Back

Retention of a single Cenp-C gene in different syntenic locations in the montium group of Drosophila species

Soares, R. F.; Chang, C.-H.; Koerich, L. B.; Malik, H. S.; KUHN, G. C. S.

2025-12-15 genetics
10.64898/2025.12.11.693522 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Chromosome segregation in eukaryotes requires the orchestrated interaction of chromosomes with microtubules, mediated by the kinetochore multiprotein complex that assembles on specific chromosomal regions known as centromeres. In most eukaryotes, two centromeric proteins, CenH3 and Cenp-C, are essential for centromere function. In Drosophila, the localization of CenH3 (referred to as Cid in Drosophila) depends on its chaperone CAL1 and Cenp-C. Previous studies have shown that both Cid and Cenp-C underwent a coincident gene duplication and likely functional specialization in the Drosophila subgenus. Independently, Cid duplications led to Cid1, Cid3, and Cid4 paralogs in the montium group (Sophophora subgenus), but it is unknown whether this group also underwent parallel duplications of Cenp-C. Here, we investigate this possibility by analyzing sequenced genomes of 23 montium group species. We identified Cenp-C genes in five distinct syntenic loci; we named these genes Cenp-C1b, Cenp-C1c, Cenp-C1d, Cenp-C1e and Cenp-C3. Despite their distinct synteny, most montium group species only encode a single Cenp-C; their phylogeny mirrors the species phylogeny, and they appear to have retained Cenp-C protein motifs indicative of function. A closer examination revealed that these Cenp-C genes resulted from gene translocations or alternate retention (duplication followed by loss of the ancestral copy); only one species, D. vulcana, retains two intact Cenp-C paralogs. Therefore, unlike the Drosophila genus, the co-retention of three Cid paralogs in the montium group has not resulted in a coincident Cenp-C paralog co-retention. Our work highlights differences in functional retention and likely specialization of the two most conserved centromeric proteins in eukaryotes.

Matching journals

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

1
PLOS Genetics
756 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
22.4%
2
Chromosome Research
18 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
10.0%
3
Current Biology
596 papers in training set
Top 3%
6.3%
4
Genetics
225 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
4.8%
5
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 33%
4.8%
6
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 22%
3.9%
50% of probability mass above
7
Genome Biology and Evolution
280 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
2.6%
8
PLOS Biology
408 papers in training set
Top 5%
2.6%
9
Journal of Cell Science
353 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
2.6%
10
G3 Genes|Genomes|Genetics
351 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.1%
11
Genome Research
409 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.1%
12
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 54%
1.9%
13
Nucleic Acids Research
1128 papers in training set
Top 9%
1.9%
14
Life Science Alliance
263 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.9%
15
BMC Biology
248 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.8%
16
Open Biology
95 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.8%
17
mBio
750 papers in training set
Top 8%
1.5%
18
Molecular Biology and Evolution
488 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.5%
19
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2130 papers in training set
Top 35%
1.5%
20
iScience
1063 papers in training set
Top 20%
1.3%
21
G3: Genes, Genomes, Genetics
222 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.3%
22
Communications Biology
886 papers in training set
Top 17%
0.9%
23
Cell Reports
1338 papers in training set
Top 31%
0.9%
24
EMBO reports
136 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.9%
25
Genome Biology
555 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.9%
26
Molecular Biology of the Cell
272 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
27
The Plant Cell
141 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
28
Molecular Microbiology
66 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%
29
Genomics
60 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.6%
30
GENETICS
189 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%