Molecular Biology and Evolution, Vol 16, 1251-1255, Copyright © 1999 by Society for Molecular Biology and Evolution
C Vieira, D Lepetit, S Dumont and C Biemont
Transposable elements (TEs) make up around 10%-15% of the Drosophila
melanogaster genome, but its sibling species Drosophila simulans carries
only one third as many such repeat sequences. We do not, however, have an
overall view of copy numbers of the various classes of TEs (long terminal
repeat [LTR] retrotransposons, non-LTR retrotransposons, and transposons)
in genomes of natural populations of both species. We analyzed 34 elements
in individuals from various natural populations of these species. We show
that D. melanogaster has higher average chromosomal insertion site numbers
per genome than D. simulans for all TEs except five. The LTR
retrotransposons gypsy, ZAM, and 1731 and the transposon bari-1 present
similar low copy numbers in both species. The transposon hobo has a large
number of insertion sites, with significantly more sites in D. simulans.
High variation between populations in number of insertion sites of some
elements of D. simulans suggests that these elements can invade the genome
of the entire species starting from a local population. We propose that TEs
in the D. simulans genome are being awakened and amplified as they had been
a long time ago in D. melanogaster.
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Wake up of transposable elements following Drosophila simulans worldwide colonization
Laboratoire de Biometrie, Genetique, Biologie des populations, UMR Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Universite Lyon 1, Villeurbanne, France.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  E. B. Dopman and D. L. Hartl A portrait of copy-number polymorphism in Drosophila melanogaster PNAS, December 11, 2007; 104(50): 19920 - 19925. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. M. Bergman and D. Bensasson Recent LTR retrotransposon insertion contrasts with waves of non-LTR insertion since speciation in Drosophila melanogaster PNAS, July 3, 2007; 104(27): 11340 - 11345. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. P. Garcia Guerreiro and A. Fontdevila The Evolutionary History of Drosophila buzzatii. XXXVI. Molecular Structural Analysis of Osvaldo Retrotransposon Insertions in Colonizing Populations Unveils Drift Effects in Founder Events Genetics, January 1, 2007; 175(1): 301 - 310. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 D. C. Presgraves Intron Length Evolution in Drosophila Mol. Biol. Evol., November 1, 2006; 23(11): 2203 - 2213. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. L. Rouzic and P. Capy Population Genetics Models of Competition Between Transposable Element Subfamilies Genetics, October 1, 2006; 174(2): 785 - 793. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Boulesteix, M. Weiss, and C. Biemont Differences in Genome Size Between Closely Related Species: The Drosophila melanogaster Species Subgroup Mol. Biol. Evol., January 1, 2006; 23(1): 162 - 167. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
N. Mugnier, C. Biemont, and C. Vieira New Regulatory Regions of Drosophila 412 Retrotransposable Element Generated by Recombination Mol. Biol. Evol., March 1, 2005; 22(3): 747 - 757. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. Vieira, C. Nardon, C. Arpin, D. Lepetit, and C. Biemont Evolution of Genome Size in Drosophila. Is the Invader's Genome Being Invaded by Transposable Elements? Mol. Biol. Evol., July 1, 2002; 19(7): 1154 - 1161. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 N. J. Bowen and J. F. McDonald Drosophila Euchromatic LTR Retrotransposons are Much Younger Than the Host Species in Which They Reside Genome Res., September 1, 2001; 11(9): 1527 - 1540. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|