The coelacanth: Can a "living fossil" have active transposable elements in its genome?

Mobile genetic elements Pub Date : 2015-05-27 eCollection Date: 2015-07-01 DOI:10.1080/2159256X.2015.1052184
Magali Naville, Domitille Chalopin, Didier Casane, Patrick Laurenti, Jean-Nicolas Volff
{"title":"The coelacanth: Can a \"living fossil\" have active transposable elements in its genome?","authors":"Magali Naville,&nbsp;Domitille Chalopin,&nbsp;Didier Casane,&nbsp;Patrick Laurenti,&nbsp;Jean-Nicolas Volff","doi":"10.1080/2159256X.2015.1052184","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The coelacanth has long been regarded as a \"living fossil,\" with extant specimens looking very similar to fossils dating back to the Cretaceous period. The hypothesis of a slowly or even not evolving genome has been proposed to account for this apparent morphological stasis. While this assumption seems to be sustained by different evolutionary analyses on protein-coding genes, recent studies on transposable elements have provided more conflicting results. Indeed, the coelacanth genome contains many transposable elements and has been shaped by several major bursts of transposition during evolution. In addition, comparison of orthologous genomic regions from the genomes of the 2 extant coelacanth species <i>L. chalumnae</i> and <i>L. menadoensis</i> revealed multiple species-specific insertions, indicating transposable element recent activity and contribution to post-speciation genome divergence. These observations, which do not support the genome stasis hypothesis, challenge either the impact of transposable elements on organismal evolution or the status of the coelacanth as a \"living fossil.\" Closer inspection of fossil and molecular data indicate that, even if coelacanths might evolve more slowly than some other lineages due to demographic and/or ecological factors, this variation is still in the range of a \"non-fossil\" vertebrate species.</p>","PeriodicalId":89441,"journal":{"name":"Mobile genetic elements","volume":"5 4","pages":"55-59"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/2159256X.2015.1052184","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Mobile genetic elements","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/2159256X.2015.1052184","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2015/7/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

The coelacanth has long been regarded as a "living fossil," with extant specimens looking very similar to fossils dating back to the Cretaceous period. The hypothesis of a slowly or even not evolving genome has been proposed to account for this apparent morphological stasis. While this assumption seems to be sustained by different evolutionary analyses on protein-coding genes, recent studies on transposable elements have provided more conflicting results. Indeed, the coelacanth genome contains many transposable elements and has been shaped by several major bursts of transposition during evolution. In addition, comparison of orthologous genomic regions from the genomes of the 2 extant coelacanth species L. chalumnae and L. menadoensis revealed multiple species-specific insertions, indicating transposable element recent activity and contribution to post-speciation genome divergence. These observations, which do not support the genome stasis hypothesis, challenge either the impact of transposable elements on organismal evolution or the status of the coelacanth as a "living fossil." Closer inspection of fossil and molecular data indicate that, even if coelacanths might evolve more slowly than some other lineages due to demographic and/or ecological factors, this variation is still in the range of a "non-fossil" vertebrate species.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

腔棘鱼:“活化石”的基因组中有活性转座因子吗?
腔棘鱼一直被认为是“活化石”,现存的标本看起来与白垩纪时期的化石非常相似。缓慢甚至不进化的基因组假说已经被提出来解释这种明显的形态停滞。虽然这一假设似乎得到了不同的蛋白质编码基因进化分析的支持,但最近对转座因子的研究提供了更多相互矛盾的结果。事实上,腔棘鱼基因组包含许多转座因子,并且在进化过程中被几次主要的转座爆发所塑造。此外,对现存的两个腔棘鱼物种L. chalumnae和L. menadoensis基因组的同源基因组区域进行比较,发现了多个物种特异性插入,表明转座元件最近有活性,并对物种形成后的基因组分化做出了贡献。这些不支持基因组停滞假说的观察结果,挑战了转座因子对生物体进化的影响,也挑战了腔棘鱼作为“活化石”的地位。对化石和分子数据的仔细检查表明,即使腔棘鱼可能由于人口统计学和/或生态因素而比其他一些谱系进化得更慢,这种变异仍然在“非化石”脊椎动物物种的范围内。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书