![]() | ![]() |
Formats:
|
||||||||||||
Human-specific gain of function in a developmental enhancer 1 Genomics Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA. 2 United States Department of Energy Joint Genome Institute, Walnut Creek, CA 94598, USA. 5 MRC Human Genetics Unit, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh EH4 2XU, UK. Correspondence and requests for materials should be addressed to E.M.R. (Email: EMRubin/at/lbl.gov) or J.P.N. (Email: james.noonan/at/yale.edu). 3Present address: Computational and Mathematical Biology, Genome Institute of Singapore 138672, Singapore. 4Present address: Division of Biology, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA 91125, USA. 6Present address: Department of Genetics, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT 06520, USA. The publisher's final edited version of this article is available free at Science. See commentary "Comment on "Human-specific gain of function in a developmental enhancer"." in Science, volume 323 on page 714. See commentary "Genetics. Enhancing gene regulation." in Science, volume 321 on page 1300. See other articles in PMC that cite the published article.Abstract Changes in gene regulation are thought to have contributed to the evolution of human development. However, in vivo evidence for uniquely human developmental regulatory function has remained elusive. In transgenic mice, a conserved noncoding sequence (HACNS1) that evolved extremely rapidly in humans acted as an enhancer of gene expression that has gained a strong limb expression domain relative to the orthologous elements from chimpanzee and rhesus macaque. This gain of function was consistent across two developmental stages in the mouse and included the presumptive anterior wrist and proximal thumb. In vivo analyses with synthetic enhancers, in which human-specific substitutions were introduced into the chimpanzee enhancer sequence or reverted in the human enhancer to the ancestral state, indicated that 13 substitutions clustered in an 81-basepair module otherwise highly constrained among terrestrial vertebrates were sufficient to confer the human-specific limb expression domain. Genome sequence changes that altered the molecular machinery of development likely facilitated the evolution of uniquely human morphological traits (1,2). Although these genetic modifications remain largely unidentified, it has long been thought that changes in gene expression, due to positive selection for nucleotide substitutions that modified the activity of cis-regulatory elements, played a prominent role (3). Several cases of putatively adaptive sequence change, including polymorphisms among human populations and apparently fixed differences between humans and other primates, have been shown to affect in vitro promoter or enhancer function in cell line reporter assays (4-7). However, the impact of human-specific nucleotide substitutions on the in vivo activity of developmental regulatory elements remains obscure. In vivo analyses of evolutionarily conserved noncoding sequences have revealed them to be enriched in cis-regulatory transcriptional enhancers that confer specific expression patterns during development (8-11). Recent efforts have identified conserved noncoding sequences that evolved rapidly on the human lineage, but it is not known if these sequences include regulatory elements with altered activities in humans (12-15). Here we focus on functionally characterizing the most rapidly evolving human noncoding element yet identified, which we termed human-accelerated conserved noncoding sequence 1 (HACNS1) (12). Although this 546 basepair element is highly constrained in all sequenced terrestrial vertebrate genomes, it has accumulated 16 human-specific sequence changes in the ~6 million years since the human-chimpanzee split (Fig. 1A
To test this hypothesis, we evaluated the ability of HACNS1 and its orthologs from chimpanzee and rhesus macaque to function as transcriptional enhancers during development using a transgenic mouse enhancer assay in which the activity of each sequence is assessed through a β-galactosidase (lacZ) reporter gene coupled to a minimal Hsp68 promoter (17). We initially examined the potential enhancer activity of HACNS1 at embryonic day 11.5 (E11.5). We tested a 1.2 kb DNA fragment encompassing HACNS1 that also contained nonconserved sequences flanking the element, in order to include possible functional sequences near HACNS1 not detected by conservation (Table S1). At E11.5, the human element drove strong and reproducible reporter gene expression in the anterior limb bud, pharyngeal arches, developing ear and eye, suggesting that HACNS1 acts as a robust enhancer during development (Figs. 1B, C To explore the activity of HACNS1 at a more advanced stage of limb development, we compared the expression patterns of the human, chimpanzee and rhesus enhancers in E13.5 transgenic mouse embryos. At this stage, the human element continued to drive reproducible reporter gene expression in the anterior developing forelimb, particularly in the shoulder and the anterior junction of the forearm and handplate in 11 of 12 positive embryos (Figs. 2A, B, C
We next sought to identify human-specific sequence changes responsible for the functional change in the human enhancer. While the 16 human-specific substitutions within the 546 bp conserved region corresponding to HACNS1 are the most striking feature of the 1.2 kb orthologous segments we initially tested for enhancer function, these segments also included ~650 bp of nonconserved DNA containing additional human-chimpanzee sequence differences. To isolate the effect of the substitutions within HACNS1 on enhancer function, we synthesized a chimeric 1.2 kb enhancer in which we transferred all 16 substitutions into the chimpanzee sequence background (16). This “humanized” chimpanzee enhancer produced an E11.5 expression pattern nearly identical to that of the native human enhancer, suggesting that the human-specific sequence changes within HACNS1 are responsible for the gain of function we observe (8/8 embryos; Figs. Figs.3D3D
The precise molecular mechanism by which the substitutions in HACNS1 confer the human-specific expression pattern remains to be determined. Computational analysis of predicted transcription factor binding sites in HACNS1 and its nonhuman orthologs suggested that multiple sites have been gained and lost in this enhancer during human evolution (Fig. S6). Predicted human-specific binding sites for the developmental transcription factors PAX9 and ZNF423 may contribute to HACNS1 enhancer activity, as the known expression pattern of PAX9 in the mouse limb overlaps the human-specific limb domain of HACNS1 at E11.5 and E13.5, and ZNF423 is expressed in the mouse handplate mesenchyme from E10.5 through E12.5 (19-21). Several lines of evidence suggest that the functional changes in HACNS1 are due to adaptive evolution. The rate of human-specific accelerated evolution in HACNS1 is more than four times the local neutral rate. Moreover, this rapid evolution is not consistent with biased gene conversion (BGC), a neutral mechanism postulated to cause hotspots of accelerated evolution in the genome by increasing the local fixation rate of AT to GC substitutions (22,23). Under the neutral BGC hypothesis, one would expect an increase in the overall substitution rate across the entire region of increased AT to GC substitution (23). An excess of AT to GC substitutions is indeed present in HACNS1 (binomial test P value = 1.1e-4; 16), and the element lies in a ~5-kb genomic region enriched in such substitutions (Fig. 4
Our results evoke the hypothesis that human-specific adaptive evolution in HACNS1 has contributed to uniquely human aspects of digit and limb patterning. The increased dexterity of the human hand compared to other primates is due to morphological differences that include rotation of the thumb toward the palm and an increase in the length of the thumb compared to the other digits (1). Human-specific changes in hindlimb morphology, such as the characteristic inflexibility and shortened digits of the human foot, facilitated habitual bipedalism. The gain of function in HACNS1 may have influenced the evolution of these or other human limb features by altering the expression of nearby genes during limb development. HACNS1 is located within an intron of CENTG2, which encodes a GTPase activating protein involved in the regulation of endosome function, and ~300 kb downstream of GBX2, an essential developmental transcription factor (24, 25). The potential role of CENTG2 in limb development has not been evaluated. Although mouse Gbx2 is expressed in the developing limb, Gbx2 null mice have not been described as showing abnormal limbs (25). However, we note that the HACNS1 expression pattern in transgenic mice may not entirely recapitulate the precise HACNS1 expression pattern in the human embryo. The accelerated evolution of HACNS1 might therefore reflect selection for changes in structures other than, or in addition to, the limb. Elucidating the role of HACNS1 in human morphological evolution requires further lines of evidence, including the analysis of GBX2 and CENTG2 expression during human development and the generation of HACNS1 targeted replacement mice. Independent of these considerations, our study suggests that adaptive nucleotide substitution altered the function of a developmental enhancer in humans, and illustrates a strategy that could be employed across the genome to understand at a molecular level how human development evolved through cis-regulatory change. 1 Click here to view.(6.0M, pdf) Acknowledgments We thank members of the Pennacchio and Rubin laboratories for critical comments on the manuscript. Research was done under Department of Energy Contract DE-AC02-05CH11231, University of California, E.O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. L.A.P. was supported by grant HL066681, Berkeley-Program for Genomic Applications, under the Programs for Genomic Applications, funded by the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute, and HG003988 funded by the National Human Genome Research Institute. S.P. was additionally supported by the Agency for Science, Technology, and Research of Singapore. A.V. was supported by an American Heart Association postdoctoral fellowship. J.P.N. was supported by NIH National Research Service Award fellowship 1-F32-GM074367 and funds from the Department of Genetics, Yale University School of Medicine. Footnotes References 1. Trinkaus E. Evolution of human manipulation. In: Jones S, Martin R, Pilbeam D, editors. The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Human Evolution. Cambridge Univ. Press; New York: 1993. pp. 346–349. 2. Carroll SB. Nature. 2003;422:849. [PubMed] 3. King MC, Wilson AC. Science. 1975;188:107. [PubMed] 4. Tournamille C, et al. Nat. Genet. 1995;10:224. [PubMed] 5. Rockman MV, et al. PLoS Biol. 2005;3:e387. [PubMed] 6. Tishkoff SA, et al. Nat. Genet. 2007;39:31. [PubMed] 7. Wray GA. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2007;8:206. [PubMed] 8. Boffelli D, Nobrega MA, Rubin EM. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2004;5:456. [PubMed] 9. Nobrega MA, Ovcharenko I, Afzal V, Rubin EM. Science. 2003;302:417. 10. Pennacchio LA, et al. Nature. 2006;444:499. [PubMed] 11. Visel A, et al. Nat. Genet. 2008;40:158. [PubMed] 12. Prabhakar S, Noonan JP, Pääbo S, Rubin EM. Science. 2006;314:786. [PubMed] 13. Pollard KS, et al. Nature. 2006;443:167. [PubMed] 14. Bird CP, et al. Genome Biol. 2007;8:R118. [PubMed] 15. Bush EC, Lahn BT. BMC Evol. Biol. 2008;8:17. [PubMed] 16. Materials and methods are available as supporting material on Science Online. 17. Kothary R, et al. Development. 1989;105:707. [PubMed] 18. Sharpe J, et al. Science. 2002;296:541. [PubMed] 19. Neubüser A, Koseki H, Balling R. Dev. Biol. 1995;170:701. [PubMed] 20. Peters H, Neubüser A, Kratochwil K, Balling R. Genes Dev. 1998;12:2735. [PubMed] 21. Warming S, Suzuki T, Yamaguchi TP, Jenkins NA, Copeland NG. Oncogene. 2004;23:2727. [PubMed] 22. Pollard KS, et al. PLoS Genet. 2006;2:e168. [PubMed] 23. Galtier N, Duret L. Trends Genet. 2007;23:273–277. [PubMed] 24. Nie Z, et al. J Biol. Chem. 2002;50:48965. [PubMed] 25. Wassarman KM, et al. Development. 1997;124:2923. [PubMed] 26. Blanchette M, et al. Genome Res. 2004;14:708. [PubMed] 27. Siepel A, et al. Genome Res. 2005;15:1034. [PubMed] 28. Kent WJ, et al. Genome Res. 2002;12:996–1006. [PubMed] |
PubMed related articles
Your browsing activity is empty. Activity recording is turned off. |
|||||||||||
Nature. 2003 Apr 24; 422(6934):849-57.
[Nature. 2003]Science. 1975 Apr 11; 188(4184):107-16.
[Science. 1975]Nat Genet. 1995 Jun; 10(2):224-8.
[Nat Genet. 1995]Nat Rev Genet. 2007 Mar; 8(3):206-16.
[Nat Rev Genet. 2007]Nat Rev Genet. 2004 Jun; 5(6):456-65.
[Nat Rev Genet. 2004]Nat Genet. 2008 Feb; 40(2):158-60.
[Nat Genet. 2008]Science. 2006 Nov 3; 314(5800):786.
[Science. 2006]BMC Evol Biol. 2008 Jan 23; 8():17.
[BMC Evol Biol. 2008]Development. 1989 Apr; 105(4):707-14.
[Development. 1989]Science. 2002 Apr 19; 296(5567):541-5.
[Science. 2002]Dev Biol. 1995 Aug; 170(2):701-16.
[Dev Biol. 1995]Oncogene. 2004 Apr 8; 23(15):2727-31.
[Oncogene. 2004]PLoS Genet. 2006 Oct 13; 2(10):e168.
[PLoS Genet. 2006]Trends Genet. 2007 Jun; 23(6):273-7.
[Trends Genet. 2007]J Biol Chem. 2002 Dec 13; 277(50):48965-75.
[J Biol Chem. 2002]Development. 1997 Aug; 124(15):2923-34.
[Development. 1997]Genome Res. 2004 Apr; 14(4):708-15.
[Genome Res. 2004]Genome Res. 2002 Jun; 12(6):996-1006.
[Genome Res. 2002]