Journal of Genetics and Genomics

正Aims and Scope Journal of Genetics and Genomics(JGG)is an international journal publishing peer-reviewed articles of novel and significant discoveries in the fields of genetics and genomics.Topics of particular interest include but are not limited to:molecular genetics,developmental genetics,cytogenetics,epigenetics,medical genetics,population and evolutionary genetics,genomics and functional genomics as well as bioinformatics and computational biology.The main article types     

Journal of Genetics and Genomics

正Aims and Scope Journal of Genetics and Genomics(JGG)is an international journal publishing peer-reviewed articles of novel and significant discoveries in the fields of genetics and genomics.Topics of particular interest include but are not limited to:molecular genetics,developmental genetics,cytogenetics,epigenetics,medical genetics,population and evolutionary genetics,genomics and functional genomics as well     

Structural specificity in plant–filamentous pathogen interactions

Plant diseases bear names such as leaf blights, root rots, sheath blights, tuber scabs, and stem cankers, indicating that symptoms occur preferentially on specific parts of host plants. Accordingly, many plant pathogens are specialized to infect and cause disease in specific tissues and organs. Conversely, others are able to infect a range of tissues, albeit often disease symptoms fluctuate in different organs infected by the same pathogen. The structural specificity of a pathogen defines the degree to which it is reliant on a given tissue, organ, or host developmental stage. It is influenced by both the microbe and the host but the processes shaping it are not well established. Here we review the current status on structural specificity of plant–filamentous pathogen interactions and highlight important research questions. Notably, this review addresses how constitutive defence and induced immunity as well as virulence processes vary across plant organs, tissues, and even cells. A better understanding of the mechanisms underlying structural specificity will aid targeted approaches for plant health, for instance by considering the variation in the nature and the amplitude of defence responses across distinct plant organs and tissues when performing selective breeding.     

Developmental plasticity and evolutionary explanations

Developmental plasticity looks like a promising bridge between ecological and developmental perspectives on evolution. Yet, there is no consensus on whether plasticity is part of the explanation for adaptive evolution or an optional “add‐on” to genes and natural selection. Here, we suggest that these differences in opinion are caused by differences in the simplifying assumptions, and particular idealizations, that enable evolutionary explanation. We outline why idealizations designed to explain evolution through natural selection prevent an understanding of the role of development, and vice versa. We show that representing plasticity as a reaction norm conforms with the idealizations of selective explanations, which can give the false impression that plasticity has no explanatory power for adaptive evolution. Finally, we use examples to illustrate why evolutionary explanations that include developmental plasticity may in fact be more satisfactory than explanations that solely refer to genes and natural selection.     

Does phenotypic plasticity initiate developmental bias?

The generation of variation is paramount for the action of natural selection. Although biologists are now moving beyond the idea that random mutation provides the sole source of variation for adaptive evolution, we still assume that variation occurs randomly. In this review, we discuss an alternative view for how phenotypic plasticity, which has become well accepted as a source of phenotypic variation within evolutionary biology, can generate nonrandom variation. Although phenotypic plasticity is often defined as a property of a genotype, we argue that it needs to be considered more explicitly as a property of developmental systems involving more than the genotype. We provide examples of where plasticity could be initiating developmental bias, either through direct active responses to similar stimuli across populations or as the result of programmed variation within developmental systems. Such biased variation can echo past adaptations that reflect the evolutionary history of a lineage but can also serve to initiate evolution when environments change. Such adaptive programs can remain latent for millions of years and allow development to harbor an array of complex adaptations that can initiate new bouts of evolution. Specifically, we address how ideas such as the flexible stem hypothesis and cryptic genetic variation overlap, how modularity among traits can direct the outcomes of plasticity, and how the structure of developmental signaling pathways is limited to a few outcomes. We highlight key questions throughout and conclude by providing suggestions for future research that can address how plasticity initiates and harbors developmental bias.     

Historical and philosophical perspectives on the study of developmental bias

Throughout the recent history of research at the intersection of evolution and development, notions such as developmental constraint, evolutionary novelty, and evolvability have been prominent, but the term “developmental bias” has scarcely been used. And one may even doubt whether a unique and principled definition of bias is possible. I argue that the concept of developmental bias can still play a vital scientific role by means of setting an explanatory agenda that motivates investigation and guides the formulation of integrative explanatory frameworks. Less crucial is a definition that would classify patterns of phenotypic variation and unify variational patterns involving different traits and taxa as all being “bias.” Instead, what we should want is a concept that generates intellectual identity across various researchers, and that unites the diverse fields and approaches relevant to the study of developmental bias, from paleontology to behavioral biology. I point to some advantages of conducting research specifically under the label of “developmental bias,” compared with employing other, more common terms such as “evolvability.”     

Postnatal exposure to finasteride causes different effects on the prostate of male and female gerbils

The development and maintenance of prostate function depend on a fine balance between oestrogen and androgen levels. Finasteride inhibits 5α‐reductase, which is responsible for the conversion of testosterone into its most active form, dihydrotestosterone. Enzymes that metabolize these hormones have a highly relevant role in both the normal prostate metabolism and in the occurrence of pathological conditions. There are few studies on the impact of finasteride on male prostate development and fewer studies on the female prostate and possible intersexual differences. Therefore, we treated male and female gerbils from 7 to 14 days in postnatal life with a high dose of finasteride (500 μg/kg/day); the prostate complexes were then removed and submitted to immunohistochemistry, immunofluorescence and three‐dimensional reconstruction. In addition, hormonal serum dosages were administered. Treatment with finasteride resulted in an increased thickness of the periductal smooth musculature in the prostate of both male and female gerbils, such as well as a reduction in the thickness of developing prostate alveoli in both sexes. In addition, intersexual differences were observed as increased epithelial proliferation and decreases in the number of developing alveoli in females. Together, the data indicate that postnatal exposure to finasteride causes greater changes in the female gerbil prostate than in the male.     

Ultra‐high α‐linolenic acid accumulating developmental defective embryo was rescued by lysophosphatidic acid acyltransferase 2

For decades, genetic engineering approaches to produce unusual fatty acids (UFAs) in crops has reached a bottleneck, including reduced seed oil production and seed vigor. Currently, plant models in the field of research are primarily used to investigate defects in oil production and seedling development, while the role of UFAs in embryonic developmental defects remains unknown. In this study, we developed a transgenic Arabidopsis plant model, in which the embryo exhibits severely wrinkled appearance owing to α‐linolenic acid (ALA) accumulation. RNA‐sequencing analysis in the defective embryo suggested that brassinosteroid synthesis, FA synthesis and photosynthesis were inhibited, while FA degradation, endoplasmic reticulum stress and oxidative stress were activated. Lipidomics analysis showed that ultra‐accumulated ALA is released from phosphatidylcholine as a free FA in cells, inducing severe endoplasmic reticulum and oxidative stress. Furthermore, we identified that overexpression of lysophosphatidic acid acyltransferase 2 rescued the defective phenotype. In the rescue line, the pool capacity of the Kennedy pathway was increased, and the esterification of ALA indirectly to triacylglycerol was enhanced to avoid stress. This study provides a plant model that aids in understanding the molecular mechanism of embryonic developmental defects and generates strategies to produce higher levels of UFAs.     

How do developmental and parental exposures to predation affect personality and immediate behavioural plasticity in the snail Physa acuta?

Individuals differ in personality and immediate behavioural plasticity. While developmental environment may explain this group diversity, the effect of parental environment is still unexplored—a surprising observation since parental environment influences mean behaviour. We tested whether developmental and parental environments impacted personality and immediate plasticity. We raised two generations of Physa acuta snails in the laboratory with or without developmental exposure to predator cues. Escape behaviour was repeatedly assessed on adult snails with or without predator cues in the immediate environment. On average, snails were slower to escape if they or their parents had been exposed to predator cues during development. Snails were also less plastic in response to immediate predation risk on average if they or their parents had been exposed to predator cues. Group diversity in personality was greater in predator-exposed snails than unexposed snails, while parental environment did not influence it. Group diversity in immediate plasticity was not significant. Our results suggest that only developmental environment plays a key role in the emergence of group diversity in personality, but that parental environment influences mean behavioural responses to the environmental change. Consequently, although different, both developmental and parental cues may have evolutionary implications on behavioural responses.