Lineage-specific evolution, structural diversity, and activity of R2 retrotransposons in animals
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
Background: Retrotransposons play outsized roles in the evolution of gene regulation, genome function, and disease pathogenesis, and more recently they have sparked interest as instruments for new gene therapy approaches. R2 retrotransposons insert site-specifically into the multicopy genes encoding 28S ribosomal RNA at a target sequence conserved broadly across eukaryotic evolution. R2 retrotransposons have been detected in many animals, but previous surveys have been limited in scope and methodology. Results: Here, we substantially expand the known distribution of R2 retrotransposons from previously unrepresented or underrepresented taxonomic groups, ranging from ctenophores to amphibians and reptiles. We discover diverse R2 domain architectures and motifs and identify many new avian R2 candidates for genome engineering development. Overall, phylogenetic analyses reveal two highly successful R2 lineages. We describe lineage-distinctive features of the N-terminal DNA recognition domains and reverse-transcriptase domain signatures. Within a lineage, R2 protein sequences do not necessarily preserve the unifying configuration of N-terminal domains assumed in the current clade classification scheme. We show that recombinant R2 proteins with distinctive domain architectures and distribution across major animal classes support target-primed reverse transcription with conserved site specificity. Conclusions: Our analysis of the surprisingly varied domain architectures that support target-site specificity informs new R2 classification criteria and provides a greatly expanded foundation for additional structure/function insights about DNA binding selectivity. This expanded perspective on R2 evolution informs approaches for engineering therapeutic gene insertion technologies and offers an opportunity to investigate the conservation and diversification of retrotransposons.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Highly accurate protein structure prediction with AlphaFold
Jumper, J., Evans, R., Pritzel, A., Green, T., Figurnov, M., Ronneberger, O., Tunyasuvunakool, K., Bates, R., Žídek, A., Potapenko, A., et al. (2021) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-021-03819-2 · Cited by 43,764 · cited 1× · see citing works
“For protein structure prediction, we used the AlphaFold3 web server (https:// alpha folds erver. com/) [58, 59].”
Accurate structure prediction of biomolecular interactions with AlphaFold 3
Abramson, J., Adler, J., Dunger, J., Evans, R., Green, T., Pritzel, A., Ronneberger, O., Willmore, L., Ballard, A. J., Bambrick, J., et al. (2024) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-024-07487-w · Cited by 15,861 · cited 1× · see citing works
“For protein structure prediction, we used the AlphaFold3 web server (https:// alpha folds erver. com/) [58, 59].”
A Field Guide to Eukaryotic Transposable Elements
Wells, J. N., & Feschotte, C. (2020) · Annual Review of Genetics · doi:10.1146/annurev-genet-040620-022145 · Cited by 686 · see citing works
Ancient gene linkages support ctenophores as sister to other animals
Schultz, D. T., Haddock, S. H. D., Bredeson, J. V., Green, R. E., Simakov, O., & Rokhsar, D. S. (2023) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-023-05936-6 · Cited by 362 · see citing works
The retrotransposon <i>R2</i> maintains <i>Drosophila</i> ribosomal DNA repeats
Nelson, J. O., Slicko, A., & Yamashita, Y. M. (2021) · doi:10.1101/2021.07.12.451825 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
- Authors
- Hassan, N. T., Van Treeck, B., Rodríguez-Vargas, A., Sheppard, A. E., Collins, K., & Adelson, D. L.
- Affiliations
- The University of Adelaide (AU)
- University of California, Berkeley (US)
- South Australian Museum (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Collins, Kathleen
- Venue
- Genome Biology
- Published
- 2026-04-14
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 1
- ISSN
- 1465-6906 (ISSN-L)
- 1474-760X
- PMC
- PMC13188248
- OpenAlex
- W4410219560
- Cited by
- 5
- References
- 5
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5
- FWCI
- 18.49
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Genome biology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Figshare (cc-by)
- Funders
- Fulbright Future Scholarship
- National Institutes of Health (F32 GM139306, DP1 HL156819)
- California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (EDUC4-1279)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Chromosomal and Genetic Variations
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › CRISPR and Genetic Engineering
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genome Rearrangement Algorithms
- Keywords
- R2 retrotransposon, retrotransposon evolution, 28S rRNA gene, target site specificity, reverse transcriptase domain, domain architecture, phylogenetic classification, ctenophores, genome editing, gene therapy
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