Abstract

BackgroundThe introduction of DNA-based molecular markers made a revolution in biological systematics. However, in cases of very recent divergence events, the neutral divergence may be too slow, and the analysis of adaptive part of the genome is more informative to reconstruct the recent evolutionary history of young species. The advantage of proteomics is its ability to reflect the biochemical machinery of life. It may help both to identify rapidly evolving genes and to interpret their functions.MethodsHere we applied a comparative gel-based proteomic analysis to several species from the gastropod family Littorinidae. Proteomes were clustered to assess differences related to species, geographic location, sex and body part, using data on presence/absence of proteins in samples and data on protein occurrence frequency in samples of different species. Cluster support was assessed using multiscale bootstrap resampling and the stability of clustering—using cluster-wise index of cluster stability. Taxon-specific protein markers were derived using IndVal method. Proteomic trees were compared to consensus phylogenetic tree (based on neutral genetic markers) using estimates of the Robinson–Foulds distance, the Fowlkes–Mallows index and cophenetic correlation.ResultsOverall, the DNA-based phylogenetic tree and the proteomic similarity tree had consistent topologies. Further, we observed some interesting deviations of the proteomic littorinid tree from the neutral expectations. (1) There were signs of molecular parallelism in two Littoraria species that phylogenetically are quite distant, but live in similar habitats. (2) Proteome divergence was unexpectedly high between very closely related Littorina fabalis and L. obtusata, possibly reflecting their ecology-driven divergence. (3) Conservative house-keeping proteins were usually identified as markers for cryptic species groups (“saxatilis” and “obtusata” groups in the Littorina genus) and for genera (Littoraria and Echinolittorina species pairs), while metabolic enzymes and stress-related proteins (both potentially adaptively important) were often identified as markers supporting species branches. (4) In all five Littorina species British populations were separated from the European mainland populations, possibly reflecting their recent phylogeographic history. Altogether our study shows that proteomic data, when interpreted in the context of DNA-based phylogeny, can bring additional information on the evolutionary history of species.

Highlights

  • Phylogenetic analysis strives to reconstruct the evolutionary history based on variation in heritable traits

  • We deduced the overall similarity of species proteomes from their clustering based on presence/absence of peptides in consensus proteomes (Fig. 1A; File S2). These results were compared with a phylogenetic tree obtained by Bayesian inference based on three molecular markers used earlier by Reid, Dyal & Williams (2012) (Fig. 1B; File S2)

  • The general trees’ topologies were similar: the first split was between genera—Littoraria, Echinolittorina and Littorina; within Littorina subgenera (L. (Littorina) littorea and L

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Phylogenetic analysis strives to reconstruct the evolutionary history based on variation in heritable traits. The methodological breakthrough in DNA analysis introduced the molecular markers into phylogenetic studies and led to the development of several quantitative approaches to reconstruct evolutionary processes from DNA variation (Zuckerkandl & Pauling, 1962; Kimura, 1968; Felsenstein, 1988; Maddison, 1997). In cases of very recent divergence events, the neutral divergence may be too slow, and the analysis of adaptive part of the genome is more informative to reconstruct the recent evolutionary history of young species. Proteomic trees were compared to consensus phylogenetic tree (based on neutral genetic markers) using estimates of the Robinson–Foulds distance, the Fowlkes–Mallows index and cophenetic correlation. Our study shows that proteomic data, when interpreted in the context of DNA-based phylogeny, can bring additional information on the evolutionary history of species

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.