Chimpanzee and Human Y Chromosomes Are Remarkably Divergent in Structure and Gene Content

LetterThe human Y chromosome began to evolve from an autosome hundreds of millions of years ago, acquiring a sex-determining function and undergoing a series of inversions that suppressed crossing over with the X chromosome[1, 2]. Little is known about the recent evolution of the Y chromosome because only the human Y chromosome has been fully sequenced. Prevailing theories hold that Y chromosomes evolve by gene loss, the pace of which slows over time, eventually leading to a paucity of genes, and stasis [3, 4]. These theories have been buttressed by partial sequence data from newly emergent plant and animal Y chromosomes [5, 6, 7, 8], but they have not been tested in older, highly evolved Y chromosomes such as that of humans. Here we finished sequencing of the male-specific region of the Y chromosome (MSY) in our closest living relative, the chimpanzee, achieving levels of accuracy and completion previously reached for the human MSY. By comparing the MSYs of the two species we show that they differ radically in sequence structure and gene content, indicating rapid evolution during the past 6 million years. The chimpanzee MSY contains twice as many massive palindromes as the human MSY, yet it has lost large fractions of the MSY protein-coding genes and gene families present in the last common ancestor. We suggest that the extraordinary divergence of the chimpanzee and human MSYs was driven by four synergistic factors: the prominent role of the MSY in sperm production, ‘genetic hitchhiking’ effects in the absence of meiotic crossing over, frequent ectopic recombination within the MSY, and species differences in mating behaviour. Although genetic decay may be the principal dynamic in the evolution of newly emergent Y chromosomes, wholesale renovation is the paramount theme in the continuing evolution of chimpanzee, human and perhaps other older MSYs.National Institutes of Health (U.S.)Howard Hughes Medical Institut

Evidence for Restriction of Ancient Primate Gammaretroviruses by APOBEC3 but Not TRIM5α Proteins

Because of evolutionary pressures imposed through episodic colonization by retroviruses, many mammals express factors, such as TRIM5α and APOBEC3 proteins, that directly restrict retroviral replication. TRIM5 and APOBEC restriction factors are most often studied in the context of modern primate lentiviruses, but it is likely that ancient retroviruses imposed the selective pressure that is evident in primate TRIM5 and APOBEC3 genes. Moreover, these antiretroviral factors have been shown to act against a variety of retroviruses, including gammaretroviruses. Endogenous retroviruses can provide a ‘fossil record’ of extinct retroviruses and perhaps evidence of ancient TRIM5 and APOBEC3 antiviral activity. Here, we investigate whether TRIM5 and APOBEC3 proteins restricted the replication of two groups of gammaretroviruses that were endogenized in the past few million years. These endogenous retroviruses appear quite widespread in the genomes of old world primates but failed to colonize the human germline. Our analyses suggest that TRIM5α proteins did not pose a major barrier to the cross-species transmission of these two families of gammaretroviruses, and did not contribute to their extinction. However, we uncovered extensive evidence for inactivation of ancient gammaretroviruses through the action of APOBEC3 cytidine deaminases. Interestingly, the identities of the cytidine deaminases responsible for inactivation appear to have varied in both a virus and host species–dependent manner. Overall, sequence analyses and reconstitution of ancient retroviruses from remnants that have been preserved in the genomes of modern organisms offer the opportunity to probe and potentially explain the evolutionary history of host defenses against retroviruses

Retrotransposon-centered analysis of piRNA targeting shows a shift from active to passive retrotransposon transcription in developing mouse testes

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Piwi-associated RNAs (piRNAs) bind transcripts from retrotransposable elements (RTE) in mouse germline cells and seemingly act as guides for genomic methylation, thereby repressing the activity of RTEs. It is currently unknown if and how Piwi proteins distinguish RTE transcripts from other cellular RNAs. During germline development, the main target of piRNAs switch between different types of RTEs. Using the piRNA targeting of RTEs as an indicator of RTE activity, and considering the entire population of genomic RTE loci along with their age and location, this study aims at further elucidating the dynamics of RTE activity during mouse germline development.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Due to the inherent sequence redundancy between RTE loci, assigning piRNA targeting to specific loci is problematic. This limits the analysis, although certain features of piRNA targeting of RTE loci are apparent. As expected, young RTEs display a much higher level of piRNA targeting than old RTEs. Further, irrespective of age, RTE loci near protein-coding coding genes are targeted to a greater extent than RTE loci far from genes. During development, a shift in piRNA targeting is observed, with a clear increase in the relative piRNA targeting of RTEs residing within boundaries of protein-coding gene transcripts.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Reanalyzing published piRNA sequences and taking into account the features of individual RTE loci provide novel insight into the activity of RTEs during development. The obtained results are consistent with some degree of proportionality between what transcripts become substrates for Piwi protein complexes and the level by which the transcripts are present in the cell. A transition from active transcription of RTEs to passive co-transcription of RTE sequences residing within protein-coding transcripts appears to take place in postnatal development. Hence, the previously reported increase in piRNA targeting of SINEs in postnatal testis development does not necessitate widespread active transcription of SINEs, but may simply be explained by the prevalence of SINEs residing in introns.</p