Anatomical Contributions to Hylobatid Taxonomy and Adaptation

Compared with the great apes, the small-bodied hylobatids were treated historically as a relatively uniform group with 2 genera, Hylobates and the larger-bodied Symphalangus. Four genera are now recognized, each with a different chromosome number: Hoolock (hoolock) (38), Hylobates (44), Nomascus (crested gibbon) (52), and Symphalangus (siamang) (50). Previous morphological studies based on relative bone lengths, e.g., intermembral indices; molar tooth sizes; and body masses did not distinguish the 4 genera from each other. We applied quantitative anatomical methods to test the hypothesis that each genus can be differentiated from the others using the relative distribution of body mass to the forelimbs and hind limbs. Based on dissections of 13 hylobatids from captive facilities, our findings demonstrate that each of the 4 genera has a distinct pattern of body mass distribution. For example, the adult Hoolock has limb proportions of nearly equal mass, a pattern that differentiates it from species in the genus Hylobates, e.g., H. lar (lar gibbon), H. moloch (Javan gibbon), H. pileatus (pileated gibbon), Nomascus, and Symphalangus. Hylobates is distinct in having heavy hind limbs. Although Symphalangus has been treated as a scaled up version of Hylobates, its forelimb exceeds its hind limb mass, an unusual primate pattern otherwise found only in orangutans. This research provides new information on whole body anatomy and adds to the genetic, ecological, and behavioral evidence for clarifying the taxonomy of the hylobatids. The research also underscores the important contribution of studies on rare species in captivity

Mitochondrial evidence for multiple radiations in the evolutionary history of small apes

Background: Gibbons or small apes inhabit tropical and subtropical rain forests in Southeast Asia and adjacent regions, and are, next to great apes, our closest living relatives. With up to 16 species, gibbons form the most diverse group of living hominoids, but the number of taxa, their phylogenetic relationships and their phylogeography is controversial. To further the discussion of these issues we analyzed the complete mitochondrial cytochrome b gene from 85 individuals representing all gibbon species, including most subspecies. Results: Based on phylogenetic tree reconstructions, several monophyletic clades were detected, corresponding to genera, species and subspecies. A significantly supported branching pattern was obtained for members of the genus Nomascus but not for the genus Hylobates. The phylogenetic relationships among the four genera were also not well resolved. Nevertheless, the new data permitted the estimation of divergence ages for all taxa for the first time and showed that most lineages emerged during four short time periods. In the first, between ~6.7 and ~8.3 mya, the four gibbon genera diverged from each other. In the second (~3.0 - ~3.9 mya) and in the third period (~1.3 - ~1.8 mya), Hylobates and Hoolock differentiated. Finally, between ~0.5 and ~1.1 mya, Hylobates lar diverged into subspecies. In contrast, differentiation of Nomascus into species and subspecies was a continuous and prolonged process lasting from ~4.2 until ~0.4 mya. Conclusions: Although relationships among gibbon taxa on various levels remain unresolved, the present study provides a more complete view of the evolutionary and biogeographic history of the hylobatid family, and a more solid genetic basis for the taxonomic classification of the surviving taxa. We also show that mtDNA constitutes a useful marker for the accurate identification of individual gibbons, a tool which is urgently required to locate hunting hotspots and select individuals for captive breeding programs. Further studies including nuclear sequence data are necessary to completely understand the phylogeny and phylogeography of gibbons

A Chromosomal Inversion Unique to the Northern White-Cheeked Gibbon

The gibbon family belongs to the superfamily Hominoidea and includes 15 species divided into four genera. Each genus possesses a distinct karyotype with chromosome numbers varying from 38 to 52. This diversity is the result of numerous chromosomal changes that have accumulated during the evolution of the gibbon lineage, a quite unique feature in comparison with other hominoids and most of the other primates. Some gibbon species and subspecies rank among the most endangered primates in the world. Breeding programs can be extremely challenging and hybridization plays an important role within the factors responsible for the decline of captive gibbons. With less than 500 individuals left in the wild, the northern white-cheeked gibbon (Nomascus leucogenys leucogenys, NLE) is the most endangered primate in a successful captive breeding program. We present here the analysis of an inversion that we show being specific for the northern white-cheeked gibbon and can be used as one of the criteria to distinguish this subspecies from other gibbon taxa. The availability of the sequence spanning for one of the breakpoints of the inversion allows detecting it by a simple PCR test also on low quality DNA. Our results demonstrate the important role of genomics in providing tools for conservation efforts

Centromere remodeling in Hoolock leuconedys (Hylobatidae) by a new transposable element unique to the gibbons

Gibbons (Hylobatidae) shared a common ancestor with the other hominoids only 15-18 million years ago. Nevertheless, gibbons show very distinctive features that include heavily rearranged chromosomes. Previous observations indicate that this phenomenon may be linked to the attenuated epigenetic repression of transposable elements (TEs) in gibbon species. Here we describe the massive expansion of a repeat in almost all the centromeres of the eastern hoolock gibbon (Hoolock leuconedys). We discovered that this repeat is a new composite TE originating from the combination of portions of three other elements (L1ME5, AluSz6, and SVA-A) and thus named it LAVA. We determined that this repeat is found in all the gibbons but does not occur in other hominoids. Detailed investigation of 46 different LAVA elements revealed that the majority of them have target site duplications (TSDs) and a poly-A tail, suggesting that they have been retrotransposing in the gibbon genome. Although we did not find a direct correlation between the emergence of LAVA elements and human-gibbon synteny breakpoints, this new composite transposable element is another mark of the great plasticity of the gibbon genome. Moreover, the centromeric expansion of LAVA insertions in the hoolock closely resembles the massive centromeric expansion of the KERV-1 retroelement reported for wallaby (marsupial) interspecific hybrids. The similarity between the two phenomena is consistent with the hypothesis that evolution of the gibbons is characterized by defects in epigenetic repression of TEs, perhaps triggered by interspecific hybridization. © 2012 The Author(s)

An alu-based phylogeny of gibbons (hylobatidae)

Gibbons (Hylobatidae) are small, arboreal apes indigenous to Southeast Asia that diverged from other apes ∼15-18 Ma. Extant lineages radiated rapidly 6-10 Ma and are organized into four genera (Hylobates, Hoolock, Symphalangus, and Nomascus) consisting of 12-19 species. The use of short interspersed elements (SINEs) as phylogenetic markers has seen recent popularity due to several desirable characteristics: the ancestral state of a locus is known to be the absence of an element, rare potentially homoplasious events are relatively easy to resolve, and samples can be quickly and inexpensively genotyped. During radiation of primates, one particular family of SINEs, the Alu family, has proliferated in primate genomes. Nomascus leucogenys (northern white-cheeked gibbon) sequences were analyzed for repetitive content with RepeatMasker using a custom library. The sequences containing Alu elements identified as members of a gibbon-specific subfamily were then compared with orthologous positions in other primate genomes. A primate phylogenetic panel consisting of 18 primate species, including 13 gibbon species representing all four extant genera, was assayed for all loci, and a total of 125 gibbon-specific Alu insertions were identified. The resulting amplification patterns were used to generate a phylogenetic tree. We demonstrate significant support for Symphalangus as the most basal lineage within the family. Our findings also place Nomascus as a derived lineage, sister to Hoolock, with the Nomascus-Hoolock clade sister to Hylobates. Further, our analysis groups N. leucogenys and Nomascus siki as sister taxa to the exclusion of the other Nomascus species assayed. This study represents the first use of SINEs to determine the genus level phylogenetic relationships within the family Hylobatidae. These relationships have been resolved with robust support at most internal nodes, demonstrating the utility of SINE-based phylogenetic analysis. We postulate that hybridization and rapid radiation may have contributed to the complex and contradictory findings of the previous studies. Our findings will aid in the conservation of these threatened primates and inform future studies of the biogeographical history and distribution of modern gibbon species. © 2012 The Author

A High-Resolution Map of Synteny Disruptions in Gibbon and Human Genomes

Gibbons are part of the same superfamily (Hominoidea) as humans and great apes, but their karyotype has diverged faster from the common hominoid ancestor. At least 24 major chromosome rearrangements are required to convert the presumed ancestral karyotype of gibbons into that of the hominoid ancestor. Up to 28 additional rearrangements distinguish the various living species from the common gibbon ancestor. Using the northern white-cheeked gibbon (2n = 52) (Nomascus leucogenys leucogenys) as a model, we created a high-resolution map of the homologous regions between the gibbon and human. The positions of 100 synteny breakpoints relative to the assembled human genome were determined at a resolution of about 200 kb. Interestingly, 46% of the gibbon–human synteny breakpoints occur in regions that correspond to segmental duplications in the human lineage, indicating a common source of plasticity leading to a different outcome in the two species. Additionally, the full sequences of 11 gibbon BACs spanning evolutionary breakpoints reveal either segmental duplications or interspersed repeats at the exact breakpoint locations. No specific sequence element appears to be common among independent rearrangements. We speculate that the extraordinarily high level of rearrangements seen in gibbons may be due to factors that increase the incidence of chromosome breakage or fixation of the derivative chromosomes in a homozygous state

Evolutionary Breakpoints in the Gibbon Suggest Association between Cytosine Methylation and Karyotype Evolution

Gibbon species have accumulated an unusually high number of chromosomal changes since diverging from the common hominoid ancestor 15–18 million years ago. The cause of this increased rate of chromosomal rearrangements is not known, nor is it known if genome architecture has a role. To address this question, we analyzed sequences spanning 57 breaks of synteny between northern white-cheeked gibbons (Nomascus l. leucogenys) and humans. We find that the breakpoint regions are enriched in segmental duplications and repeats, with Alu elements being the most abundant. Alus located near the gibbon breakpoints (<150 bp) have a higher CpG content than other Alus. Bisulphite allelic sequencing reveals that these gibbon Alus have a lower average density of methylated cytosine that their human orthologues. The finding of higher CpG content and lower average CpG methylation suggests that the gibbon Alu elements are epigenetically distinct from their human orthologues. The association between undermethylation and chromosomal rearrangement in gibbons suggests a correlation between epigenetic state and structural genome variation in evolution

Primate TNF Promoters Reveal Markers of Phylogeny and Evolution of Innate Immunity

Background. Tumor necrosis factor (TNF) is a critical cytokine in the immune response whose transcriptional activation is controlled by a proximal promoter region that is highly conserved in mammals and, in particular, primates. Specific single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) upstream of the proximal human TNF promoter have been identified, which are markers of human ancestry. Methodology/Principal findings. Using a comparative genomics approach we show that certain fixed genetic differences in the TNF promoter serve as markers of primate speciation. We also demonstrate that distinct alleles of most human TNF promoter SNPs are identical to fixed nucleotides in primate TNF promoters. Furthermore, we identify fixed genetic differences within the proximal TNF promoters of Asian apes that do not occur in African ape or human TNF promoters. Strikingly, protein-DNA binding assays and gene reporter assays comparing these Asian ape TNF promoters to African ape and human TNF promoters demonstrate that, unlike the fixed differences that we define that are associated with primate phylogeny, these Asian ape-specific fixed differences impair transcription factor binding at an Sp1 site and decrease TNF transcription induced by bacterial stimulation of macrophages. Conclusions/significance. Here, we have presented the broadest interspecies comparison of a regulatory region of an innate immune response gene to date. We have characterized nucleotide positions in Asian ape TNF promoters that underlie functional changes in cell type- and stimulus-specific activation of the TNF gene. We have also identified ancestral TNF promoter nucleotide states in the primate lineage that correspond to human SNP alleles. These findings may reflect evolution of Asian and African apes under a distinct set of infectious disease pressures involving the innate immune response and TNF

A New Generic Name for the Hoolock Gibbon (Hylobatidae)

Contrary to usual practice, the generic nomen Bunopithecus is not applicable to hoolock gibbons. We recount the history of its application and explain why it is spurious. We supply a new generic name, list the characters and content of the genus, and compare it to the other 3 genera of the Hylobatidae