Opinion
Reducing the genome size of organelles favours gene transfer to the nucleus

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-5347(00)02084-XGet rights and content

Abstract

Endosymbiotic organelles exhibit strong genetic erosion during their evolution as a result of the loss of unnecessary genes and of gene transfer to the nucleus. The reasons for this erosion are much debated. Unidirectionality of DNA exchange between cell compartments could favour biased gene transfer, but selection might also act to favour nuclear localization of genes, for example, because organelles accumulate more mutations than do nuclei. Selection for rapid replication might be a general cause of organelle genome reduction. This selection also accounts for the compactness of organelle genomes.

Section snippets

The unidirectional transfer hypothesis

The unidirectional transfer hypothesis suggests that genes can move only from organelles to the nucleus, because one or more of the steps described in Box 1 are more likely to occur in one direction (towards the nucleus) than in the other. For example, Step 1 (sequence transfer to the nucleus) could be unidirectional: organelles would be unable to import nucleic sequences, perhaps because transfer is more frequent from a multicopy genome to a single copy genome than the reverse 10. A slightly

Free radical and Muller's ratchet hypotheses

Once the genetic redundancy following Step 2 is established, any copy can be lost (Box 1). Repeated sequence transfers, followed by random loss at Step 3, could lead to gene transfer (the ‘gene transfer ratchet’) 12. However, the expression of the new nuclear copy is likely to be less accurately regulated and less adapted to (eco)physiological needs than that of the original organelle copy 9: why then does it survive? A role for selection at this step can be addressed by evaluating the outcome

Selection for small genome size as an alternative explanation

Loss of organelle genes could be favoured if, in intracellular life forms, there is selection for smaller organelle genomes. The size of the eukaryotic host genome is less constrained 40, as shown by the presence of noncoding sequences. No selective pressure specifically favours nuclear loss and asymmetric gene loss could be selected after genetic redundancy has been achieved by gene transfer (Fig. 1b) or gene substitution (Fig. 1a). There is a long-recognized trend towards genome size

Organelle genome compactness

Selection for small genomes also accounts for organelle genome compactness. Pseudogenes are uncommon in organelle genomes and intergenic spacers are rather short. Unnecessary genes often undergo deletions; for example, the fast elimination of photosynthetic genes from nonphotosynthetic plastids of Epiphagus (a parasitic angiosperm of recent origin 29) and Plasmodium (the causal agent for malaria, which possesses a highly derived plastid 16) (Table 1). Note that the loss of pseudogenes in

Selection pressures acting on organelle genome size

Selective pressure for small size is probably not continuous, but it might act at some stages of the life cycle, mainly those requiring fast division. Some limited stages, such as the zygotic bottleneck 36 or gametogenesis 49, can be of major importance for cytoplasmic organelle populations. Similarly, accumulation of deleted mitochondria during ageing varies among human tissues 50, indicating different selection pressures.

The pressure might not even be constant at the phylogenetic level and

Conclusions

Selection for small genomes, through replicative advantage and/or increased metabolic efficiency, contributes to the genetic reduction of endosymbionts, independently of their eukaryotic or prokaryotic origin, either through gene transfer or through substitution of nuclear genes (Fig. 1). Combined, it leads to the increasing control of organelles by the nucleus. Acquisition of new genes by organelles, although genetically and cytologically possible, is greatly hampered by this selection in most

Acknowledgements

We wish to thank A. Atlan, G. Dujardin, A. Rötig, P. Saumitou-Laprade and B. Sears for helpful discussions, and S. Loiseaux-De Goër for help in preparing Table 1. We also acknowledge two anonymous referees for their comments on this Opinion.

Glossary

Biolistic methods
experimental genetic transformation using tungsten bullets and a gun to enhance DNA penetration in the cells.
Coenocytic
cell with numerous nuclei within a single cytosolic space.
Endosymbiosis
mutually beneficial association of two organisms, with one living in the cells of the other. [Primary endosymbiosis: symbiotic engulfment of a bacterium by a eukaryotic cell. It can lead to organelles surrounded by two membranes (the outer one deriving from the phagocytotic membrane).

References (51)

  • A. Kanno

    Maintenance of chloroplast-derived sequences in the mitochondrial DNA of Gramineae

    Curr. Genet.

    (1997)
  • S. Eschbach

    A eukaryotic genome of 660 kb: electrophoretic karyotype of nucleomorph and cell nucleus of the cryptomonad alga, Pyrenomonas salina

    Nucleic Acids Res.

    (1991)
  • O.P. Judson et al.

    Ancient asexual scandals

    Trends Ecol. Evol.

    (1996)
  • B.J. Saville

    mtDNA recombination in a natural population

    Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.

    (1998)
  • K.L. Adams

    Intracellular gene transfer in action: dual transcription and multiple silencings of nuclear and mitochondrial cox2 genes in legumes

    Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.

    (1999)
  • J.D. Palmer

    Contrasting modes and tempos of genome evolution in land plant organelles

    Trends Genet.

    (1990)
  • M.W. Gray

    The endosymbiont hypothesis revisited

    Int. Rev. Cytol.

    (1992)
  • H. Mireau

    The same Arabidopsis gene encodes both cytosolic and mitochondrial alanyl-tRNA synthetases

    Plant Cell

    (1996)
  • J.F. Allen

    Control of gene expression by redox potential and the requirement for chloroplast and mitochondrial genomes

    J. Theor. Biol.

    (1993)
  • H.L. Race

    Why have organelles retained genomes?

    Trends Genet.

    (1999)
  • J.L. Blanchard et al.

    Organellar genes – why do they end up in the nucleus?

    Trends Genet.

    (2000)
  • M.M. Haüber

    How to evolve a complex plastid? A hypothesis

    Bot. Acta

    (1994)
  • W.F. Doolittle

    You are what you eat: a gene transfer ratchet could account for bacterial genes in eukaryotic nuclear genomes

    Trends Genet.

    (1998)
  • X. Lin

    Sequence and analysis of chromosome 2 of the plant Arabidopsis thaliana

    Nature

    (2000)
  • P. Gilson et al.

    The miniaturized nuclear genome of a eukaryotic endosymbiont contains genes that overlap, genes that are cotranscribed and the smallest known spliceosomal introns

    Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.

    (1996)
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text