Meiotic Drivers: Cheaters divide and conquer
Cheaters who act selfishly to prosper at the expense of others are commonplace in the natural world, and genomes are no exception. Humans typically have two copies of each gene: we inherit one copy from our mother and the other from our father—and, if we have a child, we will pass on one of these copies essentially at random. However, there are genes or genetic elements that subvert the fairness of inheritance, often in creative and insidious ways, solely for their own benefit.
Some of these selfish genetic elements ensure that they get passed on to an individual's offspring more often than they should, by making their way into more than half of that individual’s gametes (e.g., sperm and egg cells in animals, or spores in fungi). Some of the best-studied examples of these genes are those that essentially commit a kind of fratricide to get ahead. Gamete killers directly cripple or kill any of their ‘sibling’ sperm or spores that did not inherit the killer gene, and these genes have been discovered in mice, flies and various fungi (Burt and Trivers, 2006).
Gamete killers are a subset of a broader class of 'meiotic drivers'. Meiotic drivers were originally defined as genes that could directly cheat when chromosomes are being segregated into the gametes (a process called meiosis). However, the term has now been more broadly applied to include any gene that subverts the fairness of inheritance by any means. Now, in eLife, Harmit Malik and colleagues at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center—including Sarah Zanders as first author—report that three meiotic drivers keep two yeast species reproductively isolated (Zanders et al., 2014).
By circumventing unbiased inheritance, meiotic drivers find shelter from being purged by natural selection acting on their hosts. Even meiotic drivers that cause a drop in fitness (in terms of survival or the number of offspring produced) can thus spread in populations. By eluding fitness-based selection, chromosomes carrying meiotic drivers can accumulate harmful mutations or structural rearrangements and this ‘baggage’ can be dragged along with the driver to higher frequency (Burt and Trivers, 2006). The negative effects of meiotic drivers select for other genes that suppress these effects, and this can initiate a molecular arms race between drivers and suppressors that is predicted to cause rapid evolutionary divergence of these genes. Because they can both rapidly diverge and compromise fertility, it has been suggested that meiotic drivers could cause related populations of organisms to become reproductively isolated (Hurst and Werren, 2001; McDermott and Noor, 2010)—something that might drive the generation of new species.
To date, evidence comes largely from studying the fruit fly Drosophila. But now, Zanders et al. have catalogued genetic elements that contribute to reproductive isolation between two closely related fission yeast species: S. pombe and S. kambucha. S. pombe has been studied as a model organism since the 1950s, while S. kambucha was isolated more recently from a fungus that has been used in China for centuries to make a drink called Che (Singh and Klar, 2002). These two species—which each have three chromosomes—can mate to produce hybrids, but these hybrids have very low fertility and often fail to produce viable spores.
Zanders et al. found that one region of the genome was the opposite way round (or inverted) in S. pombe (compared to S. kambucha), and that two essential genes had switched their positions in the genome of S. kambucha. Both of these rearrangements did affect fertility, but these differences were not sufficient to account for the extremely low spore production of hybrids of these two yeast species. After ruling out several alternatives, Zanders et al. discovered something remarkable: each chromosome in S. kambucha contains a spore killer gene. Spore killers are a type of gamete killer, and each encodes what is essentially a molecular poison. The spores that harbour a particular killer gene are immune to the respective poison, but the details of this immunity remain largely mysterious (though see Hammond et al., 2012). As such, a spore from the S. pombe/S. kambucha hybrid must receive all three killer genes by random segregation to be fully sheltered from all three poisons (Figure 1).
To add to the complication, two of the killer genes interact: the killer gene on chromosome 2 is stronger when there is also a killer gene on chromosome 3; however, the killer gene on chromosome 3 is weakened by that on chromosome 2. The mechanism of this interaction, and whether it directly results from the killer genes themselves, remains unknown. Furthermore, only hybrid spores that inherit versions of these two chromosomes from the same yeast species (either both from S. pombe or both from S. kambucha) are viable. This is because two essential genes have been swapped between chromosomes 2 and 3 in one of the parent species, and thus a spore must inherit these two chromosomes together, or die because it ends up lacking one or the other of these genes.
There is yet another twist: spores from the hybrids often carried both copies of chromosome 3, one originally from S. pombe and the other from S. kambucha. Having ruled out that hybrids might simply produce more aneuploids (spores with extra or missing chromosomes), Zanders et al. propose that there may be a weaker killer gene on the S. pombe version of chromosome 3, such that aneuploids carrying both versions of chromosome 3 are more likely to survive than spores with only the S. kambucha variant. Whether this is caused by a different version of the same gene, or by a distinct driver that arose independently on S. pombe chromosome 3, will be a very interesting follow-up question.
In summary, Zanders et al. provide an exciting milestone for research on meiotic drive systems and their potential links to speciation. The finding that multiple independent meiotic drivers can differ between even closely related species, can change the structure of genomes, and can also act together to cause a very strong fertility barrier, is an important insight. This study highlights that meiotic drivers need not be rare, and that they can both directly and indirectly affect multiple chromosomes. The identification of the underlying genes, and any suppressors that may exist, will not only allow us to understand the molecular mechanisms of spore killing, but may also clarify how meiotic drivers can arise repeatedly. This study reminds us that much remains to be learned about the dynamics of drivers and possible piggy-back effects on genome architecture, speciation, and extinction.
References
-
BookGenes in conflict: the biology of selfish genetic elementsHarvard University Press.
-
Molecular dissection of Neurospora spore killer meiotic drive elementsProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 109:12093–12098.https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.120326710
-
The role of selfish genetic elements in eukaryotic evolutionNature Reviews Genetics 2:597–606.https://doi.org/10.1038/35084545
-
The role of meiotic drive in hybrid male sterilityPhilosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 365:1265–1272.https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2009.0264
-
The 2.1-kb inverted repeat DNA sequences flank the mat2,3 silent region in two species of Schizosaccharomyces and are involved in epigenetic silencing in Schizosaccharomyces pombeGenetics 162:591–602.
Article and author information
Author details
Publication history
Copyright
© 2014, Bomblies
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
-
- 1,826
- views
-
- 62
- downloads
-
- 4
- citations
Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.
Download links
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)
Further reading
-
- Chromosomes and Gene Expression
- Immunology and Inflammation
Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified hundreds of genetic signals associated with autoimmune disease. The majority of these signals are located in non-coding regions and likely impact cis-regulatory elements (cRE). Because cRE function is dynamic across cell types and states, profiling the epigenetic status of cRE across physiological processes is necessary to characterize the molecular mechanisms by which autoimmune variants contribute to disease risk. We localized risk variants from 15 autoimmune GWAS to cRE active during TCR-CD28 co-stimulation of naïve human CD4+ T cells. To characterize how dynamic changes in gene expression correlate with cRE activity, we measured transcript levels, chromatin accessibility, and promoter–cRE contacts across three phases of naive CD4+ T cell activation using RNA-seq, ATAC-seq, and HiC. We identified ~1200 protein-coding genes physically connected to accessible disease-associated variants at 423 GWAS signals, at least one-third of which are dynamically regulated by activation. From these maps, we functionally validated a novel stretch of evolutionarily conserved intergenic enhancers whose activity is required for activation-induced IL2 gene expression in human and mouse, and is influenced by autoimmune-associated genetic variation. The set of genes implicated by this approach are enriched for genes controlling CD4+ T cell function and genes involved in human inborn errors of immunity, and we pharmacologically validated eight implicated genes as novel regulators of T cell activation. These studies directly show how autoimmune variants and the genes they regulate influence processes involved in CD4+ T cell proliferation and activation.
-
- Chromosomes and Gene Expression
- Developmental Biology
Differentiation of female germline stem cells into a mature oocyte includes the expression of RNAs and proteins that drive early embryonic development in Drosophila. We have little insight into what activates the expression of these maternal factors. One candidate is the zinc-finger protein OVO. OVO is required for female germline viability and has been shown to positively regulate its own expression, as well as a downstream target, ovarian tumor, by binding to the transcriptional start site (TSS). To find additional OVO targets in the female germline and further elucidate OVO’s role in oocyte development, we performed ChIP-seq to determine genome-wide OVO occupancy, as well as RNA-seq comparing hypomorphic and wild type rescue ovo alleles. OVO preferentially binds in close proximity to target TSSs genome-wide, is associated with open chromatin, transcriptionally active histone marks, and OVO-dependent expression. Motif enrichment analysis on OVO ChIP peaks identified a 5’-TAACNGT-3’ OVO DNA binding motif spatially enriched near TSSs. However, the OVO DNA binding motif does not exhibit precise motif spacing relative to the TSS characteristic of RNA polymerase II complex binding core promoter elements. Integrated genomics analysis showed that 525 genes that are bound and increase in expression downstream of OVO are known to be essential maternally expressed genes. These include genes involved in anterior/posterior/germ plasm specification (bcd, exu, swa, osk, nos, aub, pgc, gcl), egg activation (png, plu, gnu, wisp, C(3)g, mtrm), translational regulation (cup, orb, bru1, me31B), and vitelline membrane formation (fs(1)N, fs(1)M3, clos). This suggests that OVO is a master transcriptional regulator of oocyte development and is responsible for the expression of structural components of the egg as well as maternally provided RNAs that are required for early embryonic development.