Trends in Genetics
OpinionEvolution of genome size: new approaches to an old problem
Section snippets
‘Adaptive’ versus ‘junk DNA’ theories of genome-size evolution
Traditionally, theories of genome-size evolution primarily attempted to solve the puzzle of the apparent wastefulness of Nature; that is,why would many genomes have vast amounts of extra DNA considering the actual informational needs of the organism? There are two broad classes of explanations.
The ‘adaptive’ theories postulate an adaptive function for this extra DNA given that DNA abundance, rather than its information content, can have a direct and significant effect on phenotype 4 (Box 1).
Evolutionary forces affecting genome size
The current dichotomy between adaptive and junk DNA theories places the focus squarely on the question of whether extra DNA benefits the organism. But could there be more to it? I propose that by focussing exclusively on the question of the function (or lack of thereof) of extra DNA, the current debate obscures differences between various evolutionary explanations that might also be relevant. The easiest way to see this is to cast the question of genome-size evolution in terms of population
Distinguishing evolutionary forces of genome-size change
Given the multitude of genetic and population processes involved, the main challenge of the approach I am advocating is to find a way of distinguishing among them and to studying them individually.
One way to distinguish among the forces acting on genome size is to consider the timescale over which these forces could be effective, as different mutational mechanisms act on very different timescales. The activity of TEs is relatively fast, potentially amplifying the transposable-element copy
Global nature of forces affecting genome size
Another way to differentiate among multiple forces acting on genome size is to consider the scope of their action. Some forces, such as natural selection acting on a trait correlated with total genome size, are global in the sense that they affect the size of all genomic sequences, provided that these sequences are free to vary in size and that size variation exists. For example, if a lineage experiences an increased selection for a shorter developmental time (and therefore for more rapid DNA
Measuring individual forces
How can we assess the relative importance of particular mechanisms as forces of this genome-size change? As genome-size changes are reflected in all genomic components, we cannot answer this question simply by testing whether any one particular class of sequences is amplified in large genomes or reduced in compact ones. The action of any global force would produce very similar long-term effects.
What we need are direct experimental studies of the strength of the individual mechanisms of
Conclusion
The question of the C-value paradox has puzzled us for almost half a century. For much of this time the debate has centered on whether the vast amounts of noncoding DNA have any functional, adaptive role. This question needs to be settled if we are to understand fully the evolution of genome size. However, I believe the primary focus on this one question distracts us from other essential questions. How important is genetic drift in genome-size evolution? Do mutational rates of DNA addition and
Acknowledgements
I thank M. Siegal, D. Hartl, D. Bensasson, T. Gregory and E. Zuckerkandl for very helpful comments. Comments by the two anonymous referees and the editor helped to improve the manuscript significantly.
References (50)
- et al.
High rate of DNA loss in the Drosophila melanogaster and Drosophila virilis species groups
Mol. Biol. Evol.
(1998) Repetitive sequences: cause for variation in genome size and chromosome morphology in the genus Oryza
Plant Mol. Biol.
(1997)Nonviral retroposons: genes, pseudogenes, and transposable elements generated by the reverse flow of genetic information
Annu. Rev. Biochem.
(1986)- et al.
Trash DNA is what gets thrown away: High rate of DNA loss in Drosophila
Gene
(1997) - et al.
The DNA content of animal cells and its evolutionary significance
J. Gen. Physiol.
(1951) The genetic organization of chromosomes
Annu. Rev. Genet.
(1971)- et al.
The Eukaryotic Genome in Development and Evolution
(1988) The duration of meiosis
Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci.
(1971)Nuclear volume control by nucleoskeletal DNA, selection for cell volume and cell growth rate, and the solution of the DNA C-value paradox
J. Cell Sci.
(1978)Buffering: a possible passive-homeostasis role for redundant DNA
J. Theor. Biol.
(1998)
A possible function of constitutive heterochromatin: the bodyguard hypothesis
Genetics
Selfish DNA: the ultimate parasite
Nature
Selfish genes, the phenotype paradigm and genome evolution
Nature
Undermethylation associated with retroelement activation and chromosome remodelling in an interspecific mammalian hybrid
Nature
The molecular basis of P-M hybrid dysgenesis: the role of the P element, a P-strain specific transposon family
Cell
Transposable elements in Drosophila melanogaster
Diverse transposable elements are mobilized in hybrid dysgenesis in Drosophila virilis
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.
Regulation of mutator activities in maize
Basic Life Sci.
From the cover: genome evolution of wild barley (Hordeum spontaneum) by BARE-1 retrotransposon dynamics in response to sharp microclimatic divergence
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.
A demonstrable local and geometric increase in the chromosomal DNA of Chironomous
Experientia.
Nuclear DNA variation in Allium
Heredity
Constraints upon the organization and evolution of chromosomes in Allium
Theor. Appl. Genet.
Evolution of genome size in Allium (Alliacea)
Plant Syst. Evol.
Plant DNA contents and systematics
Cited by (355)
Nuclear genome of dinoflagellates: Size variation and insights into evolutionary mechanisms
2024, European Journal of ProtistologyThe implications of satellite DNA instability on cellular function and evolution
2024, Seminars in Cell and Developmental BiologyHorizontal transfer of Buster transposons across multiple phyla and classes of animals
2022, Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution