Characterization of the genome and silk-gland transcriptomes of Darwin's bark spider (Caerostris darwini).

Natural silks crafted by spiders comprise some of the most versatile materials known. Artificial silks-based on the sequences of their natural brethren-replicate some desirable biophysical properties and are increasingly utilized in commercial and medical applications today. To characterize the repertoire of protein sequences giving silks their biophysical properties and to determine the set of expressed genes across each unique silk gland contributing to the formation of natural silks, we report here draft genomic and transcriptomic assemblies of Darwin's bark spider, Caerostris darwini, an orb-weaving spider whose dragline is one of the toughest known biomaterials on Earth. We identify at least 31 putative spidroin genes, with expansion of multiple spidroin gene classes relative to the golden orb-weaver, Trichonephila clavipes. We observed substantial sharing of spidroin repetitive sequence motifs between species as well as new motifs unique to C. darwini. Comparative gene expression analyses across six silk gland isolates in females plus a composite isolate of all silk glands in males demonstrated gland and sex-specific expression of spidroins, facilitating putative assignment of novel spidroin genes to classes. Broad expression of spidroins across silk gland types suggests that silks emanating from a given gland represent composite materials to a greater extent than previously appreciated. We hypothesize that the extraordinary toughness of C. darwini major ampullate dragline silk may relate to the unique protein composition of major ampullate spidroins, combined with the relatively high expression of stretchy flagelliform spidroins whose union into a single fiber may be aided by novel motifs and cassettes that act as molecule-binding helices. Our assemblies extend the catalog of sequences and sets of expressed genes that confer the unique biophysical properties observed in natural silks.

Introduction

Discovered in 2010, the orb-weaving Darwin’s bark spider (Caerostris darwini) [1] is remarkable not only for the ways it has adapted to use silk for prey capture, but the intrinsic biophysical properties of the silks it weaves to achieve this goal. Produced by the major ampullate silk glands, draglines produced by C. darwini can reach the length of 25m and are used to lay bridge lines across waterways to establish capture orbs [2]. To function at this extreme length, draglines produced by C. darwini must combine remarkable tensile strength with extensibility to create one of the toughest silks that have been documented to date [3]. In addition, C. darwini also creates colossal, prey catching orb webs that are up to 2.8m2 in area [1]. The capture spiral of these webs is crafted from material produced in flagelliform silk glands [4], but also requires a viscous adhesive to capture prey en masse [1], which is achieved via aqueous secretions produced in the aggregate glands [5-7]. While the collection of these silk properties is defining for all orb-weaving spiders, the extreme nature of the specific properties displayed by C. darwini is of fundamental interests across evolutionary, ecological, and material science contexts.

Given the availability of high-throughput sequencing technologies facilitating mass data generation, recent work has greatly expanded the catalog of genomes and transcriptomes available in orb-weaving spider species, including C. darwini. We reported the first draft assembly of the genome and transcriptome of the orb-weaving spider, Trichonephila clavipes (formerly Nephila clavipes). This effort resulted in the first catalog of full-length spider fibroin (‘spidroin’) genes obtained from the genome with transcription characterized across multiple tissues, including silk glands [8]. Subsequently, genomes for additional orb-weaving spiders were characterized, including for Araneus ventricosus [9], the batik golden web spider Trichonephila antipodiana [10], the European wasp spider Argiope bruennichi [11], and very recently, three additional orb-weavers (Trichonephila clavata, Trichonephila inaurata, and Nephila pilipes) along with an improved draft genome of T. clavipes [12]. While this body of work has greatly expanded the repertoire of silk genes available in orb-weavers, the properties and sequences that are specifically utilized by C. darwini is not fully understood. Recent long-read transcript sequencing of multiple isolated major ampullate silk glands in C. darwini revealed a novel major ampullate spidroin gene (MaSp4) highly expressed along with several other spidroin genes [13]. MaSp4 possesses a novel glycine-proline-glycine-proline motif (“GPGP”) that may contribute to the toughness of dragline silks [14]. These observations motivate further work to characterize the full genome and transcriptome to elucidate the catalog of spidroins used in C. darwini as well as their presumably complex expression across morphologically distinct silk glands.

In what follows, we present draft genomic and transcriptomic assemblies of C. darwini, with long-read sequencing follow-up studies to create N and C-Terminal anchored sequences with complete or near complete reconstruction of spidroin/spidroin-like genes. We identified representatives of all major classes of spidroins. Furthermore, we identified expansions of the major ampullate and flagelliform spidroin gene classes, as well as novel spidroin and spidroin-like genes highly expressed in silk glands. Acquisition of tissues from male as well as female specimens also identified sex-specific differences in expression of spidroins, including the elucidation of the subset of spidroins expressed by males with those uniquely expressed in females. We also show substantial expression of flagelliform spidroin genes within major ampullate glands, suggesting that the addition of flagelliform spidroins to major ampullate silk fibers contributes to the exceptional biomechanics of C. darwini draglines.

Materials and methods

Spider specimens

All specimens from which data were collected derived from wild-caught C. darwini adults collected from Andasibe-Mantadia National Park in Madagascar. Details on permit and shipment information are provided (). DNA for libraries constructed and used for genome assembly was extracted from one female, DNA for long-read SMRT sequencing was extracted from an additional female, RNA for sequencing experiments was extracted from three additional females, and RNA for qPCR validation experiments was extracted from three additional females and three males. The following permits were obtained: Repoblikan’I Madagasikara, Secretariat General, Direction Generale de Forets, Direction de la Conservation de la Biodiversite et due systeme des aires protegees: 090/12/MEF/SG/DGF/DCB.SAP/SCB; Repoblikan’I Madagasikara, Direction Generale des Forets, Direction de la Valorisation des Resources Naturelles, Service de la Gestion Faune et Flore: 042_EA04/MG12; Repoblikan’I Madagasikara, Secretariat General, Direction Generale de Forets, Direction de la Conservation de la Biodiversite et due systeme des aires protegees: 280/17/MEEF/SG/DGF/DSAP/SCB.Re; Repoblikan’I Madagasikara, Secretariat General, Direction Generale des Forets, Direction de la Valorisation des Ressources Forestieres: 314N-EA12/MG17.

DNA extraction and sequencing

DNA was extracted using phenol:chloroform and column-based methods. Short fragment (180 bp) paired-end sequencing libraries were constructed using TruSeq LT kits (Illumina). Paired-end long-insert jumping libraries were built using two protocols: Illumina’s Mate Pair v2 (MPv2) and Nextera Mate Pair kits. MPv2 libraries featured inserts with size ranges of 3 kb, 5 kb, 7 kb, 9 kb and 11 kb, whereas Nextera Mate Pair libraries featured inserts with size ranges of 2 kb, 4 kb, 5 kb, 6 kb, 7 kb, 9 kb, 11 kb, 13 kb, and 17 kb. Libraries were barcoded and pooled for multiple runs per library (). High-throughput DNA sequencing was performed on either the Illumina HiSeq 2000 or HiSeq2500 (100 x 100) platforms using TruSeq v3 cluster kits and TruSeq SBS chemistry (Illumina).

RNA-sequencing preparation and data generation

For two individuals, RNA was extracted from the entirety of each specimen for two “whole body” RNA sequencing libraries. For the other individual, select tissues were microdissected (silk glands, venom glands, and brain tissue), and used for 6 tissue-specific RNA sequencing libraries (). In all cases, RNA was extracted using a combined TRIzol (Ambion, Life Technologies) plus column-based protocol. Each of the prepared RNA samples were treated with TURBO-free DNase (Life Technologies), and ribosomal RNA content was depleted with the Ribo-Zero Gold Kit (Epicentre, Human/Mouse/Rat). Strand-specific RNA sequencing libraries were constructed using the NEBnext Ultra Directional RNA Library Prep Kit (NEB, protocol “B”) and barcoded using TruSeq RNA adapters (Illumina). All C. darwini RNA sequencing libraries are provide (). High-throughput RNA sequencing was performed on the Illumina HiSeq2000 (100 x 100) platform using TruSeq v3 cluster kits and TruSeq SBS chemistry (Illumina).

De novo genome assembly

Raw FASTQ read files were evaluated using FastQC (v0.11.268), then trimmed using Trimmomatic (v0.3269) to remove adapter read-through, low quality bases, and ambiguous base calls. All jumping mate pair DNA libraries were processed using the program FastUniq (v1.170) to remove duplicate read pairs. The C. darwini genome was assembled de novo using a meta-assembly approach. Three draft assemblies were constructed in parallel using AllPaths-LG vR49967, SOAPdenovo2 (v2.04), and Platanus (v1.2.4), then merged using Metassembler (v1.5) with gaps closed on the metaassembly using GapCloser (v1.12-r6). Genomic quality metrics were calculated for all C. darwini assemblies using scripts from the Assemblathon 2 competition [15]. To assess the genome’s functional “completeness”, the Benchmarking Universal Single-Copy Orthologs (BUSCO) gene mapping method75 was also applied to all C. darwini assemblies to identify conserved protein-coding genetic loci [16]. All single copy gene sequences from Ixodes scapularis (deer tick) were extracted from the BUSCO Arthropod gene set, a 95% refinement cutoff was applied, and 2,058 I. scapularis loci were used to query the completeness of all intermediate and final C. darwini assemblies ().

De novo transcriptome assembly

After quality control and filtering of reads, all RNA libraries were combined to perform de novo assembly as a primary “all-isolate” transcriptome using Trinity (r20140717, ) [17, 18]. Meanwhile, 8 tissue-specific transcriptomes were individually de novo assembled using Trinity (). All transcripts were aligned back to the genome using the splice-aware mRNA/EST aligner GMAP (rel_10.22.14) [19], and reads from each RNA library were aligned to the genome using STAR (v2.4.2a, ) [20]. As above, BUSCO was also performed with the all-isolate transcriptome assembly ().

Genome annotation

Genomic features were defined on the C. darwini final metassembly using four successive rounds of the annotation pipeline MAKER2 [21]. Repetitive regions were identified using RepeatRunner (supplied with Maker2), RepeatMasker v4.0.5 with RMblast, and RepBase repeat libraries [22], then subsequently masked for downstream gene modeling. Tandem repeats were identified using Tandem Repeats Finder v4.07b [23]. Gene models were based on multiple types of evidence: alternate species protein sequence alignments, alternate species EST/mRNA/cDNA sequence alignments, de novo assembled transcripts from C. darwini RNA-seq experiments, and ab initio gene predictions. Protein and EST/mRNA sequences were collected from online databases (). Exon boundaries were marked using Exonerate v2.2.0 [24], and tRNA by tRNAscan-SE [25]. Feature boundaries were further polished by Maker2 directing successive rounds of trained predictions from SNAP (rel_11.29.13) [26] and Augustus v3.0.2 (WebAugustus41) [27]. In total, >9 million genomic features and 410,081 putative genes were modeled on the C. darwini final annotated meta-assembly (). Putative gene model identities were established by the reciprocal alignment of model protein sequences to the UniProtKB/Swiss-Prot85 protein database (v6.3.15) using BLASTP86 and Maker2 accessory scripts. Five tiers/sets of gene models with increasing stringency were defined on the basis of agreement among coding feature annotations, conserved protein domains, eukaryotic gene structure, and similarities with curated gene databases (). Downstream analyses were based on the “Gold” gene set (14,894 genes, 15,343 mRNAs), and contained only gene models that possessed known protein domains from the InterPro Pfam database [28], was produced using BLASTP [29], HMMer [30], and “Maker Standard” scripts (K. Childs), but also had biological supporting evidence (RNA, protein alignment).

Spidroin identification and validation

C. darwini spidroins were identified by multiple BLAST [29] searches of the genome, transcriptomes, and gene models using a previously curated database of spidroin query sequences (). We assessed sequence homology to known spidroin sequences by aligning Caerostris darwini genomic scaffold sequences using different BLAST algorithms (BLAST v2.2.29: blastn, tblastx, tblastn) in multiple successive rounds of the different genomic sub-assemblies and the final meta-assembly. Query sequences (524 nucleotide and 380 amino acid sequences) were collected from GenBank, literature review, and the Trichonephila clavipes spidroin catalog, and were compared using a BLAST e-value threshold of 1E-6. Positive alignments were tallied, and the scaffolds and gene models with manually inspected for additional spidroin signatures (the “MAFAS” motif in N-terminal domain, repetitive GPGQQ or poly-A coding motifs, and evidence of expression from RNA-seq reads in silk gene tissues). Caerostris darwini sequences that had support from multiple lines of evidence (homology, known motifs, gene expression profiles) were promoted as candidate spidroin loci and subjected to further analyses such as motif painting, phylogenetic comparisons, qPCR gene expression profiling.

Five loci exhibited complete coding sequences, but the remainder of putative C. darwini spidroins had internal sequence gaps, were only repeats, or were incomplete N- or C-terminal sequences at the end of scaffolds. To identify missing pieces, multiple rounds of searching was performed by adding C. darwini spidroin hits from the previous round to each new list of queries. Putative spidroin fragments were organized into five categories for validation and completion experiments (see below): complete, internal gap, 5′ end, 3′ end, and repetitive sequence ().

Putative C. darwini spidroins were isolated and filled using a combination of Long-Range PCR (LR-PCR) followed by Single Molecule Real-Time (SMRT) sequencing of a single C. darwini adult female (Cae-009, ) at very high coverage. Multiple pairs of LR-PCR primers () were designed for each scaffold (Primer3), so that putative spidroin loci could be completely isolated by LR-PCR amplicons, and alternate primer pairs could be recruited in cases of sub-optimal amplification. Pair-mates were proposed using sequence similarity, orthologous alignments, and transcript tissue specificity. To “bridge” two separate scaffolds, multiple combinations of cross-pair LR-PCR experiments were performed to identify scaffold pairs that were more cryptically related. LR-PCR reactions employed high efficiency PrimeStar GXL polymerase (Clontech/TaKaRa) and visualized on low voltage 0.5% Bio-Rad Certified Megabase agarose gels. Amplicons were purified and pooled at equimolar ratios, with slightly higher volumes for the longest fragments (>20 kb). Two unique pools of spidroin amplicons were processed for SMRT library construction [31], and sequenced using the P6-C4 sequencing enzyme, chemistry, and 4-hour movie collection parameters (Pacific Biosciences). Quality-filtered FASTQ files of long SMRT reads were directly aligned to scaffolds that exhibited complete spidroins or spidroins with internal gaps on single scaffolds using PBJelly (PBSuite 15.2.20.p1) [32] and BLASR (v1.3.191) [33]. For putatively linked scaffold pairs, manual alignments were performed to effectively bridge gaps, correct errors, and resolve repeats. In total, 23 C. darwini spidroin sequences and 3 spidroin-like sequences were validated ( and ).

A catalog of spidroin genes identified in Caerostris darwini.

Circular symbols denote the silk class of each spidroin, determined by alignment of N and C-terminal domains and motifs to previously known spidroin sequences. Genic structures are drawn to scale. Scaffold identifiers for the locations of the genes are provided in parentheticals, or embedded in the name (for Spidroin-like sequences). AcSp: Aciniform, AgSp: aggregate; FLAG: flagelliform; MaSp: major ampullate; MiSp: minor ampullate; PySp: pyriform; TuSp: Tubuliform; SpL: Spidroin-like.

Spidroin gene repeat motif identification and analysis

An initial set of C. darwini spidroins were translated into amino acid residues () and then subjected to repeat motif identification using MEME and motif painting with MAST v4.10 [34]. Repetitive motifs were manually curated to remove low-quality hits and motifs occurring in N- and C-terminal domains (using a hard cutoff of 100 residues) and cataloged as unique “motif variants” ranging from 4 to 41 residues in length. Motif variants were then organized into “motif groups” based on residue content and sequence (). Motifs that could not be informatively grouped were designated “unassigned”. The full catalog of motif variants was input in secondary rounds of motif searching with the custom pipeline (see URLs; ). Next, the pipeline was used to search for higher-order repetitive structures denoted as ensembles / cassettes, defined at least two adjacent motif occurrences that were enriched across spidroins. Cassette variants were organized into “cassette groups” and curated to remove cassette types that exhibited inter-motif gaps >20 residues or that occurred in N- and C-terminal domains (). Due to a technical oversight, SpL_170 was not included in this motif and cassette discovery analysis.

2D structure analysis

Using protein translated sequences for our assembled MaSp4_A and MaSp4_B transcripts, we utilized the RaptorX-Property web server [35] to generate 8-state 2-dimensional secondary protein structure predictions, with default parameters utilized.

Quantitative PCR (qPCR) analysis

For the specimens used for these experiments (see above), from the abdomen, silk glands were identified by relative position and morphology, then individually collected by severing their ducts near the spinnerets. From the cephalothorax, legs were collected, venom glands were collected after separation of the chelicerae from the cephalothorax, and the remaining cephalothorax tissue was retained as the “head” sample. In total, each specimen was microdissected into nine tissue subsections: venom glands, head (with no venom glands), legs, major ampullate silk gland (MA), minor ampullate silk gland (MI), flagelliform silk gland (FL), aggregate silk gland (AG), tubuliform silk glands, and “other silk glands” (OTHER: piriform and aciniform glands, attached to spinneret) which yielded 27 experimental samples in total (). RNA was extracted using TRIzol (Ambion, Life Technologies) and RNeasy Mini Kit spin columns (Qiagen), and additional cleanup performed using the RNA Clean & Concentrator-5 kit with DNAse I treatment (Zymo Research). Small aliquots (~5 μL) were used for quality control and quantification. cDNA was produced from each RNA sample with a high capacity cDNA Reverse Transcription kit (Life Technologies) and run alongside multiple “no reverse transcriptase” [NRT] negative controls. Primers were designed to target 31 loci (all 23 spidroins, six spidroin-like genes, one venom locus [CRiSP/Allergen/PR-1] [36], and one housekeeping gene [RPL13a]), plus genomic-scaffold-controls for all single-exon spidroin genes (). qPCR reactions were set up in triplicate using standard SYBR Green PCR Master Mix (Life Technologies) and run on a ViiA 7 Real-Time PCR machine. Relative transcript abundance of targets in silk and venom gland samples was normalized to leg tissue samples and calculated using the 2-ΔΔCT method [37].

Results

Draft, annotated genomic and transcriptomic assemblies for Caerostris darwini

We began by sequencing genomic DNA isolated from a field-collected C. darwini female generated from a diverse set of sequencing libraries we prepared (Methods, Spider specimens and DNA extraction and sequencing). Next, we analyzed the data generated from these libraries using multiple computational de novo genome construction methods, unified the results via meta-assembly, and constructed 1.45 Gb of draft genome (Tables ). We estimated the size of the full C. darwini genome to be 1.81 Gb. Our meta-assembly consisted of 45,784 scaffolds (N50: 489.8 kb, N50 contig size: 94.6 kb), with ~140x coverage from re-mapping of 1.34 billion 100 bp quality control, filtered, unique read-pairs ().

To map the locations of protein coding and transcribed genes within the C. darwini genome, we extracted RNA from multiple isolated tissues–whole body, brain, venom and silk glands–that were obtained from three field-collected females (Methods, Spider specimens). We obtained strand-specific 100-bp paired-end reads from RNA-sequencing and performed computational de novo assembly for each isolate (Methods, ). We also assembled a transcriptome representing the union of RNA-Seq data from all the isolated tissues, which comprised ~309 million quality control, filtered unique read-pairs (Tables ). To quantify the completeness of the protein-coding genome, we searched our draft assemblies for homology to 1,066 curated arthropod sequences [8], and estimated that our draft genome is 95.2% complete and our all-isolate transcriptome assembly is 97.5% complete ().

Finally, we applied the MAKER2 pipeline [21] to enrich our draft genome with annotations. Our annotation mapping efforts were informed by coding sequences from a catalog of data from closely related species (), the all-isolate transcriptomes that we generated, application of in silico gene prediction methods, and libraries of transposable elements and repeated motifs (Methods, Genome annotation). In total, we attached >12 million features to our draft assembly, and conservatively estimated 14,894 genes present in the genome (“Gold” annotation, ).

Identification of the C. darwini spidroin gene catalog

Anticipating that our draft assembly would not fully capture the complete sequences for spidroins–a class of very large, highly coding-repetitive genes–we next performed validation of our assemblies as well as locus refinement for spidroin genes. To achieve this goal, we first searched our draft genomic and transcriptomic assemblies as well as our annotated gene models for sequences that aligned with a curated library of previously established spidroin genes (Methods, ). After filtering (Methods), we identified 34 candidate N-terminal domain (NTD) and 33 candidate C-terminal domain (CTD) sequences from this search. Using this set of candidate sequences, we next performed long-range PCR amplification followed by single-molecule real-time sequencing (SMRT PacBio) to reconstruct full length sequences at high coverage (Methods, ). These data allowed us to link NTD and CTD on a single scaffold for 23 spidroins and 3 spidroin-like genes, based on definitions described previously [38], with partial sequences for the remaining 8 NTD and 7 CTD sequences (). While gaps persisted in this subset, we were able to enumerate substantial portions of their repeated motif structures, which we characterize in more detail below.

To map our spidroins to the set of the major silk gene classes that have been previously described, we performed sequence alignment of the conserved NTD and CTD as well as comparing to internal motifs reported to be specific to a particular spidroin class [8]. To aid in clarifying cryptic, unclassified spidroin-like sequences, we used the T. clavipes spidroin sequence catalog we previously generated. We observed that the majority of spidroins identified in C. darwini map to one of the seven previously categorized spidroin classes (). Within these classes, we identified novel members, which expanded several classes in C. darwini. Relative to T. clavipes, we found one additional major ampullate spidroin (MaSp), three additional minor ampullate spidroins (MiSp), and four additional flagelliform spidroins (FLAG). The expansion of FLAG genes was intriguing, as this class of genes is used by spiders in silks to construct the orb web’s “stretchy” capture spiral, suggesting perhaps additional adaptive pressure on these classes of genes in this lineage as it diverged from the common ancestor with T. clavipes [39-41]. However, three C. darwini spidroins–Sp_81.2, SpL_133.2, and SpL_4399.2 –eluded assignment to any of the previously established classes based on sequence homology alone.

A catalog of spidroin repetitive motifs and cassettes in C. darwini

Using the catalog of spidroins identified in C. darwini and T. clavipes, we sought to characterize the set of coding motifs found within these genes that were unique to or shared between these species. To achieve this, we applied the computational motif detection and demarcation approach we previously described [8], working first to enumerate the complete set of repetitive sequence motifs with catalogs of spidroin and spidroin-like genes described above along with those we previously reported in T. clavipes (Methods, ). Overall, we observed 11,024 occurrences of 2,771 motif sequences found in both species, ranging from 4 to 41 amino acids in length (Tables ). 6,950 (63%) of occurrences were found in C. darwini, likely due to the larger repertoire of more complete spidroins characterized from C. darwini than T. clavipes. 1,493 (53%) of motif variants enumerated were exclusive to C. darwini (), with the majority of those (1189 of 1493, 79.6%) originating from a specific C. darwini gene with a proportion similar to T. clavipes (301 of 403, 74.6% ).

The subset of the 2,711 motif types that were specific to C. darwini but shared across genes within class (n = 127, 8.5%) or across classes (n = 177, 11.9) were the most frequent, indicating motif types that are heavily utilized by C. darwini. Of those, the greatest number were observed in MaSp class members which included several of the xPGPQ motif varieties found specifically in both MaSp4 spidroins (MaSp4_A and MaSp4_B) and the CTD of another putative member of the MaSp class (). Both MaSp4 genes were described by numerous tandem repeats of GPGPQGPS, flanked by Serine, Valine, and Threonine-rich motifs (e.g., SVSVVSTTIS VSVVSTTVS) vaguely analogous to homopolymer runs of alanine common to minor ampullate spidroins. 2D protein structural analysis (Methods, ) suggests these spacers may form beta-strands that can, when adjacent to one another, form hydrogen bonds leading to formation of beta-sheets. In addition, the FLAG class members in C. darwini had many repetitive motifs that were shared across this class specifically. The most common C. darwini specific motifs found were [GGP]3 and GGSGGGL, repetitive sequences not enumerated in T. clavipes ( These motifs have been previously hypothesized to link together to form structures that might also form intramolecular bonds contributing to elasticity [42]. Beyond the substantial number of unique motifs that were Glycine, Serine, and Proline-rich, a handful of other unique motifs were also present, which included SGMMY, TVVDN[L|I]SVNV, and PITISGTLNV (). Finally, the aciniform spidroins appeared unusual in the distinctive divergence of repetitive motif sequences utilized across both species. In C. darwini, AcSp1 was a diversely repetitive spidroin containing over 300 motif occurrences of 16 motif types (into 11 distinctive structures, ) including several that were quite long (7–24 amino acids in length, ). However, none of these motif types were observed in T. clavipes, which contained 162 motif occurrences across 14 distinct types, only two motifs of which were shared across aciniform spidroins between species (n = 15 occurrences total, ). This divergence, previously noted in other species for aciniform silk [43], is consistent with strong, adaptive evolution on this spidroin.

Most frequent coding repeat sequence motifs found only in Caerostris darwini or shared with Trichonephila clavipes.

Top 15 most frequently observed motifs that were exclusive to C. darwini (upper frame) or shared with T. clavipes (lower frame). For motifs found in spidroin-like genes or atypical spidroin genes, a brief label for the name of the gene is provided (e.g., 81.2, 133.2, and 5803). The single example where motif usage was shared but utilized in different spidroin classes is shaded.

The motifs shared between C. darwini and T. clavipes tended to be present in similar classes of spidroin genes in both species (). For example, as expected given previously described spidroins across spider species, the most frequently shared motifs across these species included the previously described catalog of Glycine-rich motifs (e.g., GYGGQ, GGY, etc.) for flagelliform spidroins, stretches of poly-alanine repeats in major and minor ampullate spidroins, and GA repeats in minor ampullate spidroins (). In addition, we noted similarities in the frequency of use for shared motifs between two spidroins (Sp_5803 in T. clavipes, Sp_81.2 in C. darwini). Sp_5803 is highly expressed in flagelliform glands (as is Sp_81.2 in C. darwini, see below); thus, the frequently shared use in these spidroins suggests conservation of elements to preserve its function. In contrast to use of motifs across species with spidroin classes, we noted a commonly occurring motif (GGQ[GGP]2) which appears to be utilized in major ampullate spidroins in T. clavipes but flagelliform in C. darwini. We note that this repeat was quite like the commonly occurring motif [GGP]3 described above, which was also found in flagelliform spidroins in C. darwini. Given their suggested 2D protein structural properties [42], these structures and motifs may further contribute to the extensibility of this silk.

We next used the catalog of short motifs described above to enumerate the set of coding sequences comprised of multiple motifs in tandem (referred to as ensembles [44, 45] or cassettes [8]) found in C. darwini and T. clavipes spidroin genes. To achieve this, we utilized our previously described computational cassette detection and demarcation approach [8], working to apply the lists of repetitive sequence motifs jointly to the set of spidroin and spidroin-like genes identified in both spider species (Methods, ). Overall, we observed 3,693 occurrences across 2,268 cassette sequence types found in both species () comprised of 2 to 6 motifs each (). 2,344 (63.4%) of cassette occurrences were found in C. darwini, again presumably due to the larger catalog of spidroin genes overall identified. We observed only a small fraction of cassettes shared between C. darwini and T. clavipes (67 / 3,693 = 1.8%, ), which contrasted with the much greater proportion of non-tandem motifs shared between them (= 31.4%, ). Not surprisingly, the most frequent cassettes across classes were those motifs that were common to the class, e.g., the DTxSYzTGEY motif, common to aggregate spidroins, was also a common component of cassettes found in aggregate spidroins; similarly, cassettes containing poly-Alanine tracks were abundant in minor ampullate spidroins (). Flagelliform spidroins had by far the most diverse number of cassette types (n = 10) involving 308 occurrences of the xGG_GGx cassette, a cassette used across virtually all spidroin gene classes. Consistent with the presence of motif frequency seen above, we also found GPGPQ in tandem (n = 57) and poly-Alanine+GPGPQ cassettes (n = 19) frequently in C. darwini and present in MaSp4 and AgSp1. Taken collectively, these data suggest that the repertoire of repetitive motifs combine uniquely and amplify in number in a species-specific way.

Tissue-specific expression of each spidroin across silk glands

Previous work has demonstrated that spidroins assigned to a particular gene class are not exclusively transcribed in the silk gland in which the gene is assigned [8, 13] with proteomic analyses also indicating diverse protein expression across silk glands [46]. To validate and compare transcription levels across silk glands, we directly interrogated the degree of spidroin expression bias by using quantitative PCR (qPCR) to measure RNA transcript levels in morphologically classified silk gland isolates and control tissues isolated from three field-collected adult females (Methods, ). We were able to cleanly separate isolates of all morphologically distinct gland types, except for the aciniform and piriform glands, which due to their proximal anatomic locations (i.e., attached to the spinnerets) and small size could not be cleanly separated and were therefore treated as a combined sample (“Other Silk Glands”, Methods, ). In total, we profiled 25 spidroin genes, 3 spidroin like genes with canonical N- or C-terminal domains, 3 additional spidroin-like genes, and 2 control genes (PR-1, for venom gland expression and RPL13a as a normalizing control) with 2 technical replicates per tissue isolate (Methods, ).

Profiling expression across tissues revealed both ubiquitously and gland-specific spidroin expression in C. darwini. Consistent with patterns of expression previously characterized in other spider species, we observed examples of spidroin genes from each class that are highly expressed in their corresponding morphologically distinct silk gland. This included, but was not limited to, MaSp1_B in major ampullate glands () or Flag_D in flagelliform glands (). In addition, we observed that in each silk gland assayed, spidroin transcripts belonging to more than one silk class were also detected (Figs ) but with very low expression in non-silk gland tissues (. Among those spidroins that were highly expressed across a range of silk glands were AgSp1_B, MaSp1_B, MaSp4_A, and to a lesser extent, MaSp4_B (). Despite observing relatively broad expression for most spidroin genes, we noted two transcripts whose expression was primarily found in a single gland, and not strongly expressed in others: MaSp1_A, strongly expressed in major ampullate, and Flag_F, which was modestly expressed above baseline in flagelliform glands only. In addition, we also noted two transcripts whose highest expression did not match the N- and C-Terminal similarity class definition: MaSp2_A, whose expression was highest in aciniform/pyriform glands, and MiSp_E, whose expression was highest in tubuliform and flagelliform glands. These data continue to support a model whereby natural silk extruded by orb-weaving spiders for specific needs is the composite of many spidroins expressed across many glands.

Results of qPCR Expression profiling of all spidroins across silk glands in female and male specimens.

Relative transcript abundance of spidroin targets plus controls across silk gland samples, normalized to leg tissue samples and calculated using the 2-ΔΔCT method (Methods). Results reported are specifically for (A) major ampullate and (B) flagelliform glands in females, as well as (C) all silk glands in males.

We next aimed to use transcriptional expression as information to guide the classification of the spidroin-like transcripts we had identified and assembled. We found that the glands in which these spidroin-like transcripts had the highest expression were: aciniform/pyriform glands for SpL_133.2 and aggregate glands for SpL_4399.2. For the remaining non-canonical spidroin-like genes, those also include flagelliform glands for SpL_2234.1 and SpL_2234.2, and major ampullate (by a very small amount over minor ampullate) gland for SpL_170. We also note that the atypical spidroin, Sp_81.2, was most highly expressed in flagelliform glands. These patterns of expression perhaps give a small clue to the nature and possible role of these genes in natural silk production, either directly in silk fibers or in genes to facilitate assembly or aggregation in the gland.

The gene expression profiling results present here thus far derived from mature females. To elucidate the repertoire of spidroin genes utilized in males versus females, we next performed qPCR to profile expression of the above collection of spidroin and spidroin-like transcripts in silk gland and control tissues isolated from field-collected mature males (Methods, ). Given the extreme sexual size dimorphism in C. darwini with males >3 times smaller than females [1], it was not feasible to dissect individual silk glands from males; thus, we profiled abdomens and a combined sample of extracted silk glands instead (Figs ) in addition to non-silk gland tissue isolates (). First, we observed little if any expression of aggregate, flagelliform, or tubuliform spidroin transcripts. This was not altogether unexpected given the contribution of these classes of genes to construction of the web capture spiral (flagelliform), prey capture using the capture spiral (aggregate), or egg-case construction (tubuliform), which are behaviors not utilized by mature males [38]. In fact, male C. darwini—as do male spiders in general—lack tubuliform spigots or associated glands and do not appear to have a functional ‘triad’ of a flagelliform and two aggregate spigots (). This reflects the biological reality of sexual dimorphism in most orb web spiders, where adult males do not engage in web building but rather inhabit female webs awaiting mating encounters and feeding along with the females [47]. Our own field observations confirm this to be true for C. darwini [1]. In addition, we noted that only a subset of major or minor ampullate spidroins were expressed (), suggesting utilization of these transcripts in males for their limited silk production capabilities, with the complement of those expressed in females (MaSp1_A, MaSp1_C, MaSp2_A, MaSp3_B, and MiSp_E) suggestive of the importance of these transcripts for the substantially more diverse repertoire of silks constructed by females. As above, this finding reflects the species biology where males do not construct capture webs. Among the set of spidroin-like transcripts, we noted high expression of SpL_133.2, further supporting its novelty and additional co-expression with AcSp1 and PySp1 perhaps suggestive of its functional role.

Curiously, we noted modest, but non-trivial expression of several spidroins outside of silk glands in males. First, MiSp_D appeared to have non-trivial expression in the cephalothorax, chelicerae plus venom gland, and pedipalps, correlating with the expression of the venom-gland control gene PR-1. Similarly, a handful of flagelliform spidroins (Flag_A, Flag_B, Flag_E) also appeared slightly upregulated in cephalothorax and chelicerae plus venom gland. Finally, MiSp_E appeared to be expressed in male pedipalps specifically. Given previous examples of canonical spidroins transcribed outside of silk glands in other species [8], these patterns of expression hint at the possibility of repurposing of spidroin genes.

Discussion

In summary, we created an initial draft, annotated genomic and multi-tissue transcriptomic assemblies for C. darwini. These assemblies enabled the identification of 31 putative spidroin genes, including several novel transcripts. Validation and gap filling using qPCR followed by long-read sequencing allowed us to characterize the patterns of spidroin motifs found in C. darwini and by comparing them to those of T. clavipes enabled the identification of candidate motifs that contribute to the unique properties of silks woven by C. darwini. Our gene expression profiling demonstrated examples of gland-specific expression of spidroin genes, as well as spidroins broadly expressed across multiple glands. On this particular point, we note very recent work which reached similar conclusions from analysis of protein expression of silk glands in orb-weaving spiders as well [46], further supporting that diverse spidroin expression is functionally consequential. Finally, characterization of expression in males elucidated the catalog of spidroins utilized by males, and the complement of spidroins utilized by females, including multiple MaSp and Flag transcripts.

Recent work has greatly expanded the number of spider genomes available for analysis, and thus considering how C. darwini relates to T. clavipes bears some brief discussion. Currently, C. darwini and T. clavipes are catalogued as representatives of the same family, Araneidae [48]. However, Kuntner et al. [49] consider Trichonephila as member of Nephilidae, and Caerostris as member of Araneidae, both families being true orb-weavers, Orbipurae. This is because Araneidae as currently circumscribed is poorly defined and ancient [49]. Regardless of which family classification is being followed, the current evidence dates the most recent common ancestor of Caerostris darwini and Trichonephila clavipes to between 62 and >200 million years ago, albeit with large confidence intervals [40, 49].

The function and nature of Sp_5803 as a spidroin itself has not been clear, and our results here provide further support for this target as a true spidroin. Detailed examination of the domains of Sp_5803 in T. clavipes with comparative genomics across available spider species revealed that this spidroin has only the canonical N-terminal domain region mapping to previously characterized true spidroins, but does contain a high density of ordered repeats typical of spidroins. Sp_5803 was highly expressed in the flagelliform glands of T. clavipes females but not males [8, 38]. In C. darwini, we observed a gene (SpL_81.2) with features quite similar to Sp_5803 in that it was also missing a canonical spidroin C-terminal domain while carrying a canonical spidroin N-terminal domain, sharing canonical sequence motifs with Sp_5803 that feature dense sets of repeats typical of a spidroin (), and is highly expressed in the flagelliform glands of females but not males (). We thus propose that T. clavipes Sp_5803 and C. darwini Sp_81.2 are orthologous spidroin genes. Further comparative genomics analysis with newly available orb-weaving spiders could provide additional data on this hypothesis, and perhaps the timing of when it arose or when the Sp_81.2 C-terminal domain was presumably lost.

Some C. darwini specific motifs and cassettes that were highly abundant in MaSp spidroins (e.g., [GGP]3 or GGSGGGL) likely form helices that act to bind molecules together. This may contribute to increased ability to form composite fibers that may unite the mechanical properties of different spidroins and underlying the unusual biology of this species. For example, the web frame and radial threads are made of major ampullate silk that is impressively tough in C. darwini due to its higher extensibility, probably an adaptation to river-bridging webs [3]. The relatively high expression of flagelliform spidroins in major ampullate glands suggests that these spidroins fuse with major ampullate spidroins into a fiber that is both strong and unusually extendible—hence tough. Similarly, the unusually diverse aciniform spidroins might be connected to the incredible bridging capabilities of C. darwini, who uses a higher quantity of aciniform silk strands to form a sail-like terminus of the bridging silk, creating sufficient wind-drag to be carried over rivers and lakes [2].

Very recent (unpublished) work corroborates our genomic findings and provides even further proteomic details about spidroins found in manually drawn dragline silk and its toughness relative to other, related bark spiders found in Madagascar [50, 51]. Specifically, Kono et al. report that a set of non-spidroin products they referred to as SpiCE proteins contributes to the composite nature of the fibers and are important to tensile properties. Between both works, a picture is emerging that mixing multiple spidroins and other silk-associated proteins into a composite fiber can greatly impact and enhance mechanical properties and hence the function of silks. By integrating multiple genomic studies with ecological and biomechanical studies, a more complete picture of the silk production system of the Darwin’s bark spider has been revealed.

qPCR results for spidroins (females) for major ampullate, minor ampullate, and “other” glands.

Relative transcript abundance of spidroin targets plus controls across silk gland samples are presented, normalized to leg tissue samples and calculated using the 2-ΔΔCT method.

(PDF)

Click here for additional data file.

qPCR results for spidroins (females) for tubuliform, flagelliform, aggregate glands.

Relative transcript abundance of spidroin targets plus controls across silk gland samples are presented, normalized to leg tissue samples and calculated using the 2-ΔΔCT method.

(PDF)

Click here for additional data file.

qPCR results for spidroins (females) for epigynum, mature eggs, and ovaries + eggs.

Relative transcript abundance of spidroin targets plus controls across silk gland samples are presented, normalized to leg tissue samples and calculated using the 2-ΔΔCT method.

(PDF)

Click here for additional data file.

qPCR results for spidroins (females) for all cephalothorax, cephalothorax (without Chelicerae), and Chelicerae only.

Relative transcript abundance of spidroin targets plus controls across silk gland samples are presented, normalized to leg tissue samples and calculated using the 2-ΔΔCT method.

(PDF)

Click here for additional data file.

qPCR results for spidroins (females) for venom glands, pedipalps, and legs.

Relative transcript abundance of spidroin targets plus controls across silk gland samples are presented, normalized to leg tissue samples and calculated using the 2-ΔΔCT method.

(PDF)

Click here for additional data file.

qPCR results for spidroins (males) for abdomen, all silk glands, and cephalothorax.

Relative transcript abundance of spidroin targets plus controls across silk gland samples are presented, normalized to leg tissue samples and calculated using the 2-ΔΔCT method.

(PDF)

Click here for additional data file.

qPCR results for spidroins (males) for cephalothorax (w/o chelicerae), chelicerae and venom glands, and pedipalps.

Relative transcript abundance of spidroin targets plus controls across silk gland samples are presented, normalized to leg tissue samples and calculated using the 2-ΔΔCT method.

(PDF)

Click here for additional data file.

qPCR results for spidroins (males) for legs.

Relative transcript abundance of spidroin targets plus controls across silk gland samples are presented, normalized to leg tissue samples and calculated using the 2-ΔΔCT method.

(PDF)

Click here for additional data file.

Structure of the C. darwini spinning apparatus.

(a) Adult female spinnerets (ALS = anterior lateral spinneret, posterior median spinnerets = PMS, posterior lateral spinneret = PLS); (b) adult female ALS with marked piriform (pi) and major ampullate (map) spigots; (c) adult female PMS with marked tubuliform (tu), aciniform (ac) and minor ampullate (mip) spigots; (d) adult female PLS with marked tubuliform (tu) spigots; (e) adult female magnified PLS part with marked flagelliform (fl) and aggregate (ag) spigots; (f) adult male PLS with marked flagelliform (fl) and aggregate (ag) spigots.

(PDF)

Click here for additional data file.

Samples used in the study.

Identifiers and accession details for samples used for experiments described in this study.

(XLSX)

Click here for additional data file.

Sequencing libraries constructed for this study.

Details of barcodes, adaptors and samples used for constructing RNA, DNA, and SMRT Sequencing libraries.

(XLSX)

Click here for additional data file.

Sequencing runs performed for this study.

Design details of sequencing performed for data collection.

(XLSX)

Click here for additional data file.

DNA sequencing read files used in this study.

A list of the sequencing read file names and the type of library used in this study, including Illumina and PacBio technologies, with SRA accession numbers.

(XLSX)

Click here for additional data file.

Genome assembly metrics.

Assembly metrics summarized for each type of assembly method as well as meta-assembly.

(XLSX)

Click here for additional data file.

RNA sequencing read files used in this study.

A list of the sequencing runs and libraries used for transcriptome characterization, with SRA accession numbers.

(XLSX)

Click here for additional data file.

Transcriptome assembly metrics.

Details of transcriptomic assembly measures (total transcripts, N50) as well as BUSCO summary for all isolates.

(XLSX)

Click here for additional data file.

Input files used in the C. darwini genome annotation pipeline.

Details and sources of databases utilized for annotation mapping.

(XLSX)

Click here for additional data file.

Genome annotation metrics.

A summary of annotation for various gene models of increasing stringency (Max, Standard, Silver, Gold, Platium).

(XLSX)

Click here for additional data file.

Curated library of previously established spidroin genes used for analysis.

List of accessions for catalog of spidroins used for comparison and discovery of spidroins in C. darwini.

(XLSX)

Click here for additional data file.

PCR primers used for amplicon generation towards SMRT sequencing.

List of primers used to generate amplicons for validating, gap closing, and merging putative spidroins characterized in the C. darwini genome.

(XLSX)

Click here for additional data file.

Spidroin repeat motif type occurrences and coordinates.

Results for the locations and characterization of annotated motifs discovered from the spidroin motif painting analysis.

(XLSX)

Click here for additional data file.

Spidroin repeat motif groups and descriptions for Caerostris darwini.

Summary of the motif groups discovered from the spidroin motif painting analysis.

(XLSX)

Click here for additional data file.

Spidroin repeat motif types for C. darwini and sharing across genes and with T. clavipes.

Occurrence counts, motif lengths, and sharing details of motifs identified by the painting analysis.

(XLSX)

Click here for additional data file.

Spidroin repeat type sharing across genes, classes, and species.

A summary of the frequency of sharing of motif groups across C. darwini and T. clavipes.

(XLSX)

Click here for additional data file.

Spidroin repeat cassette type occurrences and coordinates.

Results for the locations and characterization of annotated cassettes discovered from the spidroin motif painting analysis.

(XLSX)

Click here for additional data file.

Spidroin repeat cassette groups and descriptions for Caerostris darwini and Trichonephila clavipes.

Summary of the cassette groups discovered from the spidroin motif painting analysis.

(XLSX)

Click here for additional data file.

Spidroin repeat cassette types for Caerostris darwini and Trichonephila clavipes.

Occurrence counts, motif lengths, and sharing details of cassettes identified by the painting analysis.

(XLSX)

Click here for additional data file.

Spidroin repeat cassette type sharing across genes, classes, and species.

A summary of the frequency of sharing of cassette groups across C. darwini and T. clavipes.

(XLSX)

Click here for additional data file.

List of qPCR primers used for silk-gland expression profiling.

Primer sequences used for the qPCR validation experiments performed for identified spidroins.

(XLSX)

Click here for additional data file.

Amino acid sequences for the spidroins identified in Caerostris darwini.

This is a .fasta file that includes the set of sequences used for the motif painting analysis, plus the sequence for SpL_170.

(FSA)

Click here for additional data file.

Transfer Alert

This paper was transferred from another journal. As a result, its full editorial history (including decision letters, peer reviews and author responses) may not be present.

22 Feb 2022

14 Apr 2022

We thank the reviewers for a careful reading and comments on our submitted manuscript. Our responses to comments are provide below.

Reviewer #1: The manuscript “Characterization of the genome and silk-gland transcriptomes of Darwin’s bark spider (Caerostris darwini)” by P.L. Babb et al. is acceptable for publication in Plos One after minor revision.

The paper presents the whole sequencing of the genome of the Caerostris darwini spider with special attention to the spidroin genes. The same research group performed the first complete sequencing of the genome of a spider (Triconephila clavipes), which led to identification of the full set of spidroin genes in one species. Technically the work is irreproachable and the analysis highlights what the authors consider as the main findings of their work.

Author Response: We very much thank the reviewer for their support for our work.

Consistently with this judgement, there are just a couple of suggestions with regard to the manuscript before being finally published.

1) Since the authors make an extensive comparison between the spidroin genes of Caerostris darwini and Triconephila clavipes, it would be helpful if they devote a few sentences to explain the phylogenetic relation between both species and their location in the Araenomorphae lineage.

Author Response: We agree, and have added the following text to the discussion:

Recent work has greatly expanded the number of spider genomes available for analysis, and thus considering how C. darwini relates to T. clavipes bears some brief discussion. Currently, C. darwini and T. clavipes are catalogued as representatives of the same family, Araneidae [25]. However, Kuntner et al. [26] consider Trichonephila as member of Nephilidae, and Caerostris as member of Araneidae, both families being true orb-weavers, Orbipurae. This is because Araneidae as currently circumscribed is poorly defined and ancient [26]. Regardless of which family classification is being followed, the current evidence dates the most recent common ancestor of Caerostris darwini and Trichonephila clavipes to between 62 and >200 million years ago, albeit with large confidence intervals [18,19,26].

2) The authors mention twice that “C. darwini...whose dragline is the toughest known biomaterial on Earth” (Abstract) and “…to create the toughest silks that have been documented to date [3]”. (Introduction). Undoubtedly, C. darwini spins one of the toughest spider silks, however, other spiders such Argiope aurantia (see Madurga et al., Scientific Reports 6:18991 (2016)) show comparable or even higher values of work to fracture. Therefore, I would recommend to downgrade the previous sentences to “… whose drageline is one of the toughest known biomaterials on Earth” and “…to create one of the toughest silks …”.

Author Response: We agree, and have edited the abstract and introductory text as suggested.

3) The authors rise the critical question of gene expression at several points along the manuscript: “These observations motivated further work …as well as their presumably complex expression across morphologically distinct silk glands” (Introduction) and “Previous work has demonstrated that spidroins assigned to a particular gene class are not exclusively transcribed in the silk gland in which the gene is assigned” (Results, Line 282). I fully agree with this view of the Authors and I think it is worth highlighting that similar conclusions are found through the proteomic analysis of protein expression of silk glands in orb-weaving spiders (Jorge et al., J. Exp. Zool. Part B, https://doi.org/10.1002/jez.b.23117).

Author Response: Thanks to the reviewer for this very recent reference! We have included this reference and a note of this point in the discussion.

In results: “… with proteomic analyses also indicating diverse protein expression across silk glands [24]”

In discussion: “… On this particular point, we note very recent work which reached similar conclusions from analysis of protein expression of silk glands in orb-weaving spiders as well [24], further supporting that diverse spidroin expression is functionally consequential.”

Reviewer #2: Some minor suggestions:

1. As bulky amount of data was presented, descriptions linking to methods in the main text could be more specific, for example, “……for along with those we previously reported in T. clavipes (Methods)” (line 198), which part of the “Method”?

Author Response: Where possible we have indicated a sub-header where in methods details could be found.

2. How to approach some of the data in detail? For example, “three C. darwini spidroins – Sp_81.2, SpL_133.2, and SpL_4399.2 – eluded assignment to any of the previously established classes based on sequence homology alone (line 187-188)" but it’s not very direct to get these sequences and the relevant analysis, which is actually of real interest.

Author Response: We have now provided the amino acid sequences of spidroins we initially characterized in C. darwini (Supplementary Data 1). The homology characterization experiments are results of interpreting BLAST results using these sequences against the catalog of spidroins that we previously curated (described in methods with details of sequences available in Supplementary Table 10). Spidroins were defined and identified by (i) the presence of coding repetitive motifs, (ii) blast protein / nucleotide sequence alignments of N and C-terminal domains with the N/C terminal domains of established, canonical spidroins, (iii) expression in silk glands, and (iv) manual review and guidance from domain-expert collaborators. We have added details to methods (L210 – 223).

4 May 2022

Characterization of the genome and silk-gland transcriptomes of Darwin’s bark spider (Caerostris darwini)

PONE-D-22-01083R1

Dear Dr. Voight,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Serena Aceto, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: The paper is acceptable for publication in its present form. The authors have addressed all my previous concerns.

Reviewer #2: The authors presented genomic dissection of Darwin’s bark spider, Caerostris darwini, and focused on the new putative spidroin genes. The data has been clearly and systematically presented.

This manuscript is therefore suggested for direct acceptance.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

26 May 2022

PONE-D-22-01083R1

Characterization of the genome and silk-gland transcriptomes of Darwin’s bark spider (Caerostris darwini)

Dear Dr. Voight:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr Serena Aceto

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Table 1

Summary statistics for the C. darwini genome and transcriptome assemblies.

Estimated Genome Size
Genome Sizea:	1.81 Gb
Genome Assembly	“Full” b	“Annotated” c
Assembly Size:	1.53 Gb	1.45 Gb
	1.51 Gb non-gap	1.43 Gb non-gap
% Genome Captured:	84.9%	80.4%
Number of Contigs:	253,859	465,207
N50 Contig Size:	87,597 bp	94,553 bp
Number of Scaffolds:	232,896	45,784
N50 Scaffold Size:	453,395 bp	489,784 bp
Largest Scaffold:	4,645,134 bp	4,645,134 bp
Scaffolds >100 kb:	3082	3082
BUSCO % recoverede:	94.8%	95.2%
Transcriptome Assembly	“All Isolates”
Read Input:	6.19 x 108 reads
Number of Transcripts:	1,056,281
N50 Transcript Contig Size:	911 bp
BUSCO % recoverede:	97.5%

Statistics regarding construction of the draft meta-assembled genome and “all isolates” transcriptome:

a genome size estimate calculated based on k-mer frequency (K = 25 scale);

b gap-closed meta-assembly of AllPaths LG + SOAPdenovo2 + Platanus (minimum scaffold length = 100 bp);

c gap-closed meta-assembly of AllPaths LG + SOAPdenovo2 + Platanus (minimum scaffold length = 1,000 bp + 49 additional scaffolds containing BLAST hits for previously published spider spidroin gene sequences);

d unique QC-filtered paired and single reads remapped to assembly;

e completeness based upon matches to 2,058 I. scapularis BUSCO loci. Additional genome assembly metrics are provided in and for transcriptome metrics.

Table 2

Spidroin repeat motif summary for C. darwini and motif sharing with T. clavipes.

Metric	Count
Number of Motif Variant Sequences types detected	2771
Types private to C. darwini (%)	1493 (53.9)
Types private to T. clavipes (%)	403 (14.5)
Shared between C. darwini and T. clavipes (%)	875 (31.6)
Number of defined Motif Groups	140
Number of defined Motif Sub-groups	302
Number after variant descriptions collapsed	246
Total Motif Occurrences observed for n = 38 C. darwini spidroin or spidroin-like genes	6950
Total Motif Occurrences observed for n = 28 T. clavipes spidroin or spidroin-like genes	4074