Abstract
The need for genomes to detect and correct errors has been a major force in evolution, driving DNA to ‘speak in palindromes’ and splitting members of a species into two sexes. Errors associated with DNA mutations or DNA damage may be imperfectly corrected in our bodies (“soma”), but should be better corrected in the germ line. To this end, meiotic recombination repair, in which maternal and paternal genomes are compared, is the last court of appeal. For this ‘rebooting’ of the genome, parental genomes must be neither too similar, nor too disparate. If too similar (inbreeding), differences will not emerge at meiosis in their child’s gonad. If too disparate, an exploratory speciation process (anti-recombination) may initiate, manifest as a healthy, but sterile, child (hybrid sterility). For the initiation of speciation, human females must: (i) differentiate their sex chromosomes (X and X), (ii) differentiate their non-sex chromosomes (22 autosomal pairs), and (iii) activate ‘check-points’ which respond to such differentiations by disrupting meiosis. In contrast human males, being already advanced in the first step due to differentiation of their sex chromosomes (X and Y), have to complete only the latter steps. Thus, the first sign of speciation (incipient speciation), manifest as hybrid sterility, is production of sterile males (Haldane’s rule). Long ago, anti-recombination activity prevented repair of Y-chromosomes, which degenerated, thus loosing many X-chromosome equivalent genes. Human males now have potentially only one dose of many X-chromosome gene products, whereas females have potentially two doses. Dosage compensation in human females, leaving only one X-chromosome active, buffers fluctuations in intracellular protein concentrations between male and female generations. This permits a gene, independently of the sex which may harbor it, to fine-tune the concentration of its protein product to that of other proteins with which it has been traveling through the generations. In this way, collective protein functions, including intracellular self/not-self discrimination, are facilitated. Failure of this may predispose human females to autoimmune disease. By virtue of extensive palindromic sequences, Y chromosomes appear, like some rare ameiotic organisms, capable of in-series error-correction.
What makes hybrid male sterility of great current interest is the increasing evidence that the building blocks of this isolating barrier may be radically different from what we had come to believe. … It is clear that a new paradigm is emerging, which will force us, first, to revised many conclusions … that had gathered almost unanimous agreement, and, second, to try a completely different experimental approach.
Horacio Naveira and Xulio Maside (1998) [1]
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Naveira HF, Maside XR (1998) The genetics of hybrid male sterility in Drosophila. In: Howard DJ, Berlocher SH (eds) Endless Forms and Speciation. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 329–338
Delboeuf J (1877) Les mathématiques et le transformisme. Une loi mathématique applicable a la théorie du transformisme. La Revue Scientifique 29:669–679
Bernstein C, Bernstein H (1991) Aging, Sex and DNA Repair. Academic Press, San Diego, CA
Supek F, Lehner B (2015) Differential DNA mismatch repair underlies mutation rate variation across the human genome. Nature 521:81–84
Ridley M (2000) Mendel’s Demon. Gene Justice and the Complexity of Life. Orion Books, London, pp 167–201
Medvinsky A, Smith A (2003) Fusion brings down barriers. Nature 422:823–825
Reese V (2002) Mutation repair: a proposed mechanism that would enable complex genomes to better resist mutational entropy and which suggests a novel function for meiosis. The Human Behavior and Evolution Society 14th Annual Meeting, Rutgers University. Abstracts of presentations to session on "New Developments in Biology," June 21, p. 40. [See also: “Meiotic pairing inadequacies at the levels of X chromosome, gene, or base: epigenetic tagging for transgenerational error-correction guided by a future homologous duplex.” (Reese VR, Forsdyke DR, 2016; Biological Theory, in press.)]
McKee BD (1996) Meiotic recombination: a mechanism for tracking and eliminating mutations? BioEssays 18:411–419
Wahls WP, Davidson MK (2012) New paradigms for conserved, multifactorial, cis-acting regulation of meiotic recombination. Nucleic Acids Research 40:9983–9989
Baker CL, Kajita S, Walker M, Saxl RL, Raghupathy N, Choi K, Petkov PM, Piagen K (2015) PRDM9 drives evolutionary erosion of hotspots in Mus musculus through haplotype-specific initiation of meiotic recombination. PLOS Genetics 11:e1004916
Butler S (1914) The Humour of Homer and Other Essays. Kennerley, New York, pp 209–313
Noort V van, Worning P, Ussery DW, Rosche WA, Sinden RR (2003) Strand misalignments lead to quasipalindrome correction. Trends in Genetics 19:365–369
Navarre WW, McClelland M, Libby SJ, Fang FC (2007) Silencing of xenogeneic DNA by H-NS – facilitation of lateral gene transfer in bacteria by a defense system that recognizes foreign DNA. Genes & Development 21:1456–1471
Forsdyke DR, Zhang C, Wei J-F (2010) Chromosomes as interdependent accounting units. The assigned orientation of C. elegans chromosomes minimizes the total W-base Chargaff difference. Journal of Biological Systems 18:1–16
Sinclair R (2015) Necessary relations for nucleotide frequencies. Journal of Theoretical Biology 374:179–182
Forsdyke DR (2001) The Origin of Species, Revisited. McGill-Queen’s University Press, Montreal
Darwin C (1871) Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex. Appleton, New York, pp 245–311
Haldane JBS (1922) Sex ratio and unidirectional sterility in hybrid animals. Journal of Genetics 12:101–109
Coyne JA (1992) Genetics and speciation. Nature 355:511–515
Forsdyke DR (1995) Fine tuning of intracellular protein concentrations, a collective protein function involved in aneuploid lethality, sex-determination and speciation. Journal of Theoretical Biology 172:335–345
Chandley AC, Jones RC, Dott HM, Allen WR, Short RV (1974) Meiosis in interspecific equine hybrids. 1. The male mule (Equus asinus X E. caballus) and hinny (E. caballus X E. asinus). Cytogenetics & Cell Genetics 13:330–341
Vries H de (1889) Intracellular Pangenesis. Open Court, Chicago, (1910) pp 18–19
Darwin C (1851) A Monograph on the Subclass Cirripedia, vol. 1. The Ray Society, London, pp 281–293
Bateson W (1922) Evolutionary faith and modern doubts. Science 55:55–61
Goldschmidt R (1940) The Material Basis of Evolution, Yale University Press, New Haven, pp 233–236
Forsdyke DR (2000) Haldane's rule: hybrid sterility affects the heterogametic sex first because sexual differentiation is on the path to species differentiation. Journal of Theoretical Biology 204:443–452
Romanes GJ (1886) Physiological selection: an additional suggestion on the origin of species. Journal of the Linnean Society (Zoology) 19:337–411
Romanes GJ (1897) Darwin, and After Darwin: 3. Isolation and Physiological Selection. Longmans Green, London
Wallace AR (1868) Letter to Darwin, 24th March. Available at https://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/entry-6045
Koller PC, Darlington CD (1934) The genetical and mechanical properties of the sex chromosomes. 1. Rattus norvegicus. Journal of Genetics 29:159–173. [In male meiosis, the Y chromosome is an inadequate pairing partner for the X chromosome with respect to error-correction. At that time the X chromosome’s transcription products are not required and it is epigenetically silenced and cordoned off with the Y chromosome as the “XY body” - a process known as “meiotic sex chromosome inactivation” (MSCI). Thus, the X chromosome emerges without error-correction from male meiosis. It can only redeem itself in female generations, where there is a pairing partner. This appears to be an example of a more widely recognized phenomenon - “meiotic silencing of unpaired DNA” (MSUD; see Chapter 18), and is consistent with the shorter lifespans of the daughters of elderly fathers (see Gavrilov et al. 1997, “Mutation load and human longevity.” Mutation Research 377:61–62). The latter is an example of a “paternal age effect.”]
Montoya-Burgos JI, Boursot P, Galtier N (2003) Recombination explains isochores in mammalian genomes. Trends in Genetics 19:128–130
Willard HF (2003) Tales of the Y chromosome. Nature 423:810–813
Warburton PE, Giordano J, Cheung F, Gelfand Y, Benson G (2004) Inverted repeat structure of the human genome: the X chromosome contains a preponderance of large, highly homologous inverted repeats that contain testes genes. Genome Research 14:1861–1869
Flot J-F, et al. (2013) Genomic evidence for ameiotic evolution in the bdelloid rotifer Adineta vaga. Nature 500:453–457
Gladyshev E, Meselson M (2008) Extreme resistance of bdelloid rotifers to ionizing radiation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 105:5139–5144
Gartler SM (2014) A brief history of dosage compensation. Journal of Genetics 93:591–595
Carrel L, Cottle AA, Goglin KC, Willard HF (1999) A first-generation X-inactivation profile of the human X chromosome. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 96:14440–14444
Papadopulos AST, Chester M, Ridout K, Filatov DA (2015) Rapid Y degeneration and dosage compensation in plant sex chromosomes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 112:13021–13026 [In some species MSCI extends transgenerationally, so that in daughters only the X chromosome donated by the mother is expressed and the X chromosome donated by the father remains epigenetically silenced (see: Engel 2015, “Imprinted X chromosome inactivation offers up a double dose of epigenetics.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 112:14408–14409)]
Bridges CB (1922) The origin of variations in sexual and sex-limited characters. American Naturalist 56:51–63
Forsdyke DR (1994) Relationship of X chromosome dosage compensation to intracellular self/not-self discrimination: a resolution of Muller's paradox? Journal of Theoretical Biology 167:7–12
Forsdyke DR (2009) X chromosome reactivation perturbs intracellular self/not-self discrimination. Immunology & Cell Biology (2009) 87:525–528
Gladstein N, McKeon MN, Horabin JI (2010) Requirement of male-specific dosage compensation in Drosophila females—implications of early X chromosome gene expression. PLoS Genetics 6: e1001041
Forsdyke DR (2012) Ohno's hypothesis and Muller's paradox: sex chromosome dosage compensation may serve collective gene functions. BioEssays 34:930–933
Zhang J, Yang JR (2015) Determinants of the rate of protein sequence evolution. Nature Reviews Genetics 16:409–420
Yang J-R, Liao B-Y, Zhuang S-M, Zhang J (2012) Protein misinteraction avoidance causes highly expressed proteins to evolve slowly. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 109:E831–E840
Monteith WB, Cohen RD, Smith AE, Guzman-Cisneros E, Pielak GJ (2015) Quinary structure modulates protein stability in cells. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 112:1739–42
Laurent JM, et al. (2010) Protein abundances are more conserved than mRNA abundances across diverse taxa. Proteomics 10:4209–4212
Khan Z, Ford MJ, Cusanovich DA, Mitrano A, Pritchard JK, Gilad Y. (2013) Primate transcript and protein expression levels evolve under compensatory selection pressures. Science 342:1100–1104
Wiseman FK, Al-Janabi T, Hardy J, Karmiloff-Smith A, Nizetic D, Tybulewicz VLJ, Fisher EMC, Strydom A (2015) A genetic cause of Alzheimer disease: mechanistic insights from Down Syndrome. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 16:564–574
Jacobs PA (2014) An opportune life: 50 years in human cytogenetics. Annual Review of Genomics & Human Genetics 15:29–46
Gimenez-Barcons M, Casteras A, Armengol MdP, Porta E, Correa PA, Marın A, Pujol-Borrell R, Colobran R (2014) Autoimmune predisposition in Down syndrome may result from a partial central tolerance failure due to insufficient intrathymic expression of AIRE and Peripheral Antigens. Journal of Immunology 193:3872–3879
Danial NN, Korsmeyer SJ (2004) Cell death. Critical control points. Cell 116:205–219
Bateson W, Punnett RC (1911) On gametic series involving reduplication of certain terms. Journal of Genetics 1:293–302
Weinberg W (1912) Zur Vererbung des Zwergwuchses. Archiv für Rassen- und Gesellschafts-Biologie 9: 710–717
Goriely A, Wilkie AO (2012) Paternal age effect mutations and selfish spermatogonial selection: causes and consequences for human disease: American Journal of Human Genetics 90:175–200
Shinde DN, Elmer DP, Calabrese P, Boulanger J, Arnheim N, Tiemann-Boege I (2013) New evidence for positive selection helps explain the paternal age effect observed in achondroplasia. 22:4117–4126
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Forsdyke, D.R. (2016). Rebooting the Genome. In: Evolutionary Bioinformatics. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28755-3_17
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28755-3_17
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-28753-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-28755-3
eBook Packages: Biomedical and Life SciencesBiomedical and Life Sciences (R0)