the genome of prasinoderma coloniale unveils the existence ...general rights copyright and moral...
TRANSCRIPT
General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.
Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research.
You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain
You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.
Downloaded from orbit.dtu.dk on: Aug 30, 2021
The genome of Prasinoderma coloniale unveils the existence of a third phylum withingreen plants
Li, Linzhou; Wang, Sibo; Wang, Hongli; Sahu, Sunil Kumar; Marin, Birger; Li, Haoyuan; Xu, Yan; Liang,Hongping; Li, Zhen; Cheng, ShifengTotal number of authors:24
Published in:Nature Ecology & Evolution
Link to article, DOI:10.1038/s41559-020-1221-7
Publication date:2020
Document VersionPublisher's PDF, also known as Version of record
Link back to DTU Orbit
Citation (APA):Li, L., Wang, S., Wang, H., Sahu, S. K., Marin, B., Li, H., Xu, Y., Liang, H., Li, Z., Cheng, S., Reder, T., Çebi, Z.,Wittek, S., Petersen, M., Melkonian, B., Du, H., Yang, H., Wang, J., Wong, G. K. S., ... Liu, H. (2020). Thegenome of Prasinoderma coloniale unveils the existence of a third phylum within green plants. Nature Ecology &Evolution, 4, 1220-1231. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-020-1221-7
Articleshttps://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-020-1221-7
1State Key Laboratory of Agricultural Genomics, BGI-Shenzhen, Shenzhen, China. 2Department of Biotechnology and Biomedicine, Technical University of Denmark, Lyngby, Denmark. 3Department of Biology, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark. 4BGI Education Center, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenzhen, China. 5Institute for Plant Sciences, Department of Biological Sciences, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany. 6Department of Plant Biotechnology and Bioinformatics (Ghent University) and Center for Plant Systems Biology, Ghent, Belgium. 7Central Collection of Algal Cultures, Faculty of Biology, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany. 8School of Biology and Biological Engineering, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou, China. 9Department of Biological Sciences and Department of Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. 10Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Genome Read and Write, BGI-Shenzhen, Shenzhen, China. 11College of Horticulture, Nanjing Agricultural University, Nanjing, China. 12Centre for Microbial Ecology and Genomics, Department of Biochemistry, Genetics and Microbiology, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa. 13These authors contributed equally: Linzhou Li, Sibo Wang. ✉e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]
One of the most important biological events in the history of life was the successful colonization of the terrestrial landscape by green plants (Viridiplantae) that paved the
way for terrestrial animal evolution, altering geomorphology and changes in the Earth’s climate1–3. The Viridiplantae comprise perhaps 500,000 species, ranging from the smallest to the largest eukaryotes4,5. Divergence time estimates from molecular data sug-gest that Viridiplantae may be close to 1 billion years old6,7. All extant green plants are classified in either of two divisions/phyla, Chlorophyta and Streptophyta, which differ structurally, bio-chemically and molecularly8–12. The Streptophyta contain the land plants (embryophytes) and a paraphyletic assemblage of algae known as the streptophyte algae, whereas all other green algae comprise the Chlorophyta. The reconstruction of phylogenetic relationships across green plants using transcriptomic or genomic data provided evidence that unicellular, often scaly, flagellate organisms were positioned near the base of the radiation in both phyla13–16, corroborating earlier proposals based on ultrastruc-tural analyses that the common ancestor of all green plants may have been a scaly flagellate17,18. The search for an extant relative of such a flagellate, however, has been in vain, although an initial report suggested that Mesostigma viride diverged before the split of Chlorophyta and Streptophyta19, a result not corroborated by
later studies20. M. viride is now recognized as an early-diverging member of the Streptophyta21,22. While the majority of the early-diverging lineages in the Chlorophyta consisted of (mostly marine) scaly flagellates, some lineages were represented by very small, non-flagellate unicells often surrounded by cell walls23,24. One of these lineages, provisionally termed ‘Prasinococcales’23 (clade VI), could not be reliably positioned in phylogenetic trees24,25. A major step forward was made when it was discovered that an enigmatic, non-cultured group of deep-water, oceanic macroscopic algae of palmelloid organization comprising the genera Verdigellas and Palmophyllum formed a deeply diverg-ing lineage of Viridiplantae that included the Prasinococcales26. Later, the class Palmophyllophyceae was established for these organisms as the first divergence in Chlorophyta, that is sister to all other Chlorophyta27. Phylogenies based on nuclear-encoded ribosomal RNA genes (4,579 positions), however, placed Palmophyllophyceae as the earliest divergence in Viridiplantae, but monophyly of Chlorophyta + Streptophyta to the exclusion of Palmophyllophyceae, received no support in these analyses27.
To date, genomic resources for the Palmophyllophyceae have been limited to organelle genomes. Here we present the first nuclear genome sequence of a unicellular member of this lineage, Prasinoderma coloniale (Fig. 1a). Based on phylogenomic analyses,
The genome of Prasinoderma coloniale unveils the existence of a third phylum within green plantsLinzhou Li1,2,13, Sibo Wang1,3,13, Hongli Wang1,4, Sunil Kumar Sahu 1, Birger Marin 5, Haoyuan Li1, Yan Xu1,4, Hongping Liang1,4, Zhen Li 6, Shifeng Cheng1, Tanja Reder5, Zehra Çebi5, Sebastian Wittek5, Morten Petersen3, Barbara Melkonian5,7, Hongli Du8, Huanming Yang1, Jian Wang1, Gane Ka-Shu Wong 1,9, Xun Xu 1,10, Xin Liu 1, Yves Van de Peer 6,11,12 ✉, Michael Melkonian5,7 ✉ and Huan Liu 1,3 ✉
Genome analysis of the pico-eukaryotic marine green alga Prasinoderma coloniale CCMP 1413 unveils the existence of a novel phylum within green plants (Viridiplantae), the Prasinodermophyta, which diverged before the split of Chlorophyta and Streptophyta. Structural features of the genome and gene family comparisons revealed an intermediate position of the P. colo-niale genome (25.3 Mb) between the extremely compact, small genomes of picoplanktonic Mamiellophyceae (Chlorophyta) and the larger, more complex genomes of early-diverging streptophyte algae. Reconstruction of the minimal core genome of Viridiplantae allowed identification of an ancestral toolkit of transcription factors and flagellar proteins. Adaptations of P. coloniale to its deep-water, oligotrophic environment involved expansion of light-harvesting proteins, reduction of early light-induced proteins, evolution of a distinct type of C4 photosynthesis and carbon-concentrating mechanism, synthesis of the metal-complexing metabolite picolinic acid, and vitamin B1, B7 and B12 auxotrophy. The P. coloniale genome provides first insights into the dawn of green plant evolution.
NaTuRe eCoLoGY & eVoLuTioN | VOL 4 | SEPTEMBER 2020 | 1220–1231 | www.nature.com/natecolevol1220
ArticlesNature ecology & evolutioN
we establish a new phylum for this group, the Prasinodermophyta, with two classes, as the earliest divergence of the Viridiplantae. The genome of P. coloniale provided new insights into pico-eukaryotic biology near the dawn of green plant evolution.
Results and discussionGenome sequencing and characteristics. The genome size of P. coloniale was estimated to be about 26.04 Mb. After reads fil-tering (7.4 Gb PacBio data) and self-correction, a 25.3 Mb genome was de novo assembled consisting of 22 chromosomes, including the complete chloroplast and mitochondrial genomes (Supplementary Figs. 1 and 2). The sizes of the individual chromo-somes varied from 0.45 to 3.60 Mb. BUSCO analysis showed a high degree of completeness of the genome, with 282 out of 303 (93.1%) complete eukaryotic universal genes (Supplementary Table 1). Additionally, 99.38% (Supplementary Table 2) of the transcriptome
could be mapped to the assembled genome. P. coloniale has a GC content of 69.8%, while 6.51% of the genome consists of repeats (Supplementary Fig. 3, Supplementary Table 3 and Extended Data Fig. 1). A total of 7,139 protein-coding genes were annotated, of which 6,996 were supported by the transcriptome. Additionally, 6,759 (94.7%) genes were annotated from known protein databases (Supplementary Table 4).
Phylogenetic analyses and Prasinodermophyta div. nov. Phylo-genetic analyses of P. coloniale were performed with two different taxon and datasets. (1) Both maximum-likelihood and Bayesian trees were constructed from an alignment of 256 orthologues of single-copy nuclear genes from 28 taxa of Archaeplastida, showing that P. coloniale (and the related Prasinococcus capsulatus) diverged before the split of Streptophyta and Chlorophyta (Fig. 1b). All inter-nal branches in the tree received maximal/nearly maximal support,
Bathycoccus prasinos
Auxenochlorella protothecoides
Ostreococcus lucimarinus
Gonium pectorale
Chromochloris zofingiensis
Chlamydomonas reinhardtii
Coccomyxa subellipsoidea
Ulva mutabilis
Volvox carteri
Ostreococcus tauri
Chlorella variabilis
Prasinodermophyta
Glaucoplantae
Rhodoplantae
a c
Viridiplantae
Streptophyta
Chlorophyta
Cyanidioschyzon merolaeGaldieria sulphuraria
Rhodella maculatacf.Bangiopsis sp. CCMP1999
Rhodosorus marinus CCMP769Rhodosorus marinus UTEX2760
Porphyridium aerugineumTimspurckia oligopyrenoides
Erythrolobus australicus
StylonematophyceaeRhodellophyceae
Cyanidiophyceae
Compsopogon caeruleusRhodochaete parvula/pulchella
Madagascaria erythrocladiodesPyropia yezoensis
Bangia fuscopurpureaPorphyra purpurea
Porphyra umbilicalisAsparagopsis taxiformis
Schizymenia dubyiGracilariopsis chorda
Chondrus crispusAhnfeltia plicata
Palmaria palmataHelminthocladia australis
Porolithon onkodesSporolithon durum
Rhodogorgon sp.
Gloeochaete wittrockianaCyanoptyche gloeocystis
Glaucocystis nostochinearumCyanophora paradoxa
Prasinoderma sp. MBIC10622
Prasinoderma colonialePrasinoderma singularis
Prasinococcus capsulatusPalmophyllum crassumVerdigellas peltata
Cymbomona s tetramitiformisPyramimona s tetrarhynchusPyramimona s olivacea
Pyramimona s parkeaeMonomastix sp.Monomastix opisthostigma
Crustomastix stigmaticaDolichomastix tenuilepis
Bathycoccus prasinosOstreococcus lucimarinusOstrecoccus tauri
Mamiella gilvaMicromonas commoda
Micromonas bravoNephroselmis olivacea
Nephroselmis pyriformisPycnococcus provasolii
Chloropicon primusMarsupiomonas pelliculata
Pedinomonas minorChlorella vulgaris
Chlorella variabilisAuxenochlorella protothecoides
Botryococcus brauniiCoccomyxa subellipsoidea
Koliella longisetaStichococcus bacillaris
Scherffelia dubiaTetraselmis striata
Tetraselmis cordiformisStigeoclonium helveticum
Chromochloris zofingiensisHydrodictyonre ticulatum
Spermatozopsis exsultansChlamydomonas reinhardtiiYamagishiella unicocca
Eudorina sp.Volvox carteri
Oltmannsiellopsis sp.Ignatius tetrasporusDesmochloris halophila
Ulva mutabilis
Mesostigma virideChlorokybus atmophyticus
Spirotaenia condensataEntransia fimbriata
Klebsormidium nitensChara braunii
Nitella hyalinaColeochaete scutataChaetosphaeridium globosum
Mesotaenium endlicherianumCylindrocystis brebissonii
Cylindrocystis cushleckaeMesotaenium caldariorum
Mougeotia sp.Netrium digitus
Penium margaritaceumCosmarium ochthodes
Phaeoceros sp.Nothoceros vincentianus
Nardia compressaTreubia lacunosa
Marchantia polymorphaTakakia lepidozioidesDiphyscium fulvifolium
Polytrichum juniperinumPhyscomitrella patens
Huperzia selago/lucidulaEquisetum arvense/diffusum
Angiopteris lygodiifolia/fokiensisPinus taedaArabidopsis thaliana0.05
PorphyridiophyceaeCompsopogonophyceae
Bangiophyceae
Palmophyllo-phyceae
Pyramimonadophyceae
Mamiellophyceae
Nephroselmidophyceae
PedinophyceaeChloropicophyceae/Pseudoscourfieldiales
Trebouxiophyceae
Chlorodendrophyceae
Chlorophyceae
Ulvophyceae
MesostigmatophyceaeKlebsormidiophyceae
Prasinodermo-phyceae
Rhodoplantae
Glaucoplantae
Viridiplantae
Prasinodermo-phyta
Chlorophyta
Streptophyta
Florideophyceae
CharophyceaeColeochaetophyceae
Zygnematophyceae
Hornworts
Liverworts
Embryophyta
Mosses
Tracheophytes91/57/1
69/-/-
95/58/1
97/100/1
68/63/157/–/–
56/100/-
94/76/1
95/89/1100/93/1
94/86/197/96/1
81/81/1
–/70/–
94/98/1
82/99/1
85/9
8/1
94/9
6/1
96/98/1
96/98/1
75/55/1
95/91/1
56/83/0.98
82/100/1
89/99/1
54/100/1
82/–/1
67/–/1
57/–/0.96
97/99/1
92/9
3/1
75/73/1
81/7
3/1
83/96/1
79/96/166/56/1
Chondrus crispus
Chlorokybus atmophyticus
Micromonas commoda
Chara braunii
Mesostigma viride
Arabidopsis thaliana
Cymbomonas sp. (1KP)
Klebsormidium nitens
Pyramimonas parkeae (1KP)
Monomastix opisthostigma (1KP)
Prasinococcus capsulatus (1KP)
Dolichomastix tenuilepis (1KP)
Cyanophora paradoxa
Porphyra umbilicalis
Micromonas pusilla
Prasinoderma coloniale
Prasinoderma singularis (MMETSP)
Cyanidioschyzon merolae100/1
0.1
100/1
100/1
100/1
100/1
100/1
100/1
100/
1
100/1
62/1
100/1
100/1
100/1100/1
100/1
100/1
100/1
100/1
100/1100/1
100/1
100/1
100/1
100/1
100/1
10 µm
100/1
100/1
b
Fig. 1 | Phylogenetic analysis of P. coloniale. a, Light micrograph of P. coloniale. b, The phylogenetic tree was constructed using the maximum-likelihood method in RAxML and MrBayes based on a concatenated sequence alignment of 256 single-copy genes (500 bootstraps). c, The basal divergence of the new phylum Prasinodermophyta, as revealed by analyses of complete nuclear- and plastid-encoded rRNA operons from 109 Archaeplastida. The rRNA dataset comprised 8,818 aligned positions and contained representatives of all major lineages of Rhodoplantae (seven classes), Glaucoplantae (four genera) and Viridiplantae (three divisions with several classes) including embryophytes. Shown is the RAxML phylogeny (GTRGAMMA model); the three support values at branches are RAxML/IQ-TREE bootstrap percentages/Bayesian posterior probabilities. Bold branches received maximal support (100/100/1).
NaTuRe eCoLoGY & eVoLuTioN | VOL 4 | SEPTEMBER 2020 | 1220–1231 | www.nature.com/natecolevol 1221
Articles Nature ecology & evolutioN
and the monophyly of Streptophyta + Chlorophyta to the exclusion of P. coloniale and P. capsulatus received 88% bootstrap and 1.0 posterior probability support. A phylogenetic tree constructed from 31 mitochondrial genes of 19 taxa of Archaeplastida also revealed P. coloniale as the earliest divergence in Viridiplantae (Supplemen-tary Fig. 4). (2) We increased the taxon sampling to 109 taxa of Archaeplastida, including six sequences of Palmophyllophyceae27 comprising nuclear- and plastid-encoded rRNA operons. The phylogeny corroborated the multi-protein phylogeny because Palmophyllophyceae again diverged before the split of Chlorophyta and Streptophyta (Fig. 1c). Separate phylogenies of nuclear- and plastid-encoded rRNA operons gave congruent results, although support values were generally lower (Supplementary Figs. 5 and 6). The summary coalescent method ASTRAL gave inconclusive results (Supplementary Table 5 and Supplementary Figs. 7 and 8), and taxon sampling was sensitive to long-branch attraction28 (Supplementary Fig. 9 and Extended Data Fig. 2). The former tree is corroborated by a recent phylotranscriptomic analysis of 1,090 viri-diplant species in which the placement of three Palmophyllophyceae was unstable in ASTRAL trees but resolved as the basal divergence of Viridiplantae in concatenated trees29. Previous plastome phylog-enies placed Palmophyllophyceae either as the earliest divergence within Chlorophyta, sister to all other Chlorophyta27, or in an unre-solved position among Chlorophyta15. Plastome phylogenies are limited by the dataset (70–80 plastid-encoded genes) but also suf-fer from introgression of the plastid from one species to another, recombination and gene conversion, as well as differential selective pressures acting on protein-coding plastid genes, which may also introduce biases and lead to incongruent gene and species trees30–33. For example, unlike nuclear trees, some studies have failed to recover Ulvophyceae, Trebouxiophyceae and Pedinophyceae as mono-phyletic groups27 or Mesostigmatophyceae within Streptophyta15. Based on their phylogenetic positions (Fig. 1b,c, Supplementary Figs. 4–6 and Extended Data Fig. 2), gene family comparisons and molecular synapomorphies, we here propose a new division/phy-lum for the Palmophyllophyceae sensu27, the Prasinodermophyta div. nov. with two classes, Prasinodermophyceae class. nov. and Palmophyllophyceae emend (Supplementary Data 1).
Comparison of gene families among Archaeplastida. The phy-logenetic placement of Prasinodermophyta as a sister group to all other Viridiplantae provided a unique opportunity to reconstruct the minimum core genome of Viridiplantae, and to compare the genome of P. coloniale to those of early-diverging Streptophyta, Chlorophyta and the Glaucoplantae, to identify plesiomorphic and apomorphic traits. In total, 4,052 orthogroups are shared among Chlorophyta and Streptophyta, of which 3,292 are also shared with P. coloniale. If the orthogroups shared uniquely by P. coloniale with either Micromonas commoda (621) or Chlorokybus atmoph-yticus (179) are added, 4,092 orthogroups represent the minimal core genome of Viridiplantae (Fig. 2a). A total of 1,356 unique orthogroups were found in P. coloniale, mainly involved in bio-logical process categories such as photosynthesis-antenna proteins, plant–pathogen interaction and plant hormone signal transduc-tion (Supplementary Table 6). Thus, it is reasonable to expect that these unique biological traits reflect adaptations of P. coloniale to its deep-water/low-light, oligotrophic habitat.
Comparative genomics of P. coloniale with early-diverging Viridiplantae. About 38.5% of the P. coloniale genes gave best hits with Chlorophyta, while a similar percentage (33.9%) gave best hits with Streptophyta, supporting an equidistant relationship between P. coloniale and Streptophyta and Chlorophyta (Supplementary Fig. 10). P. coloniale, along with some representative early-diverging Viridiplantae, showed a very similar percentage of Viridiplantae genes (commonly shared). The remaining proteins of P. coloniale
were equally distributed among Streptophyta- and Chlorophyta- specific genes (Fig. 2b). Principal component analysis (PCA) showed that early-diverging Chlorophyta (Mamiellophyceae), streptophyte algae (Mesostigmatophyceae, Klebsormidiophyceae and Charophyceae), Glaucoplantae and Rhodoplantae form four separate clusters with P. coloniale in an isolated position, which also further supports its classification as a new and independent clade—that is, the Prasinodermophyta div. nov. (Fig. 2c)
Furthermore, a comparative analysis on structural genomic features showed a trend of gradually increasing average intron length and decreasing average exon length from P. coloniale to early-diverging streptophytes, and the opposite trend from P. coloniale to early-diverging Chlorophyta was observed (Fig. 2d). In addition, the genome size, gene size, gene spacing distance and total and average exon numbers exhibited a similar pat-tern with early-diverging Chlorophyta (Extended Data Fig. 3 and Supplementary Table 7). However, the P. coloniale genome contains 41% coding sequences, higher than the early-diverging strepto-phytes but considerably lower than early-diverging Chlorophyta. In summary, the structural characteristics of the P. coloniale genome revealed its intermediate position between the extremely compact and small genomes of picoplanktonic early-diverging Chlorophyta34 and the larger and structurally more complex genomes of early-diverging streptophytes35,36.
Analysis of transcription factors in P. coloniale. In total, 55 of 114 types of TF/TR genes were identified in the P. coloniale genome (Supplementary Table 8). Although all 55 types of transcription factor/transcription regulator (TF/TR) genes of P. coloniale were also found in Chlorophyta and early-diverging streptophyte algae, considerably lower numbers of TF/TR genes (201) were identi-fied in P. coloniale compared to Chlorophyta and Streptophyta (Supplementary Table 9).
Among the 55 types of TF/TR genes, the majority (50) are also present in Glaucoplantae and/or Rhodoplantae, suggesting that these constituted the basic TF/TR toolbox in the common ances-tor of Archaeplastida. However, five TF/TR types of P. coloniale (C2C2-Dof, WRKY, SBP, GARP_ARR-B and TAZ) were presumably gained in the common ancestor of the Viridiplantae since they are absent in both Glaucoplantae and Rhodoplantae (Supplementary Table 8). WRKY proteins are key regulators of development, car-bohydrate synthesis, senescence and responses to biotic and abiotic stresses in embryophytes37. Using newly retrieved WRKY sequences, we confirmed the presence of eight well-supported WRKY domain subgroups in Viridiplantae (Extended Data Fig. 4). The number of gene copies with WRKY domains and the divergent sequences of the N-terminal WRKY domains in P. coloniale may be related to its picoplanktonic lifestyle and/or low-light environment (the pico-planktonic Mamiellophyceae generally also display more than one WRKY gene copy; Supplementary Table 8).
The type-B phospho-accepting response regulator (GARP_ARR-B) family modulates plastid biogenesis, circadian clock oscil-lation, cytokinin signalling and control of the phosphate starvation response in plants38. Since many genes of the cytokinin biosynthesis and signalling pathways are lacking in P. coloniale (Supplementary Table 10), these response regulators may be involved in other func-tions. Finally, the evolution of the SQUAMOSA promotor-binding protein (SBP)-box TF was previously suggested to predate the split of Streptophyta and Chlorophyta39. SBP-box TFs have diverse spe-cialized functions in embryophytes, but in green algae they may be involved in more basic functions such as regulation of trace metal homeostasis40. The C2C2-Dof (DNA binding with one fin-ger) TFs have been implicated in light control of zygote germina-tion in Chlamydomonas reinhardtii41 and apparently originated also in the common ancestor of Viridiplantae. Besides the five TF/TR gains, expansion in gene copy numbers was observed in only
NaTuRe eCoLoGY & eVoLuTioN | VOL 4 | SEPTEMBER 2020 | 1220–1231 | www.nature.com/natecolevol1222
ArticlesNature ecology & evolutioN
one TF (Jumonji_Other) in the common ancestor of Viridiplantae when compared with Glaucoplantae and Rhodoplantae. Plant JmjC domain-containing proteins have important functions in both his-tone modification42 and regulation of development and environ-mental responses43.
In contrast to gains and expansion of TFs/TRs, P. coloniale also exhibited loss of six TFs/TRs (C2H2, C3H, CCAAT_HAP2, MADS_MIKC, MBF1 and Zinc Finger MIZ type) that are present in Chlorophyta, Streptophyta, Glaucoplantae and Rhodoplantae. Mapping of TFs/TRs on the phylogeny (Fig. 1b) also allowed tentative conclusions about gains of TFs/TRs in the common ancestor of Chlorophyta + Streptophyta (five: ABI3/VP1, Dicer, HD_DDT, Pseudo ARR-B and Whirly) and the common ancestor of Streptophyta (seven: HD-ZIP_I_II, HD-ZIP_III, HD-PLINC, GRF, LUG, SRS and Trihelix).
Light-harvesting complex (LHC) and LHC-like proteins in P. coloniale. Archaeplastida produce metabolic energy by col-lecting solar energy and transferring it to photosynthetic reac-tion centres, facilitated by two types of light-harvesting complexes (LHC I and LHC II), composed of LHC proteins that interact with
light-harvesting pigments44–47. We identified 41 LHC and LHC-like proteins of P. coloniale (Supplementary Table 11).
Phylogenetic analysis of LHC proteins from P. coloniale showed them to be widely distributed in seven of the ten LHC clades, namely LHCA, LHCB, LHCX, PSBS, OHP, Ferrochelatase and ELIPs (Fig. 3). The P. coloniale genome has 19 Lhcb genes (six of which appar-ently originated from three successive gene duplications in the Prasinoderma lineage). P. coloniale also displayed nine Lhca genes, whereas in most of the investigated early-diverging Chlorophyta/Mamiellophyceae and in Mesostigma (Streptophyta) there are only six Lhca genes (Supplementary Table 11). As in the early-diverging Mamiellophyceae, P. coloniale displayed two LHCX proteins. There are three helix proteins in P. coloniale, as in Cyanophora paradoxa. Other types of LHC-like proteins, such as RedCap, SEP (SEP apparently originated in streptophyte algae) and LHCL, are miss-ing in P. coloniale. The relatively large number of gene copies of chlorophyll-a/b-binding proteins (Lhca, Lhcb) in P. coloniale could reflect adaptation to the low-light environment from which this strain was isolated (150 m depth), requiring larger LHC antennae. This is corroborated by two other observations: first, the relatively low Chl-a/b ratio (1.13) reported for this organism and the related
O. lucimarinus
O. tauri
B. prasinos
M. commoda
M. pusilla
P. coloniale
Both Early Streptophyta Early Chlorophyta
P. coloniale
M. commoda
C. paradoxa
C. atmophyticus
2,610(13,647)
1,356(1,360)
19,205(19,315)
3,290(3,318)
3,728(3,730)
320(720)
113(318)
226(594)
179(393)
621(1,385)
432(1,162)
440(1,733)
682(2,336)
Ear
ly C
hlor
ophy
taE
arly
Str
epto
phyt
a
a c
b d
0.2
0
0.2
0.2 0 0.2 0.4
PC1 (25% variance)
PC
2 (1
7% v
aria
nce)
P. coloniale
O. tauriO. lucimarinus
B. prasinos M. pusilla
M. commoda
C. merolae
P. umbilicalis
C. crispus
C. paradoxa
M. viride
C. atmophyticus
K. nitens
C. braunii
Early Chlorophyta
Rhodoplantae Glaucoplantae
Early Streptophyta
P. coloniale
0 25 50
Percentage of proteins
75 100
C .braunii
K. nitens
M. viride
C. atmophyticus
371(1,422)
245(940)
M. endlicherianum
M. endlicherianum
2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 12.5
Ln(exon/intron length)
O. lucimarinus
O. tauri
B. prasinos
M. commoda
M. pusilla
P. colonialeE
arly
Chl
orop
hyta
Ear
ly S
trep
toph
yta
C .braunii
K. nitens
M. viride
C. atmophyticus
M. endlicherianum
Exon
Intron
Fig. 2 | Comparative analysis of P. coloniale and other Chlorophyta. a, Venn diagram showing unique and shared orthogroups among P. coloniale, C. atmophyticus, M. commoda and C. paradoxa. Gene numbers are given in parentheses. b, Percentages of proteins found among Viridiplantae (red), Chlorophyta-specific (blue) and Streptophyta-specific (green) based on the classification given in OrthoFinder. Species abbreviations are listed in Supplementary Table 32. c, PCA of the type and number of Pfam domains of all genes across the Viridiplantae. d, Box-and-whisker plots depicting distributions of the lengths of exons and introns in selected Viridiplantae.
NaTuRe eCoLoGY & eVoLuTioN | VOL 4 | SEPTEMBER 2020 | 1220–1231 | www.nature.com/natecolevol 1223
Articles Nature ecology & evolutioN
Palmophyllum48 (0.64), and second, the lower number (six) of ELIPs in P. coloniale compared to core Chlorophyta (nine in Ulva lactuca and ten in C. reinhardtii) or early-diverging subaerial/terrestrial streptophyte algae (13/9 in C. atmophyticus and Klebsormidium nitens, respectively).
Carbon-concentrating mechanisms (CCMs). Previous studies of picoplanktonic Mamiellophyceae suggested that these algae might possess a C4-like carbon fixation pathway to alleviate low CO2 affin-ity49. A C4-like CCM has also been reported in photosynthetic stra-menopiles50–53. CCMs mainly rely on carbonic anhydrases (CAs) that catalyse the reversible conversion of carbon dioxide to bicar-bonate. Four CA genes belonging to the delta- and gamma-type CAs were identified in the genome of P. coloniale, while alpha- and beta-type CAs were absent (Fig. 4a). Among Viridiplantae,
only Mamiellophyceae were found to encode delta-type CAs (Supplementary Table 12). Whereas alpha-, beta- and gamma-type CAs apparently evolved in the common ancestor of Archaeplastida (alpha- and beta-type CAs were lost in P. coloniale, and alpha-type CAs in the later-diverging Mamiellophyceae, perhaps related to cell miniaturization in both groups), delta-type CAs apparently evolved in the common ancestor of Viridiplantae and were independently lost in the core Chlorophyta and in Streptophyta.
Here we propose a putative model of CCMs in P. coloniale, based on the targets of the genes that are necessary for inorganic carbon assimilation (Fig. 4b). As a potential C4-like CCM, malate dehydrogenase catalyses the reaction to yield malate in the cyto-sol, mitochondrion and chloroplast (Fig. 4b). Malic enzymes could be transported into the mitochondrion and chloroplast, where they release CO2. Previous studies of CCMs in Micromonas and
KleflGAQ84962.1
PR
CO
L 00003440-RA
KleflGAQ78204.1
Phypa22 380V6.1
KleflG
AQ
83767.1
Cocsu9730
SEP2
OHP2
Chr
sp20
1S03
273
Micpu1634
Batpr
6663
Ost
luC
p109
0
Ostlu771
PR
CO
L 00002344-RA
ChlNC e gw1.35.79.1
LHC
B-M
Phy
pa28
315
V6.
1C
hrsp
51S
0652
5
Cocsu4143
Vol
ca51
8
LHCA5
Mesvi294S
04944
OLQ13027.1
MicR
CC
9020
Mesvi2480S04542C
ocsu3787
Ostta6764
ChlN
C IG
S.gm
4 00564
LI818-1-M.commoda
MicRCC81
30
TP02
G07
820
Mic
RC
C32
57
LI818-2-M.commoda
Kle
flGA
Q89
773.
1
Chlre6633
Mesvi409S05858
Phypa15 328V6.1
MicRCC2881
Mesvi1889S03762
OHP8
Batpr
4993
Mesvi487S09487
TP23G01280
0987
0S0
8psr
hC
Chr
sp20
1S03
275
Cyame3457
LHCX1
OstR
CC
56129 estExt Genew
ise1.C 80543
LHCA2
Chlre11593
Cocsu2649
PRCOL 00003386-RA
PRCOL
0000
0672
-RA
PRCOL 00001429-RA
LHC
A1
Cocsu8199
Chr
sp4S
0641
9
LHC
A6
LHC
B1
ChlN
C gw
1.1.492.1
Chlre8151
Chlre2155
Chlre7351
Volca7030
1.12028Q
AGlfel
K
LHCX6
Cocsu1035
Coc
su74
38
KleflGAQ89394.1
PR
CO
L 00005963-RA
Phypa241 86V6.2
Chl
re89
38
Cocsu8822
Porpu2050.7
KleflGAQ85853.1
KleflG
AQ
84898.1
Phypa371 25V6.1
PRCOL 000
0623
1-RA
Chl
NC
IGS
.gm
12
0032
9
Phypa38 333V6.1
KleflGAQ82899.1
Bat
pr21
03
Ostta5365
LHC
A7
Cyapa38681C07299
PRCOL 00006974-RA
LHCX4
Porpu
4470
.5
MicRCC5674
Chlre13637Chrsp115S00070
Phypa15 146V6.1
Cyapa7056C13222
PRCOL 00004425-RA
Ostlu8
31
KleflG
AQ
83766.1
Ost
ta74
09
OstRCC13158 gw1.8.715.1
Phypa196 69V
6.1
Batpr2517
LHCB4
Micpu4367
Chlre9739
LHC
A8
Batpr1548
Chrsp171S08706
Volca3084
Mes
vi163
S0339
9
PRCOL 00001034-RAMesvi1580S00244
PRCOL 00001561-RA
Chrsp4S
06301
ELIP1
OHP3
Volc
a561
Chr
sp38
7S05
519
Batpr4852
KleflGAQ81861.1
OHP9
Chlre6630
AT4G
10340.1C
hrsp110S01575
Micpu9402
Chlre5807
Chl
NC
fgen
esh3
pg.
C s
caffo
ld 3
0002
91
Mesvi1297S02417
KleflGAQ78205.1
Micpu9517
Chlre6654
PRCOL 00006298-RA
1.08519Q
AGlfel
K
Volca10426
KleflG
AQ
82390.1
Chlre5661
Cocsu7575
Cyapa27092C21200
Chr
sp38
7S05
514
Mesvi566S06881
Ostlu2457
AT
1G61
520.
3
Mic
RC
C44
06
Chlre742
Chrsp80S07789
PRCOL 00001426-RA
Ost
lu75
13
PRC
OL 00002443-R
A
Cocsu8704
Ostta2555
TP02G07730
OstRCC45963 estExt Genewise1Plus.C 50413
PR
CO
L 00006120-RA
PR
CO
L 00
0058
20-R
A
PR
CO
L 00
0023
72-R
A
Batpr6309PR
CO
L 00
0061
79-R
A
OstRCC93518 eugene1.0000070083
KleflGAQ89635.1
Cocsu5074
Phypa6 313V
6.1
Porpu2120.4
Volca6174
PRCOL 00003592-RA
KleflGAQ89393.1
Volca1616
2.6V361
77apyhP
LHCA9
OstRCC91056 eugene1.0000020518
LHC
A4
Cocsu9222
Micpu2001
OstRCC7388 gw1.1.703.1
1.35
308
QA
Glfel
K
Chr
sp75
S07
575
Chr
sp49
S06
161
PRCOL 00003352-RA
PR
CO
L 00005945-RA
Mes
vi34
37S
0528
2
Micpu2975
OstRCC87531 eugene1.0000110216
Kle
flGA
Q82
022.
1
Micpu2560
PRCOL 00003936-RA
KleflG
AQ
91570.1
Bat
pr33
68
LHC
B3
Ferrochelatase-2
PRCOL 00003081-RA
Mesvi277S04867
Volca
1021
6
Volca10160
35690S448ivse
M
PRC
OL 00003351-R
A
PR
CO
L 00
0024
42-R
A
KleflGAQ
79032.1
Chocr
4498
1.29628Q
AGlfel
K
Porpu2120.3
Cocsu7412
Ostta9
74
ES0009G00310
ChlN
C e gw
1.7.200.1
Micpu9518
PTI 0
1G02
410
Porpu504.4
AT3G
4747
0.1
1070
0S4
9psr
hC
Ost
lu19
37
Phypa54 304V6.1
Volca9179
Chrsp44S05761
Micpu3415
XP 005
8416
55.1
OHP4
Chrsp88S09238Phypa9 38V6.1
Kle
flGA
Q82
095.
1
Ost
ta59
66
Porpu3409.2
PR
CO
L 00
0002
34-R
A
Ost
lu57
98
Ost
ta19
96
Mesvi120S
00996
PRCOL 00006230-RA
ES02
56G
0010
0
MicRCC547
Chrsp158S02304
MicRCC3535
Kle
flGA
Q89
802.
1
Phypa99 95V6.1
Red
Cap
2
PRCOL 00000073-RA
Mesvi1099S
09089
Cyapa25517C20094
AT2G30390.2
Ostta2962MicRCC1826
OHP1-ARATH
Micpu5452
MicR
CC
8849
Bat
pr17
4
Kle
flGA
Q86
204.
1
Volca6284
LHC
B5
Ostlu3216
PRCOL 00004719-RA
LHC
A3
ES0018
G0004
0
Mesvi7832S00861
Porp
u343
1.6
Volca3680
Mesvi1214S02143
1.21339Q
AGlfel
K
Cyapa
2696
4C21
111
MicRCC7651
KleflG
AQ
81172.1
Mesvi649S00788
OstRCC17975 e gw1.1.961.1
Mes
vi234
9S04
479
Chlre12974
Phypa213 80V6.1
Chlre13639
PTI 25G00510
Ost
lu57
23
Micpu4422
Cocsu7386
Cocsu1579
Batpr7309
Mesvi120S
02122
Ostlu7206
KleflGAQ89003.1
OHP6
Ostlu5142
LHCX2
Ost
lu68
40
PRCOL 00004845-RA
MicR
CC7301
PR
CO
L 00
0002
35-R
A
Chrsp56S06666
Chlre11594
KleflG
AQ
88363.1
Mesvi686S07587E
LIP2
Cocsu8703
OHP2-ARATH
OHP10
LHC
B2
OstRCC59
614 e
st or
fs.7 1
200 C
BPU CBPX C
BPY 158 1
Chl
re70
18
Cocsu8809
ChlN
C IG
S.gm
18 00325
PRCOL 00001129-RA
ChlNC fgenesh3 pm.C scaffold 8000032
PTI 06G
0409
0
Mesvi179S
03581
Red
Cap
1
KleflGAQ78568.1
Bat
pr36
57
PTI 17G00120
OHP5C
hrsp
4S06
304
Chlre11852
Chr
sp17
5S02
382
Mes
vi12
13S
0213
8
KleflG
AQ
82234.1
PRCOL 00006531-RA
Mesvi566S06883
PR
CO
L 00
0007
77-R
A
AT
3G54
890.
1
Mic
RC
C61
99
ChlN
C estExt G
enewise1Plus.C
40251
Mesvi855S08428
Phypa12 176V6.2
Chlre5397
Phypa33 127V6.2
1.45
308
QA
Glfel
KOHP7
Mic
pu67
70M
icpu
3934
Phypa6 312V
6.1
Mesvi1156S00088
Ferroch
elatase-1
Volca5761
LHCX5
HLIP-LIKE--Microm
onas comm
oda
PRCOL 00006232-RA
Cocsu5492
LHCX3--Phaeodactylum tricornutum
Cyam
e444
9
MicRCC9338
PR
CO
L 00005165-RA
XP 0
0583
1727
.1
ChlNC IGS.gm 3 00253
PR
CO
L 00
0032
42-R
A
PRCOL 00006299-RA
Batpr6824
Ostta6972
Ost
lu74
40
HLIP2
Volca7897
Chrsp23S03692
Chr
sp20
1S03
279
Cyapa
2696
4C21
112
KleflGAQ81840.1
Chrsp57S
06809
KleflGAQ82404.1
Chr
sp20
1S03
272
Ost
RC
C48
476
estE
xt G
enew
ise1
Plus
.C 1
3052
4
PSBS-1
Phypa364 8V6.1
Phypa78 96V
6.1
KleflG
AQ
82232.1
Ost
RC
C21
948
e gw
1.4.
646.
1
LHCSR2-LI818
Micpu8203
Mesvi1099S
09088
PRC
OL
0000
4018
-RA
OHP1
Chlre13289
Chr
sp68
S07
373
Cocsu8039
LHCSR1-LI818
MicRCC9510
Klef
lGAQ
7902
6.1
Cocsu8078
Chr
sp45
S05
933
1.04
009
QA
Glfel
KChrsp33S05150
XP 005
8396
72.1
Chlre8238
Chlre5427
KleflGAQ87685.1
Bat
pr66
97
Chrsp115S00750
Micp
u878
8
ChlNC estExt fgenesh3 pg.C 120179
Ostta1036
Mesvi531S06696
Cocsu4837
ChlNC e gw1.13.26.1
Porpu983.1
Chr
sp38
7S05
513
PSBS-2
ES0486G00010
Mesvi229S
00395
Ostlu6397
PRC
OL 00006738-R
A
PR
CO
L 00
0006
21-R
A
97
91 100
100
100
100
100
89
100
98
88 99
100
92
99
99
100
92
100
99
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
96
92
100
96
99
100
80
86
100
100
91
100
100
100100
96
100
82
99
100
9510
0
100
100
100
100
100
87
93
89
86
82
100
98
100
100
100
100
82
80
100
89
100
100
100
84
100
81
99
84
95
99
83
100
99100
100
86
100
100
100
100
95
95
96
100
100
100
100
100
95
83
97
99
100
91
100
100
89
98
94
100
100
100
9691
100
100
100
100
100
100
98
100
87
100
100
100
85
100
100
100
82
100
99
93
99
100
98
96
100
94
94
94
100
96
99
99
100
100
100
100
97
89
100
100
100
100
85
99
100
100
100
9399
98
100
100
100
100
97
100
100
100
93
92
100
100
100
100
100
99
87
100
99
94
100
88
97
100
100
98
96
100
100
98100
91
100
100
94
90
86
98
100
99 100
95
9885
100
100
100
89
99
81
100
100
92
100
100
97
90
94
81
81
86
99
82
100
100
100
100
99
99
80
97
99
98
100
100
97
9192
100
100100
100
99
100
100
98
100
100
98 99100
89
100
100
94
100
86
100
100
87
99
98
99
100
100
89
100
91
100
10010
0
100
100
97
100
100
85
Tree scale: 1
Embryophyta
Prasinophytes
Streptophyte algae
TUC clade
Rhodoplantae
Diatoms
Cryptophyta
Brown algae
Glaucoplantae
OHP1
ELIP
RedCap
Ferrochelatase
OH
P2
LHC
LP
SB
S
LHCBLHCA
LHC
XS
ep
Fig. 3 | Phylogenetic tree of the LHC antenna protein superfamily. The tree is derived from a MAFFT alignment and was constructed using IQ-TREE (see Methods) with the model of sequence evolution suggested by the programme. Bootstrap values (500 replicates) ≥50% are shown. The LHC superfamily can be divided into ten clades, marked by different colours; the LHC genes of P. coloniale are highlighted in red. The coloured circles on the outer ring denote the distribution of the different LHC subfamilies in the respective taxa. The TUC clade comprises Trebouxiophyceae, Ulvophyceae and Chlorophyceae (all in Chlorophyta). ELIP, early light-induced protein; SEP, two-helix stress-enhanced protein; OHP, one-helix protein; PSBS, the photosystem II subunit S; RedCAP, red lineage chlorophyll a/b-binding (CAB)-like protein.
NaTuRe eCoLoGY & eVoLuTioN | VOL 4 | SEPTEMBER 2020 | 1220–1231 | www.nature.com/natecolevol1224
ArticlesNature ecology & evolutioN
Ostreococcus suggested that these algae might perform cytosol- and chloroplast-based C4-like CCMs49. P. coloniale, however, potentially harbours cytosol-, chloroplast- and mitochondrion-based CCMs to enhance the ability to concentrate CO2 in a low-CO2 environment. Interestingly, the P. coloniale genome encoded phosphoenolpyru-vate carboxykinase (PEPCK) but not pyruvate carboxylase (PC), opposite to the situation in the genomes of Mamiellophyceae49,54–56. This result suggests that a distinct CCM might exist in P. coloniale that uses phosphoenolpyruvate (PEP) as a substrate from the gly-colytic pathway to produce oxaloacetate (OAA) by PEPCK, instead of PC as in the Mamiellophyceae (Supplementary Table 12 and 13).
Analysis of carbohydrate-active enzymes (CAZymes) and peptidoglycan biosynthesis. The P. coloniale genome encoded 34 glycoside hydrolases (GHs) and 83 glycosyltransferases (GTs) belonging to 16 GH and 33 GT families (Supplementary Table 14). The total number of CAZymes was lower than in the early-diverging Chlorophyta and Streptophyta, and even lower than in Ostreococcus spp., the smallest eukaryotes (Supplementary Table 15), which prob-ably reflects the simple chemical structure of the P. coloniale cell wall (cells are enclosed within thick cell walls57). P. coloniale, however, harbours all genes involved in the biosynthesis and metabolism of starch (Supplementary Table 16 and Supplementary Fig. 11). Surprisingly, we could not find any enzymes involved in the syn-thesis or remodelling of the major components of the primary cell wall in embryophytes, such as enzymes of cellulose, mannan, xylo-glucan and xylan biosynthesis and degradation. Chlorella spp. have been reported to contain a cell wall with components of glucos-amine polymers such as chitin and chitosan58. However, very few chitosan-related genes were identified in the genome of P. coloniale (Supplementary Table 17). Interestingly, some but not many bacte-ria/archaea-specific protein glycosylation genes could be detected in the P. coloniale genome, such as low-salt glycan biosynthesis pro-tein Agl12, low-salt glycan biosynthesis reductase Agl14 and the GT AglE, which are involved in S-layer and cell surface structure
biogenesis in bacteria and archaea59. Furthermore, seven copies of regulatory response/sensor proteins, homologous to bacteria, could be identified in P. coloniale, which might respond to environmen-tal signals. Further studies are needed to biochemically explore the main components of the cell wall of P. coloniale.
Peptidoglycan is the main component of cell walls in bacteria60. Peptidoglycan biosynthesis requires several enzymes to participate in the conversion of UDP-N-acetyl-d-glucosamine (GlcNAc) t o GlcNac- N - ac et yl mu ra my l- pe nt ap ep ti de -p yr op ho sp horyl-unde caprenol61. All ten core enzymes involved in peptidoglycan biosynthesis were identified in the P. coloniale genome (Fig. 5a). Consistent with pre-vious results, Glaucoplantae (C. paradoxa) and Micromonas pusilla (Mamiellophyceae), as well as all streptophyte algae, bryophytes and ferns, encoded all the core enzymes62. We conclude that pep-tidoglycan was present in the ancestor of Archaeplastida, com-pletely lost in Rhodoplantae but retained in the common ancestor of Viridiplantae and Glaucoplantae, and then independently lost (to different degrees) in the later-diverging Mamiellophyceae, the core Chlorophyta and the vast majority of vascular seed plants.
Evolutionary analysis of flagella and sexual reproduction in P. coloniale. Prasinoderma coloniale and other members of the recently described class Palmophyllophyceae27 have been reported to lack flagella57,63–65. We performed a comparative analysis of fla-gellar proteins, and found that non-flagellate species (three species of Trebouxiophyceae and four of Ostreococcus and Bathycoccus) have ≤26 core flagellar proteins and a total number of flagellar pro-teins of ≤140 (average 117, n = 7), whereas flagellate species display ≥40 core flagellar proteins and a total of ≥192 flagellar proteins (average 272, n = 13) (Fig. 5b and Supplementary Table 18). This is corroborated by recent analyses among non-flagellate organisms (angiosperms, Rhodoplantae and pennate diatoms) that yielded on average 77 flagellar proteins21 (n = 10). Furthermore, non-flagellate species completely lack central pair proteins, dynein heavy chains (DHC1–7), and most of the intraflagellar transport (IFT) and radial
OAA MAMDHPEPC
MDH
MAME
δ-CA
Calvincycle
RuBP3-PGA
PEP
δ-CA
Pyr
PEP
MERuBisCO
OAA
OAA
MA
PEP PyrGlucose Ethanol
TCA
Glycolysis
γ-CAMDH
PEPCK PC
HCO3–
HCO3–
HCO3–
CO2
CO2CO2
CO2
+γ-CA
CO2
Respiration
+
ME
a b
PPDK46
69100
100 98
Alpha-CA
Delta-CA
Gamma-CABeta-CA
PR
CO
L_00000018-RA
PRCOL_00006549-RA
PRCOL_00006246-RAPRCOL_00000479-RA
1
Fig. 4 | CCMs in P. coloniale. a, Maximum-likelihood phylogeny of CA proteins in P. coloniale. b, Proposed CCMs in which inorganic carbon is assimilated by P. coloniale based on predicted protein localizations. A brown arrow denotes that a reaction occurs only in P. coloniale, and a grey dotted arrow denotes a reaction that exists in Mamiellophyceae. MA, malic acid; MDH, malate dehydrogenase; ME, malic enzyme; Pyr, pyruvate; 3-PGA, 3-phosphoglyceric acid; PPDK, pyruvate, phosphate dikinase; RuBisCO, ribulose-1,5-bisphosphate carboxylase oxygenase; TCA, tricarboxylic acid cycle.
NaTuRe eCoLoGY & eVoLuTioN | VOL 4 | SEPTEMBER 2020 | 1220–1231 | www.nature.com/natecolevol 1225
Articles Nature ecology & evolutioN
spoke proteins (RSP)21. RSP3, which binds to the inner dynein arm of the axonemal doublet microtubule and is required for axonemal sliding and flagellar motility, is also absent in non-flagellate organ-isms66,67. The number of flagellar proteins in P. coloniale (50 core proteins, 217 total flagellar proteins) and the presence of IFT (12) and DHC proteins (6), as well as RSP3, strongly suggest that P. colo-niale can produce flagellate cells. The absence of the PF6 protein of the central pair microtubule apparatus may indicate that flagellate cells in P. coloniale are short-lived, like the spermatozoids of centric diatoms68 or Chara braunii that also lack this protein.
Since sexual reproduction has not been observed in P. coloniale and Palmophyllophyceae in general, we searched for genes partici-pating in sexual reproduction. Thirty-one out of 40 meiosis-related genes were identified in the P. coloniale genome, and 8 out of 11 meiosis-specific genes were found (Supplementary Table 19). These numbers are higher than reported for meiosis-related genes in Symbiodinium69 (25) and Trichomonas vaginalis70 (27), and for
meiosis-specific genes in some other protists (five genes in Giardia71 and diatoms72 and four in the trebouxiophytes Auxenochlorella and Helicosporidium73), but similar to the number of meiosis-specific genes in Micromonas (7)49. Interestingly, P. coloniale seems to lack DMC1, the loss of which correlates with the adaptation of recombination-independent mechanisms for pairing and synapsis in both Drosophila and Caenorhabditis74. We tentatively conclude that P. coloniale retains the capacity for meiotic recombination and thus sexual reproduction.
De novo NAD+ and quinolate biosynthesis in P. coloniale. Nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide (NAD) and its phosphate (NADP) are essential redox co-factors in all living systems. All eukaryotic organisms have the ability to synthesize NAD by one of two de novo pathways, the aspartate pathway75 or the kynurenine pathway starting with tryptophan76. To date, no eukaryotic organism had been found that contains both pathways. P. coloniale is the first
RS
P1
RS
P2
RS
P3
RS
P4
RS
P5
RS
P6
RS
P8
RS
P9
RS
P10
RS
P11
RS
P12
RS
P16
RS
P17
RS
P23
CP
C1
PF
6P
F16
PF
20O
DA
DC
1O
DA
DC
2O
DA
DC
3O
DA
IC1
OD
AIC
2O
DA
LC1
OD
ALC
3O
DA
LC6
OD
ALC
7O
DA
LC8
OD
AD
HC
aO
DA
DH
Cb
OD
AD
HC
gIA
1D
HC
1aIA
1D
HC
1bID
A5
IAIC
28ID
AIC
138
IA1
IC14
0IF
T20
IFT
22IF
T46
IFT
52IF
T57
IFT
72/7
4IF
T80
IFT
81IF
T88
IFT
122A
IFT
140
IFT
172
DH
C1b
DH
C2
DH
C4
DH
C5
DH
C6
DH
C7
DH
C8
DH
C9
Mas
tigon
eme
M. pusillaM. commodaB. prasinosO. tauriO. lucimarinusOstreococcus sp.C. subellipsoideaC. variabilisA. protothecoides
M. neglectumC. zofingiensisD. salinaC. eustigmaC. reinhardtiiG. pectorale
Radial spoke proteinCentral pair
protein Out dynein Inner dyneinIntraflagellar transport
protein Dynein protein
Other flagellar proteinsSelected flagellar proteins
Reciprocal best hits
100 200 300
Flagellum loss events
57/28257/295
59/338
56/27150/256
54/228
49/202
21/8726/11425/104
18/9517/10117/9020/84
53/18752/184
Chl
orop
hyta
U. mutabilis
P. coloniale
Gla
ucop
lant
ae
C. paradoxa
C. brauniiK. nitensC. atmophyticusM. viride
44/227
45/17250/167
40/16951/189
42/15042/162
Str
epto
phyt
a
Ath
Osa
Sm
o
Ppa
Mpo Kni
Cat
Mvi
Apr
Ceu Cre
Cso
Cva
Czo
Csu
Gpe
Mne
Vca Bpr
Mco
MpuOlu
Osp Ota
Pco
Pum Ccr
Cm
e
Cpa
Presence Absence
Streptophyta TUC clade Prasinophytes
MurA
MurB
MurC
MurD
MurE
Ddl
MurF
MurY
MurG
PBP
b
a
V. carteri
0
Glaucoplantae Rhodoplantae
Flagella previously not reported
Fig. 5 | analysis of peptidoglycan biosynthesis and flagellar proteins derived from the P. coloniale genome. a, Distribution of proteins involved in the peptidoglycan biosynthetic pathway across Archaeplastida. b, Distribution of key flagellar proteins across Viridiplantae and Glaucoplantae.
NaTuRe eCoLoGY & eVoLuTioN | VOL 4 | SEPTEMBER 2020 | 1220–1231 | www.nature.com/natecolevol1226
ArticlesNature ecology & evolutioN
Tryptophan
L-Kynurenine
3-Hydroxy-L-kynurenine
3-Hydroxyanthranilate
2-Amino 3-carboxymuconate6-semialdehyde
Quinolinate
Iminoaspartate
L-Aspartate
NAD+
N-Formylkynurenine
TDO/IDO
AFM
KYU
HAAO
KMO
AO
QSSpontaneous
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750 800
PRCOL_00003084-RA
Bacteria-WP_040496802.1
Fungi-XP_021878578.1
Animal-XP_027039601.1
Animal-XP_027050477.1
Fungi-CEG65823.1
Bacteria-WP_026611299.1
Picolinic acid
ACMSD
2-Aminomuconic6-semialdehyde
P. coloniale
Early Chlorophyta
Early Streptophyta
Rhodoplantae
Glaucoplantae
Bacteria
a
b
Consensus
HAAOKYU
NNP
KYU
HAAO
Fig. 6 | Comparison of de novo NaD+ and quinolinate biosynthesis genes. a, Distribution of genes related to the de novo NAD+ and quinolinate biosynthetic pathways in P. coloniale (orange) as compared with Rhodoplantae (red), Glaucoplantae (purple), early-diverging Chlorophyta (blue), early-diverging Streptophyta (green) and bacteria (brown). Solid circles denote the presence of homologues in each clade. TDO/IDO, tryptophan-/indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase; AFM, arylformamidase; KMO, kynurenine 3-monooxygenase; KYU, kynureninase; HAAO, 3-hydroxyanthranilate 3,4-dioxygenase; ACMSD, 2-amino-3-carboxymuconate-6-semialdehyde decarboxylase; AO, l-aspartate oxidase; QS, quinolinate synthase. b, A gene fusion architecture between KYU and HAAO of P. coloniale; the left and right parts are the KYU and HAAO genes, respectively. A comparison of sequence similarity of various KYU and HAAO genes from different organisms is shown.
NaTuRe eCoLoGY & eVoLuTioN | VOL 4 | SEPTEMBER 2020 | 1220–1231 | www.nature.com/natecolevol 1227
Articles Nature ecology & evolutioN
eukaryotic organism to display both pathways (Supplementary Table 20, Fig. 6a and Supplementary Figs. 12–21): the (presumably) ancestral eukaryotic kynurenine pathway and the aspartate path-way. It has been hypothesized that the latter was acquired through primary endosymbiosis from cyanobacteria77. This is corroborated by the fact that both aspartate oxidase (AO) and quinolinate syn-thase (QS) of Glaucoplantae in phylogenetic analyses branch within cyanobacteria. Rhodoplantae have apparently lost the aspartate pathway (and instead retained the kynurenine pathway for NAD biosynthesis77). In Viridiplantae, however, the original cyanobac-terial AO and QS genes were replaced by those acquired through horizontal gene transfer (HGT) from other bacteria (Bacteriodetes and Deltaproteobacteria, respectively77). However, we can now develop a hypothetical evolutionary scenario for both pathways in Archaeplastida: with the introduction of the aspartate pathway from cyanobacteria during primary endosymbiosis, the ancestral eukaryotic kynurenine pathway for NAD biosynthesis was lost in Glaucoplantae and Viridiplantae (but not in Rhodoplantae, which apparently lost the aspartate pathway). While Glaucoplantae essen-tially retained the cyanobacterial aspartate pathway, the ancestor of the Viridiplantae replaced the cyanobacterial AO and QS genes by nuclear-encoded genes obtained from other bacteria through HGT, thus compensating their function and representing a new synapo-morphy for Viridiplantae. This recalls the situation in Paulinella chromatophora, in which loss of genes from the chromatophore genome was compensated by bacterial genes obtained through HGT and encoded on the nuclear genome78. We suggest that P. coloniale retained the kynurenine pathway, not for NAD syn-thesis but for synthesis (and possible excretion) of picolinic acid. Additionally, gene fusion architecture between KYU and HAAO of P. coloniale was observed (Fig. 6b). The metabolite picolinic acid, a tryptophan catabolite, can potentially form metal complexes with limiting trace elements such as iron, an important property in oli-gotrophic environments.
Vitamin auxotrophy and selenocysteine-containing proteins in P. coloniale. Previous studies found that some Mamiellophyceae (Ostreococcus, Micromonas) need to acquire the vitamins thiamine (B1) and cobalamin (B12) from the extracellular environment for growth, because they lack either enzymes needed for their biosyn-thesis (B1) or vitamin-independent isoforms of essential enzymes (for example, methionine synthase) that require the vitamin as a co-enzyme (B12)79,80. P. coloniale shares these features with the picoplanktonic Mamiellophyceae (Supplementary Table 21). The absence of any enzymes involved in the biosynthesis of thiamine in P. coloniale (except for the final phosphorylation step) dem-onstrates (1) the lack of bacterial contaminations in the genome assembly of the axenic strain used, and (2) that thiamine must be provided by the extracellular environment. It has recently been shown that, in Ostreococcus tauri, B1 and B12 auxotrophy can be alle-viated by co-cultivation with the bacterium Dinoroseobacter shibae, a member of the Rhodobacteraceae81, suggesting that in P. coloniale similar algal/bacterial partnerships may exist. Most importantly, P. coloniale is also a vitamin B7 (biotin) auxotroph, lacking all four genes involved in the biosynthesis of this vitamin, and apparently the only biotin auxotroph currently known among Archaeplastida82 (Supplementary Table 21). Many genomes of marine bacteria con-tain full sets of biotin biosynthesis genes83,84 and these bacteria could be a source of biotin for P. coloniale. Genome compaction in these picoplanktonic eukaryotes may have facilitated evolution of such symbiotic interactions in an oligotrophic marine environment.
The Mamiellophyceae genomes encode a large number of selenocysteine-containing proteins compared to C. reinhardtii49,54. The number of selenoproteins, their homologues and selenocys-teine insertion sequences have recently been investigated across selected Archaeplastida genomes85. P. coloniale also displayed a
high number of selenocysteine-containing proteins, similar to picoplanktonic Mamiellophyceae but unlike core Chlorophyta, early-diverging streptophyte algae, Glaucoplantae and Rhodoplantae (Supplementary Table 22). Selenoenzymes are more catalytically active than similar enzymes lacking selenium, and small cells may therefore require fewer of those proteins54.
ConclusionThe picoplanktonic eukaryote P. coloniale is a member of a new divi-sion/phylum of Viridiplantae, the Prasinodermophyta, that in phy-logenomic analyses diverges before the split of Viridiplantae into Chlorophyta and Streptophyta. Its genome revealed both ancestral and derived characteristics that correspond to its unique phyloge-netic position, equidistant from Chlorophyta and Streptophyta. The genome of strain CCMP 1413 showed adaptations to a low-light (deep-water), oligotrophic oceanic environment. In such an envi-ronment, metabolic coupling and horizontal gene transfer from bac-teria may have facilitated adaptation. In the latter, it resembles the genomes of the picoplanktonic Mamiellophyceae (Chlorophyta), although a number of apomorphic features in the genome of P. coloniale suggest that the picoplanktonic lifestyle in the two groups evolved independently.
MethodsCultivation of algae, nucleic acid extraction and light microscopy. Cultures of P. coloniale (CCMP 1413) were obtained from the National Center for Marine Algae and Microbiota (https://ncma.bigelow.org/ccmp1413#.XqP0zGgzYdU). Axenic cultures were prepared by streaking out algae on agar and picking single cell-derived clones from the plates. Algae were grown in a modified ASP12 culture medium86 (http://www.ccac.uni-koeln.de/) in a 14/10 h light/dark cycle at 20 µmol photons m−2 s−1 and 23 °C. During all steps of culture scale-up until nucleic acid extraction, axenicity was monitored by both sterility tests and light microscopy. Total RNA was extracted from P. coloniale using the CTAB-PVP method as described in ref. 87 (appendix S1 therein). Total DNA was extracted using a modified CTAB protocol88. Light microscopy was performed with a Leica DMLB light microscope using a PL-APO ×100/1.40 numerical aperture (NA) objective, an immersed condenser (NA 1.4) and a Metz Mecablitz 32 Ct3 flash system.
Genome sequencing and assembly. The long reads libraries were constructed using standard library preparation protocols and sequenced by the Pacbio Sequel platform. NextDenovo (https://github.com/Nextomics/NextDenovo) was used to generate the draft assembly. The draft assembly were first polished by Pacbio reads using Arrow, then NextPolish was used to perform a second round of polishing using short reads generated by the Illumina sequence platform. To eliminate putative bacterial contamination, contigs were searched against the NCBI non-redundant database.
K-mer analysis was performed to survey genome size, heterozygosity and repeat content before genome assembly. The peak of K-mer frequency (M) was determined by the real sequencing depth of the genome (N), read length (L) and the length of the K-mer (K) following the formula: M = N × (L – K + 1)/L. This formula enables accurate estimation of N, and hence an estimation of the genome size for homozygous diploid or haploid genomes. All these analyses indicated homozygosity of the genome and gave similar estimations of genome size. The final genome size was estimated (~26.04 Mb) using 17-mer analysis.
The quality of the assembly was evaluated in four ways: (1) we used BUSCO v.3 to determine the presence of a proportion of a core set of 303 highly conserved eukaryotic genes. (2) SOAP (v.2.21) was used to map the short reads to the assemblies to evaluate the DNA reads mapping rate in both species. In the meantime, sequence depth and genomic copy content distribution were calculated. (3) We used BLAT (v.36) to compare the draft assemblies to a transcript assembled by Bridger. (4) We mapped the RNA reads to the draft assemblies to evaluate the RNA reads mapping rate using Tophat2.
Transcriptome sequencing and assembly. Two methods of library construction were performed. The rRNA-depleted RNA library was constructed using the ribo-zero rRNA removal kit (plant) (Illumina) following the manufacturer’s protocol, while the poly (A)-selected RNA library was constructed using the ScriptSeq Library Prep kit (Plant leaf) (Illumina) following the manufacturer’s protocol. A total of 12.09 Gb of PE-100 RNA-seq data was generated using the Illumina Hiseq 4000 sequencing platform. SOAPfilter (v.2.2) was used to filter the reads with N > 10 bp, removing duplicates and adaptors. As a result, 5.58 Gb of clean reads were obtained after filtering, then Bridger was used to assemble the clean data into a transcriptome, which was used for gene annotation and genome evaluation.
NaTuRe eCoLoGY & eVoLuTioN | VOL 4 | SEPTEMBER 2020 | 1220–1231 | www.nature.com/natecolevol1228
ArticlesNature ecology & evolutioN
Repeat annotation. A pipeline combining de novo and library-based approaches was used to identify the repeat elements. For the de novo approach, MITE-hunter and LTRharvest were used to annotate the transposon and retrotransposon, respectively, then RepeatModeler (v.1.0.8) was performed to annotate the other repeat elements. For the library-based approach, the custom library Repbase 22.01 was used to identify the repeat elements by RepeatMasker.
Gene prediction and preliminary functional annotation. Three methods were combined to predict the gene model, an ab initio prediction method, a homologue search method and a RNA-seq data-aided method. For the first method, PASApipeline-2.1.0 was performed to predict gene structure using transcripts assembled by Bridger, which were further used in AUGUSTUS (v.3.2.3) to train gene models. GeneMark (v.1.0) was used to construct a hidden Markov model (HMM) profile for further annotation. For the homologue search method, gene sets of homologue species and public proteins of Prasinoderma were downloaded from the NCBI database. For the RNA-aided method, transcripts were assembled by Bridger as evidence. All predictions were combined using two rounds of MAKER (v.2.31.8) to yield the consensus gene sets. The final gene set was evaluated by mapping with eukaryotic BUSCO v.3 dataset and RNA read mapping by Tophat2. Coverage depth was calculated by Samtools (v.0.1.19).
Preliminary gene function annotation was performed by BLASTP (<10 × 10–5) against certain known databases, including SwissProt, TrEMBL, KEGG, COG and NR. InterProScan (using data from Pfam, PRINTS, SMART, ProDom and PROSITE) was used to identify protein motifs and protein domains of the predicted gene set. Gene Ontology information was obtained through Blast2Go (v.2.5.0). For certain key functional genes we used a stricter functional annotation method by the addition of some known query genes, as described in Detection of important candidate functional genes.
Whole-genome phylogenetic analysis. For whole-genome phylogenetic analysis, both genome data downloaded from public databases (NCBI Refseq or JGI) and transcriptome data downloaded from the 1000 Plants Project (1KP, https://sites.google.com/a/ualberta.ca/onekp/) were used. First, OrthoFinder (v.1.1.8) was used to infer orthogroups (gene families) among the 28 selected organisms. Single-copy orthogroups (gene families with only one gene copy per species) were collected, since every single-copy gene in each gene family could be an orthologue among 28 organisms. We used multiple alignment with fast Fourier transform (MAFFT v.7.310) to perform multiple sequence alignment for each single-copy gene orthogroup, followed by a gap position (removing only positions where 50% or more of the sequences having a gap are treated as gap positions). We constructed multiple phylogenetic trees using different tree construction methods (concatenated and coalescent methods) based on different taxon samplings (that is, number of species). In concatenated tree reconstruction, each single-copy gene alignment was linked by order to establish a super-gene, which was used to construct a concatenated maximum-likelihood phylogenetic tree with either RAxML (amino acid substitution model: CAT + GTR, with 500 bootstrap replicates) or IQ-TREE (amino substitution model inferred by ModelFinder, with 500 bootstrap replicates). In addition, we used MrBayes (v.3.2.6) to construct a Bayesian phylogenetic tree, Markov chain Monte Carlo, which was set to run 1,000,000 generations and sampled every 1,000 generations, the first 25% of which was discarded as burn-in. In the coalescent method, a maximum-likelihood phylogenetic tree was constructed for each single-copy orthogroup. We then used ASTRAL to combine all single-copy gene trees into a species tree with the multi-species coalescent model. Finally, we compared and summarized phylogenetic trees using different methods or different datasets. For a general discussion on concatenated versus coalescent methods for phylogenetic reconstruction, see ref. 28.
Phylogenetic analyses of complete nuclear and plastid-encoded rRNA operon sequences of 109 Archaeplantae. New sequence data of rRNA operons were generated for several taxa (see Supplementary Table 33, and as described previously30). For other taxa, data were either retrieved from annotated entries in sequence databases (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nucleotide/) or assembled from non-annotated transcriptome sequence data (MMETSP and ONE_KP; see Supplementary Table 31). All new rRNA sequences, as well as newly assembled transcriptome data, were submitted to GENBANK (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/genbank/; bold accession numbers in Supplementary Table 31). Sequences were manually aligned, guided by rRNA/transfer RNA secondary structures using SeaView 4.3.0 (http://pbil.univ-lyon1.fr/software/seaview.html). For phylogenetic analyses, only those positions were selected that could be unambiguously aligned among the Rhodoplantae, Glaucoplantae and Viridiplantae—in total, 8,818 nucleotides (nt). For all phylogenetic analyses, the 8,818 positions were subdivided into four sections: nuclear 18 S rDNA (1,621 nt), nuclear 5.8 S and 28 S rDNA (3,025 nt), plastid 16 S rDNA and two tRNA genes (1,535 nt) and plastid 23 S rDNA (2,637 nt). Tree reconstructions were performed at the CIPRES Science Gateway (http://www.phylo.org/sub_sections/portal/) using three methods: maximum-likelihood with RAxML (v.8.2.10), maximum-likelihood with IQ-TREE (v.1.6.10) and Bayesian tree reconstruction with MrBayes (v.3.2.6).
RAxML analyses were performed with 1,000 bootstrap replicates, each with 100 starting trees, using either the GTRGAMMA model (for all trees shown here) or the GTRCAT model (GTRCAT trees were almost identical to GTRGAMMA trees; not shown). In likelihood analyses using IQ-TREE, the best-fitting model was identified by ModelFinder and the bootstrap analysis again involved 1,000 replicates. For Bayesian analysis, 1,000,000 generations were calculated under the GTR + I + G model, and generations 1–250,000 were discarded as burn-in. Bootstrap percentages <50% and Bayesian posterior probabilities <0.9 were regarded as ‘unsupported’. Phylogenetic trees were also constructed using nuclear- and plastid-encoded rRNA operons separately (Supplementary Figs. 5 and 6).
Search for unique rRNA synapomorphies. To find unique molecular synapomorphies (Supplementary Files_Taxonomic Acts and Revisions)—that is, rare mutations that characterize a given clade—we performed tree-based synapomorphy searches as previously described89. To identify genuine non-homoplasious synapomorphies (flagged as NHS), and to find homoplasious changes (parallelisms and reversals), the synapomorphy search must cover as much diversity as possible. Therefore, all synapomorphies that resulted from the initial search procedure (using only 109 Plantae) were controlled for homoplasies by (1) a taxon-rich alignment containing nuclear rRNA operons from about 1,300 Archaeplastida/Plantae, (2) an alignment with plastid rRNA operons from about 1,600 Archaeplastida/Plantae and (3) BLAST searches (https://blast.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/Blast.cgi).
Genome composition of P. coloniale genome. We looked at the components of the P. coloniale genome mainly in three ways: (1) gene family clustering was first performed on gene sets of the species C. atmophyticus (Streptophyta), M. commoda (Chlorophyta), C. paradoxa (Glaucoplantae) and P. coloniale. Commonly shared and unique gene families were shown and displayed on a Venn diagram. (2) The P. coloniale gene set was aligned to the NCBI non-redundant database (NR), and the best alignment results (Best-hit) were obtained for each gene. The NCBI taxonomy database was then used to classify the P. coloniale gene set. (3) We selected early-diverging Streptophyta (five species), early-diverging Chlorophyta (five species) and P. coloniale to perform the gene family cluster, and then divided all gene families into three categories: early Chlorophyta gene families, early Streptophyta gene families and gene families shared by both early Chlorophyta and early Streptophyta35. First, we removed unusual/weird gene families in which the gene number of some species was over tenfold larger than the average gene number of the other species. We also removed gene families that include only one species. Then, the average gene numbers in early Chlorophyta and early Streptophyta were determined for each gene family. If the average gene number of early Chlorophyta in a gene family was more than twice the number of early Streptophyta, that gene family was designated as an early Chlorophyta gene family. Conversely, if the average gene number of early Streptophyta in a gene family was larger than twice the number of early Chlorophyta, that gene family was designated as an early Streptophyta gene family. The remaining gene families were shared between early Chlorophyta and early Streptophyta.
Detection of key candidate functional genes. All candidate genes were screened based on the following conditions: (1) candidate gene sequences should be similar to the query genes collected from previous studies or databases (BLAST <10 × 10–5); and (2) the function of the candidate genes should be consistent with the query genes according to online NR functional annotation or Swissprot functional annotation.
Regarding the detection of flagellar genes, we mainly referenced the flagellar genes from refs. 49,90. After elimination of redundancy, we obtained 397 flagellar genes as our query set. We used the reciprocal best hits method to identify flagellar genes.
For cell wall-related gene annotation we used the CAZyme database as query, then the web meta-server dbCAN2 (http://bcb.unl.edu/dbCAN2/index.php) was used to detect CAZymes. dbCAN2 integrates three tools/databases for automated CAZyme annotation: (1) HMMER, for annotation of the CAZyme domain against the dbCAN CAZyme domain HMM database; (2) DIAMOND for fast blast hits in the CAZy database; and (3) Hotpep for short conserved motifs in the Peptide Pattern Recognition (PPR) library.
For TFs we used the HMMER search method. We downloaded the HMMER model of the domain structure of each transcription factor from the Pfam website (https://pfam.xfam.org/) while referring to the TAPscan v.2 transcription factor database91 (https://plantcode.online.uni-marburg.de/tapscan/). Preliminary candidates were collected by searching the profile HMM for each species (<10 × 10–5), then we filtered those genes that did not match the SwissProt functional annotation (<10 × 10–5). Finally, we filtered genes containing a wrong domain according to the domain rules of the TAPscan v.2 transcription factor database. Most TFs/TRs were confirmed by phylogenetic tree analysis.
Subcellular localization. To predict where key proteins (for example, certain enzymes related to carbon-concentrating mechanisms) reside in a cell, we used online tools including WoLF_PSORT (https://www.genscript.com/wolf-psort.html?src=leftbar), TargetP (http://www.cbs.dtu.dk/services/TargetP/), Hectar
NaTuRe eCoLoGY & eVoLuTioN | VOL 4 | SEPTEMBER 2020 | 1220–1231 | www.nature.com/natecolevol 1229
Articles Nature ecology & evolutioN
(https://webtools.sb-roscoff.fr/) and LocSigDB (http://genome.unmc.edu/LocSigDB/index.html) to predict the subcellular localization of these proteins. Combining the results of the four tools, we estimated the localization.
Reporting Summary. Further information on research design is available in the Nature Research Reporting Summary linked to this article.
Data availabilityWhole-genome assemblies, annotation and raw data for P. coloniale in this study are deposited at the CNGB Nucleotide Sequence Archive92 (CNSA: http://db.cngb.org/cnsa, accession no. CNP0000924).
Received: 12 June 2019; Accepted: 12 May 2020; Published online: 22 June 2020
References 1. Niklas, K. J. The Evolutionary Biology of Plants (Univ. of Chicago Press, 1997). 2. Kenrick, P. & Crane, P. The origin and early evolution of plants on Land.
Nature 389, 33–39 (1997). 3. Willis, K. & McElwain, J. The Evolution of Plants (Oxford Univ. Press, 2014). 4. Judd, W. S., Campbell, C. S., Kellogg, E. A., Stevens, P. F. & Donoghue, M. J.
Plant Systematics: A Phylogenetic Approach (Sinauer, 2008). 5. Courties, C. et al. Smallest eukaryotic organism. Nature 370, 255 (1994). 6. Yoon, H. S., Hackett, J. D., Ciniglia, C., Pinto, G. & Bhattacharya, D. A
molecular timeline for the origin of photosynthetic eukaryotes. Mol. Biol. Evol. 21, 809–818 (2004).
7. Morris, J. L. et al. The timescale of early land plant evolution. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 115, E2274–E2283 (2018).
8. Bremer, K. Summary of green plant phylogeny and classification. Cladistics 1, 369–385 (1985).
9. Melkonian, M. & Surek, B. Phylogeny of the Chlorophyta: congruence between ultrastructural and molecular evidence. Bull. Soc. Zool. Fr. 120, 191–208 (1995).
10. Lewis, L. A. & McCourt, R. M. Green algae and the origin of land plants. Am. J. Bot. 91, 1535–1556 (2004).
11. Becker, B. & Marin, B. Streptophyte algae and the origin of embryophytes. Ann. Bot. 103, 999–1004 (2009).
12. Leliaert, F. et al. Phylogeny and molecular evolution of the green algae. Crit. Rev. Plant Sci. 31, 1–46 (2012).
13. Wickett, N. J. et al. Phylotranscriptomic analysis of the origin and early diversification of land plants. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111, E4859–E4868 (2014).
14. Ruhfel, B. R., Gitzendanner, M. A., Soltis, P. S., Soltis, D. E. & Burleigh, J. G. From algae to angiosperms–inferring the phylogeny of green plants (Viridiplantae) from 360 plastid genomes. BMC Evol. Biol. 14, 23 (2014).
15. Gitzendanner, M. A., Soltis, P. S., Wong, G. K. S., Ruhfel, B. R. & Soltis, D. E. Plastid phylogenomic analysis of green plants: a billion years of evolutionary history. Am. J. Bot. 105, 291–301 (2018).
16. Turmel, M. & Lemieux, C. Evolution of the plastid genome in green algae. Adv. Bot. Res. 85, 157–193 (2018).
17. Stewart, K. D. & Mattox, K. R. Structural evolution in the flagellated cells of green algae and land plants. BioSystems 10, 145–152 (1978).
18. Melkonian, M. Structural and evolutionary aspects of the flagellar apparatus in green algae and land plants. Taxon 31, 255–265 (1982).
19. Lemieux, C., Otis, C. & Turmel, M. Ancestral chloroplast genome in Mesostigma viride reveals an early branch of green plant evolution. Nature 403, 649–652 (2000).
20. Wang, S. et al. Genomes of early-diverging streptophyte algae shed light on plant terrestrialization. Nat. Plants 6, 95–106 (2020).
21. Rodríguez-Ezpeleta, N., Philippe, H., Brinkmann, H., Becker, B. & Melkonian, M. Phylogenetic analyses of nuclear, mitochondrial, and plastid multigene data sets support the placement of Mesostigma in the Streptophyta. Mol. Biol. Evol. 24, 723–731 (2007).
22. Marin, B. & Melkonian, M. Mesostigmatophyceae, a new class of streptophyte green algae revealed by SSU rRNA sequence comparisons. Protist 150, 399–417 (1999).
23. Guillou, L. et al. Diversity of picoplanktonic prasinophytes assessed by direct nuclear SSU rDNA sequencing of environmental samples and novel isolates retrieved from oceanic and coastal marine ecosystems. Protist 155, 193–214 (2004).
24. Marin, B. & Melkonian, M. Molecular phylogeny and classification of the Mamiellophyceae class. nov. (Chlorophyta) based on sequence comparisons of the nuclear- and plastid-encoded rRNA operons. Protist 161, 304–336 (2010).
25. Lemieux, C., Otis, C. & Turmel, M. Six newly sequenced chloroplast genomes from prasinophyte green algae provide insights into the relationships among prasinophyte lineages and the diversity of streamlined genome architecture in picoplanktonic species. BMC Genomics 15, 857 (2014).
26. Zechman, F. W. et al. An unrecognized ancient lineage of green plants persists in deep marine waters. J. Phycol. 46, 1288–1295 (2010).
27. Leliaert, F. et al. Chloroplast phylogenomic analyses reveal the deepest-branching lineage of the Chlorophyta, Palmophyllophyceae class. nov. Sci. Rep. 6, 25367 (2016).
28. Molloy, E. & Warnow, T. Large-scale species tree estimation. Preprint at arXiv https://arxiv.org/abs/1904.02600 (2019).
29. Leebens-Mack, J. H. et al. One thousand plant transcriptomes and the phylogenomics of green plants. Nature 574, 679–685 (2019).
30. Marin, B. Nested in the Chlorellales or independent class? Phylogeny and classification of the Pedinophyceae (Viridiplantae) revealed by molecular phylogenetic analyses of complete nuclear and plastid-encoded rRNA operons. Protist 163, 778–805 (2012).
31. Shen, X.-X., Hittinger, C. T. & Rokas, A. Contentious relationships in phylogenomic studies can be driven by a handful of genes. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 1, 0126 (2017).
32. Walker, J. F., Walker-Hale, N., Vargas, O. M., Larson, D. A. & Stull, G. W. Characterizing gene tree conflict in plastome-inferred phylogenies. PeerJ. 7, e7747 (2019).
33. Gonçalves, D. J. P., Simpson, B. B., Ortiz, E. M., Shimizu, G. H. & Jansen, R. K. Incongruence between gene trees and species trees and phylogenetic signal variation in plastid genes. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 138, 219–232 (2019).
34. Grimsley, N., Yau, S., Piganeau, G. & Moreau, H. in Marine Protists (eds. Ohtsuka, S. et al.) 107–127 (Springer, 2015).
35. Hori, K. et al. Klebsormidium flaccidum genome reveals primary factors for plant terrestrial adaptation. Nat. Commun. 5, 3978 (2014).
36. Nishiyama, T. et al. The Chara genome: secondary complexity and implications for plant terrestrialization. Cell 174, 448–464 (2018).
37. Rinerson, C. I., Rabara, R. C., Tripathi, P., Shen, Q. J. & Rushton, P. J. The evolution of WRKY transcription factors. BMC Plant Biol. 15, 66 (2015).
38. Safi, A. et al. The world according to GARP transcription factors. Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 39, 159–167 (2017).
39. Guo, A.-Y. et al. Genome-wide identification and evolutionary analysis of the plant-specific SBP-box transcription factor family. Gene 418, 1–8 (2008).
40. Kropat, J. et al. A regulator of nutritional copper signaling in Chlamydomonas is an SBP domain protein that recognizes the GTAC core of copper response element. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 102, 18730–18735 (2005).
41. Moreno-Risueno, M. Á., Martínez, M., Vicente-Carbajosa, J. & Carbonero, P. The family of DOF transcription factors: from green unicellular algae to vascular plants. Mol. Genet. Genomics 277, 379–390 (2007).
42. Crevillén, P. et al. Epigenetic reprogramming that prevents transgenerational inheritance of the vernalized state. Nature 515, 587–590 (2014).
43. Liu, C., Lu, F., Cui, X. & Cao, X. Histone methylation in higher plants. Annu. Rev. Plant Biol. 61, 395–420 (2010).
44. Croce, R., Van Grondelle, R., Van Amerongen, H. & Van Stokkum, I. Light Harvesting in Photosynthesis (CRC Press, 2018).
45. Grossman, A. R., Bhaya, D., Apt, K. E. & Kehoe, D. M. Light-harvesting complexes in oxygenic photosynthesis: diversity, control, and evolution. Annu. Rev. Genet. 29, 231–288 (1995).
46. Dreyfuss, B. W. & Thornber, J. P. Assembly of the light-harvesting complexes (LHCs) of photosystem II (monomeric LHC Iib complexes are intermediates in the formation of oligomeric LHC IIb complexes). Plant Physiol. 106, 829–839 (1994).
47. Schmid, V. H. R. Light-harvesting complexes of vascular plants. Cell. Mol. Life Sci. 65, 3619–3639 (2008).
48. Kunugi, M. et al. Evolution of green plants accompanied changes in light-harvesting systems. Plant Cell Physiol. 57, 1231–1243 (2016).
49. Worden, A. Z. et al. Green evolution and dynamic adaptations revealed by genomes of the marine picoeukaryotes Micromonas. Science 324, 268–272 (2009).
50. Cock, J. M. et al. The Ectocarpus genome and the independent evolution of multicellularity in brown algae. Nature 465, 617–621 (2010).
51. Roberts, K., Granum, E., Leegood, R. C. & Raven, J. A. Carbon acquisition by diatoms. Photosynth. Res. 93, 79–88 (2007).
52. Kroth, P. G. et al. A model for carbohydrate metabolism in the diatom Phaeodactylum tricornutum deduced from comparative whole genome analysis. PLoS ONE 3, e1426 (2008).
53. Radakovits, R. et al. Draft genome sequence and genetic transformation of the oleaginous alga Nannochloropis gaditana. Nat. Commun. 3, 686 (2012).
54. Palenik, B. et al. The tiny eukaryote Ostreococcus provides genomic insights into the paradox of plankton speciation. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 104, 7705–7710 (2007).
55. Derelle, E. et al. Genome analysis of the smallest free-living eukaryote Ostreococcus tauri unveils many unique features. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 103, 11647–11652 (2006).
56. Moreau, H. et al. Gene functionalities and genome structure in Bathycoccus prasinos reflect cellular specializations at the base of the green lineage. Genome Biol. 13, R74 (2012).
NaTuRe eCoLoGY & eVoLuTioN | VOL 4 | SEPTEMBER 2020 | 1220–1231 | www.nature.com/natecolevol1230
ArticlesNature ecology & evolutioN
57. Jouenne, F. et al. Prasinoderma singularis sp. nov. (Prasinophyceae, Chlorophyta), a solitary coccoid prasinophyte from the South-East Pacific Ocean. Protist 162, 70–84 (2011).
58. Blanc, G. et al. The Chlorella variabilis NC64A genome reveals adaptation to photosymbiosis, coevolution with viruses, and cryptic sex. Plant Cell 22, 2943–2955 (2010).
59. Fagan, R. P. & Fairweather, N. F. Biogenesis and functions of bacterial S-layers. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 12, 211–222 (2014).
60. Seltmann, G. & Holst, O. The Bacterial Cell Wall (Springer Science & Business Media, 2013).
61. Lovering, A. L., Safadi, S. S. & Strynadka, N. C. J. Structural perspective of peptidoglycan biosynthesis and assembly. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 81, 451–478 (2012).
62. van Baren, M. J. et al. Evidence-based green algal genomics reveals marine diversity and ancestral characteristics of land plants. BMC Genomics 17, 267 (2016).
63. Miyashita, H., Ikemoto, H., Kurano, N., Miyachi, S. & Chihara, M. Prasinococcus capsulatus gen. et sp. nov., a new marine coccoid prasinophyte. J. Gen. Appl. Microbiol. 39, 571–582 (1993).
64. Hasegawa, T. et al. Prasinoderma coloniale gen. et sp. nov., a new pelagic coccoid prasinophyte from the Western Pacific Ocean. Phycologia 35, 170–176 (1996).
65. Sieburth, J. M., Keller, M. D., Johnson, P. W. & Myklestad, S. M. Widespread occurrence of the oceanic ultraplankter, Prasinococcus capsulatus (Prasinophyceae), the diagnostic “Golgi‐decapore complex” and the newly described polysaccharide “capsulan”. J. Phycol. 35, 1032–1043 (1999).
66. Yang, P. & Smith, E. F. in The Chlamydomonas Sourcebook (ed. Witman, G. B.) 209–234 (Elsevier, 2009).
67. Jivan, A., Earnest, S., Juang, Y. C. & Cobb, M. H. Radial spoke protein 3 is a mammalian protein kinase A-anchoring protein that binds ERK1/2. J. Biol. Chem. 284, 29437–29445 (2009).
68. Armbrust, E. V. et al. The genome of the diatom Thalassiosira pseudonana: ecology, evolution, and metabolism. Science 306, 79–86 (2004).
69. Chi, J., Parrow, M. W. & Dunthorn, M. Cryptic sex in Symbiodinium (Alveolata, Dinoflagellata) is supported by an inventory of meiotic genes. J. Eukaryot. Microbiol. 61, 322–327 (2014).
70. Malik, S.-B. An expanded inventory of conserved meiotic genes provides evidence for sex in Trichomonas vaginalis. PLoS ONE 3, e2879 (2008).
71. Ramesh, M. A., Malik, S. B. & Logsdon, J. M. Jr A phylogenomic inventory of meiotic genes: evidence for sex in Giardia and an early eukaryotic origin of meiosis. Curr. Biol. 15, 185–191 (2005).
72. Patil, S. et al. Identification of the meiotic toolkit in diatoms and exploration of meiosis-specific SPO11 and RAD51 homologs in the sexual species Pseudo-nitzschia multistriata and Seminavis robusta. BMC Genomics 16, 930 (2015).
73. Fučíková, K., Pažoutová, M. & Rindi, F. Meiotic genes and sexual reproduction in the green algal class Trebouxiophyceae (Chlorophyta). J. Phycol. 51, 419–430 (2015).
74. Villeneuve, A. M. & Hillers, K. J. Whence meiosis? Cell 106, 647–650 (2001). 75. Griffith, G. R., Chandler, J. L. & Gholson, R. K. Studies on the de novo
biosynthesis of NAD in Escherichia coli: the separation of the nadB gene product from the nadA gene product and its purification. Eur. J. Biochem. 54, 239–245 (1975).
76. Gaertner, F. H. & Shetty, A. S. Kynureninase-type enzymes and the evolution of the aerobic tryptophan-to-nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide pathway. Biochim. Biophys. Acta Enzymol. 482, 453–460 (1977).
77. Ternes, C. M. & Schönknecht, G. Gene transfers shaped the evolution of de novo NAD+ biosynthesis in eukaryotes. Genome Biol. Evol. 6, 2335–2349 (2014).
78. Nowack, E. C. M. et al. Gene transfers from diverse bacteria compensate for reductive genome evolution in the chromatophore of Paulinella chromatophora. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 113, 12214–12219 (2016).
79. Croft, M. T., Lawrence, A. D., Raux-Deery, E., Warren, M. J. & Smith, A. G. Algae acquire vitamin B12 through a symbiotic relationship with bacteria. Nature 438, 90–93 (2005).
80. Helliwell, K. E. The roles of B vitamins in phytoplankton nutrition: new perspectives and prospects. New Phytol. 216, 62–68 (2017).
81. Cooper, M. B. et al. Cross-exchange of B-vitamins underpins a mutualistic interaction between Ostreococcus tauri and Dinoroseobacter shibae. ISME J. 13, 334–345 (2019).
82. Croft, M. T., Warren, M. J. & Smith, A. G. Algae need their vitamins. Eukaryot. Cell 5, 1175–1183 (2006).
83. Cho, S. H. et al. Elucidation of the biosynthetic pathway of vitamin B groups and potential secondary metabolite gene clusters via genome analysis of a marine bacterium Pseudoruegeria sp. M32A2M. J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 30, 505–514 (2020).
84. Karimi, E. et al. Genome sequences of 72 bacterial strains isolated from Ectocarpus subulatus: a resource for algal microbiology. Genome Biol. Evol. 12, 3647–3655 (2020).
85. Liang, H. et al. Phylogenomics provides new insights into gains and losses of selenoproteins among Archaeplastida. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 20, 3020 (2019).
86. McFadden, G. I. & Melkonian, M. Use of Hepes buffer for microalgal culture media and fixation for electron microscopy. Phycologia 25, 551–557 (1986).
87. Johnson, M. T. J. et al. Evaluating methods for isolating total RNA and predicting the success of sequencing phylogenetically diverse plant transcriptomes. PLoS ONE 7, e50226 (2012).
88. Sahu, S. K., Thangaraj, M. & Kathiresan, K. DNA extraction protocol for plants with high levels of secondary metabolites and polysaccharides without using liquid nitrogen and phenol. ISRN Mol. Biol. 2012, 205049 (2012).
89. Marin, B., Palm, A., Klingberg, M. & Melkonian, M. Phylogeny and taxonomic revision of plastid-containing euglenophytes based on SSU rDNA sequence comparisons and synapomorphic signatures in the SSU rRNA secondary structure. Protist 154, 99–145 (2003).
90. Nevers, Y. et al. Insights into ciliary genes and evolution from multi-level phylogenetic profiling. Mol. Biol. Evol. 34, 2016–2034 (2017).
91. De Clerck, O. et al. Insights into the evolution of multicellularity from the sea lettuce genome. Curr. Biol. 28, 2921–2933 (2018).
92. Cheng, S. et al. 10KP: a phylodiverse genome sequencing plan. Gigascience 7, giy013 (2018).
acknowledgementsWe thank G. Günther (http://www.mikroskopia.de/index.html) for microscopic images of P. coloniale. Financial support was provided by the Shenzhen Municipal Government of China (grant no. JCYJ20151015162041454) and the Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Genome Read and Write (grant no. 2017B030301011). This work is part of the 10KP project, and is supported by China National GeneBank.
author contributionsH.Liu., M.M. and Y.V.P. conceived, designed and supervised the project. M.M., H.Liu., X.X., J.W., G.K.-S.W. and H.Y. provided resources and materials. Z.C. and S.K.S. developed the protocol for DNA extraction. S.Wittek., T.R. and B.Melkonian grew the organisms to quantity and extracted DNA. Samples were sequenced by B.G.I.; L.L. and S.Wang generated the draft genome and performed the annotation. L.L., S.Wang, H.W., S.K.S., B.Marin, H.Y., Y.X., H.Li., H.Liang, Z.L., S.C. and M.P. analysed data. S.Wang., L.L., S.K.S. and M.M. wrote the paper. J.W., H.Y., X.L., H.Liu., M.M. and Y.V.P. revised the manuscript. All authors read and revised the final version of the manuscript.
Competing interestsThe authors declare no competing interests.
additional informationExtended data is available for this paper at https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-020-1221-7.
Supplementary information is available for this paper at https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-020-1221-7.
Correspondence and requests for materials should be addressed to Y.V.P., M.M. or H.L.
Reprints and permissions information is available at www.nature.com/reprints.
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adap-tation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long
as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statu-tory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.© The Author(s) 2020
NaTuRe eCoLoGY & eVoLuTioN | VOL 4 | SEPTEMBER 2020 | 1220–1231 | www.nature.com/natecolevol 1231
Articles Nature ecology & evolutioNArticles Nature ecology & evolutioN
Extended Data Fig. 1 | a physical map of the P. coloniale genome. Outer ring: The 22 chromosomes were labeled from Chr1 to Chr22. Inner rings 2–5 (from outside to inside): Illumina sequencing depth colored in light green (y-axis min-max: 0–592). PacBio sequencing depth colored in light purple (y-axis min-max: 0–67). GC content of P. coloniale chromosomes in light blue (y-axis min-max: 0–80.0). The gene number distribution of P. coloniale colored in red (y-axis min-max: 0–38). The slide window of inner rings 2–5 is 5,000 bp. Inner rings 6–15: Genes shared between P. coloniale and other early-diverging viridiplant genomes, from outside to inside. M. viride, C. atmophyticus, K. nitens, C. braunii and M. endlicherianum (green), M. commoda, M. pusilla, B. prasinos, O. lucimarinus and O. tauri (blue).
NaTuRe eCoLoGY & eVoLuTioN | www.nature.com/natecolevol
ArticlesNature ecology & evolutioN ArticlesNature ecology & evolutioN
Extended Data Fig. 2 | See next page for caption.
NaTuRe eCoLoGY & eVoLuTioN | www.nature.com/natecolevol
Articles Nature ecology & evolutioNArticles Nature ecology & evolutioN
Extended Data Fig. 2 | The impact of a severely reduced taxon sampling in rRNa phylogenies on the placement of the Prasinodermophyta. (a). RAxML phylogeny of 23 Archaeplastida/Plantae, for which genome sequences have been determined. As an exception, the Gonium genome project did not cover both rRNA operons, and thus, Gonium was replaced by the closely related Yamagishiella. For similar reasons, Micromonas pusilla was replaced by M. bravo. The Prasinodermophyta, represented only by Prasinoderma coloniale, was resolved as sister to the Mamiellales (Mamiellophyceae) with maximal support. This artificial placement (that is Prasinoderma coloniale diverging within the Chlorophyta) gained high support by bootstrapping (numbers in red color). (b). Splitting the long branch of Prasinoderma coloniale by addition of Prasinococcus capsulatus did not change the artificial placement of the Prasinodermophyta, but reduced the bootstrap support for the artificial branches (numbers in red color). (c). When the long branch of the Mamiellales was subdivided by addition of Monomastix sp. and Pyramimonas parkeae, the Mamiellophyceae/Pyramimonadophyceae-clade diverged independently, and the Prasinodermophyta attained a basally diverging position within Viridiplantae. However, the support for the basal divergence of the Prasinodermophyta was relatively low (numbers in blue color). (d). Further addition of only two taxa, Dolichomastix tenuilepis and Cymbomonas tetramitiformis, was sufficient to raise the bootstrap support for the monophyly of the Chlorophyta (to the exclusion of Prasinodermophyta; 94%), and the monophyly of Chlorophyta+Streptophyta (again to the exclusion of Prasinodermophyta; 89%) to high values (numbers in blue color), comparable to the 109-taxa rRNA phylogeny (Fig. 1c), and the genome/transcriptome tree (Fig. 1b). Taxon sampling for resolving the phylogenetic position of the Prasinodermophyta is thus saturated with only 28 sequences of Archaeplastidae/Plantae.
NaTuRe eCoLoGY & eVoLuTioN | www.nature.com/natecolevol
ArticlesNature ecology & evolutioN ArticlesNature ecology & evolutioN
Extended Data Fig. 3 | Comparison of genome characteristics across Viridiplantae. Genome size, average gene size, the percentage of the coding sequence, average gene density, average exon number per gene and total exon number among early-diverging lineages of Chlorophyta and Streptophyta compared to P. coloniale.
NaTuRe eCoLoGY & eVoLuTioN | www.nature.com/natecolevol
Articles Nature ecology & evolutioNArticles Nature ecology & evolutioN
Extended Data Fig. 4 | The phylogenetic tree of WRKY domain. Prasinoderma’s WRKY domain is marked in light green color. WRKY domains I CTD and I NTD represent the C- and N-terminal domains of a single WRKY gene, each domain is monophyletic comprising both Streptophyta and Chlorophyta. This suggests that the common ancestor of Chlorophyta and Streptophyta had this configuration. Interestingly, P. coloniale has four gene copies with a total of six WRKY domains (Supplementary Fig. 13). Two of the gene copies display both N- and C-terminal WRKY domains, the other two have only N-terminal WRKY domains. The phylogenetic tree (Supplementary Fig. 13) placed three WRKY domains in clade I CTD (two C-terminal and one N-terminal WRKY domain), the other N-terminal WRKY domains of P. coloniale could not be positioned in one of the 8 WRKY domain subfamilies. We suggest that the I CTD subfamily is ancestral in the Viridiplantae and the N-terminal WRKY domains originated by domain duplication and shuffling.
NaTuRe eCoLoGY & eVoLuTioN | www.nature.com/natecolevol
1
nature research | reporting summ
aryO
ctober 2018
Corresponding author(s): Huan Liu
Last updated by author(s): Apr 30, 2020
Reporting SummaryNature Research wishes to improve the reproducibility of the work that we publish. This form provides structure for consistency and transparency in reporting. For further information on Nature Research policies, see Authors & Referees and the Editorial Policy Checklist.
StatisticsFor all statistical analyses, confirm that the following items are present in the figure legend, table legend, main text, or Methods section.
n/a Confirmed
The exact sample size (n) for each experimental group/condition, given as a discrete number and unit of measurement
A statement on whether measurements were taken from distinct samples or whether the same sample was measured repeatedly
The statistical test(s) used AND whether they are one- or two-sided Only common tests should be described solely by name; describe more complex techniques in the Methods section.
A description of all covariates tested
A description of any assumptions or corrections, such as tests of normality and adjustment for multiple comparisons
A full description of the statistical parameters including central tendency (e.g. means) or other basic estimates (e.g. regression coefficient) AND variation (e.g. standard deviation) or associated estimates of uncertainty (e.g. confidence intervals)
For null hypothesis testing, the test statistic (e.g. F, t, r) with confidence intervals, effect sizes, degrees of freedom and P value noted Give P values as exact values whenever suitable.
For Bayesian analysis, information on the choice of priors and Markov chain Monte Carlo settings
For hierarchical and complex designs, identification of the appropriate level for tests and full reporting of outcomes
Estimates of effect sizes (e.g. Cohen's d, Pearson's r), indicating how they were calculated
Our web collection on statistics for biologists contains articles on many of the points above.
Software and codePolicy information about availability of computer code
Data collection Paired-end libraries with insert sizes of 170 bp, 250 bp, 2 kb, 5 kb, 10 kb and 20 kb were constructed following standard Illumina protocols. The libraries were sequenced on an Illumina HiSeq 2000/4000. A total of 179Gb (about 8885.94X) paired-end data were generated for Prasinoderma coloniale (CCMP 1413). Besides, 7.4 Gb Pacbio long reads were generated by Sequel II platform. For Illumina sequencing, we considered two ways of library construction. The rRNA-depleted RNA library was constructed using the ribo-zero rRNA removal kit (plant) (Illumina, American) following the manufacturer’s protocol, while the poly (A)-selected RNA library was constructed using the ScriptSeq Library Prep kit (Plant leaf) (Illumina, American) following the manufacturer’s protocol.
Data analysis The list of Software used in this study are as follows: CLC Assembly Cell (version 5.0.1) Pairfq (version 0.16.0) SOAPfilter (version 2.2) fastp (version v0.20.1) Kmerfreq (version 1.0) Jellyfish (version v2.3.0) SPAdes (version 3.10.1) SSPACE (version 3.0) GapCloser (version 1.12) MeDuSa (version 1.6) NextDenovo (version v2.2) NextPolish (version v1.1.0) BUSCO (version3) Soap (version 2.21) blat (v36)
2
nature research | reporting summ
aryO
ctober 2018
Bridger_r2014-12-01 Trinityrnaseq (version 2.1.1) Tophat2 (version 2.1.0) RepeatModeler (version 1.0.8) GenomeTools (version 1.5.8) MITE-hunter LTRharvest PASApipeline-2.1.0 AUGUSTUS (version 3.2.3) GeneMark (version 1.0) MAKER (version 2.31.8) SNAP (version 2006-07-28) Samtools (version 0.1.19) blast-2.2.26 ncbi-blast-2.2.31+ Blast2go (version 2.5.0) InterProScan 5.28-67.0 OrthoFinder (version 1.1.8) MAFFT (version 7.310) RAxML (version 8.2.4) IQ-tree (version 1.6.1) ASTRAL (version 4.11.1)
For manuscripts utilizing custom algorithms or software that are central to the research but not yet described in published literature, software must be made available to editors/reviewers. We strongly encourage code deposition in a community repository (e.g. GitHub). See the Nature Research guidelines for submitting code & software for further information.
DataPolicy information about availability of data
All manuscripts must include a data availability statement. This statement should provide the following information, where applicable: - Accession codes, unique identifiers, or web links for publicly available datasets - A list of figures that have associated raw data - A description of any restrictions on data availability
The whole genome assemblies for P. coloniale in this study are deposited at DDBJ/ENA/GenBank under the accession numbers of RQSC00000000. Those data are also available in the CNGB Nucleotide Sequence Archive (CNSA: http://db.cngb.org/cnsa; accession number CNA0002354).
Field-specific reportingPlease select the one below that is the best fit for your research. If you are not sure, read the appropriate sections before making your selection.
Life sciences Behavioural & social sciences Ecological, evolutionary & environmental sciences
For a reference copy of the document with all sections, see nature.com/documents/nr-reporting-summary-flat.pdf
Life sciences study designAll studies must disclose on these points even when the disclosure is negative.
Sample size Axenic cultures of Prasinoderma coloniale (CCMP 1413) were obtained from the Culture Collection of Algae at the University of Cologne and grown in a modified ASP12 culture medium (http://www.ccac.uni-koeln.de/).
Data exclusions The reads with low quality are more likely to contain errors, which might complicate the assembly process, and were excluded. Detailed criteria are provided in the subsection of Method "Genome sequencing and assembly"
Replication NA
Randomization No randomization is required for our experiment.
Blinding Blind experiment is not required for our work.
Reporting for specific materials, systems and methodsWe require information from authors about some types of materials, experimental systems and methods used in many studies. Here, indicate whether each material, system or method listed is relevant to your study. If you are not sure if a list item applies to your research, read the appropriate section before selecting a response.
3
nature research | reporting summ
aryO
ctober 2018
Materials & experimental systemsn/a Involved in the study
Antibodies
Eukaryotic cell lines
Palaeontology
Animals and other organisms
Human research participants
Clinical data
Methodsn/a Involved in the study
ChIP-seq
Flow cytometry
MRI-based neuroimaging