4.5 Article

Genome streamlining via complete loss of introns has occurred multiple times in lichenized fungal mitochondria

期刊

ECOLOGY AND EVOLUTION
卷 9, 期 7, 页码 4245-4263

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/ece3.5056

关键词

genome reduction; homing endonucleases; introns; lichen; parasitic genetic elements; symbiosis

资金

  1. National Science Foundation's Dimensions of Biodiversity Program [1432629, 1542639]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Reductions in genome size and complexity are a hallmark of obligate symbioses. The mitochondrial genome displays clear examples of these reductions, with the ancestral alpha-proteobacterial genome size and gene number having been reduced by orders of magnitude in most descendent modern mitochondrial genomes. Here, we examine patterns of mitochondrial evolution specifically looking at intron size, number, and position across 58 species from 21 genera of lichenized Ascomycete fungi, representing a broad range of fungal diversity and niches. Our results show that the cox1gene always contained the highest number of introns out of all the mitochondrial protein-coding genes, that high intron sequence similarity (>90%) can be maintained between different genera, and that lichens have undergone at least two instances of complete, genome-wide intron loss consistent with evidence for genome streamlining via loss of parasitic, noncoding DNA, in Phlyctis boliviensisand Graphis lineola. Notably, however, lichenized fungi have not only undergone intron loss but in some instances have expanded considerably in size due to intron proliferation (e.g., Alectoria fallacina and Parmotrema neotropicum), even between closely related sister species (e.g., Cladonia). These results shed light on the highly dynamic mitochondrial evolution that is occurring in lichens and suggest that these obligate symbiotic organisms are in some cases undergoing recent, broad-scale genome streamlining via loss of protein-coding genes as well as noncoding, parasitic DNA elements.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据