z-logo
Premium
Evolution of a symbiotic receptor through gene duplications in the legume–rhizobium mutualism
Author(s) -
De Mita Stéphane,
Streng Arend,
Bisseling Ton,
Geurts René
Publication year - 2014
Publication title -
new phytologist
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 3.742
H-Index - 244
eISSN - 1469-8137
pISSN - 0028-646X
DOI - 10.1111/nph.12549
Subject(s) - biology , neofunctionalization , gene duplication , rhizobia , symbiosis , phylogenetic tree , gene , phylogenetics , genetics , rhizobium , evolutionary biology , gene family , molecular evolution , functional divergence , genome , bacteria
Summary The symbiosis between legumes and nitrogen‐fixing rhizobia co‐opted pre‐existing endomycorrhizal features. In particular, both symbionts release lipo‐chitooligosaccharides ( LCO s) that are recognized by L ys M ‐type receptor kinases. We investigated the evolutionary history of rhizobial LCO receptor genes M t LYK 3 ‐ L j NFR 1 to gain insight into the evolutionary origin of the rhizobial symbiosis. We performed a phylogenetic analysis integrating gene copies from nonlegumes and legumes, including the non‐nodulating, phylogenetically basal legume C ercis chinensis . Signatures of differentiation between copies were investigated through patterns of molecular evolution. We show that two rounds of duplication preceded the evolution of the rhizobial symbiosis in legumes. Molecular evolution patterns indicate that the resulting three paralogous gene copies experienced different selective constraints. In particular, one copy maintained the ancestral function, and another specialized into perception of rhizobial LCO s. It has been suggested that legume LCO receptors evolved from a putative ancestral defense‐related chitin receptor through the acquisition of two kinase motifs. However, the phylogenetic analysis shows that these domains are actually ancestral, suggesting that this scenario is unlikely. Our study underlines the evolutionary significance of gene duplication and subsequent neofunctionalization in M t LYK 3‐ L j NFR 1 genes. We hypothesize that their ancestor was more likely a mycorrhizal LCO receptor, than a defense‐related receptor kinase.

This content is not available in your region!

Continue researching here.

Having issues? You can contact us here