Back

Developmental And Evolutionary Comparative Analysis Of A Hoxd Regulatory Landscape In Mammals And Birds

Hintermann, A.; Guerreiro, I.; Bolt, C. C.; Gitto, S.; Duboule, D.; Beccari, L.

2021-08-12 developmental biology
10.1101/2021.08.12.456039 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Modifications in gene regulation during development are considered to be a driving force in the evolution of organisms. Part of these changes involve rapidly evolving cis-regulatory elements (CREs), which interact with their target genes through higher-order 3D chromatin structures. However, how such 3D architectures and variations in CREs contribute to transcriptional evolvability remains elusive. During vertebrate evolution, Hox genes were redeployed in different organs in a class-specific manner, while maintaining the same basic function in organizing the primary body axis. Since a large part of the relevant enhancers are located in a conserved regulatory landscape, this gene cluster represents an interesting paradigm to study the emergence of regulatory innovations. Here, we analysed Hoxd gene regulation in both murine vibrissae and chicken feather primordia, two mammalian- and avian-specific skin appendages which express different subsets of Hoxd genes, and compared their regulatory modalities with the regulations at work during the elongation of the posterior trunk, a mechanism highly conserved in amniotes. We show that in the former two structures, distinct subsets of Hoxd genes are contacted by different lineage-specific enhancers, likely as a result of using an ancestral chromatin topology as an evolutionary playground, whereas the regulations implemented in the mouse and chicken embryonic trunk partially rely on conserved CREs. Nevertheless, a high proportion of these non-coding sequences active in the trunk appear to have functionally diverged between the two species, suggesting that transcriptional robustness is maintained despite a considerable divergence in CREs sequence, an observation supported by a genome-wide comparative approach.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.