Subgenome evolution in allotetraploid plants

SUMMARY Polyploidization is a well‐known speciation and adaptation mechanism. Traces of former polyploidization events were discovered within many genomes, and especially in plants. Allopolyploidization by interspecific hybridization between two species is common. Among hybrid plants, many are domes...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The Plant journal : for cell and molecular biology 2021-05, Vol.106 (3), p.672-688
Hauptverfasser: Schiavinato, Matteo, Bodrug‐Schepers, Alexandrina, Dohm, Juliane C., Himmelbauer, Heinz
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 688
container_issue 3
container_start_page 672
container_title The Plant journal : for cell and molecular biology
container_volume 106
creator Schiavinato, Matteo
Bodrug‐Schepers, Alexandrina
Dohm, Juliane C.
Himmelbauer, Heinz
description SUMMARY Polyploidization is a well‐known speciation and adaptation mechanism. Traces of former polyploidization events were discovered within many genomes, and especially in plants. Allopolyploidization by interspecific hybridization between two species is common. Among hybrid plants, many are domesticated species of agricultural interest and many of their genomes and of their presumptive parents have been sequenced. Hybrid genomes remain challenging to analyse because of the presence of multiple subgenomes. The genomes of hybrids often undergo rearrangement and degradation over time. Based on 10 hybrid plant genomes from six different genera, with hybridization dating from 10,000 to 5 million years ago, we assessed subgenome degradation, subgenomic intermixing and biased subgenome fractionation. The restructuring of hybrid genomes does not proceed proportionally with the age of the hybrid. The oldest hybrids in our data set display completely different fates: whereas the subgenomes of the tobacco plant Nicotiana benthamiana are in an advanced stage of degradation, the subgenomes of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa) are exceptionally well conserved by structure and sequence. We observed statistically significant biased subgenome fractionation in seven out of 10 hybrids, which had different ages and subgenomic intermixing levels. Hence, we conclude that no correlation exists between biased fractionation and subgenome intermixing. Lastly, domestication may encourage or hinder subgenome intermixing, depending on the evolutionary context. In summary, comparative analysis of hybrid genomes and their presumptive parents allowed us to determine commonalities and differences between their evolutionary fates. In order to facilitate the future analysis of further hybrid genomes, we automated the analysis steps within manticore, which is publicly available at https://github.com/MatteoSchiavinato/manticore.git. Significance Statement The purpose of this work was to compare the level of subgenomic intermixing in hybrid plants, providing insight into how intermixing levels are influenced by domestication, biased fractionation or hybrid age. A computational framework is presented to evaluate subgenomic conservation and intermixing in other hybrids, as there seems to be no one rule that fits all.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/tpj.15190
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_8251528</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2528423421</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4830-207e3b4d07b0d9d67ca97dbbf07231427bb356109087bfa60fd54aeb65f405703</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kctKxDAUhoMoznhZ-AIy4EbBjie3pt0IMnhFUFDBXUjadOyQaWrTjszbG60OKng2WZyPj__kR2gPwxiHOWnr2RhznMIaGmIa84hi-ryOhpDGEAmGyQBteT8DwILGbBMNKOVMJCQeouOHTk9N5eZmZBbOdm3pqlFZjZS1rjVto2rrynxUW1W1fgdtFMp6s_v1bqOni_PHyVV0e3d5PTm7jTKWUIgICEM1y0FoyNM8FplKRa51AYJQzIjQmvIYQwqJ0IWKocg5U0bHvGDABdBtdNp7607PTZ6ZKgSxsm7KuWqW0qlS_t5U5YucuoVMCMecJEFw-CVo3GtnfCvnpc-MDVcY13lJWCIw5wxEQA_-oDPXNVU4T5KgYoQyggN11FNZ47xvTLEKg0F-dCBDB_Kzg8Du_0y_Ir8_PQAnPfBWWrP83yQf72965Ttf9JAg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2528423421</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Subgenome evolution in allotetraploid plants</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>IngentaConnect Free/Open Access Journals</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><source>Wiley Online Library Free Content</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><creator>Schiavinato, Matteo ; Bodrug‐Schepers, Alexandrina ; Dohm, Juliane C. ; Himmelbauer, Heinz</creator><creatorcontrib>Schiavinato, Matteo ; Bodrug‐Schepers, Alexandrina ; Dohm, Juliane C. ; Himmelbauer, Heinz</creatorcontrib><description>SUMMARY Polyploidization is a well‐known speciation and adaptation mechanism. Traces of former polyploidization events were discovered within many genomes, and especially in plants. Allopolyploidization by interspecific hybridization between two species is common. Among hybrid plants, many are domesticated species of agricultural interest and many of their genomes and of their presumptive parents have been sequenced. Hybrid genomes remain challenging to analyse because of the presence of multiple subgenomes. The genomes of hybrids often undergo rearrangement and degradation over time. Based on 10 hybrid plant genomes from six different genera, with hybridization dating from 10,000 to 5 million years ago, we assessed subgenome degradation, subgenomic intermixing and biased subgenome fractionation. The restructuring of hybrid genomes does not proceed proportionally with the age of the hybrid. The oldest hybrids in our data set display completely different fates: whereas the subgenomes of the tobacco plant Nicotiana benthamiana are in an advanced stage of degradation, the subgenomes of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa) are exceptionally well conserved by structure and sequence. We observed statistically significant biased subgenome fractionation in seven out of 10 hybrids, which had different ages and subgenomic intermixing levels. Hence, we conclude that no correlation exists between biased fractionation and subgenome intermixing. Lastly, domestication may encourage or hinder subgenome intermixing, depending on the evolutionary context. In summary, comparative analysis of hybrid genomes and their presumptive parents allowed us to determine commonalities and differences between their evolutionary fates. In order to facilitate the future analysis of further hybrid genomes, we automated the analysis steps within manticore, which is publicly available at https://github.com/MatteoSchiavinato/manticore.git. Significance Statement The purpose of this work was to compare the level of subgenomic intermixing in hybrid plants, providing insight into how intermixing levels are influenced by domestication, biased fractionation or hybrid age. A computational framework is presented to evaluate subgenomic conservation and intermixing in other hybrids, as there seems to be no one rule that fits all.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0960-7412</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1365-313X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/tpj.15190</identifier><identifier>PMID: 33547826</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>allotetraploid ; Brassica - genetics ; Chenopodium quinoa ; Chenopodium quinoa - genetics ; Comparative analysis ; Conserved sequence ; crop plant ; Degradation ; Domestication ; Evolution ; Evolution, Molecular ; Fractionation ; genome evolution ; Genome, Plant - genetics ; Genomes ; Hybridization ; Hybridization, Genetic - genetics ; Hybrids ; interspecific hybrid ; Interspecific hybridization ; Nicotiana - genetics ; Nicotiana benthamiana ; Original ; Plants - genetics ; Polyploidy ; Quinoa ; Speciation ; Statistical analysis ; subgenome intermixing ; Tetraploidy ; Tobacco</subject><ispartof>The Plant journal : for cell and molecular biology, 2021-05, Vol.106 (3), p.672-688</ispartof><rights>2021 The Authors. published by Society for Experimental Biology and John Wiley &amp; Sons Ltd.</rights><rights>2021 The Authors. The Plant Journal published by Society for Experimental Biology and John Wiley &amp; Sons Ltd.</rights><rights>2021. This article is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4830-207e3b4d07b0d9d67ca97dbbf07231427bb356109087bfa60fd54aeb65f405703</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4830-207e3b4d07b0d9d67ca97dbbf07231427bb356109087bfa60fd54aeb65f405703</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-9323-0280 ; 0000-0001-8897-2928 ; 0000-0001-5970-4457</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Ftpj.15190$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Ftpj.15190$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,776,780,881,1411,1427,27901,27902,45550,45551,46384,46808</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33547826$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Schiavinato, Matteo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bodrug‐Schepers, Alexandrina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dohm, Juliane C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Himmelbauer, Heinz</creatorcontrib><title>Subgenome evolution in allotetraploid plants</title><title>The Plant journal : for cell and molecular biology</title><addtitle>Plant J</addtitle><description>SUMMARY Polyploidization is a well‐known speciation and adaptation mechanism. Traces of former polyploidization events were discovered within many genomes, and especially in plants. Allopolyploidization by interspecific hybridization between two species is common. Among hybrid plants, many are domesticated species of agricultural interest and many of their genomes and of their presumptive parents have been sequenced. Hybrid genomes remain challenging to analyse because of the presence of multiple subgenomes. The genomes of hybrids often undergo rearrangement and degradation over time. Based on 10 hybrid plant genomes from six different genera, with hybridization dating from 10,000 to 5 million years ago, we assessed subgenome degradation, subgenomic intermixing and biased subgenome fractionation. The restructuring of hybrid genomes does not proceed proportionally with the age of the hybrid. The oldest hybrids in our data set display completely different fates: whereas the subgenomes of the tobacco plant Nicotiana benthamiana are in an advanced stage of degradation, the subgenomes of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa) are exceptionally well conserved by structure and sequence. We observed statistically significant biased subgenome fractionation in seven out of 10 hybrids, which had different ages and subgenomic intermixing levels. Hence, we conclude that no correlation exists between biased fractionation and subgenome intermixing. Lastly, domestication may encourage or hinder subgenome intermixing, depending on the evolutionary context. In summary, comparative analysis of hybrid genomes and their presumptive parents allowed us to determine commonalities and differences between their evolutionary fates. In order to facilitate the future analysis of further hybrid genomes, we automated the analysis steps within manticore, which is publicly available at https://github.com/MatteoSchiavinato/manticore.git. Significance Statement The purpose of this work was to compare the level of subgenomic intermixing in hybrid plants, providing insight into how intermixing levels are influenced by domestication, biased fractionation or hybrid age. A computational framework is presented to evaluate subgenomic conservation and intermixing in other hybrids, as there seems to be no one rule that fits all.</description><subject>allotetraploid</subject><subject>Brassica - genetics</subject><subject>Chenopodium quinoa</subject><subject>Chenopodium quinoa - genetics</subject><subject>Comparative analysis</subject><subject>Conserved sequence</subject><subject>crop plant</subject><subject>Degradation</subject><subject>Domestication</subject><subject>Evolution</subject><subject>Evolution, Molecular</subject><subject>Fractionation</subject><subject>genome evolution</subject><subject>Genome, Plant - genetics</subject><subject>Genomes</subject><subject>Hybridization</subject><subject>Hybridization, Genetic - genetics</subject><subject>Hybrids</subject><subject>interspecific hybrid</subject><subject>Interspecific hybridization</subject><subject>Nicotiana - genetics</subject><subject>Nicotiana benthamiana</subject><subject>Original</subject><subject>Plants - genetics</subject><subject>Polyploidy</subject><subject>Quinoa</subject><subject>Speciation</subject><subject>Statistical analysis</subject><subject>subgenome intermixing</subject><subject>Tetraploidy</subject><subject>Tobacco</subject><issn>0960-7412</issn><issn>1365-313X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>24P</sourceid><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kctKxDAUhoMoznhZ-AIy4EbBjie3pt0IMnhFUFDBXUjadOyQaWrTjszbG60OKng2WZyPj__kR2gPwxiHOWnr2RhznMIaGmIa84hi-ryOhpDGEAmGyQBteT8DwILGbBMNKOVMJCQeouOHTk9N5eZmZBbOdm3pqlFZjZS1rjVto2rrynxUW1W1fgdtFMp6s_v1bqOni_PHyVV0e3d5PTm7jTKWUIgICEM1y0FoyNM8FplKRa51AYJQzIjQmvIYQwqJ0IWKocg5U0bHvGDABdBtdNp7607PTZ6ZKgSxsm7KuWqW0qlS_t5U5YucuoVMCMecJEFw-CVo3GtnfCvnpc-MDVcY13lJWCIw5wxEQA_-oDPXNVU4T5KgYoQyggN11FNZ47xvTLEKg0F-dCBDB_Kzg8Du_0y_Ir8_PQAnPfBWWrP83yQf72965Ttf9JAg</recordid><startdate>202105</startdate><enddate>202105</enddate><creator>Schiavinato, Matteo</creator><creator>Bodrug‐Schepers, Alexandrina</creator><creator>Dohm, Juliane C.</creator><creator>Himmelbauer, Heinz</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><general>John Wiley and Sons Inc</general><scope>24P</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7QP</scope><scope>7QR</scope><scope>7TM</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9323-0280</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8897-2928</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5970-4457</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202105</creationdate><title>Subgenome evolution in allotetraploid plants</title><author>Schiavinato, Matteo ; Bodrug‐Schepers, Alexandrina ; Dohm, Juliane C. ; Himmelbauer, Heinz</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4830-207e3b4d07b0d9d67ca97dbbf07231427bb356109087bfa60fd54aeb65f405703</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>allotetraploid</topic><topic>Brassica - genetics</topic><topic>Chenopodium quinoa</topic><topic>Chenopodium quinoa - genetics</topic><topic>Comparative analysis</topic><topic>Conserved sequence</topic><topic>crop plant</topic><topic>Degradation</topic><topic>Domestication</topic><topic>Evolution</topic><topic>Evolution, Molecular</topic><topic>Fractionation</topic><topic>genome evolution</topic><topic>Genome, Plant - genetics</topic><topic>Genomes</topic><topic>Hybridization</topic><topic>Hybridization, Genetic - genetics</topic><topic>Hybrids</topic><topic>interspecific hybrid</topic><topic>Interspecific hybridization</topic><topic>Nicotiana - genetics</topic><topic>Nicotiana benthamiana</topic><topic>Original</topic><topic>Plants - genetics</topic><topic>Polyploidy</topic><topic>Quinoa</topic><topic>Speciation</topic><topic>Statistical analysis</topic><topic>subgenome intermixing</topic><topic>Tetraploidy</topic><topic>Tobacco</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Schiavinato, Matteo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bodrug‐Schepers, Alexandrina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dohm, Juliane C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Himmelbauer, Heinz</creatorcontrib><collection>Wiley Online Library Open Access</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Calcium &amp; Calcified Tissue Abstracts</collection><collection>Chemoreception Abstracts</collection><collection>Nucleic Acids Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>The Plant journal : for cell and molecular biology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Schiavinato, Matteo</au><au>Bodrug‐Schepers, Alexandrina</au><au>Dohm, Juliane C.</au><au>Himmelbauer, Heinz</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Subgenome evolution in allotetraploid plants</atitle><jtitle>The Plant journal : for cell and molecular biology</jtitle><addtitle>Plant J</addtitle><date>2021-05</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>106</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>672</spage><epage>688</epage><pages>672-688</pages><issn>0960-7412</issn><eissn>1365-313X</eissn><abstract>SUMMARY Polyploidization is a well‐known speciation and adaptation mechanism. Traces of former polyploidization events were discovered within many genomes, and especially in plants. Allopolyploidization by interspecific hybridization between two species is common. Among hybrid plants, many are domesticated species of agricultural interest and many of their genomes and of their presumptive parents have been sequenced. Hybrid genomes remain challenging to analyse because of the presence of multiple subgenomes. The genomes of hybrids often undergo rearrangement and degradation over time. Based on 10 hybrid plant genomes from six different genera, with hybridization dating from 10,000 to 5 million years ago, we assessed subgenome degradation, subgenomic intermixing and biased subgenome fractionation. The restructuring of hybrid genomes does not proceed proportionally with the age of the hybrid. The oldest hybrids in our data set display completely different fates: whereas the subgenomes of the tobacco plant Nicotiana benthamiana are in an advanced stage of degradation, the subgenomes of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa) are exceptionally well conserved by structure and sequence. We observed statistically significant biased subgenome fractionation in seven out of 10 hybrids, which had different ages and subgenomic intermixing levels. Hence, we conclude that no correlation exists between biased fractionation and subgenome intermixing. Lastly, domestication may encourage or hinder subgenome intermixing, depending on the evolutionary context. In summary, comparative analysis of hybrid genomes and their presumptive parents allowed us to determine commonalities and differences between their evolutionary fates. In order to facilitate the future analysis of further hybrid genomes, we automated the analysis steps within manticore, which is publicly available at https://github.com/MatteoSchiavinato/manticore.git. Significance Statement The purpose of this work was to compare the level of subgenomic intermixing in hybrid plants, providing insight into how intermixing levels are influenced by domestication, biased fractionation or hybrid age. A computational framework is presented to evaluate subgenomic conservation and intermixing in other hybrids, as there seems to be no one rule that fits all.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><pmid>33547826</pmid><doi>10.1111/tpj.15190</doi><tpages>17</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9323-0280</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8897-2928</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5970-4457</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0960-7412
ispartof The Plant journal : for cell and molecular biology, 2021-05, Vol.106 (3), p.672-688
issn 0960-7412
1365-313X
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_8251528
source MEDLINE; IngentaConnect Free/Open Access Journals; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete; Wiley Online Library Free Content; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals
subjects allotetraploid
Brassica - genetics
Chenopodium quinoa
Chenopodium quinoa - genetics
Comparative analysis
Conserved sequence
crop plant
Degradation
Domestication
Evolution
Evolution, Molecular
Fractionation
genome evolution
Genome, Plant - genetics
Genomes
Hybridization
Hybridization, Genetic - genetics
Hybrids
interspecific hybrid
Interspecific hybridization
Nicotiana - genetics
Nicotiana benthamiana
Original
Plants - genetics
Polyploidy
Quinoa
Speciation
Statistical analysis
subgenome intermixing
Tetraploidy
Tobacco
title Subgenome evolution in allotetraploid plants
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-04T11%3A44%3A59IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Subgenome%20evolution%20in%20allotetraploid%20plants&rft.jtitle=The%20Plant%20journal%20:%20for%20cell%20and%20molecular%20biology&rft.au=Schiavinato,%20Matteo&rft.date=2021-05&rft.volume=106&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=672&rft.epage=688&rft.pages=672-688&rft.issn=0960-7412&rft.eissn=1365-313X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/tpj.15190&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2528423421%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2528423421&rft_id=info:pmid/33547826&rfr_iscdi=true