Sea anemone genomes reveal ancestral metazoan chromosomal macrosynteny

Sea anemone genomes reveal ancestral metazoan chromosomal macrosynteny | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Biological Sciences - Article Sea anemone genomes reveal ancestral metazoan chromosomal macrosynteny Ulrich Technau, Sophia Robb, Grigory Genikhovich, Juan Montenegro, and 12 more This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-796229/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Draft genome sequences of non-bilaterian species have provided important insights into the evolution of the metazoan gene repertoire. However, there is little information about the evolution of gene clusters, genome architectures and karyotypes during animal evolution. Here we report chromosome-level genome assemblies of two related anthozoan cnidarians, the sea anemones, Nematostella vectensis and Scolanthus callimorphus . We find a robust set of 15 chromosomes with a clear one-to-one correspondence of the chromosomes between the two species. We show that, in contrast to Bilateria, Hox and NK clusters of investigated cnidarians are disintegrated, indicating that microsynteny conservation is largely lost. In line with that, we find no evidence for topologically associated domains, suggesting fundamental difference in long-range gene regulation compared to vertebrates. However, both sea anemone genomes show remarkable chromosomal conservation with other cnidarians, several bilaterians and the sponge Ephydatia muelleri , allowing us to reconstruct the putative cnidarian and metazoan chromosomes, consisting of 19 and 16 ancestral linkage groups, respectively. These data suggest that large parts of the ancestral metazoan genome have been retained in chromosomes of some extant lineages, yet, higher order gene regulation may have evolved only after the cnidarian-bilaterian split. Evolutionary Genetics Bioinformatics sea anemones chromosome-level genome assemblies Nematostella vectensis Scolanthus callimorphus Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Introduction Draft genomes comprising hundreds to thousands of scaffolds, while helpful to identify gene repertoires, were neither suitable to reconstruct the evolutionary history of chromosomes nor did they always allow researchers to investigate long-range cis-regulation of genes. Recent chromosome-level genome assemblies refueled the opportunity to compare the content and localization of homologous genes between distantly related species. This led to the reconstruction of ancestral linkage groups among Chordata 1,2 and Spiralia 3,4 . However, these analyses remained restricted to bilaterians and did not provide insights into the origin of metazoan chromosomes or their diversification. In this regard, representatives of Cnidaria, the sister clade to Bilateria, are crucial. Cnidaria constitute a large clade of basally branching Metazoa, dating back between 590 and 690 Mya 5–7 . Their robust phylogenetic position as sister to Bilateria makes them the key group to study the evolution of bilaterian features, such as axis organization, mesoderm formation and central nervous system development 8 . The genome of the edwardsiid sea anemone Nematostella vectensis became the first non-bilaterian animal genome to have a draft scaffold-level sequenced in 2007, and revealed uncanny conservation of gene content to vertebrates as well as first hints for macrosyntenic conservation 9 . By now, genomes of the representatives of all five cnidarian classes have become available 10–18 providing valuable insight into various aspects of the cnidarian gene complement and genome organization. However, these genomes originated from fairly distantly related species, and a cornerstone to genomic inquiry has long been the conservation signals of recently diverged taxa 19 . The “starlet sea anemone” Nematostella (Figure 1a), which has been developed into an important model organism, belongs to the family of Edwardsiidae within the Actiniaria. Yet, to date no genome sequence of another edwardsiid sea anemone has been reported. An interesting and closely related sea anemone of the edwardsiid family is the “worm sea anemone” Scolanthus callimorphus (Figure 1b), dwelling in European seawater 20,21 , which according to our molecular clock calculations has separated from Nematostella approximately 174 Mio years ago (EDF 1, see Materials and Methods for details). Main Text High Quality Chromosome-Level Assemblies of Two Edwardsiid Genomes Using short-read sequencing and a k- mer coverage model, we estimated the genome length of Nematostella at 244 Mb (EDF 2), which is substantially shorter than previously suggested at 450 Mb 9 . This discrepancy could be in part attributed to the previous use of four haplotypes in sequencing. The genome of the sea anemone Exaiptasia pallida is similar in length to Nematostella 22 , while the estimated 414 Mb of the Scolanthus genome is at present the largest sequenced actiniarian genome, mainly due to expansions of repetitive elements. This indicates that the genome lengths among Actiniaria may be more dynamic than suggested from earlier analyses (Figure 1c). Using PacBio long-read sequencing and high-throughput conformation capture (Hi-C), we then assembled chromosome-level of Nematostella and Scolanthus genomes, which far surpass the quality of the published Nematostella genome in terms of contiguity, correctness, mappability and completeness (see Supplementary Text, EDF 3-5 for details). In order to compare the genomic location of homologous genes between the edwardsiids, we utilized the previously sequenced Scolanthus transcriptome 23 and we determined 24,625 gene models (see Materials and Methods for details). For Nematostella , we sequenced several transcriptome libraries from various developmental stages, which were assembled earlier as NVE gene models 24 . To further improve the gene annotation, in particular with respect to isoforms and untranslated regions, we used a combination of IsoSeq and RNAseq data, which allowed us to identify 24,525 gene models and 36,280 transcripts. BUSCO analysis showed that the transcriptome contains 96.1% of expected metazoan conserved sequences, which represents an increase over the previous NVE gene models (90.6% complete BUSCOs) (EDF 6). Additional comparison to previously cloned complete CDS (EDT 7) showed that 261 of the 277 sequences (94.2%) were present. Of the missing 16 sequences, 15 could be confidently aligned to the reference genome and have been manually added to the annotation files. To facilitate the usage of the newly assembled genomes, we established a publicly accessible Genome Browsers. Both new genome assemblies and associated data are available for browsing, downloading, and BLAST at SIMRbase ( https://simrbase.stowers.org ). The Nematostella vectensis genome assembly, referred to as Nvec200, has an abundance of aligned track data, including the newly generated gene models and a large collection of published RNAseq and ChIP-seq analysis as well as 145 ultra-conserved non-coding elements (UCNEs) shared between Nematostella and Scolanthus (Supplementary Text; EDT 8). Chromosomal Organization of the NK and extended Hox gene clusters The chromosome-level assembly of the Nematostella genome allowed us to re-address the evolution of specific gene clusters. Prominent examples of clusters of homeodomain transcription factor coding genes ancestral for Bilateria include the SuperHox cluster, the ParaHox cluster, the NK/NK-like cluster as well as NK2 group genes located separately 25–27 . It has been hypothesized that all of them originated from a single gene cluster, which then disintegrated during evolution (for review see 27 ). Our analysis revealed that Nematostella possesses a separate ParaHox cluster of two genes, ( Gsx and Xlox / Cdx) on chromosome 10, and a SuperHox cluster on chromosome 2 containing Hox , Evx , Mnx , and Rough , as well as more distant Mox and Gbx 28 (Figures 3 and 4, EDT6). We identified an NK cluster on chromosome 5 containing NK1 , NK5 , Msx , NK4 , NK3 , NK7 , NK6 , and more distant Ladybird , a Tlx-like gene and, intriguingly, Hex, which is also linked to the NK cluster in the hemichordate Saccoglossus kowalevskii 29 and in the cephalochordate Branchiostoma floridae . Similar to Bilateria, the NK2 genes were clustered separately and found on chromosome 2 (Figures 3 and 4, EDT6). In contrast, in earlier branching sponges, neither ParaHox nor extended Hox cluster genes exist, and only the NK cluster is present with a single NK2/3/4 gene, two NK5/6/7 genes, an Msx ortholog, as well as possible Hex and Tlx orthologs 30 , (EDF 7). Taken together, this allows us to propose that the last common ancestor of Cnidaria and Bilateria possessed an NK-cluster on a chromosome different from the one carrying the SuperHox cluster, and a separate NK2 cluster, which might have been on the same chromosome as the SuperHox cluster (Figure 4). The hypothesized SuperHox-NK Megacluster 25 , if it ever existed, must have both formed and broken apart during the time after the separation of the sponge lineage, but before the origin of the cnidarian-bilaterian ancestor (Figure 4a, Supplementary Text). Topologically associating domains are not detected in either sea anemone genome In the past decade, high resolution chromosome conformation capture has increased interest in topologically associating domains (TADs), recurring chromosomal folding motifs evidenced by signals in Hi-C contact maps 31 . Flanking regions of TADs are positively correlated with CCCTC-binding factor (CTCF) binding sites. Interestingly, no CTCF ortholog has been detected among non-bilaterian animals 32,33 . Consistent with this, we did not detect evidence for TADs in our edwardsiid pseudo-chromosomes in the form of differential enrichment of contact density, exemplified in the contact map shown in EDF 8. By comparison, analyses of other datasets generated using the identical protocol at similar levels of resolution have identified clear signals of TADs 34 . We can not rule out that relatively short-range Hi-C fragments in our libraries might have left important possible long-range contacts undetected. We note, however, that the Nematostella genome is fairly gene-dense (10±4 genes per 100kb), leaving relatively little intergenic sequence. It is conceivable that most relevant cis-regulatory elements may be rather located in proximity to the regulated gene. This is supported by the observation that many transgenic lines with only few kilobases upstream promoter regions driving reporter gene expression faithfully mimick endogenous expression patterns. Edwardsiid genomes in the context of reconstructed metazoan ancestral linkage groups Next, we sought to determine the extent to which the Nematostella and Scolanthus pseudo-chromosomes exhibit conservation of gene content and order (micro- and macrosynteny). Indeed, each of the 15 pseudo-chromosomes of both species share the majority of genes with a single corresponding gene in the other species (Figure 5a). We found that 8117 of 8692 mutual best BLAST hits between Nematostella and Scolanthus were retained on their respective pseudo-chromosomes, implying a one-to-one homology between all 15 chromosomes. However, gene order was largely lost from the most recent common ancestor (MRCA), which we estimate to have diverged approximately 174 Mya (EDF 1). The lack of selection pressure in favor of microsynteny conservation is clearly illustrated by the comparison of the SuperHox clusters of Scolanthus and Nematostella . Although located on homologous chromosomes, the gene order, orientation, and the number of intervening genes differs drastically between these two species (Figure 4b). Most pseudo-chromosomes, according to their homologous pair, corresponded in length but are much larger in Scolanthus (Figure 3a-1). This is accounted for by a large fraction of unclassified, potentially lineage-specific repeat sequences (EDT 1, Supplementary text). The sequencing of the Hydra genome indicated that the lineage has undergone accelerated genomic evolution 12 . Yet, Hydrozoa have a 15-chromosome karyotype among several extant species 35 , similar to the situation in Nematostella and Scolanthus . This opens a possibility that large-scale chromosome dynamics did not play much role in the early branching animal clades. In order to test this, we performed several genome-wide chromosomal comparisons by proxy of gene content (Figure 5a, top, EDF9) and leveraged the resulting chromosomal links to postulate ancestral linkage groups (ALGs) using a graph-based approach (Figure 5b-d, Supplementary Text). We first compared the Nematostella chromosomes to those of other anthozoans, such as the sea anemone Exaiptasia pallida, the stony coral Acropora millepora and the soft coral Xenia sp . (EDF 9). While both Exaiptasia and Acropora are only assembled at the scaffold level, we observed that the gene content of the scaffolds suggest a similar karyotype to Nematostella (EDF 9b,c). A recent chromosome-level genome assembly of the octocorallian Xenia sp. also suggested a 15-chromosome karyotype 10 . However, despite the identical number of chromosomes, the comparison of the octocorallian Xenia showed surprisingly little homology to those of the hexacorallian Nematostella . We discovered many translocations and fusions of apparently varying ages with only 3 chromosomes demonstrating a one-to-one relationship (Figure 5a). Next, we compared Nematostella chromosomes to the chromosomes of the members of the anthozoan sister group Medusozoa, whose split from the anthozoans is estimated at more than 580 Mya by calibrated molecular clocks (EDF 1 119 ) . Comparison to the scaffold-level genomes of the hydrozoans Hydra magnipapillata and Clytia hemispherica (both are species with 15 chromosomes 13,35 ) also suggested numerous chromosomal rearrangements (EDF 9). Comparison to the genomic scaffolds of the scyphozoan jellyfish Aurelia aurita demonstrates a higher level of macrosynteny conservation than in hydrozoans, but the genome nevertheless looks significantly scrambled. This stands in stark contrast to the genome of the jellyfish Rhopilema esculentum. In Rhopilema, recent Hi-C analysis suggested the existence of 21 chromosomes, in line with the earlier analyses of chromosome spreads 11,36 . We observed that all Rhopilema and Nematostella chromosomes show a clear 1-to-1, 1-to-2 or, in a single case, a 1-to-3 correspondence (Figure 5a). We then compared the pseudo-chromosomes of Nematostella with that of a bilaterian, the cephalochordate Branchiostoma floridae . Cephalochordates are early branching chordates lacking the two rounds of whole-genome duplication and allotetraploidization suggested for vertebrates 1,37 , as represented by their single Hox cluster 25 (Figure 5a). Strikingly, the Branchiostoma pseudo-chromosomes exhibit retained extensive macrosynteny from the bilaterian-cnidarian MRCA. The large-scale macrosynteny retention detected in Branchiostoma becomes less obvious once we focus on more recently branching bilaterian clades. Vertebrates such as the early branching teleost fish Lepisosteus oculatus 38 and humans showed additional translocation events from the MRCA (Fig. 5a). Among protostomes, we observed that the lophotrochozoan Ram's horn worm Streplosbio benedicti 39 and the sea scallop Patinopecten yessoensis 3 , as well as the ecdysozoan millipede Trigoniulus corallinus 40 , retained many macrosyntenic links (Fig. 5a) . Conversely, the horseshoe crab Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda 41 retained linkage with limited specificity whereas no apparent retention of chromosomal linkage could be detected in the case of Drosophila melanogaster or Caenorhabditis elegans (EDF 10) . Rapid intrachromosomal gene shuffling is a well-known phenomenon among Drosophila species , however within the drosophilid clade, chromosomes are retained on well-established linkage groups 42 , suggesting that these rearrangements occurred before the divergence of the drosophilids. The high degree of macrosynteny conservation with Branchiostoma motivated us to compare Nematostella pseudo-chromosomes to those of the representative of an even older lineage, the Porifera (sponges), which branched off prior to the cnidarian-bilaterian split (EDF 1) and is considered by many researchers to be the sister group to all other animals 43,44 . Strikingly, the comparison with the recently assembled chromosomes of the sponge Ephydatia muelleri revealed many ancestral linkage groups shared between them (Figure 5a). Thus, the comparison of chromosome-level assemblies of Nematostella and Scolanthus with those of other non-bilaterian and bilaterian representatives has revealed a stunning degree of macrosynteny conservation and retention of ancestral linkage groups on most chromosomes in some species (e.g. Rhopilema, Ephydatia, Branchiostoma ), and varying degrees of gene shuffling, rearrangements, splits and fusions of the chromosomes in others (e.g. Drosophila, Caenorhabditis, humans). The observed patterns allowed us to reconstruct the set of predicted ancestral linkage groups for the MRCA of cnidarians, bilaterians and metazoans (Fig. 5b). For the cnidarian ancestor, we identified 19 cnidarian ALGs. These correspond well to the extant cnidarian chromosomes (EDF 9), however, while Rhopilema and edwardsiid chromosomes appear highly representative of the ancestral cnidarian karyotype, the soft coral Xenia chromosomes appear to have undergone many more chromosomal translocation events from the hypothesized 19 ALGs of the cnidarian MRCA (EDF 9). Our results also indicate that although both Hydrozoa and Edwardsiidae have a clear 15 chromosome karyotype, their chromosomes originate from distinct fusions of cnidarian ALGs. We then inferred 17 ALGs for the ancestor of Bilateria, as also previously posited 4 (Fig. 5b,c). For the metazoan ancestor, our reconstruction resulted in 16 metazoan ALGs, which were maintained in the MRCA of Cnidaria, Bilateria and the sponge Ephydatia (Fig. 5b,c). In order to visualize how the chromosomes of extant species have undergone major splits and fusions, we projected the reconstructed ALGs of the respective cnidarian, bilaterian and metazoan ancestor to pseudo-chromosomes of the extant species. We found that many ALGs seemingly correspond to the same chromosomes across multiple species and lineages (Fig. 5c; EDF 9-11). To determine the extent of this, we further explored the relationships between the Metazoa ALGs and the Cnidaria and Bilateria (Figure 5c). Remarkably, many ancestral chromosomes exhibited a 1-to-1 correspondence across all predicted ancestral lineages (Figure 5c) and carry through to the extant lineages (Figure 5d). Discussion The assembly of two high quality, chromosome-level edwardsiid genomes has illuminated several intriguing aspects about chromosomal evolution, the NK and extended Hox clusters, the conservation of non-coding elements and the status of topologically associated domains in the common ancestor to cnidarians and bilaterians. In addition, the highly improved Nematostella genome and gene annotations will prove to be an invaluable resource in future studies of both coding and non-coding regions, structural variants among populations and continued development of functional tools for this model organism. Nearly all members of the extended Hox cluster were distributed among distant, isolated microsyntenic blocks on pseudo-chromosome 2 of Nematostella (pseudo-chromosome 4 in Scolanthus ), with the single exception of HoxF/Anthox1 , located on pseudo-chromosome 5 (Figures 3,4; Supplementary Text). This indicates a lack of proximity constraint on the Hox genes in Cnidaria, contrasting with the situation in Bilateria. In addition, while a staggered spatiotemporal pattern of Hox expression along the secondary, directive axis of the Nematostella larva and polyp can be observed 45 , unlike Bilateria, there is no correlation between expression and cluster position 46 . Notably, HoxF/Anthox1 is not only located on a different chromosome but it is also the only Hox gene expressed in the (aboral) ectoderm, while all other Hox genes are expressed in the inner endomesodermal cell layer 47,48 . The dispersed NK and extended Hox clusters may be due to the diminished or, possibly, lacking higher-order chromosome organization at the level of microsynteny. In line with this, it was recently observed that the HoxD cluster boundaries in the mouse genome are marked by TAD boundaries 49 , and the cluster’s intra-TAD gene order is deemed to be under selective pressure 50 . The lack of a CTCF gene in the Nematostella genome led us to hypothesize that the cnidarians might lack TADs, as TAD presence has been attributed to the appearance of CTCF 50 . Moreover, CTCF is absent not only in cnidarians but also in earlier branching ctenophores and sponges, which provides a possibility that the existence of TADs might represent a bilaterian-specific feature. While we were unable to detect any noticeable structure resembling the current definitions of TADs, it remains an open question as to whether larger or smaller structures, beyond the resolution of our data, could yet be detected. To our knowledge, one study has suggested evidence for the higher-order chromosomal organization in a non-bilaterian, the sponge Ephydatia 43 . However, the contact maps resemble patterns we observe in our assemblies at the boundary of scaffolds or contigs, which can be the result of differential mappability from repetitive content or assembly issues. We therefore deliberately do not report any results from a TAD finder, since, after multiple rigorous rounds of manual assembly update, we can assert that the data we have generated do not qualitatively represent TAD boundaries per se, and most results would be likely false positives. While the precise definition of a TAD is still evolving 51,52 , both data sets lack many characters of TADs identified in CTCF-containing genomes: hierarchical compartments, mammalian-specific “corner peaks” indicating strong interactions, and in our case, loop peaks and inter-contig compartments. This suggests that the presence of CTCF is necessary for the formation of TADs, however, we still cannot exclude the possibility that performing the experiment with a more homogenous cell population, or sequencing at a higher resolution, would reveal a signal on a smaller scale. While microsynteny analyses reveal little conservation of the local gene order in the genomes of Nematostella and Scolanthus , macrosyntenic analysis of the edwardsiid chromosomes compared to available cnidarian genomes revealed a high level of conservation. We identified a stable set of 19 ALGs across all clades of sequenced cnidarian genomes. When compared to extant genomes, we can trace a small number of recombination events from the ALGs since common cnidarian ancestor split an estimated 580 Mya. This stands in stark contrast to the history of, for example, the 326 Mya old ancestral genome of Amniota, which is estimated to have 49 distinct units, while the karyotypes of the extant amniote taxa consist of multiple translocated segments and variable chromosomes 53 . However, by far more remarkable is the macrosynteny maintained between the edwardsiids, the early branching chordate Branchiostoma , and the sponge Ephydatia . Our analyses reveal clear one-to-one, one-to-few or few-to-one conservation of the chromosome-level linkages between cnidarians, sponges and early chordates, which suggests a striking retention of macrosyntenies throughout evolution of these animal lineages and allows us to deduce a set of 16 ALGs of the last common metazoan ancestor, which was maintained in the cnidarian-bilaterian ancestor and gave rise to the 19 ancestral cnidarian chromosomes and the 17 ancestral bilaterian chromosomes 4 . It is tempting to speculate that the emergence of the TADs in Bilateria may have restricted local rearrangements and at the same time released the constraints on maintaining the ancestral macrosyntenies conserved all the way back to the origin of multicellular animals. Declarations Acknowledgements Special thanks to Oleg Simakov for extensive discussions and suggestions. We thank Matthew Nicotra for providing us with the HMW DNA extraction protocol used for Scolanthus. We thank Robert Reischl for the photo of Scolanthus and Patrick R.H. Steinmetz and Hanna Kraus for the photo of Nematostella vectensis (Figure 1). Special thanks to Tatiana Lebedeva for the cartoon drawings of animals used in this study. We are grateful to the Stowers Institute Molecular Biology Core facility, particularly Amanda Lawlor, Michael Peterson and Anoja Perera. This work was supported by grants of the Austrian Science Fund FWF (P24858; P21108) to U.T., support from the Stowers Institute for Medical Research to M.G. and an NIH Ruth L. Kirschstein NRSA (F32 GM131522) to E.M.H.. We are also grateful for the support of the CNRS Marine Station in Roscoff and the Assemble grant 227799 to U.T. for collecting Scolanthus . Data Availability All raw data is available via the National Center for Biotechnology Information under the accession PRJNA667495. The assembled genomes can be downloaded, browsed and searched on publicly available browsers at https://simrbase.stowers.org/starletseaanemone and https://simrbase.stowers.org/wormanemone . Code used to generate the analyses is available from the authors upon request. Materials And Methods Animal Care and Source Nematostella vectensis animals were cultured as previously described 60 at the University of Vienna and the Stowers Institute. Adult male and female individuals were verified by induction in isolation. Scolanthus callimorphus animals were collected at the Île Callot, Carantec, France. After transport, they were kept in seawater at 20°C and fed freshly hatched Artemia salina weekly or biweekly. Sequencing Short Read DNA-Seq Genomic DNA samples were extracted from both adult male and female individual Nematostella adults using the DNeasy Blood and Tissue Kit (Qiagen). After purification, approximately 5 ug of genomic DNA was recovered from each sample. Following DNA extraction, samples were sheared and size selected for ~500 bp using a Blue Pippin Prep machine (Sage Science). Following size selection, sequencing libraries were created using a KAPA HTP Library Prep kit (Roche) and subjected to paired-end sequencing on an Illumina NextSeq 500. Scolanthus DNA samples for library preparation were aliquoted from high molecular weight extractions, described below. High Molecular Weight DNA Extraction and Library Prep Nematostella high molecular weight DNA was extracted at Dovetail Genomics. Samples were quantified using Qubit 2.0 Fluorometer (Life Technologies, Carlsbad, CA, USA). The PacBio SMRTbell library (~20kb) for PacBio Sequel was constructed using SMRTbell Template Prep Kit 1.0 (PacBio, Menlo Park, CA, USA) using the manufacturer recommended protocol. The pooled library was bound to polymerase using the Sequel Binding Kit 2.0 (PacBio) and loaded onto PacBio Sequel using the MagBead Kit V2 (PacBio). Sequencing was performed on the PacBio Sequel SMRT cell, using Instrument Control Software Version 5.0.0.6235, Primary analysis software Version 5.0.0.6236 and SMRT Link Version 5.0.0.6792. High molecular weight DNA from a single Scolanthus callimorphus adult animal was extracted using a modified Urea-based DNA extraction protocol 61,62 . A whole animal was flash frozen and ground with mortar and pestle. While frozen, drops of buffer UEB1 (7M Urea, 312.5 mM NaCl, 50 mM Tris-HCl pH 8, 20 mM EDTA pH 8.1% w:v N-Lauroylsarcosine sodium salt) were added and crushed with the tissue. Tissue was incubated in a final volume of 10 mL UEB1 at RT for 10 minutes. Three rounds of phenol-chloroform extraction were performed followed by DNA precipitation by addition of 0.7 volume isopropanol. The pellet was transferred to a fresh tube and washed twice in 70% EtOH and twice more in 100% EtOH, dried, and resuspended in TE buffer. A library for PacBio sequencing was then prepared from the high molecular weight sample using the SMRTbell® Express Template Prep Kit v1. The libraries were then sequenced on a PacBio Sequel machine over 3 SMRT Cells, yielding a total of 22.85 Gb over 1,474,285 subreads. An aliquot of the same sample was used to prepare a library using the NEBNext® Ultra™ II DNA Library Prep Kit for Illumina. This was then subjected to 50 cycles of single-end sequencing in one flow cell lane using an Illumina HiSeq 2500 system. Chicago libraries 2 Chicago libraries were prepared as described previously 63 . For each library, ~500 ng of HMW gDNA (mean fragment length = 100 kbp) was reconstituted into chromatin in vitro and fixed with formaldehyde. Fixed chromatin was digested with DpnII, the 5’ overhangs filled in with biotinylated nucleotides, and then free blunt ends were ligated. After ligation, crosslinks were reversed and the DNA purified from protein. Purified DNA was treated to remove biotin that was not internal to ligated fragments. The DNA was then sheared to ~350 bp mean fragment size and sequencing libraries were generated using NEBNext Ultra enzymes and Illumina-compatible adapters. Biotin-containing fragments were isolated using streptavidin beads before PCR enrichment of each library. The libraries were sequenced on an Illumina HiSeq 2500 (rapid run mode). The number and length of read pairs produced for each library was: 116 million, 2x101 bp for library 1; 35 million, 2x101 bp for library 2. Together, these Chicago library reads provided 125 x sequence coverage of the genome (1-100 kb pairs). Chromatin was extracted from a single Nematostella vectensis adult male and Scolanthus callimorphus adult (unknown sex) nuclei using the Phase Genomics Proximo Hi-C animal protocol. After proximity ligation and purification, 16 ng and 9 ng of DNA was recovered, respectively. For library preparation 1 µl of Library Reagent 1 was added 12 PCR cycles were performed. The final library was subjected to 150 total cycles of paired-end sequencing using an Illumina NextSeq 550 machine yielding a total of 13.5 gigabases. Hi-C sequencing, Scolanthus callimorphus PacBio library preparation and sequencing, Scolanthus Illumina DNA library preparation and sequencing and adult Nematostella vectensis RNA library preparation and sequencing was performed at the VBCF NGS Unit ( https://www.viennabiocenter.org/facilities ). Nematostella vectensis DNA size selection, library preparation, and sequencing were performed by the Molecular Biology Core at the Stowers Institute for Medical Research. Developmental and adult Nematostella RNA sequencing was performed as follows. Nematostella were spawned and eggs were de-jellied and fertilized as previously described 60 . Spawning and embryo development took place at 18°C. Eggs and embryos from different stages were collected (300 per sample) in duplicate as indicated: eggs (within 30min of spawn), blastula (7.5hpf), gastrula (23.5hpf) and planula (72hpf). Eggs and embryos were collected in eppendorf tubes and centrifuged to a pellet at 21,000 x g for 1 min. All seawater was quickly removed and pellets were resuspended in 150ml lysis buffer (RLT buffer supplied by the Qiagen RNeasy kit (#74104), supplemented with 𝛃-mercaptoethanol). The samples were homogenized with an electric pestle (1 min continuous drilling) and further supplemented with 200 ml of the above lysis buffer. Homogenized samples were then transferred into QIAshredder columns (Qiagen #79654) and centrifuged at 21,000 x g for 2 min. The flow throughs were supplemented with 1 ml 70 % ethanol and transferred to RNeasy columns and were processed according to the Qiagen RNeasy protocol. Quality and integrity of the RNA was evaluated using the Agilent RNA 600 pico kit (Agilent Technologies) and RNA samples were stored at -80°C until further processing. cDNA libraries were then constructed for polyA stranded sequencing. The resulting libraries were sequenced on Illumina HiSeq using paired end runs (RapidSeq- 2x150bp). Genome Assembly Size estimates for Nematostella vectensis and Scolanthus callimorphus were derived using Genomescope 64 , taking the result of the highest k (56 and 18) which converged under the model. Initial assemblies based on PacBio sequencing of Nematostella and Scolanthus were generated using canu version 1.8 65 with the parameters rawErrorRate=0.3 correctedErrorRate=0.045. Nematostella haplotigs were removed using Purge Haplotigs 66 . First, the source PacBio reads were aligned onto the canu assembly using minimap2 67 using the parameters -ax map-pb --secondary=no. Following this a coverage histogram was generated using the Purge Haplotigs script readhist. Per the documented Purge Haplotigs protocol, lower, mid and high coverage limits were found by manual inspection of the plotted histogram to be 12, 57 and 130 respectively. All initial contigs marked as suspect or artifactual were removed from further analysis with the Purge Haplotigs script purge. Due to lower sequencing coverage of Scolanthus , diploid per-scaffold coverage could not be deconvolved from haploid, and therefore Purge Haplotigs could not be used. Removal of redundant contigs was performed with Redundans version 0.14a 68 using the parameters --noscaffolding --nogapclosing --overlap 0.66. Only contigs marked in the reduced version of the genome were used in further analysis. The input de novo assembly, shotgun reads, and Chicago library reads were used as input data for HiRise, a software pipeline designed specifically for using proximity ligation data to scaffold genome assemblie 63 . Shotgun and Chicago library sequences were aligned to the draft input assembly using a modified SNAP read mapper (http://snap.cs.berkeley.edu). The separations of Chicago read pairs mapped within draft scaffolds were analyzed by HiRise to produce a likelihood model for genomic distance between read pairs, and the model was used to identify and break putative misjoins, to score prospective joins, and make joins above a threshold. After scaffolding, shotgun sequences were used to close gaps between contigs. Repetitive DNA and Hi-C scaffolding Repetitive DNA was found using two strategies. First, known repeats found in repbase 69 were searched in the assemblies using RepeatMasker 70 using the parameters -s -align -e ncbi in addition to -species nematostella for Nematostella and -species edwardsiidae for Scolanthus . Second, novel repeat sequences were found using RepeatModeler version 2.0 71 . After generating the repeat library, genomes’ repeat regions were detected with the corresponding library using the same parameters in RepeatMasker. Hi-C sequences were aligned to the reduced and repbase masked genomes of Nematostella and Scolanthus using bwa mem 72,73 using the parameters -5SP. For Nematostella, an additional candidate assembly was generated by mapping Hi-C sequences to the Chicago library scaffolded sequences using repbase masking (dovetail_standardmask) in addition to the contig-based scaffolding (contig_standardmask). Duplicate reads were marked with the samblaster utility 74 , and duplicate, secondary and supplementary mappings were removed with samtools. These mappings were used to generate initial chromosomal assemblies using Lachesis 75 , specifying the restriction site GATC. Assemblies were manually reviewed using Juicebox Assembly Tools version 1.11.08 76 . Candidate assemblies were compared using the nucmer aligner with default parameters and visualized using mummerplot 77 . Assemblies were converted over to Juicebox format using juicebox_scripts ( https://github.com/phasegenomics/juicebox_scripts ). In the case of Scolanthus , duplicate regions were clipped, and the resulting contigs were subjected to another round of alignment, assembly and review. Nematostella scaffold correctness was assessed using REAPR 78 . Nematostella assembly nemVec1 was downloaded from the JGI website 9 . Sequences from the adult male and adult female (see Sequencing) were aligned to nemVec1 and the Nematostella genome after scaffolding with Chicago libraries using SMALT as well as the REAPR tool perfectmap using an expected insert size of 400, as determined from fragment analysis. Error-free bases and contiguity after breaking the genome were extracted from the results. Genome and gene model set assembly and completeness was assessed using BUSCO version 3.0.2 79 , using the gene set metazoa_odb9 as the standard. Gene Models Nematostella, Scolanthus and M. senile paired end sequences obtained from a previous studies 23,24 and data available on BioProject PRJNA430035 were used to generate de novo assembled transcripts. Trinity version 5.0.2 80 was run on each library using the flags --min_contig_length 200 --min_kmer_cov 2. For those which had a strand-specific library preparation, the flag --SS_lib_type RF was applied. To reduce redundancy, cd-hit version 4.6.8 81,82 was applied with the flags -M 0 -c 1. Transdecoder version 5.0.6 83 was used to detect open reading frames in the resulting reduced set of transcripts. Transcript abundance was quantified using salmon version 1.2.1 84 using the flags --seqBias --useVBOpt --discardOrphansQuasi --softclip. For PacBio Iso-seq, 12 Nematostella RNA samples were collected over the course of multiple developmental stages, adult tissues and regeneration time points. For developmental stages, zygotes spawned by a single batch of wildtype colony were kept at 22°C, and collected at 0 hpf, 24 hpf, 48 hpf, 72 hpf and 7 dpf. Adult tissues were collected from sex-sorted, sexually mature wildtype individuals kept at 22°C. The male and female mesenteries were harvested separately by surgically opening the body column and carefully peeling off the attached body column tissues. Adult oral discs were collected by surgical removal of tentacles as well as the attached pharyngeal regions. Regeneration was induced by amputating the oral part of a sexually mature individual at the mid-pharyngeal level. Regenerating tissues close to the wound were collected at 4 hpa and 12 hpa, respectively. All the samples were deep frozen and lysed using TRIzolTM reagent (Invitrogen). Phenol-chloroform extraction was performed to remove undissolved mesoglea from adult tissues. DirectzolTM RNA Miniprep Plus Kit (Zymo) was then used to purify total RNA from the aqueous phase. For each sample, 2 μg of total RNA with RIN > 7 was submitted to UC Berkeley for Iso-seq library construction. RNA Libraries were sequenced at UC Berkeley using PacBio Sequel-II system. Raw subreads bams were processed and demultiplexed using PacBio’s isoseq v3.2 conda pipeline. The steps include consensus generation, primer demultiplexing, polyA refinement and data clustering using default parameters. This resulted in the generation of 406,317 high quality HIFI reads and used to build Nvec200 transcriptome. HIFI reads were mapped to the Nematostella genome using minimap2 67 using parameters (-ax splice -uf --secondary=no) to obtain the primary best alignments. Reads were then grouped and collapsed down to potential transcripts using PacBio’s cDNA_Cupcake toolkit and TAMA 85 . Based on PacBio’s guideline, transcripts with degraded 5’ reads and have less than 10 FL counts were removed. Chimeric transcripts were then analyzed to find potential fusion genes. For reads that didn’t map to the genome, de novo transcriptome assembly was performed using graph-based tool Cogent with kmer size equals 30. . Cupcake and TAMA results were merged into non-redundant gene models using stringtie v2 86 . Deep RNA-seq reads from 4 developmental stages: egg, gastrula, pos-gastrula and planula were aligned to the genome using STAR v 2.7.3a 87 . Read alignments outside of the isoseq gene models were extracted with bedtools v2.29.2 [96] and used for reference-guided transcriptome assembly using Stringtie2. Final gene models were obtained by merging Isoseq models and RNAseq models and manually corrected using previously cloned full length CDS from Nematostella vectensis in NCBI (EDT 7). Finally, transdecoder v5.5.0 was used to produce CDS annotation using a minimum protein length of 50 amino acids and prioritizing ORFs with significant similarity to any family in the PFAM database 89 . Alignment of the protein candidates to the PFAM database was done using Hmmer v3.1b2 90 . RNAseq libraries from the N. vectensis developmental time series were downloaded and aligned to the new genome using STAR v2.7.3a 87 with standard parameters. Mapping and assignment efficiency was measured using featureCounts from the subread package 91 with the “-p” flag for paired-end libraries. Evidence for Scolanthus gene models were taken from RNA-sequencing and repeats. Scolanthus RNA-seq reads (see Sequencing) were mapped to the Scolanthus contigs using STAR version 2.7.3a 87 . These mappings were used as evidence for intron junctions to generate putative gene models and estimating hidden Markov model parameters using BRAKER2 92,93 . Gene models were then refined using Augustus version 3.3.3 94 using extrinsic evidence from STAR splice junctions and the location of repeats from RepBase (see Genome Assembly) as counter-evidence for transcription. These models were filtered with the following criteria: 1) genes completely covered by RepeatModeler repeats (see Genome Assembly) were removed 2) predicted gene models were required to be either supported by external RNA-seq evidence as reported by Augustus or have a predicted ortholog as reported by Eggnog-mapper 95 . This resulted in a set of 24,625 gene models. Transcription factor identity was inferred by aligning the predicted protein sequences to Pfam A domains version 32.0 96 using hmmer version 3.3 97 . Transcription factor families were based on domains curated in a previous work 98 . Extended Hox cluster, NK cluster and ParaHox genes were found with BLAT 99 matches of published models 28,47,100–105 to the nv1 genome, taking the best hits. If an NVE gene model 24 corresponded to the matched genomic region, its location in the nv2 genome was then determined for macrosynteny analysis. In cases where no published gene was known, reciprocal BLAST hits between the bilaterian and cnidarian counterpart were taken as evidence for orthology. Divergence Estimates Single copy orthologs were detected by collecting common complete and duplicated BUSCO genes present in the Scolanthus and Nematostella genomes. Where duplicated BUSCOs were present, the transcript with the highest score was taken. This resulted in a total of 541 orthologs. BUSCOs found in genomes obtained from previous studies 1,11–13,17,18,22,38,43,106–109 were used to generate multiple alignments. Genes were aligned with mafft version 7.427 using the E-INS-i model and a maximum 1000 refinement iterations 35 . Alignments were trimmed using trimAl version 1.4.rev15 using the “gappyout” criteria 35 . A maximum likelihood tree was inferred using iqtree version 2.0.6, using the model finder partitioned on each gene, constrained to nuclear protein models 110 . Divergence estimates were determined using r8s version 1.8.1 using the Langley-Fitch likelihood method 111 . Age ranges were estimated by fixing the split between Bilateria and Cnidaria at 595.7 and 688.3 Mya 112 . Single copy orthologs were detected by collecting common complete BUSCO genes present in the A. millepora , A. digitifera , E. pallida , M. senile , Scolanthus and Nematostella genomes. This resulted in a total of 229 orthologs. Ultraconserved Elements In order to determine noncoding elements conserved between Scolanthus and Nematostella , genomes repeat-masked from both de novo and repbase repeats were blasted using NCBI+ version 2.10.0 113 , using the flags -evalue 1E-10 -max_hsps 100000000 -max_target_seqs 100000000 -task megablast -perc_identity 0 -template_length 16 -penalty -2 -word_size 11 -template_type coding_and_optimal. Additionally, the -dbsize parameter was set to the estimated genome size. Candidate hits were then filtered using criteria loosely based on previous work 114 : for each high-scoring pair, a sliding window method was used to determine subsections of the alignment with at least 95 % identity, and extending these windows as long as the identity remains at this level. Nematostella elements mapping to more than one locus in the Scolanthus genome were reduced to the longest locus pair in both genomes. Elements mostly mapping to coding sequence were removed, and the remaining elements were classified as intron or non-coding, depending on location. Recurring UCE sequences that were not identified by RepeatModeler or RepeatMasker were detected with blastclust version 2.2.26 requiring the length of hit to cover at least 90 % of either sequence for linkage. Macrosynteny Analysis Branchiostoma floridae gene models and sequences were retrieved from the recently published study 1 . Gene orthology between Scolanthus, Nematostella and Branchiostoma were determined pairwise using reciprocal best matches. All against all comparisons were performed with NCBI+ blastp version 2.10.0 113 using an e-value threshold of 1e-5. Reciprocal best matches were determined using match bit scores. Genomes were downloaded from previous studies 3,10,12,13,17,22,38–41,43,55,106,108,109,115–117 . Ancestral genome reconstruction was carried out using a graph based approach. In brief, genes were summarized into multi-species orthologous groups, and these comprised the nodes, and orthology groups occurring on the same chromosome or scaffold of two different species were linked together. A consensus approach to community detection based on the Leiden algorithm 118 was used to determine ancestral linkage groups from this graph. For details, see the Supplementary Text. References 1. Simakov, O. et al. Deeply conserved synteny resolves early events in vertebrate evolution. Nature Ecology & Evolution 4, 820–830 (2020). 2. Putnam, N. H. et al. The amphioxus genome and the evolution of the chordate karyotype. Nature 453, 1064–1071 (2008). 3. Wang, S. et al. Scallop genome provides insights into evolution of bilaterian karyotype and development. Nature Ecology & Evolution 1, 1–12 (2017). 4. Simakov, O. et al. Insights into bilaterian evolution from three spiralian genomes. Nature 493, 526–531 (2013). 5. Cartwright, P. et al. Exceptionally Preserved Jellyfishes from the Middle Cambrian. PLOS ONE 2, e1121 (2007). 6. Technau, U., Genikhovich, G. & Kraus, J. E. M. Cnidaria. in Evolutionary Developmental Biology of Invertebrates 1 (ed. Wanninger, A.) 115–163 (Springer Vienna, 2015). doi:10.1007/978-3-7091-1862-7_6. 7. Zapata, F. et al. Phylogenomic Analyses Support Traditional Relationships within Cnidaria. PLOS ONE 10, e0139068 (2015). 8. Technau, U. & Steele, R. E. Evolutionary crossroads in developmental biology: Cnidaria. Development 138, 1447–1458 (2011). 9. Putnam, N. H. et al. Sea Anemone Genome Reveals Ancestral Eumetazoan Gene Repertoire and Genomic Organization. Science 317, 86–94 (2007). 10. Hu, M., Zheng, X., Fan, C.-M. & Zheng, Y. Lineage dynamics of the endosymbiotic cell type in the soft coral Xenia. Nature 582, 534–538 (2020). 11. Nong, W. et al. Jellyfish genomes reveal distinct homeobox gene clusters and conservation of small RNA processing. Nature Communications 11, 3051 (2020). 12. Chapman, J. A. et al. The dynamic genome of Hydra. Nature 464, 592–596 (2010). 13. Leclère, L. et al. The genome of the jellyfish Clytia hemisphaerica and the evolution of the cnidarian life-cycle. Nat Ecol Evol 3, 801–810 (2019). 14. Khalturin, K. et al. Medusozoan genomes inform the evolution of the jellyfish body plan. Nature Ecology & Evolution 3, 811–822 (2019). 15. Ohdera, A. et al. Box, stalked, and upside-down? Draft genomes from diverse jellyfish (Cnidaria, Acraspeda) lineages: Alatina alata (Cubozoa), Calvadosia cruxmelitensis (Staurozoa), and Cassiopea xamachana (Scyphozoa). Gigascience 8, (2019). 16. Kim, H.-M. et al. The genome of the giant Nomura’s jellyfish sheds light on the early evolution of active predation. BMC Biology 17, 28 (2019). 17. Gold, D. A. et al. The genome of the jellyfish Aurelia and the evolution of animal complexity. Nature Ecology & Evolution 3, 96 (2019). 18. Shinzato, C. et al. Using the Acropora digitifera genome to understand coral responses to environmental change. Nature 476, 320–323 (2011). 19. Wilson, T. J., Lazner, F., Kola, I. & Hertzog, P. J. The Mouse and the Genomic Era. in Comparative Genomics (ed. Clark, M. S.) 97–121 (Springer US, 2000). doi:10.1007/978-1-4615-4657-3_5. 20. Gosse, P. Scolanthus callimorphus. in World List of Actiniaria, accessed through : World Register of Marine Species. (2020). 21. Wilson, E. Scolanthus callimorphus Worm anemone. in Marine Life Information Network: Biology and Sensitivity Key Information Reviews, [on-line] (2005). 22. Baumgarten, S. et al. The genome of Aiptasia, a sea anemone model for coral symbiosis. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 112, 11893–11898 (2015). 23. Praher, D. et al. Conservation and turnover of miRNAs and their highly complementary targets in early branching animals. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 288, 20203169 (2021). 24. Fredman, D., Schwaiger, M., Rentzsch, F. & Technau, U. Nematostella vectensis transcriptome and gene models v2.0. (2013) doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.807696.v1. 25. Pollard, S. L. & Holland, P. W. H. Evidence for 14 homeobox gene clusters in human genome ancestry. Current Biology 10, 1059–1062 (2000). 26. Butts, T., Holland, P. W. H. & Ferrier, D. E. K. The Urbilaterian Super-Hox cluster. Trends in Genetics 24, 259–262 (2008). 27. Ferrier, D. E. K. Evolution of Homeobox Gene Clusters in Animals: The Giga-Cluster and Primary vs. Secondary Clustering. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution 4, (2016). 28. Chourrout, D. et al. Minimal ProtoHox cluster inferred from bilaterian and cnidarian Hox complements. Nature 442, 684–687 (2006). 29. Simakov, O. et al. Hemichordate genomes and deuterostome origins. Nature 527, 459–465 (2015). 30. Larroux, C. et al. The NK Homeobox Gene Cluster Predates the Origin of Hox Genes. Current Biology 17, 706–710 (2007). 31. Friedman, N. & Rando, O. J. Epigenomics and the structure of the living genome. Genome Res 25, 1482–1490 (2015). 32. Heger, P., Marin, B., Bartkuhn, M., Schierenberg, E. & Wiehe, T. The chromatin insulator CTCF and the emergence of metazoan diversity. PNAS 109, 17507–17512 (2012). 33. Schwaiger, M. et al. Evolutionary conservation of the eumetazoan gene regulatory landscape. Genome Research 24, 639–650 (2014). 34. Sieber, K. B. et al. Integrated Functional Genomic Analysis Enables Annotation of Kidney Genome-Wide Association Study Loci. JASN 30, 421–441 (2019). 35. Zacharias, H., Anokhin, B., Khalturin, K. & Bosch, T. C. G. Genome sizes and chromosomes in the basal metazoan Hydra. Zoology 107, 219–227 (2004). 36. Li, Y. et al. Chromosome-level reference genome of the jellyfish Rhopilema esculentum. Gigascience 9, (2020). 37. Dehal, P. & Boore, J. L. Two Rounds of Whole Genome Duplication in the Ancestral Vertebrate. PLOS Biology 3, e314 (2005). 38. Braasch, I. et al. The spotted gar genome illuminates vertebrate evolution and facilitates human-teleost comparisons. Nature Genetics 48, 427–437 (2016). 39. Zakas, C., Harry, N. D., Scholl, E. H. & Rockman, M. V. The genome of the poecilogonous annelid Streblospio benedicti. bioRxiv 2021.04.15.440069 (2021) doi:10.1101/2021.04.15.440069. 40. Qu, Z. et al. Millipede genomes reveal unique adaptations during myriapod evolution. PLOS Biology 18, e3000636 (2020). 41. Shingate, P. et al. Chromosome-level assembly of the horseshoe crab genome provides insights into its genome evolution. Nature Communications 11, 2322 (2020). 42. Ranz, J. M. et al. Principles of Genome Evolution in the Drosophila melanogaster Species Group. PLOS Biology 5, e152 (2007). 43. Kenny, N. J. et al. Tracing animal genomic evolution with the chromosomal-level assembly of the freshwater sponge Ephydatia muelleri. Nature Communications 11, 3676 (2020). 44. Kapli, P. & Telford, M. J. Topology-dependent asymmetry in systematic errors affects phylogenetic placement of Ctenophora and Xenacoelomorpha. Science Advances 6, eabc5162 (2020). 45. He, S. et al. An axial Hox code controls tissue segmentation and body patterning in Nematostella vectensis. Science 361, 1377–1380 (2018). 46. McGinnis, W. & Krumlauf, R. Homeobox genes and axial patterning. Cell 68, 283–302 (1992). 47. Ryan, J. F. et al. Pre-Bilaterian Origins of the Hox Cluster and the Hox Code: Evidence from the Sea Anemone, Nematostella vectensis. PLoS ONE 2, e153 (2007). 48. Finnerty, J. R., Pang, K., Burton, P., Paulson, D. & Martindale, M. Q. Origins of Bilateral Symmetry: Hox and Dpp Expression in a Sea Anemone. Science 304, 1335–1337 (2004). 49. Rodríguez-Carballo, E. et al. The HoxD cluster is a dynamic and resilient TAD boundary controlling the segregation of antagonistic regulatory landscapes. Genes Dev 31, 2264–2281 (2017). 50. Lazar, N. H. et al. Epigenetic maintenance of topological domains in the highly rearranged gibbon genome. Genome Res. 28, 983–997 (2018). 51. Rowley, M. J. & Corces, V. G. Organizational principles of 3D genome architecture. Nature Reviews Genetics 19, 789–800 (2018). 52. Szabo, Q., Bantignies, F. & Cavalli, G. Principles of genome folding into topologically associating domains. Science Advances 5, eaaw1668 (2019). 53. Sacerdot, C., Louis, A., Bon, C., Berthelot, C. & Roest Crollius, H. Chromosome evolution at the origin of the ancestral vertebrate genome. Genome Biology 19, 166 (2018). 54. Voolstra, C. R. et al. Comparative analysis of the genomes of Stylophora pistillata and Acropora digitifera provides evidence for extensive differences between species of corals. Sci Rep 7, 1–14 (2017). 55. Moya, A. et al. Whole transcriptome analysis of the coral Acropora millepora reveals complex responses to CO₂-driven acidification during the initiation of calcification. Mol. Ecol. 21, 2440–2454 (2012). 56. Cunning, R., Bay, R. A., Gillette, P., Baker, A. C. & Traylor-Knowles, N. Comparative analysis of the Pocillopora damicornis genome highlights role of immune system in coral evolution. Scientific Reports 8, 16134 (2018). 57. Jiang, J. B. et al. A hybrid de novo assembly of the sea pansy (Renilla muelleri) genome. Gigascience 8, (2019). 58. Jeon, Y. et al. The Draft Genome of an Octocoral, Dendronephthya gigantea. Genome Biol Evol 11, 949–953 (2019). 59. Marlétaz, F. et al. Amphioxus functional genomics and the origins of vertebrate gene regulation. Nature 564, 64–70 (2018). 60. Fritzenwanker, J. H. & Technau, U. Induction of gametogenesis in the basal cnidarian Nematostella vectensis (Anthozoa). Development Genes and Evolution 212, 99–103 (2002). 61. Chen, J. & Dellaporta, S. Urea-based Plant DNA Miniprep. in The Maize Handbook (eds. Freeling, M. & Walbot, V.) 526–527 (Springer, 1994). doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-2694-9_85. 62. Sanders, S. M. et al. CRISPR/Cas9-mediated gene knockin in the hydroid Hydractinia symbiolongicarpus. BMC Genomics 19, 649 (2018). 63. Putnam, N. H. et al. Chromosome-scale shotgun assembly using an in vitro method for long-range linkage. Genome Res. 26, 342–350 (2016). 64. Vurture, G. W. et al. GenomeScope: fast reference-free genome profiling from short reads. Bioinformatics 33, 2202–2204 (2017). 65. Koren, S. et al. Canu: scalable and accurate long-read assembly via adaptive k -mer weighting and repeat separation. Genome Research 27, 722–736 (2017). 66. Roach, M. J., Schmidt, S. A. & Borneman, A. R. Purge Haplotigs: allelic contig reassignment for third-gen diploid genome assemblies. BMC Bioinformatics 19, 460 (2018). 67. Li, H. Minimap2: pairwise alignment for nucleotide sequences. Bioinformatics 34, 3094–3100 (2018). 68. Pryszcz, L. P. & Gabaldón, T. Redundans: an assembly pipeline for highly heterozygous genomes. Nucleic Acids Res 44, e113–e113 (2016). 69. Bao, W., Kojima, K. K. & Kohany, O. Repbase Update, a database of repetitive elements in eukaryotic genomes. Mobile DNA 6, 11 (2015). 70. Smit, A., Hubley, R. & Green, P. RepeatMasker Open-4.0. (2013). 71. Flynn, J. M. et al. RepeatModeler2 for automated genomic discovery of transposable element families. PNAS 117, 9451–9457 (2020). 72. Li, H. Aligning sequence reads, clone sequences and assembly contigs with BWA-MEM. arXiv:1303.3997 [q-bio] (2013). 73. Li, H. & Durbin, R. Fast and accurate short read alignment with Burrows–Wheeler transform. Bioinformatics 25, 1754–1760 (2009). 74. Faust, G. G. & Hall, I. M. SAMBLASTER: fast duplicate marking and structural variant read extraction. Bioinformatics 30, 2503–2505 (2014). 75. Burton, J. N. et al. Chromosome-scale scaffolding of de novo genome assemblies based on chromatin interactions. Nature Biotechnology 31, 1119–1125 (2013). 76. Durand, N. C. et al. Juicebox Provides a Visualization System for Hi-C Contact Maps with Unlimited Zoom. Cell Systems 3, 99–101 (2016). 77. Kurtz, S. et al. Versatile and open software for comparing large genomes. Genome Biology 9 (2004). 78. Hunt, M. et al. REAPR: a universal tool for genome assembly evaluation. Genome Biology 14, R47 (2013). 79. Seppey, M., Manni, M. & Zdobnov, E. M. BUSCO: Assessing Genome Assembly and Annotation Completeness. in Gene Prediction: Methods and Protocols (ed. Kollmar, M.) 227–245 (Springer, 2019). doi:10.1007/978-1-4939-9173-0_14. 80. Grabherr, M. G. et al. Full-length transcriptome assembly from RNA-Seq data without a reference genome. Nature Biotechnology 29, 644–652 (2011). 81. Fu, L., Niu, B., Zhu, Z., Wu, S. & Li, W. CD-HIT: accelerated for clustering the next-generation sequencing data. Bioinformatics 28, 3150–3152 (2012). 82. Li, W. & Godzik, A. Cd-hit: a fast program for clustering and comparing large sets of protein or nucleotide sequences. Bioinformatics 22, 1658–1659 (2006). 83. Haas, B. J. et al. De novo transcript sequence reconstruction from RNA-Seq: reference generation and analysis with Trinity. Nat Protoc 8, (2013). 84. Srivastava, A. et al. Alignment and mapping methodology influence transcript abundance estimation. bioRxiv 657874 (2019) doi:10.1101/657874. 85. Kuo, R. I. et al. Illuminating the dark side of the human transcriptome with long read transcript sequencing. BMC Genomics 21, 751 (2020). 86. Kovaka, S. et al. Transcriptome assembly from long-read RNA-seq alignments with StringTie2. Genome Biology 20, 278 (2019). 87. Dobin, A. et al. STAR: ultrafast universal RNA-seq aligner. Bioinformatics 29, 15–21 (2013). 88. Quinlan, A. R. & Hall, I. M. BEDTools: a flexible suite of utilities for comparing genomic features. Bioinformatics 26, 841–842 (2010). 89. Mistry, J. et al. Pfam: The protein families database in 2021. Nucleic Acids Research 49, D412–D419 (2021). 90. Finn, R. D., Clements, J. & Eddy, S. R. HMMER web server: interactive sequence similarity searching. Nucleic Acids Res 39, W29–W37 (2011). 91. Liao, Y., Smyth, G. K. & Shi, W. featureCounts: an efficient general purpose program for assigning sequence reads to genomic features. Bioinformatics 30, 923–930 (2014). 92. Hoff, K. J., Lange, S., Lomsadze, A., Borodovsky, M. & Stanke, M. BRAKER1: Unsupervised RNA-Seq-Based Genome Annotation with GeneMark-ET and AUGUSTUS. Bioinformatics 32, 767–769 (2016). 93. Hoff, K. J., Lomsadze, A., Stanke, M. & Borodovsky, M. BRAKER2: Incorporating Protein Homology Information into Gene Prediction with GeneMark-EP and AUGUSTUS. 1 (2018). 94. Stanke, M., Schöffmann, O., Morgenstern, B. & Waack, S. Gene prediction in eukaryotes with a generalized hidden Markov model that uses hints from external sources. BMC Bioinformatics 7, 62 (2006). 95. Huerta-Cepas, J. et al. Fast Genome-Wide Functional Annotation through Orthology Assignment by eggNOG-Mapper. Mol Biol Evol 34, 2115–2122 (2017). 96. El-Gebali, S. et al. The Pfam protein families database in 2019. Nucleic Acids Res 47, D427–D432 (2019). 97. Eddy, S. R. Accelerated Profile HMM Searches. PLOS Computational Biology 7, e1002195 (2011). 98. de Mendoza, A. et al. Transcription factor evolution in eukaryotes and the assembly of the regulatory toolkit in multicellular lineages. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 110, E4858–E4866 (2013). 99. Kent, W. J. BLAT—The BLAST-Like Alignment Tool. Genome Res. 12, 656–664 (2002). 100. Matus, D. Q., Pang, K., Daly, M. & Martindale, M. Q. Expression of Pax gene family members in the anthozoan cnidarian, Nematostella vectensis: Pax gene expression in Nematostella vectensis. Evolution & Development 9, 25–38 (2007). 101. Ryan, J. F. et al. The cnidarian-bilaterian ancestor possessed at least 56 homeoboxes: evidence from the starlet sea anemone, Nematostella vectensis. Genome Biology 7, R64 (2006). 102. Mazza, M. E., Pang, K., Martindale, M. Q. & Finnerty, J. R. Genomic organization, gene structure, and developmental expression of three Clustered otx genes in the sea anemone Nematostella vectensis. Journal of Experimental Zoology Part B: Molecular and Developmental Evolution 308B, 494–506 (2007). 103. Matus, D. Q., Thomsen, G. H. & Martindale, M. Q. Dorso/Ventral Genes Are Asymmetrically Expressed and Involved in Germ-Layer Demarcation during Cnidarian Gastrulation. Current Biology 16, 499–505 (2006). 104. Hudry, B. et al. Molecular insights into the origin of the Hox-TALE patterning system. eLife 3, e01939 (2014). 105. Mazza, M. E., Pang, K., Reitzel, A. M., Martindale, M. Q. & Finnerty, J. R. A conserved cluster of three PRD-class homeobox genes (homeobrain, rx and orthopedia) in the Cnidaria and Protostomia. EvoDevo 1, 3 (2010). 106. Ying, H. et al. The Whole-Genome Sequence of the Coral Acropora millepora. Genome Biol Evol 11, 1374–1379 (2019). 107. Consortium*, T. C. elegans S. Genome Sequence of the Nematode C. elegans: A Platform for Investigating Biology. Science 282, 2012–2018 (1998). 108. Hoskins, R. A. et al. The Release 6 reference sequence of the Drosophila melanogaster genome. Genome Res. 25, 445–458 (2015). 109. Hydra 2.0 Web Portal. https://research.nhgri.nih.gov/hydra. 110. Minh, B. Q. et al. IQ-TREE 2: New Models and Efficient Methods for Phylogenetic Inference in the Genomic Era. Mol Biol Evol 37, 1530–1534 (2020). 111. Sanderson, M. J. r8s: inferring absolute rates of molecular evolution and divergence times in the absence of a molecular clock. Bioinformatics 19, 301–302 (2003). 112. dos Reis, M. et al. Uncertainty in the Timing of Origin of Animals and the Limits of Precision in Molecular Timescales. Current Biology 25, 2939–2950 (2015). 113. Camacho, C. et al. BLAST+: architecture and applications. BMC Bioinformatics 10, 421 (2009). 114. Dimitrieva, S. & Bucher, P. UCNEbase—a database of ultraconserved non-coding elements and genomic regulatory blocks. Nucleic Acids Res 41, D101–D109 (2013). 115. Harris, T. W. et al. WormBase: a modern Model Organism Information Resource. Nucleic Acids Res 48, D762–D767 (2020). 116. Srivastava, M. et al. The Amphimedon queenslandica genome and the evolution of animal complexity. Nature 466, 720–726 (2010). 117. Srivastava, M. et al. The Trichoplax genome and the nature of placozoans. Nature 454, 955–960 (2008). 118. Traag, V. A., Waltman, L. & Eck, N. J. van. From Louvain to Leiden: guaranteeing well-connected communities. Scientific Reports 9, 5233 (2019). 119. Kumar, S., Stecher, G., Suleski, M. & Hedges, S. B. TimeTree: A Resource for Timelines, Timetrees, and Divergence Times. Mol Biol Evol 34, 1812–1819 (2017). Additional Declarations There is NO Competing Interest. Supplementary Files EDT.xlsx Supplmentary table 1 EdwardsiidGenomesSupplementNature.docx Supplementary information Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-796229","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Biological Sciences - Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":46269048,"identity":"78b87ef3-b486-4ac3-bbb4-584bde6fec6e","order_by":0,"name":"Ulrich Technau","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4472-8258","institution":"University of Vienna","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Ulrich","middleName":"","lastName":"Technau","suffix":""},{"id":46269049,"identity":"0ea0c304-84e9-479f-ada3-3b7addf63b52","order_by":1,"name":"Sophia Robb","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Stowers","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Sophia","middleName":"","lastName":"Robb","suffix":""},{"id":46269050,"identity":"2f4d993d-3d48-4c83-8eb5-72211da329fd","order_by":2,"name":"Grigory Genikhovich","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4864-7770","institution":"University of Vienna","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Grigory","middleName":"","lastName":"Genikhovich","suffix":""},{"id":46269051,"identity":"0b8f0a7e-d72a-4e65-a7e3-97db281cd5e7","order_by":3,"name":"Juan Montenegro","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Vienna","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Juan","middleName":"","lastName":"Montenegro","suffix":""},{"id":46269053,"identity":"e8b76e93-0714-49b3-ad4b-e652f6ae312b","order_by":4,"name":"Witney Fropf","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Stowers","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Witney","middleName":"","lastName":"Fropf","suffix":""},{"id":46269056,"identity":"a5261fc9-bf54-4f99-987f-0c083268dc3f","order_by":5,"name":"Lukas Weinguny","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Vienna","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Lukas","middleName":"","lastName":"Weinguny","suffix":""},{"id":46269058,"identity":"2c7471e6-12a7-4e3e-a4ff-7e5885f937f9","order_by":6,"name":"Shuonan He","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6709-9648","institution":"Stowers Institute for Medical Research","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Shuonan","middleName":"","lastName":"He","suffix":""},{"id":46269060,"identity":"f68d638d-c87e-4a37-8569-e25cd6e3f562","order_by":7,"name":"Shiyuan Chen","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9805-2906","institution":"Stowers Institute for Medical Research","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Shiyuan","middleName":"","lastName":"Chen","suffix":""},{"id":46269061,"identity":"a8c3c7c6-10a8-4f15-b071-62c95463c87c","order_by":8,"name":"Jessica Lovegrove-Walsh","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4362-4177","institution":"University of Vienna","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Jessica","middleName":"","lastName":"Lovegrove-Walsh","suffix":""},{"id":46269065,"identity":"3f23e5e6-9479-4a2f-a279-93b12fbd1c29","order_by":9,"name":"Eric Hill","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Stowers","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Eric","middleName":"","lastName":"Hill","suffix":""},{"id":46269066,"identity":"168a7b9b-0b6a-4f1c-8a82-fa8ac425a7b3","order_by":10,"name":"Katerina Ragkousi","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Stowers","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Katerina","middleName":"","lastName":"Ragkousi","suffix":""},{"id":46269067,"identity":"ac632f0b-09f6-4d14-bfe8-6589633a8c7d","order_by":11,"name":"Daniela Praher","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Vienna","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Daniela","middleName":"","lastName":"Praher","suffix":""},{"id":46269069,"identity":"a2dd231d-1947-4808-9d7b-80b5027fd33f","order_by":12,"name":"David Fredman","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Vienna","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"David","middleName":"","lastName":"Fredman","suffix":""},{"id":46269072,"identity":"babea68f-76fe-41ab-85ea-b59db7a6af1e","order_by":13,"name":"Yehu Moran","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9928-9294","institution":"The Hebrew University of Jerusalem","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Yehu","middleName":"","lastName":"Moran","suffix":""},{"id":46269074,"identity":"c2b87e6f-5639-4017-8650-ca22ab905695","order_by":14,"name":"Matthew Gibson","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Stowers","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Matthew","middleName":"","lastName":"Gibson","suffix":""},{"id":46269075,"identity":"7ad58eb1-863c-42eb-b485-cd80c44da4ec","order_by":15,"name":"Bob Zimmermann","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2354-0408","institution":"University of Vienna","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Bob","middleName":"","lastName":"Zimmermann","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2021-08-09 09:26:45","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-796229/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-796229/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":12511408,"identity":"7e68897d-08c8-451e-8053-3498e9f70502","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2021-08-17 17:37:12","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":175539,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"a) Nematostella vectensis. photo credit: Patrick RH Steinmetz b) Scolanthus callimorphus. photo credit: Robert Reischl c) Genome size estimates of cnidarian genomes taken from11–13,15–17,22,36,54–58.","description":"","filename":"1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-796229/v1/c9bb1e56cd62b5488545e3af.png"},{"id":12511412,"identity":"7a12d948-a648-456a-96ae-13262c1675f4","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2021-08-17 17:37:12","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":190956,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"Hi-C contact maps. Contact maps of Nematostella scaffolds (a) and Scolanthus contigs (b). Each point represents a binned, normalized intensity of chromosomal contact as measured by the number of ligated fragments sequenced. Grey boxes represent pseudo-chromosomes.","description":"","filename":"2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-796229/v1/06d44a8a3682f6123eb94a21.png"},{"id":12511463,"identity":"804149c5-1bd2-4933-90df-1161bf09167f","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2021-08-17 17:40:12","extension":"png","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":205824,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"Chromosomal relationships, genomic content and locations of NK and extended Hox cluster genes of (a) Nematostella and Scolanthus and (b) Nematostella and Branchiostoma. 1) Chord diagram of macrosyntenic relationships of chromosomes based on the inferred ancestral linkage groups. Chords represent the proportion of the chromosome’s gene content in common with the compared genome, not the positional information. 2) Scaled and centered gene density relative to the respective genome. Red is high and blue is low. 3) Scaled and centered density of interspersed repeat elements relative to the respective genome. Red is high and blue is low. 4) Locations of extended Hox and NK cluster genes. ","description":"","filename":"3.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-796229/v1/029d41369643668b510297e9.png"},{"id":12511646,"identity":"77444e63-f718-4965-8adb-3823300006d6","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2021-08-17 17:43:12","extension":"jpg","order_by":4,"title":"Figure 4","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":107979,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"Evolution of a selection of Antennapedia class homeobox gene clusters. a) Composition of the extended Hox, ParaHox and NK clusters in the sponge Amphimedon queenslandica, the sea anemone Nematostella, in a chordate Branchiostoma, and the deduced cluster composition of the cnidarian-bilaterian ancestor (CBA). Greyed-out genes with question marks have uncertain orthology. Genes shown as borderless boxes have an uncertain position relative to neighboring cluster members. Stacked boxes represent clusters of paralogs of the indicated ancestral gene. Genes in immediate proximity are indicated by abutting boxes. Linked genes of the same class separated by 1 to 50 intervening genes are connected with solid lines, over 50, with dashed lines. Grey intergenic connectors in the CBA indicate that the distances and the number of the intervening genes between the cluster members cannot be estimated. NK2 of the CBA may be linked to the extended Hox cluster. Since Branchiostoma Gbx remained unplaced in the chromosome-level assembly, its position was taken from the scaffold-level assembly of Branchiostoma lanceolatum59. A two-gene ParaHox CBA scenario is shown although a three-gene ParaHox CBA scenario is possible based on evidence from Scyphozoa [20]. b) Organization of the Nematostella Hox cluster in comparison to the Hox clusters of Scolanthus, the octocoral Xenia and a scyphozoan jellyfish Rhopilema indicates loss of microsynteny. c) Staggered expression of Gbx and Hox genes along the directive axis of Nematostella (oral view) partially reflects the position of the genes on the chromosome. Arrows show the direction of transcription for each of the genes. The number of intervening genes is indicated in white circles. ","description":"","filename":"4.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-796229/v1/40f54dcff0359a606be6bc9a.jpg"},{"id":12511409,"identity":"d5c56aad-547f-4776-ae0c-17def2112716","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2021-08-17 17:37:12","extension":"png","order_by":5,"title":"Figure 5","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":522090,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"(a) Oxford plots of the macrosyntenic relationships of Nematostella vectensis (y-axis) to genomes of various metazoans (x-axis). Pairwise orthologous are ordered by their position on the chromosome labeled on the axis. Dots (genes) are colored according to their membership to the metazoan ancestral linkage groups (ALGs) shown in (c). Species names are colored according to clade shown in (b). (b) Genomes represented in this figure and EDF 9-11. (c) Relationships between the ALGs colored according to the metazoan ALG. Lines are drawn between ALGs to represent fissions. (d) Graph representing the relationships of metazoan (M), bilaterian (B) and cnidarian (C) ALGs to each other and extant genomes of Ephydatia (em), Nematostella (nv), Rhopilema (re) and Branchiostoma (bf). Edges are colored by the metazoan ALG in (b) from which its path has a source. Line width represents the fraction of the extant genome or derived ALG (bilaterian or cnidarian) content of the ancestral genome. Faded edges represent near one-to-one relationships (\u003e .8). ","description":"","filename":"5.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-796229/v1/2bc93913b89699bfe70865ef.png"},{"id":14103476,"identity":"1b3e3b3e-d3ff-4529-9ed6-26cbb6a77bd4","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2021-09-29 11:26:59","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":1480859,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-796229/v1/d290ce0a-a278-4cd1-8150-e4ffd65bf832.pdf"},{"id":12511461,"identity":"f6274c4b-053e-486a-912b-56ffe8b90abf","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2021-08-17 17:40:12","extension":"xlsx","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":340628,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"Supplmentary table 1","description":"","filename":"EDT.xlsx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-796229/v1/8142796472f741c2ca32fe75.xlsx"},{"id":12511414,"identity":"28e0ee8a-6910-4c13-add2-af6b75f51d80","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2021-08-17 17:37:12","extension":"docx","order_by":2,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":8246634,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"Supplementary information","description":"","filename":"EdwardsiidGenomesSupplementNature.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-796229/v1/5f0638a12b34756c06bb4714.docx"}],"financialInterests":"There is \u003cb\u003eNO\u003c/b\u003e Competing Interest.","formattedTitle":"Sea anemone genomes reveal ancestral metazoan chromosomal macrosynteny","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eDraft genomes comprising hundreds to thousands of scaffolds, while helpful to identify gene repertoires, were neither suitable to reconstruct the evolutionary history of chromosomes nor did they always allow researchers to investigate long-range cis-regulation of genes. Recent chromosome-level genome assemblies refueled the opportunity to compare the content and localization of homologous genes between distantly related species. This led to the reconstruction of ancestral linkage groups among Chordata\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?XVPEj4\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e1,2\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e and Spiralia\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?XjhY02\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e3,4\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e. However, these analyses remained restricted to bilaterians and did not provide insights into the origin of metazoan chromosomes or their diversification. In this regard, representatives of Cnidaria, the sister clade to Bilateria, are crucial.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eCnidaria constitute a large clade of basally branching Metazoa, dating back between 590 and 690 Mya\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?gwZWnu\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e5\u0026ndash;7\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e. Their robust phylogenetic position as sister to Bilateria makes them the key group to study the evolution of bilaterian features, such as axis organization, mesoderm formation and central nervous system development\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?By700J\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e8\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e. The genome of the edwardsiid sea anemone \u003cem\u003eNematostella vectensis\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003ebecame the first non-bilaterian animal genome to have a draft scaffold-level sequenced in 2007, and revealed uncanny conservation of gene content to vertebrates as well as first hints for macrosyntenic conservation\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?tOlsIp\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e9\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e. By now, genomes of the representatives of all five cnidarian classes have become available\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?cvtAXb\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e10\u0026ndash;18\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e providing valuable insight into various aspects of the cnidarian gene complement and genome organization. However, these genomes originated from fairly distantly related species, and a cornerstone to genomic inquiry has long been the conservation signals of recently diverged taxa\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?dLwgl5\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e19\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e. The \u0026ldquo;starlet sea anemone\u0026rdquo; \u003cem\u003eNematostella\u003c/em\u003e (Figure 1a), which has been developed into an important model organism, belongs to the family of Edwardsiidae within the Actiniaria. Yet, to date no genome sequence of another edwardsiid sea anemone has been reported. An interesting and closely related sea anemone of the edwardsiid family is the \u0026ldquo;worm sea anemone\u0026rdquo; \u003cem\u003eScolanthus callimorphus\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(Figure 1b), dwelling in European seawater\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?P02bL4\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e20,21\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e, which according to our molecular clock calculations has separated from \u003cem\u003eNematostella\u003c/em\u003e approximately 174 Mio years ago (EDF 1, see Materials and Methods for details).\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Main Text","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eHigh Quality Chromosome-Level Assemblies of Two Edwardsiid Genomes\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eUsing short-read sequencing and a \u003cem\u003ek-\u003c/em\u003emer coverage model, we estimated the genome length of \u003cem\u003eNematostella\u003c/em\u003e at 244 Mb (EDF 2), which is substantially shorter than previously suggested at 450 Mb\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?0aIBuy\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e9\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e. This discrepancy could be in part attributed to the previous use of four haplotypes in sequencing. The genome of the sea anemone \u003cem\u003eExaiptasia pallida\u003c/em\u003e is similar in length to \u003cem\u003eNematostella\u003c/em\u003e\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?5xwO3G\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e22\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e, while the estimated 414 Mb of the \u003cem\u003eScolanthus\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003egenome is at present the largest sequenced actiniarian genome, mainly due to expansions of repetitive elements. This indicates that the genome lengths among Actiniaria may be more dynamic than suggested from earlier analyses (Figure 1c). Using PacBio long-read sequencing and high-throughput conformation capture (Hi-C), we then assembled chromosome-level of \u003cem\u003eNematostella\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eand\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;Scolanthus\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003egenomes, which far surpass the quality of the \u0026nbsp;published \u003cem\u003eNematostella\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003egenome in terms of contiguity, correctness, mappability and completeness (see Supplementary Text, EDF 3-5 for details).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn order to compare the genomic location of homologous genes between the edwardsiids, we utilized the previously sequenced \u003cem\u003eScolanthus\u003c/em\u003e transcriptome\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?wZLVfI\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e23\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e and we determined 24,625 gene models \u0026nbsp;(see Materials and Methods for details). For \u003cem\u003eNematostella\u003c/em\u003e, we sequenced several transcriptome libraries from various developmental stages, which were assembled earlier as NVE gene models\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?POOlbT\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e24\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e. To further improve the gene annotation, in particular with respect to isoforms and untranslated regions, we used a combination of IsoSeq and RNAseq data, which allowed us to identify 24,525 gene models and 36,280 transcripts. BUSCO analysis showed that the transcriptome contains 96.1% of expected metazoan conserved sequences, which represents an increase over the previous NVE gene models (90.6% complete BUSCOs) (EDF 6). Additional comparison to previously cloned complete CDS (EDT 7) showed that 261 of the 277 sequences (94.2%) were present. Of the missing 16 sequences, 15 could be confidently aligned to the reference genome and have been manually added to the annotation files.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTo facilitate the usage of the newly assembled genomes, we established a publicly accessible Genome Browsers. Both new genome assemblies and associated data are available for browsing, downloading, and BLAST at SIMRbase (\u003ca href=\"https://simrbase.stowers.org\"\u003ehttps://simrbase.stowers.org\u003c/a\u003e). The \u003cem\u003eNematostella vectensis\u003c/em\u003e genome assembly, referred to as Nvec200, has an abundance of aligned track data, including the newly generated gene models and a large collection of published RNAseq and ChIP-seq analysis as well as 145 ultra-conserved non-coding elements (UCNEs) shared between \u003cem\u003eNematostella\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eScolanthus\u003c/em\u003e (Supplementary Text; EDT 8).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eChromosomal Organization of the NK and extended Hox gene clusters\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe chromosome-level assembly of the \u003cem\u003eNematostella\u003c/em\u003e genome allowed us to re-address the evolution of specific gene clusters. Prominent examples of clusters of homeodomain transcription factor coding genes ancestral for Bilateria include the SuperHox cluster, the ParaHox cluster, the NK/NK-like cluster as well as\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;NK2\u003c/em\u003e group genes located separately\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?UPdapT\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e25\u0026ndash;27\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e. It has been hypothesized that all of them originated from a single gene cluster, which then disintegrated during evolution (for review see\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?zDCGLy\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e27\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e). Our analysis revealed that \u003cem\u003eNematostella\u003c/em\u003e possesses a separate ParaHox cluster of two genes, (\u003cem\u003eGsx\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eand \u003cem\u003eXlox\u003c/em\u003e/\u003cem\u003eCdx)\u003c/em\u003e on chromosome 10, and a SuperHox cluster on chromosome 2 containing \u003cem\u003eHox\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;Evx\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;Mnx\u003c/em\u003e, and\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;Rough\u003c/em\u003e, as well as more distant \u003cem\u003eMox\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eGbx\u003c/em\u003e\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?RIJTEs\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e28\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e (Figures 3 and 4, EDT6). We identified an \u003cem\u003eNK\u003c/em\u003e cluster on chromosome 5 containing \u003cem\u003eNK1\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003eNK5\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;Msx\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;NK4\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003eNK3\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003eNK7\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;NK6\u003c/em\u003e, and more distant \u003cem\u003eLadybird\u003c/em\u003e, a \u003cem\u003eTlx-like\u003c/em\u003e gene and, intriguingly,\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;Hex,\u003c/em\u003e which is also linked to the NK cluster in the hemichordate \u003cem\u003eSaccoglossus kowalevskii\u003c/em\u003e\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?73BLuR\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e29\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e and in the cephalochordate \u003cem\u003eBranchiostoma floridae\u003c/em\u003e. Similar to Bilateria, the \u003cem\u003eNK2\u003c/em\u003e genes were clustered separately and found on chromosome 2 (Figures 3 and 4, EDT6). In contrast, in earlier branching sponges, neither ParaHox nor extended Hox cluster genes exist, and only the NK cluster is present with a single \u003cem\u003eNK2/3/4\u003c/em\u003e gene, two\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;NK5/6/7\u003c/em\u003e genes, an\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;Msx\u003c/em\u003e ortholog, as well as possible \u003cem\u003eHex\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eTlx\u003c/em\u003e orthologs\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?RX2QZf\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e30\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e, (EDF 7). Taken together, this allows us to propose that the last common ancestor of Cnidaria and Bilateria possessed an NK-cluster on a chromosome different from the one carrying the SuperHox cluster, and a separate NK2 cluster, which might have been on the same chromosome as the SuperHox cluster (Figure 4). The hypothesized SuperHox-NK Megacluster\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?AHZSRK\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e25\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e, if it ever existed, must have both formed and broken apart during the time after the separation of the sponge lineage, but before the origin of the cnidarian-bilaterian ancestor (Figure 4a, Supplementary Text).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTopologically associating domains are not detected in either sea anemone genome\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn the past decade, high resolution chromosome conformation capture has increased interest in topologically associating domains (TADs), recurring chromosomal folding motifs evidenced by signals in Hi-C contact maps\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?EBXF3H\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e31\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e. Flanking regions of TADs are positively correlated with\u0026nbsp;CCCTC-binding factor (CTCF)\u0026nbsp;binding sites. Interestingly, no CTCF ortholog has been detected among non-bilaterian animals\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?v5wTvB\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e32,33\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e. Consistent with this, we did not detect evidence for TADs in our edwardsiid pseudo-chromosomes in the form of differential enrichment of contact density, exemplified in the contact map shown in EDF 8. By comparison, analyses of other datasets generated using the identical protocol at similar levels of resolution have identified clear signals of TADs\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?xpnz8s\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e34\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e. We can not rule out that relatively short-range Hi-C fragments in our libraries might have left important possible long-range contacts undetected. We note, however, that the \u003cem\u003eNematostella\u003c/em\u003e genome is fairly gene-dense (10\u0026plusmn;4 genes per 100kb), leaving relatively little intergenic sequence. It is conceivable that most relevant cis-regulatory elements may be rather located in proximity to the regulated gene. This is supported by the observation that many transgenic lines with only few kilobases upstream promoter regions driving reporter gene expression faithfully mimick endogenous expression patterns.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEdwardsiid genomes in the context \u0026nbsp;of reconstructed metazoan ancestral linkage groups\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNext, we sought to determine the extent to which the \u003cem\u003eNematostella\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eand \u003cem\u003eScolanthus\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003epseudo-chromosomes exhibit conservation of gene content and order (micro- and macrosynteny). Indeed, each of the 15 pseudo-chromosomes of both species share the majority of genes with a single corresponding gene in the other species (Figure 5a). We found that 8117 of 8692 mutual best BLAST hits between \u003cem\u003eNematostella\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eand \u003cem\u003eScolanthus\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003ewere retained on their respective pseudo-chromosomes, implying a one-to-one homology between all 15 chromosomes. However, gene order was largely lost from the most recent common ancestor (MRCA), which we estimate to have diverged approximately 174 Mya (EDF 1). The lack of selection pressure in favor of microsynteny conservation is clearly illustrated by the comparison of the SuperHox clusters of \u003cem\u003eScolanthus\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eand \u003cem\u003eNematostella\u003c/em\u003e. Although located on homologous chromosomes, the gene order, orientation, and the number of intervening genes differs drastically between these two species (Figure 4b). Most pseudo-chromosomes, according to their homologous pair, corresponded in length but are much larger in \u003cem\u003eScolanthus\u003c/em\u003e (Figure 3a-1). This is accounted for by a large fraction of unclassified, potentially lineage-specific repeat sequences (EDT 1, Supplementary text). \u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe sequencing of the \u003cem\u003eHydra\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003egenome indicated that the lineage has undergone accelerated genomic evolution\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?RNMGu2\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e12\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e. Yet, Hydrozoa have a 15-chromosome karyotype among several extant species\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?DPXrqB\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e35\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e, similar to the situation in \u003cem\u003eNematostella\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eand \u003cem\u003eScolanthus\u003c/em\u003e. This opens a possibility that large-scale chromosome dynamics did not play much role in the early branching animal clades. In order to test this, we performed several genome-wide chromosomal comparisons by proxy of gene content (Figure 5a, top, EDF9) and leveraged the resulting chromosomal links to postulate ancestral linkage groups (ALGs) using a graph-based approach (Figure 5b-d, Supplementary Text).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWe first compared the \u003cem\u003eNematostella\u003c/em\u003e chromosomes to those of other anthozoans, such as the sea anemone \u003cem\u003eExaiptasia pallida,\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003ethe stony coral\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;Acropora millepora\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eand\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003ethe soft coral \u003cem\u003eXenia\u003c/em\u003e \u003cem\u003esp\u003c/em\u003e. (EDF 9). While both \u003cem\u003eExaiptasia\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eand \u003cem\u003eAcropora\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eare only assembled at the scaffold level, we observed that the gene content of the scaffolds suggest a similar karyotype to \u003cem\u003eNematostella\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(EDF 9b,c). A recent chromosome-level genome assembly of the octocorallian \u003cem\u003eXenia sp.\u003c/em\u003e also suggested a 15-chromosome karyotype\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?ZBdyMQ\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e10\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e. However, despite the identical number of chromosomes, the comparison of the octocorallian \u003cem\u003eXenia\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eshowed surprisingly little homology \u0026nbsp;to those of the hexacorallian \u003cem\u003eNematostella\u003c/em\u003e. \u0026nbsp;We discovered many translocations and fusions of apparently varying ages with only 3 chromosomes demonstrating a one-to-one relationship (Figure 5a).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNext, we compared \u003cem\u003eNematostella\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003echromosomes to the chromosomes of the members of the anthozoan sister group Medusozoa, whose split from the anthozoans is estimated at more than 580 Mya by calibrated molecular clocks (EDF 1\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?DQrHZL\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e119\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e)\u003cem\u003e.\u003c/em\u003e Comparison to the scaffold-level genomes of the hydrozoans \u003cem\u003eHydra magnipapillata\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eClytia hemispherica\u003c/em\u003e (both are species with 15 chromosomes\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?v1MhDg\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e13,35\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e) also suggested numerous chromosomal rearrangements (EDF 9). Comparison to the genomic scaffolds of the scyphozoan jellyfish \u003cem\u003eAurelia aurita\u003c/em\u003e demonstrates a higher level of macrosynteny conservation than in hydrozoans, but the genome nevertheless looks significantly scrambled. This stands in stark contrast to the genome of the jellyfish \u003cem\u003eRhopilema esculentum.\u003c/em\u003e In \u003cem\u003eRhopilema,\u003c/em\u003e recent Hi-C analysis suggested the existence of 21 chromosomes, in line with the earlier analyses of chromosome spreads\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?QnRWhv\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e11,36\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e. We observed that all \u003cem\u003eRhopilema\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eand \u003cem\u003eNematostella\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003echromosomes show a clear 1-to-1, 1-to-2 or, in a single case, a 1-to-3 correspondence (Figure 5a).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWe then compared the pseudo-chromosomes of \u003cem\u003eNematostella\u003c/em\u003e with that of a bilaterian, the cephalochordate \u003cem\u003eBranchiostoma floridae\u003c/em\u003e. Cephalochordates are early branching chordates lacking the two rounds of whole-genome duplication and allotetraploidization suggested for vertebrates\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?w38l3n\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e1,37\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e, as represented by their single Hox cluster\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?UGzntU\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e25\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e (Figure 5a). \u0026nbsp;Strikingly, the \u003cem\u003eBranchiostoma\u003c/em\u003e pseudo-chromosomes exhibit retained extensive macrosynteny from the bilaterian-cnidarian MRCA. The large-scale macrosynteny retention detected in \u003cem\u003eBranchiostoma\u003c/em\u003e becomes less obvious once we focus on more recently branching bilaterian clades. Vertebrates such as the early branching teleost fish \u003cem\u003eLepisosteus oculatus\u003c/em\u003e\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?dcwzcy\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e38\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e and humans showed additional translocation events from the MRCA (Fig. 5a). Among protostomes, we observed that the lophotrochozoan\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eRam\u0026apos;s horn worm \u003cem\u003eStreplosbio benedicti\u003c/em\u003e\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?AtEn41\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e39\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e and the sea scallop \u003cem\u003ePatinopecten yessoensis\u003c/em\u003e\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?9ZCxZO\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e3\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e, as well as the ecdysozoan\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003emillipede \u003cem\u003eTrigoniulus corallinus\u003c/em\u003e\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?PAMVrF\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e40\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e\u003cem\u003e,\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eretained many macrosyntenic links (Fig. 5a)\u003cem\u003e.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eConversely, the horseshoe crab \u003cem\u003eCarcinoscorpius rotundicauda\u003c/em\u003e\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?ZxOGeg\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e41\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e retained linkage with limited specificity whereas\u0026nbsp;no apparent retention of chromosomal linkage could be detected in the case of \u003cem\u003eDrosophila melanogaster\u003c/em\u003e or \u003cem\u003eCaenorhabditis elegans\u003c/em\u003e (EDF 10)\u003cem\u003e.\u003c/em\u003e Rapid intrachromosomal gene shuffling is a well-known phenomenon among \u003cem\u003eDrosophila\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003especies\u003cem\u003e,\u003c/em\u003e however within the drosophilid clade, chromosomes are retained on well-established linkage groups\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?sYCpwb\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e42\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e, suggesting that these rearrangements occurred before the divergence of the drosophilids. The high degree of macrosynteny conservation with \u003cem\u003eBranchiostoma\u003c/em\u003e motivated us to compare \u003cem\u003eNematostella\u003c/em\u003e pseudo-chromosomes to those of the representative of an even older lineage, the Porifera (sponges), which branched off prior to the cnidarian-bilaterian split (EDF 1)\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eand is considered by many researchers to be the sister group to all other animals\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?H4hkCs\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e43,44\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e\u003cem\u003e.\u003c/em\u003e Strikingly, the comparison with the recently assembled chromosomes of the sponge \u003cem\u003eEphydatia muelleri\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003erevealed many ancestral linkage groups shared between them (Figure 5a).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThus, the comparison of chromosome-level assemblies of \u003cem\u003eNematostella\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eScolanthus\u003c/em\u003e with those of other non-bilaterian and bilaterian representatives has revealed a stunning degree of macrosynteny conservation and retention of ancestral linkage groups on most chromosomes in some species (e.g. \u003cem\u003eRhopilema, Ephydatia, Branchiostoma\u003c/em\u003e), and \u0026nbsp;varying degrees of gene shuffling, rearrangements, splits and fusions of the chromosomes in others (e.g. \u003cem\u003eDrosophila, Caenorhabditis,\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003ehumans). The observed patterns allowed us to reconstruct the set of predicted ancestral linkage groups \u0026nbsp;for the MRCA of cnidarians, bilaterians and metazoans (Fig. 5b). For the cnidarian ancestor, we identified 19 cnidarian ALGs. These correspond well to the extant cnidarian chromosomes (EDF 9), however, while \u003cem\u003eRhopilema\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eand edwardsiid chromosomes appear highly representative of the ancestral cnidarian karyotype, \u0026nbsp;the soft coral \u003cem\u003eXenia\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003echromosomes appear to have undergone many more chromosomal translocation events from the hypothesized 19 ALGs of the cnidarian MRCA (EDF 9). Our results also indicate that although both Hydrozoa and \u003cem\u003eEdwardsiidae\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003ehave a clear 15 chromosome karyotype, their chromosomes originate from distinct fusions of cnidarian ALGs. We then inferred 17 ALGs for the ancestor of Bilateria, as also previously posited\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?yZEZyo\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e4\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e (Fig. 5b,c). For the metazoan ancestor, our reconstruction resulted in 16 metazoan ALGs, which were maintained in the MRCA of Cnidaria, Bilateria and the sponge \u003cem\u003eEphydatia\u003c/em\u003e (Fig. 5b,c). In order to visualize how the chromosomes of extant species have undergone major splits and fusions, we projected the reconstructed ALGs of the respective cnidarian, bilaterian and metazoan ancestor to pseudo-chromosomes of the extant species. We found that many ALGs seemingly correspond to the same chromosomes across multiple species and lineages (Fig. 5c; EDF 9-11). To determine the extent of this, we further explored the relationships between the Metazoa ALGs and the Cnidaria and Bilateria (Figure 5c). Remarkably, many ancestral chromosomes exhibited a 1-to-1 correspondence across all predicted ancestral lineages (Figure 5c) and carry through to the extant lineages (Figure 5d).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe assembly of two high quality, chromosome-level edwardsiid genomes has illuminated several intriguing aspects about chromosomal evolution, the NK and extended Hox clusters, the conservation of non-coding elements and the status of topologically associated domains in the common ancestor to cnidarians and bilaterians. In addition, the highly improved \u003cem\u003eNematostella\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003egenome and gene annotations will prove to be an invaluable resource in future studies of both coding and non-coding regions, structural variants among populations and continued development of functional tools for this model organism.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNearly all members of the extended Hox cluster were distributed among distant, isolated microsyntenic blocks on pseudo-chromosome 2 of \u003cem\u003eNematostella\u003c/em\u003e (pseudo-chromosome 4 in \u003cem\u003eScolanthus\u003c/em\u003e), with the single exception of \u003cem\u003eHoxF/Anthox1\u003c/em\u003e, located on pseudo-chromosome 5 (Figures 3,4; Supplementary Text). This indicates a lack of proximity constraint on the Hox genes in Cnidaria, contrasting with the situation in Bilateria. In addition, while a staggered spatiotemporal pattern of Hox expression along the secondary, directive axis of the \u003cem\u003eNematostella\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003elarva and polyp can be observed\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?s1wt3C\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e45\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e, unlike Bilateria, there is no correlation between expression and cluster position\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?aNTnbI\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e46\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e. Notably, \u003cem\u003eHoxF/Anthox1\u003c/em\u003e is not only located on a different chromosome but it is also the only Hox gene expressed in the (aboral) ectoderm, while all other Hox genes are expressed in the inner endomesodermal cell layer\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?6KirpB\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e47,48\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe dispersed NK and extended Hox clusters may be due to the diminished or, possibly, lacking higher-order chromosome organization at the level of microsynteny. In line with this, it was recently observed that the HoxD cluster boundaries in the mouse genome are marked by TAD boundaries\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?LWJBWo\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e49\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e, and the cluster\u0026rsquo;s intra-TAD gene order is deemed to be under selective pressure\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?4pVofv\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e50\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e. \u0026nbsp;The lack of a CTCF gene in the \u003cem\u003eNematostella\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003egenome led us to hypothesize that the cnidarians might lack TADs, as TAD presence has been attributed to the appearance of CTCF\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?fO83iW\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e50\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e. Moreover, CTCF is absent not only in cnidarians but also in earlier branching ctenophores and sponges, which provides a possibility that the existence of TADs might represent a bilaterian-specific feature. While we were unable to detect any noticeable structure resembling the current definitions of TADs, it remains an open question as to whether larger or smaller structures, beyond the resolution of our data, could yet be detected. To our knowledge, one study has suggested evidence for the higher-order chromosomal organization in a non-bilaterian, the sponge \u003cem\u003eEphydatia\u003c/em\u003e\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?6Cpumx\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e43\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e. However, the contact maps resemble patterns we observe in our assemblies at the boundary of scaffolds or contigs, which can be the result of differential mappability from repetitive content or assembly issues. We therefore deliberately do not report any results from a TAD finder, since, after multiple rigorous rounds of manual assembly update, we can assert that the data we have generated do not qualitatively represent TAD boundaries per se, and most results would be likely false positives. While the precise definition of a TAD is still evolving\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?xVuEdL\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e51,52\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e, both data sets lack many characters of TADs identified in CTCF-containing genomes: hierarchical compartments, mammalian-specific \u0026ldquo;corner peaks\u0026rdquo; indicating strong interactions, and in our case, loop peaks and inter-contig compartments. This suggests that the presence of CTCF is necessary for the formation of TADs, however, we still cannot exclude the possibility that performing the experiment with a more homogenous cell population, or sequencing at a higher resolution, would reveal a signal on a smaller scale.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWhile microsynteny analyses reveal little conservation of the local gene order in the genomes of \u003cem\u003eNematostella\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eand \u003cem\u003eScolanthus\u003c/em\u003e, macrosyntenic analysis of the edwardsiid chromosomes compared to available cnidarian genomes revealed a high level of conservation. We identified a stable set of 19 ALGs across all clades of sequenced cnidarian genomes. \u0026nbsp;When compared to extant genomes, we can trace a small number of recombination events from the ALGs since common cnidarian ancestor split an estimated 580 Mya. This stands in stark contrast to the history of, for example, the 326 Mya old ancestral genome of Amniota, which is estimated to have 49 distinct units, while the karyotypes of the extant amniote taxa consist of multiple translocated segments and variable chromosomes\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?jCVk7Y\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e53\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e. However, by far more remarkable is the macrosynteny maintained between the edwardsiids, the early branching chordate \u003cem\u003eBranchiostoma\u003c/em\u003e, and the sponge \u003cem\u003eEphydatia\u003c/em\u003e. Our analyses reveal clear one-to-one, one-to-few or few-to-one conservation of the chromosome-level linkages between cnidarians, sponges and early chordates, which suggests a striking retention of macrosyntenies throughout evolution of these animal lineages and allows us to deduce a set of 16 ALGs of the last common metazoan ancestor, which was maintained in the cnidarian-bilaterian ancestor and gave rise to the 19 ancestral cnidarian chromosomes and the 17 ancestral bilaterian chromosomes\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?IHyW1v\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e4\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e. It is tempting to speculate that the emergence of the TADs in Bilateria may have restricted local rearrangements and at the same time released the constraints on maintaining the ancestral macrosyntenies conserved all the way back to the origin of multicellular animals.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAcknowledgements\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSpecial thanks to Oleg Simakov for extensive discussions and suggestions. We thank Matthew Nicotra for providing us with the HMW DNA extraction protocol used for \u003cem\u003eScolanthus.\u003c/em\u003e We thank Robert Reischl for the photo of \u003cem\u003eScolanthus\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eand\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003ePatrick R.H. Steinmetz and Hanna Kraus for the photo of \u003cem\u003eNematostella vectensis\u003c/em\u003e (Figure 1). \u0026nbsp;Special thanks to Tatiana Lebedeva for the cartoon drawings of animals used in this study. We are grateful to the Stowers Institute Molecular Biology Core facility, particularly Amanda Lawlor, Michael Peterson and Anoja Perera.\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eThis work was supported by grants of the Austrian Science Fund FWF (P24858; P21108) to U.T., support from the Stowers Institute for Medical Research to M.G. and an NIH Ruth L. Kirschstein NRSA (F32 GM131522) to E.M.H.. We are also grateful for the support of the CNRS Marine Station in Roscoff and the Assemble grant 227799 to U.T. for collecting \u003cem\u003eScolanthus\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eData Availability\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAll raw data is available via the National Center for Biotechnology Information under the accession PRJNA667495. The assembled genomes can be downloaded, browsed and searched on publicly available browsers at \u003ca href=\"https://simrbase.stowers.org/starletseaanemone\"\u003ehttps://simrbase.stowers.org/starletseaanemone\u003c/a\u003e and \u0026nbsp;\u003ca href=\"https://simrbase.stowers.org/wormanemone\"\u003ehttps://simrbase.stowers.org/wormanemone\u003c/a\u003e. Code used to generate the analyses is available from the authors upon request.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Materials And Methods","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAnimal Care and Source\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eNematostella vectensis\u003c/em\u003e animals were cultured as previously described \u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?Y8ozZX\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e60\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e at the University of Vienna and the Stowers Institute. Adult male and female individuals were verified by induction in isolation. \u003cem\u003eScolanthus callimorphus\u003c/em\u003e animals were collected at the \u0026Icirc;le Callot, Carantec, France. After transport, they were kept in seawater at 20\u0026deg;C and fed freshly hatched \u003cem\u003eArtemia salina\u003c/em\u003e weekly or biweekly.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSequencing\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eShort Read DNA-Seq\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eGenomic DNA samples were extracted from both adult male and female individual \u003cem\u003eNematostella\u003c/em\u003e adults using the DNeasy Blood and Tissue Kit (Qiagen). After purification, approximately 5 ug of genomic DNA was recovered from each sample. Following DNA extraction, samples were sheared and size selected for ~500 bp using a Blue Pippin Prep machine (Sage Science). Following size selection, sequencing libraries were created using a KAPA HTP Library Prep kit (Roche) and subjected to paired-end sequencing on an Illumina NextSeq 500. \u003cem\u003eScolanthus\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eDNA samples for library preparation were aliquoted from high molecular weight extractions, described below.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eHigh Molecular Weight DNA Extraction and Library Prep\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eNematostella\u003c/em\u003e high molecular weight DNA was extracted at Dovetail Genomics. Samples were quantified using Qubit 2.0 Fluorometer (Life Technologies, Carlsbad, CA, USA). The PacBio SMRTbell library (~20kb) for PacBio Sequel was constructed using SMRTbell Template Prep Kit 1.0 (PacBio, Menlo Park, CA, USA) using the manufacturer recommended protocol. The pooled library was bound to polymerase using the Sequel Binding Kit 2.0 (PacBio) and loaded onto PacBio Sequel using the MagBead Kit V2 (PacBio). Sequencing was performed on the PacBio Sequel SMRT cell, using Instrument Control Software Version 5.0.0.6235, Primary analysis software Version 5.0.0.6236 and SMRT Link Version 5.0.0.6792. \u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHigh molecular weight DNA from a single \u003cem\u003eScolanthus callimorphus\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eadult animal was extracted using a modified Urea-based DNA extraction protocol\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?Nd133x\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e61,62\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e. A whole animal was flash frozen and ground with mortar and pestle. While frozen, drops of buffer UEB1 (7M Urea, 312.5 mM NaCl, 50 mM Tris-HCl pH 8, 20 mM EDTA pH 8.1% w:v N-Lauroylsarcosine sodium salt) were added and crushed with the tissue. Tissue was incubated in a final volume of 10 mL UEB1 at RT for 10 minutes. Three rounds of phenol-chloroform extraction were performed followed by DNA precipitation by addition of 0.7 volume isopropanol. The pellet was transferred to a fresh tube and washed twice in 70% EtOH and twice more in 100% EtOH, dried, and resuspended in TE buffer.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eA library for PacBio sequencing was then prepared \u0026nbsp;from the high molecular weight sample using the SMRTbell\u0026reg; Express Template Prep Kit v1. The libraries were then sequenced on a PacBio Sequel machine over 3 SMRT Cells, yielding a total of 22.85 Gb over 1,474,285 subreads. An aliquot of the same sample was used to prepare a library using the NEBNext\u0026reg; Ultra\u0026trade; II DNA Library Prep Kit for Illumina. This was then subjected to 50 cycles of single-end sequencing in one flow cell lane using an Illumina HiSeq 2500 system.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eChicago libraries\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e2 Chicago libraries were prepared as described previously\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?zU2RKp\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e63\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e. For each library, ~500 ng of HMW gDNA (mean fragment length = 100 kbp) was reconstituted into chromatin in vitro and fixed with formaldehyde. Fixed chromatin was digested with DpnII, the 5\u0026rsquo; overhangs filled in with biotinylated nucleotides, and then free blunt ends were ligated. After ligation, crosslinks were reversed and the DNA purified from protein. Purified DNA was treated to remove biotin that was not internal to ligated fragments. The DNA was then sheared to ~350 bp mean fragment size and sequencing libraries were generated using NEBNext Ultra enzymes and Illumina-compatible adapters. Biotin-containing fragments were isolated using streptavidin beads before PCR enrichment of each library. The libraries were sequenced on an Illumina HiSeq 2500 (rapid run mode). The number and length of read pairs produced for each library was: 116 million, 2x101 bp for library 1; 35 million, 2x101 bp for library 2. Together, these Chicago library reads provided 125 x sequence coverage of the genome (1-100 kb pairs). \u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eChromatin was extracted from a single \u003cem\u003eNematostella vectensis\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eadult male and \u003cem\u003eScolanthus callimorphus\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eadult (unknown sex) nuclei using the Phase Genomics Proximo Hi-C animal protocol. After proximity ligation and purification, 16 ng and 9 ng of DNA was recovered, respectively. For library preparation 1 \u0026micro;l of Library Reagent 1 was added 12 PCR cycles were performed. The final library was subjected to 150 total cycles of paired-end sequencing using an Illumina NextSeq 550 machine yielding a total of 13.5 gigabases.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHi-C sequencing, \u003cem\u003eScolanthus callimorphus\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003ePacBio library preparation and sequencing, Scolanthus Illumina DNA library preparation and sequencing and adult \u003cem\u003eNematostella vectensis\u003c/em\u003e RNA library preparation and sequencing was performed at the VBCF NGS Unit (\u003ca href=\"https://www.viennabiocenter.org/facilities\"\u003ehttps://www.viennabiocenter.org/facilities\u003c/a\u003e). \u003cem\u003eNematostella vectensis\u003c/em\u003e DNA size selection, library preparation, and sequencing were performed by the Molecular Biology Core at the Stowers Institute for Medical Research.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDevelopmental and adult \u003cem\u003eNematostella\u003c/em\u003e RNA sequencing was performed as follows. \u003cem\u003eNematostella\u003c/em\u003e were spawned and eggs were de-jellied and fertilized as previously described \u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?V9WNhl\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e60\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e. Spawning and embryo development took place at 18\u0026deg;C. Eggs and embryos from different stages were collected (300 per sample) in duplicate as indicated: eggs (within 30min of spawn), blastula (7.5hpf), gastrula (23.5hpf) and planula (72hpf). Eggs and embryos were collected in eppendorf tubes and centrifuged to a pellet at 21,000 x g for 1 min. All seawater was quickly removed and pellets were resuspended in 150ml lysis buffer (RLT buffer supplied by the Qiagen RNeasy kit (#74104), supplemented with 𝛃-mercaptoethanol). The samples were homogenized with an electric pestle (1 min continuous drilling) and further supplemented with 200 ml of the above lysis buffer. Homogenized samples were then transferred into QIAshredder columns (Qiagen #79654) and centrifuged at 21,000 x g for 2 min. The flow throughs were supplemented with 1 ml 70 % ethanol and transferred to RNeasy columns and were processed according to the Qiagen RNeasy protocol. Quality and integrity of the RNA was evaluated using the Agilent RNA 600 pico kit (Agilent Technologies) and RNA samples were stored at -80\u0026deg;C until further processing. cDNA libraries were then constructed for polyA stranded sequencing. The resulting libraries were sequenced on Illumina HiSeq using paired end runs (RapidSeq- 2x150bp).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eGenome Assembly\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSize estimates for \u003cem\u003eNematostella vectensis\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eand \u003cem\u003eScolanthus callimorphus\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003ewere derived using Genomescope\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?6S8jBK\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e64\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e, taking the result of the highest \u003cem\u003ek\u003c/em\u003e (56 and 18) which converged under the model.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eInitial assemblies based on PacBio sequencing of \u003cem\u003eNematostella\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eScolanthus\u003c/em\u003e were generated using canu version 1.8\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?a0tmyu\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e65\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e with the parameters\u0026nbsp;rawErrorRate=0.3 correctedErrorRate=0.045.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eNematostella\u003c/em\u003e haplotigs were removed using Purge Haplotigs\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?SxAHMO\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e66\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e. First, the source PacBio reads were aligned onto the canu assembly using minimap2\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?bIzEok\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e67\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e using the parameters\u0026nbsp;-ax map-pb --secondary=no. Following this a coverage histogram was generated using the Purge Haplotigs script\u0026nbsp;readhist. Per the documented Purge Haplotigs protocol, lower, mid and high coverage limits were found by manual inspection of the plotted histogram to be 12, 57 and 130 respectively. All initial contigs marked as suspect or artifactual were removed from further analysis with the Purge Haplotigs script\u0026nbsp;purge.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDue to lower sequencing coverage of \u003cem\u003eScolanthus\u003c/em\u003e, diploid per-scaffold coverage could not be deconvolved from haploid, and therefore Purge Haplotigs could not be used. Removal of redundant contigs was performed with Redundans version 0.14a\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?EtWevb\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e68\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e using the parameters\u0026nbsp;--noscaffolding --nogapclosing --overlap 0.66. Only contigs marked in the reduced version of the genome were used in further analysis.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe input de novo assembly, shotgun reads, and Chicago library reads were used as input data for HiRise, a software pipeline designed specifically for using proximity ligation data to scaffold genome assemblie\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?eivNvc\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e63\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e. Shotgun and Chicago library sequences were aligned to the draft input assembly using a modified SNAP read mapper (http://snap.cs.berkeley.edu). The separations of Chicago read pairs mapped within draft scaffolds were analyzed by HiRise to produce a likelihood model for genomic distance between read pairs, and the model was used to identify and break putative misjoins, to score prospective joins, and make joins above a threshold. After scaffolding, shotgun sequences were used to close gaps between contigs. \u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRepetitive DNA and Hi-C scaffolding\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepetitive DNA was found using two strategies. First, known repeats found in repbase\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?CatcjD\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e69\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e were searched in the assemblies using RepeatMasker\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?w0ItAs\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e70\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e using the parameters -s -align -e ncbi in addition to -species nematostella for \u003cem\u003eNematostella\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eand -species edwardsiidae for \u003cem\u003eScolanthus\u003c/em\u003e. \u0026nbsp;Second, novel repeat sequences were found using RepeatModeler version 2.0\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?FIFHSH\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e71\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e. After generating the repeat library, genomes\u0026rsquo; repeat regions were detected with the corresponding library using the same parameters in RepeatMasker.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHi-C sequences were aligned to the reduced and repbase masked genomes of \u003cem\u003eNematostella\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eand \u003cem\u003eScolanthus\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eusing\u0026nbsp;bwa mem\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?CiDxoT\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e72,73\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e using the parameters\u0026nbsp;-5SP. For \u003cem\u003eNematostella,\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003ean additional candidate assembly\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003ewas generated by mapping Hi-C sequences to the Chicago library scaffolded sequences using repbase masking (dovetail_standardmask) in addition to the contig-based scaffolding (contig_standardmask). Duplicate reads were marked with the\u0026nbsp;samblaster\u0026nbsp;utility\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?ZXC1ok\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e74\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e, and duplicate, secondary and supplementary mappings were removed with\u0026nbsp;samtools.\u0026nbsp;These mappings were used to generate initial chromosomal assemblies using Lachesis\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?kmvEuB\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e75\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e, specifying the restriction site GATC. Assemblies were manually reviewed using Juicebox Assembly Tools version 1.11.08\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?QcEQNB\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e76\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e. Candidate assemblies were compared using the nucmer aligner with default parameters and visualized using mummerplot\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?smGfu2\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e77\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e. Assemblies were converted over to Juicebox format using juicebox_scripts (\u003ca href=\"https://github.com/phasegenomics/juicebox_scripts\"\u003ehttps://github.com/phasegenomics/juicebox_scripts\u003c/a\u003e). In the case of \u003cem\u003eScolanthus\u003c/em\u003e, duplicate regions were clipped, and the resulting contigs were subjected to another round of alignment, assembly and review.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eNematostella\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003escaffold correctness was assessed using REAPR\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?2EwOSJ\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e78\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e. \u003cem\u003eNematostella\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eassembly nemVec1 was downloaded from the JGI website\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?3gcYlj\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e9\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e. Sequences from the adult male and adult female (see Sequencing) were aligned to nemVec1 and the \u003cem\u003eNematostella\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003egenome after scaffolding with Chicago libraries using SMALT as well as the REAPR tool perfectmap using an expected insert size of 400, as determined from fragment analysis. Error-free bases and contiguity after breaking the genome were extracted from the results.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eGenome and gene model set assembly and completeness was assessed using BUSCO version 3.0.2\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?RsNXCp\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e79\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e, using the gene set\u0026nbsp;metazoa_odb9\u0026nbsp;as the standard.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eGene Models\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eNematostella, Scolanthus\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eand \u003cem\u003eM. senile\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003epaired end sequences obtained from a previous studies\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?cDJlAx\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e23,24\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e and data available on BioProject PRJNA430035 were used to generate \u003cem\u003ede novo\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eassembled transcripts.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTrinity version 5.0.2\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?mtWtVT\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e80\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e was run on each library using the flags\u0026nbsp;--min_contig_length 200 --min_kmer_cov 2. For those which had a strand-specific library preparation, the flag\u0026nbsp;--SS_lib_type RF\u0026nbsp;was applied. To reduce redundancy, cd-hit version 4.6.8\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?YFMFkR\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e81,82\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e was applied with the flags\u0026nbsp;-M 0 -c 1. Transdecoder version 5.0.6\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?1OpWH4\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e83\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e was used to detect open reading frames in the resulting reduced set of transcripts. Transcript abundance was quantified using salmon version 1.2.1\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?9OvMuA\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e84\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e using the flags\u0026nbsp;--seqBias --useVBOpt --discardOrphansQuasi --softclip.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFor PacBio Iso-seq, 12 \u003cem\u003eNematostella\u003c/em\u003e RNA samples were collected over the course of multiple developmental stages, adult tissues and regeneration time points. For developmental stages, zygotes spawned by a single batch of wildtype colony were kept at 22\u0026deg;C, and collected at 0 hpf, 24 hpf, 48 hpf, 72 hpf and 7 dpf. Adult tissues were collected from sex-sorted, sexually mature wildtype individuals kept at 22\u0026deg;C. The male and female mesenteries were harvested separately by surgically opening the body column and carefully peeling off the attached body column tissues. Adult oral discs were collected by surgical removal of tentacles as well as the attached pharyngeal regions. Regeneration was induced by amputating the oral part of a sexually mature individual at the mid-pharyngeal level. Regenerating tissues close to the wound were collected at 4 hpa and 12 hpa, respectively. All the samples were deep frozen and lysed using TRIzolTM reagent (Invitrogen). Phenol-chloroform extraction was performed to remove undissolved mesoglea from adult tissues. DirectzolTM RNA Miniprep Plus Kit (Zymo) was then used to purify total RNA from the aqueous phase. For each sample, 2 \u0026mu;g of total RNA with RIN \u0026gt; 7 was submitted to UC Berkeley for Iso-seq library construction.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRNA Libraries were sequenced at UC Berkeley using PacBio Sequel-II system. Raw subreads bams were processed and demultiplexed using PacBio\u0026rsquo;s isoseq v3.2 conda pipeline. The steps include consensus generation, primer demultiplexing, polyA refinement and data clustering using default parameters. This resulted in the generation of 406,317 high quality HIFI reads and used to build Nvec200 transcriptome.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHIFI reads were mapped to the \u003cem\u003eNematostella\u003c/em\u003e genome using minimap2\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?qS9jFl\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e67\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e using parameters (-ax splice -uf --secondary=no) to obtain the primary best alignments. Reads were then grouped and collapsed down to potential transcripts using PacBio\u0026rsquo;s cDNA_Cupcake toolkit and TAMA\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?PsmXDS\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e85\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e. Based on PacBio\u0026rsquo;s guideline, transcripts with degraded 5\u0026rsquo; reads and have less than 10 FL counts were removed. Chimeric transcripts were then analyzed to find potential fusion genes. For reads that didn\u0026rsquo;t map to the genome, de novo transcriptome assembly was performed using graph-based tool Cogent with kmer size equals 30. . Cupcake and TAMA results were merged into non-redundant gene models using stringtie v2\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?BtrRiA\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e86\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e. Deep RNA-seq reads from 4 developmental stages: egg, gastrula, pos-gastrula and planula were aligned to the genome using STAR v 2.7.3a\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?mQZmG1\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e87\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e. Read alignments outside of the isoseq gene models were extracted with bedtools v2.29.2 \u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?2nqKzK\"\u003e[96]\u003c/a\u003e and used for reference-guided transcriptome assembly using Stringtie2. Final gene models were obtained by merging Isoseq models and RNAseq models and manually corrected using previously cloned full length CDS from Nematostella vectensis in NCBI (EDT 7). Finally, transdecoder v5.5.0 was used to produce CDS annotation using a minimum protein length of 50 amino acids and prioritizing ORFs with significant similarity to any family in the PFAM database\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?DXmf5H\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e89\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e. Alignment of the protein candidates to the PFAM database was done using Hmmer v3.1b2\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?ctZnp7\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e90\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e. RNAseq libraries from the \u003cem\u003eN. vectensis\u003c/em\u003e developmental time series were downloaded and aligned to the new genome using STAR v2.7.3a\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?mJb7Z0\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e87\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e with standard parameters. Mapping and assignment efficiency was measured using featureCounts from the subread package\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?36wRhs\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e91\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e with the \u0026ldquo;-p\u0026rdquo; flag for paired-end libraries.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eEvidence for \u003cem\u003eScolanthus\u003c/em\u003e gene models were taken from RNA-sequencing and repeats. \u003cem\u003eScolanthus\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eRNA-seq reads (see Sequencing) were mapped to the \u003cem\u003eScolanthus\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003econtigs using STAR version 2.7.3a\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?XFKNrv\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e87\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e. These mappings were used as evidence for intron junctions to generate putative gene models and estimating hidden Markov model parameters using BRAKER2\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?K0O07a\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e92,93\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e. Gene models were then refined using Augustus version 3.3.3\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?5eulhB\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e94\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e using extrinsic evidence from STAR splice junctions and the location of repeats from RepBase (see Genome Assembly) as counter-evidence for transcription. These models were filtered with the following criteria: 1) genes completely covered by RepeatModeler repeats (see Genome Assembly) were removed 2) predicted gene models were required to be either supported by external RNA-seq evidence as reported by Augustus or have a predicted ortholog as reported by Eggnog-mapper\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?6xAWON\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e95\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e\u003cem\u003e.\u003c/em\u003e This resulted in a set of 24,625 gene models. Transcription factor identity was inferred by aligning the predicted protein sequences to Pfam A domains version 32.0\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?KAKHfU\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e96\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e using hmmer version 3.3\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?IxyG8h\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e97\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e\u003cem\u003e.\u003c/em\u003e Transcription factor families were based on domains curated in a previous work\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?p9lNyz\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e98\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eExtended Hox cluster, NK cluster and ParaHox \u0026nbsp;genes were found with BLAT \u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?YiHHtT\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e99\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e matches of published models\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?iLarOT\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e28,47,100\u0026ndash;105\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e to the nv1 genome, taking the best hits. If an NVE gene model\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?n6p4ns\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e24\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e corresponded to the matched genomic region, its location in the nv2 genome was then determined for macrosynteny analysis. In cases where no published gene was known, reciprocal BLAST hits between the bilaterian and cnidarian counterpart were taken as evidence for orthology.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDivergence Estimates\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSingle copy orthologs were detected by collecting common complete and duplicated BUSCO genes present in the \u003cem\u003eScolanthus\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eNematostella\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003egenomes. Where duplicated BUSCOs were present, the transcript with the highest score was taken. This resulted in a total of 541 orthologs. BUSCOs found in genomes obtained from previous studies\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?cQzIK8\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e1,11\u0026ndash;13,17,18,22,38,43,106\u0026ndash;109\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e were used to generate multiple alignments. Genes were aligned with mafft version 7.427 using the E-INS-i model and a maximum 1000 refinement iterations\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?kkV38n\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e35\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e. Alignments were trimmed using trimAl version 1.4.rev15 using the \u0026ldquo;gappyout\u0026rdquo; criteria\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?hxXFdj\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e35\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e. A maximum likelihood tree was inferred using iqtree version 2.0.6, using the model finder partitioned on each gene, constrained to nuclear protein models\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?7KB5WO\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e110\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e. Divergence estimates were determined using r8s version 1.8.1 using the Langley-Fitch likelihood method\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?a08mj4\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e111\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e. Age ranges were estimated by fixing the split between Bilateria and Cnidaria at 595.7 and 688.3 Mya\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?GQeKk7\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e112\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSingle copy orthologs were detected by collecting common complete BUSCO genes present in the \u003cem\u003eA. millepora\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;A. digitifera\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;E. pallida\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;M. senile\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003eScolanthus\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eNematostella\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003egenomes. This resulted in a total of 229 orthologs.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eUltraconserved Elements\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn order to determine noncoding elements conserved between \u003cem\u003eScolanthus\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eand \u003cem\u003eNematostella\u003c/em\u003e, genomes repeat-masked from both \u003cem\u003ede novo\u003c/em\u003e and repbase repeats were blasted using NCBI+ version 2.10.0\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?POjeUc\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e113\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e, using the flags -evalue 1E-10 -max_hsps 100000000 -max_target_seqs 100000000 -task megablast -perc_identity 0 -template_length 16 -penalty -2 -word_size 11 -template_type coding_and_optimal. Additionally, the -dbsize parameter was set to the estimated genome size. Candidate hits were then filtered using criteria loosely based on previous work \u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?LG1uGF\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e114\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e: for each high-scoring pair, a sliding window method was used to determine subsections of the alignment with at least 95 % identity, and extending these windows as long as the identity remains at this level. \u003cem\u003eNematostella\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eelements mapping to more than one locus in the \u003cem\u003eScolanthus\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003egenome were reduced to the longest locus pair in both genomes. Elements mostly mapping to coding sequence were removed, and the remaining elements were classified as intron or non-coding, depending on location. Recurring UCE sequences that were not identified by RepeatModeler or RepeatMasker were detected with blastclust version 2.2.26 requiring the length of hit to cover at least 90 % of either sequence for linkage.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMacrosynteny Analysis\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eBranchiostoma floridae\u003c/em\u003e gene models and sequences were retrieved from the recently published study\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?OdERci\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e1\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e. Gene orthology between \u003cem\u003eScolanthus, Nematostella\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eand \u003cem\u003eBranchiostoma\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003ewere determined pairwise using reciprocal best matches. All against all comparisons were performed with NCBI+ blastp version 2.10.0\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?m0yK2k\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e113\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e using an e-value threshold of 1e-5. Reciprocal best matches were determined using match bit scores. Genomes were downloaded from previous studies\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?K4PW63\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e3,10,12,13,17,22,38\u0026ndash;41,43,55,106,108,109,115\u0026ndash;117\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAncestral genome reconstruction was carried out using a graph based approach. In brief, genes were summarized into multi-species orthologous groups, and these comprised the nodes, and orthology groups occurring on the same chromosome or scaffold of two different species were linked together. A consensus approach to community detection based on the Leiden algorithm\u003ca href=\"https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?8Dwemo\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e118\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e was used to determine ancestral linkage groups from this graph. For details, see the Supplementary Text.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003cp\u003e1. \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;Simakov, O. et al. Deeply conserved synteny resolves early events in vertebrate evolution. Nature Ecology \u0026amp; Evolution 4, 820\u0026ndash;830 (2020).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e2.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Putnam, N. H.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;The amphioxus genome and the evolution of the chordate karyotype.\u0026nbsp;Nature\u0026nbsp;453, 1064\u0026ndash;1071 (2008).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e3.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Wang, S.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;Scallop genome provides insights into evolution of bilaterian karyotype and development.\u0026nbsp;Nature Ecology \u0026amp; Evolution\u0026nbsp;1, 1\u0026ndash;12 (2017).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e4.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Simakov, O.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;Insights into bilaterian evolution from three spiralian genomes.\u0026nbsp;Nature\u0026nbsp;493, 526\u0026ndash;531 (2013).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e5.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Cartwright, P.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;Exceptionally Preserved Jellyfishes from the Middle Cambrian.\u0026nbsp;PLOS ONE\u0026nbsp;2, e1121 (2007).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e6.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Technau, U., Genikhovich, G. \u0026amp; Kraus, J. E. M. Cnidaria. in\u0026nbsp;Evolutionary Developmental Biology of Invertebrates 1\u0026nbsp;(ed. Wanninger, A.) 115\u0026ndash;163 (Springer Vienna, 2015). doi:10.1007/978-3-7091-1862-7_6.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e7.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Zapata, F.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;Phylogenomic Analyses Support Traditional Relationships within Cnidaria.\u0026nbsp;PLOS ONE\u0026nbsp;10, e0139068 (2015).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e8.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Technau, U. \u0026amp; Steele, R. E. Evolutionary crossroads in developmental biology: Cnidaria.\u0026nbsp;Development\u0026nbsp;138, 1447\u0026ndash;1458 (2011).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e9.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Putnam, N. H.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;Sea Anemone Genome Reveals Ancestral Eumetazoan Gene Repertoire and Genomic Organization.\u0026nbsp;Science\u0026nbsp;317, 86\u0026ndash;94 (2007).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e10.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Hu, M., Zheng, X., Fan, C.-M. \u0026amp; Zheng, Y. Lineage dynamics of the endosymbiotic cell type in the soft coral Xenia.\u0026nbsp;Nature\u0026nbsp;582, 534\u0026ndash;538 (2020).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e11.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Nong, W.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;Jellyfish genomes reveal distinct homeobox gene clusters and conservation of small RNA processing.\u0026nbsp;Nature Communications\u0026nbsp;11, 3051 (2020).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e12.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Chapman, J. A.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;The dynamic genome of Hydra.\u0026nbsp;Nature\u0026nbsp;464, 592\u0026ndash;596 (2010).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e13.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Lecl\u0026egrave;re, L.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;The genome of the jellyfish Clytia hemisphaerica and the evolution of the cnidarian life-cycle.\u0026nbsp;Nat Ecol Evol\u0026nbsp;3, 801\u0026ndash;810 (2019).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e14.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Khalturin, K.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;Medusozoan genomes inform the evolution of the jellyfish body plan.\u0026nbsp;Nature Ecology \u0026amp; Evolution\u0026nbsp;3, 811\u0026ndash;822 (2019).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e15.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Ohdera, A.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;Box, stalked, and upside-down? Draft genomes from diverse jellyfish (Cnidaria, Acraspeda) lineages: Alatina alata (Cubozoa), Calvadosia cruxmelitensis (Staurozoa), and Cassiopea xamachana (Scyphozoa).\u0026nbsp;Gigascience\u0026nbsp;8, (2019).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e16.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Kim, H.-M.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;The genome of the giant Nomura\u0026rsquo;s jellyfish sheds light on the early evolution of active predation.\u0026nbsp;BMC Biology\u0026nbsp;17, 28 (2019).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e17.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Gold, D. A.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;The genome of the jellyfish Aurelia and the evolution of animal complexity.\u0026nbsp;Nature Ecology \u0026amp; Evolution\u0026nbsp;3, 96 (2019).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e18.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Shinzato, C.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;Using the\u0026nbsp;Acropora digitifera\u0026nbsp;genome to understand coral responses to environmental change.\u0026nbsp;Nature\u0026nbsp;476, 320\u0026ndash;323 (2011).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e19.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Wilson, T. J., Lazner, F., Kola, I. \u0026amp; Hertzog, P. J. The Mouse and the Genomic Era. in\u0026nbsp;Comparative Genomics\u0026nbsp;(ed. Clark, M. S.) 97\u0026ndash;121 (Springer US, 2000). doi:10.1007/978-1-4615-4657-3_5.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e20.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Gosse, P. Scolanthus callimorphus. in\u0026nbsp;World List of Actiniaria, accessed through : World Register of Marine Species.\u0026nbsp;(2020).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e21.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Wilson, E. Scolanthus callimorphus Worm anemone. in\u0026nbsp;Marine Life Information Network: Biology and Sensitivity Key Information Reviews, [on-line]\u0026nbsp;(2005).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e22.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Baumgarten, S.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;The genome of Aiptasia, a sea anemone model for coral symbiosis.\u0026nbsp;Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.\u0026nbsp;112, 11893\u0026ndash;11898 (2015).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e23.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Praher, D.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;Conservation and turnover of miRNAs and their highly complementary targets in early branching animals.\u0026nbsp;Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences\u0026nbsp;288, 20203169 (2021).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e24.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Fredman, D., Schwaiger, M., Rentzsch, F. \u0026amp; Technau, U. Nematostella vectensis transcriptome and gene models v2.0. (2013) doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.807696.v1.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e25.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Pollard, S. L. \u0026amp; Holland, P. W. H. Evidence for 14 homeobox gene clusters in human genome ancestry.\u0026nbsp;Current Biology\u0026nbsp;10, 1059\u0026ndash;1062 (2000).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e26.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Butts, T., Holland, P. W. H. \u0026amp; Ferrier, D. E. K. The Urbilaterian Super-Hox cluster.\u0026nbsp;Trends in Genetics\u0026nbsp;24, 259\u0026ndash;262 (2008).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e27.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Ferrier, D. E. K. Evolution of Homeobox Gene Clusters in Animals: The Giga-Cluster and Primary vs. Secondary Clustering.\u0026nbsp;Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution\u0026nbsp;4, (2016).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e28.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Chourrout, D.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;Minimal ProtoHox cluster inferred from bilaterian and cnidarian Hox complements.\u0026nbsp;Nature\u0026nbsp;442, 684\u0026ndash;687 (2006).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e29.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Simakov, O.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;Hemichordate genomes and deuterostome origins.\u0026nbsp;Nature\u0026nbsp;527, 459\u0026ndash;465 (2015).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e30.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Larroux, C.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;The NK Homeobox Gene Cluster Predates the Origin of Hox Genes.\u0026nbsp;Current Biology\u0026nbsp;17, 706\u0026ndash;710 (2007).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e31.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Friedman, N. \u0026amp; Rando, O. J. Epigenomics and the structure of the living genome.\u0026nbsp;Genome Res\u0026nbsp;25, 1482\u0026ndash;1490 (2015).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e32.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Heger, P., Marin, B., Bartkuhn, M., Schierenberg, E. \u0026amp; Wiehe, T. The chromatin insulator CTCF and the emergence of metazoan diversity.\u0026nbsp;PNAS\u0026nbsp;109, 17507\u0026ndash;17512 (2012).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e33.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Schwaiger, M.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;Evolutionary conservation of the eumetazoan gene regulatory landscape.\u0026nbsp;Genome Research\u0026nbsp;24, 639\u0026ndash;650 (2014).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e34.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Sieber, K. B.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;Integrated Functional Genomic Analysis Enables Annotation of Kidney Genome-Wide Association Study Loci.\u0026nbsp;JASN\u0026nbsp;30, 421\u0026ndash;441 (2019).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e35.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Zacharias, H., Anokhin, B., Khalturin, K. \u0026amp; Bosch, T. C. G. Genome sizes and chromosomes in the basal metazoan Hydra.\u0026nbsp;Zoology\u0026nbsp;107, 219\u0026ndash;227 (2004).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e36.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Li, Y.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;Chromosome-level reference genome of the jellyfish Rhopilema esculentum.\u0026nbsp;Gigascience\u0026nbsp;9, (2020).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e37.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Dehal, P. \u0026amp; Boore, J. L. Two Rounds of Whole Genome Duplication in the Ancestral Vertebrate.\u0026nbsp;PLOS Biology\u0026nbsp;3, e314 (2005).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e38.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Braasch, I.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;The spotted gar genome illuminates vertebrate evolution and facilitates human-teleost comparisons.\u0026nbsp;Nature Genetics\u0026nbsp;48, 427\u0026ndash;437 (2016).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e39.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Zakas, C., Harry, N. D., Scholl, E. H. \u0026amp; Rockman, M. V. The genome of the poecilogonous annelid Streblospio benedicti.\u0026nbsp;bioRxiv\u0026nbsp;2021.04.15.440069 (2021) doi:10.1101/2021.04.15.440069.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e40.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Qu, Z.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;Millipede genomes reveal unique adaptations during myriapod evolution.\u0026nbsp;PLOS Biology\u0026nbsp;18, e3000636 (2020).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e41.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Shingate, P.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;Chromosome-level assembly of the horseshoe crab genome provides insights into its genome evolution.\u0026nbsp;Nature Communications\u0026nbsp;11, 2322 (2020).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e42.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Ranz, J. M.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;Principles of Genome Evolution in the Drosophila melanogaster Species Group.\u0026nbsp;PLOS Biology\u0026nbsp;5, e152 (2007).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e43.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Kenny, N. J.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;Tracing animal genomic evolution with the chromosomal-level assembly of the freshwater sponge Ephydatia muelleri.\u0026nbsp;Nature Communications\u0026nbsp;11, 3676 (2020).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e44.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Kapli, P. \u0026amp; Telford, M. J. Topology-dependent asymmetry in systematic errors affects phylogenetic placement of Ctenophora and Xenacoelomorpha.\u0026nbsp;Science Advances\u0026nbsp;6, eabc5162 (2020).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e45.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;He, S.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;An axial Hox code controls tissue segmentation and body patterning in Nematostella vectensis.\u0026nbsp;Science\u0026nbsp;361, 1377\u0026ndash;1380 (2018).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e46.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;McGinnis, W. \u0026amp; Krumlauf, R. Homeobox genes and axial patterning.\u0026nbsp;Cell\u0026nbsp;68, 283\u0026ndash;302 (1992).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e47.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Ryan, J. F.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;Pre-Bilaterian Origins of the Hox Cluster and the Hox Code: Evidence from the Sea Anemone, Nematostella vectensis.\u0026nbsp;PLoS ONE\u0026nbsp;2, e153 (2007).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e48.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Finnerty, J. R., Pang, K., Burton, P., Paulson, D. \u0026amp; Martindale, M. Q. Origins of Bilateral Symmetry: Hox and Dpp Expression in a Sea Anemone.\u0026nbsp;Science\u0026nbsp;304, 1335\u0026ndash;1337 (2004).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e49.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Rodr\u0026iacute;guez-Carballo, E.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;The HoxD cluster is a dynamic and resilient TAD boundary controlling the segregation of antagonistic regulatory landscapes.\u0026nbsp;Genes Dev\u0026nbsp;31, 2264\u0026ndash;2281 (2017).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e50.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Lazar, N. H.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;Epigenetic maintenance of topological domains in the highly rearranged gibbon genome.\u0026nbsp;Genome Res.\u0026nbsp;28, 983\u0026ndash;997 (2018).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e51.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Rowley, M. J. \u0026amp; Corces, V. G. Organizational principles of 3D genome architecture.\u0026nbsp;Nature Reviews Genetics\u0026nbsp;19, 789\u0026ndash;800 (2018).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e52.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Szabo, Q., Bantignies, F. \u0026amp; Cavalli, G. Principles of genome folding into topologically associating domains.\u0026nbsp;Science Advances\u0026nbsp;5, eaaw1668 (2019).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e53.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Sacerdot, C., Louis, A., Bon, C., Berthelot, C. \u0026amp; Roest Crollius, H. Chromosome evolution at the origin of the ancestral vertebrate genome.\u0026nbsp;Genome Biology\u0026nbsp;19, 166 (2018).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e54.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Voolstra, C. R.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;Comparative analysis of the genomes of Stylophora pistillata and Acropora digitifera provides evidence for extensive differences between species of corals.\u0026nbsp;Sci Rep\u0026nbsp;7, 1\u0026ndash;14 (2017).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e55.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Moya, A.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;Whole transcriptome analysis of the coral Acropora millepora reveals complex responses to CO₂-driven acidification during the initiation of calcification.\u0026nbsp;Mol. Ecol.\u0026nbsp;21, 2440\u0026ndash;2454 (2012).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e56.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Cunning, R., Bay, R. A., Gillette, P., Baker, A. C. \u0026amp; Traylor-Knowles, N. Comparative analysis of the Pocillopora damicornis genome highlights role of immune system in coral evolution.\u0026nbsp;Scientific Reports\u0026nbsp;8, 16134 (2018).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e57.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Jiang, J. B.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;A hybrid de novo assembly of the sea pansy (Renilla muelleri) genome.\u0026nbsp;Gigascience\u0026nbsp;8, (2019).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e58.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Jeon, Y.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;The Draft Genome of an Octocoral, Dendronephthya gigantea.\u0026nbsp;Genome Biol Evol\u0026nbsp;11, 949\u0026ndash;953 (2019).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e59.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Marl\u0026eacute;taz, F.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;Amphioxus functional genomics and the origins of vertebrate gene regulation.\u0026nbsp;Nature\u0026nbsp;564, 64\u0026ndash;70 (2018).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e60.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Fritzenwanker, J. H. \u0026amp; Technau, U. Induction of gametogenesis in the basal cnidarian Nematostella vectensis (Anthozoa).\u0026nbsp;Development Genes and Evolution\u0026nbsp;212, 99\u0026ndash;103 (2002).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e61.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Chen, J. \u0026amp; Dellaporta, S. Urea-based Plant DNA Miniprep. in\u0026nbsp;The Maize Handbook\u0026nbsp;(eds. Freeling, M. \u0026amp; Walbot, V.) 526\u0026ndash;527 (Springer, 1994). doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-2694-9_85.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e62.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Sanders, S. M.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;CRISPR/Cas9-mediated gene knockin in the hydroid Hydractinia symbiolongicarpus.\u0026nbsp;BMC Genomics\u0026nbsp;19, 649 (2018).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e63.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Putnam, N. H.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;Chromosome-scale shotgun assembly using an in vitro method for long-range linkage.\u0026nbsp;Genome Res.\u0026nbsp;26, 342\u0026ndash;350 (2016).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e64.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Vurture, G. W.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;GenomeScope: fast reference-free genome profiling from short reads.\u0026nbsp;Bioinformatics\u0026nbsp;33, 2202\u0026ndash;2204 (2017).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e65.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Koren, S.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;Canu: scalable and accurate long-read assembly via adaptive\u0026nbsp;k\u0026nbsp;-mer weighting and repeat separation.\u0026nbsp;Genome Research\u0026nbsp;27, 722\u0026ndash;736 (2017).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e66.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Roach, M. J., Schmidt, S. A. \u0026amp; Borneman, A. R. Purge Haplotigs: allelic contig reassignment for third-gen diploid genome assemblies.\u0026nbsp;BMC Bioinformatics\u0026nbsp;19, 460 (2018).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e67.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Li, H. Minimap2: pairwise alignment for nucleotide sequences.\u0026nbsp;Bioinformatics\u0026nbsp;34, 3094\u0026ndash;3100 (2018).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e68.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Pryszcz, L. P. \u0026amp; Gabald\u0026oacute;n, T. Redundans: an assembly pipeline for highly heterozygous genomes.\u0026nbsp;Nucleic Acids Res\u0026nbsp;44, e113\u0026ndash;e113 (2016).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e69.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Bao, W., Kojima, K. K. \u0026amp; Kohany, O. Repbase Update, a database of repetitive elements in eukaryotic genomes.\u0026nbsp;Mobile DNA\u0026nbsp;6, 11 (2015).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e70.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Smit, A., Hubley, R. \u0026amp; Green, P.\u0026nbsp;RepeatMasker Open-4.0. (2013).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e71.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Flynn, J. M.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;RepeatModeler2 for automated genomic discovery of transposable element families.\u0026nbsp;PNAS\u0026nbsp;117, 9451\u0026ndash;9457 (2020).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e72.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Li, H. Aligning sequence reads, clone sequences and assembly contigs with BWA-MEM.\u0026nbsp;arXiv:1303.3997 [q-bio]\u0026nbsp;(2013).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e73.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Li, H. \u0026amp; Durbin, R. Fast and accurate short read alignment with Burrows\u0026ndash;Wheeler transform.\u0026nbsp;Bioinformatics\u0026nbsp;25, 1754\u0026ndash;1760 (2009).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e74.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Faust, G. G. \u0026amp; Hall, I. M. SAMBLASTER: fast duplicate marking and structural variant read extraction.\u0026nbsp;Bioinformatics\u0026nbsp;30, 2503\u0026ndash;2505 (2014).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e75.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Burton, J. N.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;Chromosome-scale scaffolding of de novo genome assemblies based on chromatin interactions.\u0026nbsp;Nature Biotechnology\u0026nbsp;31, 1119\u0026ndash;1125 (2013).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e76.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Durand, N. C.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;Juicebox Provides a Visualization System for Hi-C Contact Maps with Unlimited Zoom.\u0026nbsp;Cell Systems\u0026nbsp;3, 99\u0026ndash;101 (2016).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e77.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Kurtz, S.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;Versatile and open software for comparing large genomes.\u0026nbsp;Genome Biology\u0026nbsp;9 (2004).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e78.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Hunt, M.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;REAPR: a universal tool for genome assembly evaluation.\u0026nbsp;Genome Biology\u0026nbsp;14, R47 (2013).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e79.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Seppey, M., Manni, M. \u0026amp; Zdobnov, E. M. BUSCO: Assessing Genome Assembly and Annotation Completeness. in\u0026nbsp;Gene Prediction: Methods and Protocols\u0026nbsp;(ed. Kollmar, M.) 227\u0026ndash;245 (Springer, 2019). doi:10.1007/978-1-4939-9173-0_14.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e80.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Grabherr, M. G.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;Full-length transcriptome assembly from RNA-Seq data without a reference genome.\u0026nbsp;Nature Biotechnology\u0026nbsp;29, 644\u0026ndash;652 (2011).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e81.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Fu, L., Niu, B., Zhu, Z., Wu, S. \u0026amp; Li, W. CD-HIT: accelerated for clustering the next-generation sequencing data.\u0026nbsp;Bioinformatics\u0026nbsp;28, 3150\u0026ndash;3152 (2012).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e82.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Li, W. \u0026amp; Godzik, A. Cd-hit: a fast program for clustering and comparing large sets of protein or nucleotide sequences.\u0026nbsp;Bioinformatics\u0026nbsp;22, 1658\u0026ndash;1659 (2006).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e83.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Haas, B. J.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;De novo transcript sequence reconstruction from RNA-Seq: reference generation and analysis with Trinity.\u0026nbsp;Nat Protoc\u0026nbsp;8, (2013).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e84.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Srivastava, A.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;Alignment and mapping methodology influence transcript abundance estimation.\u0026nbsp;bioRxiv\u0026nbsp;657874 (2019) doi:10.1101/657874.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e85.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Kuo, R. I.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;Illuminating the dark side of the human transcriptome with long read transcript sequencing.\u0026nbsp;BMC Genomics\u0026nbsp;21, 751 (2020).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e86.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Kovaka, S.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;Transcriptome assembly from long-read RNA-seq alignments with StringTie2.\u0026nbsp;Genome Biology\u0026nbsp;20, 278 (2019).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e87.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Dobin, A.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;STAR: ultrafast universal RNA-seq aligner.\u0026nbsp;Bioinformatics\u0026nbsp;29, 15\u0026ndash;21 (2013).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e88.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Quinlan, A. R. \u0026amp; Hall, I. M. BEDTools: a flexible suite of utilities for comparing genomic features.\u0026nbsp;Bioinformatics\u0026nbsp;26, 841\u0026ndash;842 (2010).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e89.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Mistry, J.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;Pfam: The protein families database in 2021.\u0026nbsp;Nucleic Acids Research\u0026nbsp;49, D412\u0026ndash;D419 (2021).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e90.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Finn, R. D., Clements, J. \u0026amp; Eddy, S. R. HMMER web server: interactive sequence similarity searching.\u0026nbsp;Nucleic Acids Res\u0026nbsp;39, W29\u0026ndash;W37 (2011).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e91.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Liao, Y., Smyth, G. K. \u0026amp; Shi, W. featureCounts: an efficient general purpose program for assigning sequence reads to genomic features.\u0026nbsp;Bioinformatics\u0026nbsp;30, 923\u0026ndash;930 (2014).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e92.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Hoff, K. J., Lange, S., Lomsadze, A., Borodovsky, M. \u0026amp; Stanke, M. BRAKER1: Unsupervised RNA-Seq-Based Genome Annotation with GeneMark-ET and AUGUSTUS.\u0026nbsp;Bioinformatics\u0026nbsp;32, 767\u0026ndash;769 (2016).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e93.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Hoff, K. J., Lomsadze, A., Stanke, M. \u0026amp; Borodovsky, M. BRAKER2: Incorporating Protein Homology Information into Gene Prediction with GeneMark-EP and AUGUSTUS. 1 (2018).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e94.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Stanke, M., Sch\u0026ouml;ffmann, O., Morgenstern, B. \u0026amp; Waack, S. Gene prediction in eukaryotes with a generalized hidden Markov model that uses hints from external sources.\u0026nbsp;BMC Bioinformatics\u0026nbsp;7, 62 (2006).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e95.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Huerta-Cepas, J.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;Fast Genome-Wide Functional Annotation through Orthology Assignment by eggNOG-Mapper.\u0026nbsp;Mol Biol Evol\u0026nbsp;34, 2115\u0026ndash;2122 (2017).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e96.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;El-Gebali, S.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;The Pfam protein families database in 2019.\u0026nbsp;Nucleic Acids Res\u0026nbsp;47, D427\u0026ndash;D432 (2019).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e97.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Eddy, S. R. Accelerated Profile HMM Searches.\u0026nbsp;PLOS Computational Biology\u0026nbsp;7, e1002195 (2011).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e98.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;de Mendoza, A.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;Transcription factor evolution in eukaryotes and the assembly of the regulatory toolkit in multicellular lineages.\u0026nbsp;Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences\u0026nbsp;110, E4858\u0026ndash;E4866 (2013).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e99.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Kent, W. J. BLAT\u0026mdash;The BLAST-Like Alignment Tool.\u0026nbsp;Genome Res.\u0026nbsp;12, 656\u0026ndash;664 (2002).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e100.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Matus, D. Q., Pang, K., Daly, M. \u0026amp; Martindale, M. Q. Expression of Pax gene family members in the anthozoan cnidarian, Nematostella vectensis: Pax gene expression in Nematostella vectensis.\u0026nbsp;Evolution \u0026amp; Development\u0026nbsp;9, 25\u0026ndash;38 (2007).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e101.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Ryan, J. F.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;The cnidarian-bilaterian ancestor possessed at least 56 homeoboxes: evidence from the starlet sea anemone, Nematostella vectensis.\u0026nbsp;Genome Biology\u0026nbsp;7, R64 (2006).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e102.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Mazza, M. E., Pang, K., Martindale, M. Q. \u0026amp; Finnerty, J. R. Genomic organization, gene structure, and developmental expression of three Clustered otx genes in the sea anemone Nematostella vectensis.\u0026nbsp;Journal of Experimental Zoology Part B: Molecular and Developmental Evolution\u0026nbsp;308B, 494\u0026ndash;506 (2007).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e103.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Matus, D. Q., Thomsen, G. H. \u0026amp; Martindale, M. Q. Dorso/Ventral Genes Are Asymmetrically Expressed and Involved in Germ-Layer Demarcation during Cnidarian Gastrulation.\u0026nbsp;Current Biology\u0026nbsp;16, 499\u0026ndash;505 (2006).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e104.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Hudry, B.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;Molecular insights into the origin of the Hox-TALE patterning system.\u0026nbsp;eLife\u0026nbsp;3, e01939 (2014).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e105.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Mazza, M. E., Pang, K., Reitzel, A. M., Martindale, M. Q. \u0026amp; Finnerty, J. R. A conserved cluster of three PRD-class homeobox genes (homeobrain, rx and orthopedia) in the Cnidaria and Protostomia.\u0026nbsp;EvoDevo\u0026nbsp;1, 3 (2010).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e106.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Ying, H.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;The Whole-Genome Sequence of the Coral Acropora millepora.\u0026nbsp;Genome Biol Evol\u0026nbsp;11, 1374\u0026ndash;1379 (2019).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e107.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Consortium*, T. C. elegans S. Genome Sequence of the Nematode C. elegans: A Platform for Investigating Biology.\u0026nbsp;Science\u0026nbsp;282, 2012\u0026ndash;2018 (1998).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e108.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Hoskins, R. A.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;The Release 6 reference sequence of the Drosophila melanogaster genome.\u0026nbsp;Genome Res.\u0026nbsp;25, 445\u0026ndash;458 (2015).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e109.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Hydra 2.0 Web Portal. https://research.nhgri.nih.gov/hydra.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e110.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Minh, B. Q.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;IQ-TREE 2: New Models and Efficient Methods for Phylogenetic Inference in the Genomic Era.\u0026nbsp;Mol Biol Evol\u0026nbsp;37, 1530\u0026ndash;1534 (2020).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e111.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Sanderson, M. J. r8s: inferring absolute rates of molecular evolution and divergence times in the absence of a molecular clock.\u0026nbsp;Bioinformatics\u0026nbsp;19, 301\u0026ndash;302 (2003).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e112.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;dos Reis, M.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;Uncertainty in the Timing of Origin of Animals and the Limits of Precision in Molecular Timescales.\u0026nbsp;Current Biology\u0026nbsp;25, 2939\u0026ndash;2950 (2015).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e113.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Camacho, C.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;BLAST+: architecture and applications.\u0026nbsp;BMC Bioinformatics\u0026nbsp;10, 421 (2009).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e114.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Dimitrieva, S. \u0026amp; Bucher, P. UCNEbase\u0026mdash;a database of ultraconserved non-coding elements and genomic regulatory blocks.\u0026nbsp;Nucleic Acids Res\u0026nbsp;41, D101\u0026ndash;D109 (2013).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e115.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Harris, T. W.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;WormBase: a modern Model Organism Information Resource.\u0026nbsp;Nucleic Acids Res\u0026nbsp;48, D762\u0026ndash;D767 (2020).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e116.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Srivastava, M.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;The Amphimedon queenslandica genome and the evolution of animal complexity.\u0026nbsp;Nature\u0026nbsp;466, 720\u0026ndash;726 (2010).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e117.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Srivastava, M.\u0026nbsp;et al.\u0026nbsp;The\u0026nbsp;Trichoplax\u0026nbsp;genome and the nature of placozoans.\u0026nbsp;Nature\u0026nbsp;454, 955\u0026ndash;960 (2008).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e118.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Traag, V. A., Waltman, L. \u0026amp; Eck, N. J. van. From Louvain to Leiden: guaranteeing well-connected communities.\u0026nbsp;Scientific Reports\u0026nbsp;9, 5233 (2019).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e119. \u0026nbsp;Kumar, S., Stecher, G., Suleski, M. \u0026amp; Hedges, S. B. TimeTree: A Resource for Timelines, Timetrees, and Divergence Times. Mol Biol Evol 34, 1812\u0026ndash;1819 (2017).\u003c/p\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"sea anemones, chromosome-level genome assemblies, Nematostella vectensis, Scolanthus callimorphus","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-796229/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-796229/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eDraft genome sequences of non-bilaterian species have provided important insights into the evolution of the metazoan gene repertoire. However, there is little information about the evolution of gene clusters, genome architectures and karyotypes during animal evolution. Here we report chromosome-level genome assemblies of two related anthozoan cnidarians, the sea anemones, \u003cem\u003eNematostella vectensis\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eScolanthus callimorphus\u003c/em\u003e. We find a robust set of 15 chromosomes with a clear one-to-one correspondence of the chromosomes between the two species. We show that, in contrast to Bilateria, Hox and NK clusters of investigated cnidarians are disintegrated, indicating that microsynteny conservation is largely lost. In line with that, we find no evidence for topologically associated domains, suggesting fundamental difference in long-range gene regulation compared to vertebrates. However, both sea anemone genomes show remarkable chromosomal conservation with other cnidarians, several bilaterians and the sponge \u003cem\u003eEphydatia muelleri\u003c/em\u003e, allowing us to reconstruct the putative cnidarian and metazoan chromosomes, consisting of 19 and 16 ancestral linkage groups, respectively. These data suggest that large parts of the ancestral metazoan genome have been retained in chromosomes of some extant lineages, yet, higher order gene regulation may have evolved only after the cnidarian-bilaterian split.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Sea anemone genomes reveal ancestral metazoan chromosomal macrosynteny","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2021-08-17 17:37:10","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-796229/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"3ccb147d-46f3-4864-bde7-eb8a15821173","owner":[],"postedDate":"August 17th, 2021","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[{"id":6517658,"name":"Evolutionary Genetics"},{"id":6517659,"name":"Bioinformatics"}],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2023-07-03T14:01:13+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2021-08-17 17:37:10","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-796229","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-796229","identity":"rs-796229","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"_2-kVJe1T_tPrBINL-cwx","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}