Many, but not all, lineage-specific genes can be explained by homology detection failure.

Genes for which homologs can be detected only in a limited group of evolutionarily related species, called "lineage-specific genes," are pervasive: Essentially every lineage has them, and they often comprise a sizable fraction of the group's total genes. Lineage-specific genes are often interpreted as "novel" genes, representing genetic novelty born anew within that lineage. Here, we develop a simple method to test an alternative null hypothesis: that lineage-specific genes do have homologs outside of the lineage that, even while evolving at a constant rate in a novelty-free manner, have merely become undetectable by search algorithms used to infer homology. We show that this null hypothesis is sufficient to explain the lack of detected homologs of a large number of lineage-specific genes in fungi and insects. However, we also find that a minority of lineage-specific genes in both clades are not well explained by this novelty-free model. The method provides a simple way of identifying which lineage-specific genes call for special explanations beyond homology detection failure, highlighting them as interesting candidates for further study.

The Origins and Functions of De Novo Genes: Against All Odds?

"De novo" genes evolve from previously non-genic DNA. This strikes many of us as remarkable, because it seems extraordinarily unlikely that random sequence would produce a functional gene. How is this possible? In this two-part review, I first summarize what is known about the origins and molecular functions of the small number of de novo genes for which such information is available. I then speculate on what these examples may tell us about how de novo genes manage to emerge despite what seem like enormous opposing odds.

Borrowed alleles and convergence in serpentine adaptation.

Serpentine barrens represent extreme hazards for plant colonists. These sites are characterized by high porosity leading to drought, lack of essential mineral nutrients, and phytotoxic levels of metals. Nevertheless, nature forged populations adapted to these challenges. Here, we use a population-based evolutionary genomic approach coupled with elemental profiling to assess how autotetraploid Arabidopsis arenosa adapted to a multichallenge serpentine habitat in the Austrian Alps. We first demonstrate that serpentine-adapted plants exhibit dramatically altered elemental accumulation levels in common conditions, and then resequence 24 autotetraploid individuals from three populations to perform a genome scan. We find evidence for highly localized selective sweeps that point to a polygenic, multitrait basis for serpentine adaptation. Comparing our results to a previous study of independent serpentine colonizations in the closely related diploid Arabidopsis lyrata in the United Kingdom and United States, we find the highest levels of differentiation in 11 of the same loci, providing candidate alleles for mediating convergent evolution. This overlap between independent colonizations in different species suggests that a limited number of evolutionary strategies are suited to overcome the multiple challenges of serpentine adaptation. Interestingly, we detect footprints of selection in A. arenosa in the context of substantial gene flow from nearby off-serpentine populations of A. arenosa, as well as from A. lyrata In several cases, quantitative tests of introgression indicate that some alleles exhibiting strong selective sweep signatures appear to have been introgressed from A. lyrata This finding suggests that migrant alleles may have facilitated adaptation of A. arenosa to this multihazard environment.

The permissive binding theory of cancer.

The later stages of cancer, including the invasion and colonization of new tissues, are actively mysterious compared to earlier stages like primary tumor formation. While we lack many details about both, we do have an apparently successful explanatory framework for the earlier stages: one in which genetic mutations hold ultimate causal and explanatory power. By contrast, on both empirical and conceptual grounds, it is not currently clear that mutations alone can explain the later stages of cancer. Can a different type of molecular change do better? Here, I introduce the "permissive binding theory" of cancer, which proposes that novel protein binding interactions are the key causal and explanatory entity in invasion and metastasis. It posits that binding is more abundant at baseline than we observe because it is restricted in normal physiology; that any large perturbation to physiological state revives this baseline abundance, unleashing many new binding interactions; and that a subset of these cause the cellular functions at the heart of oncogenesis, especially invasion and metastasis. Significant physiological perturbations occur in cancer cells in very early stages, and generally become more extreme with progression, providing interactions that continually fuel invasion and metastasis. The theory is compatible with, but not limited to, causal roles for the diverse molecular changes observed in cancer (e.g. gene expression or epigenetic changes), as these generally act causally upstream of proteins, and so may exert their effects by changing the protein binding interactions that occur in the cell. This admits the possibility that molecular changes that appear quite different may actually converge in creating the same few protein complexes, simplifying our picture of invasion and metastasis. If correct, the theory offers a concrete therapeutic strategy: targeting the key novel complexes. The theory is straightforwardly testable by large-scale identification of protein interactions in different cancers.

Mixing genome annotation methods in a comparative analysis inflates the apparent number of lineage-specific genes.

Comparisons of genomes of different species are used to identify lineage-specific genes, those genes that appear unique to one species or clade. Lineage-specific genes are often thought to represent genetic novelty that underlies unique adaptations. Identification of these genes depends not only on genome sequences, but also on inferred gene annotations. Comparative analyses typically use available genomes that have been annotated using different methods, increasing the risk that orthologous DNA sequences may be erroneously annotated as a gene in one species but not another, appearing lineage specific as a result. To evaluate the impact of such "annotation heterogeneity," we identified four clades of species with sequenced genomes with more than one publicly available gene annotation, allowing us to compare the number of lineage-specific genes inferred when differing annotation methods are used to those resulting when annotation method is uniform across the clade. In these case studies, annotation heterogeneity increases the apparent number of lineage-specific genes by up to 15-fold, suggesting that annotation heterogeneity is a substantial source of potential artifact.

Defining characteristics and conservation of poorly annotated genes in Caenorhabditis elegans using WormCat 2.0.

Omics tools provide broad datasets for biological discovery. However, the computational tools for identifying important genes or pathways in RNA-seq, proteomics, or GWAS (Genome-Wide Association Study) data depend on Gene Ontogeny annotations and are biased toward well-described pathways. This limits their utility as poorly annotated genes, which could have novel functions, are often passed over. Recently, we developed an annotation and category enrichment tool for Caenorhabditis elegans genomic data, WormCat, which provides an intuitive visualization output. Unlike Gene Ontogeny-based enrichment tools, which exclude genes with no annotation information, WormCat 2.0 retains these genes as a special UNASSIGNED category. Here, we show that the UNASSIGNED gene category enrichment exhibits tissue-specific expression patterns and can include genes with biological functions identified in published datasets. Poorly annotated genes are often considered to be potentially species-specific and thus, of reduced interest to the biomedical community. Instead, we find that around 3% of the UNASSIGNED genes have human orthologs, including some linked to human diseases. These human orthologs themselves have little annotation information. A recently developed method that incorporates lineage relationships (abSENSE) indicates that the failure of BLAST to detect homology explains the apparent lineage specificity for many UNASSIGNED genes. This suggests that a larger subset could be related to human genes. WormCat provides an annotation strategy that allows the association of UNASSIGNED genes with specific phenotypes and known pathways. Building these associations in C. elegans, with its robust genetic tools, provides a path to further functional study and insight into these understudied genes.

Pervasive population genomic consequences of genome duplication in Arabidopsis arenosa.

Ploidy-variable species allow direct inference of the effects of chromosome copy number on fundamental evolutionary processes. While an abundance of theoretical work suggests polyploidy should leave distinct population genomic signatures, empirical data remains sparse. We sequenced ~300 individuals from 39 populations of Arabidopsis arenosa, a naturally diploid-autotetraploid species. We find that the impacts of polyploidy on population genomic processes are subtle yet pervasive, such as reduced efficiency of purifying selection, differences in linked selection and rampant gene flow from diploids. Initial masking of deleterious mutations, faster rates of nucleotide substitution and interploidy introgression likely conspire to shape the evolutionary potential of polyploids.

Gene Evolution: Getting Something from Nothing.

New genes arise from pre-existing genes, but some de novo origin from non-genic sequence also seems plausible. A new study has surprisingly concluded that 25% of random DNA sequences yield beneficial products when expressed in bacteria.