| Literature DB >> 23028758 |
Caiti S S Heil1, Mohamed A F Noor.
Abstract
In humans and mice, the Cys(2)His(2) zinc finger protein PRDM9 binds to a DNA sequence motif enriched in hotspots of recombination, possibly modifying nucleosomes, and recruiting recombination machinery to initiate Double Strand Breaks (DSBs). However, since its discovery, some researchers have suggested that the recombinational effect of PRDM9 is lineage or species specific. To test for a conserved role of PRDM9-like proteins across taxa, we use the Drosophila pseudoobscura species group in an attempt to identify recombination associated zinc finger proteins and motifs. We leveraged the conserved amino acid motifs in Cys(2)His(2) zinc fingers to predict nucleotide binding motifs for all Cys(2)His(2) zinc finger proteins in Drosophila pseudoobscura and identified associations with empirical measures of recombination rate. Additionally, we utilized recombination maps from D. pseudoobscura and D. miranda to explore whether changes in the binding motifs between species can account for changes in the recombination landscape, analogous to the effect observed in PRDM9 among human populations. We identified a handful of potential recombination-associated sequence motifs, but the associations are generally tenuous and their biological relevance remains uncertain. Furthermore, we found no evidence that changes in zinc finger DNA binding explains variation in recombination rate between species. We therefore conclude that there is no protein with a DNA sequence specific human-PRDM9-like function in Drosophila. We suggest these findings could be explained by the existence of a different recombination initiation system in Drosophila.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2012 PMID: 23028758 PMCID: PMC3445564 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0045055
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1A model of Cys2His2 zinc finger binding.
In A, one zinc finger is depicted with its ββα structure, where amino acid residues at positions −1, 3, and 6 in relation to the start of the α helix bind to DNA. In B, multiple zinc fingers are displayed making tandem contacts with DNA. (This figure is adapted from http://2010.igem.org/Team:Slovenia with permission from Roman Jerala).
PRDM9 candidate proteins.
| Gene name ( | Sequence Motif | Protein Domains or notes |
| GA23469 ( | TGA[TG]ANGGA[GT]AA | SET domain, 4 zinc fingers |
| GA25755 ( | GAAGATGAGGAANNTGN[CT]NNC | SET domain, 7 zinc fingers |
| GA26409 ( | NCTTA[AT]NGAGAN[TG]N[TC] | SET domain, 5 zinc fingers |
| GA25849 ( | GAC[TG]GNNA[TC]GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG | 15 zinc fingers |
| GA26228 ( | [GT][TC]CGNGGGGTNCTNC | 6 zinc fingers |
| GA26117 | A[TG][CT]GNNTC[CT]GC[CT][GT][GC]ATNNTNCAN[TC][TG]GANG[TC]GA[TC] | 11 zinc fingers |
| GA21024 ( | NN[CT][TG][TC]NN[CT]TNACGNGNGA[TG]G[TC][TG]G[TC][TG]N[TC][TG]G[TC] | 10 zinc fingers |
| GA18168 ( | TGGNANGCCG[CG]ACNT | 5 zinc fingers; meiotic protein |
| GA21437 ( | GNGGNNG[TC][TC] | 3 zinc fingers; meiotic protein |
| GA17308 ( | NANGNN[TG][TC]NNACG[TC]C[TG][TC]GN[TC]NGNC | 8 zinc fingers; meiotic protein |
Included in this table are all zinc finger proteins identified as PRDM9 candidate proteins. These proteins were chosen through BLAST results, presence of a SET domain, and/or function in meiosis. Gene name is given as D. pseudoobscura with D. melanogaster homolog in parentheses. Sequence motifs are listed as the full predicted motif for a given gene. An “N” indicates that there was not enough information to accurately predict a nucleotide at that position in the motif. Square brackets ([]) indicate that any nucleotide enclosed within them is acceptable at that position in the motif.
Zinc finger proteins with predicted sequence motifs significantly associated with recombination.
| Gene ( | Predicted Sequence Motif | Association between motif and recombination at the superfine-scale:p, r (GC content corrected p, r) | Association between motif and recombination at the broad-scale: p, r (GC content corrected p, r) |
| GA25849 (crooked legs) | GGGGGGGGG | 0.9106, −0.0306 (0.8514, 0.1564) | 0.0034, 0.3307 (0.0003, 0.3321) |
| GA26117 | TNNTNCAN[TC] | 0.3510, −0.2497 (0.3050, 0.4086) | 0.01923, −0.2963 (0.0015, 0.3013) |
| AN[TC][TG]GANG[TC] | 0.9159, 0.0287 (0.5814, 0.2829) | 0.0272, −0.2882 (0.0012, 0.3050) | |
| GA21024 (combgap) | [TG][TC]NN[CT]TNAC | 0.3241, 0.2635 (0.5318, 0.3043) | 0.0253, −0.2902 (0.0017, 0.2979) |
| GA15299 (CG2202) | N[GA]GGGGGGG | 0.8288, −0.0588 (0.8399, 0.1627) | <0.0001, 0.4723 (<0.0001, 0.4702) |
| GA21173 (su(Hw)) | [CA][CT]TNAG[GC]T | 0.2679, 0.2946 (0.8471, 0.1588) | <0.0001,−0.4444 (<0.0001, 0.4488) |
| GA12131 (zfh1) | GTTANNNTN | 0.7078, 0.1017 (0.8518, 0.1561) | 0.0050,−0.3676 (<0.0001, 0.3678) |
| GA22134 (CG9932) | NNTANN[GC][TC]N | 0.4855, −0.1881 (0.5491, 0.2968) | 0.0083,−0.3592 (<0.0001, 0.3621) |
| GA14502 (Oaz) | [GC]TTANNGNN | 0.1056, −0.4197 (0.3145, 0.4037) | 0.0166,−0.3474 (0.0001, 0.3535) |
| TNTT[CA][GA]G | 0.5369, −0.1668 (0.7461, 0.2099) | 0.0234,−0.3413 (0.0002, 0.3413) | |
| GA20521 (CG7691) | NACNTN | 0.1618, −0.3672 (0.5137, 0.3121) | 0.0219,−0.3424 (0.0001, 0.3481) |
| GA11205 (charlatan) | NNTN[TG]GG[AT]C | 0.4588, −0.1995 (0.8200, 0.1734) | 0.0328, −0.3351 (0.0002, 0.3401) |
| GA11270 (CG11902) | [CA]ATN[TG]G[GC]A[CT] | 0.1401, 0.3857 (0.7821, 0.1926) | 0.0389,−0.332 (0.0003, 0.3374) |
| GA15842 (CG30431) | NNTATT[GC]NG | 0.9141, 0.0293 (0.7495, 0.2083) | 0.042,−0.3305 (0.0003, 0.3352) |
Gene name is given as D. pseudoobscura with D. melanogaster homolog in parentheses. The motif is a partial or whole motif significantly associated with recombination at the broad scale (no motifs were significantly associated with recombination at the superfine-scale). An “N” indicates that there was not enough information to accurately predict a nucleotide at that position in the motif, so any nucleotide is acceptable at that position. Square brackets ([]) in the motif column indicate either letter enclosed is acceptable at that position. The “broad-scale” column indicates the p-value (corrected for multiple comparisons) and correlation coefficient (r) for the broad-scale recombination dataset. Although these motifs were not significantly associated with recombination rate, the p-value and correlation coefficient (r) for the superfine-scale recombination dataset are included for reference. The p-values and correlation coefficients (r) from multiple regressions correcting for total GC content are included in parentheses.
Figure 2Predictions to test if changes in DNA binding motifs between species account for variation in recombination rate between species.
This figure depicts predictions testing if variation in the zinc finger binding sites between D. miranda and D. pseudoobscura is accountable for variation in recombination rates between species. After detecting which zinc finger proteins differed between these two species, we generated new predicted motifs for this subset of D. miranda zinc fingers. We then found the frequency of the motif and any associations with recombination using D. miranda sequence and recombination. We then took these D. miranda predicted motifs and repeated using D. pseudoobscura sequence and data. If changes in the zinc finger proteins were accountable for the variation in recombination rate between species, one expects to see a stronger correlation between D. miranda predicted motifs with D. miranda sequence and recombination data than D. miranda predicted motifs with D. pseudoobscura sequence and recombination data. Similarly with D. pseudoobscura, one expects to see a stronger correlation between D. pseudoobscura predicted motifs with D. pseudoobscura sequence and recombination data than D. pseudoobscura predicted motifs with D. miranda sequence and recombination data. If these predictions are not met, one can conclude that changes in the DNA binding motifs between these two species do not account for changes in recombination rate.