Intergenomic gene transfer in diploid and allopolyploid Gossypium.
Allopolyploidization
Chloroplast genome
Gossypium
Intergenomic gene transfer
Mitochondrial genome
Numt
Nupt
Journal
BMC plant biology
ISSN: 1471-2229
Titre abrégé: BMC Plant Biol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100967807
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 Nov 2019
12 Nov 2019
Historique:
received:
01
05
2019
accepted:
20
09
2019
entrez:
14
11
2019
pubmed:
14
11
2019
medline:
4
3
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Intergenomic gene transfer (IGT) between nuclear and organellar genomes is a common phenomenon during plant evolution. Gossypium is a useful model to evaluate the genomic consequences of IGT for both diploid and polyploid species. Here, we explore IGT among nuclear, mitochondrial, and plastid genomes of four cotton species, including two allopolyploids and their model diploid progenitors (genome donors, G. arboreum: A Extensive IGT events exist for both diploid and allotetraploid cotton (Gossypium) species, with the nuclear genome being the predominant recipient of transferred DNA followed by the mitochondrial genome. The nuclear genome has integrated 100 times more foreign sequences than the mitochondrial genome has in total length. In the nucleus, the integrated length of chloroplast DNA (cpDNA) was between 1.87 times (in diploids) to nearly four times (in allopolyploids) greater than that of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA). In the mitochondrion, the length of nuclear DNA (nuDNA) was typically three times than that of cpDNA. Gossypium mitochondrial genomes integrated three nuclear retrotransposons and eight chloroplast tRNA genes, and incorporated chloroplast DNA prior to divergence between the diploids and allopolyploid formation. For mitochondrial chloroplast-tRNA genes, there were 2-6 bp conserved microhomologies flanking their insertion sites across distantly related genera, which increased to 10 bp microhomologies for the four cotton species studied. For organellar DNA sequences, there are source hotspots, e.g., the atp6-trnW intergenic region in the mitochondrion and the inverted repeat region in the chloroplast. Organellar DNAs in the nucleus were rarely expressed, and at low levels. Surprisingly, there was asymmetry in the survivorship of ancestral insertions following allopolyploidy, with most numts (nuclear mitochondrial insertions) decaying or being lost whereas most nupts (nuclear plastidial insertions) were retained. This study characterized and compared intracellular transfer among nuclear and organellar genomes within two cultivated allopolyploids and their ancestral diploid cotton species. A striking asymmetry in the fate of IGTs in allopolyploid cotton was discovered, with numts being preferentially lost relative to nupts. Our results connect intergenomic gene transfer with allotetraploidy and provide new insight into intracellular genome evolution.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Intergenomic gene transfer (IGT) between nuclear and organellar genomes is a common phenomenon during plant evolution. Gossypium is a useful model to evaluate the genomic consequences of IGT for both diploid and polyploid species. Here, we explore IGT among nuclear, mitochondrial, and plastid genomes of four cotton species, including two allopolyploids and their model diploid progenitors (genome donors, G. arboreum: A
RESULTS
RESULTS
Extensive IGT events exist for both diploid and allotetraploid cotton (Gossypium) species, with the nuclear genome being the predominant recipient of transferred DNA followed by the mitochondrial genome. The nuclear genome has integrated 100 times more foreign sequences than the mitochondrial genome has in total length. In the nucleus, the integrated length of chloroplast DNA (cpDNA) was between 1.87 times (in diploids) to nearly four times (in allopolyploids) greater than that of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA). In the mitochondrion, the length of nuclear DNA (nuDNA) was typically three times than that of cpDNA. Gossypium mitochondrial genomes integrated three nuclear retrotransposons and eight chloroplast tRNA genes, and incorporated chloroplast DNA prior to divergence between the diploids and allopolyploid formation. For mitochondrial chloroplast-tRNA genes, there were 2-6 bp conserved microhomologies flanking their insertion sites across distantly related genera, which increased to 10 bp microhomologies for the four cotton species studied. For organellar DNA sequences, there are source hotspots, e.g., the atp6-trnW intergenic region in the mitochondrion and the inverted repeat region in the chloroplast. Organellar DNAs in the nucleus were rarely expressed, and at low levels. Surprisingly, there was asymmetry in the survivorship of ancestral insertions following allopolyploidy, with most numts (nuclear mitochondrial insertions) decaying or being lost whereas most nupts (nuclear plastidial insertions) were retained.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
This study characterized and compared intracellular transfer among nuclear and organellar genomes within two cultivated allopolyploids and their ancestral diploid cotton species. A striking asymmetry in the fate of IGTs in allopolyploid cotton was discovered, with numts being preferentially lost relative to nupts. Our results connect intergenomic gene transfer with allotetraploidy and provide new insight into intracellular genome evolution.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31718541
doi: 10.1186/s12870-019-2041-2
pii: 10.1186/s12870-019-2041-2
pmc: PMC6852956
doi:
Substances chimiques
DNA, Plant
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
492Subventions
Organisme : National Natural Science Foundation of China
ID : 31671741
Organisme : National Key R & D Program for Crop Breeding
ID : 2016YFD0101305
Références
Genome Biol Evol. 2013;5(10):1872-85
pubmed: 24029811
Nature. 1982 Oct 21;299(5885):698-702
pubmed: 6889685
Mol Genet Genomics. 2005 Feb;272(6):603-15
pubmed: 15583938
Curr Biol. 2005 Jul 26;15(14):1325-30
pubmed: 16051178
PLoS One. 2013 Aug 05;8(8):e69476
pubmed: 23940520
Mitochondrial DNA A DNA Mapp Seq Anal. 2018 May;29(4):635-642
pubmed: 28573928
Mol Genet Genomics. 2002 Dec;268(4):434-45
pubmed: 12471441
Genome Biol Evol. 2013;5(6):1060-4
pubmed: 23661564
Genome Biol Evol. 2011;3:365-71
pubmed: 21292629
Nucleic Acids Res. 2005 Oct 31;33(19):6235-50
pubmed: 16260473
Nat Genet. 2019 Feb;51(2):224-229
pubmed: 30510239
PLoS One. 2012;7(5):e37164
pubmed: 22655034
Biochimie. 1996;78(6):518-29
pubmed: 8915541
BMC Genomics. 2007 Jul 06;8:218
pubmed: 17617907
BMC Genomics. 2017 Nov 13;18(1):876
pubmed: 29132310
Plant Cell. 2011 Jul;23(7):2499-513
pubmed: 21742987
DNA Res. 1996 Oct 31;3(5):287-90
pubmed: 9039497
Curr Genet. 2002 Dec;42(3):179-84
pubmed: 12491012
Genes (Basel). 2017 Nov 24;8(12):
pubmed: 29186778
Mol Biol Evol. 2009 Jan;26(1):99-110
pubmed: 18922764
Mitochondrion. 2007 May;7(3):177-94
pubmed: 17320492
BMC Genomics. 2006 Mar 23;7:61
pubmed: 16553962
Nat Genet. 2014 Jun;46(6):567-72
pubmed: 24836287
BMC Plant Biol. 2012 May 01;12:61
pubmed: 22548759
Sci Rep. 2015 Sep 30;5:14139
pubmed: 26420475
Bioinformatics. 2010 Mar 1;26(5):589-95
pubmed: 20080505
Trends Genet. 2005 Dec;21(12):655-63
pubmed: 16216380
Nucleic Acids Res. 1996 Jun 15;24(12):2199-203
pubmed: 8710486
PLoS One. 2011 Jan 20;6(1):e16404
pubmed: 21283772
Curr Opin Genet Dev. 2018 Apr;49:1-7
pubmed: 29438956
BMC Genomics. 2008 Aug 10;9:382
pubmed: 18691433
Mob Genet Elements. 2012 Nov 1;2(6):261-266
pubmed: 23481035
Mol Biol Evol. 2012 Jul;29(7):1707-11
pubmed: 22319165
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2001 Apr 24;98(9):5099-103
pubmed: 11309509
PLoS Genet. 2018 Mar 28;14(3):e1007267
pubmed: 29590103
Nat Genet. 1998 Sep;20(1):43-5
pubmed: 9731528
Nature. 2003 Mar 6;422(6927):72-6
pubmed: 12594458
Nature. 1998 May 14;393(6681):162-5
pubmed: 11560168
Mitochondrion. 2014 Nov;19 Pt B:198-205
pubmed: 24732436
Sci Rep. 2017 Mar 06;7:43402
pubmed: 28262720
PLoS One. 2016 Jun 16;11(6):e0157183
pubmed: 27309527
BMC Genomics. 2010 Apr 09;11:233
pubmed: 20380689
BMC Genomics. 2011 Oct 11;12:497
pubmed: 21988783
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2002 Jul 23;99(15):9905-12
pubmed: 12119382
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1989 Jun;86(11):4132-6
pubmed: 16594050
Mol Biol Evol. 2007 Mar;24(3):699-709
pubmed: 17175527
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012 Feb 14;109(7):2444-8
pubmed: 22308419
Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2015 Nov;92:45-52
pubmed: 26049043
Nat Rev Genet. 2004 Feb;5(2):123-35
pubmed: 14735123
New Phytol. 2016 Apr;210(2):680-93
pubmed: 26671255
Nat Rev Genet. 2017 Jul;18(7):411-424
pubmed: 28502977
BMC Genomics. 2011 Aug 20;12:424
pubmed: 21854637
BMC Evol Biol. 2006 Jul 14;6:55
pubmed: 16842621
Nature. 2003 Jul 10;424(6945):197-201
pubmed: 12853958
PLoS One. 2011;6(7):e21743
pubmed: 21750729
New Phytol. 2015 Oct;208(2):570-83
pubmed: 25989702
Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2003 Dec;29(3):380-95
pubmed: 14615181
Heredity (Edinb). 2013 Oct;111(4):314-20
pubmed: 23715017
Nat Rev Genet. 2002 May;3(5):329-41
pubmed: 11988759
Genetics. 1996 Feb;142(2):579-85
pubmed: 8852855
Nat Biotechnol. 2015 May;33(5):524-30
pubmed: 25893780
Plant Cell Physiol. 2013 Sep;54(9):1560-8
pubmed: 23852329
Mol Plant. 2018 Mar 5;11(3):357-358
pubmed: 29476919
Cell Res. 2017 Jan;27(1):3-4
pubmed: 28025977
Cell Res. 2017 Jan;27(1):130-146
pubmed: 27725674
J Mol Evol. 1994 Aug;39(2):174-90
pubmed: 7932781
Curr Opin Plant Biol. 2018 Apr;42:37-48
pubmed: 29502038
Plant Physiol. 2006 Feb;140(2):401-10
pubmed: 16384910
Annu Rev Genet. 2017 Nov 27;51:1-22
pubmed: 28846455
PLoS One. 2012;7(8):e37128
pubmed: 22876273
Annu Rev Plant Biol. 2014;65:579-606
pubmed: 24313845
PLoS One. 2013;8(2):e56502
pubmed: 23431381
Curr Opin Plant Biol. 2016 Apr;30:159-65
pubmed: 27064530
Plant Mol Biol. 1987 Mar;9(2):121-6
pubmed: 24276901
Nucleic Acids Res. 2002 Jun 1;30(11):2478-83
pubmed: 12034836
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2018 May 1;115(18):4713-4718
pubmed: 29674453
Nat Methods. 2012 Mar 04;9(4):357-9
pubmed: 22388286
Mol Biol Evol. 2004 Jun;21(6):1081-4
pubmed: 15014143
New Phytol. 2012 Dec;196(4):1228-39
pubmed: 23009072
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009 Oct 20;106(42):17811-6
pubmed: 19815511
Genome Biol Evol. 2017 Dec 1;9(12):3449-3462
pubmed: 29228262
EMBO J. 1987 Oct;6(10):2857-63
pubmed: 14650433
New Phytol. 2014 May;202(3):736-8
pubmed: 24467712
Genome Biol Evol. 2011;3:743-8
pubmed: 21803764
Mol Biol Evol. 2007 Sep;24(9):2040-8
pubmed: 17609537
J Proteomics. 2015 Apr 24;119:61-74
pubmed: 25573812
Plant J. 2012 Aug;71(4):615-26
pubmed: 22469001
Sci Rep. 2015 Dec 04;5:17662
pubmed: 26634818
Nature. 2012 Dec 20;492(7429):423-7
pubmed: 23257886
BMC Plant Biol. 2018 Jan 5;18(1):6
pubmed: 29304730
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003 Jul 22;100(15):8828-33
pubmed: 12817081
Mol Genet Genomics. 2002 Apr;267(2):223-30
pubmed: 11976966
Nat Biotechnol. 2011 Jan;29(1):24-6
pubmed: 21221095
Genome Biol Evol. 2014 May 27;6(6):1327-34
pubmed: 24868015
BMC Genomics. 2018 Oct 26;19(1):775
pubmed: 30367630
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2015 Jul 7;112(27):E3515-24
pubmed: 26100885
Nat Biotechnol. 2015 May;33(5):531-7
pubmed: 25893781
BMC Evol Biol. 2010 Sep 10;10:274
pubmed: 20831793
Int J Mol Sci. 2018 Feb 11;19(2):null
pubmed: 29439501
Nat Genet. 2012 Oct;44(10):1098-103
pubmed: 22922876
PLoS One. 2015 Dec 08;10(12):e0144339
pubmed: 26646761
Science. 2013 Dec 20;342(6165):1468-73
pubmed: 24357311
Microbiol Mol Biol Rev. 2000 Dec;64(4):786-820
pubmed: 11104819
J Mol Biol. 1992 Jan 5;223(1):1-7
pubmed: 1731062
Bioinformatics. 2009 Aug 15;25(16):2078-9
pubmed: 19505943
Plant J. 2015 Jul;83(2):290-9
pubmed: 26031622
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2015 Aug 18;112(33):10133-8
pubmed: 25848019
PLoS Genet. 2008 Oct;4(10):e1000237
pubmed: 18949041
Mol Biol Evol. 2008 Mar;25(3):603-15
pubmed: 18192697
BMC Genomics. 2015 Oct 12;16:770
pubmed: 26459858
Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2017 Jul;112:268-276
pubmed: 28414099
PLoS Genet. 2009 Jan;5(1):e1000323
pubmed: 19119415
J Mol Evol. 1995 Oct;41(4):397-406
pubmed: 7563126
Plant Biol (Stuttg). 2017 May;19(3):484-493
pubmed: 28008701
J Mol Biol. 1990 Oct 5;215(3):403-10
pubmed: 2231712
Genome Res. 2015 Jun;25(6):814-24
pubmed: 25963125
Annu Rev Plant Biol. 2009;60:115-38
pubmed: 19014347
Nucleic Acids Res. 2003 Oct 15;31(20):5907-16
pubmed: 14530439
Mol Plant. 2016 Jul 6;9(7):1082-4
pubmed: 27102212