Article

Adaptation to P Element Transposon Invasion in Drosophila melanogaster

Program in Cell and Developmental Dynamics, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, MA 01655, USA.
Cell (Impact Factor: 33.12). 12/2011; 147(7):1551-63. DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2011.11.042
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Transposons evolve rapidly and can mobilize and trigger genetic instability. Piwi-interacting RNAs (piRNAs) silence these genome pathogens, but it is unclear how the piRNA pathway adapts to invasion of new transposons. In Drosophila, piRNAs are encoded by heterochromatic clusters and maternally deposited in the embryo. Paternally inherited P element transposons thus escape silencing and trigger a hybrid sterility syndrome termed P-M hybrid dysgenesis. We show that P-M hybrid dysgenesis activates both P elements and resident transposons and disrupts the piRNA biogenesis machinery. As dysgenic hybrids age, however, fertility is restored, P elements are silenced, and P element piRNAs are produced de novo. In addition, the piRNA biogenesis machinery assembles, and resident elements are silenced. Significantly, resident transposons insert into piRNA clusters, and these new insertions are transmitted to progeny, produce novel piRNAs, and are associated with reduced transposition. P element invasion thus triggers heritable changes in genome structure that appear to enhance transposon silencing.

0 Followers
 · 
146 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Epigenetic mechanisms involving DNA methylation, histone modification, histone variants and nucleosome positioning, and noncoding RNAs regulate cell-, tissue-, and developmental stage-specific gene expression by influencing chromatin structure and modulating interactions between proteins and DNA. Epigenetic marks are mitotically inherited in somatic cells and may be altered in response to internal and external stimuli. The idea that environment-induced epigenetic changes in mammals could be inherited through the germline, independent of genetic mechanisms, has stimulated much debate. Many experimental models have been designed to interrogate the possibility of transgenerational epigenetic inheritance and provide insight into how environmental exposures influence phenotypes over multiple generations in the absence of any apparent genetic mutation. Unexpected molecular evidence has forced us to reevaluate not only our understanding of the plasticity and heritability of epigenetic factors, but of the stability of the genome as well. Recent reviews have described the difference between transgenerational and intergenerational effects; the two major epigenetic reprogramming events in the mammalian life cycle; these two events making transgenerational epigenetic inheritance of environment-induced perturbations rare, if at all possible, in mammals; and mechanisms of transgenerational epigenetic inheritance in non-mammalian eukaryotic organisms. This paper briefly introduces these topics and mainly focuses on (1) transgenerational phenotypes and epigenetic effects in mammals, (2) environment-induced intergenerational epigenetic effects, and (3) the inherent difficulties in establishing a role for epigenetic inheritance in human environmental disease. Copyright © 2015. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
    Progress in Biophysics and Molecular Biology 04/2015; DOI:10.1016/j.pbiomolbio.2015.02.011 · 3.38 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: P element is a DNA transposon, known to spread in genome using transposase activity. Its activity is tissue-specific and normally observed at high temperatures within 24 degrees C to 29 degrees C. Here, we present a predicted RNA secondary structure domain of P element pre-mRNA which could potentially regulate the temperature sensitivity of the P element activity. In canonical P elements, the structure is a small hairpin with double-helical part interrupted by a symmetric loop and a mismatch. In M type P elements, the A.A mismatch is substituted by an A-U base pair, stabilizing the structure. The hairpin structure covers the region involving the IVS-3 5' splice site and both pseudo-splice sites F1 and F2. While the IVS-3 and F1 binding sites of U1 snRNA are located in the double-stranded part of the structure, the F2 site is exposed in the hairpin loop. The formation of this structure may interfere with landing of U1 snRNA on IVS-3 site, while F2 is positioned for the interaction. Alignment of P element sequences supports the proposed existence of the hairpin, showing high similarity for this region. The hairpin structure, stable at low temperatures, may prevent correct IVS-3 splicing. Conversely, temperature-induced destabilization of the hairpin structure may result in the splicing at the proper IVS-3 splice site. Taking into account the increasing amount of data demonstrating the important influence of RNA folding on phenotypes determined by alternative splicing a model for possible regulation of the activity of mobile elements by pre-mRNA secondary structure seems intriguing.
    Cytology and Genetics 11/2014; 48(6):40-4. DOI:10.3103/S009545271406005X · 0.28 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Transposable elements (TEs) are major components of genomes. Their mobilization may affect genomic expression and be a threat to genetic stability. This is why they have to be tightly regulated by a dedicated system. In the reproductive tissues of a large range of organisms, they are repressed by a subclass of small interfering RNAs called piRNAs (PIWI interacting RNAs). In Drosophila melanogaster, piRNAs are produced both in the ovarian germline cells and in their surrounding somatic cells. Accumulating evidence suggests that germinal and somatic piRNA pathways are far more different than previously thought. Here we review the current knowledge on piRNA production in both these cell types, and explore their similarities and differences.
    Mobile DNA 12/2014; 5(1):28. DOI:10.1186/s13100-014-0028-y · 2.43 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Download
69 Downloads
Available from
May 20, 2014