HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (9) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Ozyildirim, A. M. Articles by Laurie, G. W. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Ozyildirim, A. M. Articles by Laurie, G. W.

The Lacrimal Gland Transcriptome Is an Unusually Rich Source of Rare and Poorly Characterized Gene Transcripts

¹From the Departments of Cell Biology and ⁴Pathology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia; the ²Section on Molecular Structure and Function, National Eye Institute, Bethesda, Maryland; and the ³Department of Oral Biology, Medical College of Georgia, Augusta, Georgia.

PURPOSE. To sequence and comprehensively analyze human and mouse lacrimal gland transcriptomes as part of the NEIBank project.

METHODS. cDNA libraries generated from normal human and mouse lacrimal glands were sequenced and analyzed by PHRED, RepeatMasker, BLAST, and GRIST. Human "lacrimal-preferred genes" and putative gene regulatory elements were respectively identified in UniGene and ConSite, and gene clustering was analyzed by chromosomal mapping. "Hypothetical proteins," identified by keyword search, were verified by genomic alignment and queried in the Conserved Domain database and GEO Profiles.

RESULTS. The top six transcripts in human and mouse differed, revealing a previously unappreciated molecular divergence. The human transcriptome is enriched with transcripts from 29 lacrimal-preferred genes and a content of poorly characterized hypothetical proteins, proportionally greater than in all other tissues. Only 45% of lacrimal preferred, but 71% of hypotheticals, have mouse orthologs. Many of the latter display apparently altered cancer expression in the CGAP SAGE library collection—often in keeping with predicted WD40, protein kinase, Src homology 2 and 3, RhoGEF, and pleckstrin homology domains involved in cell signaling. At the genomic level, lacrimal-expressed genes show some evidence of clustering, particularly on human chromosomes 9 and 12. Binding sites for TFAP2A, FOXC1, and other transcription factors are predicted.

CONCLUSIONS. Interspecies divergence cautions against use of mouse models of human dry eye syndromes. Lacrimal preferred and hypothetical proteins, gene clustering, and putative gene regulatory elements together provide new clues for a molecular understanding of lacrimal gland function and mechanisms of coordinated tissue-specific transcriptional regulation.