Evolutionary analysis identifies multiple genome expansions and contractions in Sepsidae (Diptera) and suggests targets for future genomic research. (14th July 2015)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Su, Kathy F. Y.; Puniamoorthy, Jayanthi; Özsu, Nesibe; Srivathsan, Amrita; Meier, Rudolf
• Is Part Of: Cladistics. Volume 32:Number 3(2016:Jun.)
• Page Start: 308
• Page End: 316
• Publication Date: 2015-07-14
• Subjects: Cladistic analysis -- Periodicals; 578.012
• DOI: 10.1111/cla.12128
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0748-3007

Abstract

Abstract: We here argue that data from comparative studies of genome size and karyotypes provide important information for planning comparative research on genome evolution. We document for 39 species of sepsids that there is a four‐fold difference in genome size (151–618 Mbp). Mapping genome sizes onto a phylogenetic hypothesis identifies that this range is the result of five genome expansions and four genome contractions that we here define as changes in genome size of more than 50 Mbp. We then generate karyotype data for 10 species and find no changes in chromosome number. The study reveals that the "Oriental" clade of sepsids is a promising system for studying genome evolution because it has experienced three genome expansion events. These events can be compared with an expansion in the "Neotropical" clade in order to reveal the mechanisms that underlie genome expansion in Sepsidae. A review of the literature on genome sizes and karyotypes reveals that they have been poorly documented in Metazoa. This means that researchers interested in the evolution of genome expansions and contractions are currently not being able to identify appropriate target taxa for genome sequencing. We thus argue for more comparative research on genome sizes and karyotypes and point out that historically species were chosen for genome sequencing for reasons not related to genome evolution (e.g. small genome size, model species status, phylogenetic position, interesting phenotypes). We believe that it is now time to use a more genome‐centric selection criterion, where species for whole genome sequencing are selected based on their importance for understanding genome evolution.