| Literature DB >> 35413123 |
Andrew J Mason1, Matthew L Holding2, Rhett M Rautsaw3, Darin R Rokyta4, Christopher L Parkinson3,5, H Lisle Gibbs1.
Abstract
Understanding the joint roles of protein sequence variation and differential expression during adaptive evolution is a fundamental, yet largely unrealized goal of evolutionary biology. Here, we use phylogenetic path analysis to analyze a comprehensive venom-gland transcriptome dataset spanning three genera of pitvipers to identify the functional genetic basis of a key adaptation (venom complexity) linked to diet breadth (DB). The analysis of gene-family-specific patterns reveals that, for genes encoding two of the most important venom proteins (snake venom metalloproteases and snake venom serine proteases), there are direct, positive relationships between sequence diversity (SD), expression diversity (ED), and increased DB. Further analysis of gene-family diversification for these proteins showed no constraint on how individual lineages achieved toxin gene SD in terms of the patterns of paralog diversification. In contrast, another major venom protein family (PLA2s) showed no relationship between venom molecular diversity and DB. Additional analyses suggest that other molecular mechanisms-such as higher absolute levels of expression-are responsible for diet adaptation involving these venom proteins. Broadly, our findings argue that functional diversity generated through sequence and expression variations jointly determine adaptation in the key components of pitviper venoms, which mediate complex molecular interactions between the snakes and their prey.Entities:
Keywords: adaptation; diet breadth; diversity; genotype–phenotype; venom
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35413123 PMCID: PMC9040050 DOI: 10.1093/molbev/msac082
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Mol Biol Evol ISSN: 0737-4038 Impact factor: 8.800
Fig. 1.Path analysis for models of venom evolution and DB for an overall venom model (a) and the CTL (b), PLA2 (c), SVMP (d), and SVSP (e) toxin families. Path models test for varying effects among GC, SD, ED, and DB and are defined in supplementary figure S7, Supplementary Material online. The barplots show model weights for CICc comparisons. Numbers adjacent to the bars represent p-values for the test of the null hypothesis that the model fits the data structure. Models with P < 0.05 are statistically untenable. The best performing and averaged models are shown at the right with path coefficients (partial regression coefficients standardized to the other independent variables) indicated by numbers adjacent to arrows. Dashed lines in the graphical models indicate negative relationships. Averaged models were calculated based on a model weight of all top models within two CICc.
Fig. 2.Comparison of DB and mean expression for CTLs, PLA2s, SVMPs, and SVSPs. Mean expression is measured as center log-ratio transformed TPM. Black dashed lines indicate the lines of best fit inferred with phylogenetic linear models. The red dotted and dashed line and lower R and P-value in PLA2s displays the line of best fit if the outlying datapoint for C. durissus is excluded.
Fig. 3.Graphical representation of how MGD informs the understanding of the patterns of gene-family diversification. (a) Three hypothetical lineages descending from a common ancestor with differing patterns of gene diversification. Individual genes are shown as colored circles on gray lines. (b) Hypothetical gene-family phylogeny derived from the three lineages in (a) and a representation of hypothetical MGD metrics based on the phylogeny.
Fig. 4.Density distributions of standardized MGD for the SVMP (a) and SVSP (b) gene families. Correlations between expression-weighted and unweighted standardized MGD are shown as insets with P-values and R2 values inferred by linear regression. Dashed red lines show the fitted slopes and solid black lines show the one-to-one line.