Convergence and conflict among telomere specialized transposons across 60 million years of Drosophilid evolution

preprint OA: closed
📄 Open PDF Full text JSON View at publisher

Abstract

The Drosophila telomere is one of the best-studied examples of active transposable elements (TEs) benefitting, rather than harming, a host genome. All Drosophila species lack telomerase and instead have telomeres composed of head-to-tail arrays of specialized retrotransposons. These TEs ostensibly act as mutualists by elongating chromosome ends, but evidence from species closely related to Drosophila melanogaster suggests that telomeric transposons may also antagonize their host genome. Importantly, the limited number of Drosophila species characterized thus far has precluded our ability to delineate idiosyncratic from universal evolutionary forces and genetic mechanisms that shape the history of these TEs. Here, we have surveyed long-read genome assemblies of over 100 species of Drosophila , identifying a total of 396 telomeric TE families. Our findings show that these telomere-specialized elements evolve rapidly and also undergo striking convergent evolution: the complete loss of telomeric TEs has occurred repeatedly across the genus while individual telomeric TE lineages have repeatedly lost one of their two protein-coding genes. These elements have also repeatedly undergone horizontal transfer between distantly related Drosophila lineages and have repeatedly captured host gene fragments that promote their selfish suppression of host TE-silencing systems. Furthermore, telomere specialization itself appears to have evolved convergently, as some non-telomeric families have gained the ability to target their insertions to telomeres. These results provide unprecedented resolution into the evolution of these unusual TEs and highlight several novel mechanisms by which they evolve in conflict both with each other and their host genome despite the essential telomere function they provide.
Full text 1,900 characters · extracted from oa-doi-fallback · click to expand
Abstract The Drosophila telomere is one of the best-studied examples of active transposable elements (TEs) benefitting, rather than harming, a host genome. All Drosophila species lack telomerase and instead have telomeres composed of head-to-tail arrays of specialized retrotransposons. These TEs ostensibly act as mutualists by elongating chromosome ends, but evidence from species closely related to Drosophila melanogaster suggests that telomeric transposons may also antagonize their host genome. Importantly, the limited number of Drosophila species characterized thus far has precluded our ability to delineate idiosyncratic from universal evolutionary forces and genetic mechanisms that shape the history of these TEs. Here, we have surveyed long-read genome assemblies of over 100 species of Drosophila, identifying a total of 396 telomeric TE families. Our findings show that these telomere-specialized elements evolve rapidly and also undergo striking convergent evolution: the complete loss of telomeric TEs has occurred repeatedly across the genus while individual telomeric TE lineages have repeatedly lost one of their two protein-coding genes. These elements have also repeatedly undergone horizontal transfer between distantly related Drosophila lineages and have repeatedly captured host gene fragments that promote their selfish suppression of host TE-silencing systems. Furthermore, telomere specialization itself appears to have evolved convergently, as some non-telomeric families have gained the ability to target their insertions to telomeres. These results provide unprecedented resolution into the evolution of these unusual TEs and highlight several novel mechanisms by which they evolve in conflict both with each other and their host genome despite the essential telomere function they provide. Competing Interest Statement The authors have declared no competing interest.

Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below. Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy (via DOI) is the canonical version.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: oa-doi-fallback

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. This is a recent paper (2025) — citers typically take a year or two to land, and the OpenAlex reference graph may still be filling in.

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-05-20T01:45:00.602351+00:00