| Literature DB >> 25096539 |
Nicholas J Hudson1, Michelle L Baker2, Nathan S Hart3, James W Wynne2, Quan Gu4, Zhiyong Huang5, Guojie Zhang5, Aaron B Ingham6, Linfa Wang7, Antonio Reverter6.
Abstract
Bats comprise 20% of all mammalian species and display a number of characteristics, including true flight, echolocation, and a heightened ability to resist viral load that uniquely position this group for comparative genomic studies. Here we searched for evidence of genomic variation consistent with sensory rewiring through bat evolution. We focused on two species with divergent sensory preferences. Myotis davidii is a bat species that echolocates and possesses dim- but not daylight-adapted vision whereas the black flying fox (Pteropus alecto) has highly developed day vision but does not echolocate. Using the naked mole rat as a reference, we found five functional genes (CYP1A2, RBP3, GUCY2F, CRYBB1, and GRK7) encoding visual proteins that have degenerated into pseudogenes in M. davidii but not P. alecto. In a second approach genome-wide codon usage bias (CUB) was compared between the two bat species. This CUB ranking systematically enriched for vision-related (CLN8, RD3, IKZF1, LAMC3, CRX, SOX8, VAX2, HPS1, RHO, PRPH2, and SOX9) and hearing-related (TPRN, TMIE, SLC52A3, OTOF, WFS1, SOD1, TBX18, MAP1A, OTOS, GPX1, and USH1G) machinery in M. davidii but not P. alecto. All vision and hearing genes selectively enriched in M. davidii for which orthologs could be identified also were more biased in the echolocating M. lucifugus than the nonecholocating P. vampyrus. We suggest that the existence of codon bias in vision- and hearing-related genes in a species that has evolved echolocation implies CUB is part of evolution's toolkit to rewire sensory systems. We propose that the two genetic changes (pseudogene formation and CUB) collectively paint a picture of that incorporates a combination of destruction and gain-of-function. Together, they help explain how natural selection has reduced physiological costs associated with the development of a smaller eye poorly adapted to day vision but that also contribute to enhanced dim light vision and the hearing adaptations consonant with echolocation.Entities:
Keywords: bat; codon usage bias; evolution; pseudogene; vision
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25096539 PMCID: PMC4199690 DOI: 10.1534/g3.114.011262
Source DB: PubMed Journal: G3 (Bethesda) ISSN: 2160-1836 Impact factor: 3.154
Figure 1Gene structure, partial amino acid ,and nucleotide alignments for five M. davidii pseudogenes. Red triangles illustrate the location of stop codons compared with P. alecto. Amino acid alignment surrounding the stop codon region in P. alecto and M. davidii. Asterisks represent stop codons. Nucleotide alignment between P. alecto and M. davidii corresponding to the same region in amino acid alignment. Gray nucleotides represent the region after a frame shift in M. davidii that leads to a premature stop codon (red).
Figure 2Genes showing extreme codon bias (negative differential entropy) on a within-genome basis in (A) M. davidii and (B) P. alecto, with those encoding vision and hearing related proteins highlighted.
Figure 3Orthologs showing differential codon bias (distance from diagonal) between M. davidii and P. alecto on a between-genome basis. Genes encoding vision and hearing elated proteins are highlighted. Of the sensory genes IKZF1 is particularly prominent. The highly codon biased LAMC3, RHO, and SOX9 identified by GOrilla as vision-related in M. davidii appear to be absent in P. alecto. MUC19, highly biased in M. davidii, is a Mucin family member expressed in the inner ear. NEFH is equally highly biased in both bat species.
The genomic properties of three vision-related genes showing more CUB in M. davidii than P. alecto
| Gene | GC% | GC% | Gene length | Gene length |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 49.6 | 53.2 / 51.5 | 1908 | 228/816 | |
| 49.1 | 65.4 | 705 | 2118 | |
| 44.0 | 47.1 | 339 | 342 |
Background GC% and gene length cannot account for the observation. CUB, codon usage bias.
Figure 4The relationship between ENC and entropy based CUB estimation for (A) M. davidii and (B) P. alecto.
Figure 5Genes showing extreme codon bias (negative differential entropy) on a within-genome basis in (A) M. lucifugus and (B) P. vampyrus, with those encoding vision and hearing related proteins highlighted.
Figure 6Orthologs showing differential codon bias (distance from diagonal) between M. lucifugus and P. vampyrus on a between-genome basis. Genes encoding vision and hearing elated proteins are highlighted. Of the sensory genes, TSPAN10, which has a highly restricted expression pattern in retina, is particularly prominent. All the sensory genes prioritized by CUB in M. davidii are more biased in M. lucifugus than P. alecto.
Patterns of genome-wide codon usage in Myotis davidii
| UUU | 15.7 (141141) | UCU | 14.4 (128939) | UAU | 10.7 (96582) | UGU | 9.7 (87355) |
| UUC | 20.5 (183882) | UCC | 19.1 (171243) | UAC | 15.5 (139000) | UGC | 12.6 (112906) |
| UUA | 7.2 (64716) | UCA | 11.3 (101170) | UAA | 0.6 (5059) | UGA | 1.2 (10439) |
| UUG | 12.5 (112218) | UCG | 5.0 (45139) | UAG | 0.5 (4775) | UGG | 12.4 (111457) |
| CUU | 12.1 (108263) | CCU | 16.9 (151920) | CAU | 10.0 (90245) | CGU | 4.2 (37777) |
| CUC | 20.4 (183451) | CCC | 21.6 (194040) | CAC | 16.6 (148955) | CGC | 9.9 (89098) |
| CUA | 6.4 (57262) | CCA | 15.9 (143248) | CAA | 11.8 (106136) | CGA | 6.0 (54257) |
| CUG | 41.3 (371130) | CCG | 7.6 (68087) | CAG | 36.1 (323855) | CGG | 12.0 (108187) |
| AUU | 14.6 (131554) | ACU | 12.0 (108140) | AAU | 15.5 (139605) | AGU | 12.1 (108595) |
| AUC | 21.5 (193277) | ACC | 19.8 (177653) | AAC | 20.0 (179409) | AGC | 20.5 (183722) |
| AUA | 6.9 (62193) | ACA | 13.9 (125180) | AAA | 23.6 (211742) | AGA | 11.5 (103418) |
| AUG | 22.1 (198262) | ACG | 7.2 (65088) | AAG | 33.3 (298847) | AGG | 12.9 (115789) |
| GUU | 10.3 (92630) | GCU | 17.9 (161068) | GAU | 20.8 (186580) | GGU | 9.9 (89712) |
| GUC | 15.4 (137894) | GCC | 29.3 (263071) | GAC | 27.4 (246001) | GGC | 22.2 (199804) |
| GUA | 6.4 (57396) | GCA | 15.2 (136268) | GAA | 28.7 (25792) | GGA | 15.5 (138999) |
| GUG | 29.2 (261930) | GCG | 7.6 (68234) | GAG | 41.6 (374083) | GGG | 17.3 (155758) |
These data help set the expectation for whether a given M. davidii codon is preferred or nonpreferred. Observed bias in any particular gene can therefore be interpreted as likely to increase or decrease the cost and efficiency of translation
Patterns of genome-wide codon usage in Pteropus alecto
| UUU | 16.3 (156476) | UCU | 15.2 (146151) | UAU | 11.3 (108424) | UGU | 10.0 (96432) |
| UUC | 20.0 (192106) | UCC | 17.7 (170229) | UAC | 14.8 (141890) | UGC | 12.2 (116902) |
| UUA | 7.7 (74291) | UCA | 12.0 (114942) | UAA | 0.5 (5244) | UGA | 1.1 (10325) |
| UUG | 13.1 (125571) | UCG | 5.2 (49969) | UAG | 0.5 (4808) | UGG | 12.3 (117792) |
| CUU | 13.1 (125218) | CCU | 17.6 (168660) | CAU | 10.4 (100155) | CGU | 4.9 (46662) |
| CUC | 19.8 (190319) | CCC | 20.7 (198601) | CAC | 15.7 (150619) | CGC | 10.6 (101489) |
| CUA | 7.3 (69639) | CCA | 16.7 (160345) | CAA | 12.2 (116897) | CGA | 6.4 (61551) |
| CUG | 39.5 (379104) | CCG | 7.7 (74204) | CAG | 35.0 (336173) | CGG | 12.0 (114783) |
| AUU | 15.1 (144545) | ACU | 12.9 (124104) | AAU | 16.3 (156140) | AGU | 12.5 (119863) |
| AUC | 20.4 (196052) | ACC | 18.5 (177795) | AAC | 18.9 (181664) | AGC | 20.1 (192594) |
| AUA | 7.3 (70411) | ACA | 14.6 (139725) | AAA | 24.3 (233289) | AGA | 11.8 (112920) |
| AUG | 21.5 (206522) | ACG | 6.9 (65967) | AAG | 31.9 (305590) | AGG | 12.1 (116001) |
| GUU | 10.6 (101643) | GCU | 18.5 (177510) | GAU | 21.4 (205693) | GGU | 10.5 (100839) |
| GUC | 15.2 (146033) | GCC | 28.8 (275932) | GAC | 26.3 (253066) | GGC | 22.5 (215905) |
| GUA | 7.2 (69462) | GCA | 15.7 (150363) | GAA | 29.6 (284341) | GGA | 15.8 (151181) |
| GUG | 27.9 (267333) | GCG | 8.0 (76818) | GAG | 40.3 (387415) | GGG | 16.6 (159580) |
These data help set the expectation for whether a given P. alecto codon is preferred or nonpreferred. Observed bias in any particular gene can therefore be interpreted as likely to increase or decrease the cost and efficiency of translation.