Advancements in Genetic Engineering

Advancements in Genetic Engineering
Open Access

ISSN: 2169-0111

+44 1478 350008

Short Communication - (2015) Volume 4, Issue 2

View PDF Download PDF

Why Nuclear Ribosomal Internal Transcribed Spacer (ITS) has been Selected as the DNA Barcode for Fungi?

Mahmoud AGY1* and Zaher EHF2
1Biology Department (Biotechnology section), Faculty of Science, Albaha University, Albaha 1988, Saudi Arabia, E-mail: Zaher@gmail.com
2Botany Department, Faculty of Science, Mycology Research Lab, Tanta University, Tanta 31527, Egypt, E-mail: Zaher@gmail.com
*Corresponding Author: Mahmoud AGY, Botany Department, Faculty of Science, Mycology Research Lab, Tanta University, Tanta 31527, Egypt, Tel: 009660501994930 Email:

Abstract

The application of DNA sequences of standardized genetic markers for the identification of eukaryotic organisms is known as DNA barcoding. Based on a recent study by a multinational and multilaboratory fungal barcoding consortium, the nuclear ribosomal internal transcribed spacer (ITS) has been selected as the DNA barcode for fungi. DNA barcoding shows tremendous promise for the organisms rapid identification at the species level. Recently, DNA barcodes are used for identification of fungal species in marine sediments.

<

Keywords: Fungi; Barcoding; Internal transcribed spacer (ITS); Translation elongation factor 1A (tef1a); Ribosomal polymerase B2 (rpb2); Cytochrome oxidase 1 (cox1, OI)

Introduction

Fungi are highly diverse group of organisms, with large numbers of species which are not yet described. The accumulative sequencing technologies became crucial for investigating fungal communities in different habitats [1].

Many researchers have been contributing to the effort, with a concerted attempt to obtain representative sequences for all major lineages of the Eumycota [2]. Four markers were selected for different group's comparison; three regions of the nuclear ribosomal DNA and one protein coding gene. The internal transcribed spacer (ITS) of rDNA has gained much attention, where it has a wide utility as marker in different studies

Nuclear ribosomal internal transcribed spacer (ITS) region as a universal DNA barcode marker for Fungi

All fungi ITS sequences were deposited in GenBank, where the major bulk came from Latin binomial of fungi and the smaller numbers from environmental studies [3,4]. ITS has been used in combination with the large subunit (LSU) of ribosomal RNA in small numbers of environmental studies [5,6]. ITS is also used to measure the genetic distances between fungal different groups [7]. Phylogenetic studies have been used in identification and comparing of fungi units [8,9]. Protein-coding genes have proved its supremacy over rRNAgenes for resolving relationships at various taxonomic levels [10]. Using specific markers with available primers for translation elongation factor 1-α for Fusarium [11] and β-tubulin for Penicillium [12], usually amplified to a narrow taxonomic value. Among proteincoding genes, the largest subunit of RNA polymerase II (RPB1) gene might have potential as a fungal barcode [13]. The phylogenetic use of the largest subunit of RNA in studies of Basidiomycota, zygomycota, Microsporidia [13-17], and in some protists indicated a promising barcode tool [18]. RPB1 is ubiquitous and single copy, and it has a slow rate of sequence divergence. However, the use of the primers which developed by assembling the fungal tree of Life (AFTOL) project for proposed locus as a barcode remains untested [19]. Schoch et al. [2] have compared the sequences of all rDNA, in addition to representative protein-coding gene, RPB1regions to be considered as barcode for kingdom Fungi. It is advisable to sequencing the largest subunit of ribosomal polymerase II (RPB1) for fungal species identification. It has been chosen as a protein representative coding gene due to the general good PCR success with this gene and its utilization as phylogenetic marker in AFTOL project. For some fungi, the second largest subunit of ribosomal polymerase II (RPB2) and another recently introduced marker mini-chromosome maintenance proteins (MCM7) was also utilized in the second AFTOL project that were sequenced and analyzed.

To sum up, RPB1 produced more resolving distinction ability than ITS, but the latter remained the preferred choice for species barcode across all that are comparable to the success rate of the two barcode system adopted for plants [2]. ITS PCR performance success rate is a crucial point for the possible utility of the ITS as a barcode. Although the identification success for RPB1 was higher up to 81 %, however poor amplification of candidate gene/DNA fragment PCR success rate is of a serious limitation. Almost no data could be generated for the basal fungal lineages and the only data set generated for those groups came from DNA samples. Although the utility of other protein-coding genes were discussed by some researchers, and it has been concluded that the fungi identification tools efficiency came in that order: ITS and RPB1>LSU>SSU [2,5,6].

Thereafter, a discussion of whether a two gene barcode system should be considered was held, especially for yeasts, where both genes (ITS and LSU) sequencing was carried out. One critical view that should be taken into consideration is the high cost of genes sequencing versus the expected benefit of the second barcode. During barcode database development, both markers would have to be sequenced. Although it is clear that LSU is superior to the ITS for recognizing species in some groups of yeasts, a combined LSU/ITS system gave only a modest increase in identification success. Considering the assent of participating yeast taxonomists, consensus built favour of one gene barcoding system and ITS was proposed to be the best candidate for the same [2].

Mycologists have shown interest in participating in the DNA barcoding movement, with projects on quarantine-relevant fungi, medically important fungi and indoor moulds already underway. Researchers have developed interest towards sequencing fungal herbarium specimens, and pursuing an international research coordination network (perhaps affiliated with, the International Barcode of Life network; IBOL) for fungal DNA barcoding. DNA regions were evaluated as potential DNA barcodes for fungi, the second largest kingdom of eukaryotic life, by a multinational, multilaboratory consortium (Fungal barcoding consortium: (www.fungalbarcoding.org.-http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/ articles/PMC3341068/). The region of the mitochondrial cytochrome C, and oxidase subunit 1 used as the animal barcode was excluded as a potential marker, because it is difficult to be amplified in fungi, often includes large introns, and can be insufficiently variable [20].

The process of fungal barcode is basically short sections of DNA sequence that can be used to identify fungal species. This barcode area is shared across the majority of fungi, but also has enough small changes between different species that it can be used to distinguish one from another.

References

  1. Hawksworth DL ( 2001) The magnitude of fungal diversity: the 1.5 million species estimate revisited. Mycol Res 105:1422-1432.
  2. Schoch C, Keith Seifert and Pedro Crous (2011) Progress on DNA Barcoding of Fungi Reports - IMA Fungus 2:5
  3. Buée M, Reich M, Murat C, Morin E, Nilsson RH, et al. (2009)Pyrosequencing analyses of forest soils reveal an unexpectedly high fungal diversity. New Phytol 184: 449-456.
  4. O'Brien HE, Parrent JL, Jackson JA, Moncalvo JM, Vilgalys R (2005) Fungal community analysis by large-scale sequencing of environmental samples. Appl Environ Microbiol 71: 5544-5550.
  5. Gem J, Laursen GA, Timling I, McFarland JM, Booth MG, et al. (2009) Molecular phylogenetic biodiversity assessment of arctic and boreal ectomycorrhizalLactarius Pers. (Russulales; Basidiomycota) in Alaska, based on soil and sporocarp DNA. MolEcol 18:2213-2227.
  6. Taylor DL, Booth MG, McFarland JW, Herriott IC, Lennon NJ, et al. (2008) Increasing ecological inference from high throughput sequencing of fungi in the environment through a tagging approach. MolEcolResour 8: 742-752.
  7. Del-Prado R, Cubas P, Lumbsch HT, Divakar PK, Blanco O, et al. (2010) Genetic distances within and among species in monophyletic lineages of Parmeliaceae (Ascomycota) as a tool for taxon delimitation. MolPhylogenetEvol 56: 125-133.
  8. Geml J, Laursen GA, Taylor DL (2008) Molecular diversity assessment of arctic and boreal Agaricus taxa. Mycologia 100: 577-589.
  9. Porter TM, Golding GB (2011) Are similarity- or phylogeny-based methods more appropriate for classifying internal transcribed spacer (ITS) metagenomicamplicons? New Phytol 192: 775-782.
  10. Schoch CL, Sung GH, López-Giráldez F, Townsend JP, Miadlikowska J, et al. (2009) The Ascomycota tree of life: a phylum-wide phylogeny clarifies the origin and evolution of fundamental reproductive and ecological traits. SystBiol 58: 224-239.
  11. O'Donnell K, Sutton DA, Rinaldi MG, Sarver BA, Balajee SA, et al. (2010) Internet-accessible DNA sequence database for identifying fusaria from human and animal infections. J ClinMicrobiol 48: 3708-3718.
  12. Frisvad JC, Samson RA (2004) Polyphasic taxonomy of Penicillium subgenus Penicillium—a guide to identification of food and air-borne terverticillatepenicillia and their mycotoxins. Stud Mycol 49:1-173.
  13. Tanabe Y, Watanabe, Sugiyama (2002) Are Microsporidia really related to Fungi? A reappraisal based on additional gene sequences from basal fungi. Mycol Res 106: 1380-1391.
  14. Cheney SA, Lafranchi-Tristem NJ, Bourges D, Canning EU (2001) Relationships of microsporidian genera, with emphasis on the polysporous genera, revealed by sequences of the largest subunit of RNA polymerase II (RPB1). J EukaryotMicrobiol 111-117.
  15. Garnica S, Weiss M, Oertel B, Ammirati J, Oberwinkler F (2009) Phylogenetic relationships in Cortinarius, section Calochroi, inferred from nuclear DNA sequences. BMC EvolBiol 9: 1.
  16. Matheny PB, Liu YJ, Ammirati JF, Hall BD (2002) Using RPB1 sequences to improve phylogenetic inference among mushrooms (Inocybe, Agaricales). Am J Bot 89: 688-698.
  17. Tanabe Y, Saikawa M, Watanabe MM, Sugiyama J (2004) Molecular phylogeny of Zygomycota based on EF-1alpha and RPB1 sequences: limitations and utility of alternative markers to rDNA. MolPhylogenetEvol 30: 438-449.
  18. Longet D, Pawlowski J (2007) Higher-level phylogeny of Foraminifera inferred from the RNA polymerase II (RPB1) gene. Eur J Protistol 43: 171-177.
  19. McLaughlin DJ, Hibbett DS, Lutzoni F, Spatafora JW, Vilgalys R (2009) The search for the fungal tree of life. Trends Microbiol 17: 488-497.
  20. Schoch CL, Seifert KA, Huhndorf S, Robert V, Spouge JL, et al. (2012) Nuclear ribosomal internal transcribed spacer (ITS) region as a universal DNA barcode marker for Fungi. ProcNatlAcadSci U S A 109: 6241-6246.
Citation: Mahmoud, Zaher (2015) Why Nuclear Ribosomal Internal Transcribed Spacer (ITS) has been Selected as the DNA Barcode for Fungi?. Adv Genet Eng 4:119.

Copyright: © 2015 Mahmoud AGY, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Top