We report a ribosomal tag pyrosequencing study of the phylogenetic diversity of Archaea, Bacteria and Eucarya over a depth profile at the Hawaii Ocean Time-Series Station, ALOHA. The V9 region of the SSU rRNA gene was amplified from samples representing the epi-(10 m), meso-(800 m) and bathy-(4400 m) pelagia. The primers used are expected to amplify representatives of B80% of known phylogenetic diversity across all three domains. Comparisons of unique sequences revealed a remarkably low degree of overlap between communities at each depth. The 444 147 sequence tags analyzed represented 62 975 unique sequences. Of these, 3707 (5.9%) occurred at two depths, and only 298 (0.5%) were observed at all three depths. At this level of phylogenetic resolution, Bacteria diversity decreased with depth but was still equivalent to that reported elsewhere for different soil types. Archaea diversity was highest in the two deeper samples. Eucarya observations and richness estimates are almost one order of magnitude higher than any previous marine microbial Eucarya richness estimates. The associations of many Eucarya sequences with putative parasitic organisms may have significant impacts on our understanding of the mechanisms controlling host population density and diversity, and point to a more significant role for microbial Eucarya in carbon flux through the microbial loop. We posit that the majority of sequences detected from the deep sea that have closest matches to sequences from non-pelagic sources are indeed native to the marine environment, and are possibly responsible for key metabolic processes in global biogeochemical cycles.

Despite intensive efforts using linkage and candidate gene approaches, the genetic etiology for the majority of families with a multi-generational breast cancer predisposition is unknown. In this study, we used whole-exome sequencing of thirty-three individuals from 15 breast cancer families to identify potential predisposing genes. Our analysis identified families with heterozygous, deleterious mutations in the DNA repair genes FANCC and BLM, which are responsible for the autosomal recessive disorders Fanconi Anemia and Bloom syndrome. In total, screening of all exons in these genes in 438 breast cancer families identified three with truncating mutations in FANCC and two with truncating mutations in BLM. Additional screening of FANCC mutation hotspot exons identified one pathogenic mutation among an additional 957 breast cancer families. Importantly, none of the deleterious mutations were identified among 464 healthy controls and are not reported in the 1,000 Genomes data. Given the rarity of Fanconi Anemia and Bloom syndrome disorders among Caucasian populations, the finding of multiple deleterious mutations in these critical DNA repair genes among high-risk breast cancer families is intriguing and suggestive of a predisposing role. Our data demonstrate the utility of intra-family exome-sequencing approaches to uncover cancer predisposition genes, but highlight the major challenge of definitively validating candidates where the incidence of sporadic disease is high, germline mutations are not fully penetrant, and individual predisposition genes may only account for a tiny proportion of breast cancer families.

The extent to which prokaryotic evolution has been influenced by horizontal gene transfer (HGT) and therefore might be more of a network than a tree is unclear. Here we use supertree methods to ask whether a definitive prokaryotic phylogenetic tree exists and whether it can be confidently inferred using orthologous genes. We analysed an 11-taxon dataset spanning the deepest divisions of prokaryotic relationships, a 10-taxon dataset spanning the relatively recent c-proteobacteria and a 61-taxon dataset spanning both, using species for which complete genomes are available. Congruence among gene trees spanning deep relationships is not better than random. By contrast, a strong, almost perfect phylogenetic signal exists in c-proteobacterial genes. Deep-level prokaryotic relationships are difficult to infer because of signal erosion, systematic bias, hidden paralogy and/or HGT. Our results do not preclude levels of HGT that would be inconsistent with the notion of a prokaryotic phylogeny. This approach will help decide the extent to which we can say that there is a prokaryotic phylogeny and where in the phylogeny a cohesive genomic signal exists.