Plants: Re-evaluating the driving force behind mutations
Experiments on tropical trees suggest that new mutations in plants are driven by age rather than number of cell divisions during growth.
-
Download
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)
Plants: Re-evaluating the driving force behind mutationseLife 12:e89706.https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.89706 - Cite
- CommentOpen annotations (there are currently 0 annotations on this page).
- GenPhySE, INRAE, INP, ENVT, Université de Toulouse, France
Despite the important role they play in our environment, plants are often perceived to be less complex than animals, particularly in regards to their functional and evolutionary processes (Jose et al., 2019). A fundamental question in evolution is how heritable mutations, which can be transmitted to future generations, accumulate in the genome. However, this question has been little explored to date in plants compared to animals.
In animals, it was initially assumed that mutations predominately came from errors during DNA replication, causing them to appear at the same rate as cell division. However, detailed investigations over the last decade have revealed that heritable mutations accumulate with age rather than with the number of cell divisions. This is supported by data showing that the maternal age at conception contributes to the number of new mutations passed to progeny, because oocytes do not divide after childhood (Figure 1; Goldmann et al., 2016; Jónsson et al., 2017). Consequently, it is now widely accepted that the rate animals acquire heritable mutations is mostly independent from replication, and instead driven by unrepaired DNA damage accumulating with age. This also explains why certain patterns of mutations are more common, such as a high proportion of cytosine-to-thymine mutations (Gao et al., 2019).
Figure 1
Testing what drives mutations in animals and plants.
There are two hypotheses for how mutations appear and are putatively passed down to future offspring: through errors during DNA replication (cell division hypothesis), or unrepaired damage …
Unlike animals, it is assumed that plants generally differentiate their germline late in development, although this remains debated (Lanfear, 2018). If this assumption is true, the mutations plants accumulate in their somatic, non-reproductive cells during growth will also be present in the germline and can be inherited by future generations. This intergenerational transmission is supported by empirical experiments in trees (Plomion et al., 2018; Wang et al., 2019; Schmitt et al., 2023). Mutation rates in plants are generally assumed to scale with the number of cell divisions in tissues as they grow, as well as UV exposure and other weakly supported general hypotheses (Schmitt et al., 2023). Now, in eLife, Akiko Satake from Kyushu University and colleagues report fascinating counter-intuitive evidence showing that aging rather than number of cell divisions appears to be the major driver of new somatic mutations in trees (Satake et al., 2023).
The team (who are based at various institutes in Japan, Indonesia and Austria) sequenced and assembled the genomes of two evolutionary related tropical trees living in central Borneo, Indonesia: a fast-growing species known as Shorea leprosula, and a slow-growing species known as Shorea laevis. Two individuals from each species were selected, which were of similar heights but different ages, with the S. leprosula tree being 66 years old and the S. laevis tree being 256 years old on average. DNA was extracted from the leaves at the ends of several branches and then compared to identify somatic mutations that were specific to each tree. This revealed that the slow-growing species had far more somatic mutations (962) than the faster-growing species (174).
If cell divisions drive mutations, one would expect similar mutation rates per meter of growth, after making reasonable assumptions for two evolutionary related species (Figure 1). Instead, Satake et al. found that the slow-growing species obtained 3.7 times more mutations per meter than the fast-growing tree, after considering the physical distance between branch tips. This value, however, is remarkably similar to the ratio between the average ages of the trees studied (256/66=3.9). These findings suggest that somatic mutations in plants are mostly driven by unrepaired damage that accumulates with age rather than replication-associated mutations.
Although the experimental design used by Satake et al. only identified a small fraction of the total number of somatic mutations, their results provide sufficient evidence to draw interesting parallels between plants and animals. Satake et al. also found additional evidence in support of this similarity that confirm previous reports: for instance, that the plant genome is enriched in cytosine-to-thymine mutations at specific positions, and shares mutation signatures with human cancers (Alexandrov et al., 2020). From a more methodological perspective, methods initially developed for cancer have been demonstrated to perform better for the discovery of somatic mutations in plants (Schmitt et al., 2022). Altogether, this suggests that mutational processes in plants and animals are largely conserved, and that plant and animal research communities have much to gain from collaborating with one another in the future.
References
-
Parent-of-origin-specific signatures of de novo mutationsNature Genetics 48:935–939.https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.3597
-
Overcoming plant blindness in science, education, and societyPlants, People, Planet 1:169–172.https://doi.org/10.1002/ppp3.51
-
Do plants have a segregated germline?PLOS Biology 16:e2005439.https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.2005439
-
Oak genome reveals facets of long lifespanNature Plants 4:440–452.https://doi.org/10.1038/s41477-018-0172-3
Article and author information
Author details
Publication history
Copyright
© 2023, Leroy
This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.
Metrics
-
- 846
- views
-
- 84
- downloads
-
- 1
- citations
Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.
Download links
Further reading
-
- Developmental Biology
- Evolutionary Biology
The insect brain and the timing of its development underwent evolutionary adaptations. However, little is known about the underlying developmental processes. The central complex of the brain is an excellent model to understand neural development and divergence. It is produced in large parts by type II neuroblasts, which produce intermediate progenitors, another type of cycling precursor, to increase their neural progeny. Type II neuroblasts lineages are believed to be conserved among insects, but little is known on their molecular characteristics in insects other than flies. Tribolium castaneum has emerged as a model for brain development and evolution. However, type II neuroblasts have so far not been studied in this beetle. We created a fluorescent enhancer trap marking expression of Tc-fez/earmuff, a key marker for intermediate progenitors. Using combinatorial labeling of further markers, including Tc-pointed, we characterized embryonic type II neuroblast lineages. Intriguingly, we found nine lineages per hemisphere in the Tribolium embryo while Drosophila produces only eight per brain hemisphere. These embryonic lineages are significantly larger in Tribolium than they are in Drosophila and contain more intermediate progenitors. Finally, we mapped these lineages to the domains of head patterning genes. Notably, Tc-otd is absent from all type II neuroblasts and intermediate progenitors, whereas Tc-six3 marks an anterior subset of the type II lineages. Tc-six4 specifically marks the territory where anterior-medial type II neuroblasts differentiate. In conclusion, we identified a conserved pattern of gene expression in holometabolan central complex forming type II neuroblast lineages, and conserved head patterning genes emerged as new candidates for conferring spatial identity to individual lineages. The higher number and greater lineage size of the embryonic type II neuroblasts in the beetle correlate with a previously described embryonic phase of central complex formation. These findings stipulate further research on the link between stem cell activity and temporal and structural differences in central complex development.
-
- Evolutionary Biology
- Neuroscience
The structure of compound eyes in arthropods has been the subject of many studies, revealing important biological principles. Until recently, these studies were constrained by the two-dimensional nature of available ultrastructural data. By taking advantage of the novel three-dimensional ultrastructural dataset obtained using volume electron microscopy, we present the first cellular-level reconstruction of the whole compound eye of an insect, the miniaturized parasitoid wasp Megaphragma viggianii. The compound eye of the female M. viggianii consists of 29 ommatidia and contains 478 cells. Despite the almost anucleate brain, all cells of the compound eye contain nuclei. As in larger insects, the dorsal rim area of the eye in M. viggianii contains ommatidia that are believed to be specialized in polarized light detection as reflected in their corneal and retinal morphology. We report the presence of three ‘ectopic’ photoreceptors. Our results offer new insights into the miniaturization of compound eyes and scaling of sensory organs in general.
