4.8 Article

DNMT1 mutant ants develop normally but have disrupted oogenesis

期刊

NATURE COMMUNICATIONS
卷 14, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41467-023-37945-4

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

While the function of DNA methylation in arthropods is poorly understood, studies in eusocial insects have suggested its role in caste development. However, the findings are inconsistent and controversial. By using CRISPR/Cas9 to mutate DNMT1 in clonal raider ants, the authors demonstrate that ants can undergo normal development without DNMT1 or DNA methylation, contrary to mammals. They also find no evidence of DNA methylation regulating caste development, but show that DNMT1 plays a crucial but unknown role in the insect germline.
Although DNA methylation is an important gene regulatory mechanism in mammals, its function in arthropods remains poorly understood. Studies in eusocial insects have argued for its role in caste development by regulating gene expression and splicing. However, such findings are not always consistent across studies, and have therefore remained controversial. Here we use CRISPR/Cas9 to mutate the maintenance DNA methyltransferase DNMT1 in the clonal raider ant, Ooceraea biroi. Mutants have greatly reduced DNA methylation, but no obvious developmental phenotypes, demonstrating that, unlike mammals, ants can undergo normal development without DNMT1 or DNA methylation. Additionally, we find no evidence of DNA methylation regulating caste development. However, mutants are sterile, whereas in wild-type ants, DNMT1 is localized to the ovaries and maternally provisioned into nascent oocytes. This supports the idea that DNMT1 plays a crucial but unknown role in the insect germline. The role of DNA methylation in insects is poorly understood. Here, the authors knock out the DNA methyltransferase DNMT1 in an ant and find no obvious effects on development, rather showing that this enzyme seems to play a crucial role during early oogenesis.

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

4.8
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