Natural variation in the consequences of gene overexpression and its implications for evolutionary trajectories

  1. DeElegant Robinson
  2. Mike Place
  3. James Hose
  4. Adam Jochem
  5. Audrey P Gasch  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of Wisconsin-Madison, United States

Abstract

Copy number variation (CNV) through gene or chromosome amplification provides a route for rapid phenotypic variation and supports long-term evolution of gene functions. Although the evolutionary importance of CNV is known, little is understood about how genetic background influences CNV tolerance. Here, we measured fitness costs of over 4,000 over-expressed genes in 15 Saccharomyces cerevisiae strains representing different lineages, to explore natural variation in tolerating gene overexpression (OE). Strain-specific effects dominated the fitness costs of gene OE. We report global differences in the consequences of gene OE, independent of the amplified gene, as well as gene-specific effects that were dependent on the genetic background. Natural variation in the response to gene OE could be explained by several models, including strain-specific physiological differences, resource limitations, and regulatory sensitivities. This work provides new insight on how genetic background influences tolerance to gene amplification and the evolutionary trajectories accessible to different backgrounds.

Data availability

Barcode sequencing data are available in the Short Read Archive under accession number GSE171586. RNA-Seq data are available in GEO accession number GSE171585.

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. DeElegant Robinson

    Center for Genomic Science Innovation, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Mike Place

    Center for Genomic Science Innovation, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. James Hose

    Center for Genomic Science Innovation, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Adam Jochem

    Center for Genomic Science Innovation, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Audrey P Gasch

    Center for Genomic Science Innovation, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, United States
    For correspondence
    agasch@wisc.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-8182-257X

Funding

National Cancer Institute (R01CA229532)

  • James Hose
  • Adam Jochem
  • Audrey P Gasch

U.S. Department of Energy (DE-SC0018409)

  • Mike Place
  • Audrey P Gasch

National Institutes of Health (GT32GM007133)

  • DeElegant Robinson

National Human Genome Research Institute (5T32HG002760)

  • DeElegant Robinson

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

Copyright

© 2021, Robinson 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

  • 1,876
    views
  • 173
    downloads
  • 22
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

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)

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

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

  1. DeElegant Robinson
  2. Mike Place
  3. James Hose
  4. Adam Jochem
  5. Audrey P Gasch
(2021)
Natural variation in the consequences of gene overexpression and its implications for evolutionary trajectories
eLife 10:e70564.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.70564

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.70564

Further reading

    1. Chromosomes and Gene Expression
    2. Genetics and Genomics
    Erik Toraason, Alina Salagean ... Diana E Libuda
    Research Article

    The preservation of genome integrity during sperm and egg development is vital for reproductive success. During meiosis, the tumor suppressor BRCA1/BRC-1 and structural maintenance of chromosomes 5/6 (SMC-5/6) complex genetically interact to promote high fidelity DNA double strand break (DSB) repair, but the specific DSB repair outcomes these proteins regulate remain unknown. Using genetic and cytological methods to monitor resolution of DSBs with different repair partners in Caenorhabditis elegans, we demonstrate that both BRC-1 and SMC-5 repress intersister crossover recombination events. Sequencing analysis of conversion tracts from homolog-independent DSB repair events further indicates that BRC-1 regulates intersister/intrachromatid noncrossover conversion tract length. Moreover, we find that BRC-1 specifically inhibits error prone repair of DSBs induced at mid-pachytene. Finally, we reveal functional interactions of BRC-1 and SMC-5/6 in regulating repair pathway engagement: BRC-1 is required for localization of recombinase proteins to DSBs in smc-5 mutants and enhances DSB repair defects in smc-5 mutants by repressing theta-mediated end joining (TMEJ). These results are consistent with a model in which some functions of BRC-1 act upstream of SMC-5/6 to promote recombination and inhibit error-prone DSB repair, while SMC-5/6 acts downstream of BRC-1 to regulate the formation or resolution of recombination intermediates. Taken together, our study illuminates the coordinate interplay of BRC-1 and SMC-5/6 to regulate DSB repair outcomes in the germline.

    1. Evolutionary Biology
    2. Genetics and Genomics
    Philipp H Schiffer, Paschalis Natsidis ... Maximilian J Telford
    Research Article

    The evolutionary origins of Bilateria remain enigmatic. One of the more enduring proposals highlights similarities between a cnidarian-like planula larva and simple acoel-like flatworms. This idea is based in part on the view of the Xenacoelomorpha as an outgroup to all other bilaterians which are themselves designated the Nephrozoa (protostomes and deuterostomes). Genome data can provide important comparative data and help to understand the evolution and biology of enigmatic species better. Here we assemble and analyse the genome of the simple, marine xenacoelomorph Xenoturbella bocki, a key species for our understanding of early bilaterian evolution. Our highly contiguous genome assembly of X. bocki has a size of ~111 Mbp in 18 chromosome like scaffolds, with repeat content and intron, exon and intergenic space comparable to other bilaterian invertebrates. We find X. bocki to have a similar number of genes to other bilaterians and to have retained ancestral metazoan synteny. Key bilaterian signalling pathways are also largely complete and most bilaterian miRNAs are present. Overall, we conclude that X. bocki has a complex genome typical of bilaterians, which does not reflect the apparent simplicity of its body plan that has been so important to proposals that the Xenacoelomorpha are the simple sister group of the rest of the Bilateria.