Beginnings of Metagenomics and the emerging tree of life – Dr. Norman Pace


***Update, Twitter storify

I had the privilege today of attending a talk by Dr. Norman Pace from UC-Boulder, who was the first to investigate the structure/function of rRNA molecules in the context of deep phylogeny. This opened the view of culture-independent microbial studies.

Some notes:

UC Davis – Genome Center, 10/6/2015

Dr. Jonathan Eisen: transformed his life, learned from Jennifer Doudna’s course and per Colleen Cavanaugh’s instructions to read paper by Norman Pace.

“Beginnings of Metagenomics and the emerging tree of life.”

– historical context
– emergence of modern microbial ecology, “metagenomics”
– expansion of microbial diversity and the state of the big tree
– alternatives of the Woese three-branched tree of life (correct?)

Biology is not as simple as just saying prokaryotes and eukaryotes.

“Groping towards an objective describing of life’s diversity”: molecular phylogeny
(devil is in details)

  1. align sequences carefully so that orthologous residues are juxtaposed, common ancestry and function
  2. count differences between pairs of sequences = measureo f evolutionary distance that separates organisms
  3. calculate map of relationships = “tree” that most accurately fits all pairwise differences

Carl Woese studying data, early 1980s, 3 domain trees,
Accumulated hand-curated oligonucleotide catalogues of 6mers and then larger as homologues and orthologues. Published as table of “Association coefficients (SAB)”

Broad general advice: “Do what you can do to make your results interpretable for a larger audience!” Will drive home importance of your work.

Archaebacteria, Eubacteria, Eukaryotes, Woese 1987

Woese et al. 1990 Evolution PNAS Vol. 87

Some genes that are homologues underwent duplications before a common ancestor.

Paralogs you can still recognize include: elongation factors EF-G and EF-Tu, membrane ATP synthase subunits, tRNA

“blast hit doesn’t mean much” the more unrelated you get

rooting the big tree, You are here: tree of life has three main relatedness groups
– origin in on the bacterial line of descent
– chrloroplasts and mitochondria are bacterial origin
– don’t need to culture to identify

In 2001, term “metagenomics” was coined. Allows us to ask, “What kinds of organisms are there?” and “what kinds of genes are there?”. Requires reflection on sequence databases, then arrive at community structure and functional results. At the end, can ask “What kinds of genes does this community have?”

In the 80s, only had mixed natural samples and catalogue so had to figure out how to characterize.

“Analysis of hydrothermal vent-associated symbionts by ribosomal RNA sequences.” Science 224: 209 Stahl et al. 1984

“Characterization of a Yellowstone Hot Spring Microbial Community by 5S rRNA sequences.” Stahl et al. 1980s

Need a database, universal primers synthesized in house by hand (still used!)

“Rapid determination of 16S ribosomal RNA sequences for phylogenotic analyses.” Lane et al. 1985

“Phylogenetic Stains: Ribosomal RNA-Based probes for the identification of single cells.” Science 243: 1360-1989

sample->DNA->rDNA PCR library->clone->sequence (now NGS)

Pace studied a spectrum of environments, saturated brine (cryptoendoliths), mines, open ocean, aerosols in NYC subway, soapscum

Worldwide, trend through time of cumulative number of sequences >700,000 environmental (in 2007), small percentage of cultured!

Expansion of bacterial tree, ~100 phyla, 30 cultured

Strains of pangenome of one species of bacteria, ~30% overlap

In the face of all the genomic variation, what does an environmental rNRA sequence tell you?

Principle: representatives of a phylogenetic group are expected to have properties common to the group

To validate, multiple environments, specific harvest, abundance is validation of significance to the ecosystem

Concatenated gene sets for phylogeny == not a good idea, be careful. Can use this, as with any method, as guideline for further analysis. (Later: Has no problem with concatenated trees, as long as you’re not too deep in tree.)

Problems in resolving deep-branchig topology: representation, uncertainty

Representation in databases: mostly pathogens, fecal, not much else available to understand deep phylogeny

Pipelines, short reads – too short

Calculate amount of change, uncertainty deep in tree, inferred sequence change vs. observed sequence change – apply metric Knuc = -3/4ln(1-(4/3)D)

Alternatives to Woese 3D tree? Don’t think so.

Eocyte hypothesis is stronger if you string genes together

While rRNA is highly conserved, some people argue that it’s only 1500 charaters long so better to look at conservation and expand length of sequences looking at. But, these are poorly aligned.

Different pictures of three-domain model emerged, e.g. eocyte

“Complex archaea that bridge the gap between prokaryotes and eukaryotes.” tree from concatenation of 29 genes

Big problems with concatenated protein genes: deep in the tree:
– alignments (identification of orthologies)
– unseen change (very big deal with long branches)
– lateral transfer (e.g. 11/53 archaea proteins show evidence of lateral transfer)
– “heterotachy” (variable rates of change among sequences used in analysis – a statistical killer)
– did the LUCA (last universal common ancestor) state have stably contiguous genomes?

Kubatko and Degnan. 2007. “Inconsistency of phylogenetic estimates from concatenated data under coalescence.”

Beyond algorithms, look at properties of cells:

  • many properties of eukaryotes and archaea distinguish these lines from bacteria
  • Two properties are key: membrane chemistry and backbone stereochemistry are different: ether vs. ester lipids, opposite backbone stereoisomerism
  • So, if eukaryotes came out of crenarchaeota they had to remove one lipid metabolism and add-on another, highly unlikely

Need: better ways of measuring change – informatically – which will be more reliable with better resolution to ensure we’re arriving at the right answers. One example, PAM and BLOSUM protein alignment matrices in models for deep phylogeny analysis

Jonathan Eisen: Where do viruses fit?

Nance: Viruses at the time serving as vectors moving around genes, recombination, if were to guess viruses, were around since the beginning.

Amazing to attend this talk and hear from such a principal member of this field.


About Lisa Johnson

PhD candidate at UC Davis in Molecular, Cellular, and Integrative Physiology
This entry was posted in talks. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Beginnings of Metagenomics and the emerging tree of life – Dr. Norman Pace

  1. Pingback: Wrap up of talk by Norm Pace on “Metagenomics and the Tree of Life” | microBEnet: the microbiology of the Built Environment network.

  2. Pingback: Wrap up of talk by Norm Pace on “Metagenomics and the Tree of Life” – microBEnet: the microbiology of the Built Environment network

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s