» Articles » PMID: 35271794

Probing the Genomic Limits of De-extinction in the Christmas Island Rat

Overview
Journal Curr Biol
Publisher Cell Press
Specialty Biology
Date 2022 Mar 10
PMID 35271794
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Three principal methods are under discussion as possible pathways to "true" de-extinction; i.e., back-breeding, cloning, and genetic engineering. Of these, while the latter approach is most likely to apply to the largest number of extinct species, its potential is constrained by the degree to which the extinct species genome can be reconstructed. We explore this question using the extinct Christmas Island rat (Rattus macleari) as a model, an endemic rat species that was driven extinct between 1898 and 1908. We first re-sequenced its genome to an average of >60× coverage, then mapped it to the reference genomes of different Rattus species. We then explored how evolutionary divergence from the extant reference genome affected the fraction of the Christmas Island rat genome that could be recovered. Our analyses show that even when the extremely high-quality Norway brown rat (R. norvegicus) is used as a reference, nearly 5% of the genome sequence is unrecoverable, with 1,661 genes recovered at lower than 90% completeness, and 26 completely absent. Furthermore, we find the distribution of regions affected is not random, but for example, if 90% completeness is used as the cutoff, genes related to immune response and olfaction are excessively affected. Ultimately, our approach demonstrates the importance of applying similar analyses to candidates for de-extinction through genome editing in order to provide critical baseline information about how representative the edited form would be of the extinct species.

Citing Articles

Whole genomes from the extinct Xerces Blue butterfly can help identify declining insect species.

de-Dios T, Fontsere C, Renom P, Stiller J, Llovera L, Uliano-Silva M Elife. 2024; 12.

PMID: 39365295 PMC: 11466284. DOI: 10.7554/eLife.87928.


Molecular de-extinction of ancient antimicrobial peptides enabled by machine learning.

Maasch J, Torres M, Melo M, de la Fuente-Nunez C Cell Host Microbe. 2023; 31(8):1260-1274.e6.

PMID: 37516110 PMC: 11625410. DOI: 10.1016/j.chom.2023.07.001.


Ancient DNA: the past for the future.

Chen N, Nedoluzhko A BMC Genomics. 2023; 24(1):309.

PMID: 37291482 PMC: 10251542. DOI: 10.1186/s12864-023-09396-0.


What it would take to bring back the dodo.

Callaway E Nature. 2023; 614(7948):402.

PMID: 36765251 DOI: 10.1038/d41586-023-00379-5.

References
1.
Benton M, Donoghue P . Paleontological evidence to date the tree of life. Mol Biol Evol. 2006; 24(1):26-53. DOI: 10.1093/molbev/msl150. View

2.
Yang Z . PAML 4: phylogenetic analysis by maximum likelihood. Mol Biol Evol. 2007; 24(8):1586-91. DOI: 10.1093/molbev/msm088. View

3.
Schubert M, Ermini L, Der Sarkissian C, Jonsson H, Ginolhac A, Schaefer R . Characterization of ancient and modern genomes by SNP detection and phylogenomic and metagenomic analysis using PALEOMIX. Nat Protoc. 2014; 9(5):1056-82. DOI: 10.1038/nprot.2014.063. View

4.
Wales N, Caroe C, Sandoval-Velasco M, Gamba C, Barnett R, Alfredo Samaniego J . New insights on single-stranded versus double-stranded DNA library preparation for ancient DNA. Biotechniques. 2015; 59(6):368-71. DOI: 10.2144/000114364. View

5.
Paabo S . Ancient DNA: extraction, characterization, molecular cloning, and enzymatic amplification. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1989; 86(6):1939-43. PMC: 286820. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.86.6.1939. View