Origin,evolution, and distribution of different groups of non-LTR retrotransposons among eukaryotes

Non-LTR retrotransposons are an ancient group of retroelements. Twenty-one clades are distinguished today among non-LTR retrotransposons. The presence of different clades in the genome characterizes the diversity of non-LTR retrotransposons of the organism. This review presents a general picture of the evolution and distribution of different clades of non-LTR retrotransposons among the main taxa of eukaryotic organisms: protozoa, plants, fungi, and metazoa. Introduction in the analysis of new taxa and the use of new bioinformatic and experimental approaches can significantly extend our knowledge about non-LTR retrotransposons and their role in the evolution and functioning of eukaryotic genomes.     

Fine-grained annotation and classification of de novo predicted LTR retrotransposons

Long terminal repeat (LTR) retrotransposons and endogenous retroviruses (ERVs) are transposable elements in eukaryotic genomes well suited for computational identification. De novo identification tools determine the position of potential LTR retrotransposon or ERV insertions in genomic sequences. For further analysis, it is desirable to obtain an annotation of the internal structure of such candidates. This article presents LTRdigest, a novel software tool for automated annotation of internal features of putative LTR retrotransposons. It uses local alignment and hidden Markov model-based algorithms to detect retrotransposon-associated protein domains as well as primer binding sites and polypurine tracts. As an example, we used LTRdigest results to identify 88 (near) full-length ERVs in the chromosome 4 sequence of Mus musculus, separating them from truncated insertions and other repeats. Furthermore, we propose a work flow for the use of LTRdigest in de novo LTR retrotransposon classification and perform an exemplary de novo analysis on the Drosophila melanogaster genome as a proof of concept. Using a new method solely based on the annotations generated by LTRdigest, 518 potential LTR retrotransposons were automatically assigned to 62 candidate groups. Representative sequences from 41 of these 62 groups were matched to reference sequences with >80% global sequence similarity.     

Non-LTR retrotransposons in fungi

Non-long terminal repeat (non-LTR) retrotransposons have contributed to shaping the structure and function of genomes. Fungi have small genomes, usually with limited amounts of repetitive DNA. In silico approach has been used to survey the non-LTR elements in 57 fungal genomes. More than 100 novel non-LTR retrotransposons were found, which belonged to five diverse clades. The present survey identified two novel clades of fungal non-LTR retrotransposons. The copy number of non-LTR retroelements varied widely. Some of the studied species contained a single copy of non-LTR retrotransposon, whereas others possessed a great number of non-LTR retrotransposon copies per genome. Although evolutionary relationships of most elements are congruent with phylogeny of host species, a new case of possible horizontal transfer was found between Eurotiomycetes and Sordariomycetes. Electronic supplementary material  The online version of this article (doi:) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.     

The use of a non-LTR element to date the formation of the Sdic gene cluster

Transposable elements comprise a considerable part of eukaryotic genomes, and there is increasing evidence for their role in the evolution of genomes. The number of active transposable elements present in the host genome at any given time is probably small relative to the number of elements that no longer transpose. The elements that have lost the ability to transpose tend to evolve neutrally. For example, non-LTR retrotransposons often become 5′ truncated due to their own transposition mechanism and hence lose their ability to transpose. The resulting transposons can be characterized as “dead-on-arrival” (DOA) elements. Because they are abundant and ubiquitous, and evolve neutrally in the location where they were inserted, these DOA non-LTR elements make a useful tool to date molecular events. There are four copies of a “dead-on-arrival” RT1C element on the recently formed Sdic gene cluster of Drosophila melanogaster, that are not present in the equivalent region of the other species of the melanogaster subgroup. The life history of the RT1C elements in the genome of D. melanogaster was used to determine the insertion chronology of the elements in the cluster and to date the duplication events that originated this cluster.     

Getting closer to a pre-vertebrate genome: the non-LTR retrotransposons of Branchiostoma floridae

Non-LTR retrotransposons are common in vertebrate genomes and although present in invertebrates they appear at a much lower frequency. The cephalochordate amphioxus is the closest living relative to vertebrates and has been considered a good model for comparative analyses of genome expansions during vertebrate evolution. With the aim to assess the involvement of transposable elements in these events, we have analysed the non-LTR retrotransposons of Branchiostoma floridae. In silico searches have allowed to reconstruct non-LTR elements of six different clades (CR1, I, L1, L2, NeSL and RTE) and assess their structural features. According to the estimated copy number of these elements they account for less than 1% of the haploid genome, which reminds of the low abundance also encountered in the urochordate Ciona intestinalis. Amphioxus (B. floridae) and Ciona share a pre-vertebrate-like organization for the non-LTR retrotransposons (<150 copies, < 1% of the genome) versus the complexity associated to higher vertebrates (Homo sapiens >1.3.10(6) copies, > 20% of the genome).     

Non-LTR retrotransposons with unique integration preferences downstream of Dictyostelium discoideum tRNA genes

Retrotransposable elements are genetic entities which move and replicate within host cell genomes. We have previously reported on the structures and genomic distributions of two non-long terminal repeat (non-LTR) retrotransposons, DRE and Tdd-3, in the eukaryotic microorganism Dictyostelium discoideum. DRE elements are found inserted upstream, and Tdd-3 elements downstream, of transfer RNA (tRNA) genes with remarkable position and orientation specificities. The data set currently available from the Dictyostelium Genome Project led to the characterisation of two repetitive DNA elements which are related to the D. discoideum non-LTR retrotransposon Tdd-3 in both their structural properties and genomic distributions. It appears from our data that in the D. discoideum genome tRNA genes are major targets for the insertion of mobilised non-LTR retrotransposons. This may be interpreted as the consequence of a process of coevolution, allowing a viable population of retroelements to transpose without being deleterious to the small microbial host genome which carries only short intergenic DNA sequences. A new nomenclature is introduced to designate all tRNA gene-targeted non-LTR retrotransposons (TREs) in the D. discoideum genome. TREs inserted 5′ and 3′ of tRNA genes are named TRE5 and TRE3, respectively. According to this nomenclature DRE and Tdd-3 are renamed TRE5-A and TRE3-A, respectively. The new retroelements described in this study are named TRE3-B (formerly RED) and TRE3-C. Received: 27 May 1999 / Accepted: 23 July 1999     

APE-type non-LTR retrotransposons: determinants involved in target site recognition

Non-long terminal repeat (Non-LTR) retrotransposons represent a diverse and widely distributed group of transposable elements and an almost ubiquitous component of eukaryotic genomes that has a major impact on evolution. Their copy number can range from a few to several million and they often make up a significant fraction of the genomes. The members of the dominating subtype of non-LTR retrotransposons code for an endonuclease with homology to apurinic/apyrimidinic endonucleases (APE), and are thus termed APE-type non-LTR retrotransposons. In the last decade both the number of identified non-LTR retrotransposons and our knowledge of biology and evolution of APE-type non-LTR retrotransposons has increased tremendously.     

LINEs, SINEs and processed pseudogenes: parasitic strategies for genome modeling

Two major classes of retrotransposons have invaded eukaryotic genomes: the LTR retrotransposons closely resembling the proviral integrated form of infectious retroviruses, and the non-LTR retrotransposons including the widespread, autonomous LINE elements. Here, we review the modeling effects of the latter class of elements, which are the most active in humans, and whose enzymatic machinery is subverted to generate a large series of "secondary" retroelements. These include the processed pseudogenes, naturally present in all eukaryotic genomes possessing non-LTR retroelements, and the very successful SINE elements such as the human Alu sequences which have evolved refined parasitic strategies to efficiently bypass the original "protectionist" cis-preference of LINEs for their own retrotransposition.     

<Emphasis Type="Italic">LTRharvest</Emphasis>, an efficient and flexible software for <Emphasis Type="Italic">de novo</Emphasis> detection of LTR retrotransposons

Background  

Transposable elements are abundant in eukaryotic genomes and it is believed that they have a significant impact on the evolution of gene and chromosome structure. While there are several completed eukaryotic genome projects, there are only few high quality genome wide annotations of transposable elements. Therefore, there is a considerable demand for computational identification of transposable elements. LTR retrotransposons, an important subclass of transposable elements, are well suited for computational identification, as they contain long terminal repeats (LTRs).     

Evolution of errantiviruses of <Emphasis Type="Italic">Drosophila melanogaster</Emphasis>. Strategy 2: From retroviruses to retrotransposons

Drosophila melanogaster retrotransposons of the gypsy group are considered to be potential errantiviruses. Their infectivity is caused by the functional activity of the third open reading frame (ORF3) encoding the Env protein, which was probably captured from baculoviruses. Mobile genetic elements (MGEs) of the gypsy group can be conventionally divided into three subgroups: with three ORFs, with a defective ORF3, and without the ORF3. To establish the patterns of evolution of gypsy retrotransposons in D. melanogaster, the members of the three subgroups were examined. Structural analysis of retrotransposons opus and rover, which carry a defective ORF3, as well as retrotransposons Burdock, McClintock, qbert, and HMS-Beagle, which lack the ORF3, suggests that the evolution of these MGEs followed the pattern of loosing the ORF3. At the same time, an MGE of the same subgroup, Transpac, may be an ancestral form, which had acquired the env gene and gave rise to the first errantiviruses. The capture of the ORF3 by retrotransposons provided their conversion to a fundamentally new state. However, the ORF3 in the genome is not subjected to strong selective pressure, because it is not essential for intragenomic transpositions. Because of this, the process of its gradual loss seems quite natural.     

Retroelement dynamics and a novel type of chordate retrovirus-like element in the miniature genome of the tunicate Oikopleura dioica

Retrotransposable elements have played an important role in shaping eukaryotic DNA, and their activity and turnover rate directly influence the size of genomes. With approximately 15,000 genes within 65-75 megabases, the marine tunicate Oikopleura dioica, a nonvertebrate chordate, has the smallest and most compact genome ever found in animals. Consistent with a massive elimination of retroelements, only one apparently novel clade of non-long terminal repeat (non-LTR) retrotransposons was detected within 41 megabases of nonredundant genomic sequences. In contrast, at least six clades of non-LTR elements were identified in the less compact genome of the tunicate Ciona intestinalis. Unexpectedly, Ty3/gypsy-related Tor LTR retrotransposons presented an astonishing level of diversity in O. dioica. They were generally poorly or apparently not corrupted, indicating recent activity. Both Tor3 and Tor4b families bore an envelope-like open reading frame, suggesting possible horizontal acquisition through infection. The Tor4b envelope-like gene might have been obtained from a paramyxovirus (RNA virus). Tor3 and Tor4b are phylogenetically clearly distinct from vertebrate retroviruses (Retroviridae) and are more reminiscent of certain insect and plant sequences. Tor elements potentially represent a so far unknown, ancient type of infectious retroelement in chordates. Their distribution and transmission dynamics in tunicates and other chordates deserve further study.