Analysis of Retrotransposon Structural Diversity Uncovers Properties and Propensities in Angiosperm Genome Evolution
Overview
Authors
Affiliations
Analysis of LTR retrotransposon structures in five diploid angiosperm genomes uncovered very different relative levels of different types of genomic diversity. All species exhibited recent LTR retrotransposon mobility and also high rates of DNA removal by unequal homologous recombination and illegitimate recombination. The larger plant genomes contained many LTR retrotransposon families with >10,000 copies per haploid genome, whereas the smaller genomes contained few or no LTR retrotransposon families with >1,000 copies, suggesting that this differential potential for retroelement amplification is a primary factor in angiosperm genome size variation. The average ratios of transition to transversion mutations (Ts/Tv) in diverging LTRs were >1.5 for each species studied, suggesting that these elements are mostly 5-methylated at cytosines in an epigenetically silenced state. However, the diploid wheat Triticum monococcum and barley have unusually low Ts/Tv values (respectively, 1.9 and 1.6) compared with maize (3.9), medicago (3.6), and lotus (2.5), suggesting that this silencing is less complete in the two Triticeae. Such characteristics as the ratios of point mutations to indels (insertions and deletions) and the relative efficiencies of DNA removal by unequal homologous recombination compared with illegitimate recombination were highly variable between species. These latter variations did not correlate with genome size or phylogenetic relatedness, indicating that they frequently change during the evolutionary descent of plant lineages. In sum, the results indicate that the different sizes, contents, and structures of angiosperm genomes are outcomes of the same suite of mechanistic processes, but acting with different relative efficiencies in different plant lineages.
Extensive genome evolution distinguishes maize within a stable tribe of grasses.
Stitzer M, Seetharam A, Scheben A, Hsu S, Schulz A, AuBuchon-Elder T bioRxiv. 2025; .
PMID: 39896679 PMC: 11785232. DOI: 10.1101/2025.01.22.633974.
Yurkevich O, Samatadze T, Zoshchuk S, Amosova A, Muravenko O Int J Mol Sci. 2024; 25(15).
PMID: 39126057 PMC: 11312482. DOI: 10.3390/ijms25158489.
Ganguly A, Amin S, Al-Amin , Tasnim Chowdhury F, Khan H, Islam M J Genet Eng Biotechnol. 2024; 22(2):100376.
PMID: 38797551 PMC: 11015510. DOI: 10.1016/j.jgeb.2024.100376.
GABA does not regulate stomatal CO2 signalling in Arabidopsis.
Piechatzek A, Feng X, Sai N, Yi C, Hurgobin B, Lewsey M J Exp Bot. 2024; 75(21):6856-6871.
PMID: 38628155 PMC: 11565201. DOI: 10.1093/jxb/erae168.
Munasinghe M, Read A, Stitzer M, Song B, Menard C, Ma K PLoS Genet. 2023; 19(12):e1011086.
PMID: 38134220 PMC: 10773942. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1011086.