Bee genome changes dramatically through life

_{Denyse O'Leary

September 13, 2018

Epigenetics, Genetics}

Share: Facebook; Twitter; LinkedIn; Flipboard; Print; Email

Pollinating Bee Remember old-fashioned, unalterable DNA? It was interesting stuff. So now this:

“A study of chemical tags on histone proteins hints at how the same genome can yield very different animals:”

The bee genome has a superpower. Not only can the exact same DNA sequence yield three types of insect—worker, drone, and queen—that look and behave very differently, but, in the case of workers, it dictates different sets of behaviors.

A key to the genome’s versatility seems to be epigenetic changes—chemical tags that, when added or removed from DNA, change the activity of a gene. Previous studies had shown distinct patterns of tags known as methyl groups on the genomes of bees performing different roles within their hives.Shawna Williams, “As Bees Specialize, So Does Their DNA Packaging” at The Scientist

One wonders what the tax-funded textbooks are still saying about DNA…

See also: Evolution is evolving? [It had better be.] The conference seems to be dedicated to the extended evolutionary synthesis, which it contrasts with the “modern synthesis”

and

Epigenetic change: Lamarck, wake up, you’re wanted in the conference room!

Comments

To put it more bluntly: i see very little "serious" content in any of these comments. if there is something I'm missing then let me know, I guess.Amblyrhynchus_{September 17, 2018
September
09
Sep
17
17
2018
12:21 PM
12
12
21
PM
PDT}

jawa
The genome effect is not only associated with the environment but also programmed. Also it’s not only associated with observable characteristics as the definition you quoted states. The genome along with the epigenome and other factors are part of the functional complexity that gpuccio keeps pointing at, which affects many biological intracellular and intercellular processes.
I don't mean to be pedantic but how do you know that its not only associated with observable characteristics if you can't observe these unobservable characteristics? What I am getting at is that phenotype is not restricted to how the animal looks. The phenotype also includes all biological intracellular and intercellular processes. In bees, the workers feed a few larvae different than all others and this triggers the epigenetic changes that result in the development of a queen. The basic genome has the potential to be either a worker or a queen, the deciding factor is the impact of diet on how the genes are expressed. In GP's example, the phenotype is environmentally triggered but with the added complexity of having a social context. I am not disagreeing with this. This is even further complicated by the triggers that result in the workers "knowing" that a new queen is needed and altering the feeding for a few larvae. As mentioned, this is similar to clownfish, in which the change from male to female is triggered, somehow, by social behavior triggering changes to how genes are expressed. Turtles demonstrate a different "strategy". Genetically, there is no difference between male and female, as is also the case with clown fish, but different than mammals. Sex is determined during incubation by genes being expressed differently depending on the temperature of incubation. However, with turtles, there does not appear to be the "social" link that we see with clown fish and bees.R J Sawyer_{September 17, 2018
September
09
Sep
17
17
2018
12:10 PM
12
12
10
PM
PDT}

OLV, You may want to ask R J Sawyer too. He could provide a more precise explanation. :)jawa_{September 17, 2018
September
09
Sep
17
17
2018
12:03 PM
12
12
03
PM
PDT}

gpuccio (67): “controlled by the information in the species” How is that controlling information setup in the species? For example in the case of these bees in this thread? Thanks.OLV_{September 17, 2018
September
09
Sep
17
17
2018
12:00 PM
12
12
00
PM
PDT}

Peter, Amblyrhynchus could reveal it to you faster than RJ Sawyer will. :)jawa_{September 17, 2018
September
09
Sep
17
17
2018
11:37 AM
11
11
37
AM
PDT}

Peter @75: You may want to ask RJ Sawyer. He can give you a better explanation. :)jawa_{September 17, 2018
September
09
Sep
17
17
2018
11:34 AM
11
11
34
AM
PDT}

gpuccio (67): Am I included in the “everybody” too? Please see 23, 25, 28, 29, 30. Thanks.OLV_{September 17, 2018
September
09
Sep
17
17
2018
10:52 AM
10
10
52
AM
PDT}

gpuccio, How are the epigenetic markers spatiotemporally setup ?PeterA_{September 17, 2018
September
09
Sep
17
17
2018
10:20 AM
10
10
20
AM
PDT}

gpuccio @67: “It seems that everybody is only interested in discussing meaningless details.” Did you include me in that group too?PeterA_{September 17, 2018
September
09
Sep
17
17
2018
10:16 AM
10
10
16
AM
PDT}

R J Sawyer @64: The genome effect is not only associated with the environment but also programmed. Also it’s not only associated with observable characteristics as the definition you quoted states. The genome along with the epigenome and other factors are part of the functional complexity that gpuccio keeps pointing at, which affects many biological intracellular and intercellular processes.jawa_{September 17, 2018
September
09
Sep
17
17
2018
10:03 AM
10
10
03
AM
PDT}

GP When I wrote #67 I had not read your #66. I apologize. Thank you for your commnts. I figured that is what happened. That is why I added my second response. Hopefully to clarify my opinion a bit.R J Sawyer_{September 17, 2018
September
09
Sep
17
17
2018
08:35 AM
8
08
35
AM
PDT}

R J Sawyer: When I wrote #67 I had not read your #66. I apologize. Thank you for your commnts. :)gpuccio_{September 17, 2018
September
09
Sep
17
17
2018
08:27 AM
8
08
27
AM
PDT}

R J:
Phenotype: “the set of observable characteristics of an individual resulting from the interaction of its genotype with the environment.”
That is the untestable claim, anyway. The fact is no one knows what makes a bee a bee or a human a human. No one knows what determines what form will develop.ET_{September 17, 2018
September
09
Sep
17
17
2018
08:23 AM
8
08
23
AM
PDT}

R J Sawyer- If you are going to selectively quote what I post why even bother responding? Your "objection" was answered in the part that you failed to quote. If histones are coded by the DNA then obviously they were part of the genome. Seeing that they help package the DNA into chromosomes it is clear they are part of the genome as it wouldn’t exist as it is without them.ET_{September 17, 2018
September
09
Sep
17
17
2018
08:21 AM
8
08
21
AM
PDT}

GP,
Do you agree that the differentiation of social organisms in the case of bees is controlled by the genome/epigenome, even if it uses controlled environmental stimuli?
Yes. I thought that I was clear on that. I apologize if I was not.
After all, the human genome/epigenome does not control, in some ordered and hereditary way, our differentiation into doctors, engineers, soldiers, and so on.
This is true.
Animal eusociality is a complex hereditary pattern, controlled by the information in the species.
In some species this is more so than in others. For example, all clown fish are born male. In a social group, only the largest and most aggressive will become female. I don't know if the specific mechanism behind this has been worked out in as great a detail as this paper has done for bees, but they are similar in nature. Although the fact that the phenotype is affected by both genetics and environment has been known for a very long time, an understanding of the specific mechanisms involved is in its infancy. These are interesting times.R J Sawyer_{September 17, 2018
September
09
Sep
17
17
2018
08:10 AM
8
08
10
AM
PDT}

To all: It seems that everybody is only interested in discussing meaningless details. Just to be fair, I will say explicitly that the use of the word "genome" in the title is not accurate. For the last time, R J Sawyer, have you read my comments at #52 and #56? Do you agree that the differentiation of social organisms in the case of bees is controlled by the genome/epigenome, even if it uses controlled environmental stimuli? After all, the human genome/epigenome does not control, in some ordered and hereditary way, our differentiation into doctors, engineers, soldiers, and so on. Animal eusociality is a complex hereditary pattern, controlled by the information in the species. Amblyrhynchus at #57: I don't understand. You have nothing to say about any comment here? That means that you have nothing to say about my comment to your #18 (at my #31)? And about my request for some more details about your statements at #18? Of course, you can do as you like. But I cannot understand the reason for that.gpuccio_{September 17, 2018
September
09
Sep
17
17
2018
07:59 AM
7
07
59
AM
PDT}

GP
The interesting point here is that we are not talking of a generic phenotype, but of specific different phenotypes in the context of the hereditary eusocial structure. In that sense, epigenetic patterns are the controllers of the specific phenotypes. It’s different from differences in phenotype that arise from environmental differences, for example in identical twins. I think that we are agreeing more than we are disagreeing. I think where we differ is that you are distinguishing epigenetic effects such as we see with the bees from environmental effects on the phenotype, whereas I think that they are one and the same. The major difference being the magnitude of the impact.
Epigenetics is the study of heritable changes in gene expression (active versus inactive genes) that do not involve changes to the underlying DNA sequence — a change in phenotype without a change in genotype — which in turn affects how cells read the genes. Epigenetic change is a regular and natural occurrence but can also be influenced by several factors including age, the environment/lifestyle, and disease state. https://www.whatisepigenetics.com/fundamentals/

Here [the bees], the differences are part of the program.
All epigenetic effects are part of the "program". Whether or not turtles are male or female depends on the epigenetic affects of temperature during incubation. Some breast cancers are triggered by epigenetic effects. A queen develops when she is fed "royal honey" (greatly simplified). In all of these cases, these are "programmed" into the DNA. You can't have epigenetic effects with out the underlying genetics.
R J Sawyer_{September 17, 2018
September
09
Sep
17
17
2018
07:58 AM
7
07
58
AM
PDT}

ET
If histones are coded by the DNA then obviously they were part of the genome. I don't follow your logic. Insulin is also coded by your DNA. As is every protein in your body. Does than mean that all of the proteins in your body are part of the genome? I don't think that is what you are wanting to say.
R J Sawyer_{September 17, 2018
September
09
Sep
17
17
2018
07:31 AM
7
07
31
AM
PDT}

jawa
Wrong! genome effect covers a much wider area than phenotype. The genome may affect different intra-cellular or inter-cellular processes that may not necessarily get directly reflected in the phenotype. For example, cell fate determination.
Phenotype: "the set of observable characteristics of an individual resulting from the interaction of its genotype with the environment." I think that you will find that the vast majority of biologists would disagree with you. The phenotype is not restricted to shape and form. It also includes all of the cellular processes, cell types, etc.
Something seems wrong with you buddy. Could it be your attitude?
If by attitude you mean that I don't insult are demean others, then I guess I have attitude.R J Sawyer_{September 17, 2018
September
09
Sep
17
17
2018
07:29 AM
7
07
29
AM
PDT}

Ambly:
Why is so hard for any of you to simply admit this mistake and move on?
Said the person whose entire position is a mistake, can't admit it and move on.ET_{September 17, 2018
September
09
Sep
17
17
2018
05:46 AM
5
05
46
AM
PDT}

R J- If histones are coded by the DNA then obviously they were part of the genome. Seeing that they help package the DNA into chromosomes it is clear they are part of the genome as it wouldn't exist as it is without them.ET_{September 17, 2018
September
09
Sep
17
17
2018
05:44 AM
5
05
44
AM
PDT}

Amblyrhynchus @57: Are you referring to Peter’s comment @46 addressed to you? Well, your poor response confirms what was obvious from the beginning: that you are not a serious discussant here.jawa_{September 17, 2018
September
09
Sep
17
17
2018
04:03 AM
4
04
03
AM
PDT}

R J Sawyer: You’re wrong in 54 and 55. And you missed -perhaps intentionally- the comment with question addressed to you @39. Now let’s see how you respond to gpuccio’s comment @56. Most probably you’ll fail it too, though I would prefer that you do it right this time. Something seems wrong with you buddy. Could it be your attitude? One doesn’t have to be a rocket scientist in order to understand what gpuccio is explaining here.jawa_{September 17, 2018
September
09
Sep
17
17
2018
03:54 AM
3
03
54
AM
PDT}

R J Sawyer, Did you miss my question @39?jawa_{September 16, 2018
September
09
Sep
16
16
2018
08:04 PM
8
08
04
PM
PDT}

54 R J Sawyer Wrong! genome effect covers a much wider area than phenotype. The genome may affect different intra-cellular or inter-cellular processes that may not necessarily get directly reflected in the phenotype. For example, cell fate determination.jawa_{September 16, 2018
September
09
Sep
16
16
2018
08:01 PM
8
08
01
PM
PDT}

At this risk of disappointing Peter A., I can't say I have anything to say about any of these comments.Amblyrhynchus_{September 16, 2018
September
09
Sep
16
16
2018
06:29 PM
6
06
29
PM
PDT}

R J Sawyer: Thank you for your very civil contribution. Have you read my #52? The interesting point here is that we are not talking of a generic phenotype, but of specific different phenotypes in the context of the hereditary eusocial structure. In that sense, epigenetic patterns are the controllers of the specific phenotypes. It's different from differences in phenotype that arise from environmental differences, for example in identical twins. Here, the differences are part of the program.gpuccio_{September 16, 2018
September
09
Sep
16
16
2018
08:28 AM
8
08
28
AM
PDT}

GP
Whatever the title, the issue presented in New’s OP is certainly important and interesting.
I agree that the referenced paper is very interesting. I have slowly been working my way through it but, frankly, it is well beyond by area of expertise to comment on it other than in a general sense; as I am sure is also the case for most here. We have known for a very long time that the phenotype is the result of an interaction of environment and our genes. Please keep in mind that “environment” does not only refer to the environment outside our bodies, although that also plays a part. We have known for a very long time that the same female bee larva can develop into a queen or a worker depending on how it is fed (and I am sure there are other factors as well). But, at the end of the day, whether it is a worker or a queen it’s genome does not change during development. If you mapped the genome of the larva and the adult it develops into, they would bee (tee her) the same. I initially commented on the title as a simple corrective. Others, for whatever reason, decided to take it further. As far as I can tell, this paper, although very comprehensive, still boils down to providing a detailed mechanism underpinning what we already know. The phenotype is greatly affected by the environment.R J Sawyer_{September 16, 2018
September
09
Sep
16
16
2018
07:01 AM
7
07
01
AM
PDT}

Jawa
The title of the current OP, which was started Sept 13, is perhaps inaccurate because it could have said “genome effect” instead of just “genome”,
But why invent a new term when an existing term (phenotype) means exactly the same thing?R J Sawyer_{September 16, 2018
September
09
Sep
16
16
2018
06:42 AM
6
06
42
AM
PDT}

PeterA at #48: "The main topic of this OP seems very related to your latest thread on transcription regulation and to the previous discussion thread on chromatin topology and functionality." Yes, it is. Definitely!gpuccio_{September 16, 2018
September
09
Sep
16
16
2018
03:18 AM
3
03
18
AM
PDT}

Prev 1 … 3 4 5 6 7 Next

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Leave a Reply