| Literature DB >> 29982435 |
Silvia Ambrós1, Francisca de la Iglesia1, Sttefany M Rosario1,2, Anamarija Butkovic1, Santiago F Elena1,3,4.
Abstract
Functional redundancy, understood as the functional overlap of different genes, is a double-edge sword. At the one side, it is thought to serve as a robustness mechanism that buffers the deleterious effect of mutations hitting one of the redundant copies, thus resulting in pseudogenization. At the other side, it is considered as a source of genetic and functional innovation. In any case, genetically redundant genes are expected to show an acceleration in the rate of molecular evolution. Here, we tackle the role of functional redundancy in viral RNA genomes. To this end, we have evaluated the rates of compensatory evolution for deleterious mutations affecting an essential function, the suppression of RNA silencing plant defense, of tobacco etch potyvirus (TEV). TEV genotypes containing deleterious mutations in presence/absence of engineered functional redundancy were evolved and the pattern of fitness and pathogenicity recovery evaluated. Genetically redundant genotypes suffered less from the effect of deleterious mutations and showed relatively minor changes in fitness and pathogenicity. By contrast, nongenetically redundant genotypes had very low fitness and pathogenicity at the beginning of the evolution experiment that were fully recovered by the end. At the molecular level, the outcome depended on the combination of the actual mutations being compensated and the presence/absence of functional redundancy. Reversions to wild-type alleles were the norm in the nonredundant genotypes while redundant ones either did not fix any mutation at all or showed a higher nonsynonymous mutational load.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29982435 PMCID: PMC6059116 DOI: 10.1093/gbe/evy141
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Genome Biol Evol ISSN: 1759-6653 Impact factor: 3.416
. 1.—(A) Symptoms induced by the ancestral and evolved TEV genotypes. Upper panel: from left to right, (a) healthy plant, (b) chlorotic spots observed in a plant of passage 2 (P2) infected with one of the TEV-AS13 lineage, (c) the same for a plant infected with a one of the TEV-AS13/2b lineages, and (d) a plant from the third passage (P3) infected with lineage L4 of TEV-FINK. White arrows indicate the location of some chlorotic spots. Lower panel: (e) and (f) plants of passage P3 infected with lineage L1 of TEV-FINK showing the typical etching of TEV, (g) comparison of plants from the fifth passage (P5): healthy (left) or infected with lineage L1 of TEV-FINK (right), thus displaying no symptoms or the typical etch mosaic of TEV, respectively. (B) Evolution of the first principal component (PC1) summarizing the six pathogenicity-related traits. See text for a detailed description of the contribution of the different traits into PC1. Different symbols correspond to the different independently evolved lineages.
Partial Correlations (rp), Controlling for Viral Genotype, between the Different Pathogenicity-Related Traits Measured
| 1 | 0.841 | −0.841 | 0.847 | −0.424 | −0.645 | |
| 1 | −0.997 | 0.989 | −0.506 | −0.834 | ||
| 1 | −0.989 | 0.502 | 0.835 | |||
| 1 | −0.483 | −0.811 | ||||
| 1 | 0.716 | |||||
| 1 |
Note.—In all cases, 72 d.f. and P < 0.001.
i, infectivity; AUDPS, area under the disease progress stairs curve; ST50, time to observe infections symptoms inferred from a Kaplan–Meier survival regression analysis; Smax, maximal score value for the observed symptoms; τhalf, half-time to develop the maximal symptoms; b, steepness of the symptoms development curve.
Multivariate Analysis of Variance (MANOVA) of the Six Pathogenicity-Related Traits
| Source of Variation | Wilk’s | d.f. Hypothesis | d.f. Error | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intersection | 0.001 | 7,669.225 | 6 | 40 | <0.001 |
| Passage | 0.267 | 18.267 | 6 | 40 | <0.001 |
| Genotype | 0.115 | 7.265 | 18 | 113.622 | <0.001 |
| Lineage (Genotype) | 0.070 | 2.143 | 66 | 219.490 | <0.001 |
| Passage×Genotype | 0.230 | 4.294 | 18 | 113.622 | <0.001 |
| Passage×Lineage (Genotype) | 0.141 | 1.469 | 66 | 219.490 | 0.021 |
Note.—The model is described by equation (3).
. 2.—(A) Change in viral load (a proxy of within-host replicative fitness) observed between the first and the last evolution passages. (B) Negative correlation between viral load of the nonevolved genotypes and the magnitude of improvement at the end of the evolution experiment. In both panels, error bars represent ±1 SD.
Generalized Linear Model Testing for the Effect of the Different Factors on Viral Load (within-host fitness)
| Source of Variation | d.f. | Magnitude of the Effect | Power | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intersection | 300.916 | 1 | <0.001 | 0.936 | 1 |
| Passage | 449.300 | 1 | <0.001 | 0.990 | 1 |
| Genotype | 272.237 | 3 | <0.001 | 0.235 | 0.226 |
| Lineage (Genotype) | 426.675 | 11 | <0.001 | 0.989 | 1 |
| Passage×Genotype | 491.470 | 4 | <0.001 | 0.976 | 1 |
| Passage×Lineage (Genotype) | 375.156 | 11 | <0.001 | 0.978 | 1 |
Note.—The fitted model assumes a Gamma distribution of errors and a logarithmic link function and is shown in equation (4).
Likelihood ratio test.
Evaluated as .
Conventionally, values >0.8 are considered as a standard for adequacy.
. 3.—Confirmation of the presence of 2b in the evolved viral lineages. Agarose gels (1%) with conventional RT-PCR products of the region encompassing the 2b inserted into the TEV genome. Expected amplicon sizes are indicated on the right panels with arrows: 298 bp for wild-type TEV and 651 bp for TEV/2b. No deletions or reorganizations were observed in any lineage or passage. (A) Amplicons of all virus lineages from the first (P1) passage. (B) Amplicons from the fifth (P5) passage. Healthy (H), buffer-inoculated (B) plant extracts and water (RT-PCR−) were used as negative RT-PCR controls. PCR products obtained from the original full-length cDNA virus clones of TEV (pTEV) and TEV/2b (pTEV2b) are included as positive controls of insertion size. RT-PCR −: negative RT-PCR control.
. 4.—(A) Schematic representation of TEV HC-Pro and CMV 2b viral suppressors of RNA silencing proteins as present in the engineered TEV-FINK/2b and TEV-AS13/2b genomes. The main structural and functional region/domains and relevant motifs of HC-Pro and 2b are indicated. RSS: RNA silencing-suppression region. RBD: RNA-binding domains within the RSS. CPD: cysteine proteinase domain. Position of the TEV FRNK and ED amino acid motifs indicated with a horizontal line below the corresponding RBD regions. Position of the C345 and H418 dyad amino acids of the catalytic CPD in the Ct of the central region, are indicated by an asterisk. (B) Ancestral virus genotypes used in this work with the relevant amino acids and 2b insertion marked by a gray box. (C) Same as in panel (B) but indicating the mutations found in the two genes in evolving viral lineages after one (P1) and five (P5) passages. The position and type of additional mutations found are marked with triangles. Large triangles denote amino acid replacements fixed in the consensus sequence (>50%) while small ones represent minority viral subpopulations. For additional details, see supplementary table S1, Supplementary Material online.