1932
0
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Annual Review of Microbiology
  4. Volume 72, 2018
  5. Article

Annual Review of Microbiology

Volume 72, 2018

Spo11-Independent Meiosis in Social Amoebae

Abstract

Sex in social amoebae (or dictyostelids) has a number of striking features. Dictyostelid zygotes do not proliferate but grow to a large size by feeding on other cells of the same species, each zygote ultimately forming a walled structure called a macrocyst. The diploid macrocyst nucleus undergoes meiosis, after which a single meiotic product survives to restart haploid vegetative growth. Meiotic recombination is generally initiated by the Spo11 enzyme, which introduces DNA double-strand breaks. Uniquely, as far as is known among sexual eukaryotes, dictyostelids lack a gene. Despite this, recombination occurs at high frequencies during meiosis in dictyostelids, through unknown mechanisms. The molecular processes underlying these events, and the evolutionary drivers that brought them into being, may shed light on the genetic conflicts that occur within and between genomes, and how they can be resolved.

Keyword(s): evolution, protists, recombination, sex, social amoebae
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-micro-090817-062232
2018-09-08
2024-04-18
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/micro/72/1/annurev-micro-090817-062232.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-micro-090817-062232&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. 1.  Akematsu T, Fukuda Y, Garg J, Fillingham JS, Pearlman RE, Loidl J 2017. Post-meiotic DNA double-strand breaks occur in Tetrahymena, and require topoisomerase II and Spo11. eLife 6:e26176
     [Google Scholar]
  2. 2.  Aldrich HC 1967. The ultrastructure of meiosis in three species of Physarum. . Mycologia 59:1127–48
     [Google Scholar]
  3. 3.  Alexandrova O, Schade M, Böttger A, David CN 2005. Oogenesis in Hydra: Nurse cells transfer cytoplasm directly to the growing oocyte. Dev. Biol. 281:191–101
     [Google Scholar]
  4. 4.  Basu S, Fey P, Jimenez-Morales D, Dodson RJ, Chisholm RL 2015. dictyBase 2015: Expanding data and annotations in a new software environment. Genesis 53:8523–34
     [Google Scholar]
  5. 5.  Benabentos R, Hirose S, Sucgang R, Curk T, Katoh M et al. 2009. Polymorphic members of the lag gene family mediate kin discrimination in Dictyostelium. Curr. . Biol 19:7567–72
     [Google Scholar]
  6. 6.  Bergerat A, de Massy B, Gadelle D, Varoutas P-C, Nicolas A, Forterre P 1997. An atypical topoisomerase II from archaea with implications for meiotic recombination. Nature 386:6623414
     [Google Scholar]
  7. 7.  Bernard P, Couturier M 1992. Cell killing by the F plasmid CcdB protein involves poisoning of DNA-topoisomerase II complexes. J. Mol. Biol. 226:3735–45
     [Google Scholar]
  8. 8.  Blaskovics JC, Raper KB 1957. Encystment stages of Dictyostelium. Biol. . Bull 113:158–88
     [Google Scholar]
  9. 9.  Bloomfield G 2011. Genetics of sex determination in the social amoebae. Dev. Growth Differ. 53:4608–16
     [Google Scholar]
  10. 10.  Bloomfield G 2013. Sex in Dictyostelia. Dictyostelids M Romeralo, S Baldauf, R Escalante 129–48 Berlin: Springer
     [Google Scholar]
  11. 11.  Bloomfield G 2016. Atypical ploidy cycles, Spo11, and the evolution of meiosis. Semin. Cell Dev. Biol. 54:158–64
     [Google Scholar]
  12. 12.  Bloomfield G 2017. Spo11-independent recombination in the Dictyostelium sexual cycle. Poster presented at EMBO Conference on Meiosis, Hvar, Croatia, Aug. 27–Sep. 1
     [Google Scholar]
  13. 13.  Bloomfield G, Skelton J, Ivens A, Tanaka Y, Kay RR 2010. Sex determination in the social amoeba Dictyostelium discoideum. . Science 330:60101533–36
     [Google Scholar]
  14. 14.  Bozzone DM, Bonner JT 1982. Macrocyst formation in Dictyostelium discoideum: mating or selfing?. J. Exp. Zool. 220:3391–94
     [Google Scholar]
  15. 15.  Breuer C, Stacey NJ, West CE, Zhao Y, Chory J et al. 2007. BIN4, a novel component of the plant DNA topoisomerase VI complex, is required for endoreduplication in Arabidopsis. . Plant Cell 19:113655–68
     [Google Scholar]
  16. 16.  Brody T, Williams KL 1974. Cytological analysis of the parasexual cycle in Dictyostelium discoideum. . Microbiology 82:2371–83
     [Google Scholar]
  17. 17.  Buss LW 1982. Somatic cell parasitism and the evolution of somatic tissue compatibility. PNAS 79:175337–41
     [Google Scholar]
  18. 18.  Byers TJ 1986. Molecular biology of DNA in Acanthamoeba, Amoeba, Entamoeba, and Naegleria. . Int. Rev. Cytol 99:311–41
     [Google Scholar]
  19. 19.  Calkins GN, Cull SW 1907. The conjugation of Paramecium aurelia (caudatum). Arch. Protistenk. 10:375–415
     [Google Scholar]
  20. 20.  Carofiglio F, Sleddens-Linkels E, Wassenaar E, Inagaki A, van Cappellen WA, Grootegoed JA et al. 2018. Repair of exogenous DNA double-strand breaks promotes chromosome synapsis in SPO11-mutant mouse meiocytes, and is altered in the absence of HORMAD1. DNA Repair 63:25–38
     [Google Scholar]
  21. 21.  Cavalier-Smith T, Chao EE, Lewis R 2016. 187-Gene phylogeny of protozoan phylum Amoebozoa reveals a new class (Cutosea) of deep-branching, ultrastructurally unique, enveloped marine Lobosa and clarifies amoeba evolution. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 99:Suppl. C275–96
     [Google Scholar]
  22. 22.  Celerin M, Merino ST, Stone JE, Menzie AM, Zolan ME 2000. Multiple roles of Spo11 in meiotic chromosome behavior. EMBO J 19:112739–50
     [Google Scholar]
  23. 23.  Chagla AH, Lewis KE, O'Day DH 1980. Ca2+ and cell fusion during sexual development in liquid cultures of Dictyostelium discoideum. Exp. . Cell Res 126:2501–5
     [Google Scholar]
  24. 24.  Clark MA, Francis D, Eisenberg R 1973. Mating types in cellular slime molds. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 52:2672–78
     [Google Scholar]
  25. 25.  Cleveland LR 1947. Sex produced in the protozoa of Cryptocercus by molting. Science 105:271416–17
     [Google Scholar]
  26. 26.  Cornillon S, Foa C, Davoust J, Buonavista N, Gross JD, Golstein P 1994. Programmed cell death in Dictyostelium. J. Cell Sci 107:102691–704
     [Google Scholar]
  27. 27.  Crown KN, Savytskyy OP, Malik S-B, Logsdon J, Williams RS et al. 2013. A mutation in the FHA domain of Coprinus cinereus Nbs1 leads to Spo11-independent meiotic recombination and chromosome segregation. G3 3:111927–43
     [Google Scholar]
  28. 28.  Dacks J, Roger AJ 1999. The first sexual lineage and the relevance of facultative sex. J. Mol. Evol. 48:6779–83
     [Google Scholar]
  29. 29.  Deering RA 1968. Dictyostelium discoideum: a gamma-ray resistant organism. Science 162:38591289–90
     [Google Scholar]
  30. 30.  Dobell C 1914. A commentary on the genetics of the ciliate protozoa. J. Genet. 4:2131–90
     [Google Scholar]
  31. 31.  Dobell C 1938. Researches on the intestinal protozoa of monkeys and man. IX. The life-history of Entamoeba coli, with special reference to metacystic development. Parasitology 30:2195–238
     [Google Scholar]
  32. 32.  Dobell CC 1908. Memoirs: the structure and life-history of Copromonas subtilis, nov. gen. et nov. spec.; a contribution to our knowledge of the flagellata. J. Cell Sci. s2–52:20575–120
     [Google Scholar]
  33. 33.  Doorn GSV, Luttikhuizen PC, Weissing FJ 2001. Sexual selection at the protein level drives the extraordinary divergence of sex-related genes during sympatric speciation. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 268:14812155–61
     [Google Scholar]
  34. 34.  Douglas TE, Queller DC, Strassmann JE 2017. Social amoebae mating types do not invest unequally in sexual offspring. J. Evol. Biol. 30:5926–37
     [Google Scholar]
  35. 35.  Dubravcic D, van Baalen M, Nizak C 2014. An evolutionarily significant unicellular strategy in response to starvation in Dictyostelium social amoebae. F1000Research 3:133
     [Google Scholar]
  36. 36.  Eichinger L, Pachebat JA, Glöckner G, Rajandream M-A, Sucgang R et al. 2005. The genome of the social amoeba Dictyostelium discoideum. . Nature 435:703843
     [Google Scholar]
  37. 37.  Ennis HL, Dao DN, Pukatzki SU, Kessin RH 2000. Dictyostelium amoebae lacking an F-box protein form spores rather than stalk in chimeras with wild type. PNAS 97:73292–97
     [Google Scholar]
  38. 38.  Erdos GW, Nickerson AW, Raper KB 1972. Fine structure of macrocysts in Polysphondylium violaceum. . Cytobiologie 6:351–66
     [Google Scholar]
  39. 39.  Erdos GW, Raper KB, Vogen LK 1973. Mating types and macrocyst formation in Dictyostelium discoideum. . PNAS 70:61828–30
     [Google Scholar]
  40. 40.  Erdos GW, Raper KB, Vogen LK 1975. Sexuality in the cellular slime mold Dictyostelium giganteum. . PNAS 72:3970–73
     [Google Scholar]
  41. 41.  Falck J, Coates J, Jackson SP 2005. Conserved modes of recruitment of ATM, ATR and DNA-PKcs to sites of DNA damage. Nature 434:7033605
     [Google Scholar]
  42. 42.  Farah JA, Cromie G, Davis L, Steiner WW, Smith GR 2005. Activation of an alternative, rec12 (spo11)-independent pathway of fission yeast meiotic recombination in the absence of a DNA flap endonuclease. Genetics 171:41499–511
     [Google Scholar]
  43. 43.  Fédry J, Liu Y, Péhau-Arnaudet G, Pei J, Li W et al. 2017. The ancient gamete fusogen HAP2 is a eukaryotic class II fusion protein. Cell 168:5904–15.e10
     [Google Scholar]
  44. 44.  Fell PE 1969. The involvement of nurse cells in oogenesis and embryonic development in the marine sponge. Haliclona ecbasis. J. Morphol. 127:2133–49
     [Google Scholar]
  45. 45.  Feretzaki M, Heitman J 2013. Genetic circuits that govern bisexual and unisexual reproduction in Cryptococcus neoformans. . PLOS Genet 9:8e1003688
     [Google Scholar]
  46. 46.  Fernandes JB, Seguéla-Arnaud M, Larchevêque C, Lloyd AH, Mercier R 2018. Unleashing meiotic crossovers in hybrid plants. PNAS 115:102431–36
     [Google Scholar]
  47. 47.  Filosa MF, Dengler RE 1972. Ultrastructure of macrocyst formation in the cellular slime mold, Dictyostelium mucoroides: extensive phagocytosis of amoebae by a specialized cell. Dev. Biol. 29:11–16
     [Google Scholar]
  48. 48.  Fiz-Palacios O, Romeralo M, Ahmadzadeh A, Weststrand S, Ahlberg PE, Baldauf S 2013. Did terrestrial diversification of amoebas (Amoebozoa) occur in synchrony with land plants?. PLOS ONE 8:9e74374
     [Google Scholar]
  49. 49.  Flowers JM, Li SI, Stathos A, Saxer G, Ostrowski EA et al. 2010. Variation, sex, and social cooperation: molecular population genetics of the social amoeba Dictyostelium discoideum. . PLOS Genet 6:7e1001013
     [Google Scholar]
  50. 50.  Forterre P, Gribaldo S, Gadelle D, Serre M-C 2007. Origin and evolution of DNA topoisomerases. Biochimie 89:4427–46
     [Google Scholar]
  51. 51.  Frada M, Probert I, Allen MJ, Wilson WH, de Vargas C 2008. The “Cheshire Cat” escape strategy of the coccolithophore Emiliania huxleyi in response to viral infection. PNAS 105:4115944–49
     [Google Scholar]
  52. 52.  Francis D 1998. High frequency recombination during the sexual cycle of Dictyostelium discoideum. . Genetics 148:41829–32
     [Google Scholar]
  53. 53.  Francis D, Eisenberg R 1993. Genetic structure of a natural population of Dictyostelium discoideum, a cellular slime mould. Mol. Ecol. 2:6385–91
     [Google Scholar]
  54. 54.  Frolov AO, Chistyakova LV, Gudkov AV, Malysheva MN 2007. Morphological study of cysts of Pelomyxa palustris Greeff, 1874. Cell Tissue Biol 1:5457–66
     [Google Scholar]
  55. 55.  Furtado JS, Olive LS 1971. Ultrastructural evidence of meiosis in Ceratiomyxa fruticulosa. . Mycologia 63:2413–16
     [Google Scholar]
  56. 56.  Gadelle D, Filée J, Buhler C, Forterre P 2003. Phylogenomics of type II DNA topoisomerases. BioEssays 25:3232–42
     [Google Scholar]
  57. 57.  Garcia V, Gray S, Allison RM, Cooper TJ, Neale MJ 2015. Tel1ATM-mediated interference suppresses clustered meiotic double-strand-break formation. Nature 520:7545114
     [Google Scholar]
  58. 58.  Gavrilets S 2000. Rapid evolution of reproductive barriers driven by sexual conflict. Nature 403:6772886
     [Google Scholar]
  59. 59.  Geitler L 1935. Reproduction and life history in diatoms. Bot. Rev. 1:5149–61
     [Google Scholar]
  60. 60.  Girard C, Roelens B, Zawadzki KA, Villeneuve AM 2018. Interdependent and separable functions of Caenorhabditis elegans MRN-C complex members couple formation and repair of meiotic DSBs. PNAS 115:19E4443–52
     [Google Scholar]
  61. 61.  Glöckner G, Lawal HM, Felder M, Singh R, Singer G et al. 2016. The multicellularity genes of dictyostelid social amoebas. Nat. Commun. 7:12085
     [Google Scholar]
  62. 62.  Goodenough U, Heitman J 2014. Origins of eukaryotic sexual reproduction. Cold Spring Harb. Perspect. Biol. 6:3a016154
     [Google Scholar]
  63. 63.  Grell KG 1979. Cytogenetic systems and evolution in Foraminifera. J. Foraminifer. Res. 9:11–13
     [Google Scholar]
  64. 64.  Gruenheit N, Parkinson K, Stewart B, Howie JA, Wolf JB, Thompson CRL 2017. A polychromatic ‘greenbeard’ locus determines patterns of cooperation in a social amoeba. Nat. Commun. 8:14171
     [Google Scholar]
  65. 65.  Haig D 2010. Games in tetrads: segregation, recombination, and meiotic drive. Am. Nat. 176:4404–13
     [Google Scholar]
  66. 66.  Haig D, Grafen A 1991. Genetic scrambling as a defence against meiotic drive. J. Theor. Biol. 153:4531–58
     [Google Scholar]
  67. 67.  Hedgethorne K, Eustermann S, Yang J-C, Ogden TEH, Neuhaus D, Bloomfield G 2017. Homeodomain-like DNA binding proteins control the haploid-to-diploid transition in Dictyostelium. Sci. . Adv 3:9e1602937
     [Google Scholar]
  68. 68.  Hirose S, Benabentos R, Ho H-I, Kuspa A, Shaulsky G 2011. Self-recognition in social amoebae is mediated by allelic pairs of tiger genes. Science 333:6041467–70
     [Google Scholar]
  69. 69.  Hofstatter PG, Tice AK, Kang S, Brown MW, Lahr DJG 2016. Evolution of bacterial recombinase A (recA) in eukaryotes explained by addition of genomic data of key microbial lineages. Proc. Biol. Sci. 283:184020161453
     [Google Scholar]
  70. 70.  Houben A, Banaei-Moghaddam AM, Klemme S, Timmis JN 2014. Evolution and biology of supernumerary B chromosomes. Cell. Mol. Life Sci. 71:3467–78
     [Google Scholar]
  71. 71.  Hudson JJR, Hsu D-W, Guo K, Zhukovskaya N, Liu P-H et al. 2005. DNA-PKcs-dependent signaling of DNA damage in Dictyostelium discoideum. Curr. . Biol 15:201880–85
     [Google Scholar]
  72. 72.  Ishida T, Kurata T, Okada K, Wada T 2008. A genetic regulatory network in the development of trichomes and root hairs. Annu. Rev. Plant Biol. 59:1365–86
     [Google Scholar]
  73. 73.  Jahn E 1907. Myxomycetenstudien. Berichte Dtsch. Bot. Ges. 25:123–26
     [Google Scholar]
  74. 74.  Johzuka K, Ogawa H 1995. Interaction of Mre11 and Rad50: two proteins required for DNA repair and meiosis-specific double-strand break formation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. . Genetics 139:41521–32
     [Google Scholar]
  75. 75.  Kang H-A, Shin H-C, Kalantzi A-S, Toseland CP, Kim H-M et al. 2015. Crystal structure of Hop2-Mnd1 and mechanistic insights into its role in meiotic recombination. Nucleic Acids Res 43:73841–56
     [Google Scholar]
  76. 76.  Katz ER, Kao V 1974. Evidence for mitotic recombination in the cellular slime mold Dictyostelium discoideum. . PNAS 71:104025–26
     [Google Scholar]
  77. 77.  Katz ER, Sussman M 1972. Parasexual recombination in Dictyostelium discoideum: selection of stable diploid heterozygotes and stable haploid segregants. PNAS 69:2495–98
     [Google Scholar]
  78. 78.  Keeney S, Giroux CN, Kleckner N 1997. Meiosis-specific DNA double-strand breaks are catalyzed by Spo11, a member of a widely conserved protein family. Cell 88:3375–84
     [Google Scholar]
  79. 79.  Komori K, Kuroe K, Yanagisawa K, Tanaka Y 1997. Cloning and characterization of the gene encoding a mitochondrially localized DNA topoisomerase II in Dictyostelium discoideum: Western blot analysis. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1352:163–72
     [Google Scholar]
  80. 80.  Kondrashov AS 1994. Muller's ratchet under epistatic selection. Genetics 136:41469–73
     [Google Scholar]
  81. 81.  Lahr DJG, Parfrey LW, Mitchell EAD, Katz LA, Lara E 2011. The chastity of amoebae: re-evaluating evidence for sex in amoeboid organisms. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 278:17152081–90
     [Google Scholar]
  82. 82.  Lange J, Pan J, Cole F, Thelen MP, Jasin M, Keeney S 2011. ATM controls meiotic double-strand-break formation. Nature 479:7372237
     [Google Scholar]
  83. 83.  Lee J-H, Paull TT 2004. Direct activation of the ATM protein kinase by the Mre11/Rad50/Nbs1 complex. Science 304:566793–96
     [Google Scholar]
  84. 84.  Levin TC, King N 2013. Evidence for sex and recombination in the choanoflagellate Salpingoeca rosetta. Curr. . Biol 23:212176–80
     [Google Scholar]
  85. 85.  Levitan DR, Ferrell DL 2006. Selection on gamete recognition proteins depends on sex, density, and genotype frequency. Science 312:5771267–69
     [Google Scholar]
  86. 86.  Lindholm AK, Dyer KA, Firman RC, Fishman L, Forstmeier W et al. 2016. The ecology and evolutionary dynamics of meiotic drive. Trends Ecol. Evol. 31:4315–26
     [Google Scholar]
  87. 87.  Loidl J 2016. Conservation and variability of meiosis across the eukaryotes. Annu. Rev. Genet. 50:1293–316
     [Google Scholar]
  88. 88.  Loomis WF 2014. Cell signaling during development of Dictyostelium. Dev. . Biol 391:11–16
     [Google Scholar]
  89. 89.  Lukaszewicz A, Lange J, Keeney S, Jasin M 2017. Control of meiotic double-strand-break formation by ATM: local and global views. bioRxiv 236984. https://doi.org/10.1101/236984
    [Crossref]
  90. 90.  Macinnes MA, Francis D 1974. Meiosis in Dictyostelium mucoroides. . Nature 251:5473321
     [Google Scholar]
  91. 91.  Maciver SK 2016. Asexual amoebae escape Muller's Ratchet through polyploidy. Trends Parasitol 32:11855–62
     [Google Scholar]
  92. 92.  Madelin MF 1984. Myxomycetes, microorganisms and animals: a model of diversity in animal interactions. Invertebrate-Microbial Interactions JM Anderson, ADM Rayner, WH Walton 1–33 Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press
     [Google Scholar]
  93. 93.  Malik S-B, Pightling AW, Stefaniak LM, Schurko AM, Logsdon JM Jr 2008. An expanded inventory of conserved meiotic genes provides evidence for sex in Trichomonas vaginalis. . PLOS ONE 3:8e2879
     [Google Scholar]
  94. 94.  Malik S-B, Ramesh MA, Hulstrand AM, Logsdon JM Jr 2007. Protist homologs of the meiotic Spo11 gene and topoisomerase VI reveal an evolutionary history of gene duplication and lineage-specific loss. Mol. Biol. Evol. 24:122827–41
     [Google Scholar]
  95. 95.  Marec F 1996. Synaptonemal complexes in insects. Int. J. Insect Morphol. Embryol. 25:3205–33
     [Google Scholar]
  96. 96.  Masson J-Y, West SC 2001. The Rad51 and Dmc1 recombinases: a non-identical twin relationship. Trends Biochem. Sci. 26:2131–36
     [Google Scholar]
  97. 97.  Mehdiabadi NJ, Kronforst MR, Queller DC, Strassmann JE 2010. Phylogeography and sexual macrocyst formation in the social amoeba Dictyostelium giganteum. BMC Evol. . Biol 10:17
     [Google Scholar]
  98. 98.  Mignot J-P, Raikov IB 1992. Evidence for meiosis in the testate amoeba Arcella. J. . Protozool 39:2287–89
     [Google Scholar]
  99. 99.  Mochizuki K, Novatchkova M, Loidl J 2008. DNA double-strand breaks, but not crossovers, are required for the reorganization of meiotic nuclei in Tetrahymena. J. . Cell Sci 121:Part 132148–58
     [Google Scholar]
  100. 100.  Muller HJ 1964. The relation of recombination to mutational advance. Mutat. Res. Mol. Mech. Mutagen. 1:12–9
     [Google Scholar]
  101. 101.  Nickerson AW, Raper KB 1973. Macrocysts in the life cycle of the Dictyosteliaceae. I. Formation of the macrocysts. Am. J. Bot. 60:2190–97
     [Google Scholar]
  102. 102.  Nickerson AW, Raper KB 1973. Macrocysts in the life cycle of the Dictyosteliaceae. II. Germination of the macrocysts. Am. J. Bot. 60:3247–54
     [Google Scholar]
  103. 103.  O'Day DH, Keszei A 2012. Signalling and sex in the social amoebozoans. Biol. Rev. 87:2313–29
     [Google Scholar]
  104. 104.  Okada H, Hirota Y, Moriyama R, Saga Y, Yanagisawa K 1986. Nuclear fusion in multinucleated giant cells during the sexual development of Dictyostelium discoideum. Dev. . Biol 118:195–102
     [Google Scholar]
  105. 105.  Okamoto M, Yamada L, Fujisaki Y, Bloomfield G, Yoshida K et al. 2016. Two HAP2-GCS1 homologs responsible for gamete interactions in the cellular slime mold with multiple mating types: implication for common mechanisms of sexual reproduction shared by plants and protozoa and for male-female differentiation. Dev. Biol. 415:16–13
     [Google Scholar]
  106. 106.  Pauklin S, Burkert JS, Martin J, Osman F, Weller S et al. 2009. Alternative induction of meiotic recombination from single-base lesions of DNA deaminases. Genetics 182:141–54
     [Google Scholar]
  107. 107.  Paull TT, Deshpande RA 2014. The Mre11/Rad50/Nbs1 complex: recent insights into catalytic activities and ATP-driven conformational changes. Exp. Cell Res. 329:1139–47
     [Google Scholar]
  108. 108.  Peacock L, Bailey M, Carrington M, Gibson W 2014. Meiosis and haploid gametes in the pathogen Trypanosoma brucei. Curr. . Biol 24:2181–86
     [Google Scholar]
  109. 109.  Pinello JF, Lai AL, Millet JK, Cassidy-Hanley D, Freed JH, Clark TG 2017. Structure-function studies link class II viral fusogens with the ancestral gamete fusion protein HAP2. Curr. Biol. 27:5651–60
     [Google Scholar]
  110. 110.  Pochart P, Woltering D, Hollingsworth NM 1997. Conserved properties between functionally distinct MutS homologs in yeast. J. Biol. Chem. 272:4830345–49
     [Google Scholar]
  111. 111.  Raper KB, Quinlan MS 1958. Acytostelium leptosomum: a unique cellular slime mould with an acellular stalk. Microbiology 18:116–32
     [Google Scholar]
  112. 112.  Robert T, Nore A, Brun C, Maffre C, Crimi B et al. 2016. The TopoVIB-like protein family is required for meiotic DNA double-strand break formation. Science 351:6276943–49
     [Google Scholar]
  113. 113.  Robert T, Vrielynck N, Mézard C, de Massy B, Grelon M 2016. A new light on the meiotic DSB catalytic complex. Semin. Cell Dev. Biol. 54:Suppl. C165–76
     [Google Scholar]
  114. 114.  Romeralo M, Fiz-Palacios O 2013. Evolution of dictyostelid social amoebas inferred from the use of molecular tools. Dictyostelids M Romeralo, S Baldauf, R Escalante 167–82 Berlin: Springer
     [Google Scholar]
  115. 115.  Ross R 1899. Life-history of the parasites of malaria. Nature 60:322–24
     [Google Scholar]
  116. 116.  Saga Y, Okada H, Yanagisawa K 1983. Macrocyst development in Dictyostelium discoideum. II. Mating-type-specific cell fusion and acquisition of fusion-competence. J. Cell Sci. 60:1157–68
     [Google Scholar]
  117. 117.  Sansome ER, Dixon PA 1965. Cytological studies of the myxomycete Ceratiomyxa fruticulosa. Arch. . Für Mikrobiol 52:11–9
     [Google Scholar]
  118. 118.  Saxer G, Havlak P, Fox SA, Quance MA, Gupta S et al. 2012. Whole genome sequencing of mutation accumulation lines reveals a low mutation rate in the social amoeba Dictyostelium discoideum. . PLOS ONE 7:10e46759
     [Google Scholar]
  119. 119.  Schmerler S, Wessel G 2011. Polar bodies—more a lack of understanding than a lack of respect. Mol. Reprod. Dev. 78:13–8
     [Google Scholar]
  120. 120.  Schure PSJ 1949. Nuclear divisions in the fructifications of some myxomycetes and a method of culture to obtain fructifications. Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek 15:1143–61
     [Google Scholar]
  121. 121.  Sharpe SC, Eme L, Brown MW, Roger AJ 2015. Timing the origins of multicellular eukaryotes through phylogenomics and relaxed molecular clock analyses. Evolutionary Transitions to Multicellular Life I Ruiz Trillo, AM Nedelcu 3–29 Dordrecht: Springer
     [Google Scholar]
  122. 122.  Shaulsky G, Kessin RH 2007. The cold war of the social amoebae. Curr. Biol. 17:16R684–92
     [Google Scholar]
  123. 123.  Shodhan A, Lukaszewicz A, Novatchkova M, Loidl J 2014. Msh4 and Msh5 function in SC-independent chiasma formation during the streamlined meiosis of Tetrahymena. . Genetics 198:3983–93
     [Google Scholar]
  124. 124.  Singh R, Schilde C, Schaap P 2016. A core phylogeny of Dictyostelia inferred from genomes representative of the eight major and minor taxonomic divisions of the group. BMC Evol. Biol. 16:251
     [Google Scholar]
  125. 125.  Speijer D, Lukeš J, Eliáš M 2015. Sex is a ubiquitous, ancient, and inherent attribute of eukaryotic life. PNAS 112:298827–34
     [Google Scholar]
  126. 126.  Spiegel FW, Olive LS 1978. New evidence for the validity of Copromyxa protea. . Mycologia 70:4843–47
     [Google Scholar]
  127. 127.  Strassmann JE, Zhu Y, Queller DC 2000. Altruism and social cheating in the social amoeba Dictyostelium discoideum. . Nature 408:6815965
     [Google Scholar]
  128. 128.  Sucgang R, Kuo A, Tian X, Salerno W, Parikh A et al. 2011. Comparative genomics of the social amoebae Dictyostelium discoideum and Dictyostelium purpureum. . Genome Biol 12:R20
     [Google Scholar]
  129. 129.  Szabo SP, O'Day DH, Chagla AH 1982. Cell fusion, nuclear fusion, and zygote differentiation during sexual development of Dictyostelium discoideum. Dev. . Biol 90:2375–82
     [Google Scholar]
  130. 130.  Tarnita CE, Washburne A, Martinez-Garcia R, Sgro AE, Levin SA 2015. Fitness tradeoffs between spores and nonaggregating cells can explain the coexistence of diverse genotypes in cellular slime molds. PNAS 112:92776–81
     [Google Scholar]
  131. 131.  Tekle YI, Anderson OR, Lecky AF 2014. Evidence of parasexual activity in “asexual amoebae” Cochliopodium spp. (Amoebozoa): extensive cellular and nuclear fusion. Protist 165:5676–87
     [Google Scholar]
  132. 132.  Tekle YI, Wood FC, Katz LA, Cerón-Romero MA, Gorfu LA 2017. Amoebozoans are secretly but ancestrally sexual: evidence for sex genes and potential novel crossover pathways in diverse groups of amoebae. Genome Biol. Evol. 9:2375–87
     [Google Scholar]
  133. 133.  Thorne LW, Byers B 1993. Stage-specific effects of X-irradiation on yeast meiosis. Genetics 134:129–42
     [Google Scholar]
  134. 134.  Tsubouchi H, Roeder GS 2002. The Mnd1 protein forms a complex with Hop2 to promote homologous chromosome pairing and meiotic double-strand break repair. Mol. Cell. Biol. 22:93078–88
     [Google Scholar]
  135. 135.  Urushihara H, Kuwayama H, Fukuhara K, Itoh T, Kagoshima H et al. 2015. Comparative genome and transcriptome analyses of the social amoeba Acytostelium subglobosum that accomplishes multicellular development without germ-soma differentiation. BMC Genom 16:80
     [Google Scholar]
  136. 136.  Urushihara H, Muramoto T 2006. Genes involved in Dictyostelium discoideum sexual reproduction. Eur. J. Cell Biol. 85:9961–68
     [Google Scholar]
  137. 137.  Valansi C, Moi D, Leikina E, Matveev E, Graña M et al. 2017. Arabidopsis HAP2/GCS1 is a gamete fusion protein homologous to somatic and viral fusogens. J. Cell Biol. 216:3571–81
     [Google Scholar]
  138. 138.  Villeneuve AM, Hillers KJ 2001. Whence meiosis?. Cell 106:6647–50
     [Google Scholar]
  139. 139.  Vos SM, Tretter EM, Schmidt BH, Berger JM 2011. All tangled up: how cells direct, manage and exploit topoisomerase function. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 12:12827–41
     [Google Scholar]
  140. 140.  Vrielynck N, Chambon A, Vezon D, Pereira L, Chelysheva L et al. 2016. A DNA topoisomerase VI-like complex initiates meiotic recombination. Science 351:6276939–43
     [Google Scholar]
  141. 141.  Wallace MA, Raper KB 1979. Genetic exchanges in the macrocysts of Dictyostelium discoideum. . Microbiology 113:2327–37
     [Google Scholar]
  142. 142.  Wasserstrom L, Lengeler KB, Walther A, Wendland J 2013. Molecular determinants of sporulation in Ashbya gossypii. . Genetics 195:187–99
     [Google Scholar]
  143. 143.  Watanabe Y, Nurse P 1999. Cohesin Rec8 is required for reductional chromosome segregation at meiosis. Nature 400:6743461
     [Google Scholar]
  144. 144.  Weedall GD, Hall N 2015. Sexual reproduction and genetic exchange in parasitic protists. Parasitology 142:S1S120–27
     [Google Scholar]
  145. 145.  Wilson M, Cadman EJ 1928. XXIV.—The life-history and cytology of Reticularia lycoperdon Bull. Earth Environ. Sci. Trans. R. Soc. Edinb. 55:3555–608
     [Google Scholar]
  146. 146.  Wong JL, Johnson MA 2010. Is HAP2-GCS1 an ancestral gamete fusogen?. Trends Cell Biol 20:3134–41
     [Google Scholar]
  147. 147.  Wood FC, Heidari A, Tekle YI 2017. Genetic evidence for sexuality in Cochliopodium (Amoebozoa). J. Hered. 108:7769–79
     [Google Scholar]
  148. 148.  Zalevsky J, MacQueen AJ, Duffy JB, Kemphues KJ, Villeneuve AM 1999. Crossing over during Caenorhabditis elegans meiosis requires a conserved MutS-based pathway that is partially dispensable in budding yeast. Genetics 153:31271–83
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-micro-090817-062232
Loading
Spo11-Independent Meiosis in Social Amoebae
Annual Review of Microbiology 72, 293 (2018); https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-micro-090817-062232
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-micro-090817-062232
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-micro-090817-062232
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Review Article

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error