Evolution of species-specific promoter-associated mechanisms for protecting chromosome ends by Drosophila Het-A telomeric transposons

Telomere-Specialized Retroelements in Drosophila: Adaptive Symbionts of the Genome, Neutral, or in Conflict?

Linear chromosomes shorten in every round of replication. In Drosophila, telomere-specialized long interspersed retrotransposable elements (LINEs) belonging to the jockey clade offset this shortening by forming head-to-tail arrays at Drosophila telomere ends. As such, these telomeric LINEs have been considered adaptive symbionts of the genome, protecting it from premature decay, particularly as Drosophila lacks a conventional telomerase holoenzyme. However, as reviewed here, recent work reveals a high degree of variation and turnover in the telomere-specialized LINE lineages across Drosophila. There appears to be no absolute requirement for LINE activity to maintain telomeres in flies, hence the suggestion that the telomere-specialized LINEs may instead be neutral or in conflict with the host, rather than adaptive.

Drosophila: Retrotransposons Making up Telomeres

Drosophila and extant species are the best-studied telomerase exception. In this organism, telomere elongation is coupled with targeted retrotransposition of Healing Transposon (HeT-A) and Telomere Associated Retrotransposon (TART) with sporadic additions of Telomere Associated and HeT-A Related (TAHRE), all three specialized non-Long Terminal Repeat (non-LTR) retrotransposons. These three very special retroelements transpose in head to tail arrays, always in the same orientation at the end of the chromosomes but never in interior locations. Apparently, retrotransposon and telomerase telomeres might seem very different, but a detailed view of their mechanisms reveals similarities explaining how the loss of telomerase in a Drosophila ancestor could successfully have been replaced by the telomere retrotransposons. In this review, we will discover that although HeT-A, TART, and TAHRE are still the only examples to date where their targeted transposition is perfectly tamed into the telomere biology of Drosophila, there are other examples of retrotransposons that manage to successfully integrate inside and at the end of telomeres. Because the aim of this special issue is viral integration at telomeres, understanding the base of the telomerase exceptions will help to obtain clues on similar strategies that mobile elements and viruses could have acquired in order to ensure their survival in the host genome.

Retrotransposons that maintain chromosome ends

Reverse transcriptases have shaped genomes in many ways. A remarkable example of this shaping is found on telomeres of the genus Drosophila, where retrotransposons have a vital role in chromosome structure. Drosophila lacks telomerase; instead, three telomere-specific retrotransposons maintain chromosome ends. Repeated transpositions to chromosome ends produce long head to tail arrays of these elements. In both form and function, these arrays are analogous to the arrays of repeats added by telomerase to chromosomes in other organisms. Distantly related Drosophila exhibit this variant mechanism of telomere maintenance, which was established before the separation of extant Drosophila species. Nevertheless, the telomere-specific elements still have the hallmarks that characterize non-long terminal repeat (non-LTR) retrotransposons; they have also acquired characteristics associated with their roles at telomeres. These telomeric retrotransposons have shaped the Drosophila genome, but they have also been shaped by the genome. Here, we discuss ways in which these three telomere-specific retrotransposons have been modified for their roles in Drosophila chromosomes.

Adapting to life at the end of the line: How Drosophila telomeric retrotransposons cope with their job

Drosophila telomeres are remarkable because they are maintained by telomere-specific retrotransposons, rather than the enzyme telomerase that maintains telomeres in almost every other eukaryotic organism. Successive transpositions of the Drosophila retrotransposons onto chromosome ends produce long head-to-tail arrays that are analogous in form and function to the long arrays of short repeats produced by telomerase in other organisms. Nevertheless, Drosophila telomere repeats are retrotransposons, complex entities three orders of magnitude longer than simple telomerase repeats. During the >40-60 My they have been coevolving with their host, these retrotransposons perforce have evolved a complex relationship with Drosophila cells to maintain populations of active elements while carrying out functions analogous to those of telomerase repeats in other organisms. Although they have assumed a vital role in maintaining the Drosophila genome, the three Drosophila telomere-specific elements are non-LTR retrotransposons, closely related to some of the best known non-telomeric elements in the Drosophila genome. Thus, these elements offer an opportunity to study ways in which retrotransposons and their host cells can coevolve cooperatively. The telomere-specific elements display several characteristics that appear important to their roles at the telomere; for example, we have recently reported that they have evolved at least two innovative mechanisms for protecting essential sequence on their 5'ends. Because every element serves as the end of the chromosome immediately after it transposes, its 5'end is subject to chromosomal erosion until it is capped by a new transposition. These two mechanisms make it possible for at least a significant fraction of elements to survive their initial time as the chromosome end without losing sequence necessary to be competent for subsequent transposition. Analysis of sequence from >90 kb of assembled telomere array shows that these mechanisms for small scale sequence protection are part of a unified set which maintains telomere length homeostasis. Here we concentrate on recently elucidated mechanisms that have evolved to provide this small scale 5' protection.

Evolution of diverse mechanisms for protecting chromosome ends by Drosophila TART telomere retrotransposons

The retrotransposons HeT-A, TART, and TAHRE, which maintain Drosophila telomeres, transpose specifically onto chromosome ends to form long arrays that extend the chromosome and compensate for terminal loss. Because they transpose by target-primed reverse transcription, each element is oriented so that its 5' end serves as the extreme end of the chromosome until another element transposes to occupy the terminal position. Thus 5' sequences are at risk for terminal erosion while the element is at the chromosome end. Here we report that TART elements in Drosophila melanogaster and Drosophila virilis show species-specific innovations in promoter architecture that buffer loss of sequence exposed at chromosome ends. The two elements have evolved different ways to effect this protection. The D. virilis TART (TART(vir)) promoter is found in the 3' UTR of the element directly upstream of the element transcribed. Transcription starts within the upstream element so that a "Tag" of extra sequence is added to the 5' end of the newly transcribed RNA. This Tag provides expendable sequence to buffer end erosion of essential 5' sequence after the RNA is reverse transcribed onto the chromosome. In contrast, the D. melanogaster TART (TART(mel)) promoter initiates transcription deep within the 5' UTR, but the element is able to replace and extend the 5' UTR sequence by copying sequence from its 3' UTR, we believe while being reverse transcribed onto the chromosome end. Astonishingly, end-protection in TART(vir) and HeT-A(mel) are essentially identical (using Tags), whereas HeT-A(vir) is clearly protected from end erosion by an as-yet-unspecified program.

Differential maintenance of DNA sequences in telomeric and centromeric heterochromatin

Repeated DNA in heterochromatin presents enormous difficulties for whole-genome sequencing; hence, sequence organization in a significant portion of the genomes of multicellular organisms is relatively unknown. Two sequenced BACs now allow us to compare telomeric retrotransposon arrays from Drosophila melanogaster telomeres with an array of telomeric retrotransposons that transposed into the centromeric region of the Y chromosome >13 MYA, providing a unique opportunity to compare the structural evolution of this retrotransposon in two contexts. We find that these retrotransposon arrays, both heterochromatic, are maintained quite differently, resulting in sequence organizations that apparently reflect different roles in the two chromosomal environments. The telomere array has grown only by transposition of new elements to the chromosome end; the centromeric array instead has grown by repeated amplifications of segments of the original telomere array. Many elements in the telomere have been variably 5'-truncated apparently by gradual erosion and irregular deletions of the chromosome end; however, a significant fraction (4 and possibly 5 or 6 of 15 elements examined) remain complete and capable of further retrotransposition. In contrast, each element in the centromere region has lost ≥ 40% of its sequence by internal, rather than terminal, deletions, and no element retains a significant part of the original coding region. Thus the centromeric array has been restructured to resemble the highly repetitive satellite sequences typical of centromeres in multicellular organisms, whereas, over a similar or longer time period, the telomere array has maintained its ability to provide retrotransposons competent to extend telomere ends.