1. Cell Biology
  2. Evolutionary Biology
Download icon

Chimeric origins of ochrophytes and haptophytes revealed through an ancient plastid proteome

  1. Richard G Dorrell  Is a corresponding author
  2. Gillian Gile
  3. Giselle McCallum
  4. Raphaël Méheust
  5. Eric P Bapteste
  6. Christen M Klinger
  7. Loraine Brillet-Guéguen
  8. Katalina D Freeman
  9. Daniel J Richter
  10. Chris Bowler
  1. École Normale Supérieure, CNRS, Inserm, PSL Research University, France
  2. Arizona State University, United States
  3. Université Pierre et Marie Curie, France
  4. University of Alberta, Canada
  5. CNRS, UPMC, FR2424, ABiMS, Station Biologique, France
  6. Sorbonne Universités, UPMC Univ Paris 06, CNRS UMR 7144, France
Research Article
  • Cited 68
  • Views 2,487
  • Annotations
Cite this article as: eLife 2017;6:e23717 doi: 10.7554/eLife.23717

Abstract

Plastids are supported by a wide range of proteins encoded within the nucleus and imported from the cytoplasm. These plastid-targeted proteins may originate from the endosymbiont, the host, or other sources entirely. Here, we identify and characterise 770 plastid-targeted proteins that are conserved across the ochrophytes, a major group of algae including diatoms, pelagophytes and kelps, that possess plastids derived from red algae. We show that the ancestral ochrophyte plastid proteome was an evolutionary chimera, with 25% of its phylogenetically tractable proteins deriving from green algae. We additionally show that functional mixing of host and plastid proteomes, such as through dual targeting, is an ancestral feature of plastid evolution. Finally, we detect a clear phylogenetic signal from one ochrophyte subgroup, the lineage containing pelagophytes and dictyochophytes, in plastid-targeted proteins from another major algal lineage, the haptophytes. This may represent a possible serial endosymbiosis event deep in eukaryotic evolutionary history.

Data availability

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Richard G Dorrell

    IBENS, Département de Biologie, École Normale Supérieure, CNRS, Inserm, PSL Research University, Paris, France
    For correspondence
    dorrell@biologie.ens.fr
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-6263-9115
  2. Gillian Gile

    School of Life Sciences, Arizona State University, Tempe, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Giselle McCallum

    IBENS, Département de Biologie, École Normale Supérieure, CNRS, Inserm, PSL Research University, Paris, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Raphaël Méheust

    Institut de Biologie Paris-Seine, Université Pierre et Marie Curie, Paris, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-4847-426X
  5. Eric P Bapteste

    Institut de Biologie Paris-Seine, Université Pierre et Marie Curie, Paris, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Christen M Klinger

    Department of Cell Biology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Loraine Brillet-Guéguen

    CNRS, UPMC, FR2424, ABiMS, Station Biologique, Roscoff, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Katalina D Freeman

    School of Life Sciences, Arizona State University, Tempe, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Daniel J Richter

    Adaptation et Diversité en Milieu Marin, Sorbonne Universités, UPMC Univ Paris 06, CNRS UMR 7144, Roscoff, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-9238-5571
  10. Chris Bowler

    IBENS, Département de Biologie, École Normale Supérieure, CNRS, Inserm, PSL Research University, Paris, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Funding

EMBO (ALTF 1124/2014)

  • Richard G Dorrell

ERC (Diatomite)

  • Chris Bowler

LouisD Foundation

  • Chris Bowler

FP7 (615274)

  • Eric P Bapteste

Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation

  • Chris Bowler

MEMO-LIFE (ANR- 10-LABX-54)

  • Chris Bowler

ANR (ANR-11-IDEX-0001-02)

  • Chris Bowler

ANR (ANR-11-BTBR-0008)

  • Daniel J Richter

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Debashish Bhattacharya, Rutgers University, United States

Publication history

  1. Received: November 28, 2016
  2. Accepted: May 8, 2017
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: May 12, 2017 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: June 7, 2017 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2017, Dorrell et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 2,487
    Page views
  • 577
    Downloads
  • 68
    Citations

Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Crossref, Scopus, PubMed Central.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Download citations (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Further reading

    1. Cell Biology
    2. Stem Cells and Regenerative Medicine
    Chet Huan Oon, Kenneth E Prehoda
    Research Advance Updated

    The Par complex dynamically polarizes to the apical cortex of asymmetrically dividing Drosophila neuroblasts where it directs fate determinant segregation. Previously, we showed that apically directed cortical movements that polarize the Par complex require F-actin (Oon and Prehoda, 2019). Here, we report the discovery of cortical actomyosin dynamics that begin in interphase when the Par complex is cytoplasmic but ultimately become tightly coupled to cortical Par dynamics. Interphase cortical actomyosin dynamics are unoriented and pulsatile but rapidly become sustained and apically-directed in early mitosis when the Par protein aPKC accumulates on the cortex. Apical actomyosin flows drive the coalescence of aPKC into an apical cap that depolarizes in anaphase when the flow reverses direction. Together with the previously characterized role of anaphase flows in specifying daughter cell size asymmetry, our results indicate that multiple phases of cortical actomyosin dynamics regulate asymmetric cell division.

    1. Cell Biology
    2. Stem Cells and Regenerative Medicine
    Anirban Roy et al.
    Research Article Updated

    Skeletal muscle regeneration is regulated by coordinated activation of multiple signaling pathways. The unfolded protein response (UPR) is a major mechanism that detects and alleviates protein-folding stresses in the endoplasmic reticulum. However, the role of individual arms of the UPR in skeletal muscle regeneration remain less understood. In the present study, we demonstrate that IRE1α (also known as ERN1) and its downstream target, XBP1, are activated in skeletal muscle of mice upon injury. Myofiber-specific ablation of IRE1α or XBP1 in mice diminishes skeletal muscle regeneration that is accompanied with reduced number of satellite cells. Ex vivo cultures of myofiber explants demonstrate that ablation of IRE1α reduces the proliferative capacity of myofiber-associated satellite cells. Myofiber-specific ablation of IRE1α dampens Notch signaling and canonical NF-κB pathway in skeletal muscle of adult mice. Finally, targeted ablation of IRE1α also reduces Notch signaling, abundance of satellite cells, and skeletal muscle regeneration in the mdx mice, a model of Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Collectively, our experiments suggest that the IRE1α-mediated signaling promotes muscle regeneration through augmenting the proliferation of satellite cells in a cell non-autonomous manner.