The genomes of two key bumblebee species with primitive eusocial organization

Background: The shift from solitary to social behavior is one of the major evolutionary transitions. Primitively eusocial bumblebees are uniquely placed to illuminate the evolution of highly eusocial insect societies. Bumblebees are also invaluable natural and agricultural pollinators, and there is widespread concern over recent population declines in some species. High-quality genomic data will inform key aspects of bumblebee biology, including susceptibility to implicated population viability threats. Results: We report the high quality draft genome sequences of Bombus terrestris and Bombus impatiens, two ecologically dominant bumblebees and widely utilized study species. Comparing these new genomes to those of the highly eusocial honeybee Apis mellifera and other Hymenoptera, we identify deeply conserved similarities, as well as novelties key to the biology of these organisms. Some honeybee genome features thought to underpin advanced eusociality are also present in bumblebees, indicating an earlier evolution in the bee lineage. Xenobiotic detoxification and immune genes are similarly depauperate in bumblebees and honeybees, and multiple categories of genes linked to social organization, including development and behavior, show high conservation. Key differences identified include a bias in bumblebee chemoreception towards gustation from olfaction, and striking differences in microRNAs, potentially responsible for gene regulation underlying social and other traits. Conclusions: These two bumblebee genomes provide a foundation for post-genomic research on these key pollinators and insect societies. Overall, gene repertoires suggest that the route to advanced eusociality in bees was mediated by many small changes in many genes and processes, and not by notable expansion or depauperation

Cytochrome P450 1 genes in birds : evolutionary relationships and transcription profiles in chicken and Japanese quail embryos

© The Author(s), 2011. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License. The definitive version was published in PLoS One 6 (2011): e28257, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0028257.Cytochrome P450 1 (CYP1) genes are biomarkers for aryl hydrocarbon receptor (AHR) agonists and may be involved in some of their toxic effects. CYP1s other than the CYP1As are poorly studied in birds. Here we characterize avian CYP1B and CYP1C genes and the expression of the identified CYP1 genes and AHR1, comparing basal and induced levels in chicken and quail embryos. We cloned cDNAs of chicken CYP1C1 and quail CYP1B1 and AHR1. CYP1Cs occur in several bird genomes, but we found no CYP1C gene in quail. The CYP1C genomic region is highly conserved among vertebrates. This region also shares some synteny with the CYP1B region, consistent with CYP1B and CYP1C genes deriving from duplication of a common ancestor gene. Real-time RT-PCR analyses revealed similar tissue distribution patterns for CYP1A4, CYP1A5, CYP1B1, and AHR1 mRNA in chicken and quail embryos, with the highest basal expression of the CYP1As in liver, and of CYP1B1 in eye, brain, and heart. Chicken CYP1C1 mRNA levels were appreciable in eye and heart but relatively low in other organs. Basal transcript levels of the CYP1As were higher in quail than in chicken, while CYP1B1 levels were similar in the two species. 3,3′,4,5,5′-Pentachlorobiphenyl induced all CYP1s in chicken; in quail a 1000-fold higher dose induced the CYP1As, but not CYP1B1. The apparent absence of CYP1C1 in quail, and weak expression and induction of CYP1C1 in chicken suggest that CYP1Cs have diminishing roles in tetrapods; similar tissue expression suggests that such roles may be met by CYP1B1. Tissue distribution of CYP1B and CYP1C transcripts in birds resembles that previously found in zebrafish, suggesting that these genes serve similar functions in diverse vertebrates. Determining CYP1 catalytic functions in different species should indicate the evolving roles of these duplicated genes in physiological and toxicological processes.Funding to MEJ and BB was from the Carl Tryggers Stiftelse and The Swedish Research Council Formas. Funding for BRW and JJS was from the United States National Institutes of Health (National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences), grants R01ES015912 and P42ES007381 to JJS