SignificanceComparisons of genome function between species are providing important insight into the evolutionary origins of diversity. Here, we show that comparative functional genomics studies can come to the wrong conclusions if they do not take the relationships of species into account and instead rely on pairwise comparisons between species, as is common practice. We reexamined two previously published studies and found problems with pairwise comparisons that draw both their original conclusions into question. One study found support for the ortholog conjecture, and the other concluded that evolution of gene expression differed in pattern and process between animal phyla vs. within animal phyla. Our results show that, to answer evolutionary questions about genome function, it is critical to consider evolutionary relationships.

Here, we show that miR‐515‐5p inhibits cancer cell migration and metastasis. RNA‐seq analyses of both oestrogen receptor receptor‐positive and receptor‐negative breast cancer cells overexpressing miR‐515‐5p reveal down‐regulation of NRAS, FZD4, CDC42BPA, PIK3C2B and MARK4 mRNAs. We demonstrate that miR‐515‐5p inhibits MARK4 directly 3′ UTR interaction and that MARK4 knock‐down mimics the effect of miR‐515‐5p on breast and lung cancer cell migration. MARK4 overexpression rescues the inhibitory effects of miR‐515‐5p, suggesting miR‐515‐5p mediates this process through MARK4 down‐regulation. Furthermore, miR‐515‐5p expression is reduced in metastases compared to primary tumours derived from both in vivo xenografts and samples from patients with breast cancer. Conversely, miR‐515‐5p overexpression prevents tumour cell dissemination in a mouse metastatic model. Moreover, high miR‐515‐5p and low MARK4 expression correlate with increased breast and lung cancer patients' survival, respectively. Taken together, these data demonstrate the importance of miR‐515‐5p/MARK4 regulation in cell migration and metastasis across two common cancers.

There is considerable interest in comparing functional genomic data across species. One goal of such work is to provide an integrated understanding of genome and phenotype evolution. Most comparative functional genomic studies have relied on multiple pairwise comparisons between species, an approach that does not incorporate information about the evolutionary relationships among species. The statistical problems that arise from not considering these relationships can lead pairwise approaches to the wrong conclusions, and are a missed opportunity to learn about biology that can only be understood in an explicit phylogenetic context. Here we examine two recently published studies that compare gene expression across species with pairwise methods, and find reason to question the original conclusions of both. One study interpreted pairwise comparisons of gene expression as support for the ortholog conjecture, the hypothesis that orthologs tend to be more similar than paralogs. The other study interpreted pairwise comparisons of embryonic gene expression across distantly related animals as evidence for a distinct evolutionary process that gave rise to phyla. In each study, distinct patterns of pairwise similarity among species were originally interpreted as evidence of particular evolutionary processes, but instead we find they reflect species relationships. These reanalyses concretely demonstrate the inadequacy of pairwise comparisons for analyzing functional genomic data across species. It will be critical to adopt phylogenetic comparative methods in future functional genomic work. Fortunately, phylogenetic comparative biology is also a rapidly advancing field with many methods that can be directly applied to functional genomic data. SignificanceComparisons of genome function between species are providing important insight into the evolutionary origins of diversity. Here we demonstrate that comparative functional genomics studies can come to the wrong conclusions if they do not take the relationships of species into account and instead rely on pairwise comparisons between species, as is common practice. We re-examined two previously published studies and found problems with pairwise comparisons that draw both their original conclusions into question. One study had found support for the ortholog conjecture and the other had concluded that the evolution of gene expression was different between animal phyla than within them. Our results demonstrate that to answer evolutionary questions about genome function, it is critical to consider evolutionary relationships.

Siphonophores are a diverse group of hydrozoans (Cnidaria) that are found at most depths of the ocean - from the surface, like the familiar Portuguese man of war, to the deep sea. They play important roles in ocean ecosystems, and are among the most abundant gelatinous predators. A previous phylogenetic study based on two ribosomal RNA genes provided insight into the internal relationships between major siphonophore groups. There was, however, little support for many deep relationships within the clade Codonophora. Here, we present a new siphonophore phylogeny based on new transcriptome data from 29 siphonophore species analyzed in combination with 14 publicly available genomic and transcriptomic datasets. We use this new phylogeny to reconstruct several traits that are central to siphonophore biology, including sexual system (monoecy vs. dioecy), gain and loss of zooid types, life history traits, and habitat. The phylogenetic relationships in this study are largely consistent with the previous phylogeny, but we find strong support for new clades within Codonophora that were previously unresolved. These results have important implications for trait evolution within Siphonophora, including favoring the hypothesis that monoecy arose at least twice.