4.7 Article

The evolution of hexapod engrailed-family genes: evidence for conservation and concerted evolution

Journal

PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY B-BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES
Volume 273, Issue 1595, Pages 1733-1742

Publisher

ROYAL SOC
DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2006.3497

Keywords

engrailed; invected; Hexapoda; gene duplication; concerted evolution; gene conversion

Funding

  1. Wellcome Trust Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Phylogenetic analyses imply that multiple engrailed-family gene duplications occurred during hexapod evolution, a view supported by previous reports of only a single engrailed-family gene in members of the grasshopper genus Schistocerca and in the beetle Tribolium castaneum. Here, we report the cloning of a second engrailed-family gene from Schistocerca gregaria and present evidence for two engrailed-family genes from four additional hexapod species. We also report the existence of a second engrailed-family gene in the Tribolium genome. We suggest that the engrailed and invected genes of Drosophila melanogaster have existed as a conserved gene cassette throughout holometabolous insect evolution. In total 11 phylogenetically diverse hexapod orders are now known to contain species that possess two engrailed family paralogues, with in each case only one paralogue encoding the RS-motif, a characteristic feature of holometabolous insect invected proteins. We propose that the, homeoboxes of hexapod engrailed-family paralogues are evolving in a concerted fashion, resulting in gene trees that overestimate the frequency of gene duplication. We present new phylogenetic analyses using non-homeodomain amino acid sequence that support this view. The S. gregaria engrailed-family paralogues provide strong evidence that concerted evolution might in part be explained by recurrent gene conversion. Finally, we hypothesize that the RS-motif is part of a serine-rich domain targeted for phosphorylation.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available