Polyploidy has long been recognized as a major force in angiosperm evolution. Recent genomic investigations not only indicate that polyploidy is ubiquitous among angiosperms, but also suggest several ancient genome-doubling events. These include ancient whole genome duplication (WGD) events in basal angiosperm lineages, as well as a proposed paleohexaploid event that may have occurred close to the eudicot divergence. However, there is currently no evidence for WGD in Amborella, the putative sister species to other extant angiosperms. The question is no longer "What proportion of angiosperms are polyploid?", but "How many episodes of polyploidy characterize any given lineage?" New algorithms provide promise that ancestral genomes can be reconstructed for deep divergences (e.g., it may be possible to reconstruct the ancestral eudicot or even the ancestral angiosperm genome). Comparisons of diversification rates suggest that genome doubling may have led to a dramatic increase in species richness in several angiosperm lineages, including Poaceae, Solanaceae, Fabaceae, and Brassicaceae. However, additional genomic studies are needed to pinpoint the exact phylogenetic placement of the ancient polyploidy events within these lineages and to determine when novel genes resulting from polyploidy have enabled adaptive radiations.

Polyploidy and angiosperm diversification

The expansion of gene families encoding regulatory proteins is typically associated with the increase in complexity characteristic of multi-cellular organisms. The MYB and basic helix-loop-helix (bHLH) families provide excellent examples of how gene duplication and divergence within particular groups of transcription factors are associated with, if not driven by, the morphological and metabolic diversity that characterize the higher plants. These gene families expanded dramatically in higher plants; for example, there are approximately 339 and 162 MYB and bHLH genes, respectively, in Arabidopsis, and approximately 230 and 111, respectively, in rice. In contrast, the Chlamydomonas genome has only 38 MYB genes and eight bHLH genes. In this review, we compare the MYB and bHLH gene families from structural, evolutionary and functional perspectives. The knowledge acquired on the role of many of these factors in Arabidopsis provides an excellent reference to explore sequence-function relationships in crops and other plants. The physical interaction and regulatory synergy between particular sub-classes of MYB and bHLH factors is perhaps one of the best examples of combinatorial plant gene regulation. However, members of the MYB and bHLH families also interact with a number of other regulatory proteins, forming complexes that either activate or repress the expression of sets of target genes that are increasingly being identified through a diversity of high-throughput genomic approaches. The next few years are likely to witness an increasing understanding of the extent to which conserved transcription factors participate at similar positions in gene regulatory networks across plant species.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1365-313X.2010.04459.x

Evolutionary and comparative analysis of MYB and bHLH plant transcription factors

Contents

Summary 341

I.  Introduction 342
II.  What is C4 photosynthesis? 343
III.  Why did C4 photosynthesis evolve? 347
IV.  Evolutionary lineages of C4 photosynthesis 348
V.  Where did C4 photosynthesis evolve? 350
VI.  How did C4 photosynthesis evolve? 352
VII.  Molecular evolution of C4 photosynthesis 361
VIII. When did C4 photosynthesis evolve 362
IX.  The rise of C4 photosynthesis in relation to climate and CO2 363
X.  Final thoughts: the future evolution of C4 photosynthesis 365

Acknowledgements 365


References 365



Summary
C4 photosynthesis is a series of anatomical and biochemical modifications that concentrate CO2 around the carboxylating enzyme Rubisco, thereby increasing photosynthetic efficiency in conditions promoting high rates of photorespiration. The C4 pathway independently evolved over 45 times in 19 families of angiosperms, and thus represents one of the most convergent of evolutionary phenomena. Most origins of C4 photosynthesis occurred in the dicots, with at least 30 lineages. C4 photosynthesis first arose in grasses, probably during the Oligocene epoch (24–35 million yr ago). The earliest C4 dicots are likely members of the Chenopodiaceae dating back 15–21 million yr; however, most C4 dicot lineages are estimated to have appeared relatively recently, perhaps less than 5 million yr ago. C4 photosynthesis in the dicots originated in arid regions of low latitude, implicating combined effects of heat, drought and/or salinity as important conditions promoting C4 evolution. Low atmospheric CO2 is a significant contributing factor, because it is required for high rates of photorespiration. Consistently, the appearance of C4 plants in the evolutionary record coincides with periods of increasing global aridification and declining atmospheric CO2. Gene duplication followed by neo- and nonfunctionalization are the leading mechanisms for creating C4 genomes, with selection for carbon conservation traits under conditions promoting high photorespiration being the ultimate factor behind the origin of C4 photosynthesis.

The evolution of C4 photosynthesis

Transposable elements are mobile genetic units that exhibit broad diversity in their structure and transposition mechanisms. Transposable elements occupy a large fraction of many eukaryotic genomes and their movement and accumulation represent a major force shaping the genes and genomes of almost all organisms. This review focuses on DNA-mediated or class 2 transposons and emphasizes how this class of elements is distinguished from other types of mobile elements in terms of their structure, amplification dynamics, and genomic effect. We provide an up-to-date outlook on the diversity and taxonomic distribution of all major types of DNA transposons in eukaryotes, including Helitrons and Mavericks. We discuss some of the evolutionary forces that influence their maintenance and diversification in various genomic environments. Finally, we highlight how the distinctive biological features of DNA transposons have contributed to shape genome architecture and led to the emergence of genetic innovations in different eukaryotic lineages.

/pdf/dna-transposons-and-the-evolution-of-eukaryotic-genomes-4rq0mdhrsc.pdf

DNA Transposons and the Evolution of Eukaryotic Genomes

Summary An important mechanism for the evolution of phenotypic complexity, diversity and innovation, and the origin of novel gene functions is the duplication of genes and entire genomes. Recent phylogenomic studies suggest that, during the evolution of vertebrates, the entire genomewasduplicatedintworounds(2R)ofduplication. Later, � 350mya,inthestemlineageofray-finned(actinopterygian) fishes, but not in that of the land vertebrates, a third genome duplication occurred—the fish-specific genome duplication (FSGD or 3R), leading, at least initially, to up to eight copies of the ancestral deuterostome genome. Therefore, the sarcopterygian (lobe-finned fishes and tetrapods) genome possessed originally only half as many genes compared to the derived fishes, just like the most-basal and species-poor lineages of extant fishes that diverged from the fish stem lineage before the 3R duplication. Most duplicated genes were secondarily lost, yet some evolved new functions. The genomic complexity of the teleosts might be the reason for their evolutionary success and astounding biological diversity. BioEssays 27:937–945, 2005. 2005 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

/pdf/from-2r-to-3r-evidence-for-a-fish-specific-genome-iml3ia4ru5.pdf

From 2R to 3R: evidence for a fish‐specific genome duplication (FSGD)

Genome size differences are usually attributed to the amplification and deletion of various repeated DNA sequences, including transposable elements (TEs). Because environmental changes may promote modifications in the amount of these repeated sequences, it has been postulated that when a species colonizes new environments this could be followed by an increase in its genome size. We tested this hypothesis by estimating the genome size of geographically distinct populations of Drosophila ananassae, Drosophila malerkotliana, Drosophila melanogaster, Drosophila simulans, Drosophila subobscura, and Zaprionus indianus, all of which have known colonization capacities. There was no strong statistical differences between continents for most species. However, we found that populations of D. melanogaster from east Africa have smaller genomes than more recent populations. For species in which colonization is a recent event, the differences between genome sizes do not thus seem to be related to colonization history. These findings suggest either that genome size is seldom modified in a significant way during colonization or that it takes time for genome size of invading species to change significantly.

Is genome size influenced by colonization of new environments in dipteran species

Genome size varies considerably among organisms due to differences in the amplification, deletion, and divergence of various kinds of repetitive sequences, including the transposable elements, which constitute a large fraction of the genome. However, while the changes in genome size observed at a wide taxonomic level have been thoroughly investigated, we still know little about the process involved in closely related species. We estimated genome sizes and the reverse transcriptase-related sequence (RTRS) content in the nine species of the Drosophila melanogaster species subgroup. We showed that the species differ with regard to their genome size and that the RTRS content is correlated with genome size for all species except Drosophila orena. The genome of D. orena, which is 1.6-fold as big as that of D. melanogaster, has in fact not undergone any major increase in its RTRS content.

/pdf/differences-in-genome-size-between-closely-related-species-3k4ktz0ei7.pdf

Differences in Genome Size Between Closely Related Species: The Drosophila melanogaster Species Subgroup

Background

Genome size is known to exhibit interspecies differences, but also to vary between populations within a given species and even between individual cells within an organism. Major differences have often been reported and attributed to differences in measurement conditions, in internal controls of genome size, and in the stains used. Flow cytometry using intercalating dyes is the most attractive method for measuring genome size.



Methods

We estimated relative genome size of nuclei from heads of Drosophila melanogaster adult males using a FACScalibur flow cytometer and propidium iodide.



Results

We have shown that the genome size estimates depended on the temperature and humidity of the rearing medium and decreased with age in adult flies. There were large differences in genome size estimates between the vials in which the flies were maintained, but only slight variations within the vials, supporting the idea that the size estimate depends on the fly rearing conditions. Changes in the temperature of the solution of head nuclei analyzed by the cytometer also influenced the genome size estimate.



Conclusions

These findings clearly show that the environmental conditions under which the flies were reared influence the genome size estimate, perhaps as a result of a change in the accessibility of the DNA to the fluorochrome. Caution is therefore called for when estimating genome size. Experimental artifact rather than adaptation may account for some of the correlations between genome size and environmental conditions reported in the literature. Cytometry Part A 55A:43–49, 2003. © 2003 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/cyto.a.10061

Variation of the genome size estimate with environmental conditions in Drosophila melanogaster.

Handle everyday research tasks with reliable, citation-backed results

Your personal Research Agent to handle research tasks with citation-backed results

Popular Tasks used by Researchers

How can I help with your research?

Meet SciSpace

Get more enhanced response by uploading the PDFs you want me to reference.

No relevant PDFs in your library

SciSpace is the AI research assistant for academics. Run systematic literature reviews on 280M+ papers, and write papers with cited sources. Trusted by 1M+ students, PhDs & researchers.

SciSpace | AI for Research

Analyze PDFs

Code & Manuscripts

Funding & Grants

Literature & Patents

Medical & Clinical Data

Systematic Review

Visualize & Present

Web & Data

Build a Google Scholar-like website for your research.

Build a website

Create charts and images for your research

Create a Chart

Write a paper for submission to a journal

Draft a manuscript

Patent Search

Design eye-catching scientific posters in minutes.

Scientific Poster Generation

Systematic Literature Review

One task is running at the moment. Your messages will be shown right after.

Drag and drop or click here to browse

Loved by <highlight>1 million+</highlight> researchers

Extract a list of specific topics and their sources from unstructured text

Topics

Compare and analyze relevant papers that matches with your search

Papers

Get insights from PDFs and bookmarked papers from your library

My library

Recent searches

Try searching for:

Catch AI-generated content in scholarly and non-scholarly content

{ai} Detector

Ai Writer

Get PDF Summaries, highlighted text explanations 

Chat with PDF

Effortlessly create in-text citations and bibliographies in APA and 2,500 other formats

Citation generator

Get explanations, summaries, and answers on academic papers

Ease up your research workflow with {scispace}'s cohort of exciting AI tools

Elevate your academic writing skills and convey your ideas the way you want

Paraphraser

Explore our range of reading and writing tools

Your file is being prepared and should be ready in a few minutes. If it's a large file, it might take a bit longer. You can close this window, and we'll email you the file when it's done.

You have reached a maximum limit of <strong>{limit}</strong> columns in the table. Remove at least <strong>1</strong> column to add or create another one.

Michèle Weiss

Author Tools

Chat about Author

Papers

Is genome size influenced by colonization of new environments in dipteran species

Differences in Genome Size Between Closely Related Species: The Drosophila melanogaster Species Subgroup

Variation of the genome size estimate with environmental conditions in Drosophila melanogaster.