167 research outputs found

    Three divergent lineages within an Australian marsupial ( Petrogale penicillata) suggest multiple major refugia for mesic taxa in southeast Australia

    Get PDF
    Mesic southeastern Australia represents the continent's ancestral biome and is highly biodiverse, yet its phylogeographic history remains poorly understood. Here, we examine mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) control region and microsatellite diversity in the brush-tailed rock-wallaby (Petrogale penicillata; n=279 from 31 sites), to assess historic evolutionary and biogeographic processes in southeastern Australia. Our results (mtDNA, microsatellites) confirmed three geographically discrete and genetically divergent lineages within brush-tailed rock-wallabies, whose divergence appears to date to the mid-Pleistocene. These three lineages had been hypothesized previously but data were limited. While the Northern and Central lineages were separated by a known biogeographic barrier (Hunter Valley), the boundary between the Central and Southern lineages was not. We propose that during particularly cool glacial cycles, the high peaks of the Great Dividing Range and the narrow adjacent coastal plain resulted in a more significant north-south barrier for mesic taxa in southeastern Australia than has been previously appreciated. Similarly, located phylogeographic breaks in codistributed species highlight the importance of these regions in shaping the distribution of biodiversity in southeastern Australia and suggest the existence of three major refuge areas during the Pleistocene. Substructuring within the northern lineage also suggests the occurrence of multiple local refugia during some glacial cycles. Within the three major lineages, most brush-tailed rock-wallaby populations were locally highly structured, indicating limited dispersal by both sexes. The three identified lineages represent evolutionarily significant units and should be managed to maximize the retention of genetic diversity within this threatened species

    Limited introgression between rock-wallabies with extensive chromosomal rearrangements

    Get PDF
    Chromosome rearrangements can result in the rapid evolution of hybrid incompatibilities. Robertsonian fusions, particularly those with monobrachial homology, can drive reproductive isolation amongst recently diverged taxa. The recent radiation of rock-wallabies (genus Petrogale) is an important model to explore the role of Robertsonian fusions in speciation. Here, we pursue that goal using an extensive sampling of populations and genomes of Petrogale from north-eastern Australia. In contrast to previous assessments using mitochondrial DNA or nuclear microsatellite loci, genomic data are able to separate the most closely related species and to resolve their divergence histories. Both phylogenetic and population genetic analyses indicate introgression between two species that differ by a single Robertsonian fusion. Based on the available data, there is also evidence for introgression between two species which share complex chromosomal rearrangements. However, the remaining results show no consistent signature of introgression amongst species pairs and where evident, indicate generally low introgression overall. X-linked loci have elevated divergence compared with autosomal loci indicating a potential role for genic evolution to produce reproductive isolation in concert with chromosome change. Our results highlight the value of genome scale data in evaluating the role of Robertsonian fusions and structural variation in divergence, speciation, and patterns of molecular evolution

    Chromosomal speciation in the genomics era: Disentangling phylogenetic evolution of rock-wallabies

    Get PDF
    The association of chromosome rearrangements (CRs) with speciation is well established, and there is a long history of theory and evidence relating to “chromosomal speciation.” Genomic sequencing has the potential to provide new insights into how reorganization of genome structure promotes divergence, and in model systems has demonstrated reduced gene flow in rearranged segments. However, there are limits to what we can understand from a small number of model systems, which each only tell us about one episode of chromosomal speciation. Progressing from patterns of association between chromosome (and genic) change, to understanding processes of speciation requires both comparative studies across diverse systems and integration of genome-scale sequence comparisons with other lines of evidence. Here, we showcase a promising example of chromosomal speciation in a non-model organism, the endemic Australian marsupial genus Petrogale. We present initial phylogenetic results from exon-capture that resolve a history of divergence associated with extensive and repeated CRs. Yet it remains challenging to disentangle gene tree heterogeneity caused by recent divergence and gene flow in this and other such recent radiations. We outline a way forward for better integration of comparative genomic sequence data with evidence from molecular cytogenetics, and analyses of shifts in the recombination landscape and potential disruption of meiotic segregation and epigenetic programming. In all likelihood, CRs impact multiple cellular processes and these effects need to be considered together, along with effects of genic divergence. Understanding the effects of CRs together with genic divergence will require development of more integrative theory and inference methods. Together, new data and analysis tools will combine to shed light on long standing questions of how chromosome and genic divergence promote speciationThis research was supported by an Australian Research Council Discovery Grant (DP160100187) as well as and ARC Laureate Fellowship awarded to CM (ARC FL110100104)

    Ordering of mutations in preinvasive disease stages of esophageal carcinogenesis.

    Get PDF
    Cancer genome sequencing studies have identified numerous driver genes, but the relative timing of mutations in carcinogenesis remains unclear. The gradual progression from premalignant Barrett's esophagus to esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) provides an ideal model to study the ordering of somatic mutations. We identified recurrently mutated genes and assessed clonal structure using whole-genome sequencing and amplicon resequencing of 112 EACs. We next screened a cohort of 109 biopsies from 2 key transition points in the development of malignancy: benign metaplastic never-dysplastic Barrett's esophagus (NDBE; n=66) and high-grade dysplasia (HGD; n=43). Unexpectedly, the majority of recurrently mutated genes in EAC were also mutated in NDBE. Only TP53 and SMAD4 mutations occurred in a stage-specific manner, confined to HGD and EAC, respectively. Finally, we applied this knowledge to identify high-risk Barrett's esophagus in a new non-endoscopic test. In conclusion, mutations in EAC driver genes generally occur exceptionally early in disease development with profound implications for diagnostic and therapeutic strategies

    A pragmatic approach for integrating molecular tools into biodiversity conservation

    Get PDF
    Molecular tools are increasingly applied for assessing and monitoring biodiversity and informing conservation action. While recent developments in genetic and genomic methods provide greater sensitivity in analysis and the capacity to address new questions, they are not equally available to all practitioners: There is considerable bias across institutions and countries in access to technologies, funding, and training. Consequently, in many cases, more accessible traditional genetic data (e.g., microsatellites) are still utilized for making conservation decisions. Conservation approaches need to be pragmatic by tackling clearly defined management questions and using the most appropriate methods available, while maximizing the use of limited resources. Here we present some key questions to consider when applying the molecular toolbox for accessible and actionable conservation management. Finally, we highlight a number of important steps to be addressed in a collaborative way, which can facilitate the broad integration of molecular data into conservation

    Expert range maps of global mammal distributions harmonised to three taxonomic authorities

    Get PDF
    Aim: Comprehensive, global information on species' occurrences is an essential biodiversity variable and central to a range of applications in ecology, evolution, biogeography and conservation. Expert range maps often represent a species' only available distributional information and play an increasing role in conservation assessments and macroecology. We provide global range maps for the native ranges of all extant mammal species harmonised to the taxonomy of the Mammal Diversity Database (MDD) mobilised from two sources, the Handbook of the Mammals of the World (HMW) and the Illustrated Checklist of the Mammals of the World (CMW). Location: Global. Taxon: All extant mammal species. Methods: Range maps were digitally interpreted, georeferenced, error-checked and subsequently taxonomically aligned between the HMW (6253 species), the CMW (6431 species) and the MDD taxonomies (6362 species). Results: Range maps can be evaluated and visualised in an online map browser at Map of Life (mol.org) and accessed for individual or batch download for non-commercial use. Main conclusion: Expert maps of species' global distributions are limited in their spatial detail and temporal specificity, but form a useful basis for broad-scale characterizations and model-based integration with other data. We provide georeferenced range maps for the native ranges of all extant mammal species as shapefiles, with species-level metadata and source information packaged together in geodatabase format. Across the three taxonomic sources our maps entail, there are 1784 taxonomic name differences compared to the maps currently available on the IUCN Red List website. The expert maps provided here are harmonised to the MDD taxonomic authority and linked to a community of online tools that will enable transparent future updates and version control.Fil: Marsh, Charles J.. Yale University; Estados UnidosFil: Sica, Yanina. Yale University; Estados UnidosFil: Burguin, Connor. University of New Mexico; Estados UnidosFil: Dorman, Wendy A.. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: Anderson, Robert C.. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: del Toro Mijares, Isabel. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: Vigneron, Jessica G.. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: Barve, Vijay. University Of Florida. Florida Museum Of History; Estados UnidosFil: Dombrowik, Victoria L.. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: Duong, Michelle. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: Guralnick, Robert. University Of Florida. Florida Museum Of History; Estados UnidosFil: Hart, Julie A.. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: Maypole, J. Krish. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: McCall, Kira. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: Ranipeta, Ajay. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: Schuerkmann, Anna. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: Torselli, Michael A.. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: Lacher, Thomas. Texas A&M University; Estados UnidosFil: Wilson, Don E.. National Museum of Natural History; Estados UnidosFil: Abba, Agustin Manuel. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones CientĂ­ficas y TĂ©cnicas. Centro CientĂ­fico TecnolĂłgico Conicet - La Plata. Centro de Estudios ParasitolĂłgicos y de Vectores. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Ciencias Naturales y Museo. Centro de Estudios ParasitolĂłgicos y de Vectores; ArgentinaFil: Aguirre, Luis F.. Universidad Mayor de San SimĂłn; BoliviaFil: Arroyo Cabrales, JoaquĂ­n. Instituto Nacional de AntropologĂ­a E Historia, Mexico; MĂ©xicoFil: AstĂșa, Diego. Universidade Federal de Pernambuco; BrasilFil: Baker, Andrew M.. Queensland University of Technology; Australia. Queensland Museum; AustraliaFil: Braulik, Gill. University of St. Andrews; Reino UnidoFil: Braun, Janet K.. Oklahoma State University; Estados UnidosFil: Brito, Jorge. Instituto Nacional de Biodiversidad; EcuadorFil: Busher, Peter E.. Boston University; Estados UnidosFil: Burneo, Santiago F.. Pontificia Universidad CatĂłlica del Ecuador; EcuadorFil: Camacho, M. Alejandra. Pontificia Universidad CatĂłlica del Ecuador; EcuadorFil: de Almeida Chiquito, Elisandra. Universidade Federal do EspĂ­rito Santo; BrasilFil: Cook, Joseph A.. University of New Mexico; Estados UnidosFil: CuĂ©llar Soto, Erika. Sultan Qaboos University; OmĂĄnFil: Davenport, Tim R. B.. Wildlife Conservation Society; TanzaniaFil: Denys, Christiane. MusĂ©um National d'Histoire Naturelle; FranciaFil: Dickman, Christopher R.. The University Of Sydney; AustraliaFil: Eldridge, Mark D. B.. Australian Museum; AustraliaFil: Fernandez Duque, Eduardo. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: Francis, Charles M.. Environment And Climate Change Canada; CanadĂĄFil: Frankham, Greta. Australian Museum; AustraliaFil: Freitas, Thales. Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul; BrasilFil: Friend, J. Anthony. Conservation And Attractions; AustraliaFil: Giannini, Norberto Pedro. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones CientĂ­ficas y TĂ©cnicas. Centro CientĂ­fico TecnolĂłgico - TucumĂĄn. Unidad Ejecutora Lillo; ArgentinaFil: Gursky-Doyen, Sharon. Texas A&M University; Estados UnidosFil: HacklĂ€nder, Klaus. Universitat Fur Bodenkultur Wien; AustriaFil: Hawkins, Melissa. National Museum of Natural History; Estados UnidosFil: Helgen, Kristofer M.. Australian Museum; AustraliaFil: Heritage, Steven. University of Duke; Estados UnidosFil: Hinckley, Arlo. Consejo Superior de Investigaciones CientĂ­ficas. EstaciĂłn BiolĂłgica de Doñana; EspañaFil: Holden, Mary. American Museum of Natural History; Estados UnidosFil: Holekamp, Kay E.. Michigan State University; Estados UnidosFil: Humle, Tatyana. University Of Kent; Reino UnidoFil: Ibåñez Ulargui, Carlos. Consejo Superior de Investigaciones CientĂ­ficas. EstaciĂłn BiolĂłgica de Doñana; EspañaFil: Jackson, Stephen M.. Australian Museum; AustraliaFil: Janecka, Mary. University of Pittsburgh at Johnstown; Estados Unidos. University of Pittsburgh; Estados UnidosFil: Jenkins, Paula. Natural History Museum; Reino UnidoFil: Juste, Javier. Consejo Superior de Investigaciones CientĂ­ficas. EstaciĂłn BiolĂłgica de Doñana; EspañaFil: Leite, Yuri L. R.. Universidade Federal do EspĂ­rito Santo; BrasilFil: Novaes, Roberto Leonan M.. Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro; BrasilFil: Lim, Burton K.. Royal Ontario Museum; CanadĂĄFil: Maisels, Fiona G.. Wildlife Conservation Society; Estados UnidosFil: Mares, Michael A.. Oklahoma State University; Estados UnidosFil: Marsh, Helene. James Cook University; AustraliaFil: Mattioli, Stefano. UniversitĂ  degli Studi di Siena; ItaliaFil: Morton, F. Blake. University of Hull; Reino UnidoFil: Ojeda, Agustina Alejandra. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones CientĂ­ficas y TĂ©cnicas. Centro CientĂ­fico TecnolĂłgico Conicet - Mendoza. Instituto Argentino de Investigaciones de las Zonas Áridas. Provincia de Mendoza. Instituto Argentino de Investigaciones de las Zonas Áridas. Universidad Nacional de Cuyo. Instituto Argentino de Investigaciones de las Zonas Áridas; ArgentinaFil: Ordóñez Garza, NictĂ©. Instituto Nacional de Biodiversidad; EcuadorFil: Pardiñas, Ulises Francisco J.. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones CientĂ­ficas y TĂ©cnicas. Centro CientĂ­fico TecnolĂłgico Conicet - Centro Nacional PatagĂłnico. Instituto de Diversidad y EvoluciĂłn Austral; ArgentinaFil: Pavan, Mariana. Universidade de Sao Paulo; BrasilFil: Riley, Erin P.. San Diego State University; Estados UnidosFil: Rubenstein, Daniel I.. University of Princeton; Estados UnidosFil: Ruelas, Dennisse. Museo de Historia Natural, Lima; PerĂșFil: Schai-Braun, StĂ©phanie. Universitat Fur Bodenkultur Wien; AustriaFil: Schank, Cody J.. University of Texas at Austin; Estados UnidosFil: Shenbrot, Georgy. Ben Gurion University of the Negev; IsraelFil: Solari, Sergio. Universidad de Antioquia; ColombiaFil: Superina, Mariella. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones CientĂ­ficas y TĂ©cnicas. Centro CientĂ­fico TecnolĂłgico Conicet - Mendoza. Instituto de Medicina y BiologĂ­a Experimental de Cuyo; ArgentinaFil: Tsang, Susan. American Museum of Natural History; Estados UnidosFil: Van Cakenberghe, Victor. Universiteit Antwerp; BĂ©lgicaFil: Veron, Geraldine. UniversitĂ© Pierre et Marie Curie; FranciaFil: Wallis, Janette. Kasokwa-kityedo Forest Project; UgandaFil: Whittaker, Danielle. Michigan State University; Estados UnidosFil: Wells, Rod. Flinders University.; AustraliaFil: Wittemyer, George. State University of Colorado - Fort Collins; Estados UnidosFil: Woinarski, John. Charles Darwin University; AustraliaFil: Upham, Nathan S.. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: Jetz, Walter. University of Yale; Estados Unido

    Expert range maps of global mammal distributions harmonised to three taxonomic authorities

    Get PDF
    AimComprehensive, global information on species' occurrences is an essential biodiversity variable and central to a range of applications in ecology, evolution, biogeography and conservation. Expert range maps often represent a species' only available distributional information and play an increasing role in conservation assessments and macroecology. We provide global range maps for the native ranges of all extant mammal species harmonised to the taxonomy of the Mammal Diversity Database (MDD) mobilised from two sources, the Handbook of the Mammals of the World (HMW) and the Illustrated Checklist of the Mammals of the World (CMW).LocationGlobal.TaxonAll extant mammal species.MethodsRange maps were digitally interpreted, georeferenced, error-checked and subsequently taxonomically aligned between the HMW (6253 species), the CMW (6431 species) and the MDD taxonomies (6362 species).ResultsRange maps can be evaluated and visualised in an online map browser at Map of Life (mol.org) and accessed for individual or batch download for non-commercial use.Main conclusionExpert maps of species' global distributions are limited in their spatial detail and temporal specificity, but form a useful basis for broad-scale characterizations and model-based integration with other data. We provide georeferenced range maps for the native ranges of all extant mammal species as shapefiles, with species-level metadata and source information packaged together in geodatabase format. Across the three taxonomic sources our maps entail, there are 1784 taxonomic name differences compared to the maps currently available on the IUCN Red List website. The expert maps provided here are harmonised to the MDD taxonomic authority and linked to a community of online tools that will enable transparent future updates and version control

    Identification of a BRCA2-Specific modifier locus at 6p24 related to breast cancer risk

    Get PDF
    Common genetic variants contribute to the observed variation in breast cancer risk for BRCA2 mutation carriers; those known to date have all been found through population-based genome-wide association studies (GWAS). To comprehensively identify breast cancer risk modifying loci for BRCA2 mutation carriers, we conducted a deep replication of an ongoing GWAS discovery study. Using the ranked P-values of the breast cancer associations with the imputed genotype of 1.4 M SNPs, 19,029 SNPs were selected and designed for inclusion on a custom Illumina array that included a total of 211,155 SNPs as part of a multi-consortial project. DNA samples from 3,881 breast cancer affected and 4,330 unaffected BRCA2 mutation carriers from 47 studies belonging to the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 were genotyped and available for analysis. We replicated previously reported breast cancer susceptibility alleles in these BRCA2 mutation carriers and for several regions (including FGFR2, MAP3K1, CDKN2A/B, and PTHLH) identified SNPs that have stronger evidence of association than those previously published. We also identified a novel susceptibility allele at 6p24 that was inversely associated with risk in BRCA2 mutation carriers (rs9348512; per allele HR = 0.85, 95% CI 0.80-0.90, P = 3.9×10−8). This SNP was not associated with breast cancer risk either in the general population or in BRCA1 mutation carriers. The locus lies within a region containing TFAP2A, which encodes a transcriptional activation protein that interacts with several tumor suppressor genes. This report identifies the first breast cancer risk locus specific to a BRCA2 mutation background. This comprehensive update of novel and previously reported breast cancer susceptibility loci contributes to the establishment of a panel of SNPs that modify breast cancer risk in BRCA2 mutation carriers. This panel may have clinical utility for women with BRCA2 mutations weighing options for medical prevention of breast cancer

    Incident type 2 diabetes attributable to suboptimal diet in 184 countries

    Get PDF
    The global burden of diet-attributable type 2 diabetes (T2D) is not well established. This risk assessment model estimated T2D incidence among adults attributable to direct and body weight-mediated effects of 11 dietary factors in 184 countries in 1990 and 2018. In 2018, suboptimal intake of these dietary factors was estimated to be attributable to 14.1 million (95% uncertainty interval (UI), 13.8–14.4 million) incident T2D cases, representing 70.3% (68.8–71.8%) of new cases globally. Largest T2D burdens were attributable to insufficient whole-grain intake (26.1% (25.0–27.1%)), excess refined rice and wheat intake (24.6% (22.3–27.2%)) and excess processed meat intake (20.3% (18.3–23.5%)). Across regions, highest proportional burdens were in central and eastern Europe and central Asia (85.6% (83.4–87.7%)) and Latin America and the Caribbean (81.8% (80.1–83.4%)); and lowest proportional burdens were in South Asia (55.4% (52.1–60.7%)). Proportions of diet-attributable T2D were generally larger in men than in women and were inversely correlated with age. Diet-attributable T2D was generally larger among urban versus rural residents and higher versus lower educated individuals, except in high-income countries, central and eastern Europe and central Asia, where burdens were larger in rural residents and in lower educated individuals. Compared with 1990, global diet-attributable T2D increased by 2.6 absolute percentage points (8.6 million more cases) in 2018, with variation in these trends by world region and dietary factor. These findings inform nutritional priorities and clinical and public health planning to improve dietary quality and reduce T2D globally.publishedVersio
    • 

    corecore