The complexities and nuances of analyzing the genome of Drosophila ananassae and its Wolbachia endosymbiont
JournalG3: Genes, Genomes, Genetics
PublisherGenetics Society of America
MetadataShow full item record
AbstractIn "Retrotransposons Are the Major Contributors to the Expansion of the Drosophila ananassae Muller F Element," Leung et al. (2017) improved contigs attributed to the Muller F element from the original CAF1 assembly, and used them to conclude that most of the sequence expansion of the fourth chromosome of D. ananassae is due to a higher transposon load than previously thought, but is not due to Wolbachia DNA integrations. While we do not disagree with the first conclusion, the authors base their second conclusion on the lack of homology detected between their improved CAF1 genome assembly attributed to D. ananassae and reference Wolbachia genomes. While the consensus CAF1 genome assembly lacks any sequence similarity to the reference genome of the Wolbachia endosymbiont of Drosophila melanogaster (wMel), numerous studies from multiple laboratories provide experimental support for a large lateral/horizontal gene transfer (LGT) of a Wolbachia genome into this D. ananassae line. As such, we strongly suspect that the original whole genome assembly was either constructed after the removal of all Wolbachia reads, or that Wolbachia sequences were directly removed from the contigs in the CAF1 assembly. Hence, Leung et al. (2017) could not have identified the Wolbachia LGT using the CAF1 assembly. This manuscript by Leung et al. (2017) highlights that an assembly of the Wolbachia sequence reads and their mate pairs was erroneously attributed solely to the Wolbachia endosymbiont, albeit before we understood the extent of LGT in D. ananassae. As such, we recommend that the sequences deposited at the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) under PRJNA13365 should not be attributed to Wolbachia endosymbiont of D. ananassae, but should have their taxonomy reclassified by NCBI as "Unclassified sequences." As our knowledge about genome biology improves, we need to reconsider and reanalyze earlier genomes removing the prejudice introduced from now defunct paradigms. © 2018 Dunning Hotopp and Klasson.
SponsorsThis work was supported by the National Institutes of Health through an NIH Director's Transformative Research Award (1-R01-CA206188) and the National Science Foundation Advances in Biological Informatics (ABI-1457957) to J.C.D.H.
Identifier to cite or link to this itemhttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85039954213&doi=10.1534%2fg3.117.300164&partnerID=40&md5=5f284586b9c58d70fe38c6dc4facb02d; http://hdl.handle.net/10713/8814