| Literature DB >> 26961250 |
Heli Salmela1, Taina Stark2, Dimitri Stucki1, Siiri Fuchs1, Dalial Freitak1, Alivia Dey3, Clement F Kent3, Amro Zayed3, Kishor Dhaygude1, Heikki Hokkanen4, Liselotte Sundström5.
Abstract
Protection against inflammation and oxidative stress is key in slowing down aging processes. The honey bee (Apis mellifera) shows flexible aging patterns linked to the social role of individual bees. One molecular factor associated with honey bee aging regulation is vitellogenin, a lipoglycophosphoprotein with anti-inflammatory and antioxidant properties. Recently, we identified three genes in Hymenopteran genomes arisen from ancient insect vitellogenin duplications, named vg-like-A, -B, and -C. The function of these vitellogenin homologs is unclear. We hypothesize that some of them might share gene- and protein-level similarities and a longevity-supporting role with vitellogenin. Here, we show how the structure and modifications of the vg-like genes and proteins have diverged from vitellogenin. Furthermore, all three vg-like genes show signs of positive selection, but the spatial location of the selected protein sites differ from those found in vitellogenin. We show that all these genes are expressed in both long-lived winter worker bees and in summer nurse bees with intermediate life expectancy, yet only vg-like-A shows elevated expression in winter bees as found in vitellogenin. Finally, we show that vg-like-A responds more strongly than vitellogenin to inflammatory and oxidative conditions in summer nurse bees, and that also vg-like-B responds to oxidative stress. We associate vg-like-A and, to lesser extent, vg-like-B to the antiaging roles of vitellogenin, but that vg-like-C probably is involved in some other function. Our analysis indicates that an ancient duplication event facilitated the adaptive and functional divergence of vitellogenin and its paralogs in the honey bee.Entities:
Keywords: Apis mellifera; functional divergence; gene expression; protein structure; seasonality; vitellogenin
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 26961250 PMCID: PMC4825421 DOI: 10.1093/gbe/evw014
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Genome Biol Evol ISSN: 1759-6653 Impact factor: 3.416
Sequence-Based Predictions of Glycosylation and Phosphorylation Sites and Signal Peptide in Vg and the Vg-Like Proteins, and Protein Localization Based on a Mass-Spectrometric Database
| Protein Name | Glycosylation Sites | Signal Peptide | Phosphorylation Sites (Ser/Thr/Tyr) | Localization (Q = queen, W = worker, D = Drone) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vg | 3 | 16 aa | 74/28/17 | Q, W: Most tissues D: Many tissues Abundancy: Q>W≫D |
| Vg-like-A | 6 | 18 aa | 39/15/14 | Q: Fat body, heart, leg W, D: Fat body, heart, leg, antenna Abundancy: W>Q≫D |
| Vg-like-B | 11 | 35 aa | 32/12/27 | — |
| Vg-like-C | 1 | 11 aa | 13/4/3 | Q, W, D: Antenna base Abundancy: D>W>Q |
FThe domain architecture of Vg and Vg-like proteins in the honey bee. (A) A bar presentation of the full amino acid sequences. The domains N-sheet, α-helical, and vWFD are highlighted, as well as the polyserine linker. The approximate area that carries lipid molecules is indicated as Lipid cavity. (B) Partial homology models of the proteins. The lipids (orange) are captured from the template structure (PDB-ID = 1LSH). The colors in A correspond to the domain colors in B. Most of the gray areas in the lipid cavity and the vWFD are missing in the models (see Materials and Methods).
Summary Statistics for Molecular Evolution in the Vg-Like Genes
| VgA-whole | VgA-N | VgB-whole | VgB-N | VgC-whole | VgC-N | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Selection coeff (γ) | 1.163 | 2.699 | −0.687 | 2.660 | 0.908 | 1.885 |
| Tajima’s | −1.158 | −1.043 | −1.761 | −2.28005 | −0.653 | −1.514 |
| Fu & Li’s | −0.969 | −1.018 | −1.761 | −3.47505 | −0.661 | −1.640 |
| π ( | 0.008 | 0.008 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.024 | 0.021 |
| 0.184 | 0.252 | 0.050 | 0.054 | 0.224 | 0.245 | |
| d | 0.202 | 0.186 | 0.160 | 0.121 | 0.155 | 0.151 |
N represents the N-terminal area visualized in figure 1; the N-sheet domain (Vg-like-A, -B, and -C) together with the α-helical domain (Vg-like-A and -B).
Average dN/dS over sister species.
Significant values.
FLocation of the fixed amino acid differences between Apis mellifera and Apis cerana in Vg-like-A, -B, and -C proteins. The protein models of A. mellifera are shown in light gray. The amino acid residues with fixed changes are shown as sticks colored green in the N-sheet domain, red in the α-helical domain, and black in the remaining area (partial lipid cavity). For clarity, only the single lipid putatively located in the N-sheet domain is shown (orange). Some structural elements with known or putative functional importance have several fixed changes that are encircled: A loop area in the N-sheet (black circle), an area near the putative lipophilic ligand (gray circle in Vg-like-C), and an area in the α-helical domain (red circle in Vg-like-A).
FThe expression of vg and the vg-like-genes in winter bees (W) and summer nurses (S) (mean ± standard error of the mean, N = 30 winter bees from 3 hives and N = 49 summer nurses from 5 hives, with 9–10 individuals per hive). The expression was measured by qPCR and normalized to a reference gene (RP49 or actin). The summer nurses shown here are the same as the Control group in figure 4.
FThe expression of vg and the vg-like genes in summer nurse bees (mean ± standard error of the mean, N = 49, 44, and 49 for Control, Sham, and Paraquat, respectively, with 7–11 individuals from five hives). The three treatment groups were: Control (noninjected), Sham (injected with bee saline), and Paraquat (injected with oxidative poison Paraquat in bee saline). Significant differences are indicated (0.05 is denoted by *; <0.01 is denoted by ***). The expression was measured by qPCR and normalized to a reference gene.
Pairwise Comparisons of Gene Expression Differences between the Three Treatment Groups for Each Gene in Summer Nurse Bees
| Gene | Treatment Comparison | Estimate | Standard Error | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control–Sham | −1.77020 | 0.49000 | −3.613 | 0.000546*** | |
| Control–Paraquat | −2.01643 | 0.47383 | −4.256 | 4.69 × 10−5*** | |
| Sham–Paraquat | 0.24622 | 0.48764 | 0.505 | 0.690318 | |
| Control–Sham | −4.09851 | 0.49776 | −8.234 | 7.99 × 10−16*** | |
| Control–Paraquat | −4.25438 | 0.48423 | −8.786 | <2.00 × 10−16*** | |
| Sham–Paraquat | 0.15587 | 0.48999 | 0.318 | 0.794542 | |
| Control–Sham | −0.53782 | 0.49481 | −1.087 | 0.383639 | |
| Control–Paraquat | −1.13756 | 0.48178 | −2.361 | 0.029812* | |
| Sham–Paraquat | 0.59974 | 0.48475 | 1.237 | 0.324015 | |
| Control–Sham | 0.47177 | 0.48721 | 0.968 | 0.401082 | |
| Control–Paraquat | 0.46004 | 0.47642 | 0.966 | 0.401082 | |
| Sham–Paraquat | 0.01174 | 0.48710 | 0.024 | 0.980779 |
is denoted by 0.05
is denoted by <0.01
Effect of Treatments on the Expression of Vitellogenin and Differences in the Expression of vg-Like Genes Compared with Vitellogenin
| Effect | Estimate (± standard error) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Intercept | 4.77 ± 0.44 | <0.0001 | |
| Sham | −1.77 ± 0.49 | 0.0003 | |
| Paraquat | −2.02 ± 0.47 | <0.0001 | |
| 4.74 ± 0.48 | <0.0001 | ||
| 2.89 ± 0.48 | <0.0001 | ||
| 7.06 ± 0.48 | <0.0001 | ||
| Sham × | −2.33 ± 0.7 | 0.0009 | |
| Paraquat × | −2.24 ± 0.68 | 0.001 | |
| Sham × | 1.23 ± 0.7 | 0.077 | |
| Paraquat × | 0.88 ± 0.68 | 0.194 | |
| Sham × | 2.24 ± 0.69 | 0.001 | |
| Paraquat × | 2.48 ± 0.67 | 0.0003 |
Note.—Estimated from a linear mixed model with dCt values as dependent variable and colony as random effect.
Subscripts indicate the degrees of freedom.