Next Article in Journal
New Arthrobotrys Nematode-Trapping Species (Orbiliaceae) from Terrestrial Soils and Freshwater Sediments in China
Next Article in Special Issue
Cuticular Wax Modification by Epichloë Endophyte in Achnatherum inebrians under Different Soil Moisture Availability
Previous Article in Journal
Marine Compounds with Anti-Candida sp. Activity: A Promised “Land” for New Antifungals
Previous Article in Special Issue
Comparative Research on Metabolites of Different Species of Epichloë Endophytes and Their Host Achnatherum sibiricum
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Telomere-to-Telomere Genome Sequences across a Single Genus Reveal Highly Variable Chromosome Rearrangement Rates but Absolute Stasis of Chromosome Number

1
School of Natural Sciences, Massey University, Palmerston North 4442, New Zealand
2
Plant Ecological Genetics, Institute of Integrative Biology, ETH Zürich, 8092 Zürich, Switzerland
3
Graduate School of Bioagricultural Sciences, Nagoya University, Nagoya 464-8601, Japan
4
Julius Kühn Institute–Federal Research Centre for Cultivated Plants, Institute for Crop and Soil Science, 38116 Braunschweig, Germany
5
Julius Kühn Institute–Federal Research Centre for Cultivated Plants, Institute for Epidemiology and Pathogen Diagnostics, 38116 Braunschweig, Germany
6
School of Biological Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland 1010, New Zealand
7
Digital Life Institute, University of Auckland, Auckland 1010, New Zealand
8
Noble Research Institute, Ardmore, OK 73401, USA
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
J. Fungi 2022, 8(7), 670; https://doi.org/10.3390/jof8070670
Submission received: 3 June 2022 / Revised: 14 June 2022 / Accepted: 23 June 2022 / Published: 25 June 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Fungal Endophytes of Grasses)

Abstract

:
Genome rearrangements in filamentous fungi are prevalent but little is known about the modalities of their evolution, in part because few complete genomes are available within a single genus. To address this, we have generated and compared 15 complete telomere-to-telomere genomes across the phylogeny of a single genus of filamentous fungi, Epichloë. We find that the striking distinction between gene-rich and repeat-rich regions previously reported for isolated species is ubiquitous across the Epichloë genus. We built a species phylogeny from single-copy gene orthologs to provide a comparative framing to study chromosome composition and structural change through evolutionary time. All Epichloë genomes have exactly seven nuclear chromosomes, but despite this conserved ploidy, analyses reveal low synteny and substantial rearrangement of gene content across the genus. These rearrangements are highly lineage-dependent, with most occurring over short evolutionary distances, with long periods of structural stasis. Quantification of chromosomal rearrangements shows they are uncorrelated with numbers of substitutions and evolutionary distances, suggesting that different modes of evolution are acting to create nucleotide and chromosome-scale changes.

1. Introduction

Despite the recent flood of genomic data, eukaryotic genomes assembled to chromosome-level remain uncommon [1] and the availability of multiple finished genomes from a single genus is extremely rare [2,3]. As a consequence, our understanding of how chromosome structure evolves through time is not well advanced [4]. We know that major structural changes are common, ranging from whole chromosome number variation (chromosome fission and fusion, aneuploidy, polyploidy, and accessory chromosomes) to smaller rearrangements within and between existing chromosomes [5]. On this smaller scale, sequence rearrangements are often shaped by forces including transposition, inversion and duplication [6], but the order and pace of these structural changes has not been studied in depth.
Within the eukaryotic kingdom Fungi, Saccharomycetales yeasts have been the most well studied, in large part due to their unusually small genome sizes [7], and yeast genomics has thus provided most insights into the evolution of structural genomic rearrangements [3,8]. However, the genomes of these unicellular yeasts are not strongly representative of most multi-cellular fungi lineages, particularly because they lack abundant transposable elements that are a feature of most eukaryote genomes. Finished genome assemblies of multiple species within a single genus of filamentous fungi are still uncommon. Comparisons of chromosome content in the genus Verticillium revealed considerable sequence rearrangements between species of the vascular plant pathogen [9], leading to low levels of chromosome conservation and aneuploidy within the genus. Whether this pattern extends to other genera and lineages of filamentous fungi is still unknown.
Epichloë is a genus of filamentous ascomycete fungi that are obligate symbionts of cool season grasses [10]. They have been studied extensively as a result of their important ecological roles as mutualists producing alkaloids that protect their grass hosts from herbivory [11]. The genus comprises a mix of haploid species generally able to reproduce sexually [12,13] and non-sexual hybrid species that do not cross back to parental lineages [14,15]. The genomes of Epichloë species sequenced to date are highly compartmentalized into distinct gene-rich regions adjacent to repeat-rich regions depleted in genes [16,17].
To facilitate a detailed understanding of chromosome evolution in genomes more representative of multi-celled eukaryotes, we have used long- and short-read sequencing to generate 15 complete telomere-to-telomere genomes from 12 Epichloë species, with 11 genomes newly presented here. These genomes comprise an evolutionary “transect”—a systematic sampling across the phylogenetic diversity of an entire genus. We focused on the non-hybrid haploid lineages so that our view of chromosome evolution is not confounded by hybridization. The taxonomic scope of this dataset permits a detailed analysis of chromosome change right across a genus, allowing us to identify the primary patterns and trends of chromosome evolution at different evolutionary distances, from the level of strains within a single species, through to deeply divergent lineages.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Genome Sequencing

Genomes were sequenced from high molecular weight genomic DNA obtained as described in Winter et al. [16]. Sequencing runs were performed either on the Oxford Nanopore MinION Mk1B using a R10.3 flow cell or the PacBio RSII or Sequel II instruments, depending on the sample (Table 1). Genomes were assembled using Canu v2.1.1 [18], with ambiguous breaks resolved using either Mecat2 v20193.14 [19] for PacBio data or Necat v0.0.1 [20] for Nanopore data. Genome polishing was performed with Pilon v1.24 [21], using Illumina short read libraries, where available (Table 1), or the Pilon long-read option. Homologous DNA lies across different chromosomes in Epichloë, therefore chromosomes were labelled by size within each strain, according to standard conventions.

2.2. Genome Annotation and Repeat Content Analysis

Gene models were called de novo for each species separately using the standard settings of funannotate v1.8.9 (https://funannotate.readthedocs.io; accessed on 1 March 2022). Repeat elements were identified using RepeatModeler v2.0.2a [22] and RepeatMasker v4.1.2.p1 (https://www.repeatmasker.org; accessed on 1 March 2022). Regions of low GC content, typically caused by Repeat-Induced Point (RIP) mutations in this genus, were identified with OcculterCut v1.1 [23]. Densities across the genome, as well as the fraction of repeat elements found in AT-rich regions, were calculated using the ‘coverage’ function of bedtools v2.30.0 [24].

2.3. Phylogenetic Analysis

Conserved gene orthologs were independently identified in each species with BUSCO v5.2.2 [25] using the closest reference database, hypocreales_odb10. Single copy ortholog protein sequences were passed to OrthoFinder v2.5.4 [26], which generated a maximum likelihood species phylogeny using RAxML-NG v1.0.3 [27] based on 1,489 orthologs with <5% missingness across species. Inclusion of two outgroup species with draft assemblies, Claviceps paspali C7990 (NCBI accession number GCA_000223175.2) [28] and C. purpurea C20.1 (GCA_000347355.1) [29], allowed rooting of the tree. Branch support values were calculated using the Shimodaira-Hasegawa algorithm in FastTree v2.1.10 with 1000× resampling.

2.4. Genome Synteny

Rearrangements of coding regions between chromosomes across different species were inferred and visualized using MCScan (python version) [30]. Fasta files containing DNA sequences of genes identified by the annotation pipeline were generated using the ‘getfasta’ function of bedtools v2.30.0 [24]. These sequence files and their corresponding annotation files were passed to the JCVI python module of MCScan, which built pairwise genome comparisons. For visual clarity, four species from major clades in the genus phylogeny (E. gansuensis, E. glyceriae, E. baconii, E. typhina 1756) were selected to illustrate rearrangements across all seven chromosomes.

2.5. Genome-Scale Multiple Alignment and Ancestral Genome Reconstruction

Genomes were aligned using Progressive Cactus v2.0.3 [31], a reference-free genome scale alignment program. The rooted phylogeny was used as a guide tree, and ancestral genome sequences were reconstructed at internal nodes in the tree. Mutations were counted from extant genomes to the sequence of the most proximal ancestor using the hierarchical alignment HAL toolkit v2.1 [32]. Eight classes of mutation were counted, corresponding to nucleotide substitutions (transitions, transversions), insertions/deletions of one or more nucleotides, and larger sequence rearrangements (inversions, duplications, transpositions). Linear regression models were built in R v4.1.0 [33] to check for correlations between mutation types and evolutionary distances, or between different mutation types. Probability values were calculated using Student’s t-test. The locations of structural variations on extant genomes were extracted via the halLiftover function of the HAL toolkit v2.1 [32] and compared to the location of AT-rich regions using bedtools v2.30.0 [24].

3. Results

3.1. Telomere-to-Telomere Genome Sequences for 15 Epichloë Species and Strains

Genomes were sequenced, completely assembled and annotated for 15 strains from 12 Epichloë species (Table 1), representing 85% of the haploid non-hybrid species currently recognized in the genus. All major clades in the genus Epichloë are represented, such that the most recent common ancestor of all sampled species is equivalent to the root of the genus phylogeny. All genomes were assembled to chromosome level, and consist of one circular mitochondrial sequence and seven nuclear chromosomes, including a resolved rDNA locus. The number of annotated genes varies from 6,489 to 8,324 per genome (Table 2).
We generated a species phylogeny using 1,489 single-copy gene orthologs (Figure 1C and Figure 2A), which recapitulates the known topology of Epichloë [34]. For instance, E. clarkii, E. poae and the two strains of E. typhina cluster in a monophyletic group that corresponds to the established E. typhina species complex; strains of E. elymi group with E. bromicola; strains of E. festucae group with E. amarillans and E. baconii; and E. brachyelytri, E. glyceriae, E. scottii and E. gansuensis are all positioned as basal single-species lineages. All branches in the phylogeny have high support values, so we consider that this phylogeny provides a robust evolutionary framework for interpreting changes in chromosome-level structure.

3.2. Large Genome Size Variation Is Primarily Due to Repeat Element Dynamics

A striking feature of the Epichloë genomes is that all have seven chromosomes. Despite this, the different species and strains exhibit large variation in genome size (Figure 1A, Table 2), ranging from 33.2 Mb (E. festucae E437) to 46.2 Mb (E. bromicola NFe1). They also exhibit variation in gene number (Table 2) that is uncorrelated with genome size (R2 = 0.02, p = 0.56). Instead, larger genomes consistently have higher repeat content (Table 2, positive correlation R2 = 0.81, p = 2.89 × 10−6), indicating that genome size is largely determined by insertion/deletion of repeats. Specifically, there was significant correlation between genome size and the two most abundant classes of retrotransposons, LTR-copia (R2 = 0.53, p = 0.003) and LTR-gypsy (R2 = 0.55, p = 0.002), suggesting a dominant role for these repeat classes in the genome size changes observed in Epichloë. Transposable elements in Epichloë are typically deactivated by Repeat-Induced Point (RIP) mutation, which induces cytosine to thymine transitions in any repeated genomic sequences [35]. All Epichloë genomes show striking compartmentalization, with distinct blocks of AT-rich and GC-rich regions [16,17]. Consistent with the AT-rich regions deriving from RIP activity on repeats, these regions contain 45% to 68% of the repeat elements identified by RepeatMasker and are almost completely devoid of genes (from zero to 360 genes across all AT-rich regions, depending on the genome). There is 2-fold variation in the number of AT-rich blocks per genome (Table 2), with some species exhibiting a large number of relatively small blocks (e.g., E. bromicola has 808 blocks of average size 27.8 Kb), while other species have a small number of larger blocks (e.g., E. amarillans has only 351 blocks but an average size of 44.4 Kb).

3.3. Chromosome Structure across the Genus Is Highly Rearranged despite Conservation of Chromosome Number

To assess chromosome evolution across the genus, we first looked at large-scale rearrangements of coding regions through synteny analyses using MCScan. We found that rearrangements of coding regions both within and between chromosomes are extremely common (Figure 1B,C). Indeed, the degree of restructuring is so substantial that it prevents numbering of chromosomes on homology grounds, so we instead number chromosomes from largest to smallest within each species. As expected, species in basal positions in the phylogeny (E. gansuensis, E. glyceriae) have the most rearrangements relative to other Epichloë genomes (Figure 1B), but variation is even observed between strains within the same species (Figure 1C). One of the most striking patterns from these data is the strict conservation of chromosome number despite the high degree of rearrangement. Therefore, there is a surprising lack of association between the extent of rearrangements and chromosome number in Epichloë.
The extensive nature of the chromosomal rearrangements prompted us to examine patterns of rearrangements at different evolutionary distances at the single chromosome level. Taking sequences homologous to E. clarkii chromosome 2 as an exemplar, shifts of chromosomal content from one chromosome to another occurred four times in the evolutionary history of the genus (Figure 1C). In the basal species E. gansuensis and E. scottii, content homologous to this chromosome was located on two distinct chromosomes (chromosomes 1 and 6 in E. gansuensis and chromosomes 1 and 4 in E. scottii), with minor rearrangements between the two taxa. Consolidation into a single chromosome occurred on the branch linking E. gansuensis and E. scottii to the rest of the genus. Once formed, this configuration persisted in most derived species, including the typhina species complex (E. clarkii, E. poae and both strains of E. typhina), the E. bromicola and E. elymi monophyletic clade, and the single species lineages of E. glyceriae and E. brachyelytri. Only minor internal chromosomal rearrangements differentiate this chromosome in these seven species. However, two further chromosome rearrangements occurred in the clade comprising E. amarillans, E. baconii and E. festucae, distributing the homologous sequence content across two chromosomes (chromosome 1 and 6 in E. festucae, chromosome 3 and 5 in E. amarillans) or three chromosomes (chromosome 1, 5 and 6 in E. baconii).

3.4. Chromosome Rearrangements Are Not Correlated with Nucleotide Scale Changes

Unlike gene based synteny analyses, whole genome alignments can identify and quantify sequence rearrangements that occur at small scales and in non-coding regions. To investigate the patterns of variation from single nucleotide to large sequence rearrangements across the genus, we performed a reference-free whole genome sequence alignment using the framework provided by Progressive Cactus. This method uses ancestral sequence reconstruction in its alignment process, which allows us to quantify mutations and sequence rearrangements occurring between internal nodes of the tree and extant species, providing a framework to quantify changes across different evolutionary distances. Ancestral genomes reconstructed at internal nodes of the Epichloë phylogeny each constituted an assemblage of 269 to 1538 fragmented sequences. As such, they do not capture the chromosomal-level configuration of ancestral genomes and only allow localized reconstructions of ancient sequences. Quantified on the terminal branches of the tree between extant and closest ancestral genomes, substitutions were the most common class of mutation, with up to 1,497,975 substitutions on the longest branch of the tree. Insertions were more common than deletions, and inversions were the rarest class of mutation (Figure 2C, Table 3). Unsurprisingly, across the entire genome (both coding and non-coding regions), transitions, transversions and substitutions as a whole correlated most with the evolutionary distances inferred from the single copy ortholog genes (Figure 2B; R2 = 0.81 to 0.89, all p < 1 × 10−5). Insertions and deletions exhibited more moderate correlations (R2 = 0.57 and 0.68, p = 6.6 × 10−4 and 9.4 × 10−5). Most strikingly, however, rearrangements did not correlate with evolutionary distances (R2 = 0 to 0.006, p = 0.32 to 0.95). These results suggest the surprising conclusion that rearrangements in Epichloë have separate evolutionary dynamics to nucleotide-level mutational changes.
It has previously been suggested that transposable elements and AT-rich repeat regions facilitate chromosomal rearrangements [36]. Therefore, we looked to see the extent to which the chromosomal rearrangements we observe in Epichloë genomes are associated with AT-rich regions. We found that AT-rich regions were most impacted by rearrangements, with changes between ancestral and extant genomes affecting between 43% and 71% of all nucleotides within these regions (Figure 2D). In contrast, rearrangements only affected 1 to 11% of the nucleotides in GC-rich regions. Overall, genomes with larger AT-rich regions were also found to have undergone larger numbers of sequence rearrangements (R2 = 0.46, p = 0.006 for the correlation between the size of the AT-rich regions and the total number of observed rearrangements). These results indicate that most of the chromosomal level structural changes observed in Epichloë have been driven by recombination breakages in repeat elements, which in turn suggests that these recombination events (or at least the fixation of them) and nucleotide-level mutations have had different dynamics during the course of Epichloë evolution.

4. Discussion

Most studies of genome structure have focused either on variation within a species [37,38] or across widely divergent taxa [39]. Here we report complete telomere-to-telomere genomes for 15 strains in 12 species within the Epichloë genus, which includes representatives of all the major clades in this globally distributed fungal endophyte group. These genomes show ~1.4-fold variation in size (33.2–46.2 Mb), with the majority of this variation being driven by changes in genomic repeat content, particularly transposable elements, as has been observed for many other species across kingdoms [40,41]. The completeness of these genomes enables detailed comparisons of their genome evolution over both long and short timeframes.
One of the most striking observations from this study is the chromosome number conservatism of Epichloë. Earlier attempts to resolve ploidy using pulsed-field gel electrophoresis raised the possibility of variation in chromosome number within the genus. However, based on the data presented here, all non-hybrid Epichloë species studied so far have exactly seven nuclear chromosomes. This absolute stasis in chromosome number has not been observed in other fungi genera as far as we are aware. The most interesting aspect of this observation is that it comes despite extensive rearrangements within and between these chromosomes. A possible explanation for the constant chromosome number, despite extensive rearrangement, is constrained expression of the proteins involved in binding to centromere regions. Centromeres determine chromosome number and are defined epigenetically in Epichloë, not by centromere-specific repeats [16], so centromere number may be determined by the expression level of these molecular components irrespective of how much rearrangement has occurred. Alternatively, Epichloë may be particularly recalcitrant to de novo centromere formation/loss, thus rendering all di/acentric chromosomes lethal. The fact that some Epichloë allopolyploids appear to have a chromosome number that is not a multiple of seven [42] may provide an avenue to test these hypotheses experimentally.
The most surprising observation in this study is that the numbers of chromosomal level rearrangements are uncorrelated with nucleotide-level mutations in Epichloë. We show that nucleotide-base mutations accumulate gradually over evolutionary time with some variation between species, much as expected (Figure 2B). However, detailed reconstruction across the genus reveals that some genomes rearrange rapidly over short time spans, while others have changed little over much deeper evolutionary time. Although chronological timelines are not known with great precision for Epichloë [43], some chromosome structures, such as the conserved chromosome formation shown in Figure 1C between the evolutionarily distant E. brachyelytri and E. elymi, appear to have persisted largely unchanged over the course of millions of years [44]. In contrast, other chromosomes are punctuated by bursts of rapid change, with major rearrangements having occurred over relatively short evolutionary timeframes, such as the same chromosome that shows deep evolutionary stasis between E. brachyelytri and E. elymi being substantially restructured in the monophyletic clade comprising E. festucae, E. amarillans and E. baconii. Thus, the disconnect between the rates of nucleotide-level changes and rearrangements appears to lie primarily with discontinuous rearrangement rates.
What is the cause of the periods of relative rearrangement stasis versus punctuated change? Our data show that most rearrangements occur in the AT-rich repeat regions (Figure 2D), implicating these regions in the rearrangements. As transposons are numerous in AT-rich regions, albeit often deactivated by RIP mutations, the rearrangements may be a consequence of transposon-mediated recombination events [45,46] that are induced by transposon mobility and/or the multiple homology targets that are provided by transposon copies. AT-rich regions differ substantially between Epichloë strains, thereby suggesting that these differences might underlie the different rearrangement rates.
An alternative explanation is that the periodic nature of rearrangements simply reflects stochastic occurrence. Chromosomal rearrangements tend to be neutral as long as they do not disrupt the function of essential genes or the capacity for sexual crossing. Many rearrangements may therefore be fortuitous, rare events that became fixed within populations through the standard processes of random genetic drift. The absolute number of rearrangements is far smaller than the number of nucleotide-level changes, thus also favoring the idea that many rearrangements may be chance events.
A third, not mutually exclusive, explanation is that some rearrangements were beneficial, and thus have been fixed by selection. In this case, the discontinuous occurrence simply reflects the stochastic nature of beneficial rearrangements arising. Chromosomal rearrangements alter 3D associations of DNA in the nucleus, as well as methylation and transcription of genes near break points, thus providing possible beneficial effects [47]. In addition, proximity to repeat elements affects the expression of genes in Epichloë [16], so repositioning of genes through chromosomal rearrangement might lead to altered functional outcomes. It would be interesting to determine whether the expression levels of genes near the break points identified in the synteny analysis, particular those between closely related strains such as E. festucae Fl1 and E437, have significant fitness consequences. It is also possible that chromosome rearrangements have driven speciation, since large genomic rearrangements are thought to be a cause of reproductive isolation. Consistent with this, rearrangements have been found to correlate with species richness across fungi phylogenetic groups [48]. However, while we find major rearrangements at the origin of some clades, other clades share no common chromosome restructurings, and chromosome structure variation sometimes occurs even between strains within species. Therefore, the rearrangements we observe in Epichloë are unlikely to be solely a consequence of their effects on speciation.

5. Conclusions

To better understand the evolution of fungal chromosome structure, we present 15 complete telomere-to-telomere genomes from 12 Epichloë species. The key trend we observe, a striking dichotomy between periods of stability and change, was unexpected. While some aspects of chromosome structure, such as the constrained number of chromosomes, appears to be surprisingly conservative, other aspects such as intra- and inter-chromosomal reordering can occur remarkably quickly. The punctuated nature of this genome-scale evolutionary change, and its underlying causes, is an obvious question for future work, which this set of complete genomes across an entire genus will help enable.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, M.P.C.; methodology, D.W., K.L. and M.Q.; validation, M.Q.; formal analysis, M.Q.; resources, S.A., A.L., A.D.T., D.T. and T.T.; data curation, M.Q., D.W. and A.D.T.; writing—original draft preparation, M.Q. and M.P.C.; writing—review and editing, M.Q., M.P.C., A.R.D.G., C.A.Y. and A.L.; visualization, M.Q.; supervision, M.P.C.; All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was supported by grants from the Royal Society of New Zealand Marsden Fund (18-MAU-049), the New Zealand Tertiary Education Commission through Bio-Protection Aotearoa, and computing resources from Massey University.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Data underlying the analyses presented here have been deposited at NCBI under the BioProject numbers listed in Table 1.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Rhie, A.; McCarthy, S.A.; Fedrigo, O.; Damas, J.; Formenti, G.; Koren, S.; Uliano-Silva, M.; Chow, W.; Fungtammasan, A.; Kim, J.; et al. Towards complete and error-free genome assemblies of all vertebrate species. Nature 2021, 592, 737–746. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Seixas, F.A.; Edelman, N.B.; Mallet, J. Synteny-based genome assembly for 16 species of Heliconius butterflies, and an assessment of structural variation across the genus. Genome Biol. Evol. 2021, 13, evab069. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Gordon, J.L.; Byrne, K.P.; Wolfe, K.H. Mechanisms of chromosome number evolution in yeast. PLoS Genet. 2011, 7, e1002190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  4. Arneodo, A.; Vaillant, C.; Audit, B.; Argoul, F.; D’aubenton-Carafa, Y.; Thermes, C. Multi-scale coding of genomic information: From DNA sequence to genome structure and function. Phys. Rep. 2011, 498, 45–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Heitman, J.; Priest, S.J.; Yadav, V. Advances in understanding the evolution of fungal genome architecture. F1000Research 2020, 9, 776. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Ho, S.S.; Urban, A.E.; Mills, R.E. Structural variation in the sequencing era. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2019, 21, 171–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Engel, S.R.; Dietrich, F.S.; Fisk, D.G.; Binkley, G.; Balakrishnan, R.; Costanzo, M.C.; Dwight, S.S.; Hitz, B.C.; Karra, K.; Nash, R.S.; et al. The reference genome sequence of Saccharomyces cerevisiae: Then and now. G3 Genes Genomes Genet. 2014, 4, 389–398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  8. Gorkovskiy, A.; Verstrepen, K.J. The role of structural variation in adaptation and evolution of yeast and other fungi. Genes 2021, 12, 699. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Shi-Kunne, X.; Faino, L.; van den Berg, G.C.M.; Thomma, B.P.H.J.; Seidl, M.F. Evolution within the fungal genus Verticillium is characterized by chromosomal rearrangement and gene loss. Environ. Microbiol. 2018, 20, 1362–1373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  10. Tadych, M.; Bergen, M.S.; White, J.F. Epichloë spp. associated with grasses: New insights on life cycles, dissemination and evolution. Mycologia 2014, 106, 181–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Pan, J.; Bhardwaj, M.; Nagabhyru, P.; Grossman, R.B.; Schardl, C.L.; Wilson, R.A. Enzymes from fungal and plant origin required for chemical diversification of insecticidal loline alkaloids in grass-Epichloë symbiota. PLoS ONE 2014, 9, e115590. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  12. Leuchtmann, A.; Bacon, C.W.; Schardl, C.L.; White, J.F.; Tadych, M. Nomenclatural realignment of Neotyphodium species with genus Epichloë. Mycologia 2017, 106, 202–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Thünen, T.; Becker, Y.; Cox, M.P.; Ashrafi, S. Epichloë scottii sp. nov., a new endophyte isolated from Melica uniflora is the missing ancestor of Epichloë disjuncta. IMA Fungus 2022, 13, 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Shymanovich, T.; Charlton, N.D.; Musso, A.M.; Scheerer, J.; Cech, N.B.; Faeth, S.H.; Young, C.A. Interspecific and intraspecific hybrid Epichloë species symbiotic with the North American native grass Poa alsodes. Mycologia 2017, 109, 459–474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  15. Campbell, M.A.; Tapper, B.A.; Simpson, W.R.; Johnson, R.D.; Mace, W.; Ram, A.; Lukito, Y.; Dupont, P.Y.; Johnson, L.J.; Scott, D.B.; et al. Epichloë hybrida, sp. nov., an emerging model system for investigating fungal allopolyploidy. Mycologia 2017, 109, 715–729. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  16. Winter, D.J.; Ganley, A.R.D.; Young, C.A.; Liachko, I.; Schardl, C.L.; Dupont, P.-Y.; Berry, D.; Ram, A.; Scott, B.; Cox, M.P. Repeat elements organise 3D genome structure and mediate transcription in the filamentous fungus Epichloë festucae. PLoS Genet. 2018, 14, e1007467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  17. Treindl, A.D.; Stapley, J.; Winter, D.J.; Cox, M.P.; Leuchtmann, A. Chromosome-level genomes provide insights into genome evolution, organization and size in Epichloë fungi. Genomics 2021, 113, 4267–4275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Koren, S.; Walenz, B.; Berlin, K.; Miller, J.; Bergman, N.; Phillippy, A. Canu: Scalable and accurate long-read assembly via adaptive k-mer weighting and repeat separation. Genome Res. 2017, 27, 722–736. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  19. Xiao, C.-L.; Chen, Y.; Xie, S.-Q.; Chen, K.-N.; Wang, Y.; Han, Y.; Luo, F.; Xie, Z. MECAT: Fast mapping, error correction, and de novo assembly for single-molecule sequencing reads. Nat. Methods 2017, 14, 1072–1074. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Chen, Y.; Nie, F.; Xie, S.-Q.; Zheng, Y.-F.; Dai, Q.; Bray, T.; Wang, Y.-X.; Xing, J.-F.; Huang, Z.-J.; Wang, D.-P.; et al. Efficient assembly of nanopore reads via highly accurate and intact error correction. Nat. Commun. 2021, 12, 60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Walker, B.J.; Abeel, T.; Shea, T.; Priest, M.; Abouelliel, A.; Sakthikumar, S.; Cuomo, C.A.; Zeng, Q.; Wortman, J.; Young, S.K.; et al. Pilon: An integrated tool for comprehensive microbial variant detection and genome assembly improvement. PLoS ONE 2014, 9, e112963. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Flynn, M.J.; Hubley, R.; Goubert, C.; Rosen, J.; Clark, A.G.; Feschotte, C.; Smit, A.F. RepeatModeler2 for automated genomic discovery of transposable element families. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2020, 117, 9451–9457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Testa, A.C.; Oliver, R.P.; Hane, J.K. OcculterCut: A comprehensive survey of AT-rich regions in fungal genomes. Genome Biol. Evol. 2016, 8, 2044–2064. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  24. Quinlan, A.R.; Hall, I.M. BEDTools: A flexible suite of utilities for comparing genomic features. Bioinformatics 2010, 26, 841–842. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  25. Simão, F.A.; Waterhouse, R.M.; Ioannidis, P.; Kriventseva, E.V.; Zdobnov, E.M. BUSCO: Assessing genome assembly and annotation completeness with single-copy orthologs. Bioinformatics 2015, 31, 3210–3212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  26. Emms, D.M.; Kelly, S. OrthoFinder: Phylogenetic orthology inference for comparative genomics. Genome Biol. 2019, 20, 238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  27. Stamatakis, A. RAxML version 8: A tool for phylogenetic analysis and post-analysis of large phylogenies. Bioinformatics 2014, 30, 1312–1313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Oberti, H.; Abreo, E.; Reyno, R.; Feijoo, M.; Murchio, S.; Dalla-Rizza, M. New draft genome sequence of the ergot disease fungus Claviceps paspali. Microbiol. Resour. Announc. 2020, 9, 29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Oberti, H.; Spangenberg, G.; Cogan, N.; Reyno, R.; Feijoo, M.; Murchio, S.; Dalla-Rizza, M. Genome-wide analysis of Claviceps paspali: Insights into the secretome of the main species causing ergot disease in Paspalum spp. BMC Genom. 2021, 22, 766. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Tang, H.; Wang, X.; Bowers, J.E.; Ming, R.; Alam, M.; Paterson, A.H. Unraveling ancient hexaploidy through multiply-aligned angiosperm gene maps. Genome Res. 2008, 18, 1944–1954. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  31. Armstrong, J.; Hickey, G.; Diekhans, M.; Fiddes, I.T.; Novak, A.M.; Deran, A.; Fang, Q.; Xie, D.; Feng, S.; Stiller, J.; et al. Progressive Cactus is a multiple-genome aligner for the thousand-genome era. Nature 2020, 587, 246–251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Hickey, G.; Paten, B.; Earl, D.; Zerbino, D.; Haussler, D. HAL: A hierarchical format for storing and analyzing multiple genome alignments. Bioinformatics 2013, 29, 1341–1342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. R Development Core Team. A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. 2022. Available online: https://www.r-project.org (accessed on 1 May 2022).
  34. Craven, K.D.; Hsiau, P.T.W.; Leuchtmann, A.; Hollin, W.; Schardl, C.L. Multigene phylogeny of Epichloë species, fungal symbionts of grasses. Ann. Mo. Bot. Gard. 2001, 88, 14–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Gladyshev, E. Repeat-induced point mutation and other genome defense mechanisms in Fungi. Microbiol. Spectr. 2017, 5, 0042. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  36. Schardl, C.L.; Young, C.A.; Hesse, U.; Amyotte, S.G.; Andreeva, K.; Calie, P.J.; Fleetwood, D.J.; Haws, D.C.; Moore, N.; Oeser, B.; et al. Plant-symbiotic fungi as chemical engineers: Multi-genome analysis of the Clavicipitaceae reveals dynamics of alkaloid loci. PLoS Genet. 2013, 9, e1003323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  37. Badet, T.; Fouché, S.; Hartmann, F.E.; Zala, M.; Croll, D. Machine-learning predicts genomic determinants of meiosis-driven structural variation in a eukaryotic pathogen. Nat. Commun. 2021, 12, 3551. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Catanach, A.; Crowhurst, R.; Deng, C.; David, C.; Bernatchez, L.; Wellenreuther, M. The genomic pool of standing structural variation outnumbers single nucleotide polymorphism by threefold in the marine teleost Chrysophrys auratus. Mol. Ecol. 2019, 28, 1210–1223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Hane, J.K.; Rouxel, T.; Howlett, B.J.; Kema, G.H.J.; Goodwin, S.B.; Oliver, R.P. A novel mode of chromosomal evolution peculiar to filamentous Ascomycete fungi. Genome Biol. 2011, 12, R45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  40. Dunham, M.J.; Badrane, H.; Ferea, T.; Adams, J.; Brown, P.O.; Rosenzweig, F.; Botstein, D. Characteristic genome rearrangements in experimental evolution of Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2002, 99, 16144–16149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  41. Zhang, J.; Peterson, T. Genome rearrangements by nonlinear transposons in maize. Genetics 1999, 153, 1403–1410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Kuldau, G.A.; Tsai, H.F.; Schardl, C.L. Genome sizes of Epichloë species and anamorphic hybrids. Mycologia 1999, 91, 776–782. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Clay, K.; Schardl, C.L. Evolutionary origins and ecological consequences of endophyte symbiosis with grasses. Am. Nat. 2002, 160, S99–S127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Ambrose, K.V.; Koppenhöfer, A.M.; Belanger, F.C. Horizontal gene transfer of a bacterial insect toxin gene into the Epichloë fungal symbionts of grasses. Sci. Rep. 2014, 4, 5562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  45. Walker, E.L.; Robbins, T.P.; Bureau, T.E.; Kermicle, J.; Dellaporta, S.L. Transposon-mediated chromosomal rearrangements and gene duplications in the formation of the maize R-r complex. EMBO J. 1995, 14, 2350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Xuan, Y.H.; Piao, H.L.; Je, B.I.; Park, S.J.; Park, S.H.; Huang, J.; Zhang, J.B.; Peterson, T.; Han, C.D. Transposon Ac/Ds-induced chromosomal rearrangements at the rice OsRLG5 locus. Nucleic Acids Res. 2011, 39, e149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Berthelot, C.; Muffato, M.; Abecassis, J.; Crollius, H.R. The 3D organization of chromatin explains evolutionary fragile genomic regions. Cell Rep. 2015, 10, 1913–1924. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  48. Wang, Q.; Sun, M.; Zhang, Y.; Song, Z.; Zhang, S.; Zhang, Q.; Xu, J.R.; Liu, H. Extensive chromosomal rearrangements and rapid evolution of novel effector superfamilies contribute to host adaptation and speciation in the basal ascomycetous fungi. Mol. Plant Pathol. 2020, 21, 330–348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Figure 1. (A) Genome sizes for 15 Epichloë strains. The color of points indicates the repeat element content (%) of each genome. (B) Genome-wide rearrangements between four Epichloë species, inferred from gene-based syntenic analysis. Chromosomes are numbered relative to their size within each species, as the extensive rearrangements prevent homology-based numbering. (C) Evolutionary restructuring of a representative chromosome across the genus Epichloë. Sequences homologous in gene content to chromosome 2 in E. clarkii are highlighted in orange. Stars indicate positions in the phylogeny where major inter-chromosomal rearrangements have occurred. The chromosome numbers for each species are indicated.
Figure 1. (A) Genome sizes for 15 Epichloë strains. The color of points indicates the repeat element content (%) of each genome. (B) Genome-wide rearrangements between four Epichloë species, inferred from gene-based syntenic analysis. Chromosomes are numbered relative to their size within each species, as the extensive rearrangements prevent homology-based numbering. (C) Evolutionary restructuring of a representative chromosome across the genus Epichloë. Sequences homologous in gene content to chromosome 2 in E. clarkii are highlighted in orange. Stars indicate positions in the phylogeny where major inter-chromosomal rearrangements have occurred. The chromosome numbers for each species are indicated.
Jof 08 00670 g001
Figure 2. (A) Phylogenetic relationships between the 15 Epichloë species/strains inferred using maximum likelihood from 1,489 single copy gene orthologs. Blue dots indicate the positions of extant genomes; yellow dots indicate inferred ancestral genomes; mutations inferred by Progressive Cactus were counted on the red branches. All branches have support values of 1. (B) Heatmap highlighting the relative numbers of eight mutation classes accumulated on the terminal branches of the phylogeny between the closest ancestral genome and extant taxa. All rates are scaled from zero to one, with zero corresponding to the lowest number of mutations in the dataset and one to the highest. (C) Violin plots showing the absolute numbers of the eight mutation classes accumulated on terminal branches, with a log-scaled y axis. (D) Proportion of gene and repeat regions impacted by structural variation in each Epichloë strain, relative to the ancestral genomes inferred using Progressive Cactus. For each genome, the proportion of affected nucleotides was calculated by looking at the coverage of sequences duplicated, inverted, transposed and inserted relative to the closest ancestral genome.
Figure 2. (A) Phylogenetic relationships between the 15 Epichloë species/strains inferred using maximum likelihood from 1,489 single copy gene orthologs. Blue dots indicate the positions of extant genomes; yellow dots indicate inferred ancestral genomes; mutations inferred by Progressive Cactus were counted on the red branches. All branches have support values of 1. (B) Heatmap highlighting the relative numbers of eight mutation classes accumulated on the terminal branches of the phylogeny between the closest ancestral genome and extant taxa. All rates are scaled from zero to one, with zero corresponding to the lowest number of mutations in the dataset and one to the highest. (C) Violin plots showing the absolute numbers of the eight mutation classes accumulated on terminal branches, with a log-scaled y axis. (D) Proportion of gene and repeat regions impacted by structural variation in each Epichloë strain, relative to the ancestral genomes inferred using Progressive Cactus. For each genome, the proportion of affected nucleotides was calculated by looking at the coverage of sequences duplicated, inverted, transposed and inserted relative to the closest ancestral genome.
Jof 08 00670 g002
Table 1. Summary information for the 15 Epichloë strains.
Table 1. Summary information for the 15 Epichloë strains.
SpeciesStrainSequencing
Technology
Host SpeciesGeographical OriginSexual
Reproduction
NCBI BioProject Number
E. amarillansNFe708PacBio RSII/IlluminaElymus canadensisIowa, USAObservedPRJNA532945
E. baconiiE357MinIONCalamagrostis villosaSwitzerlandObservedPRJNA842087
E. brachyelytriE1124MinIONBrachyelytrum erectumNew York, USAObservedPRJNA841758
E. bromicolaNFe1MinION/IlluminaHordeum bogdaniiKazakhstanNot observedPRJNA842763
E. clarkii1605_22PacBio RSII/IlluminaHolcus lanatusSwitzerlandObservedPRJNA533212
E. elymiNFe728MinIONElymus virginicusOklahoma, USAObservedPRJNA839151
E. elymiNFe732PacBio RSII/IlluminaElymus canadensisOklahoma, USANot observedPRJNA532946
E. festucaeE437PacBio RSII/IlluminaFestuca pulchellaJapanObservedPRJNA842088
E. festucaeFl1PacBio RSII/IlluminaFestuca longifoliaUnited KingdomObservedPRJNA431450
E. gansuensise7080MinIONAchnatherum inebriansChinaNot observedPRJNA842754
E. glyceriaeE2772MinIONGlyceria striataNew York, USAObservedPRJNA841696
E. poaePn1703_3PacBio Sequel II/IlluminaPoa nemoralisFranceObservedPRJNA843480
E. scottiiDSM112488MinIONMelica unifloraGermanyObservedPRJNA756890
E. typhinaPt1807_3PacBio Sequel II/IlluminaPoa trivialisSpainObservedPRJNA844123
E. typhina1756PacBio RSII/IlluminaDactylis glomerataSwitzerlandObservedPRJNA533210
Table 2. Genomic characteristics of the 15 Epichloë strains.
Table 2. Genomic characteristics of the 15 Epichloë strains.
SpeciesStrainChromosomesGenome LengthNumber of GenesRepeat Regions (%)AT-Rich Regions (%)Number of AT-Rich BlocksMean Length of AT-Rich Blocks
E. amarillansNFe708738,224,1697451684135144,429
E. baconiiE357739,250,5077486673952829,265
E. brachyelytriE1124744,747,8577335724977728,132
E. bromicolaNFe1746,201,0377615724980827,892
E. clarkii1605_22745,646,7937772724965034,135
E. elymiNFe728734,206,0407424643234032,533
E. elymiNFe732733,820,3308324633234830,920
E. festucaeE437733,219,4737764612839523,630
E. festucaeFl1735,023,6907822633243525,714
E. gansuensise7080739,568,8827601633742833,994
E. glyceriaeE2772743,207,5517267714749640,681
E. poaePn1703_3734,185,4847420633239627,983
E. scottiiDSM112488737,342,2476486623736329,549
E. typhinaPt1807_3739,303,2837305684151331,484
E. typhina1756733,870,7667539643250327,726
Table 3. Numbers of each mutation class accumulated on terminal branches of the Epichloë phylogeny, between ancestral and extant genomes.
Table 3. Numbers of each mutation class accumulated on terminal branches of the Epichloë phylogeny, between ancestral and extant genomes.
GenomeTerminal Branch LengthSubstitutionsTransitionsTransversionsInsertionsDeletionsInversionsDuplicationsTranspositions
E. amarillans0.009439413,037278,990134,04770302924016,594137
E. baconii0.01839608,309320,946287,36310,798962114,58250
E. brachyelytri0.034203772,918465,715307,20311,6483,713053,611193
E. bromicola0.016056794,167464,710329,45713,2912,241220,66659
E. clarkii0.006319493,578296,234197,34414,4521,137160,699312
E. festucae (E437)0.001888307,728173,466134,2626016421113,191102
E. festucae (Fl1)0.001466234,349139,93094,4197410403129,260172
E. gansuensis0.0550921,497,975921,662576,31320,8214835125,934116
E. glyceriae0.023931710,405475,456234,94976974900027,682166
E. elymi (NFe728)0.00083581,94455,42126,52339462430593768
E. elymi (NFe732)0.000892156,10999,73256,37738912483642180
E. poae0.009131500,740283,538217,20272921025011,46746
E. scottii0.024456649,936408,925241,01111,6544056325,089166
E. typhina (Pt1807)0.010108594,494353,680240,81411,3362080142,243242
E. typhina (1756)0.009271455,536264,745190,7919370932124,706202
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Quenu, M.; Treindl, A.D.; Lee, K.; Takemoto, D.; Thünen, T.; Ashrafi, S.; Winter, D.; Ganley, A.R.D.; Leuchtmann, A.; Young, C.A.; et al. Telomere-to-Telomere Genome Sequences across a Single Genus Reveal Highly Variable Chromosome Rearrangement Rates but Absolute Stasis of Chromosome Number. J. Fungi 2022, 8, 670. https://doi.org/10.3390/jof8070670

AMA Style

Quenu M, Treindl AD, Lee K, Takemoto D, Thünen T, Ashrafi S, Winter D, Ganley ARD, Leuchtmann A, Young CA, et al. Telomere-to-Telomere Genome Sequences across a Single Genus Reveal Highly Variable Chromosome Rearrangement Rates but Absolute Stasis of Chromosome Number. Journal of Fungi. 2022; 8(7):670. https://doi.org/10.3390/jof8070670

Chicago/Turabian Style

Quenu, Mathieu, Artemis D. Treindl, Kate Lee, Daigo Takemoto, Torsten Thünen, Samad Ashrafi, David Winter, Austen R. D. Ganley, Adrian Leuchtmann, Carolyn A. Young, and et al. 2022. "Telomere-to-Telomere Genome Sequences across a Single Genus Reveal Highly Variable Chromosome Rearrangement Rates but Absolute Stasis of Chromosome Number" Journal of Fungi 8, no. 7: 670. https://doi.org/10.3390/jof8070670

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop