RNA-Seq of three free-living flatworm species suggests rapid evolution of reproduction-related genes.
Differential expression
Orthologs
Platyhelminthes
RNA-Seq
Rate of evolution
Regeneration
Journal
BMC genomics
ISSN: 1471-2164
Titre abrégé: BMC Genomics
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100965258
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 Jul 2020
06 Jul 2020
Historique:
received:
23
12
2019
accepted:
22
06
2020
entrez:
8
7
2020
pubmed:
8
7
2020
medline:
20
3
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The genus Macrostomum consists of small free-living flatworms and contains Macrostomum lignano, which has been used in investigations of ageing, stem cell biology, bioadhesion, karyology, and sexual selection in hermaphrodites. Two types of mating behaviour occur within this genus. Some species, including M. lignano, mate via reciprocal copulation, where, in a single mating, both partners insert their male copulatory organ into the female storage organ and simultaneously donate and receive sperm. Other species mate via hypodermic insemination, where worms use a needle-like copulatory organ to inject sperm into the tissue of the partner. These contrasting mating behaviours are associated with striking differences in sperm and copulatory organ morphology. Here we expand the genomic resources within the genus to representatives of both behaviour types and investigate whether genes vary in their rate of evolution depending on their putative function. We present de novo assembled transcriptomes of three Macrostomum species, namely M. hystrix, a close relative of M. lignano that mates via hypodermic insemination, M. spirale, a more distantly related species that mates via reciprocal copulation, and finally M. pusillum, which represents a clade that is only distantly related to the other three species and also mates via hypodermic insemination. We infer 23,764 sets of homologous genes and annotate them using experimental evidence from M. lignano. Across the genus, we identify 521 gene families with conserved patterns of differential expression between juvenile vs. adult worms and 185 gene families with a putative expression in the testes that are restricted to the two reciprocally mating species. Further, we show that homologs of putative reproduction-related genes have a higher protein divergence across the four species than genes lacking such annotations and that they are more difficult to identify across the four species, indicating that these genes evolve more rapidly, while genes involved in neoblast function are more conserved. This study improves the genus Macrostomum as a model system, by providing resources for the targeted investigation of gene function in a broad range of species. And we, for the first time, show that reproduction-related genes evolve at an accelerated rate in flatworms.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The genus Macrostomum consists of small free-living flatworms and contains Macrostomum lignano, which has been used in investigations of ageing, stem cell biology, bioadhesion, karyology, and sexual selection in hermaphrodites. Two types of mating behaviour occur within this genus. Some species, including M. lignano, mate via reciprocal copulation, where, in a single mating, both partners insert their male copulatory organ into the female storage organ and simultaneously donate and receive sperm. Other species mate via hypodermic insemination, where worms use a needle-like copulatory organ to inject sperm into the tissue of the partner. These contrasting mating behaviours are associated with striking differences in sperm and copulatory organ morphology. Here we expand the genomic resources within the genus to representatives of both behaviour types and investigate whether genes vary in their rate of evolution depending on their putative function.
RESULTS
RESULTS
We present de novo assembled transcriptomes of three Macrostomum species, namely M. hystrix, a close relative of M. lignano that mates via hypodermic insemination, M. spirale, a more distantly related species that mates via reciprocal copulation, and finally M. pusillum, which represents a clade that is only distantly related to the other three species and also mates via hypodermic insemination. We infer 23,764 sets of homologous genes and annotate them using experimental evidence from M. lignano. Across the genus, we identify 521 gene families with conserved patterns of differential expression between juvenile vs. adult worms and 185 gene families with a putative expression in the testes that are restricted to the two reciprocally mating species. Further, we show that homologs of putative reproduction-related genes have a higher protein divergence across the four species than genes lacking such annotations and that they are more difficult to identify across the four species, indicating that these genes evolve more rapidly, while genes involved in neoblast function are more conserved.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
This study improves the genus Macrostomum as a model system, by providing resources for the targeted investigation of gene function in a broad range of species. And we, for the first time, show that reproduction-related genes evolve at an accelerated rate in flatworms.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32631219
doi: 10.1186/s12864-020-06862-x
pii: 10.1186/s12864-020-06862-x
pmc: PMC7336406
doi:
Substances chimiques
Helminth Proteins
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
462Subventions
Organisme : Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung
ID : 31003A_162543
Organisme : Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung
ID : 310030_184916
Organisme : Austrian Science Fund
ID : P30347
Organisme : Fonds National de la Recherche Luxembourg
ID : 13569708
Références
Bioinformatics. 2012 Dec 1;28(23):3150-2
pubmed: 23060610
Elife. 2016 Dec 20;5:
pubmed: 27997336
Nat Rev Genet. 2002 Feb;3(2):137-44
pubmed: 11836507
Nat Methods. 2016 May;13(5):425-30
pubmed: 27043882
Dev Biol. 2018 Jan 15;433(2):448-460
pubmed: 28757111
PeerJ. 2016 Jan 28;4:e1660
pubmed: 26835189
Genome Biol Evol. 2019 Feb 1;11(2):531-545
pubmed: 30649284
Front Zool. 2007 Mar 09;4:9
pubmed: 17349046
BMC Genomics. 2018 Jan 8;19(1):30
pubmed: 29310587
Nat Commun. 2017 Dec 14;8(1):2120
pubmed: 29242515
Mol Ecol. 2019 May;28(9):2321-2341
pubmed: 30891857
Mol Biol Evol. 2013 Apr;30(4):772-80
pubmed: 23329690
Nat Biotechnol. 2011 May 15;29(7):644-52
pubmed: 21572440
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010 May 25;107(21):9546-51
pubmed: 20460310
Sci Rep. 2018 Feb 16;8(1):3192
pubmed: 29453392
Evolution. 2013 Nov;67(11):3233-42
pubmed: 24152005
Gene. 2004 Oct 13;340(2):303-12
pubmed: 15475172
Mol Ecol. 2013 Feb;22(3):620-34
pubmed: 22998089
Mol Biol Evol. 2010 Jun;27(6):1235-46
pubmed: 20080865
Genome Biol. 2014;15(12):550
pubmed: 25516281
Elife. 2020 Feb 18;9:
pubmed: 32066524
Genome Res. 2016 Aug;26(8):1134-44
pubmed: 27252236
J Exp Biol. 2017 May 1;220(Pt 9):1568-1577
pubmed: 28183866
Evolution. 2016 Feb;70(2):314-28
pubmed: 26787006
Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2015 Nov;92:82-107
pubmed: 26093054
Nat Methods. 2011 Sep 29;8(10):785-6
pubmed: 21959131
BMC Biol. 2018 Mar 5;16(1):28
pubmed: 29506533
Genetics. 2007 Nov;177(3):1321-35
pubmed: 18039869
Proc Int Conf Intell Syst Mol Biol. 1998;6:175-82
pubmed: 9783223
Dev Biol. 2008 Jul 1;319(1):146-59
pubmed: 18405892
Proc Biol Sci. 2013 Feb 27;280(1757):20122711
pubmed: 23446521
Aging Cell. 2018 Jun;17(3):e12739
pubmed: 29488325
IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph. 2014 Dec;20(12):1983-92
pubmed: 26356912
Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2015;2015:6461-4
pubmed: 26737772
BMC Evol Biol. 2018 May 30;18(1):81
pubmed: 29848299
J Evol Biol. 2012 Dec;25(12):2559-68
pubmed: 23110716
Biol Lett. 2018 Oct 10;14(10):
pubmed: 30305462
Genes (Basel). 2017 Oct 30;8(11):
pubmed: 29084138
J Proteomics. 2016 Mar 1;135:12-25
pubmed: 26074353
Mol Biol Evol. 2005 Sep;22(9):1793-801
pubmed: 15917496
J Evol Biol. 2015 Apr;28(4):739-55
pubmed: 25789690
BMC Dev Biol. 2016 Jun 02;16(1):20
pubmed: 27255153
Front Zool. 2015 Jul 03;12:14
pubmed: 26146508
Mol Biol Evol. 2015 Jan;32(1):268-74
pubmed: 25371430
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011 Jan 25;108(4):1490-5
pubmed: 21220334
Nucleic Acids Res. 2016 Jan 4;44(D1):D279-85
pubmed: 26673716
Cell Rep. 2017 Jan 17;18(3):762-776
pubmed: 28099853
Mol Biol Evol. 2009 Aug;26(8):1733-43
pubmed: 19420050
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2019 Mar 5;116(10):4297-4306
pubmed: 30782790
Proc Biol Sci. 2015 Jul 22;282(1811):
pubmed: 26136446
Bioinformatics. 2017 Sep 15;33(18):2938-2940
pubmed: 28645171
Front Zool. 2014 Feb 12;11(1):12
pubmed: 24520881
PLoS One. 2016 Oct 18;11(10):e0164915
pubmed: 27755577
Front Zool. 2009 Jul 30;6:15
pubmed: 19642971
Genome Biol. 2016 Jan 26;17:13
pubmed: 26813401
Nat Protoc. 2013 Aug;8(8):1494-512
pubmed: 23845962
Nat Methods. 2017 Jun;14(6):587-589
pubmed: 28481363
Nat Methods. 2017 Apr;14(4):417-419
pubmed: 28263959
Sci Rep. 2017 Jul 20;7(1):6066
pubmed: 28729552
BMC Genomics. 2018 May 8;19(1):332
pubmed: 29739332
Mol Biol Evol. 2018 Mar 1;35(3):543-548
pubmed: 29220515
Genome Biol. 2015 Aug 06;16:157
pubmed: 26243257
Syst Biol. 2010 May;59(3):307-21
pubmed: 20525638
Genome Biol. 2008 Oct 30;9(10):235
pubmed: 18983710
Mol Biol Evol. 2014 Nov;31(11):3081-92
pubmed: 25158799
Gigascience. 2015 Oct 19;4:48
pubmed: 26500767
Mol Biol Evol. 2013 May;30(5):1188-95
pubmed: 23418397
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2015 Oct 6;112(40):12462-7
pubmed: 26392545