The Conserved miR-51 microRNA Family Is Redundantly Required for Embryonic Development and Pharynx Attachment in Caenorhabditis elegans

A major question about cytokinesis concerns the role of the septin proteins, which localize to the division site in all animal and fungal cells but are essential for cytokinesis only in some cell types. For example, in Schizosaccharomyces pombe, four septins localize to the division site, but deletion of the four genes produces only a modest delay in cell separation. To ask if the S. pombe septins function redundantly in cytokinesis, we conducted a synthetic-lethal screen in a septin-deficient strain and identified seven mutations. One mutation affects Cdc4, a myosin light chain that is an essential component of the cytokinetic actomyosin ring. Five others cause frequent cell lysis during cell separation and map to two loci. These mutations and their dosage suppressors define a signaling pathway (including Rho1 and a novel arrestin) for repairing cell-wall damage. The seventh mutation affects the poorly understood RNA-binding protein Scw1 and severely delays cell separation when combined either with a septin mutation or with a mutation affecting the septin-interacting, anillin-like protein Mid2, suggesting that Scw1 functions in a pathway parallel to that of the septins. Taken together, our results suggest that the S. pombe septins participate redundantly in one or more pathways that cooperate with the actomyosin ring during cytokinesis and that a septin defect causes septum defects that can be repaired effectively only when the cell-integrity pathway is intact.THE fission yeast Schizosaccharomyces pombe provides an outstanding model system for studies of cytokinesis (McCollum and Gould 2001; Balasubramanian et al. 2004; Pollard and Wu 2010). As in most animal cells, successful cytokinesis in S. pombe requires an actomyosin ring (AMR). The AMR begins to assemble at the G₂/M transition and involves the type II myosin heavy chains Myo2 and Myp2 and the light chains Cdc4 and Rlc1 (Wu et al. 2003). Myo2 and Cdc4 are essential for cytokinesis under all known conditions, Rlc1 is important at all temperatures but essential only at low temperatures, and Myp2 is essential only under stress conditions. As the AMR constricts, a septum of cell wall is formed between the daughter cells. The primary septum is sandwiched by secondary septa and subsequently digested to allow cell separation (Humbel et al. 2001; Sipiczki 2007). Because of the internal turgor pressure of the cells, the proper assembly and structural integrity of the septal layers are essential for cell survival.Septum formation involves the β-glucan synthases Bgs1/Cps1/Drc1, Bgs3, and Bgs4 (Ishiguro et al. 1997; Le Goff et al. 1999; Liu et al. 1999, 2002; Martín et al. 2003; Cortés et al. 2005) and the α-glucan synthase Ags1/Mok1 (Hochstenbach et al. 1998; Katayama et al. 1999). These synthases are regulated by the Rho GTPases Rho1 and Rho2 and the protein kinase C isoforms Pck1 and Pck2 (Arellano et al. 1996, 1997, 1999; Nakano et al. 1997; Hirata et al. 1998; Calonge et al. 2000; Sayers et al. 2000; Ma et al. 2006; Barba et al. 2008; García et al. 2009b). The Rho GTPases themselves appear to be regulated by both GTPase-activating proteins (GAPs) and guanine-nucleotide-exchange factors (GEFs) (Nakano et al. 2001; Calonge et al. 2003; Iwaki et al. 2003; Tajadura et al. 2004; Morrell-Falvey et al. 2005; Mutoh et al. 2005; García et al. 2006, 2009a,b). In addition, septum formation and AMR function appear to be interdependent. In the absence of a normal AMR, cells form aberrant septa and/or deposit septal materials at random locations, whereas a mutant defective in septum formation (bgs1) is also defective in AMR constriction (Gould and Simanis 1997; Le Goff et al. 1999; Liu et al. 1999, 2000). Both AMR constriction and septum formation also depend on the septation initiation network involving the small GTPase Spg1 (McCollum and Gould 2001; Krapp and Simanis 2008). Despite this considerable progress, many questions remain about the mechanisms and regulation of septum formation and its relationships to the function of the AMR.One major question concerns the role(s) of the septins. Proteins of this family are ubiquitous in fungal and animal cells and typically localize to the cell cortex, where they appear to serve as scaffolds and diffusion barriers for other proteins that participate in a wide variety of cellular processes (Longtine et al. 1996; Gladfelter et al. 2001; Hall et al. 2008; Caudron and Barral 2009). Despite the recent progress in elucidating the mechanisms of septin assembly (John et al. 2007; Sirajuddin et al. 2007; Bertin et al. 2008; McMurray and Thorner 2008), the details of septin function remain obscure. However, one prominent role of the septins and associated proteins is in cytokinesis. Septins concentrate at the division site in every cell type that has been examined, and in Saccharomyces cerevisiae (Hartwell 1971; Longtine et al. 1996; Lippincott et al. 2001; Dobbelaere and Barral 2004) and at least some Drosophila (Neufeld and Rubin 1994; Adam et al. 2000) and mammalian (Kinoshita et al. 1997; Surka et al. 2002) cell types, the septins are essential for cytokinesis. In S. cerevisiae, the septins are required for formation of the AMR (Bi et al. 1998; Lippincott and Li 1998). However, this cannot be their only role, because the AMR itself is not essential for cytokinesis in this organism (Bi et al. 1998; Korinek et al. 2000; Schmidt et al. 2002). Moreover, there is no evidence that the septins are necessary for AMR formation or function in any other organism. A further complication is that in some cell types, including most Caenorhabditis elegans cells (Nguyen et al. 2000; Maddox et al. 2007) and some Drosophila cells (Adam et al. 2000; Field et al. 2008), the septins do not appear to be essential for cytokinesis even though they localize to the division site.S. pombe has seven septins, four of which (Spn1, Spn2, Spn3, and Spn4) are expressed in vegetative cells and localize to the division site shortly before AMR constriction and septum formation (Longtine et al. 1996; Berlin et al. 2003; Tasto et al. 2003; Wu et al. 2003; An et al. 2004; Petit et al. 2005; Pan et al. 2007; Onishi et al. 2010). Spn1 and Spn4 appear to be the core members of the septin complex (An et al. 2004; McMurray and Thorner 2008), and mutants lacking either of these proteins do not assemble the others at the division site. Assembly of a normal septin ring also depends on the anillin-like protein Mid2, which colocalizes with the septins (Berlin et al. 2003; Tasto et al. 2003). Surprisingly, mutants lacking the septins are viable and form seemingly complete septa with approximately normal timing. These mutants do, however, display a variable delay in separation of the daughter cells, suggesting that the septins play some role(s) in the proper completion of the septum or in subsequent processes necessary for cell separation (Longtine et al. 1996; An et al. 2004; Martín-Cuadrado et al. 2005).It is possible that the septins localize to the division site and yet are nonessential for division in some cell types because their role is redundant with that of some other protein(s) or pathway(s). To explore this possibility in S. pombe, we screened for mutations that were lethal in combination with a lack of septins. The results suggest that the septins cooperate with the AMR during cytokinesis and that, in the absence of septin function, the septum is not formed properly, so that an intact system for recognizing and repairing cell-wall damage becomes critical for cell survival.     

Profiling Sex-Specific piRNAs in Zebrafish

Piwi proteins and their partner small RNAs play an essential role in fertility, germ-line stem cell development, and the basic control and evolution of animal genomes. However, little knowledge exists regarding piRNA biogenesis. Utilizing microfluidic chip analysis, we present a quantitative profile of zebrafish piRNAs expressed differentially between testis and ovary. The sex-specific piRNAs are derived from separate loci of repeat elements in the genome. Ovarian piRNAs can be categorized into groups that reach up to 92 members, indicating a sex-specific arrangement of piRNA genes in the genome. Furthermore, precursor piRNAs preferentially form a hairpin structure at the 3′end, which seem to favor the generation of mature sex-specific piRNAs. In addition, the mature piRNAs from both the testis and the ovary are 2′-O-methylated at their 3′ ends.SMALL RNAs, ranging from 19 to 30 nucleotides (nt) in length, constitute a large family of regulatory molecules with diverse functions in invertebrates, vertebrates, plants, and fungi (Bartel 2004; Nakayashiki 2005). Two major classes of small RNAs are microRNAs (miRNAs) and small interfering RNAs (siRNAs). The functions of small RNAs have been conserved through evolution; they have been shown to inhibit gene expression at the levels of mRNA degradation, translational repression, chromatin modification, heterochromatin formation, and DNA elimination (Mochizuki et al. 2002; Bartel 2004; Kim et al. 2005; Brodersen and Voinnet 2006; Lee and Collins 2006; Vaucheret 2006).Over the past few years, focus on the genetics of small RNAs has helped clarify the mechanisms behind the regulation of these molecules. While hundreds of small RNAs have been identified from mammalian somatic tissues, relatively little is known about small RNAs in germ cells. A recent breakthrough has been the identification of small RNAs that associate with Piwi proteins (piRNAs) from Drosophila and mammalian gonads (Aravin et al. 2001, 2006; Girard et al. 2006; Grivna et al. 2006; Vagin et al. 2006; Watanabe et al. 2006). piRNAs and their interacting proteins Ziwi/Zili have also been identified in zebrafish (Houwing et al. 2007, 2008). Increasing evidence indicates that piRNAs play roles mainly in germ cell differentiation and genomic stability (Carthew 2006; Lau et al. 2006; Vagin et al. 2006; Brennecke et al. 2007; Chambeyron et al. 2008; Klattenhoff and Theurkauf 2008; Kuramochi-Miyagawa et al. 2008; Kim et al. 2009; Lim et al. 2009; Unhavaithaya et al. 2009). Moreover, although piRNAs are mostly expressed in germ line cells, recent studies showed piRNA expression in nongerm cells, for example, T-cell lines (Jurkat cells and MT4) (Azuma-Mukai et al. 2008; Yeung et al. 2009), indicating other functions such as in the immune system. piRNAs do not appear to be derived from double-stranded RNA precursors, and their biogenesis mechanisms, although unclear, may be distinct from those of siRNA and miRNA. Recently, two distinct piRNA production pathways were further proposed: the “ping-pong” model (Brennecke et al. 2007; Gunawardane et al. 2007) and the Ago3-independent piRNA pathway centered on Piwi in somatic cells (Li et al. 2009; Malone et al. 2009). However, the mechanistic pathways of piRNA activity and their biogenesis are still largely unknown.Teleost fishes comprise >24,000 species, accounting for more than half of extant vertebrate species, displaying remarkable variation in morphological and physiological adaptations (see review in Zhou et al. 2001). Recently, Houwing et al. (2007, 2008) reported findings on Ziwi/Zili and associated piRNAs, implicating roles in germ cell differentiation, meiosis, and transposon silencing in the germline of the zebrafish. However, some of the identified zebrafish piRNAs are nonrepetitive and nontransposon-related piRNAs, suggesting that piRNAs may have additional unknown roles. In this study, we show that for males and females, piRNAs are specifically derived from separate loci of the repeat elements, and that ovarian piRNAs are far more often associated in groups. Genomic analysis of piRNAs indicates a tendency to folding at the 3′ end of the piRNA precursor, which may favor cleavage of the piRNA precursor to generate mature sex-specific piRNAs. Furthermore, methylation modification occurs at the 2′-O-hydroxyl group on the ribose of the final 3′ nucleotide in both the testis and the ovary.     

Genetic Modifiers of dFMR1 Encode RNA Granule Components in Drosophila

Mechanisms of neuronal mRNA localization and translation are of considerable biological interest. Spatially regulated mRNA translation contributes to cell-fate decisions and axon guidance during development, as well as to long-term synaptic plasticity in adulthood. The Fragile-X Mental Retardation protein (FMRP/dFMR1) is one of the best-studied neuronal translational control molecules and here we describe the identification and early characterization of proteins likely to function in the dFMR1 pathway. Induction of the dFMR1 in sevenless-expressing cells of the Drosophila eye causes a disorganized (rough) eye through a mechanism that requires residues necessary for dFMR1/FMRP''s translational repressor function. Several mutations in dco, orb2, pAbp, rm62, and smD3 genes dominantly suppress the sev-dfmr1 rough-eye phenotype, suggesting that they are required for dFMR1-mediated processes. The encoded proteins localize to dFMR1-containing neuronal mRNPs in neurites of cultured neurons, and/or have an effect on dendritic branching predicted for bona fide neuronal translational repressors. Genetic mosaic analyses indicate that dco, orb2, rm62, smD3, and dfmr1 are dispensable for translational repression of hid, a microRNA target gene, known to be repressed in wing discs by the bantam miRNA. Thus, the encoded proteins may function as miRNA- and/or mRNA-specific translational regulators in vivo.THE subcellular localization and regulated translation of stored mRNAs contributes to cellular asymmetry and subcellular specialization (Lecuyer et al. 2007; Martin and Ephrussi 2009). In mature neurons, local protein synthesis at active synapses may contribute to synapse-specific plasticity that underlies persistent forms of memory (Casadio et al. 1999; Ashraf et al. 2006; Sutton and Schuman 2006; Richter and Klann 2009). During this process, synaptic activity causes local translation of mRNAs normally stored in translationally repressed synaptic mRNPs (Sutton and Schuman 2006; Richter and Klann 2009). While specific neuronal translational repressors and microRNAs have been implicated in this process, their involvement in local translation that underlies memory, as well as the underlying mechanisms, are generally not well understood (Schratt et al. 2006; Keleman et al. 2007; Kwak et al. 2008; Li et al. 2008; Richter and Klann 2009). Furthermore, it remains possible that there are neuron-specific, mRNA-specific, and stimulus-pattern specific pathways for neuronal translational control (Raab-Graham et al. 2006; Giorgi et al. 2007).The Fragile-X Mental Retardation protein (FMRP) is among the best studied of neuronal translational repressors, in part due to its association with human neurodevelopmental disease (Pieretti et al. 1991; Mazroui et al. 2002; Gao 2008). Consistent with function in synaptic translation required for memory formation, mutations in FMRP are associated with increased synaptic translation, enhanced LTD, increased synapse growth, and also with enhanced long-term memory (Zhang et al. 2001; Huber et al. 2002; Bolduc et al. 2008; Dictenberg et al. 2008).FMRP co-immunoprecipitates with components of the RNAi and miRNA machinery and appears to be required for aspects of miRNA function in neurons (Caudy et al. 2002; Ishizuka et al. 2002; Jin et al. 2004b; Gao 2008). In addition, FMRP associates with neuronal polyribosomes as well as with Staufen-containing ribonucleoprotein (mRNP) granules easily observed in neurites of cultured neurons (Feng et al. 1997; Krichevsky and Kosik 2001; Mazroui et al. 2002; Kanai et al. 2004; Barbee et al. 2006; Bramham and Wells 2007; Bassell and Warren 2008; Dictenberg et al. 2008). FMRP-containing neuronal mRNPs contain not only several ubiquitous translational control molecules, but also CaMKII and Arc mRNAs, whose translation is locally controlled at synapses (Rook et al. 2000; Krichevsky and Kosik 2001; Kanai et al. 2004; Barbee et al. 2006). Thus, FMRP-containing RNA particles are probably translationally repressed and transported along microtubules from the neuronal cell body to synaptic sites in dendrites where local synaptic activity can induce their translation (Kiebler and Bassell 2006; Dictenberg et al. 2008).The functions of FMRP/dFMR1 in mRNA localization as well as miRNA-dependent and independent forms of translational control is likely to require several other regulatory proteins. To identify such proteins, we used a previously designed and validated genetic screen (Wan et al. 2000; Jin et al. 2004a; Zarnescu et al. 2005). The overexpression of dFMR1 in the fly eye causes a “rough-eye” phenotype through a mechanism that requires (a) key residues in dFMR1 that mediate translational repression in vitro; (b) Ago1, a known components of the miRNA pathway; and (c) a DEAD-box helicase called Me31B, which is a highly conserved protein from yeast (Dhh1p) to humans (Rck54/DDX6) functioning in translational repression and present on neuritic mRNPs (Wan et al. 2000; Laggerbauer et al. 2001; Jin et al. 2004a; Coller and Parker 2005; Barbee et al. 2006; Chu and Rana 2006). To identify other Me31B-like translational repressors and neuronal granule components, we screened mutations in 43 candidate proteins for their ability to modify dFMR1 induced rough-eye phenotype. We describe the results of this genetic screen and follow up experiments to address the potential cellular functions of five genes identified as suppressors of sev-dfmr1.     

Patterns and Processes of Genome-Wide Divergence Between North American and African Drosophila melanogaster

Genomic tools and analyses are now being widely used to understand genome-wide patterns and processes associated with speciation and adaptation. In this article, we apply a genomics approach to the model organism Drosophila melanogaster. This species originated in Africa and subsequently spread and adapted to temperate environments of Eurasia and the New World, leading some populations to evolve reproductive isolation, especially between cosmopolitan and Zimbabwean populations. We used tiling arrays to identify highly differentiated regions within and between North America (the United States and Caribbean) and Africa (Cameroon and Zimbabwe) across 63% of the D. melanogaster genome and then sequenced representative fragments to study their genetic divergence. Consistent with previous findings, our results showed that most differentiation was between populations living in Africa vs. outside of Africa (i.e., “out-of-Africa” divergence), with all other geographic differences being less substantial (e.g., between cosmopolitan and Zimbabwean races). The X chromosome was much more strongly differentiated than the autosomes between North American and African populations (i.e., greater X divergence). Overall differentiation was positively associated with recombination rates across chromosomes, with a sharp reduction in regions near centromeres. Fragments surrounding these high F_ST sites showed reduced haplotype diversity and increased frequency of rare and derived alleles in North American populations compared to African populations. Nevertheless, despite sharp deviation from neutrality in North American strains, a small set of bottleneck/expansion demographic models was consistent with patterns of variation at the majority of our high F_ST fragments. Although North American populations were more genetically variable compared to Europe, our simulation results were generally consistent with those previously based on European samples. These findings support the hypothesis that most differentiation between North America and Africa was likely driven by the sorting of African standing genetic variation into the New World via Europe. Finally, a few exceptional loci were identified, highlighting the need to use an appropriate demographic null model to identify possible cases of selective sweeps in species with complex demographic histories.THE study of genetic differentiation between populations and species has recently been empowered by the use of genomic techniques and analysis (e.g., Noor and Feder 2006; Stinchcombe and Hoekstra 2008). In the past decade, genetic studies of adaptation and speciation have taken advantage of emerging molecular techniques to scan the genomes of diverging populations for highly differentiated genetic regions (e.g., Wilding et al. 2001; Emelianov et al. 2003; Beaumont and Balding 2004; Campbell and Bernatchez 2004; Scotti-Saintagne et al. 2004; Achere et al. 2005; Turner et al. 2005; Vasemagi et al. 2005; Bonin et al. 2006, 2007; Murray and Hare 2006; Savolainen et al. 2006; Yatabe et al. 2007; Nosil et al. 2008, 2009; Turner et al. 2008a,b; Kulathinal et al. 2009). As a result, genome scans can identify candidate regions that may be associated with adaptive evolution between diverging populations and, more broadly, are able to describe genome-wide patterns and processes of population differentiation (Begun et al. 2007; Stinchcombe and Hoekstra 2008).Genome scans in well-studied genetic model species such as Drosophila melanogaster gain particular power because differentiated loci are mapped to a well-annotated genome. Moreover, the evolutionary history of D. melanogaster is rich with adaptive and demographic events with many parallels to human evolution. Most notable is the historical out-of-Africa migration and subsequent adaptation to temperate ecological environments of Europe, Asia, North America, and Australia. This has resulted in widespread genetic and phenotypic divergence between African and non-African populations (e.g., David and Capy 1988; Begun and Aquadro 1993; Capy et al. 1994; Colegrave et al. 2000; Rouault et al. 2001; Takahashi et al. 2001; Caracristi and Schlötterer 2003; Baudry et al. 2004; Pool and Aquadro 2006; Schmidt et al. 2008; Yukilevich and True 2008a,b). Further, certain populations in Africa and in the Caribbean vary in their degree of reproductive isolation from populations in more temperate regions (Wu et al. 1995; Hollocher et al. 1997; Yukilevich and True 2008a,b). In particular, the Zimbabwe and nearby populations of southern Africa are strongly sexually isolated from all other populations, designating them as a distinct behavioral race (Wu et al. 1995).D. melanogaster has received a great deal of attention from the population geneticists in studying patterns of sequence variation across African and non-African populations. Many snapshots have been taken of random microsatellite and SNP variants spread across X and autosomes, and these have generated several important conclusions. Polymorphism patterns in European populations are characterized by reduced levels of nucleotide and haplotype diversity, an excess of high frequency-derived polymorphisms, and elevated levels of linkage disequilibrium relative to African populations (e.g., Begun and Aquadro 1993; Andolfatto 2001; Glinka et al. 2003; Haddrill et al. 2005; Ometto et al. 2005; Thornton and Andolfatto 2006; Hutter et al. 2007; Singh et al. 2007). These results have been generally interpreted as compatible with population size reduction/bottlenecks followed by recent population expansions. On the other hand, African populations are generally assumed either to have been relatively constant in size over time or to have experienced population size expansions. They generally show higher levels of nucleotide and haplotype diversity, an excess of rare variants, and a deficit of high frequency-derived alleles (Glinka et al. 2003; Ometto et al. 2005; Pool and Aquadro 2006; Hutter et al. 2007; but see Haddrill et al. 2005 for evidence of bottlenecks in Africa).Previous work also shows that the ratio of X-linked to autosomal polymorphism deviates from neutral expectations in opposite directions in African and European populations with more variation on the X than expected in Africa and less variation on the X than expected in Europe (Andolfatto 2001; Kauer et al. 2002; Hutter et al. 2007; Singh et al. 2007). The deviation from neutrality in the ratio of X-autosome polymorphism may be explained by positive selection being more prevalent on the X in Europe and/or by a combination of bottlenecks and male-biased sex ratios in Europe and female-biased sex ratios in Africa (Charlesworth 2001; Hutter et al. 2007; Singh et al. 2007). The selective explanation stems from the argument that, under the hitchhiking selection model, X-linked loci are likely to be more affected by selective sweeps than autosomal loci (Maynard Smith and Haigh 1974; Charlesworth et al. 1987; Vicoso and Charlesworth 2006, 2009).The relative contribution of selective and demographic processes in shaping patterns of genomic variation and differentiation is highly debated (Wall et al. 2002; Glinka et al. 2003; Haddrill et al. 2005; Ometto et al. 2005; Schöfl and Schlötterer 2004; Thornton and Andolfatto 2006; Hutter et al. 2007; Singh et al. 2007; Shapiro et al. 2007; Stephan and Li 2007; Hahn 2008; Macpherson et al. 2008; Noor and Bennett 2009; Sella et al. 2009). This is especially the case in D. melanogaster because derived non-African populations have likely experienced a complex set of demographic events during their migration out of Africa (e.g., Thornton and Andolfatto 2006; Singh et al. 2007; Stephan and Li 2007), making population genetics signatures of demography and selection difficult to tease apart (e.g., Macpherson et al. 2008). Thus it is still unclear what role selection has played in shaping overall patterns of genomic variation and differentiation relative to demographic processes in this species.While there is a long tradition in studying arbitrarily or opportunistically chosen sequences in D. melanogaster, genomic scans that focus particularly on highly differentiated sites across the genome have received much less attention. Such sites are arguably the best candidates to resolve the debate on which processes have shaped genomic differentiation within species (e.g., Przeworski 2002). Recently, a genome-wide scan of cosmopolitan populations in the United States and in Australia was performed to investigate clinal genomic differentiation on the two continents (Turner et al. 2008a). Many single feature polymorphisms differentiating Northern and Southern Hemisphere populations were identified. Among the most differentiated loci in common between continents, 80% were differentiated in the same orientation relative to the Equator, implicating selection as the likely explanation (Turner et al. 2008a). Larger regions of genomic differentiation within and between African and non-African populations have also been discovered, some of them possibly being driven by divergent selection (e.g., Dopman and Hartl 2007; Emerson et al. 2008; Turner et al. 2008a, Aguade 2009). Despite this recent progress, we still know relatively little about large-scale patterns of genomic differentiation in this species, especially between African and non-African populations, and whether most of this differentiation is consistent with demographic processes alone or if it requires selective explanations.In this work, we explicitly focus on identifying differentiated sites across the genome between U.S., Caribbean, West African, and Zimbabwean populations. This allows us to address several fundamental questions related to genomic evolution in D. melanogaster, such as the following: (1) Do genome-wide patterns of differentiation reflect patterns of reproductive isolation? (2) Is genomic differentiation random across and within chromosomes or are some regions overrepresented? (3) What are the population genetics properties of differentiated sites and their surrounding sequences? (4) Can demographic historical processes alone explain most of the observed differentiation on a genome-wide level or is it necessary to involve selection in their explanation?In general, our findings revealed that most genomic differentiation within D. melanogaster shows an out-of-Africa genetic signature. These results are inconsistent with the notion that most genomic differentiation occurs between cosmopolitan and Zimbabwean reproductively isolated races. Further, we found that the X is more differentiated between North American and African populations and more strongly deviates from pure neutrality in North American populations relative to autosomes. Nevertheless, our article shows that much of this deviation from neutrality is broadly consistent with several demographic null models, with a few notable exceptions. Athough this does not exclude selection as a possible alternative mechanism for the observed patterns, it supports the idea that most differentiation in D. melanogaster was likely driven by the sorting of African standing genetic variation into the New World.     

Deletion in a Quantitative Trait Gene qPE9-1 Associated With Panicle Erectness Improves Plant Architecture During Rice Domestication

Rice plant architecture is an important agronomic trait and a major determinant in high productivity. Panicle erectness is the preferred plant architecture in japonica rice, but the molecular mechanism underlying domestication of the erect panicle remains elusive. Here we report the map-based cloning of a major quantitative trait locus, qPE9-1, which plays an integral role in regulation of rice plant architecture including panicle erectness. The R6547 qPE9-1 gene encodes a 426-amino-acid protein, homologous to the keratin-associated protein 5-4 family. The gene is composed of three Von Willebrand factor type C domains, one transmembrane domain, and one 4-disulfide-core domain. Phenotypic comparisons of a set of near-isogenic lines and transgenic lines reveal that the functional allele (qPE9-1) results in drooping panicles, and the loss-of-function mutation (qpe9-1) leads to more erect panicles. In addition, the qPE9-1 locus regulates panicle and grain length, grain weight, and consequently grain yield. We propose that the panicle erectness trait resulted from a natural random loss-of-function mutation for the qPE9-1 gene and has subsequently been the target of artificial selection during japonica rice breeding.THE worldwide explosion of the human population necessitates an increase in grain yield, which poses a substantial challenge (Rosegrant and Cline 2003). Improvement of plant architecture is considered as a viable approach to increase grain yield, because crop plants with desirable architecture are able to produce much higher yields (Wang and Li 2008). The most striking example arose in the late 1950s, when selection for the semi-dwarf stature in rice and wheat greatly improved plant architecture and yield potential (Peng et al. 1999; Monna et al. 2002; Sasaki et al. 2002; Spielmeyer et al. 2002). Tiller, panicle, and leaf morphology also play important roles in shaping high-yield crop architecture. Most plant architecture traits are controlled by quantitative trait loci (QTL) derived from naturally occurring allelic variation. Rice (Oryza sativa L.) is the most important food crop in the world (White 1994). It is the staple of diet for heavily populated Asian countries as well as many African countries. Numerous QTL or major genes controlling plant architecture traits have been identified and several have recently been cloned (Li et al. 2004; Ashikari et al. 2005; Fan et al. 2006; Xie et al. 2006; Song et al. 2007; Yu et al. 2007; Jin et al. 2008; Shomura et al. 2008; Tan et al. 2008; Xing et al. 2008; Xue et al. 2008). Cloning and functional characterization of these genes not only addresses fundamental questions in plant development, but also facilitates bridging the gap between gene identification and breeding application by improving the precision and efficiency of selection.Rice panicle architecture not only contributes to grain yield, but also to the ecological conditions of cultivated populations and the physicochemical properties of different varieties (Xu et al. 1996; Yuan 1997; Chen et al. 2001). Presently, most japonica rice varieties cultivated in China exhibit the panicle erectness (PE) type of inflorescence (Zhang et al. 2002b). PE varieties typically bear short, erect panicles and leaves, which benefit ventilation and light penetration. As a result, populations of PE varieties show higher photosynthetic rates and material production capacity (Liu et al. 2001; Zhang et al. 2002a; Chen et al. 2007). Additionally, PE rice varieties show increased lodging and fertilizer resistance due to decreased plant height (Xu et al. 1995). Therefore, PE is the preferred plant architecture for high-yield japonica rice.Since development of the first rice PE variety, Guihuahuang, in the early 1960s, a large number of PE japonica varieties have been released in China, including the most well known, Liaojing 5. PE varieties have increased yield potential compared to panicle drooping varieties and therefore are the preferred. PE serves as the most suitable morphological index, and has subsequently been brought into super high-yield breeding. The development and cultivation of PE varieties is considered the third landmark trait after dwarf and hybrid rice in the history of Chinese rice breeding (Zhang et al. 2002b).The genetic mechanisms controlling PE have received some attention. Initially, PE was reported to be governed by a recessive gene (Zhu and Gu 1979), while other studies suggested a major gene with dominant or additive effects, and polygenic modifications serving to regulate PE (Xu et al. 1995; Wang et al. 1997). Chen et al. (2006) proposed that panicle angle was controlled by two major genes with additive-dominance-epistatic effects and also polygenes with additive-dominance-epistatic influences, using major gene–polygene mixed inheritance models and a joint analysis method. Pedigree analysis of PE varieties indicated that two-thirds of the varieties possessed genes from the Italian Balilla variety and shared a close relationship with Liaojing 5 (Zhang et al. 2002b). The dominant EP gene was first reported from chromosome 9, between the two SSR markers RM5833-11 and RM5686-23, at a genetic distance of 1.5 and 0.9 cM, respectively (Kong et al. 2007). In a previous study, we identified and characterized qPE9-1, a major QTL on chromosome 9 responsible for the erect panicle trait using a double-haploid (DH) population derived from a cross between Wuyunjing 8 and Nongken 57 varieties (Yan et al. 2007).However, despite some progresses of the molecular mechanisms governing rice PE, the complexity of the trait results in substantial gaps in our understanding of its regulation. Here we report on a major QTL, qPE9-1, which encodes a keratin-associated protein 5-4, regulates rice PE, and plays pleiotropic roles in an array of plant architecture and yield traits.     

Genetic and Epigenetic Dynamics of a Retrotransposon After Allopolyploidization of Wheat

Allopolyploidy, or the combination of two or more distinct genomes in one nucleus, is usually accompanied by radical genomic changes involving transposable elements (TEs). The dynamics of TEs after an allopolyploidization event are poorly understood. In this study, we analyzed the methylation state and genetic rearrangements of a high copied, newly amplified terminal-repeat retrotransposon in miniature (TRIM) family in wheat termed Veju. We found that Veju insertion sites underwent massive methylation changes in the first four generations of a newly formed wheat allohexaploid. Hypomethylation or hypermethylation occurred in ∼43% of the tested insertion sites; while hypomethylation was significantly predominant in the first three generations of the newly formed allohexaploid, hypermethylation became predominant in the subsequent generation. In addition, we determined that the methylation state of Veju long terminal repeats (LTRs) might be correlated with the deletion and/or insertion of the TE. While most of the methylation changes and deletions of Veju occurred in the first generation of the newly formed allohexaploid, most Veju insertions were seen in the second generation. Finally, using quantitative PCR, we quantitatively assessed the genome composition of Veju in the newly formed allohexaploid and found that up to 50% of Veju LTRs were deleted in the first generation. Retrotransposition bursts in subsequent generations, however, led to increases in Veju elements. In light of these findings, the underlying mechanisms of TRIM rearrangements are discussed.TRANSPOSABLE elements (TEs) are DNA sequences that range in size from several hundred base pairs to >15 kb and that have the ability to move to different locations within the genome. TE movement occurs through either a copy-and-paste mechanism involving RNA intermediates (class 1) or a cut-and-paste mechanism involving DNA intermediates (class 2). Class 1 elements are also called retrotransposons, or retroelements, and comprise two main types: (1) long terminal repeat (LTR) retrotransposons, flanked by LTRs, and (2) non-LTR elements (such as long interspersed nuclear elements and short interspersed nuclear elements).LTR retrotransposons are the most abundant mobile elements in plant genomes (Feschotte et al. 2002), as the replicative mode of retroelement transposition enables the LTR retrotransposon to accrue in high copy number. Indeed, in some grasses, LTR retrotransposons represent up to 90% of the genome (Bennetzen and Kellogg 1997; Feschotte et al. 2002). As such, retrotransposon sequences function well as substrates for illegitimate and unequal recombinations that can lead to a variety of mutations, such as deletions, insertions, translocations, and others (Parisod et al. 2009).The replicative nature of TEs seems to be stimulated by a variety of specific stress conditions (reviewed by Wessler 1996; Capy et al. 2000; Grandbastien et al. 2005), including challenges to the genome such as interspecific hybridization, an idea first proposed by Barbara McClintock 26 years ago (McClintock 1984). Accordingly, allopolyploidization is usually coupled with rapid and reproducible genomic changes, including the elimination of DNA sequences (Liu et al. 1998a,b; Ozkan et al. 2001; Shaked et al. 2001; Adams and Wendel 2005b; Skalicka et al. 2005), gene silencing (Chen and Pikaard 1997; Comai et al. 2000; Kashkush et al. 2002; Simons et al. 2006), alteration of cytosine methylation (Shaked et al. 2001; Madlung et al. 2002; Salmon et al. 2005; Beaulieu et al. 2009; Xu et al. 2009), activation of genes and retrotransposons (Kashkush et al. 2002, 2003; O''Neill et al. 2002), massively altered gene expression patterns (Kashkush et al. 2002; Wang et al. 2006), and organ-specific subfunctionalization, i.e., differential expression of homeoalleles in different tissues and at different developmental stages (Adams et al. 2003; Adams and Wendel 2004). These and other studies (Levy and Feldman 2002; Osborn et al. 2003; Adams and Wendel 2005a; Rapp and Wendel 2005; Chen and Ni 2006; Chen 2007) demonstrate the dynamic nature of allopolyploid plant genomes.Although allopolyploidization has generally been assumed to induce large bursts of TE activity (Matzke and Matzke 1998), several studies that focused on different allopolyploid systems failed to provide any evidence for a transposition burst and offered only limited evidence for the transposition of specific TEs (Madlung et al. 2005; Ainouche et al. 2009; Beaulieu et al. 2009). In newly formed Arabidopsis allopolyploids, no evidence for transposition bursts was reported (Beaulieu et al. 2009), although limited evidence suggested that transposition events occurred in a specific TE called Sunfish (Madlung et al. 2005). Little evidence of TE transposition was found in a natural population of the 150-year-old allopolyploid, Spartina anglica (Ainouche et al. 2009), and no evidence of transposition of Wis 2-1A retrotransposons in a newly formed wheat allotetraploid was present (Kashkush et al. 2003). The results of these works and others indicate that, in the short term, TE proliferation after allopolyploidization may be restricted to a few specific TEs in particular allopolyploidy systems (Parisod et al. 2009).This study entailed a detailed investigation of the methylation patterns and rearrangements of a one terminal-repeat retrotransposon in miniature (TRIM) family in wheat termed Veju. TRIM elements possess the classical structure of LTR retrotransposons, but they are distinguished by their small overall sizes (0.4 to ∼2.5 kb). A nonautonomous retrotransposon, Veju is 2520 bp long with 374 bp of identical LTRs, yet does not contain the proteins required for retrotransposition (Sanmiguel et al. 2002). However, because Veju elements contain polypurine tracts (PPTs) and primer binding sites (PBSs), they are capable of transposing if the retrotransposition proteins are available from another source. In addition, the identical sequences of the Veju 5′ and 3′ LTRs indicate that some members of the Veju family retain retrotransposition activity.In silico analysis of Veju sequences revealed them to be one of the most active and most recently inserted sequences in the wheat genome (Sanmiguel et al. 2002; Sabot et al. 2005a). As such, we have determined and compared the methylation patterns of >880 Veju insertion sites in the first four generations of a newly formed wheat allohexaploid, as well as in the parental lines. We then tested the correlation between the cytosine methylation and genetic rearrangements (i.e., deletions and insertions) of Veju and addressed the precise developmental timing of these rearrangements. Finally, we successfully tested overall changes in the copy numbers of Veju in the newly formed allohexaploid using real-time quantitative PCR.