The evolution and genomic basis of beetle diversity.

The order Coleoptera (beetles) is arguably the most speciose group of animals, but the evolutionary history of beetles, including the impacts of plant feeding (herbivory) on beetle diversification, remain poorly understood. We inferred the phylogeny of beetles using 4,818 genes for 146 species, estimated timing and rates of beetle diversification using 89 genes for 521 species representing all major lineages and traced the evolution of beetle genes enabling symbiont-independent digestion of lignocellulose using 154 genomes or transcriptomes. Phylogenomic analyses of these uniquely comprehensive datasets resolved previously controversial beetle relationships, dated the origin of Coleoptera to the Carboniferous, and supported the codiversification of beetles and angiosperms. Moreover, plant cell wall-degrading enzymes (PCWDEs) obtained from bacteria and fungi via horizontal gene transfers may have been key to the Mesozoic diversification of herbivorous beetles-remarkably, both major independent origins of specialized herbivory in beetles coincide with the first appearances of an arsenal of PCWDEs encoded in their genomes. Furthermore, corresponding (Jurassic) diversification rate increases suggest that these novel genes triggered adaptive radiations that resulted in nearly half of all living beetle species. We propose that PCWDEs enabled efficient digestion of plant tissues, including lignocellulose in cell walls, facilitating the evolution of uniquely specialized plant-feeding habits, such as leaf mining and stem and wood boring. Beetle diversity thus appears to have resulted from multiple factors, including low extinction rates over a long evolutionary history, codiversification with angiosperms, and adaptive radiations of specialized herbivorous beetles following convergent horizontal transfers of microbial genes encoding PCWDEs.

Beyond pain: Using Unsupervised Machine Learning to Identify Phenotypic Clusters of Small Fiber Neuropathy.

Background and Objectives: Small fiber neuropathy (SFN) is characterized by dysfunction and loss of peripheral unmyelinated and thinly myelinated nerve fibers, resulting in a phenotype that includes varying combinations of somatosensory and dysautonomia symptoms, which can be profoundly disabling and lead to decreased quality of life. Treatment aimed mainly at pain reduction, which may not target the underlying pathophysiology, is frequently ineffective. Another impediment to the effective management of SFN may be the significant between-patient heterogeneity. Accordingly, we launched this study to gain insights into the symptomatic variability of SFN and determine if SFN patients can be sub-grouped based on clinical characteristics. Methods: To characterize the phenotype and investigate how patients with SFN differ from those with large fiber involvement, 105 patients with skin-biopsy proven SFN and 45 with mixed fiber neuropathy (MFN) were recruited. Using unsupervised machine learning, SFN patients were clustered based upon symptom concurrence and severity. Demographics, clinical data, symptoms, and skin biopsy- and laboratory findings were compared between the groups. Results: MFN- as compared to SFN patients, were more likely to be male, older, had a lower intraepidermal nerve fiber density at the ankle and more frequent abnormal immunofixation. Beyond these differences, symptom prevalence and intensities were similar in the two cohorts. SFN patients comprised three distinct phenotypic clusters, which differed significantly in symptom severity, co-occurrence, localization, and skin biopsy findings. Only one subgroup, constituting about 20% of the patient population, was characterized by intense neuropathic pain, which was always associated with several other SFN symptoms of similarly high intensities. A pauci-symptomatic cluster comprised patients who experienced few SFN symptoms, generally of low to moderate intensity. The largest cluster was characterized by intense fatigue, myalgias and subjective weakness, but lower intensities of burning pain and paresthesia. Discussion: This data-driven study introduces a new approach to subgrouping patients with SFN. Considering both neuropathic pain and pernicious symptoms beyond pain, we identified three clusters, which may be related to distinct pathophysiological mechanisms. Although additional validation will be required, our findings represent a step towards stratified treatment approaches and, ultimately, personalized treatment.

Anti-Plexin-D1 Seropositive Small Fiber Neuropathy: Clinical Phenotype, Demographics, and Literature Review.

OBJECTIVES: Small fiber neuropathy (SFN) is a subtype of painful neuropathies defined by dysfunction of the Aδ and unmyelinated C fibers. It presents with both neuropathic pain and dysautonomia symptoms, posing a significant diagnostic and therapeutic challenge. To address this challenge, research has been conducted to identify autoantibodies and define their association with phenotypes. METHODS: Eleven cases of anti-plexin-D1 seropositive SFN were reviewed, along with relevant literature, in attempt to better define anti-plexin-D1 SFN demographics, symptoms, associated medical conditions, and therapeutics. RESULTS: Anti-plexin-D1 SFN typically presents in female patients, with neuropathic pain, normal skin biopsy findings, and normal nerve conduction studies. Anti-plexin-D1 shows an association with concurrent chronic pain, with almost half of the patients undergoing an interventional procedure. CONCLUSIONS: Anti-plexin-D1 represents a unique subgroup of SFN, defined by distinct demographics, phenotype, biopsy findings, and therapeutic management.

Comparing FGFR-3 and TS-HDS Seropositive Small Fiber Neuropathy: Unique Patient Features, Symptoms, Laboratory, and Nerve Conduction Study Findings.

OBJECTIVES: Small fiber neuropathy presents a significant diagnostic and therapeutic challenge. To solve this challenge, efforts have been made to identify autoantibodies associated with this condition. Previous literature has often considered tri-sulfated heparin disaccharide (TS-HDS) and fibroblast growth factor receptor 3 (FGFR3) as a singular seropositive group and/or focused primarily on symptomatic associations. METHODS: One hundred seventy-two small fiber neuropathy patients with a Washington University Sensory Neuropathy panel were selected for TS-HDS seropositivity, FGFR-3 seropositivity, and seronegative controls. Data were collected to on the demographic, symptomatic, and laboratory profiles of each subgroup. RESULTS: Percent female (P = 0.0043), frequency of neuropathic pain symptoms (P = 0.0074), and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (P = 0.0293), vitamin D (P < 0.0001), and vitamin B12 (P = 0.0033) differed between the groups. Skin biopsy was more frequently normal within both the FGFR-3 and the TS-HDS cohort (P = 0.0253). CONCLUSIONS: TS-HDS and FGFR-3 display a distinct phenotype from both controls and one another. Immunoglobulin M (IgM) against FGFR-3 and IgM against TS-HDS may be individually valuable markers for the development of distinct clinical phenotypes.