structural and evolutionary genomics natural selection in genome evolution giorgio bernardi
DESCRIPTION
Structural and Evolutionary Genomics NATURAL SELECTION IN GENOME EVOLUTION Giorgio Bernardi. SZN. ELSEVIER. Formation of the earth. Multicellular organisms. Origin of life. Big Bang. CONSCIOUSNESS. & CULTURE. BRAIN. LIFE. COSMOS. SZN. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Structural and Evolutionary
GenomicsNATURAL SELECTION
IN GENOME EVOLUTION
Giorgio Bernardi
ELSEVIER
SZN
N. Hartmann’s “strata of existence” (after Bernardi, 2005)
SZN-14 -10 -5 0
Billions years
Big Bang Formation of the earth
Origin of life
Multicellular organisms
Origin of lifeOrigin of life
1. Absolutely exceptional chance event
(Jacques Monod, 1970)
2. Necessary event under the prevailing
physico-chemical conditions
(Christian de Duve, 1995)
SZN
SZN
Jacques MonodJacques Monod
“Le Hasard et la Nécessité”
1970
Christian de DuveChristian de Duve
“Vital Dust: Life as a Cosmic Imperative”
1995
SZN
Georges CuvierGeorges Cuvier (1769 – 1832)
1. Fixity of species
2. Extinction of species
SZN
Jean-Baptiste Lamarck
“Philosophie Zoologique”
1809
• “Internal force”
• Inheritance of acquired characters
SZN
Alfred R. WallaceAlfred R. Wallace
“On the Tendency of Varieties to
Depart Indefinitelyfrom the Original Type”
(1858)
SZN
Charles DarwinCharles Darwin
“The Origin of Species”
1859
SZN
Evolution:
descent with
modification
Charles Darwin
1. Classical approaches to the study of evolution; classical theories
2. Our approach: structural and evolutionary genomics
3. An ultra-darwinian view of evolution : the neo-selectionist theory
SZN
At the level of the “classical classical
phenotypephenotype”
(form and function of organisms)
1. at the trait level (natural selection ; Darwin, 1859; Wallace, 1859)
SZN
SZN
SZN
This preservation of favourable individual differences and variations [positive selection], and the destruction of those which are injurious
variations [negative selection], I have called Natural SelectionNatural Selection, or the Survival of the Fittest
[adaptation].Variations neither useful nor injurious
[neutral variations]would not be affected by natural selectionwould not be affected by natural selection
and would be left either a fluctuating element, … or would ultimately become fixed, ...
Charles Darwin
At the level of the “classical classical
phenotypephenotype”
(characters)
1. at the trait level (natural selection)
2. at the genetic level (selectionist theory ; Fisher, 1930; Wright, 1931; Haldane, 1932)
SZN
SZN
Ronald A. Fisher John B.S. Haldane Sewall Wright
SZN
The selectionist
(neo-darwinian, synthetic)
theory of evolution
reconciled
Mendel’s laws of inheritance
with evolution
but neglected neutral changes
At the level of the “classical phenotypeclassical phenotype”
(proteins and expression)
1. at the trait level (natural selection)
2. at the genetic level (selectionist theory)
3. at the protein level (Zuckerkandl and Pauling, 1962; Sueoka, 1962; Freese, 1962; Kimura, 1968; 1983)
SZN
SZN
The molecular clockThe molecular clock
Time (Myr)
Am
ino a
cid
diff
ere
nce
s
SZN
PROKARYOTES
25 50 75
GC
AT GC
Biases in the replication Biases in the replication machinerymachinery
Sueoka (1962); Freese (1962)
SZN
Motoo KimuraMotoo Kimura
“The Neutral Theory of Molecular Evolution”
1983
The mutation-random drift theory
(the neutral theory)
“the main cause of evolutionary change
at the molecular level - changes in the
genetic material itself - is random
fixation of selectively neutral or nearly
neutral mutants ”.
(Kimura, 1983)SZN
SZN
At the level of the “genome phenotypegenome phenotype”
(Bernardi et al., 1973, 1976)
Instead of looking at a few genes, this approach looked at the whole genome, more specifically
at its compositional patterns and their evolution, moving, therefore, from the genetic
level to the genomic levelSZN
SZN
The genome: an operational
definition
The haploid chromosome set
Hans Winkler (1920)
SZN
• constant amount of DNA per cell in
any given organism (Boivin et al.,
1948; Mirsky and Ris, 1949)
• c-value, or constant value (Swift,
1950)
• genome size (Hinegardner, 1976)
SZN
The prokaryotic paradigmThe prokaryotic paradigm
The genome as the sum total of genes
SZN
Genome size, coding sequences and gene numbers in some representative
organisms Organism Genome size
a
Mb b
Coding sequence
s %
Gene numbers a
kb/gene a, b
Haemophilus
2 85 2,000 1
Yeast 12 70 6,000 2
Human 3,200 2 32,000 100
a in approximate figuresb kb, kilobases, or thousands of base pairs, bp; Mb, megabases, or millions of bp; (Gb, gigabases, are billions of base pairs)
SZN
The genome as
the sum total of coding
and
non-coding sequences
SZN
The genome
• The bean bag view
• Additive vs. cooperative properties
• The integrated ensemble view
Vertebrates
1. are a very small phylum
2. have common genetic background (vertebrates share most genes)
3. have a large genome (~ 3000 Mb; with coding sequences representing < 3%)
SZN
Structural genomics of vertebrates: our main conclusions
(i) Genome compartmentalization (1973, 1976) (discontinuous compositional heterogeneity, isochores)
(ii) Genome phenotype (1976, 1986) (compositional patterns of isochores and coding
sequences)
(iii) Genomic code compositional correlations ● between coding sequences and - non-coding sequences (1984) - thermal stability of proteins (1986) ● among codon positions (universal correlation; 1992)
SZN
● First evidence that the eukaryotic genome is an integrated ensemble: no junk DNA)● Incompatibility with neutral theory
SZN
SZN
1
2
3
4
5
1
6
7
8
9
10
Isochore patterns
2004
Costantini,Saccone,Auletta
and Bernardi
2001
Pavlicek, Paces, Clay
and Bernardi
SZN
Genome phenotypes
DNA Coding Sequences
SZN
Universal correlations
Compositional correlations
SZN
Hydrophobicity
SZN
Intron, UTR size Large Small
Chromatin structure Closed Open
GC Heterogeneity Low High
Gene expression Low High
Replication timing Late Early
Recombination Low High
Gene distribution
Correlations with structure and function
•Bernardi et al., 1984
•Mouchiroud et al., 1991
•Zoubak et al., 1996
• Lander et al., 2001
Genome evolutionGenome evolutionin vertebratesin vertebrates
1. Conservative mode
2. Transitional mode
SZN
Genome evolution in Genome evolution in vertebratesvertebrates
The conservative mode
Mammalian orders are characterized by
• a star-like phylogeny (over 100 Myrs)
• a strong mutational AT bias (GC AT; mC T)
• a conservation of base composition, methylation and CpG levels SZN
SZN
Most recentcommon ancestor
Extant mammalian orders
similar isochore patterns
100 MyrsAT bias
SZN
Genome evolution in Genome evolution in vertebratesvertebrates
The transitional mode
GC increase
THE COMPOSITIONAL TRANSITIONS: (cold- to warm-blooded vertebrates)
Compositional changes
1. concerned the (gene-dense) ancestral genome core
2. affected both coding and non-coding sequences (at comparable and correlated levels)
3. occurred (and were similar) in the independent ancestral lines of mammals and birds (convergent evolution)
4. did not affect cold-blooded vertebrates (with exceptions)
5. stopped with the appearance of present-day mammals and birds (an equilibrium was reached)
SZN
SZN
The formation and maintenance of GC-rich isochores
is due to
NATURAL SELECTIONSelective advantages:
Increased thermodynamic stability of
DNA, RNA & proteins
(Bernardi and Bernardi, 1986)
SZN
Varrialeet al., 2005
1
2
3Polar fish
Tropical/Temperate fish
R = 0.50
R = 0.45
Mammals
R = 0.80
5m
C,
%
0
GC, %
35 40 45 505mC, %
0
1
2
35 40 45 50
GC, %
Snakes
Lizards
Turtles
Crocodiles
Mammals
Polar fish
The compositional transitions affected
1. only a small part of the genome(the ancestral genome core)
2. both coding and non coding sequences (at comparable and correlated levels)
SZN
SZN
Chromosomal regions in interphase nuclei
Gene-rich Gene-poor
Chromatin open closed
Location central peripheral
GC-increase at higher body temperature
needed not needed
for chromatin stability
Saccone et al., 2002; Di Filippo et al., 2005
SZN
The genome compartmentalization,
the genome phenotype and
the genomic code,
the conservative and transitional modes of genome evolution
cannot be accounted for by
“a random fixation of neutral mutants”
(i.e., by the neutral theory)
YETthe majority of mutations per se can only be neutral or nearly neutral (if for no other reason that the vast majority of the genome is non coding)
SZN
SZN
1. explains hownatural selection can take place at the isochore level
2. reconcilesthe neutral theory with natural selection
3. makes predictions:genome phenotype differences in populations; genomic fitness
(Bernardi, 2004)
Negative selection
Structural transition
Compositional optimum
56%
55%
54%
GC
Changes to AT Changes to GC Critical
changesSZN
SZN
The structural transition
can be visualized as
a change in DNA and chromatin
structure
which affects
gene expression
SZN
Hence
negative selection
SZN
Isopycnic expression of
integrated viral sequences
•BLV (Kettmann et al., 1979)
•HBV (Zerial et al., 1986)
•MMTV (Salinas et al., 1987)
•RSV (Rynditch et al., 1991; 1998)
•HTLV-1 (Zoubak et al., 1994)
•HIV-1 (Tsyba et al., 1992; 2004)
SZN
Natural selection(mainly negative selection)
1. controls neutral changes at the isochore level
2. causes the shifts in the compositional transitions of the genome
SZN
Negative selection below the lower (blue) level
Shift of the compositional optimum (black line)
50%
49%
51%
50%
50%49.5 %
T°
Ratchet mechanism:
SZN
CHANGECHANGESS
NEUTRAL
DARWINIAN VIEWDARWINIAN VIEW
ADVANTAGEOUS
DELETERIOUS
NEO-DARWINIAN NEO-DARWINIAN
VIEWVIEWULTRA-DARWINIAN ULTRA-DARWINIAN
VIEWVIEW
NEUTRAL
NEUTRAL VIEWNEUTRAL VIEW
CRITICAL GENETIC
SGENOM
ICS
Predictions of the neo-selectionist theory
1. Genome phenotype differences in populations
( denote lower GC levels)
2. Genomic fitness SZN
Population A
Population B
SZN
Although
the neo-selectionist theory
can integrate
the neutral theory,
it represents a very different
view
of genome evolution
The dilemma of the neutral theory(Kimura, 1983)
• “Why natural selection is so prevalent at the phenotypic level and yet random fixation of selectively neutral or nearly neutral alleles prevails at the molecular level ” ?
“laws governing molecular evolution are clearly different from those governing phenotypic evolution.”
• “increases and decreases in the mutant frequencies are due mainly to chance.”
“Survival of the luckiest” SZN
1. the classical phenotype (form and function; proteins and
expression)
SZN“Survival of the fittest”
According to the neo-selectionist theory natural selection operates
not only on
2. the genome phenotype (compositional patterns and functional implications)
but also on
SZN
1. The eukaryotic genome is an integrated ensemble of compositionally correlated coding and non-coding sequences: there is no junk DNA.
2. Isochore patterns (genome phenotypes) are stable or changing depending upon environmental conditions.
3. The GC increases accompanying the transition from cold- to warm-blooded vertebrates are advantageous because they stabilize thermodynamically DNA, RNA and proteins.
4. Changes only affect the (gene-dense) genome core because of its open chromatin structure.
5. The neo-selectionist theory (an ultra-darwinian theory) explains how natural selection controls neutral changes at the isochore level and causes shifts in compositional genome transitions.
Acknowledgements• Fernando Alvarez, Montevideo• Stilianos Arhondakis, Naples• Fabio Auletta, Naples• Oliver Clay, Naples• Stéphane Cruveiller, Naples/Paris• Maria Costantini, Naples• Giuseppe D’Onofrio, Naples• Kamel Jabbari, Paris• Héctor Musto, Montevideo• Adam Pavlicek, Prague/Paris• Edda Rayko, Paris• Alla Rynditch, Kiev• Salvo Saccone, Catania• Giuseppe Torelli, Naples• Annalisa Varriale, Naples
SZN
SZN