Meibo Xu1, Xionglei He. 1. State Key Laboratory of Bio-Control, College of Life Sciences, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China.
Abstract
Genetic incompatibility is believed to be the major cause of postzygotic reproductive isolation. Despite huge efforts seeking for speciation-related incompatibilities in the past several decades, a general understanding of how genetic incompatibility evolves in affecting hybrid fitness is not available, primarily due to the fact that the number of known incompatibilities is small. Instead of further mapping specific incompatible genes, in this paper we aimed to know the overall effects of incompatibility on fertility and viability, the two aspects of fitness, by examining 89 gametes produced by yeast S. cerevisiae-S. paradoxus F1 hybrids. Homozygous F2 hybrids formed by autodiploidization of F1 gametes were subject to tests for growth rate and sporulation efficiency. We observed much stronger defects in sporulation than in clonal growth for every single F2 hybrid strain, indicating that genetic incompatibility affects hybrid fertility more than hybrid viability in yeast. We related this finding in part to the fast-evolving nature of meiosis-related genes, and proposed that the generally low expression levels of these genes might be a cause of the observation.
Genetic incompatibility is believed to be the major cause of postzygotic reproductive isolation. Despite huge efforts seeking for speciation-related incompatibilities in the past several decades, a general understanding of how genetic incompatibility evolves in affecting hybrid fitness is not available, primarily due to the fact that the number of known incompatibilities is small. Instead of further mapping specific incompatible genes, in this paper we aimed to know the overall effects of incompatibility on fertility and viability, the two aspects of fitness, by examining 89 gametes produced by yeastS. cerevisiae-S. paradoxus F1 hybrids. Homozygous F2 hybrids formed by autodiploidization of F1 gametes were subject to tests for growth rate and sporulation efficiency. We observed much stronger defects in sporulation than in clonal growth for every single F2 hybrid strain, indicating that genetic incompatibility affects hybrid fertility more than hybrid viability in yeast. We related this finding in part to the fast-evolving nature of meiosis-related genes, and proposed that the generally low expression levels of these genes might be a cause of the observation.
Postzygotic reproductive isolation is a key step of forming new species, and the
underlying genetic mechanisms can be multiple [1], [2], [3], [4]. The model of between-gene
incompatibility proposed by Dobzhansky [5] and Muller [6] posits that
independent evolution of two populations can generate alleles that are completely
normal on native genetic background but deleterious on genetic background of the
other population, rendering hybrid inviability or sterility. This is an appealing
idea because it predicts that new species can evolve as a time-dependent by-product
of geographical separation of populations, and has therefore received a lot of
attention. Efforts in the past several decades have revealed a handful of genetic
incompatibilities in organisms including fly [7], [8], [9], [10], nematode [11], mouse [12], yeast [13], and plants [14], [15]. Although the
evolution of genetic incompatibility between two species is inevitable even if the
speciation is not due to incompatibility, such incompatibilities identified from
recently formed species are probable speciation-causing genes, and thus of great
interest to people. Some common features were observed from these probable
speciation genes [16]; for example, they tend to be fast evolving. However, a
general understanding of how genetic incompatibility evolves in affecting the
fitness of hybrids is still lacking. An organism's fitness is influenced by its
ability to survive and develop/grow (viability), and its ability to reproduce
(fertility). Available incompatibilities identified from different organisms show an
equivocal pattern regarding their effects on the two components of fitness [16]. It is the
aim of this study to systematically test whether genetic incompatibility affects
hybrid fertility and hybrid viability differently.It should be pointed out that the diploid F1 hybrids are not suitable for addressing
the above question, because: 1) the heterozygous nature of F1 hybrid genome will
mask the effects of recessive incompatibility, and 2) in addition to genetic
incompatibility, some confounding factors such as chromosomal translocation and
sequence divergence may also reduce F1 hybrid fertility by disturbing meiosis [17]. To overcome
the two problems, homozygous F2 hybrids are needed. In addition, two species that
are close enough to form a hybrid but are diverged sufficiently to have evolved a
plenty of genetic incompatibilities are desired. In this paper, the hybrid of yeastsSaccharomyces cerevisiae (Sc) and
Sacchromyces paradoxus (Sp) was examined; the
two Saccharomyces species split ∼10 million years ago, being
∼15% diverged in genome sequence [18]. We were fully aware that,
given the significant sequence divergence, any specific incompatibility identified
from the two yeasts is more likely to be the aftermath rather than the cause of
speciation. This, however, still fits our interest in understanding how genetic
incompatibility evolves between two separated populations. The haploid gametes of F1
hybrids underwent autodiploidization to form diploid homozygous F2 hybrids.
Fertility and viability of the yeast were measured by the sporulation frequency and
the clonal growth rate, respectively, for each of the F2 hybrids (Figure 1). We obtained strong
evidence supporting that genetic incompatibility affects hybrid fertility more than
hybrid viability in yeast.
Figure 1
A schematic map of the experimental design.
Results
The heterozygous F1 hybrid formed between Sc and Sp
grows normally but produces only ∼1% viable gametes, while both parental
species can produce 90–100% viable gametes [19]. Fortunately, the population of
yeast cells is large enough, so sufficient F1 gametes were readily available. A
total of 94 gametes were randomly selected. Genetic incompatibility could be a cause
for the ∼99% inviable F1 gametes, through either preventing gamete
formation or killing the gametes once formed. The incompatibility of preventing
gamete formation in the heterozygous F1 hybrid, if present, must be dominant;
however, a previous work has demonstrated that there is no dominant genetic
incompatibility in the yeast hybrid [20]. The remaining concern was that genotypes with lethal
incompatibility that kills gametes, if exist, can not be obtained, so the 94 gametes
may contain ascertainment bias, resulting in underestimation of the effects of
incompatibility on viability.
Genotyping the 94 selected gametes using 93 markers
Ninety-three markers encompassing the whole yeast nuclear genome were designed to
genotype the 94 gametes, to evaluate the potential ascertainment bias (Figure 2A; Table S1).
We ignored the mitochondrial genome because the Sc−Sp F1
hybrid we used contains only Sc mitochondrion. Five gametes
were excluded from further study because they show significant
(P<10−5; Pearson correlation analysis)
genotypic similarity to other gametes. Among the remaining 89 gametes, there are
a similar number of Sc origins and Sp origins
for all makers, with the exception of markers 10A and 10B that are of
Sc origin in >90% of gametes (Figure 2A; Table S2).
The result is unexpected because a previous study tested the whole chromosome 10
of Sp and found no incompatibility of this Sp
chromosome with Sc genome [19]. To resolve this
inconsistency, we constructed a new F1 hybrid using different
Sc and Sp strains, and found that our
above observation can not be reproduced (a total of 21 gametes were examined,
and the marker 10B was from Sc in 9 gametes and from
Sp in the other 12 gametes). The Sp
strain, YDG749, used in our confirmation experiment is the same one used by the
previous study [19], while the Sp genome of the original
F1 hybrid was from YCM361. So, it is likely that a mutation occurred to an
essential gene of the Sp locus when the original F1 hybrid was
made or cultured in laboratory. We made no attempt to find the mutation from the
∼150 kb region and ignored this single suspicious locus in further study,
because the primary goal of this work is to assess the overall effects of a
mixture of unknown incompatibilities.
Figure 2
Marker position and the recombination rate between neighboring
markers.
(A) A schematic map of the 93 markers on 16 yeast
chromosomes. The black triangle shows the position of centromere. The
capital letter above the line is marker name, and the number under the
line is the percentage of gametes being of Sc origin
for the corresponding marker. Note that two markers 10A and 10B are of
Sc origin in >90% of gametes, an
observation that can not be reproduced in other
Sc−Sp hybrids. (B) The
recombination rate between neighboring markers is generally low. Three
blocks (AB, BC, and CD) at the chromosome 10 were not included.
Marker position and the recombination rate between neighboring
markers.
(A) A schematic map of the 93 markers on 16 yeast
chromosomes. The black triangle shows the position of centromere. The
capital letter above the line is marker name, and the number under the
line is the percentage of gametes being of Sc origin
for the corresponding marker. Note that two markers 10A and 10B are of
Sc origin in >90% of gametes, an
observation that can not be reproduced in other
Sc−Sp hybrids. (B) The
recombination rate between neighboring markers is generally low. Three
blocks (AB, BC, and CD) at the chromosome 10 were not included.
No ascertainment bias was detected from the 89 gametes
It was proposed that sequence divergence between Sc and
Sp suppresses recombination in the
Sc−Sp F1 hybrid [4]. Indeed, despite the median
distance of two neighboring markers being 103 kb, the median recombination rate
between two markers is 5.7% (Figure 2B), much smaller than the rate of ∼1 recombination per
100 kb per meiosis in Sc
[21]. The
suppressed recombination helped us to identify the origin of a block between two
markers with high confidence. For example, markers 1-A and 1-B are both from
Sp in gamete 3, and both from Sc in gamete
6, so the 32 kb block between 1-A and 1-B is of Sp origin in
the gamete 3, and of Sc origin in the gamete 6, each with a
roughly estimated false discovery rate (FDR) of 0.07%, given that the
recombination rate between 1-A and 1-B is 2.7% (two recombination events
are needed when 1-A and 1-B are from the same yeast but the block 1-AB contains
genes of different yeasts); the origin of block 1-AB will not be assigned for
gametes in which 1-A and 1-B are from different species. Since we did not design
markers for telomeres, the origins of two ends of a chromosome were based on the
single closest marker.The 93 markers separate the yeast genome into 109 blocks. If there is lethal
incompatibility between two loci, one would expect the absence of heterogeneous
combination (i.e., two blocks are from different yeasts) between the
corresponding blocks. Interestingly, we observed the absence of heterogeneous
combination only for blocks on the same chromosomes, which is presumably due to
the low recombination rate in the F1 hybrid [4]. Heterogeneous combination
was observed for all between-chromosome block pairs; in fact, none of these
block pairs showed significant under-representation of heterogeneous combination
at an FDR of 1% (i.e., the frequency of heterogeneous combination is at
least 26/89 = 29.2%, because with 89 strains an
observed ratio of 25∶64 will be regarded as significant deviation from
expectation with the Chi-square P = 0.007)
(Figure 3). The same is
true when one-way incompatibility was tested (data not shown). The result is in
well line with a previous study in which a whole Sc chromosome
was replaced by its Sp homologous chromosome and no lethal or
severe phenotype was observed for all 9 tested chromosomes (amount to
∼43% of the yeast genome). Thus, it seems unlikely that lethal or
nearly-lethal genetic incompatibility affecting the viability of F1 gametes was
present. In other words, the 89 gametes represent a largely unbiased sample.
Figure 3
No between-chromosome two-locus incompatibility was detected.
The fraction of heterogeneous combination
((ScSp+SpSc)/(ScSc+ScSp+SpSc+SpSp))
is shown for each of the 5111 block pairs. None is significantly
different from 0.5, the expected value, at an FDR of 1%, as
determined by Chi-square test. Note that the 4 blocks at the left arm of
chromosome 10 were excluded from the analysis.
No between-chromosome two-locus incompatibility was detected.
The fraction of heterogeneous combination
((ScSp+SpSc)/(ScSc+ScSp+SpSc+SpSp))
is shown for each of the 5111 block pairs. None is significantly
different from 0.5, the expected value, at an FDR of 1%, as
determined by Chi-square test. Note that the 4 blocks at the left arm of
chromosome 10 were excluded from the analysis.
Measuring the sporulation frequency and the clonal growth rate of F2
hybrids
Aneuploidy was not considered in the above analyses. An aneuploid gamete carries
both Sc and Sp alleles for the same loci,
which can mask the effects of genetic incompatibility. We found that an average
of 8% of genomes contain both Sc and Sp
alleles in a single gamete, so the fraction of incompatibilities that were
masked in the 89 gametes is 1−0.92, where
n is the number of loci involved for an incompatibility.
This should not bias our study because it affects fertility and viability to the
same extent, but will reduce the power of detecting the different effects of
incompatibility on fertility and viability, particularly when complex
incompatibilities (with large n) are considered.Because an intact HO gene was present in the genomes, all the 89 F1 gametes
underwent autodiploidization, forming homozygous diploid F2 hybrids [22]. We
confirmed experimentally the diploidy for the 89 strains. The sporulation-based
relative fitness was quantified by examining the frequency of cells capable of
forming tetrads in the medium for sporulation, and the growth-based relative
fitness of a F2 hybrid was obtained by measuring the growth rate in YEPD, a
fermentable medium both Sc and Sp having
adapted to. Interestingly, the growth-based relative fitness was significantly
(P<10−5; Z-test) higher than the
sporulation-based relative fitness for every single F2 strain (Figure 4), when
Sp was used as the wild-type control for calculating
relative fitness. There was only one exception, if Sc was used
as the wild-type control (data not shown). The pattern is not simply due to
aneuploidy, a known factor adversely affecting cell growth [23], because the 7 strains that
are not aneuploid show the same pattern (Figure 4). The average growth-based relative
fitness of F2 hybrids is >0.9, suggesting sparse and weak genetic
incompatibility affecting hybrid viability; in sharp contrast, the average
sporulation-based relative fitness of these hybrids is <0.2, indicating
prevalent and strong incompatibility affecting hybrid fertility (Figure 4). Of note,
58.4% (52/89) of the F2 strains were not able to form tetrads at all, and
the underlying incompatibility is not clear, partly because the sample size is
too small. We made no attempt to map incompatible genes by examining more
strains, because it was not the intent of this study. We also found that strains
with strong defects in tetrad formation tend to grow slowly
(R
2 = 0.45,
P<10−12; Pearson correlation analysis),
suggesting pleiotropic effects of genetic incompatibility.
Figure 4
The growth-based relative fitness is significantly
(P<10−5; Z-test) higher than
the sporulation-based relative fitness in all 89 F2 hybrids after
Bonferroni correction for multiple testing.
The diploid Sp-YCM361 was used as the wild-type control
in calculating relative fitness. Arrows point to strains that are not
aneuploid. Error bar shows one standard error of the mean.
The growth-based relative fitness is significantly
(P<10−5; Z-test) higher than
the sporulation-based relative fitness in all 89 F2 hybrids after
Bonferroni correction for multiple testing.
The diploid Sp-YCM361 was used as the wild-type control
in calculating relative fitness. Arrows point to strains that are not
aneuploid. Error bar shows one standard error of the mean.
Discussion
Our result seems to be contradictory to a previous study in which only
∼18% of the Sc−Sp F2 hybrids are sterile [24]. In fact, the
different levels of aneuploidy of F2 hybrids between the two studies underlie the
difference. The overall frequency of tetrasomy in the F2 hybrids of that study is
31%, and the number is 8.5% in our case when a similar approach was
used to measure tetrasomy (244 out of 89*32 = 2848
chromosome ends show both Sp and Sc signatures)
[24], which
leads to the proportions of exposed incompatibilities being dramatically different
between the two studies. For example, only
(1–31%)∧2 = 47.6% of two-locus
incompatibilities can be exposed in that study while the number is
(1–8.5%)∧2 = 83.7% in our study. So,
the low level of aneuploidy helped us to gain a better understanding in the effects
of genetic incompatibility.We used the sporulation frequency and the clonal growth rate at defined lab
conditions as the proxies of yeast ferility and yeast viability, respectively, and
observed a much higher growth-based fitness compared to sporulation-based fitness
for every single F2 hybrid, strongly supporting that genetic incompatibility affects
hybrid sterility more than hybrid viability in yeast. It is worth pointing out that
a similar pattern was observed within the species of Sc
[25], [26]. It
should be noted that within-chromosome incompatibility [27] was not effectively
investigated in this study due to the low recombination rate in the F1 hybrid.
Further work is required to know if within-chromosome incompatibility evolves in a
similar fashion as between-chromosome incompatibility does in affecting hybrid
fitness. Using whole-chromosome replacement, a previous study examined
∼43% of the yeast genome, and identified no lethal or severe
growth-related incompatibility between Sp and Sc
[19]. We confirmed
the previous result using a different approach, and further showed that the same is
true for the rest ∼57% of the genome. When we were preparing the
manuscript, a newly published paper examined about one hundred
Sc−Sp F1 gametes using much denser markers, and came to
the same conclusion that no strong two-locus incompatibility between
Sc and Sp exists [28]. In principle, incompatibility
involving 3 or more loci could be present. One three-locus lethal incompatibility
leads to 12.5% inviable gametes, and 6 such incompatibilities are needed to
cause the frequency of inviable gametes be 55.1% (1−0.8756),
a level comparable to the observed frequency (58.4%) of complete sterility
for F2 hybrids, and an even larger number of more than three-locus incompatibilities
are required to generate a similar proportion of inviable gametes, which seems
unlikely given the rarity of two-locus incompatibility.The molecular mechanism underlying the finding is intriguing. A recent study revealed
that MRS1, an Sc nuclear gene, is incompatible
with COX1, an Sp mitochondrial gene [29]. This recessive
incompatibility leads to hybrid sterility by disturbing cell metabolism on
non-fermentable medium on which yeast sporulates. Interestingly, we found that one
of the three major incompatibility-causing sites on the
Sc-MRS1 gene is polymorphic [30] (Figure S1),
indicating that the derived incompatible allele is evolutionarily young. This case,
together with several others found between Saccharomyces species
[13], [29], suggests that
fertility-related incompatibility often results from defects in respiration on
non-fermentable media. However, despite of 58.4% of F2 hybrids in our study
being completely sterile, only 13.5% (12/89) can not form colonies on the
non-fermentable medium YPG (1% yeast extract, 2% peptone, and
3% glycerol) agar, indicating that defects in respiration explain only a part
of the fertility-related incompatibilities.Since clonal growth requires mitosis while sporulation requires meiosis, different
sets of genes with different molecular features are involved in the two processes.
Presumably, the chance of evolving viability-related incompatibility should be
higher than that of evolving fertility-related incompatibility, because there are
more genes involved in clonal growth than in sporulation. However, meiosis-related
genes are generally expressed at merely detectable levels during asexual clonal
growth [31],
the major means of reproduction for wild yeast [32]. Recent progress in protein
evolution predicts that such genes tend to evolve rapidly, because the deleterious
effect of protein mis-folding caused by a non-synonymous mutation on a lowly
expressed gene is relatively small [33]. Using data from our previous
work [34] we found
that meiosis-related genes are indeed fast evolving in the yeast (Figure 5). This may partly explain
why fertility-related incompatibilities are more common than viability-related
incompatibilities, and suggests a neutral view on the evolution of genetic
incompatibility as well as speciation. These being said, we caution that natural
populations of Sc and Sp are often found in the
same habitat [22],
a scenario atypical to what the Dobzhansky-Muller model is usually applied to. Also,
a recent paper showed that substantial genetic incompatibility affecting both growth
and sporulation can evolve between two initially-identical yeast populations after
just 500 generations of independent adapted evolution in laboratory [35]. It is hard to
reconcile the result with the nearly normal growth of the F1 hybrid of
Sc and Sp, two species with as high as
∼15% of sequence divergence. Apparently the unique life cycle, including
the fermentation-supported clonal growth and the respiration-supported sporulation,
and the evolutionary history of natural Saccharomyces populations
should be accounted for, before we can fully understand how speciation was initiated
and how genetic incompatibility has evolved in yeast [22].
Figure 5
Meiosis-related genes tend to be fast-evolving compared to other genes in
Sc (P<10−3,
Mann-Whitney U test).
The number of non-synonymous substitutions per non-synonymous site (dN) was
calculated using Sp as the reference [34]. The proportion
(y-axis) of genes with dN smaller than a certain number
(x-axis) is shown.
Meiosis-related genes tend to be fast-evolving compared to other genes in
Sc (P<10−3,
Mann-Whitney U test).
The number of non-synonymous substitutions per non-synonymous site (dN) was
calculated using Sp as the reference [34]. The proportion
(y-axis) of genes with dN smaller than a certain number
(x-axis) is shown.
Materials and Methods
Strains and genome information
Unless otherwise stated, the F1 hybrid used in this study was made by crossing
gametes of a diploid Sc strain YCM362 (HO,
ura3; Y55 background) with gametes of a diploid
Sp strain YCM361 (HO, lys2; N17
background), and is a gift of Dr. Calum Maclean. To reconcile our observation at
chromosome 10 with a previous finding, we constructed another F1 hybrid by
crossing an Sc strain BY4742 (MATalpha; ho,
his3, lseu2, lys2,
ura3) with an Sp strain YDG749 (MATa;
ho, ura3); The Sp-YDG749
is a gift of Dr. Duncan Greig. The genome information of Sc-Y55
and Sp-N17 was obtained from a recent paper [30].
Sample gametes of F1 hybrids
A single colony of the F1 hybrid was inoculated in 50 ml of YEPD (1% yeast
extract, 2% peptone, and 2% dextrose) at 30°C until the cell
concentration reached ∼1.0×108 cells/ml. The culture was
centrifuged, and all cells were transferred into 50 ml of medium containing
0.25% yeast extract, 0.1% dextrose, 0.82% sodium acetate,
and 0.18% potassium chloride for sporulation at 30°C. One week later,
an aliquot of culture was subject to microscopic examination. Cells were
collected by centrifuging, washed twice using sterile water, and re-suspended in
1 ml of sterile water. 100 µl of cell suspension was diluted by adding 900
µl of sterile water, and incubated with 340 U of lyticase (Sigma) for 40
minutes at 30°C, to remove the ascus wall and release spores. The solution
was then in 55°C water bath for 15 minutes to kill the remaining diploid F1
hybrids. Spores were collected, washed twice using sterile water, and plated on
YEPD agar after appropriate dilution. The YEPD plates were incubated at 30°C
for 4 days, single colonies were randomly picked, and streaked on fresh YEPD
agar plates. For each strain, a single colony growing on the fresh plate was
used for further experiments. Some of the picked strains are remaining
heterozygous diploid F1 hybrids, which were identified using two markers that
can discriminate Sc from Sp. The first marker
(Forward: 5′-GATAGTCTCCAAAGGAAGAG; Reverse: 5′-CAATTTGGTCATTAGAAGC) is at
chromosome 10, and the obtained PCR products can be cut by the restriction
enzyme Xba I if the template is from Sp, and can not be cut if
the template is from Sc. The second marker (Forward:
5′-GTTTCCAACCTATTCGCAA; Reverse: 5′-GCTGTATGATTGATAAAGAGG) is at
chromosome 16, and the obtained PCR products can be cut by the restriction
enzyme Xho I if the template is from Sc, and can not be cut if
the template is from Sp. We did not use the marker separating
the mating types (a/alpha versus a or alpha) of a yeast cell, because of
potential autodiploidization of haploid gametes which would produce homozygous
diploid F2. The two markers generated consistent results, and colonies that are
heterozygous at the two loci are F1 hybrids, and thus were discarded. A total of
94 F1 gametes were obtained. Note that the identity of these gametes were
further assessed with additional 93 markers covering the whole yeast genome (See
below).
Design markers for genotyping sampled gametes
A set of 93 markers were designed to genotype the 94 gametes, with approximately
one marker per 100 kb of the yeast genome. For each marker, a pair of PCR
primers was designed, and the PCR products derived from Sc and
Sp differ in a specific restriction site (one can be cut
while the other can not). For a given gamete, signatures representing both
Sc and Sp can sometimes be found by a
single marker, suggesting the presence of aneuploidy; in this case, the origin
of this marker in this gamete was not assigned.
Test genotype relatedness of the 94 gametes
We considered only markers at the two ends of a chromosome to ensure that they
segregated largely independently, so from the 16 yeast chromosomes a total of 32
markers were used to evaluate the genotype relatedness. We used 0 and 1 to
denote Sc origin and Sp origin, respectively,
and did the Pearson correlation analysis for all gamete pairs
(94*93/2 = 4371 pairs). A minimum number of gametes
were discarded to ensure that within the retained gametes no one is
significantly related to others at an FDR of
0.05/4371∼ = 10−5.
Seek for two-locus genetic incompatibility
There are 4 possible combinations between two loci: ScSc,
ScSp, SpSc, and SpSp;
ScSp and SpSc were considered as
heterogeneous combinations. Chi-square test was used to determine whether the
frequency of heterogeneous combination
((ScSp+SpSc)/(ScSc+ScSp+SpSc+SpSp))
is significantly different from 0.5, the expected frequency; the frequency of
heterogeneous combination was either
ScSp/(ScSp+ScSc) or
SpSc/(SpSc+SpSp),
when one-way incompatibility was considered. We excluded 4 blocks at the left
arm of chromosome 10 from analysis, and a total of 5111 block pairs were
tested.
Check the ploidy of yeast hybrids
Two pairs of PCR primers targeting the MAT locus were designed. The first pair
(Forward: 5′-AGTCACATCAAGATCGTTTATGG; Reverse: 5′-ACTCCACTTCAAGTAAGAGTTTG) can
produce a 544 bp fragment if the MAT locus is a; the second pair (Forward:
5′-AGTCACATCAAGATCGTTTATGG; Reverse: 5′-GCACGGAATATGGGACTACTTCG) can
produce a 404 bp fragment if the MAT locus is alpha. Both of the two fragments
will be observed if the cell is diploid.
Estimate the relative fitness of F2 hybrids
Using markers that can separate the mating types (a/alpha versus a or alpha) of a
yeast cell, we confirmed that all the 89 strains have already completed
autodiploidization, being homozygous diploid F2 hybrids. Cells were cultured in
50 ml of YEPD at 30°C until the cell concentration reached
∼1.0×108 cells/ml, and the culture was centrifuged and
all cells were transferred into 50 ml of medium for sporulation at 30°C.
After one week, an aliquot of culture was subject to examination of tetrad
formation under microscope, and a total of 100 cells were counted to estimate
the frequency (f) of cells having formed tetrads. Three
aliquots were examined for each strain. Following the definition of relative
fitness [36],
the sporulation-based relative
fitness (sF) in this work was computed
using the formula:where F is the average
f of the three examined aliquots for the wildtype strain
(Sc-YCM362 or Sp-YCM361); the average
sF of the three aliquots was used as the sporulation-based
relative fitness of an F2 hybrid. For the clonal growth rate, cells were
cultured in 50 ml of YEPD at 30°C for ∼18 hours, with an initial
concentration of OD660∼ = 0.05, and the
OD660 was measured every two hours using the 2800 UV/VIS
Spectrophotometer (UNIC Corp., Shanghai). We calculated the doubling time
(t) of cells for three consecutive periods at the
logarithmic phase. Since relative fitness is defined as the average number of
surviving progeny of a particular genotype compared with average number of
surviving progeny of competing genotypes after a single generation [36], the
growth-based relative fitness
(gF) in this work was computed using the
formula:where T is the average
doubling time of the three periods at the logarithmic phase for the wild-type
control (the Sc strain YCM362 or the Sp strain
YCM361); the average gF of the three periods was used as the
growth-based relative fitness of an F2 hybrid.The partial MRS1 gene sequences of different
Sp and Sc strains. Arrows show the
non-synonymous substitutions that cause major incompatibility between
Sc-MRS1 and Sp-COX1. The red arrow
points to the site where the incompatibility-causing mutation (A→G) is
not fixed yet in Sc populations.(TIF)Click here for additional data file.(XLS)Click here for additional data file.(XLS)Click here for additional data file.
Authors: B Knegt; T Potter; N A Pearson; Y Sato; H Staudacher; B C J Schimmel; E T Kiers; M Egas Journal: Heredity (Edinb) Date: 2016-10-26 Impact factor: 3.821