Meiosis Progression and Recombination in Holocentric Plants: What Is Known?

Abstract

Differently from the common monocentric organization of eukaryotic chromosomes, the so-called holocentric chromosomes present many centromeric regions along their length. This chromosomal organization can be found in animal and plant lineages, whose distribution suggests that it has evolved independently several times. Holocentric chromosomes present an advantage: even broken chromosome parts can be correctly segregated upon cell division. However, the evolution of holocentricity brought about consequences to nuclear processes and several adaptations are necessary to cope with this new organization. Centromeres of monocentric chromosomes are involved in a two-step cohesion release during meiosis. To deal with that holocentric lineages developed different adaptations, like the chromosome remodeling strategy in Caenorhabditis elegans or the inverted meiosis in plants. Furthermore, the frequency of recombination at or around centromeres is normally very low and the presence of centromeric regions throughout the entire length of the chromosomes could potentially pose a problem for recombination in holocentric organisms. However, meiotic recombination happens, with exceptions, in those lineages in spite of their holocentric organization suggesting that the role of centromere as recombination suppressor might be altered in these lineages. Most of the available information about adaptations to meiosis in holocentric organisms is derived from the animal model C. elegans. As holocentricity evolved independently in different lineages, adaptations observed in C. elegans probably do not apply to other lineages and very limited research is available for holocentric plants. Currently, we still lack a holocentric model for plants, but good candidates may be found among Cyperaceae, a large angiosperm family. Besides holocentricity, chiasmatic and achiasmatic inverted meiosis are found in the family. Here, we introduce the main concepts of meiotic constraints and adaptations with special focus in meiosis progression and recombination in holocentric plants. Finally, we present the main challenges and perspectives for future research in the field of chromosome biology and meiosis in holocentric plants.

Compatibility between snails and schistosomes: insights from new genetic resources, comparative genomics, and genetic mapping

“…The size of the two QTLs (qRS-2.1 and qRS-5.1) covers an interval of 0.5–1.43 cM in genetic distance or 0.99–1.36 Mb in physical distance, while the 95% confidence intervals of QTLs span large chromosomal regions ranging from 2 to 8 cM genetic distance or 4.03–21.36 Mb physical distance. Interestingly, both QTLs locate in centromeric and pericentromeric regions inferred from the genetic map as corresponding to large, low or zero recombination regions 38 , suggesting centromeric/pericentromeric regions may play a role in schistosome resistance/susceptibility in B. glabrata .

Fig.

…”

Parthenogenomics: insights on mutation rates and nucleotide diversity in parthenogeneticPanagrolaimusnematodes

“…In sexual Panagrolaimus ES5, used as as genomic reference for sexual populations in this study, canonical meiosis occurs [pers. comment, Caroline Blanc and Marie Delattre], recombination occurs between homologs, sister chromatids orient via fused sister-centromeres and segregate to the same pole (Hofstatter et al , 2021). Without the presence of recombination, selection is less effective, linked loci do not allow for selection to act upon target loci independently, leading to the accumulation of mildly deleterious mutations (Bast et al , 2018).…”

The Formation of Bivalents and the Control of Plant Meiotic Recombination

“…Though controversial for many years, the divergence of several basic molecular meiotic mechanisms is now clear between different plant species. Achiasmatic inverted meiosis has also been reported in few non-model plants ( Cabral et al, 2014 ; Heckmann et al, 2014 ; Hofstatter et al, 2021 ) underlining the extreme diversity of the plant meiotic programs. It contradicts the predictive expected assumptions based on phylogenetic relationships between plant species.…”