The clustering of transcription factor binding sites in developmental enhancers and the apparent preferential conservation of clustered sites have been widely interpreted as proof that spatially constrained physical interactions between transcription factors are required for regulatory function. However, we show here that selection on the composition of enhancers alone, and not their internal structure, leads to the accumulation of clustered sites with evolutionary dynamics that suggest they are preferentially conserved. We simulated the evolution of idealized enhancers from Drosophila melanogaster constrained to contain only a minimum number of binding sites for one or more factors. Under this constraint, mutations that destroy an existing binding site are tolerated only if a compensating site has emerged elsewhere in the enhancer. Overlapping sites, such as those frequently observed for the activator Bicoid and repressor Krüppel, had significantly longer evolutionary half-lives than isolated sites for the same factors. This leads to a substantially higher density of overlapping sites than expected by chance and the appearance that such sites are preferentially conserved. Because D. melanogaster (like many other species) has a bias for deletions over insertions, sites tended to become closer together over time, leading to an overall clustering of sites in the absence of any selection for clustered sites. Since this effect is strongest for the oldest sites, clustered sites also incorrectly appear to be preferentially conserved. Following speciation, sites tend to be closer together in all descendent species than in their common ancestors, violating the common assumption that shared features of species' genomes reflect their ancestral state. Finally, we show that selection on binding site composition alone recapitulates the observed number of overlapping and closely neighboring sites in real D. melanogaster enhancers. Thus, this study calls into question the common practice of inferring “cis-regulatory grammars” from the organization and evolutionary dynamics of developmental enhancers.
Vyšlo v časopise: Evolutionary Mirages: Selection on Binding Site Composition Creates the Illusion of Conserved Grammars in Enhancers. PLoS Genet 6(1): e32767. doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1000829 Kategorie: Research Article prolekare.web.journal.doi_sk: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1000829
1. StanojevicD
SmallS
LevineM
1991 Regulation of a segmentation stripe by overlapping activators and repressors in the Drosophila embryo. Science 254 1385 1387
2. NibuY
SengerK
2003 CtBP-independent repression in the Drosophila embryo. Mol Cell Biol 23 3990 3999
3. KulkarniMM
ArnostiDN
2005 cis-regulatory logic of short-range transcriptional repression in Drosophila melanogaster. Mol Cell Biol 25 3411 3420
4. LebrechtD
FoehrM
SmithE
LopesFJ
Vanario-AlonsoCE
2005 Bicoid cooperative DNA binding is critical for embryonic patterning in Drosophila. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 102 13176 13181
5. KulkarniMM
2003 Information display by transcriptional enhancers. Development 130 6569 6575
6. ArnostiDN
KulkarniMM
2005 Transcriptional enhancers: Intelligent enhanceosomes or flexible billboards? J Cell Biochem 94 890 898
7. MerikaM
ThanosD
2001 Enhanceosomes. Curr Opin Genet Dev 11 205 208
8. HareEE
PetersonBK
IyerVN
MeierR
EisenMB
2008 Sepsid even-skipped enhancers are functionally conserved in Drosophila despite lack of sequence conservation. PLoS Genet 4 e1000106 doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1000106
9. KimJ
HeX
SinhaS
2009 Evolution of regulatory sequences in 12 Drosophila species. PLoS Genet 5 e1000330 doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1000330
10. MakeevVJ
LifanovAP
NazinaAG
PapatsenkoDA
2003 Distance preferences in the arrangement of binding motifs and hierarchical levels in organization of transcription regulatory information. Nucleic Acids Res 31 6016 6026
11. PapatsenkoD
GoltsevY
2009 Organization of developmental enhancers in the Drosophila embryo. Nucleic Acids Res
12. LynchM
2007 The frailty of adaptive hypotheses for the origins of organismal complexity. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 104 Suppl 1 8597 8604
13. TanayA
SiggiaED
2008 Sequence context affects the rate of short insertions and deletions in flies and primates. Genome Biol 9 R37
14. MacArthurS
BrookfieldJF
2004 Expected rates and modes of evolution of enhancer sequences. Mol Biol Evol 21 1064 1073
15. HeX
LingX
2009 Alignment and prediction of cis-regulatory modules based on a probabilistic model of evolution. PLoS Comput Biol 5 e1000299 doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000299
16. LudwigMZ
PatelNH
KreitmanM
1998 Functional analysis of eve stripe 2 enhancer evolution in Drosophila: rules governing conservation and change. Development 125 949 958
17. DermitzakisET
ClarkAG
2002 Evolution of transcription factor binding sites in Mammalian gene regulatory regions: conservation and turnover. Mol Biol Evol 19 1114 1121
18. MosesAM
PollardDA
NixDA
LiXY
2006 Large-scale turnover of functional transcription factor binding sites in Drosophila. PLoS Comput Biol 2 e130 doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.0020130
19. DrieverW
Nusslein-VolhardC
1988 A gradient of bicoid protein in Drosophila embryos. Cell 54 83 93
20. StanojevicD
HoeyT
1989 Sequence-specific DNA-binding activities of the gap proteins encoded by hunchback and Kruppel in Drosophila. Nature 341 331 335
21. TreismanJ
DesplanC
1989 The products of the Drosophila gap genes hunchback and Kruppel bind to the hunchback promoters. Nature 341 335 337
22. Rivera-PomarR
JackleH
1996 From gradients to stripes in Drosophila embryogenesis: filling in the gaps. Trends Genet 12 478 483
23. SmallS
KrautR
WarriorR
1991 Transcriptional regulation of a pair-rule stripe in Drosophila. Genes Dev 5 827 839
24. PetrovDA
2002 DNA loss and evolution of genome size in Drosophila. Genetica 115 81 91
25. BergmanCM
CarlsonJW
CelnikerSE
2005 Drosophila DNase I footprint database: a systematic genome annotation of transcription factor binding sites in the fruitfly, Drosophila melanogaster. Bioinformatics 21 1747 1749
26. LiangHL
NienCY
LiuHY
MetzsteinMM
KirovN
2008 The zinc-finger protein Zelda is a key activator of the early zygotic genome in Drosophila. Nature 456 400 403
27. RastegarS
HessI
DickmeisT
NicodJC
ErtzerR
2008 The words of the regulatory code are arranged in a variable manner in highly conserved enhancers. Dev Biol 318 366 377
28. WonKJ
SandelinA
MarstrandTT
KroghA
2008 Modeling promoter grammars with evolving hidden Markov models. Bioinformatics 24 1669 1675
29. GertzJ
CohenBA
2009 Analysis of combinatorial cis-regulation in synthetic and genomic promoters. Nature 457 215 218
30. NeafseyDE
PalumbiSR
2003 Genome size evolution in pufferfish: a comparative analysis of diodontid and tetraodontid pufferfish genomes. Genome Res 13 821 830
31. GraurD
ShualiY
LiWH
1989 Deletions in processed pseudogenes accumulate faster in rodents than in humans. J Mol Evol 28 279 285
32. PetrovDA
HartlDL
1998 High rate of DNA loss in the Drosophila melanogaster and Drosophila virilis species groups. Mol Biol Evol 15 293 302
33. PetrovDA
SangsterTA
JohnstonJS
ShawKL
2000 Evidence for DNA loss as a determinant of genome size. Science 287 1060 1062
34. RobertsonHM
2000 The large srh family of chemoreceptor genes in Caenorhabditis nematodes reveals processes of genome evolution involving large duplications and deletions and intron gains and losses. Genome Res 10 192 203
35. BensassonD
PetrovDA
ZhangDX
HewittGM
2001 Genomic gigantism: DNA loss is slow in mountain grasshoppers. Mol Biol Evol 18 246 253
36. HasegawaM
KishinoH
YanoT
1985 Dating of the human-ape splitting by a molecular clock of mitochondrial DNA. J Mol Evol 22 160 174
37. BrownCT
XieY
DavidsonEH
CameronRA
2005 Paircomp, FamilyRelationsII and Cartwheel: tools for interspecific sequence comparison. BMC Bioinformatics 6 70
38. DownTA
BergmanCM
SuJ
HubbardTJ
2007 Large-scale discovery of promoter motifs in Drosophila melanogaster. PLoS Comput Biol 3 e7 doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.0030007
39. NoyesMB
MengX
WakabayashiA
BrodskyMH
2008 A systematic characterization of factors that regulate Drosophila segmentation via a bacterial one-hybrid system. Nucleic Acids Res 36 2547 2560
40. LiXY
MacArthurS
BourgonR
NixD
2008 Transcription factors bind thousands of active and inactive regions in the Drosophila blastoderm. PLoS Biol 6 e27 doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0060027
41. De RenzisS
ElementoO
TavazoieS
WieschausEF
2007 Unmasking activation of the zygotic genome using chromosomal deletions in the Drosophila embryo. PLoS Biol 5 e117 doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0050117
Zvýšte si kvalifikáciu online z pohodlia domova
Nemáte účet? Registrujte sa
Zadajte e-mailovú adresu, s ktorou ste vytvárali účet. Budú Vám na ňu zasielané informácie k nastaveniu nového hesla.
