| Literature DB >> 30236055 |
Fernando Diaz1, Carson W Allan1, Luciano M Matzkin2,3,4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Adaptation to new hosts in phytophagous insects often involves mechanisms of host recognition by genes of sensory pathways. Most often the molecular evolution of sensory genes has been explained in the context of the birth-and-death model. The role of positive selection is less understood, especially associated with host adaptation and specialization. Here we aim to contribute evidence for this latter hypothesis by considering the case of Drosophila mojavensis, a species with an evolutionary history shaped by multiple host shifts in a relatively short time scale, and its generalist sister species, D. arizonae.Entities:
Keywords: Adaptation; Cactophilic Drosophila; Gustatory receptor; Molecular evolution; Odorant receptor; Population genetics
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30236055 PMCID: PMC6148956 DOI: 10.1186/s12862-018-1250-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Evol Biol ISSN: 1471-2148 Impact factor: 3.260
Fig. 1Map showing geographic distributions and evolutionary relationships of D. mojavensis host populations, the cactus generalist D. arizonae and D. navojoa (Opuntia sp. breeder). D. mojavensis lines were sampled from each population: Baja California (BAJ), Sonora Desert (SON), Mojave Desert (MOJ) and Santa Catalina Island (CAT) (cactus hosts are indicated). D. arizonae lines were sampled from the Sonora Desert population while the sole D. navojoa line was sampled from Jalisco, Mexico. Map was made using public domain vector and raster data from Natural Earth (www.naturalearthdata.com) and then modified to highlight species distributions
Descriptive parameters for genetic diversity, neutrality tests and divergence. Results are shown for each gene in D. mojavensis and D. arizonae. In the case of D. mojavensis, genetic diversity and divergence values correspond to the average across the four populations (See Methods for abbreviations)
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 1479 | 1479 | 1215 | 1215 | 1182 | 1182 | 1170 | 1170 |
|
| 8.5 | 8 | 12.5 | 12 | 12.2 | 12 | 13.7 | 12 |
|
| 6.2 | 8 | 9 | 12 | 8.5 | 12 | 8 | 12 |
|
| 0.929 | 1.00 | 0.866 | 1.00 | 0.741 | 1.00 | 0.831 | 1.00 |
|
| 18.2 | 12 | 20.5 | 27 | 20.7 | 35 | 12.2 | 20 |
|
| 0.0049 | 0.0023 | 0.0052 | 0.0048 | 0.0049 | 0.0073 | 0.0029 | 0.0061 |
|
| 0.0180 | 0.0069 | 0.0192 | 0.0159 | 0.0121 | 0.0207 | 0.0094 | 0.0237 |
|
| 0.0007 | 0.0008 | 0.0010 | 0.0014 | 0.0026 | 0.0031 | 0.0010 | 0.0009 |
|
| 0.0046 | 0.0031 | 0.0055 | 0.0074 | 0.0059 | 0.0098 | 0.0033 | 0.0057 |
|
| 0.0168 | 0.0107 | 0.0207 | 0.0259 | 0.0152 | 0.0257 | 0.0116 | 0.0210 |
|
| 0.0006 | 0.0007 | 0.0010 | 0.0018 | 0.0031 | 0.0048 | 0.0010 | 0.0011 |
|
| 0.37 | -1.38 | -0.41 | -1.59 | -0.27 | -1.15 | -0.04 | 0.36 |
|
| 0.43 | -1.93 | -0.01 |
| -0.65 | -1.79 | -0.37 | 0.37 |
|
| 0.50 | -2.21 | -0.15 |
| -0.70 | -1.96 | -0.35 | 0.46 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| na |
| na |
| na |
| na |
|
| 0.036 | 0.038 | 0.059 | 0.066 | 0.38 | 0.30 | 0.27 | 0.36 |
Significant and marginally significant values after FDR correction are in bold
aIn the case of D. mojavensis the significance (negative or positive) is indicated when at least one population was significant following Additional file 1: Table S3
D. moj: D. mojavensis
D. ari: D. arizonae
π: Nucleotide diversity for synonymous sites
π: Nucleotide diversity for nonsynonymous sites
θ: Total theta Watterson
θ: Theta Watterson for synonymous sites
θ: Theta Watterson for nonsynonymous sites
Gene-wide tests of positive selection and McDonald-Kreitman test. A summary of P-values obtained for selection tests is shown for each gene. Results for McDonald-Kreitman test are shown for the whole gene as well as for each domain (Cytoplasmic, transmembrane or extracellular) (See Methods for abbreviations)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| 0.131 | 1.000 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | 0.502 | 1.000 | na | 0.350 |
|
|
|
| 0.629 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 |
| 0.084 | 1.000 | na |
|
|
| 0.280 | 0.996 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | 0.885 | 1.000 | 0.662 | 1.000 |
|
|
|
| 0.053 |
|
|
|
| 0.661 | 0.109 |
Significant and marginally significant values after FDR correction are in bold
a This test showed positive selection specific to D. mojavensis lineage
b This test was also significant for pairwise comparisons using D. mojavensis populations (SON and BAJ) and D. arizonae but not with ancestral D. navojoa outgroup (Additional file 1: Table S5)
c This test was also significant for pairwise comparisons using D. mojavensis populations (SON, BAJ and CAT) and D. arizonae as well as ancestral D. navojoa outgroup (Additional file 1: Table S5)
MK: McDonald-Kreitman test for whole gene
MK: McDonald-Kreitman test for cytoplasmic domain
MK: McDonald-Kreitman test for transmembrane domain
MK: McDonald-Kreitman test for extracellular domain
Codon-based tests of positive selection. A summary of P-values and posterior probabilities obtained for selection tests are shown for those codons where at least one test resulted with significant value after FDR correction (global α = 0.05). The codon location in domains (Cyto, trans or extr) is indicated for each codon under positive selection. Biochemical properties significantly associated with amino acid sites under selection are indicated for PRIME test (See Methods for abbreviations)
|
| Domain |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||||||
| 73 |
| 0.571 | 0.471 | 0.369 | > 0.050 |
| 0.227 | 0.732 | > 0.050 |
| 93 |
| < 0.500 | 0.748 | 0.642 | > 0.050 |
| 0.487 | 0.650 | > 0.050 |
| 482 |
|
| 0.189 | 0.184 | > 0.050 |
| 0.078 |
|
|
| 485 |
|
| 0.428 | 0.434 | > 0.050 |
| 0.139 |
|
|
|
| |||||||||
| 100 |
| < 0.500 | 0.132 | 0.092 | > 0.050 |
| 0.141 | 0.648 | > 0.050 |
| 116 |
| < 0.500 | 0.982 | 0.815 | > 0.050 |
| 0.583 | 0.401 | > 0.050 |
| 125 |
| < 0.500 | 0.752 | 0.529 | > 0.050 |
| 0.449 | 0.467 | > 0.050 |
| 236 |
| < 0.500 | 0.199 | 0.348 | > 0.050 |
|
| 0.653 |
|
| 253 |
|
| 0.237 |
| > 0.050 |
| 0.058 |
|
|
| 274 |
| < 0.500 | 0.434 | 0.424 | > 0.050 |
| 0.388 | 0.623 | > 0.050 |
| 335 |
| < 0.500 | 0.850 | 0.965 | > 0.050 |
| 0.664 | 0.451 | > 0.050 |
| 391 |
|
|
|
| > 0.050 |
|
|
|
|
| 404 |
|
| 0.434 | 0.268 | > 0.050 |
| 0.271 | 0.621 | > 0.050 |
|
| |||||||||
| 9 |
| 0.764 | 0.411 | 0.155 | > 0.050 |
| 0.133 | 0.712 | > 0.050 |
| 99 |
|
| 0.075 |
|
|
|
|
| > 0.050 |
| 230 |
|
| 0.088 | 0.145 | > 0.050 |
| 0.121 |
|
|
| 236 |
|
| 0.136 | 0.105 | > 0.050 |
| 0.131 |
|
|
| 362 |
| 0.536 | 0.451 | 0.136 | > 0.050 |
| 0.151 | 0.727 |
|
| 386 |
|
| 0.330 | 0.051 | > 0.050 |
|
|
|
|
| 387 |
|
| 0.089 | 0.024 | > 0.050 |
|
|
| > 0.050 |
| 391 |
|
| 0.386 | 0.070 | > 0.050 |
| 0.066 |
| > 0.050 |
|
| |||||||||
| 7 |
| 0.712 | 0.459 | 0.203 | > 0.050 |
| 0.229 | 0.828 | > 0.050 |
| 21 |
| < 0.500 | 0.459 | 0.285 | > 0.050 |
| 0.064 | 0.794 | > 0.050 |
| 43 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 92 |
| 0.773 | 0.572 | 0.518 | > 0.050 | 0.855 |
| 0.644 |
|
| 178 |
| < 0.500 | 0.478 | 0.271 | > 0.050 | 0.720 |
| 0.701 | > 0.050 |
| 187 |
|
| 0.228 | 0.064 |
|
| 0.085 |
| > 0.050 |
| 238 |
|
| 0.496 | 0.205 | > 0.050 |
|
|
| > 0.050 |
| 284 |
| 0.845 | 0.176 | 0.063 | > 0.050 |
| 0.07 |
| > 0.050 |
Significant and marginally significant values after FDR correction are in bold
Fig. 2Predicted topology of chemoreceptor proteins showing seven transmembrane domains and a cytoplasmic NH2-tail. Positively selected sites are highlighted in red. Topology was predicted by the TMHMM software
ANOVA of the GLM analysis for the number of sites showing evidence of positive selection and the proportion of sites under positive selection (controlling for the number of amino acids within a domain) (See Methods for abbreviations)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||
| Gene | 3 | 8.8x10-5 | 8 | 0.0005 | 0.4366 |
| Domain | 2 | 2.7x10-4 | 6 | 0.0002 |
|
|
| |||||
| Gene | 3 | 0.0102 | 8 | 0.0232 | 0.1913 |
| Domain | 2 | 0.0103 | 6 | 0.0129 | 0.0925 |
Significant values are in bold
Fig. 3Distribution of the sites showing evidence of positive selection by protein domains in each chemoreceptor gene: Cytoplasmic (Cyto), Extracellular (Extr) and Transmembrane (Trans). The number of sites under positive selection was significantly higher in the cytoplasmic region (Tukey test for multiple comparisons; p < 0.05)