[The genetic walk of evolution]

Gephebase, a database of genotype-phenotype relationships for natural and domesticated variation in Eukaryotes

Gephebase is a manually-curated database compiling our accumulated knowledge of the genes and mutations that underlie natural, domesticated and experimental phenotypic variation in all Eukaryotes—mostly animals, plants and yeasts. Gephebase aims to compile studies where the genotype–phenotype association (based on linkage mapping, association mapping or a candidate gene approach) is relatively well supported. Human clinical traits and aberrant mutant phenotypes in laboratory organisms are not included and can be found in other databases (e.g. OMIM, OMIA, Monarch Initiative). Gephebase contains more than 1700 entries. Each entry corresponds to an allelic difference at a given gene and its associated phenotypic change(s) between two species or two individuals of the same species, and is enriched with molecular details, taxonomic information, and bibliographic information. Users can easily browse entries and perform searches at various levels using boolean operators (e.g. transposable elements, snakes, carotenoid content, Doebley). Data is exportable in spreadsheet format. This database allows to perform meta-analyses to extract global trends about the living world and the research fields. Gephebase should also help breeders, conservationists and others to identify promising target genes for crop improvement, parasite/pest control, bioconservation and genetic diagnostic. It is freely available at www.gephebase.org.

The coding loci of evolution and domestication: current knowledge and implications for bio-inspired genome editing

One promising application of CRISPR/Cas9 is to create targeted mutations to introduce traits of interest into domesticated organisms. However, a major current limitation for crop and livestock improvement is to identify the precise genes and genetic changes that must be engineered to obtain traits of interest. Here, we discuss the advantages of bio-inspired genome editing, i.e. the engineered introduction of natural mutations that have already been associated with traits of interest in other lineages (breeds, populations or species). To obtain a landscape view of potential targets for genome editing, we used Gephebase (www.gephebase.org), a manually curated database compiling published data about the genes responsible for evolutionary and domesticated changes across eukaryotes, and examined the >1200 mutations that have been identified in the coding regions of more than 700 genes in animals, plants and yeasts. We observe that our genetic knowledge is relatively important for certain traits, such as xenobiotic resistance, and poor for others. We also note that protein-null alleles, often owing to nonsense and frameshift mutations, represent a large fraction of the known loci of domestication (42% of identified coding mutations), compared with intraspecific (27%) and interspecific evolution (11%). Although this trend may be subject to detection, publication and curation biases, it is consistent with the idea that breeders have selected large-effect mutations underlying adaptive traits in specific settings, but that these mutations and associated phenotypes would not survive the vagaries of changing external and internal environments. Our compilation of the loci of evolution and domestication uncovers interesting options for bio-inspired and transgene-free genome editing.

Replaying the tape of life in the twenty-first century

Should the tape of life be replayed, would it produce similar living beings? A classical answer has long been ‘no’, but accumulating data are now challenging this view. Repeatability in experimental evolution, in phenotypic evolution of diverse species and in the genes underlying phenotypic evolution indicates that despite unpredictability at the level of basic evolutionary processes (such as apparition of mutations), a certain kind of predictability can emerge at higher levels over long time periods. For instance, a survey of the alleles described in the literature that cause non-deleterious phenotypic differences among animals, plants and yeasts indicates that similar phenotypes have often evolved in distinct taxa through independent mutations in the same genes. Does this mean that the range of possibilities for evolution is limited? Does this mean that we can predict the outcomes of a replayed tape of life? Imagining other possible paths for evolution runs into four important issues: (i) resolving the influence of contingency, (ii) imagining living organisms that are different from the ones we know, (iii) finding the relevant concepts for predicting evolution, and (iv) estimating the probability of occurrence for complex evolutionary events that occurred only once during the evolution of life on earth.