| Literature DB >> 35603034 |
Abstract
Evolving to become bigger and/or longer lived should increase cancer susceptibility, but this predicted increase is not observed, a contradiction named Peto's paradox. A solution is that cancer suppression evolves to minimize cancer susceptibility, and the discovery of 19 retrogene (RTG) copies of the tumor suppressor gene TP53 in the African elephant (Loxodonta africana) is increasingly cited as a classic example of such adaptive suppression. However, classic examples need rigorous evaluation and an alternative hypothesis is that the RTGs spread by genetic drift. This study shows that before its duplication, the ancestral elephant RTG was already truncated from 390 amino acids to 157 by a frameshift mutation, and that 14 of the 19 copies are now truncated to ≤88 amino acids. There was no compelling evidence of either positive or negative selection acting on these 88 codons, and the pattern of RTG accumulation fits a neutral model with a duplication rate of ~10-6 per generation. It is concluded that there is no evidence supporting the hypothesis that the 19 elephant RTGs spread to fixation by selection; instead, the evidence indicates that these RTGs accumulated primarily by segmental duplication and drift. It is shown that the evolutionary multistage model of carcinogenesis (EMMC) predicts the recruitment of 1-2 independently acting tumor suppressor genes to suppress the increased cancer risk in elephants, so it is possible that one or a few RTGs may have been favored by selection resulting in the known enhanced sensitivity of elephant cells to DNA damage. However, the analysis does not provide any support for either a direct (via conserved TP53 activity) or indirect (via supporting canonical TP53 function) role of the RTGs sequences, so that the presence of multiple copies of TP53 retrogenes in elephants needs to be further justified before being used as a classic example of tumor suppression in large-bodied animals.Entities:
Keywords: Peto’s paradox; TP53; elephant; hyrax; manatee; multistage carcinogenesis; retrogene
Year: 2022 PMID: 35603034 PMCID: PMC9108310 DOI: 10.1111/eva.13383
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Evol Appl ISSN: 1752-4571 Impact factor: 4.929
The predicted adaptive increase in cancer suppression needed to control three different cancers in the African elephant and Florida manatee via either an additive increase in driver mutations (M) or a multiplicative decrease in somatic mutation rate (u) assuming their common ancestor had a body size and life span similar to the rock hyrax
| Parameters | Colorectal cancer | Hepatocellular cancer | Esophageal cancer | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C (human) | 2 × 108 | 3.01 × 108 | 6,652,800 | ||||||||||||
| k (human) | 73 divs/year | 0.9125 divs/year | 33.2 divs/year | ||||||||||||
| Baseline | 4.0 × 10−6 | 2.5 × 10−6 | 8.2 × 10−7 | 5.2 × 10−7 | 4 × 10−6 | 2.6 × 10−6 | |||||||||
| Baseline | 4 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 3 | |||||||||
| No MR | MR effect | No MR | MR effect | No MR | MR effect | ||||||||||
| Av weight (kg) | Max age (years) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
| Rock hyrax |
| 2.95 | 11 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| African elephant |
| 3940 | 65 | +3.6 | x36 | +1.5 | x12 | +1.1 | x217 | +0.7 | x74 | +2.2 | x65 | +1.3 | x22 |
| Florida manatee |
| 467 | 40 | +2.3 | x13 | +1.4 | x6 | +0.7 | x46 | +0.5 | x21 | +1.7 | x19 | +0.8 | x9 |
| Human |
| 58.7 | 55 | +2.3 | x11 | +0.9 | x7 | +0.6 | x22 | +0.4 | x14 | +1.6 | x14 | +0.9 | x9 |
The results assume either no metabolic rate effect of size on division rate (no MR) or an effect scaled by C−0.15 (MR effect). The equivalent adaptive change required in humans was estimated assuming an ancestor with a similar size and longevity to the hyrax. Parameters: C = estimated number of stem cells; k = estimated number of divisions. Max age defines the estimated age by which reproduction ceases.
FIGURE 1Aligned sequences of TP53 and RTGs of the African elephant, the Florida manatee, and the rock hyrax showing deletions in the RTGs, a single insertion in the elephant TP53, and the codons identified as selected in the 5′ region (1 and 49) and in the pseudogene 3′ region (1126). The gene position is in “ref bp,” that is, from the start of the elephant TP53 sequence
FIGURE 2The maximum likelihood tree of the 19 RTGs of the African elephant and the single RTGs of the rock hyrax and Florida manatee, rooted by the canonical TP53 sequences (not shown). Inferred occurrences of indels are shown together with their length and location (in parenthesis; see Figure 1). Bootstrap values greater than 90% are also shown