Dataset Information

Evolutionary origin of type IV classical cadherins in arthropods.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Classical cadherins are a metazoan-specific family of homophilic cell-cell adhesion molecules that regulate morphogenesis. Type I and type IV cadherins in this family function at adherens junctions in the major epithelial tissues of vertebrates and insects, respectively, but they have distinct, relatively simple domain organizations that are thought to have evolved by independent reductive changes from an ancestral type III cadherin, which is larger than derived paralogs and has a complicated domain organization. Although both type III and type IV cadherins have been identified in hexapods and branchiopods, the process by which the type IV cadherin evolved is still largely unclear.

Results

Through an analysis of arthropod genome sequences, we found that the only classical cadherin encoded in chelicerate genomes was the type III cadherin and that the two type III cadherin genes found in the spider Parasteatoda tepidariorum genome exhibited a complex yet ancestral exon-intron organization in arthropods. Genomic and transcriptomic data from branchiopod, copepod, isopod, amphipod, and decapod crustaceans led us to redefine the type IV cadherin category, which we separated into type IVa and type IVb, which displayed a similar domain organization, except type IVb cadherins have a larger number of extracellular cadherin (EC) domains than do type IVa cadherins (nine versus seven). We also showed that type IVa cadherin genes occurred in the hexapod, branchiopod, and copepod genomes whereas only type IVb cadherin genes were present in malacostracans. Furthermore, comparative characterization of the type IVb cadherins suggested that the presence of two extra EC domains in their N-terminal regions represented primitive characteristics. In addition, we identified an evolutionary loss of two highly conserved cysteine residues among the type IVa cadherins of insects.

Conclusions

We provide a genomic perspective of the evolution of classical cadherins among bilaterians, with a focus on the Arthropoda, and suggest that following the divergence of early arthropods, the precursor of the insect type IV cadherin evolved through stepwise reductive changes from the ancestral type III state. In addition, the complementary distributions of polarized genomic characters related to type IVa/IVb cadherins may have implications for our interpretations of pancrustacean phylogeny.

SUBMITTER: Sasaki M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5473995 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Gene clusters, such as the Hox gene cluster, are known to have critical roles in development. In eukaryotes gene clusters arise primarily by tandem gene duplication and divergence. Genes within a cluster are often co-regulated, providing selective pressure to maintain the genome organisation, and this co-regulation can result in temporal or spatial co-linearity of gene expression. It has been previously noted that in Drosophila melanogaster, three of the four runt-domain (RD) containing genes are found in a relatively tight cluster on chromosome 1, raising the possibility of a putative functional RD gene cluster in D. melanogaster. RESULTS:To investigate the possibility of such a gene cluster, orthologues of the Drosophila melanogaster RD genes were identified in several endopterygotan insects, two exopterygotan insects and two non-insect arthropods. In all insect species four RD genes were identified and orthology was assigned to the Drosophila sequences by phylogenetic analyses. Although four RD genes were found in the crustacean D. pulex, orthology could not be assigned to the insect sequences, indicating independent gene duplications from a single ancestor following the split of the hexapod lineage from the crustacean lineage.In insects, two chromosomal arrangements of these genes was observed; the first a semi-dispersed cluster, such as in Drosophila, where lozenge is separated from the core cluster of three RD genes often by megabases of DNA. The second arrangement was a tight cluster of the four RD genes, such as in Apis mellifera.This genomic organisation, particularly of the three core RD genes, raises the possibility of shared regulatory elements. In situ hybridisation of embryonic expression of the four RD genes in Drosophila melanogaster and the honeybee A. mellifera shows no evidence for either spatial or temporal co-linearity of expression during embryogenesis. CONCLUSION:All fully sequenced insect genomes contain four RD genes and orthology can be assigned to these genes based on similarity to the D. melanogaster protein sequences. Examination of the genomic organisation of these genes provides evidence for a functional RD gene cluster. RD genes from non-insect arthropods are also clustered, however the lack of orthology between these and insect RD genes suggests this cluster is likely to have resulted from a duplication event independent from that which created the insect RD gene cluster. Analysis of embryonic RD gene expression in two endopterygotan insects, A. mellifera and D. melanogaster, did not show evidence for coordinated gene expression, therefore while the functional significance of this gene cluster remains unknown its maintenance during insect evolution implies some functional significance to the cluster.