats (LTRs), retrotransposons can be further classified as LTR or non-LTR retrotransposons [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref10">10</xref>] . Non-LTR retrotransposons are usually further divided into long or short interspersed nuclear elements (LINEs and SINEs, respectively) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref10">10</xref>] .</p><p>The LINE retrotransposons are ubiquitous, showing a great variation in structure and size [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref11">11</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref12">12</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref13">13</xref>] . A large body of knowledge on mammalian LINEs has been accumulated [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref14">14</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref15">15</xref>] . In contrast, LINEs in plants have been poorly investigated. The first identified plant LINE retrotransposon was Cin4 in Zea mays, which inactivates the A1 gene following its insertion into the A1 3'-untranslated region [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref16">16</xref>] . Since that pioneer study, numerous other LINEs have been identified in taxa such as Lilium speciosum (del2) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref17">17</xref>] , Arabidopsis thaliana (Tal 1-1) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref18">18</xref>] , Chlorella vulgaris (Zepp) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref19">19</xref>] , Hordeum vulgare (BLIN) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref20">20</xref>] , Oryza sativa (Karma) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref21">21</xref>] , Ipomoea batatas (LIb) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref22">22</xref>] , Beta vulgaris (BNR) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref13">13</xref>] , and so on. Full-length LINEs have one or two open reading frames (ORFs) encoding proteins required for reverse transcription. The ORF1 sequence contains the gag gene, while genes for an endonuclease (en), reverse transcriptase (rt), and a cysteine-rich domain (Cys) encoding a putative RNA-binding motif are present in ORF2 [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref12">12</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref23">23</xref>] . The rt is a key enzyme for retrotransposition and shares several conserved domains that are typical of retroviral RNA-directed DNA polymerases [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref24">24</xref>] . Previously studies have suggested that amplification of rt fragments using degenerate oligonucleotide primers complementary to the conserved domains of the rt is a feasible and efficient approach to evaluate the characterization of LINE retrotransposons in various plant species [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref18">18</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref25">25</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref26">26</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref27">27</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref28">28</xref>] .</p><p>Morus (mulberry) is a representative genus of the cosmopolitan family Moraceae (Rosales), and comprises of more than 13 species (over 1000 cultivars), which are widely distributed in Asia, Africa, Europe, and the United States [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref29">29</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref30">30</xref>] . Meanwhile, mulberry attracts people for its delicious fruit and rich source of medicines against certain serious diseases [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref31">31</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref32">32</xref>] . The relationship between mulberry and silkworm is part of the best example of “plant defense-insect adaptation” [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref33">33</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref34">34</xref>] . The mulberry species, Morus notabilis, has a relatively small genome (estimated to be 357 Mb), and cytogenetic data suggest that M. notabilis is composed of 14 chromosomes (2n = 14) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref35">35</xref>] . The previous studies published from our lab are the only papers describing the presence of LINE retrotransposons in the mulberry genome [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref35">35</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref36">36</xref>] . Detailed characterization of LINE retrotransposable elements in mulberry has not been carried out so far.</p><p>In the present work, our objective was to characterize the diversity of rt fragments of LINE retrotransposons from the M. notabilis genome, which were amplified and cloned using degenerate primers. Meanwhile, this present work also attempted to characterize their heterogeneity and phylogenetic relationships. In addition, fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) was used to clarify the distribution of these elements within the chromosomes. These results will lead us to better understand the LINE retrotransposons roles on the structural, functional, and evolutionary dynamics of mulberry genomes.</p></sec><sec id="s2"><title>2. Methods</title><sec id="s2_1"><title>2.1. Plant Materials and DNA Isolation</title><p>Young leaves of M. notabilis C.K.Schn (Taxonomy ID: 981085) (2n = 14) were obtained from mulberry trees growing in Ya’an, Sichuan Province, China. The collected young leaves were stored in liquid nitrogen until used. Total genomic DNA used as a template for the cloning was extracted from the young leaves using a standard cetyltrimethylammonium bromide (CTAB) protocol [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref37">37</xref>] .</p></sec><sec id="s2_2"><title>2.2. Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) and Cloning of Amplicons</title><p>The rt sequences of LINEs were amplified from the genomic DNA of mulberry using degenerate primers (forward: 5'-GGGATCCNGGNCCNGAYGGNWT-3'; reverse: 5'-SWNARNGGRTCNCCYTG-3') [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref18">18</xref>] . The primers were synthesized by BGI (Shenzhen, China). PCR reaction mixture contained 20 ng DNA, 10 pmol of each primer, 0.25 mM of each dNTPs (Takara, Japan), 10&#215; PCR buffer (including 3.5 mM MgCl<sub>2</sub>, Takara, Japan), and 1 U rTaq polymerase (Takara, Japan). PCR amplification was carried out in 96-well thermal cycler (Applied Biosystems, USA). The PCR program was: 94˚C for 5 min; 35 cycles at 94 &#176;C for 1 min, 50˚C for 1 min, and 72˚C for 1 min; 72˚C for 7 min. PCR products were analyzed on 1.5% agarose gels and purified using the Agarose Gel DNA Extraction Kit (TaKaRa, Japan) according to the manufacturer’s instructions. Purified products were cloned into the pMD19-T vector (TaKaRa, Japan) following the manufacturer’s instructions. Two independent rounds of PCR amplification and cloning were carried out for the elements. The positive clones were verified by PCR and sequenced in both directions using M13 universal primers at Sangon Biotech (Shanghai, China). Clones were named according to the following rules: Mno stands for the Morus notabilis, L means the type of the element (L for LINE), and the serial stands for the clone number from Morus notabilis.</p></sec><sec id="s2_3"><title>2.3. Sequence Data and Phylogenetic Analysis</title><p>Cloned sequences were compared with the previously characterized plant retroelement sequences in the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) (http://blast.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/) and Genetic Information Research Institute (GIRI) (http://www.girinst.org/) databases using BLAST [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref38">38</xref>] . The nucleotide and protein sequences were aligned using MUSCLE (version 3.8.31) with default parameters [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref39">39</xref>] . Sequence identities were calculated by BioEdit (version 7.2.5) with BLOSUM62 matrix [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref40">40</xref>] . The locations of stop codons in rt sequences were demonstrated using the Gene Structure Display Server (GSDS, http://gsds.cbi.pku.edu.cn/) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref41">41</xref>] . Nucleotide sequences of the isolated rt fragments and 29 LINE rt sequences from 13 other plant species (Supplementary material 1) were aligned by MUSCLE (version 3.8.31) with default parameters [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref39">39</xref>] . In order to perform phylogenetic analysis, MEGA6 was used to find the best-fit substitution models for those datasets with default parameters [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref42">42</xref>] . The best substitution model (Tamura 3-parameter + G, T92 + G) was used to construct a phylogenetic tree according to the maximum-likelihood method with the pairwise deletion in MEGA 6 [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref42">42</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref43">43</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref44">44</xref>] . Tree topology was assessed by bootstrap analysis with 1000 resampling replicates.</p></sec><sec id="s2_4"><title>2.4. Chromosome Preparation and FISH</title><p>Mulberry chromosome spreads were prepared using young leaves treated with 2 mM 8-hydroxyquinoline in darkness for 3 h at room temperature (24˚C). Samples were fixed in a methanol/glacial acetic acid solution (v/v = 3:1) for 2 h at 4˚C, incubated in 1/15 M KCl for 30 min, and digested by an enzyme mixture (5% cellulose and 2.5% pectinase) at 37˚C for 3 h. After the cell walls were completely degraded, samples were spread onto slides. According to the manufacturer’s instructions for the PCR DIG Probe Synthesis Kit (Roche), probes were labeled with digoxigenin-11-dUTP using PCR with degenerate primers. Fluorescence in situ hybridization was completed according to a modified procedure [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref45">45</xref>] . Briefly, the prepared chromosomes (on slides) were treated with 100 μg/ml RNase for 15 min at 37˚C, and then digested with 1 μg/ml<sup> </sup>proteinase K for 10 min at 37˚C. Samples were denatured with 70% (v/v) formamide for 10 min at 72˚C, and then immediately treated for 5 min with each of 70%, 90%, and 100% (v/v) anhydrous ethanol solutions precooled to −20˚C. The hybridization mixture, which consisted of 2&#215; SSC, 0.25 μg salmon sperm DNA, 10% (w/v) SDS, 50% (w/v) DS, 50% (v/v) formamide, and 400 ng labeled DNA probe, was denatured for 6 min at 96˚C. The slides and hybridization mixture were incubated at 80˚C for 10 min and then maintained at 37˚C for 16 h. The slides were washed with 10% (v/v) formamide for 10 s, 2&#215; SSC at 37˚C for 5 min (five times), and 0.2% (v/v) Tween-20 at room temperature for 5 min. Digoxigenin was detected using FITC-conjugated anti-digoxigenin antibody (Roche), and chromosomes were counterstained with 4',6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI). Slides were viewed using a Leica DM2500 fluorescence microscope (Leica, Germany). Images were captured using the CV-M4+CL progressive scan charge-coupled device camera (DM2500, Leica) and analyzed using CytoVision software (version 7.3.1).</p></sec></sec><sec id="s3"><title>3. Results</title><sec id="s3_1"><title>3.1. Identification of rt Fragments</title><p>The sequences of the expected 580 bp amplicons [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref18">18</xref>] were compared with sequences available in the NCBI and GIRI databases using BLAST [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref38">38</xref>] . In total, two independent rounds of PCR and cloning yielded 43 clones with homology to known retroelements in the NCBI and GIRI (http://www.girinst.org/) database. All these elements were selected for further analysis. All the clones are deposited in GenBank under accession numbers: KT900650?KT900692 (Supplementary material 2).</p></sec><sec id="s3_2"><title>3.2. Characterization of LINE rt Sequences</title><p>Nucleotide sequences derived from the isolated rt fragments were aligned and used to construct a phylogenetic tree using the maximum-likelihood method in MEGA6. The identified rt sequences were classified into eight groups (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>). Group I contained the most rt clones (41.8%, 18/43), followed by Group VI (30.2%, 13/43). These two groups accounted for 72.1% of the 43 clones and were further classified into several subfamilies. Additionally, sequences of clones from the same group were of almost the same length, and were highly similar (&gt; 97%, except for Group II) (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref> and Supplementary material 2). The length of isolated LINE rt fragments ranged from 557 bp (MnoL_11, MnoL_13, and MnoL_15) to 595 bp (MnoL_31), with an average of 579 bp. The AT/GC ratio</p><fig id="fig1"  position="float"><label><xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref></label><caption><title> Phylogenetic analysis of reverse transcriptases from mulberry LINE retrotransposons. All cloned nucleotide sequences of reverse transcriptase fragments from mulberry were aligned by muscle (version 3.8.31) under default parameters. The best substitution model (Tamura 3-parameter + G), which was tested by MEGA6, was used to construct a phylogenetic tree based on a maximum-likelihood method with the pairwise deletion in MEGA6. Only more than 50% of the frequency of replicate (1000 replicates) trees were shown. The sequences were classified into eight groups: Group I to Group VIII</title></caption><graphic mimetype="image"   position="float"  xlink:type="simple"  xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/2-1070272x3.png"/></fig><p>ranged from 1.26 (MnoL_20 and MnoL_37) to 1.98 (MnoL_42), with an average of 1.37, which indicated the rt sequences are rich in AT (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref> and Supplementary material 2). Pairwise comparisons revealed that similarity among 43 rt nucleotide sequences ranged from 31.8% (MnoL_20 and MnoL_31, MnoL_31 and MnoL_36) to 99.4% (MnoL_17 and MnoL_29) (Supplementary material 3). These results suggest that the rt sequences isolated were highly heterogeneous.</p><p>The alignment of amino acid sequences of multiple isolated mulberry LINE rt rfragments evealed that all sequences contained several premature stop codons, with the exception of the MnoL_10 sequence (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref>). The MnoL_42 sequence had 16 premature stop codons, which is the most of any clone. Additionally, the premature stop codons were in similar locations in the sequences from the same group (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref>). Furthermore, all sequences carry frameshift mutation, except for the MnoL_10, MnoL_23, and MnoL_31 sequences (Supplementary material 4).</p><fig id="fig2"  position="float"><label><xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref></label><caption><title> Premature stop codon positions in reverse transcriptase sequences from mulberry LINE retrotransposons. The locations of premature stop codons in rt sequences were demonstrated using the Gene Structure Display Server (GSDS, http://gsds.cbi.pku.edu.cn/). Each straight red line represents one of the eight groups of reverse transcriptase sequences (from top to bottom: Group I to Group VIII). The blue line means reverse transcriptase fragments. Red block appeared in the blue line means premature stop codons</title></caption><graphic mimetype="image"   position="float"  xlink:type="simple"  xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/2-1070272x4.png"/></fig></sec><sec id="s3_3"><title>3.3. Phylogenetic Analysis of LINE rt Clones</title><p>Phylogenetic analyses indicated that the mulberry LINE rt sequences are homologous to rt sequences in other species (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3</xref>). One interesting feature of the result is that PTLRT19 grouped with other mulberry rt sequences (Group V, VI, VII), instead of other PTLRT (PTLRT12, PTLRT4, and PTLRT14) from Paeonia suffruticosa. In fact, P. suffruticosa and M. notabilis are distantly related taxa. The phylogenetic between the LINE-rt sequences and the host species trees were incongruous (APG, The Angiosperm Phylogeny Group, http://www.theplantlist.org).</p><fig id="fig3"  position="float"><label><xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3</xref></label><caption><title> Phylogenetic analysis of reverse transcriptase fragments from mulberry and other thirteen plant species. All nucleotide sequences of reverse transcriptase fragments from mulberry and the representative members of other thirteen plant species were aligned by muscle (version 3.8.31) with default parameters. Firstly, MEGA6 was used to find the best-fit substitution models for those datasets with default parameters. The best substitution model (Tamura 3-parameter + G) was used to construct a phylogenetic tree, using the maximum-likelihood method with the pairwise deletion in MEGA6. Frequency (&gt;50%) of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstraps test (1000 replicates) were shown. Detailed information of other thirteen plant species used in the present research was shown in supplementary material 1</title></caption><graphic mimetype="image"   position="float"  xlink:type="simple"  xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/2-1070272x5.png"/></fig></sec><sec id="s3_4"><title>3.4. Distribution of LINEs in the Mulberry Genome</title><p>Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) was performed to study the distribution of these sequences along mulberry chromosomes. Chromosomal localization of the LINEs elements was performed using a heterogeneous probe cocktail containing all isolated clones. FISH with such a cocktail revealed that hybridization signals were mainly concentrated in subtelomeric and pericentromeric regions (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4">Figure 4</xref>).</p></sec></sec><sec id="s4"><title>4. Discussion</title><sec id="s4_1"><title>4.1. Characterization of LINEs</title><p>All cloned rt fragments could be classified into eight groups (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>). Group I and VI consisted of the most rt clones (72.1%, 31/43). Only one clone (MnoL_42) contained in the Group VIII (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>). The range of nucleotide sequence similarities between MnoL_42 and the other clones was only 32.8 to 37.2% (Supplementary material 3). Meanwhile, the number of premature stop codons in MnoL_42 was 16, which is much higher than in the other clones (Supplementary material 2). These results indicated that mutations accumulated progressively over evolutionary time. Combining these data with the phylogenetic analysis results (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>) allows us to come to the conclusion that the MnoL_42 is an ancient LINE in mulberry.</p><p>The rt fragments amplified from the mulberry genome were highly heterogeneous. Almost all the 43 rt sequences described here contained frameshifts and premature stop codons (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref> and Supplementary material 5), which were the main causes of the observed heterogeneity. These results are consistent with those observed in other plants, including Hordeum species [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref20">20</xref>] and Vicia species [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref27">27</xref>] . Furthermore, the rt fragments from clones within the same group exhibited very few differences, suggesting that the heterogeneity among rt sequences is also the result of base substitutions, deletions, and insertions. As shown in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref>, similar stop codon distribution patterns among sequences of the rt fragments from the same group suggested that they went through a similar evolutionary process.</p><fig id="fig4"  position="float"><label><xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4">Figure 4</xref></label><caption><title> Chromosomal distribution of mulberry LINE retrotransposons by fluorescence in situ hybridization experiment. Images were captured using the CV-M4+CL progressive scan charge-coupled device camera (DM2500, Leica) and CytoVision software (version 7.3.1). (a) Cytological detection of mulberry chromosome; (b) blue ﬂuorescence signals correspond to 4'-6-diamidino-2-phenylindole-stained DNA; (c) green ﬂuorescence signals correspond to hybridization sites of reverse transcriptase probes; (d) the overlaid images of (b) and (c). Scale bar: 5 μm</title></caption><graphic mimetype="image"   position="float"  xlink:type="simple"  xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/2-1070272x6.png"/></fig><p>As indicated in <xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref> and Supplementary material 2, the AT/GC ratio ranged from 1.26 to 1.98, with an average of 1.37. The results suggested that the rt sequences are rich in AT bases, which is important for the LINE copy and paste replication mechanism [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref12">12</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref46">46</xref>] . An intact LINE element contains two open reading frames, ORF1 and ORF2. The ORF2 contains reverse transcriptase, which is a critical enzyme responsible for the replication process of LINE [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref12">12</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref23">23</xref>] . One of the critical steps in the life cycle of LINE is that the ORF2 protein cleaves the first one DNA strand at the target. Due to the fact that the target sequence in this site is always rich, AT bases and the target site are usually similar to consensus TTAAAA [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref47">47</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref48">48</xref>] ; the AT bases content is high in the rt sequences to ensure that the target sites can be identified efficiently in the replication process of LINE.</p><p>Interestingly, there were no frameshifts or premature stop codons in MnoL_ 10 (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref> and Supplementary material 5). All rt fragments from mulberry, with the exception of clone MonL_10, represented potential pseudogenes (possessed stop codons or frameshifts). It would be worthwhile carrying out further research on MonL_10, which may be a potential active transposable element.</p></sec><sec id="s4_2"><title>4.2. Phylogenetic Analysis of LINEs</title><p>Interestingly, we found a phenomenon that PTLRT19 grouped with other mulberry rt sequences (Group V, VI, and VII), instead of other PTLRT (PTLRT12, PTLRT4, and PTLRT14) from Paeonia suffruticosa (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3</xref>). While the two species (P. suffruticosa and M. notabilis) are distantly related taxa according to the APG (The Angiosperm Phylogeny Group, http://www.theplantlist.org). Similarity phenomenon had been found in other studies. For example, twenty-six genomes harbor at least one case of horizontal TE transfer (HTT), which may be important in TE-driven genome evolution, and these HTTs involve species as distantly related as palm and grapevine, tomato and bean, poplar and peach, and so on [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref49">49</xref>] .</p><table-wrap id="table1" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref></label><caption><title> Length, AT/GC ratio, and similarity [range (average)] of reverse transcriptase fragments from mulberry LINE retrotransposons</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" ></th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Number</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Length (bp)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >AT/GC</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Identity (%)</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >LINE</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >43</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >557 - 595 (579)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.26 - 1.98 (1.37)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >31.8 - 99.4 (61.3)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Group I</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >18</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >583 - 584 (584)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.35 - 1.40 (1.38)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >97.4 - 99.4 (98.6)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Group II</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >587 - 587 (587)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.28 - 1.28 (1.28)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >97.9</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Group III</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >586</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.46</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >-</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Group IV</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >557 - 557 (557)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.34 - 1.36 (1.35)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >98.5 - 99.1 (98.7)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Group V</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >576 - 579 (578)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.36 - 1.51 (1.43)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >66.7 - 98.6 (77.5)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Group VI</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >13</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >575 - 575 (575)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.26 - 1.32 (1.29)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >97.7 - 99.1 (98.6)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Group VII</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >595</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.32</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >-</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Group VIII</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >586</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.46</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >-</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>It is hypothesized that HTT may be the reason for this phenomenon observed in our research. Further analysis was performed in this work. Accordingly, three criteria have been defined for the detection of HTTs: (i) patchy distribution of the TEs in phylogenies, (ii) high sequence similarity of the TE between distantly related taxa, and (iii) phylogenetic incongruence between the TE and host species trees [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref50">50</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref51">51</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref52">52</xref>] . In the present work, although there is phylogenetic incongruence between the TE and trees of the two species, the range of nucleotide sequence similarities between PTLRT19 and mulberry rt sequences (Group V, VI, and VII) is only 0.520 to 0.562 (Supplementary material 4). These results suggest that the conclusion for PTLRT19 is that it is uncertain whether it represents a horizontal transfer event.</p></sec><sec id="s4_3"><title>4.3. Chromosomal Localization of LINE Retrotransposons</title><p>The LINE distribution patterns are associated with LINE functions. For example, FISH experiments in Cannabis sativa suggested that differential accumulation of LINE retrotransposon elements onto the Y chromosome leads to sex chromosome heteromorphism [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref53">53</xref>] . Although the chromosomal distribution of LINEs has been analyzed in only a few plant species, the FISH results here revealed that the distribution of LINEs in mulberry chromosomes was similar to that in sugar beet and peanut chromosomes [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref28">28</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref54">54</xref>] . Furthermore, the weak hybridization signals observed in this study indicated that LINEs were not abundant in the mulberry genome (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4">Figure 4</xref>). Most of the hybridization signals were concentrated in subtelomeric and pericentromeric regions. The subtelomeric and pericentromeric regions are generally considered to correspond to the constitutively heterochromatic region. In fact, there is extensive DNA methylation in these regions [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref55">55</xref>] . Thus, we hypothesized that the tendency for LINEs to insert into these regions may be related to DNA methylation in mulberry.</p><p>Meanwhile, recent reports suggest that LINE insertion into promoters can influence promoter functionality and gene regulation, resulting in up or down regulation of reporter genes [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref56">56</xref>] . Insertion of a LINE into a gene can induce alternative splicing or change gene expression patterns, which can result in a change in the function of the gene [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref57">57</xref>] . Although we currently have no evidence that the mulberry LINEs described here are active and functional, previous studies have indicated that some LINEs are active and functional in other species [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.77807-ref58">58</xref>] . So, our future studies will attempt to characterize the functions of mulberry LINEs more comprehensively, considering their localization in subtelomeric and pericentromeric regions.</p></sec></sec><sec id="s5"><title>Acknowledgements</title><p>The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest. The authors thank all the laboratory members who provided advice during this work. This project was funded by “Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (XDJK2015C116)” and “China Postdoctoral Science Foundation (2016M592622)”.</p></sec><sec id="s6"><title>Conflict of Interest</title><p>All authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.</p></sec><sec id="s7"><title>Cite this paper</title><p>Ma, B., Xin, Y.C., Kuang, L.L., Hou, F. and He, N.J. (2017) Identification and Characterization of Re- verse Transcriptase Fragments of Long In- terspersed Nuclear Elements (LINEs) in the Morus notabilis Genome. American Journal of Molecular Biology, 7, 138-152. https://doi.org/10.4236/ajmb.2017.73011</p></sec><sec id="s8"><title>All Links to Supplementary Materials Were Created and Listed Below</title></sec><sec id="s9"><title>Supplementary Material 1:</title><p>https://drive.google.com/open?id=0BwZN0JGYCBPNbmhweU1QT01nZkE</p></sec><sec id="s10"><title>Supplementary Material 2:</title><p>https://drive.google.com/open?id=0BwZN0JGYCBPNSVhhdkNXU2YzdUE</p></sec><sec id="s11"><title>Supplementary Material 3:</title><p>https://drive.google.com/open?id=0BwZN0JGYCBPNVjdXd1lPaURyNUU</p></sec><sec id="s12"><title>Supplementary Material 4:</title><p>https://drive.google.com/open?id=0BwZN0JGYCBPNQVllSmQ1MUhIWlk</p></sec><sec id="s13"><title>Supplementary Material 5</title><p>https://drive.google.com/open?id=0BwZN0JGYCBPNVTBjaXVmSm9UMzg</p><disp-formula id="scirp.77807-formula91"><graphic  xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/2-1070272x7.png"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>Submit or recommend next manuscript to SCIRP and we will provide best service for you:</p><p>Accepting pre-submission inquiries through Email, Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter, etc.</p><p>A wide selection of journals (inclusive of 9 subjects, more than 200 journals)</p><p>Providing 24-hour high-quality service</p><p>User-friendly online submission system</p><p>Fair and swift peer-review system</p><p>Efficient typesetting and proofreading procedure</p><p>Display of the result of downloads and visits, as well as the number of cited articles</p><p>Maximum dissemination of your research work</p><p>Submit your manuscript at: http://papersubmission.scirp.org/</p><p>Or contact ajmb@scirp.org</p></sec><sec id="s14"><title>NOTES</title></sec></body><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="scirp.77807-ref1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">McClintock, B. (1950) The Origin and Behavior of Mutable Loci in Maize. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 36, 344-355. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.36.6.344</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Bucher, E., Reinders, J. and Mirouze, M. (2012) Epigenetic Control of Transposon Transcription and Mobility in Arabidopsis. Current Opinion in Plant Biology, 15, 503-510. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pbi.2012.08.006</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Bennetzen, J.L. (2000) Transposable Element Contributions to Plant Gene and Genome Evolution. Plant Molecular Biology, 42, 251-269. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006344508454</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Feschotte, C. (2008) Transposable Elements and the Evolution of Regulatory Networks. Nature Reviews Genetics, 9, 397-405. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg2337</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Mita, P. and Boeke, J.D. (2016) How Retrotransposons Shape Genome Regulation. Current Opinion in Genetics &amp; Development, 37, 90-100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gde.2016.01.001</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Lisch, D. (2013) How Important Are Transposons for Plant Evolution? Nature Reviews Genetics, 14, 49-61. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg3374</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Rajput, M.K. (2015) Retrotransposons: The Intrinsic Genomic Evolutionist. Genes &amp; Genomics, 37, 113-123. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13258-014-0250-5</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Kumar, A. and Bennetzen, J.L. (1999) Plant Retrotransposons. Annual Review of Genetics, 33, 479-532. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.genet.33.1.479</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Du, J., Tian, Z., Hans, C.S., Laten, H.M., Cannon, S.B., Jackson, S.A., Shoemaker, R.C. and Ma, J. (2010) Evolutionary Conservation, Diversity and Specificity of LTR-Retrotransposons in Flowering Plants: Insights from Genome-Wide Analysis and Multi-Specific Comparison. The Plant Journal, 63, 584-598. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-313X.2010.04263.x</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Wicker, T., Sabot, F., Hua-Van, A., Bennetzen, J.L., Capy, P., Chalhoub, B., Flavell, A., Leroy, P., Morgante, M., Panaud, O., et al. (2007) A unified Classification System for Eukaryotic Transposable Elements. Nature Reviews Genetics, 8, 973-982. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg2165</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Noma, K., Ohtsubo, E. and Ohtsubo, H. (1999) Non-LTR Retrotransposons (LINEs) as Ubiquitous Components of Plant Genomes. Molecular and General Genetics, 261, 71-79. https://doi.org/10.1007/s004380050943</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Schmidt, T. (1999) LINEs, SINEs and Repetitive DNA: Non-LTR Retrotransposons in Plant Genomes. Plant Molecular Biology, 40, 903-910.https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006212929794</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Heitkam, T. and Schmidt, T. (2009) BNR—A LINE Family from Beta vulgaris—Contains a RRM Domain in Open Reading Frame 1 and Defines a L1 Sub-Clade Present in Diverse Plant Genomes. The Plant Journal, 59, 872-882.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-313X.2009.03923.x</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Belancio, V.P., Hedges, D.J. and Deininger, P. (2008) Mammalian Non-LTR Retrotransposons: For Better or Worse, in Sickness and in Health. Genome Research, 18, 343-358. https://doi.org/10.1101/gr.5558208</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Han, J.S. (2010) Non-Long Terminal Repeat (Non-LTR) Retrotransposons: Mechanisms, Recent Developments, and Unanswered Questions. Mobile DNA, 1, 15.https://doi.org/10.1186/1759-8753-1-15</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Schwarzsommer, Z., Leclercq, L., Gobel, E. and Saedler, H. (1987) Cin4, an Insert Altering the Structure of the A1 Gene in Zea mays, Exhibits Properties of Nonviral Retrotransposons. The EMBO Journal, 6, 3873-3880.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Leeton, P.R. and Smyth, D.R. (1993) An Abundant LINE-Like Element Amplified in the Genome of Lilium speciosum. Molecular and General Genetics, 237, 97-104.https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00282789</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Wright, D.A., Ke, N., Smalle, J., Hauge, B.M., Goodman, H.M. and Voytas, D.F. (1996) Multiple Non-LTR Retrotransposons in the Genome of Arabidopsis thaliana. Genetics, 142, 569-578.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Higashiyama, T., Noutoshi, Y., Fujie, M. and Yamada, T. (1997) Zepp, a LINE-Like Retrotransposon Accumulated in the Chlorella Telomeric Region. The EMBO Journal, 16, 3715-3723. https://doi.org/10.1093/emboj/16.12.3715</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Vershinin, A.V., Druka, A., Alkhimova, A.G., Kleinhofs, A. and Heslop-Harrison, J.S. (2002) LINEs and gypsy-Like Retrotransposons in Hordeum Species. Plant Molecular Biology, 49, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014469830680</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Komatsu, M., Shimamoto, K. and Kyozuka, J. (2003) Two-Step Regulation and Continuous Retrotransposition of the Rice LINE-Type Retrotransposon Karma. The Plant Cell, 15, 1934-1944. https://doi.org/10.1105/tpc.011809</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Yamashita, H. and Tahara, M. (2006) A LINE-Type Retrotransposon Active in Meristem Stem Cells Causes Heritable Transpositions in the Sweet Potato Genome. Plant Molecular Biology, 61, 79-84. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11103-005-6002-9</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Piskareva, O., Ernst, C., Higgins, N. and Schmatchenko, V. (2013) The Carboxy-Terminal Segment of the Human LINE-1 ORF2 Protein Is Involved in RNA Binding. FEBS Open Bio, 3, 433-437. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fob.2013.09.005</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Xiong, Y. and Eickbush, T.H. (1990) Origin and Evolution of Retroelements Based upon Their Reverse Transcriptase Sequences. The EMBO Journal, 9, 3353-3362.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Malik, H.S., Burke, W.D. and Eickbush, T.H. (1999) The Age and Evolution of Non-LTR Retrotransposable Elements. Molecular Biology and Evolution, 16, 793-805. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a026164</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Kubis, S.E., Castilho, A.M., Vershinin, A.V. and Heslop-Harrison, J.S. (2003) Retroelements, Transposons and Methylation Status in the Genome of Oil Palm (Elaeis guineensis) and the Relationship to Somaclonal Variation. Plant Molecular Biology, 52, 69-79. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023942309092</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Hill, P., Burford, D., Martin, D.M. and Flavell, A.J. (2005) Retrotransposon Populations of Vicia Species with Varying Genome Size. Molecular Genetics and Genomics, 273, 371-381. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00438-005-1141-x</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Samoluk, S.S., Robledo, G., Podio, M., Chalup, L., Ortiz, J.P.A., Pessino, S.C. and Seijo, J.G. (2015) First Insight into Divergence, Representation and Chromosome Distribution of Reverse Transcriptase Fragments from L1 Retrotransposons in Peanut and Wild Relative Species. Genetica, 143, 113-125.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10709-015-9820-y</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Nepal, M.P. and Ferguson, C.J. (2012) Phylogenetics of Morus (Moraceae) Inferred from ITS and trnL-trnF Sequence Data. Systematic Botany, 37, 442-450.https://doi.org/10.1600/036364412X635485</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Berg</surname><given-names> C.C. </given-names></name>,<etal>et al</etal>. (<year>2005</year>)<article-title>Moraceae Diversity in a Global Perspective. Proceedings of a Symposium on Plant Diversity and Complexity Patterns—Local, Regional and Global Dimensions</article-title><source> Biologiske Skrifter</source><volume> 55</volume>,<fpage> 423</fpage>-<lpage>440</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi"></pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Venkatesh, K.P. and Chauhan, S. (2008) Mulberry: Life Enhancer. Journal of Medicinal Plants Research, 2, 271-278.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Darias-Martin, J., Lobo-Rodrigo, G., Hernandez-Cordero, J., Diaz-Diaz, E. and Diaz-Romero, C. (2003) Alcoholic Beverages Obtained from Black Mulberry. Food Technology and Biotechnology, 41, 173-176.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Konno, K., Ono, H., Nakamura, M., Tateishi, K., Hirayama, C., Tamura, Y., Hattori, M., Koyama, A. and Kohno, K. (2006) Mulberry Latex Rich in Antidiabetic Sugar-Mimic Alkaloids Forces Dieting on Caterpillars. Proceedings of the National Academy of the United States of America, 103, 1337-1341.https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0506944103</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Daimon, T., Taguchi, T., Meng, Y., Katsuma, S., Mita, K. and Shimada, T. (2008) Beta-Fructofuranosidase Genes of the Silkworm, Bombyx mori: Insights into Enzymatic Adaptation of B. mori to Toxic Alkaloids in Mulberry Latex. Journal of Biological Chemistry, 283, 15271-15279. https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M709350200</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">He, N., Zhang, C., Qi, X., Zhao, S., Tao, Y., Yang, G., Lee, T.H., Wang, X., Cai, Q., Li, D., et al. (2013) Draft Genome Sequence of the Mulberry Tree Morus notabilis. Nature Communications, 4, Article No. 2445. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms3445</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Ma, B., Li, T., Xiang, Z. and He, N. (2015) MnTEdb, a Collective Resource for Mulberry Transposable Elements. Database (Oxford), 2015, bav004-bav004.https://doi.org/10.1093/database/bav004</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation publication-type="book" xlink:type="simple">Doyle, J. (1991) DNA Protocols for Plants. In: Hewitt, G.M., Johnston, A.W.B. and Young, J.P.W., Eds., Molecular Techniques in Taxonomy, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 283-293. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-83962-7_18</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Altschul, S.F., Gish, W., Miller, W., Myers, E.W. and Lipman, D.J. (1990) Basic Local Alignment Search Tool. Journal of Molecular Biology, 215, 403-410.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Edgar, R.C. (2004) MUSCLE: Multiple Sequence Alignment with High Accuracy and High Throughput. Nucleic Acids Research, 32, 1792-1797.https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkh340</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Hall, T. (2011) BioEdit: An Important Software for Molecular Biology. GERF Bulletin of Bioscience, 2, 6.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Guo, A.Y., Zhu, Q.H., Chen, X. and Luo, J.C. (2007) [GSDS: A Gene Structure Display Server]. Hereditas, 29, 1023-1026.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Tamura, K., Stecher, G., Peterson, D., Filipski, A. and Kumar, S. (2013) MEGA6: Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis Version 6.0. Molecular Biology and Evolution, 30, 2725-2729. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/mst197</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref43"><label>43</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Yang, Z. (1996) Maximum-Likelihood Models for Combined Analyses of Multiple Sequence Data. Journal of Molecular Evolution, 42, 587-596.https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02352289</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref44"><label>44</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Tamura</surname><given-names> K. </given-names></name>,<etal>et al</etal>. (<year>1992</year>)<article-title>Estimation of the Number of Nucleotide Substitutions When There Are Strong Transition-Transversion and G+C-Content Biases</article-title><source> Molecular Biology and Evolution</source><volume> 9</volume>,<fpage> 678</fpage>-<lpage>687</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi"></pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref45"><label>45</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Schwarzacher, T. and Heslopharrison, P. (2000) Practical in Situ Hybridization. Heredity, 85, 97-97.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref46"><label>46</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Dhellin, O., Maestre, J. and Heidmann, T. (1997) Functional Differences between the Human LINE Retrotransposon and Retroviral Reverse Transcriptases for in Vivo mRNA Reverse Transcription. The EMBO Journal, 16, 6590-6602.https://doi.org/10.1093/emboj/16.21.6590</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref47"><label>47</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Kaessmann, H., Vinckenbosch, N. and Long, M. (2009) RNA-Based Gene Duplication: Mechanistic and Evolutionary Insights. Nature Reviews Genetics, 10, 19-31.https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg2487</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref48"><label>48</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Rawal, K. and Ramaswamy, R. (2011) Genome-Wide Analysis of Mobile Genetic Element Insertion Sites. Nucleic Acids Research, 39, 6864-6878.https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkr337</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref49"><label>49</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">El Baidouri, M., Carpentier, M.C., Cooke, R., Gao, D., Lasserre, E., Llauro, C., Mirouze, M., Picault, N., Jackson, S.A. and Panaud, O. (2014) Widespread and Frequent Horizontal Transfers of Transposable Elements in Plants. Genome Research, 24, 831-838. https://doi.org/10.1101/gr.164400.113</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref50"><label>50</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Schaack, S., Gilbert, C. and Feschotte, C. (2010) Promiscuous DNA: Horizontal Transfer of Transposable Elements and Why It Matters for Eukaryotic Evolution. Trends in Ecology &amp; Evolution, 25, 537-546. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2010.06.001</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref51"><label>51</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Silva, J.C., Loreto, E.L. and Clark, J.B. (2004) Factors That Affect the Horizontal Transfer of Transposable Elements. Current Issues in Molecular Biology, 6, 57-71.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref52"><label>52</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Loreto, E.L., Carareto, C.M. and Capy, P. (2008) Revisiting Horizontal Transfer of Transposable Elements in Drosophila. Heredity, 100, 545-554.https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.hdy.6801094</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref53"><label>53</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Sakamoto, K., Ohmido, N., Fukui, K., Kamada, H. and Satoh, S. (2000) Site-Specific Accumulation of a LINE-Like Retrotransposon in a Sex Chromosome of the Dioecious Plant Cannabis sativa. Plant Molecular Biology, 44, 723-732.https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026574405717</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref54"><label>54</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Kubis, S.E., Heslop-Harrison, J.S., Desel, C. and Schmidt, T. (1998) The Genomic Organization of Non-LTR Retrotransposons (LINEs) from Three Beta Species and Five Other Angiosperms. Plant Molecular Biology, 36, 821-831.https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005973932556</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref55"><label>55</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Suzuki, M.M. and Bird, A. (2008) DNA Methylation Landscapes: Provocative Insights from Epigenomics. Nature Reviews Genetics, 9, 465-476.https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg2341</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref56"><label>56</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Dhadi, S.R., Xu, Z., Shaik, R., Driscoll, K. and Ramakrishna, W. (2015) Differential Regulation of Genes by Retrotransposons in Rice Promoters. Plant Molecular Biology, 87, 603-613. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11103-015-0300-7</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref57"><label>57</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Xu, Z.J. and Ramakrishna, W. (2008) Retrotransposon Insertion Polymorphisms in Six Rice Genes and Their Evolutionary History. Gene, 412, 50-58.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.77807-ref58"><label>58</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Hu, G., Hawkins, J.S., Grover, C.E. and Wendel, J.F. (2010) The History and Disposition of Transposable Elements in Polyploid Gossypium. Genome, 53, 599-607.https://doi.org/10.1139/G10-038</mixed-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>