Close

DNA methylation enables recurrent endogenization of giant viruses in an animal relative

Luke A. Sarre, Iana V. Kim, Vladimir Ovchinnikov, Marine Olivetta, Hiroshi Suga, Omaya Dudin, Arnau Sebé-Pedrós, Alex de Mendoza

Posted on: 27 February 2024 , updated on: 28 February 2024

Preprint posted on 8 January 2024

Article now published in Science Advances at http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.ado6406

Methylation silences giant virus DNA in Amoebidium

Selected by Jennifer Ann Black

Categories: evolutionary biology

Background

Methyl groups can be added to DNA bases via enzymes called DNA methyltransferases (DNMTs). These modifications can change how a gene is expressed (i.e., enhance or repress). DNMTs are found in many eukaryotes and are generally well conserved throughout eukaryotic evolution. 5-methyl cytosine (5mC) is generated when DNMTs add a methyl group from S-adenosyl methionine (SAM) to cytosine on the 5th carbon of its ring (1). Typically, 5mC in eukaryotes relates to gene silencing, and these modifications are often associated with DNA sequences originating from viruses and transposable elements (TE). Silencing these exogenous DNA elements can prevent them from becoming toxic to their host. During a viral infection, DNA from the virus can incorporate into the host’s DNA cell and may be left behind long after the infection is cleared. This could, for example, happen after giant virus infections. These viruses have large genomes and invade many kinds of eukaryotic cells. Evidence suggests that some genes important for eukaryotic evolution originate from these large viruses whose DNA was incorporated into the genome of the host cell (2). However, how eukaryotes incorporate and keep viral DNA sequences in check to stop them causing problems is unclear. In this study, the authors show that in a close relative of animals, a protist called Amoebidium appalachense, 5mC silences giant virus DNA present in their genome, preventing the viral DNA from becoming toxic to the cell.

 

Key Findings:

1) In A. appalachense, hypermethylated regions correlate with the locations of viral DNA insertions

Amoebidium appalachense is a protist relative of animals isolated from freshwater arthropods. Using short and long-read sequencing in addition to micro-C, (a technique used to capture information about chromosome-chromosome interactions) the authors assembled the A. appalachense genome, identifying 18 DNMTs in total, some of which can produce 5mC. After mapping DNA methylation across the genome, they discovered a pattern between areas with high methylation and the locations of transposable elements (TEs). In addition, high levels of methylation coincided with repeated sequences originating from 1) Giant viruses, 2) Adintoviruses (similar to virophages; may parasitize giant viruses), 3) Plavanka associated transposons. They estimated that 3.1% of the total genome of A. appalachense is composed of these three repetitive DNA species with ~ 14 % of the proteome derived from these viral-origin genes.

 

2) 5mC keeps viral DNA in check in A. appalachense

To understand what these endogenized viral DNA sequences might offer A. appalachense, the authors rebuilt the gene repertoire of these giant viruses and examined which of the viral genes were incorporated into the host genome, finding many genes enriched for viral integration, replication, regulation, and transporters; all of which likely relate to ‘viral takeover’ of a host cell during infection. Additionally, 10 of the 18 DNMTs were of viral origin suggesting that they may could have been used by the virus, though for what purpose is currently unknown but perhaps for gene expression control – giant viruses have the capacity to methylate their own DNA (3) – or modulating interactions with the host immune system.

Additionally, the authors evidence for the presence of histone demethylases; enzymes that remove DNA methyl groups. These histone demethylases were enriched for a domain called Jumonji C (JmjC). These JmjC containing proteins are probably distant paralogs of histone lysine demethylases (KDM), subfamily 4 (KDM4) A. appalchense already has an ortholog of KDM4 in addition to these JmjC containing proteins. Interestingly, the underlying genes have a similar structure to a eukaryotic gene – containing multiple exons – which is rare in giant viruses. Some of these JmjC encoding genes are transcribed by A. appalachense suggesting they perform functions for this protist. The authors suggest two potential origins of these JmjC containing genes: 1) They are A. appalachense specific paralogs of these KDM4 genes that were acquired by the infecting giant virus, or 2) These KDM4-like genes came from an infected host, were incorporated into the giant virus, remodelled for use and then transferred back to A. appalachense during infection. The authors suggest that these KDM4-like enzymes could have helped the virus to avoid silencing by the host or aid viral incorporation into the host genome.

 

3) 5mC silences these viral DNA sequences

To investigate what role(s) 5mC plays in A. appalachense, the authors chemically depleted DNA methylation in these protozoans (from ~ 40 % to ~ 15 %). In methylation depleted samples, almost all TEs and genes associated with hypermethylated promoters were up regulated. Additionally, they detected transcripts originating from viral genes in the A. appalachense genome however, as no viral particles were found, there is not enough information left in the genome to create a fully functional new virus. Thus, 5mC minimises the risks of these viral sequences encompassed within the A. appalachense genome. Finally, the authors note that these incorporation events appear stochastic, probably from failed infections.

Figure adapted from Sarre et al. Figure summarises the relationship between 5mC in eukaryotic organisms and the endogenisation of giant viruses.

 

What I liked about this preprint:

I find it curious that eukaryotic genomes contain genes of viral origin and that these genes may be central to our evolution. Not only is A. appalachense an interesting organism in its own right but studying these unorthodox eukaryotes further often gives us very key insights into how complex biology evolves.

 

Questions for the authors:

1) Is 5mC the sole method used by A. appalachense to facilitate viral gene silencing?

2) How is 5mC reversed in A. appalachense? Do they have TETs like humans that trigger removal of the base via Base Excision Repair (BER)? Does the hypermethylation of these regions in this organism’s genome lead to increased DNA instability?

3) Could you speculate as to the potential relevance of gene body methylation in this organism given the correlations in animals between gene body methylation and transcription?

4) You demonstrate that A. appalachense possesses a large amount of viral DNA. As full viral particles cannot form based on the remaining sequences, could you speculate as to why this protist retained such a large quantity of potentially harmful DNA? What are the risks of expressing a viral replication factor for example? Do they outcompete the hosts?

 

References:

  1. Turpin, M & Salbert, G. 5-methylcytosine turnover: Mechanisms and therapeutic implications in cancer. Fron. Mol. Biosci. 2022
  2. Cheng, S., Wong, G.K-S, & Melkonian, M. Giant DNA viruses make big strides in eukaryotic evolution. Cell Host & Microbe. 2021.
  3. Jeudy, S., Rigou, S., Alempic, J-M., Claverie, J-m., Abergel, C, & Legendrem M. The DNA methylation landscape of giant viruses. Nat. Com. 2020

Tags: 5mc, amoeba, gene expression, gene silencing, methylation, virus

doi: https://doi.org/10.1242/prelights.36588

Read preprint (No Ratings Yet)

Author's response

Alex de Mendoza shared

1) Is 5mC the sole method used by A. appalachense to facilitate viral gene silencing?

AdM: Probably not, other silencing mechanisms are still in play (e.g. histone modifications), as there are still many giant virus genes that do not get reactivated when 5mC is removed. However, that could also be because the whole regulatory network responsible for full viral reactivation is no longer available in the Amoebidium genome, or because some of the viral genes and promoters have accumulated mutations rendering them unviable.

 

2) How is 5mC reversed in A. appalachense? Do they have TETs like humans that trigger removal of the base via Base Excision Repair (BER)? Does the hypermethylation of these regions in this organism’s genome lead to increased DNA instability?

 

AdM: We do not find TETs in Amoebidium, therefore, it is unclear how they are demethylating their genome, if they ever do! Notably, plants use completely different demethylases to animals, so Amoebidium might have something like that. However, during Amoebidium developmental cycle, methylation levels remain rather static, so there is no evidence for a dynamic methylome in these organisms. Regarding genome instability, we do not know, we see that the cells can recover after the 5mC removal treatment, but lots of cells die and look unhealthy during treatment.

 

3) Could you speculate as to the potential relevance of gene body methylation in this organism given the correlations in animals between gene body methylation and transcription?

 

AdM: That’s tricky as gene body methylation is still poorly understood in invertebrates. We know it is associated with transcription and that it forms a feedback loop with histone modifications such as H3K36me3, but we do not really understand why it is there. A prevalent theory is that gene body methylation is there to prevent spurious transcription start happening from intragenic regions. Besides the efficiency argument, this would also prevent transposons found in introns of transcribed genes to hijack RNA polymerase and get transcribed. This would seem reasonable for Amoebidium to do, minimising the chances of transcriptional start as much as possible, since so many parts of its genome are filled with potentially toxic viral / transposon derived genes.

 

4) You demonstrate that A. appalachense possesses a large amount of viral DNA. As full viral particles cannot form based on the remaining sequences, could you speculate as to why this protist retained such a large quantity of potentially harmful DNA? What are the risks of expressing a viral replication factor for example? Do they outcompete the hosts?

 

AdM: My guess is that Amoebidium has kept a lot of these because it can, rather than a major adaptationist cause. A proof is that different Amoebidium strains have lost / gained many of these insertions, which do not seem to stay in the genome for long or under purifying selection. On one hand, being able to silence these insertions with 5mC is good as it avoids them being a problem, but it is also bad as it fills the genomes with “junk”. In contrast, other protists of the same lineage (ichthyosporeans) that lack 5mC do not seem to encode large scale giant virus endogenisations. Probably, expressing a viral replication factor by itself is not a big deal in terms of risks, but these insertion events most likely involve many genes inserted in one go, and those expressed in combination are what can cause issues, as many of the viral genes are probably there to hijack host cellular biology.

Then, as an analogous example, in mammalian genomes endogenous retroviruses are very abundant, and probably most insertions do not do much and are silenced upon arrival. But some have acquired important roles, either as coding genes or regulatory elements. Therefore, having the potential to regulate these “invaders” is a potential pathway towards domestication of some of the DNA viruses bring to the host.

Have your say

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Sign up to customise the site to your preferences and to receive alerts

Register here

Also in the evolutionary biology category:

Enhancer-driven cell type comparison reveals similarities between the mammalian and bird pallium

Nikolai Hecker , Niklas Kempynck , David Mauduit, et al.

Selected by 02 July 2024

Rodrigo Senovilla-Ganzo

Bioinformatics

Modular control of time and space during vertebrate axis segmentation

Ali Seleit, Ian Brettell, Tomas Fitzgerald, et al.

AND

Natural genetic variation quantitatively regulates heart rate and dimension

Jakob Gierten, Bettina Welz, Tomas Fitzgerald, et al.

Selected by 24 June 2024

Girish Kale, Jennifer Ann Black

Developmental Biology

Fetal brain response to maternal inflammation requires microglia

Bridget Elaine LaMonica Ostrem, Nuria Dominguez Iturza, Jeffrey Stogsdill, et al.

Selected by 24 April 2024

Manuel Lessi

Neuroscience

preLists in the evolutionary biology category:

‘In preprints’ from Development 2022-2023

A list of the preprints featured in Development's 'In preprints' articles between 2022-2023

 



List by Alex Eve, Katherine Brown

preLights peer support – preprints of interest

This is a preprint repository to organise the preprints and preLights covered through the 'preLights peer support' initiative.

 



List by preLights peer support

EMBO | EMBL Symposium: The organism and its environment

This preList contains preprints discussed during the 'EMBO | EMBL Symposium: The organism and its environment', organised at EMBL Heidelberg, Germany (May 2023).

 



List by Girish Kale

9th International Symposium on the Biology of Vertebrate Sex Determination

This preList contains preprints discussed during the 9th International Symposium on the Biology of Vertebrate Sex Determination. This conference was held in Kona, Hawaii from April 17th to 21st 2023.

 



List by Martin Estermann

EMBL Synthetic Morphogenesis: From Gene Circuits to Tissue Architecture (2021)

A list of preprints mentioned at the #EESmorphoG virtual meeting in 2021.

 



List by Alex Eve

Planar Cell Polarity – PCP

This preList contains preprints about the latest findings on Planar Cell Polarity (PCP) in various model organisms at the molecular, cellular and tissue levels.

 



List by Ana Dorrego-Rivas

TAGC 2020

Preprints recently presented at the virtual Allied Genetics Conference, April 22-26, 2020. #TAGC20

 



List by Maiko Kitaoka et al.

ECFG15 – Fungal biology

Preprints presented at 15th European Conference on Fungal Genetics 17-20 February 2020 Rome

 



List by Hiral Shah

COVID-19 / SARS-CoV-2 preprints

List of important preprints dealing with the ongoing coronavirus outbreak. See http://covidpreprints.com for additional resources and timeline, and https://connect.biorxiv.org/relate/content/181 for full list of bioRxiv and medRxiv preprints on this topic

 



List by Dey Lab, Zhang-He Goh

1

SDB 78th Annual Meeting 2019

A curation of the preprints presented at the SDB meeting in Boston, July 26-30 2019. The preList will be updated throughout the duration of the meeting.

 



List by Alex Eve

Pattern formation during development

The aim of this preList is to integrate results about the mechanisms that govern patterning during development, from genes implicated in the processes to theoritical models of pattern formation in nature.

 



List by Alexa Sadier
Close