| 1. |
- Harper, Amber, et al.
(författare)
-
Widespread retention of ohnologs in key developmental gene families following whole-genome duplication in arachnopulmonates
- 2021
-
Ingår i: G3. - : Oxford University Press. - 2160-1836. ; 11:12
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Whole-genome duplications (WGDs) have occurred multiple times during animal evolution, including in lineages leading to vertebrates, teleosts, horseshoe crabs, and arachnopulmonates. These dramatic events initially produce a wealth of new genetic material, generally followed by extensive gene loss. It appears, however, that developmental genes such as homeobox genes, signaling pathway components and microRNAs are frequently retained as duplicates (so-called ohnologs) following WGD. These not only provide the best evidence for WGD, but an opportunity to study its evolutionary consequences. Although these genes are well studied in the context of vertebrate WGD, similar comparisons across the extant arachnopulmonate orders are patchy. We sequenced embryonic transcriptomes from two spider species and two amblypygid species and surveyed three important gene families, Hox, Wnt, and frizzled, across these and 12 existing transcriptomic and genomic resources for chelicerates. We report extensive retention of putative ohnologs, further supporting the ancestral arachnopulmonate WGD. We also found evidence of consistent evolutionary trajectories in Hox and Wnt gene repertoires across three of the six arachnopulmonate orders, with interorder variation in the retention of specific paralogs. We identified variation between major clades in spiders and are better able to reconstruct the chronology of gene duplications and losses in spiders, amblypygids, and scorpions. These insights shed light on the evolution of the developmental toolkit in arachnopulmonates, highlight the importance of the comparative approach within lineages, and provide substantial new transcriptomic data for future study.
|
|
| 2. |
- Klionsky, Daniel J., et al.
(författare)
-
Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy
- 2012
-
Ingår i: Autophagy. - : Informa UK Limited. - 1554-8635 .- 1554-8627. ; 8:4, s. 445-544
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- In 2008 we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, research on this topic has continued to accelerate, and many new scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Accordingly, it is important to update these guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Various reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose. Nevertheless, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. A key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers or volume of autophagic elements (e.g., autophagosomes or autolysosomes) at any stage of the autophagic process vs. those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process); thus, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation needs to be differentiated from stimuli that result in increased autophagic activity, defined as increased autophagy induction coupled with increased delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (in most higher eukaryotes and some protists such as Dictyostelium) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). In other words, it is especially important that investigators new to the field understand that the appearance of more autophagosomes does not necessarily equate with more autophagy. In fact, in many cases, autophagosomes accumulate because of a block in trafficking to lysosomes without a concomitant change in autophagosome biogenesis, whereas an increase in autolysosomes may reflect a reduction in degradative activity. Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a formulaic set of rules, because the appropriate assays depend in part on the question being asked and the system being used. In addition, we emphasize that no individual assay is guaranteed to be the most appropriate one in every situation, and we strongly recommend the use of multiple assays to monitor autophagy. In these guidelines, we consider these various methods of assessing autophagy and what information can, or cannot, be obtained from them. Finally, by discussing the merits and limits of particular autophagy assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field.
|
|
