Cited by 31Protist diversity and phylogenyChromosomal and Genetic VariationsGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies

Large genomic differences between the morphologically indistinguishable diplomonads Spironucleus barkhanus and Spironucleus salmonicida

Open access
Roxström-Lindquist, Katarina, Jerlström-Hultqvist, Jon, Jørgensen, Anders, Troell, Karin, Svärd, Staffan G, Andersson, Jan O·2010·BMC Genomics

Abstract

Background: Microbial eukaryotes show large variations in genome structure and content between lineages, indicating extensive flexibility over evolutionary timescales. Here we address the tempo and mode of such changes within diplomonads, flagellated protists with two nuclei found in oxygen-poor environments. Approximately 5,000 expressed sequence tag (EST) sequences were generated from the fish commensal Spironucleus barkhanus and compared to sequences from the morphologically indistinguishable fish parasite Spironucleus salmonicida, and other diplomonads. The ESTs were complemented with sequence variation studies in selected genes and genome size determinations. Results: Many genes detected in S. barkhanus and S. salmonicida are absent in the human parasite Giardia intestinalis, the most intensively studied diplomonad. For example, these fish diplomonads show an extended metabolic repertoire and are able to incorporate selenocysteine into proteins. The codon usage is altered in S. barkhanus compared to S. salmonicida. Sequence variations were found between individual S. barkhanus ESTs for many, but not all, protein coding genes. Conversely, no allelic variation was found in a previous genome survey of S. salmonicida. This difference was confirmed by sequencing of genomic DNA. Up to five alleles were identified for the cloned S. barkhanus genes, and at least nineteen highly expressed S. barkhanus genes are represented by more than four alleles in the EST dataset. This could be explained by the presence of a non-clonal S. barkhanus population in the culture, by a ploidy above four, or by duplications of parts of the genome. Indeed, genome size estimations using flow cytometry indicated similar haploid genome sizes in S. salmonicida and G. intestinalis (~12 Mb), whereas the S. barkhanus genome is larger (~18 Mb). Conclusions: This study indicates extensive divergent genome evolution within diplomonads. Genomic traits such as codon usage, frequency of allelic sequence variation, and genome size have changed considerably between S. barkhanus and S. salmonicida. These observations suggest that large genomic differences may accumulate in morphologically indistinguishable eukaryotic microbes.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/1471-2164-11-258

Cites

63 of 63 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Annexin homologs from Spironucleus were reported to be more similar to other annexins than to alpha-giardins.

    “Annexin homologs from Spironucleus, another parasitic diplomonad lineage, were reported to be more similar to other annexins than to alpha-giardins (13).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Morrison HG McArthur AG Gillin FD Aley SB Adam RD Olsen GJ Best AA Cande WZ Chen F Cipriano MJ Genomic minimalism in the early diverging intestinal parasite Giardia lamblia Science 2007 317 1921 1926 10.1126/science.1143837 17901334 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Roxström-Lindquist, K., Jerlström-Hultqvist, J., Jørgensen, A., Troell, K., Svärd, S. G., & Andersson, J. O.
Affiliations
  • Uppsala University (SE)
  • Norwegian Veterinary Institute (NO)
Corresponding author
Andersson, Jan O
Venue
BMC Genomics
Published
2010-04-21
Volume
11
Issue
1
Pages
258-258
ISSN
1471-2164 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2095519923
Cited by
29
References
63
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 7 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 2
FWCI
1.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • BMC Genomics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Uppsala University Publications (Uppsala University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Carl Tryggers Stiftelse för Vetenskaplig Forskning
  • Vetenskapsrådet
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protist diversity and phylogeny
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Chromosomal and Genetic Variations
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Keywords
diplomonads, Giardia lamblia, genome evolution, expressed sequence tags, allelic variation, codon usage, selenocysteine incorporation, genome size, fish parasites
MeSH terms
Amino Acid Sequence, Animals, Molecular Sequence Data, Salmonidae, Sequence Alignment, Genome, Diplomonadida

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review