| Literature DB >> 25015382 |
Adam J Reid1, Damer P Blake2, Hifzur R Ansari3, Karen Billington4, Hilary P Browne1, Josephine Bryant1, Matt Dunn1, Stacy S Hung5, Fumiya Kawahara6, Diego Miranda-Saavedra7, Tareq B Malas3, Tobias Mourier8, Hardeep Naghra9, Mridul Nair3, Thomas D Otto1, Neil D Rawlings10, Pierre Rivailler11, Alejandro Sanchez-Flores12, Mandy Sanders1, Chandra Subramaniam4, Yea-Ling Tay13, Yong Woo3, Xikun Wu14, Bart Barrell1, Paul H Dear15, Christian Doerig16, Arthur Gruber17, Alasdair C Ivens18, John Parkinson5, Marie-Adèle Rajandream1, Martin W Shirley19, Kiew-Lian Wan13, Matthew Berriman1, Fiona M Tomley20, Arnab Pain21.
Abstract
Global production of chickens has trebled in the past two decades and they are now the most important source of dietary animal protein worldwide. Chickens are subject to many infectious diseases that reduce their performance and productivity. Coccidiosis, caused by apicomplexan protozoa of the genus Eimeria, is one of the most important poultry diseases. Understanding the biology of Eimeria parasites underpins development of new drugs and vaccines needed to improve global food security. We have produced annotated genome sequences of all seven species of Eimeria that infect domestic chickens, which reveal the full extent of previously described repeat-rich and repeat-poor regions and show that these parasites possess the most repeat-rich proteomes ever described. Furthermore, while no other apicomplexan has been found to possess retrotransposons, Eimeria is home to a family of chromoviruses. Analysis of Eimeria genes involved in basic biology and host-parasite interaction highlights adaptations to a relatively simple developmental life cycle and a complex array of co-expressed surface proteins involved in host cell binding.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25015382 PMCID: PMC4199364 DOI: 10.1101/gr.168955.113
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Genome Res ISSN: 1088-9051 Impact factor: 9.043
Eimeria species biology and genomic sag repertoire
Figure 1.Whole-genome phylogeny and synteny between Eimeria species. (A) Maximum likelihood phylogeny showing the evolutionary relationships between Eimeria species based on alignment of 814 one-to-one orthologs shared with T. gondii. The scale is in substitutions per site. (B) Genomic scaffolds were placed onto optical maps. Black bands show map coverage. Coverage was noticeably better for E. tenella than the tier 2 species. E. tenella maps are named as chromosomes (e.g., C1) where it was possible to reliably identify that chromosome, otherwise they are given their optical map numbers (e.g., O4). Each E. tenella map has been assigned a color and ribbons highlight syntenic regions in the related genomes. E. necatrix is most closely related to E. tenella and correspondingly shows the greatest degree of synteny. The clearest exceptions are (1) O10, which is split between two optical contigs in E. necatrix, and (2) O8, which is similarly split. Map coverage is lower in E. acervulina and E. maxima and this gives the impression that there is a great deal of novel sequence in these species. However, this is largely the result of differential representation of the genomes in their respective maps. Each map is annotated with repeat-poor (blue) and repeat-rich (red) regions ≥30 kb. This highlights the barcode-like patterning across the whole of each genome.
Figure 2.Characterization of HAARs in Eimeria protein sequences. (A) Eimeria tenella has a greater number of HAARs than any other genome sequenced and a distinct distribution of HAAR types compared with other repeat-rich genomes, including Plasmodium falciparum and the more closely related and not especially repeat-rich Toxoplasma. (B) The most common STRs in Eimeria genomes are variations on CAG. The second most common are variations on a telomere repeat which we call telomere-like repeats due to their locations throughout the genome. (C) CAG repeats occur in protein-coding regions of the genome more than expected. (D) CAG repeats can encode strings of one of five amino acids. In Eimeria they tend to encode alanine and glutamine more often than expected, serine as often as expected, and leucine and cysteine more rarely than expected. A very similar pattern is observed in a limited selection of E. tenella peptides derived from proteomics experiments.
Figure 3.Analysis of the principle family of surface antigens in Eimeria spp. (A) The four loci of tandemly repeated sag genes in E. tenella are shown with each sag gene represented by bars describing the relative expression levels in four stages of the lifecycle. Gene names used previously in the literature are shown where appropriate. Arrows indicate direction of transcription. (B) We found that, of those tested, SAG proteins from subfamily A bound host cells, but those from family B did not. (U) Unwashed; (W) washed; (B) bound. (C) Expression of multiple sag genes in individual cells of E. tenella was detected using RT-PCR. Ten cells were analyzed for each of eight genes in both sporozoites and second-generation merozoites. (Lanes 1–10) Single-cell multiplex test RT-PCRs. Controls: (lane P1) positive, cDNA library multiplex RT-PCR; (lane N1) negative, no template multiplex RT-PCR; (lane P2) positive, single sporozoite, single target RT-PCR; (lane N2) negative, single sporozoite, single target PCR with no RT. (D) Expression values for all E. tenella sag genes were clustered and those clusters ordered by mean peak expression, showing that most genes peak in the second-generation merozoite. Where appropriate, genes are annotated with their genomic locus as defined in A. (E) Patterns of homology for Eimeria sag and Toxoplasma srs genes suggest that while Toxoplasma acquired the precursors to its key family of 6-cys surface antigens from a horizontal gene transfer of metazoan ephrin, Eimeria has derived them from the cysteine-rich secretory proteins, antigen 5, and pathogenesis-related 1 protein (CAP) family already found in Apicomplexa. Thin, single-headed arrows show phylogenetic paths for CAP- and ephrin-related domains, while bold arrows show the best evidence for the closest relatives of the sag and srs families. Numbers indicate gene frequencies for each family.