Evolution of viviparity in mammals: what genomic imprinting tells us about mammalian placental evolution
Tomoko Kaneko-Ishino A C and Fumitoshi Ishino
B C
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations
A School of Health Sciences, Tokai University, 143 Shimokasuya, Isehara, Kanagawa 259-1193, Japan.
B Department of Epigenetics, Medical Research Institute, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, 1-5-45 Yushima, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-8510, Japan.
C Corresponding authors. Emails: fishino.epgn@mri.tmd.ac.jp; tkanekoi@is.icc.u-tokai.ac.jp
Reproduction, Fertility and Development 31(7) 1219-1227 https://doi.org/10.1071/RD18127
Submitted: 5 April 2018 Accepted: 1 October 2018 Published: 10 January 2019
Journal Compilation © CSIRO 2019 Open Access CC BY-NC-ND
Abstract
Genomic imprinting is an epigenetic mechanism of regulating parent-of-origin-specific monoallelic expression of imprinted genes in viviparous therian mammals such as eutherians and marsupials. In this review we discuss several issues concerning the relationship between mammalian viviparity and genomic imprinting, as well as the domestication of essential placental genes: why has the genomic imprinting mechanism been so widely conserved despite the evident developmental disadvantages originating from monoallelic expression? How have genomic imprinted regions been established in the course of mammalian evolution? What drove the evolution of mammalian viviparity and how have genomic imprinting and domesticated genes contributed to this process? In considering the regulatory mechanism of imprinted genes, reciprocal expression of paternally and maternally expressed genes (PEGs and MEGs respectively) and the presence of several essential imprinted genes for placental formation and maintenance, it is likely that complementary, thereby monoallelic, expression of PEGs and MEGs is an evolutionary trade-off for survival. The innovation in novel imprinted regions was associated with the emergence of imprinting control regions, suggesting that genomic imprinting arose as a genome defence mechanism against the insertion of exogenous DNA. Mammalian viviparity emerged in the period when the atmospheric oxygen concentration was the lowest (~12%) during the last 550 million years (the Phanerozoic eon), implying this low oxygen concentration was a key factor in promoting mammalian viviparity as a response to a major evolutionary pressure. Because genomic imprinting and gene domestication from retrotransposons or retroviruses are effective measures of changing genomic function in therian mammals, they are likely to play critical roles in the emergence of viviparity for longer gestation periods.
Additional keywords: complementation hypothesis, domesticated genes, evolutionary trade-off, genome defence mechanism, Peg10, Peg11/Rtl1, reciprocal monoallelic expression, retrotransposons.
References
Ashwell, K. W. (2008). Encephalization of Australian and New Guinean marsupials. Brain Behav. Evol. 71, 181–199.| Encephalization of Australian and New Guinean marsupials.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 18230970PubMed |
Bell, A. C., and Felsenfeld, G. (2000). Methylation of a CTCF-dependent boundary controls imprinted expression of the Igf2 gene. Nature 405, 482–485.
| Methylation of a CTCF-dependent boundary controls imprinted expression of the Igf2 gene.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 10839546PubMed |
Berner, R. A., Vandenbrooks, J. M., and Ward, P. D. (2007). Evolution. Oxygen and evolution. Science 316, 557–558.
| Evolution. Oxygen and evolution.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 17463279PubMed |
Blake, A., Pickford, K., Greenaway, S., Thomas, S., Pickard, A., Williamson, C. M., Adams, N. C., Walling, A., Beck, T., Fray, M., Peters, J., Weaver, T., Brown, S. D., Hancock, J. M., and Mallon, A. M. (2010). MouseBook: an integrated portal of mouse resources. Nucleic Acids Res. 38, D593–D599.
| MouseBook: an integrated portal of mouse resources.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 19854936PubMed |
Bourc’his, D., Xy, G. L., Lin, C. S., Bollman, B., and Bester, T. H. (2001). Dmnt3L and the establishment of maternal genomic imprinting. Science 294, 2536–2539.
| Dmnt3L and the establishment of maternal genomic imprinting.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 11719692PubMed |
Cattanach, B. M., and Beechey, C. V. (1990). Autosomal and X-chromosome imprinting. Development 108, 63–72.
Charlier, C., Segers, K., Wagenaar, D., Karim, L., Berghmans, S., Jaillon, O., Shay, T., Weissenbach, J., Cockett, N., Gyapay, G., and Georges, M. (2001). Human–ovine comparative sequencing of a 250-kb imprinted domain encompassing the Callipyge (clpg) locus and identification of six imprinted transcripts: DLK1, DAT, GTL2, PEG11, antiPEG11, and MEG8. Genome Res. 11, 850–862.
| Human–ovine comparative sequencing of a 250-kb imprinted domain encompassing the Callipyge (clpg) locus and identification of six imprinted transcripts: DLK1, DAT, GTL2, PEG11, antiPEG11, and MEG8.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 11337479PubMed |
Constância, M., Hemberger, M., Hughes, J., Dean, W., Ferguson-Smith, A., Fundele, R., Stewart, F., Kelsey, G., Fowden, A., Sibley, C., and Reik, W. (2002). Placental-specific IGF-II is a major modulator of placental and fetal growth. Nature 417, 945–948.
| Placental-specific IGF-II is a major modulator of placental and fetal growth.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 12087403PubMed |
Cowley, M., and Oakey, R. J. (2010). Retrotransposition and genomic imprinting. Brief Funct. Genomics 9, 340–346.
| Retrotransposition and genomic imprinting.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 20591835PubMed |
Edwards, C. A., Mungall, A. J., Matthews, L., Ryder, E., Gray, D. J., Pask, A. J., Shaw, G., Graves, J. A., Rogers, J., SAVOIR consortium Dunham, I., Renfree, M. B., and Ferguson-Smith, A. C. (2008). The evolution of the DLK1–DIO3 imprinted domain in mammals. PLoS Biol. 6, e135.
| The evolution of the DLK1–DIO3 imprinted domain in mammals.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 18532878PubMed |
Guillemot, F., Nagy, A., Auerbach, A., Rossant, J., and Joyner, A. L. (1994). Essential role of Mash-2 in extraembryonic development. Nature 371, 333–336.
| Essential role of Mash-2 in extraembryonic development.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 8090202PubMed |
Guillemot, F., Caspary, T., Tilghman, S. M., Copeland, N. G., Gilbert, D. J., Jenkins, N. A., Anderson, D. J., Joyner, A. L., Rossant, J., and Nagy, A. (1995). Genomic imprinting of Mash2, a mouse gene required for trophoblast development. Nat. Genet. 9, 235–242.
| Genomic imprinting of Mash2, a mouse gene required for trophoblast development.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 7773285PubMed |
Haig, D., and Westoby, M. (1991). Genomic imprinting in endosperm: its effects on seed development in crosses between species and between different ploidies of the same species, and its implications for the evolution of apomixis. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 333, 1–13.
| Genomic imprinting in endosperm: its effects on seed development in crosses between species and between different ploidies of the same species, and its implications for the evolution of apomixis.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Hark, A. T., Schoenherr, C. J., Katz, D. J., Ingram, R. S., Levorse, J. M., and Tilghman, S. M. (2000). CTCF mediates methylation-sensitive enhancer-blocking activity at the H19/Igf2 locus. Nature 405, 486–489.
| CTCF mediates methylation-sensitive enhancer-blocking activity at the H19/Igf2 locus.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 10839547PubMed |
Hata, K., Okano, M., Lei, H., and Li, E. (2002). Dnmt3L cooperates with the Dnmt3 family of de novo DNA methyltranferase to establish maternal imprints in mice. Development 129, 1983–1993.
| 11934864PubMed |
Hore, T. A., Rapkins, R. W., and Graves, J. A. (2007). Construction and evolution of imprinted loci in mammals. Trends Genet. 23, 440–448.
| Construction and evolution of imprinted loci in mammals.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 17683825PubMed |
Inoue, A., Jiang, L., Lu, F., Suzuki, T., and Zhang, Y. (2017a). Maternal H3K27me3 controls DNA methylation-independent imprinting. Nature 547, 419–424.
| Maternal H3K27me3 controls DNA methylation-independent imprinting.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 28723896PubMed |
Inoue, A., Jiang, L., Lu, F., and Zhang, Y. (2017b). Genomic imprinting of Xist by maternal H3K27me3. Genes Dev. 31, 1927–1932.
| Genomic imprinting of Xist by maternal H3K27me3.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 29089420PubMed |
Kalish, J. M., Jiang, C., and Bartolomei, M. S. (2014). Epigenetics and imprinting in human diseases. Int. J. Dev. Biol. 58, 291–298.
| Epigenetics and imprinting in human diseases.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 25023695PubMed |
Kaneko-Ishino, T., and Ishino, F. (2012). The role of genes domesticated from LTR retrotransposons and retroviruses in mammals. Front. Microbiol. 3, 262.
| The role of genes domesticated from LTR retrotransposons and retroviruses in mammals.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 22866050PubMed |
Kaneko-Ishino, T., and Ishino, F. (2015). Mammalian-specific genomic functions: newly acquired traits generated by genomic imprinting and LTR retrotransposon-derived genes in mammals. Proc. Jpn. Acad. Ser. B Phys. Biol. Sci. 91, 511–538.
| Mammalian-specific genomic functions: newly acquired traits generated by genomic imprinting and LTR retrotransposon-derived genes in mammals.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 26666304PubMed |
Kaneko-Ishino, T., Kohda, T., and Ishino, F. (2003). The regulation and biological significance of genomic imprinting in mammals. J. Biochem. 133, 699–711.
| The regulation and biological significance of genomic imprinting in mammals.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 12869525PubMed |
Kaneko-Ishino, T., Kohda, T., Ono, R., and Ishino, F. (2006). Complementation hypothesis: the necessity of a monoallelic gene expression mechanism in mammalian development. Cytogenet. Genome Res. 113, 24–30.
| Complementation hypothesis: the necessity of a monoallelic gene expression mechanism in mammalian development.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 16575159PubMed |
Keverne, E. B. (2013). Importance of the matriline for genomic imprinting, brain development and behaviour. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 368, 20110327.
| Importance of the matriline for genomic imprinting, brain development and behaviour.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 23166391PubMed |
Keverne, E. B. (2014). Mammalian viviparity: a complex niche in the evolution of genomic imprinting. Heredity 113, 138–144.
| Mammalian viviparity: a complex niche in the evolution of genomic imprinting.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 24569636PubMed |
Killian, J. K., Byrd, J. C., Jirtle, J. V., Munday, B. L., Stoskopf, M. K., MacDonald, R. G., and Jirtle, R. L. (2000). M6P/IGF2R imprinting evolution in mammals. Mol. Cell 5, 707–716.
| M6P/IGF2R imprinting evolution in mammals.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 10882106PubMed |
Latos, P. A., Pauler, F. M., Koerner, M. V., Şenergin, H. B., Hudson, Q. J., Stocsits, R. R., Allhoff, W., Stricker, S. H., Klement, R. M., Warczok, K. E., Aumayr, K., Pasierbek, P., and Barlow, D. P. (2012). Airn transcriptional overlap, but not its lncRNA products, induces imprinted Igf2r silencing. Science 338, 1469–1472.
| Airn transcriptional overlap, but not its lncRNA products, induces imprinted Igf2r silencing.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 23239737PubMed |
Lee, J., Inoue, K., Ono, R., Ogonuki, N., Kohda, T., Kaneko-Ishino, T., Ogura, A., and Ishino, F. (2002). Erasing genomic imprinting memory in mouse clone embryos produced from Day-11.5 primordial germ cells. Development 129, 1807–1817.
| 11934847PubMed |
Li, X., Ito, M., Zhou, F., Youngson, N., Zuo, X., Leder, P., and Ferguson-Smith, A. C. (2008). A maternal–zygotic effect gene, Zfp57, maintains both maternal and paternal imprints. Dev. Cell 15, 547–557.
| A maternal–zygotic effect gene, Zfp57, maintains both maternal and paternal imprints.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 18854139PubMed |
Lyon, M. F. (1963). Lyonization of the X chromosome. Lancet 282, 1120–1121.
| Lyonization of the X chromosome.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Lyon, M. F. (1986). X chromosomes and dosage compensation. Nature 320, 313.
| X chromosomes and dosage compensation.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 3960115PubMed |
Mann, J. R., and Lovell-Badge, R. H. (1984). Inviability of parthenogenones is determined by pronuclei, not egg cytoplasm. Nature 310, 66–67.
| Inviability of parthenogenones is determined by pronuclei, not egg cytoplasm.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 6738704PubMed |
McGrath, J., and Solter, D. (1984). Completion of mouse embryogenesis requires both the maternal and paternal genomes. Cell 37, 179–183.
| Completion of mouse embryogenesis requires both the maternal and paternal genomes.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 6722870PubMed |
Moore, T., and Haig, D. (1991). Genomic imprinting in mammalian development: a parental tug-of-war. Trends Genet. 7, 45–49.
| Genomic imprinting in mammalian development: a parental tug-of-war.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 2035190PubMed |
Ono, R., Kobayashi, S., Wagatsuma, H., Aisaka, K., Kohda, T., Kaneko-Ishino, T., and Ishino, F. (2001). A retrotransposon-derived gene, PEG10, is a novel imprinted gene located on human chromosome 7q21. Genomics 73, 232–237.
| A retrotransposon-derived gene, PEG10, is a novel imprinted gene located on human chromosome 7q21.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 11318613PubMed |
Ono, R., Nakamura, K., Inoue, K., Naruse, M., Usami, T., Wakisaka-Saito, N., Hino, T., Suzuki-Migishima, R., Ogonuki, N., Miki, H., Kohda, T., Ogura, A., Yokoyama, M., Kaneko-Ishino, T., and Ishino, F. (2006). Deletion of Peg10, an imprinted gene acquired from a retrotransposon, causes early embryonic lethality. Nat. Genet. 38, 101–106.
| Deletion of Peg10, an imprinted gene acquired from a retrotransposon, causes early embryonic lethality.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 16341224PubMed |
Rapkins, R. W., Hore, T., Smithwick, M., Ager, E., Pask, A. J., Renfree, M. B., Kohn, M., Hameister, H., Nicholls, R. D., Deakin, J. E., and Graves, J. A. (2006). Recent assembly of an imprinted domain from non-imprinted components. PLoS Genet. 2, e182.
| Recent assembly of an imprinted domain from non-imprinted components.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 17069464PubMed |
Reik, W., and Walter, J. (2001). Genomic imprinting: parental influence on the genome. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2, 21–32.
| Genomic imprinting: parental influence on the genome.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 11253064PubMed |
Renfree, M. B. (2010). Review: marsupials: placental mammals with a difference. Placenta 31, S21–S26.
| Review: marsupials: placental mammals with a difference.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 20079531PubMed |
Renfree, M. B., Hore, T. A., Shaw, G., Graves, J. A., and Pask, A. J. (2009). Evolution of genomic imprinting: insights from marsupials and monotremes. Annu. Rev. Genomics Hum. Genet. 10, 241–262.
| Evolution of genomic imprinting: insights from marsupials and monotremes.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 19630559PubMed |
Renfree, M. B., Suzuki, S., and Kaneko-Ishino, T. (2012). The origin and evolution of genomic imprinting in mammals. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 368, 20120151.
Roberts, R. M., Green, J. A., and Schulz, L. C. (2016). The evolution of the placenta. Reproduction 152, R179–R189.
| The evolution of the placenta.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 27486265PubMed |
Sekita, Y., Wagatsuma, H., Nakamura, K., Ono, R., Kagami, M., Wakisaka, N., Hino, T., Suzuki-Migishima, R., Kohda, T., Ogura, A., Ogata, T., Yokoyama, M., Kaneko-Ishino, T., and Ishino, F. (2008). Role of retrotransposon-derived imprinted gene, Rtl1, in the feto–maternal interface of mouse placenta. Nat. Genet. 40, 243–248.
| Role of retrotransposon-derived imprinted gene, Rtl1, in the feto–maternal interface of mouse placenta.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 18176565PubMed |
Sleutels, F., Zwart, R., and Barlow, D. P. (2002). The non-coding Air RNA is required for silencing autosomal imprinted genes. Nature 415, 810–813.
| The non-coding Air RNA is required for silencing autosomal imprinted genes.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 11845212PubMed |
Smits, G., Mungall, A. J., Griffiths-Jones, S., Smith, P., Beury, D., Matthews, L., Rogers, J., Pask, A. J., Shaw, G., VandeBerg, J. L., McCarrey, J. R., SAVOIR Consortium Renfree, M. B., Reik, W., and Dunham, I. (2008). Conservation of the H19 noncoding RNA and H19–IGF2 imprinting mechanism in therians. Nat. Genet. 40, 971–976.
| Conservation of the H19 noncoding RNA and H19–IGF2 imprinting mechanism in therians.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 18587395PubMed |
Solter, D. (1988). Differential imprinting and expression of maternal and paternal genomes. Annu. Rev. Genet. 22, 127–146.
| Differential imprinting and expression of maternal and paternal genomes.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 3071246PubMed |
Surani, M. A., Barton, S. C., and Norris, M. L. (1984). Development of reconstituted mouse eggs suggests imprinting of the genome during gametogenesis. Nature 308, 548–550.
| Development of reconstituted mouse eggs suggests imprinting of the genome during gametogenesis.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 6709062PubMed |
Suzuki, S., Renfree, M. B., Pask, A., Shaw, G., Kobayashi, S., Kohda, T., Kaneko-Ishino, T., and Ishino, F. (2005). Genomic imprinting of IGF2, P57KIP2 and PEG1/MEST in a marsupial, the tammar wallaby. Mech. Dev. 122, 213–222.
| Genomic imprinting of IGF2, P57KIP2 and PEG1/MEST in a marsupial, the tammar wallaby.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 15652708PubMed |
Suzuki, S., Ono, R., Narita, T., Pask, A. J., Shaw, G., Wang, C., Kohda, T., Alsop, A. E., Graves, M. J. A., Kohara, Y., Ishino, F., Renfree, M. B., and Kaneko-Ishino, T. (2007). Retrotransposon silencing by DNA methylation can drive mammalian genomic imprinting. PLoS Genet. 3, e55.
| Retrotransposon silencing by DNA methylation can drive mammalian genomic imprinting.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 17432937PubMed |
Suzuki, S., Shaw, G., Kaneko-Ishino, T., Ishino, F., and Renfree, M. B. (2011). The evolution of mammalian genomic imprinting was accompanied by the acquisition of novel CpG islands. Genome Biol. Evol. 3, 1276–1283.
| The evolution of mammalian genomic imprinting was accompanied by the acquisition of novel CpG islands.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 22016334PubMed |
Tyndale-Biscoe, H., and Renfree, M. (1987). Monographs on marsupial biology. In ‘Reproductive Physiology of Marsupials’. pp. 310–323. (Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.)
Varmuza, S., and Mann, M. (1994). Genomic imprinting – defusing the ovarian time bomb. Trends Genet. 10, 118–123.
| Genomic imprinting – defusing the ovarian time bomb.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 7848407PubMed |
Weidman, J. R., Dolinoy, D. C., Maloney, K. A., Cheng, J. F., and Jirtle, R. L. (2006). Imprinting of opossum Igf2r in the absence of differential methylation and air. Epigenetics 1, 50–55.
| Imprinting of opossum Igf2r in the absence of differential methylation and air.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Weisbecker, V., and Goswami, A. (2010). Brain size, life history, and metabolism at the marsupial/placental dichotomy. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 107, 16216–16221.
| Brain size, life history, and metabolism at the marsupial/placental dichotomy.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 20823252PubMed |
Wildman, D. E., Chen, C., Erez, O., Grossman, L. I., Goodman, M., and Romero, R. (2006). Evolution of the mammalian placenta revealed by phylogenetic analysis. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 103, 3203–3208.
| Evolution of the mammalian placenta revealed by phylogenetic analysis.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 16492730PubMed |
Wilkins, J. F., and Haig, D. (2003). What good is genomic imprinting: the function of parent-specific gene expression. Nat. Rev. Genet. 4, 359–368.
| What good is genomic imprinting: the function of parent-specific gene expression.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 12728278PubMed |
Yokomine, T., Shirohzu, H., Purbowasito, W., Toyoda, A., Iwama, H., Ikeo, K., Hori, T., Mizuno, S., Tsudzuki, M., Matsuda, Y., Hattori, M., Sakaki, Y., and Sasaki, H. (2005). Structural and functional analysis of a 0.5-Mb chicken region orthologous to the imprinted mammalian Ascl2/Mash2-Igf2–H19 region. Genome Res. 15, 154–165.
| Structural and functional analysis of a 0.5-Mb chicken region orthologous to the imprinted mammalian Ascl2/Mash2-Igf2–H19 region.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 15590938PubMed |
Yokomine, T., Hata, K., Tsudzuki, M., and Sasaki, H. (2006). Evolution of the vertebrate DNMT3 gene family: a possible link between existence of DNMT3L and genomic imprinting. Cytogenet. Genome Res. 113, 75–80.
| Evolution of the vertebrate DNMT3 gene family: a possible link between existence of DNMT3L and genomic imprinting.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 16575165PubMed |
