BRAVO Ignacio's profile
avatar

BRAVO IgnacioORCID_LOGO

  • Laboratory MIVEGEC (CNRS IRD Univ Montpellier), Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), Montpellier, France
  • Evolutionary Applications, Evolutionary Epidemiology, Experimental Evolution, Genome Evolution, Molecular Evolution, Other, Phylogenetics / Phylogenomics, Systematics / Taxonomy
  • recommender

Recommendations:  4

Reviews:  0

Areas of expertise
Academic Career 2015->> Research Director. French National Center for Scientific Research (CNRS), Montpellier, France. 2011-2015 Head of the Infections and Cancer Laboratory. Catalan Institute of Oncology (ICO), Barcelona, Spain. 2008-2011 Ramón y Cajal Research Fellow. Centre for Public Health Research (CSISP). Valencia. Spain. 2007-2008 Junior Professorship. Institute for Evolution and Biodiversity. University Münster, Münster, Germany. 2006. EMBO Short term fellowship (3 months). Laboratory Prof. Dr. Hervé Philippe. Université de Montréal, Canada. 2006-2007 Research Scientist. Laboratory Prof. Dr. Lutz Gissmann, Genome Modifications and Carcinogenesis, German Cancer Research Centre, Heidelberg, Germany. 2002-2006 Postdoctoral researcher. Laboratory Prof. Dr. Ángel Alonso Cell Differentiation, German Cancer Research Centre, Heidelberg, Germany. 1998-2002 PhD in Biology. 2002. Universidad de León, Spain. Selected recent publications Pimenoff V, Mendes de Oliveira C, Bravo IG. Transmission between Archaic and Modern Human Ancestors during the Evolution of the Oncogenic Human Papillomavirus 16. Mol Biol Evol. 2017 Jan;34(1):4-19. doi: 10.1093/molbev/msw214. Nicolás-Párraga S, Gandini C, Pimenoff VN, Alemany L, de Sanjosé S, Bosch FX and Bravo IG*. HPV16 variants distribution in invasive cancers of the cervix, vulva, vagina, penis, and anus. Cancer Med. 2016 Oct;5(10):2909-2919. doi: 10.1002/cam4.870. Mengual-Chuliá B, Bedhomme S, Lafforgue G, Elena SF, Bravo IG. Assessing parallel gene histories in viral genomes. BMC Evol Biol. 2016 Feb 5;16(1):32. doi: 10.1186/s12862-016-0605-4. Félez-Sánchez M, Trösemeier JH, Bedhomme S, González-Bravo MI, Kamp C, Bravo IG. Cancer, Warts, or Asymptomatic Infections: Clinical Presentation Matches Codon Usage Preferences in Human Papillomaviruses. Genome Biol Evol. 2015 Jul 1;7(8):2117-35. doi: 10.1093/gbe/evv129. Bravo IG and Félez-Sánchez M. “Papillomaviruses: viral evolution, cancer and evolutionary medicine". Evol Med Public Health. 2015 Jan 28;2015(1):32-51. doi: 10.1093/emph/eov003. Garcia-Perez, R, Ibanez C, Godinez JM, Arechiga N, Garin I, Perez-Suarez G, de Paz O, Juste J, Echevarria JE, Bravo IG.
 “Novel papillomaviruses in free-ranging Iberian bats: no virus-host co-evolution, no strict host specificity and hints for recombination”. 
Genome Biol Evol (2014) 6(1):94-104. doi: 10.1093/gbe/evt211 Godínez JM, Nicolás-Párraga S, Pimenoff VN, Mengual-Chuliá B, Muñoz N, Bosch FX, Sánchez GI, McCloskey J, Bravo IG. “Phylogenetically related, clinically different: human papillomaviruses 6 and 11 variants distribution in genital warts and in laryngeal papillomatosis”. Clin Microbiol Infect. (2014) 20(6):O406-13. doi: 10.1111/1469-0691.12420.

Recommendations:  4

25 Sep 2023
article picture

Random genetic drift sets an upper limit on mRNA splicing accuracy in metazoans

The drift barrier hypothesis and the limits to alternative splicing accuracy

Recommended by based on reviews by Lars M. Jakt and 2 anonymous reviewers

Accurate information flow is central to living systems. The continuity of genomes through generations as well as the reproducible functioning and survival of the individual organisms require a faithful information transfer during replication, transcription and translation. The differential efficiency of natural selection against “mistakes” results in decreasing fidelity rates for replication, transcription and translation. At each level in the information flow chain (replication, transcription, translation), numerous complex molecular systems have evolved and been selected for preventing, identifying and, when possible, correcting or removing such “mistakes” arising during information transfer.

However, fidelity cannot be improved ad infinitum. First, because of the limits imposed by the physical nature of the processes of copying and recoding information over different molecular supports: all mechanisms ensuring fidelity during biological information transfer ultimately rely on chemical kinetics and thermodynamics. The more accurate a copying process is, the lower the synthesis rate and the higher the energetic cost of correcting errors. Second, because of the limits imposed by random genetic drift: natural selection cannot effectively act on an allele that contributes with a small differential advantage unless effective population size is large. If s <1/Ne (or s <1/(2Ne) in diploids) the allele frequency in the population is de facto subject to neutral drift processes.

In their preprint “Random genetic drift sets an upper limit on mRNA splicing accuracy in metazoans”, Bénitière, Necsulea and Duret explore the validity of this last mentioned “drift barrier” hypothesis for the case study of alternative splicing diversity in eukaryotes (Bénitière et al. 2022). Splicing refers to an ensemble of eukaryotic molecular processes mediated by a large number of proteins and ribonucleoproteins and involving nucleotide sequence recognition, that uses as a molecular substrate a precursor messenger RNA (mRNA), directly transcribed from the DNA, and produces a mature mRNA by removing introns and joining exons (Chow et al. 1977). Alternative splicing refers to the case in which different molecular species of mature mRNAs can be produced, either by cis-splicing processes acting on the same precursor mRNA, e.g. by varying the presence/absence of different exons or by varying the exon-exon boundaries, or by trans-splicing processes, joining exons from different precursor mRNA molecules.

The diversity of mRNA molecular species generated by alternative splicing enlarges the molecular phenotypic space that can be generated from the same genotype. In humans, alternative splicing occurs in around 95% of the ca. 20,000 genes, resulting in ca. 100,000 medium-to-high abundance transcripts (Pan et al. 2008). In multicellular organisms, the frequency of alternatively spliced mRNAs varies between tissues and across ontogeny, often in a switch-like pattern (Wang et al. 2008). In the molecular and cell biology community, it is commonly accepted that splice variants contribute with specific functions (Marasco and Kornblihtt 2023) although there exists a discussion around the functional nature of low-frequency splice variants (see for instance the debate between Tress et al. 2017 and Blencowe 2017). The origin, diversity, regulation and evolutionary advantage of alternative splicing constitutes thus a playground of the selectionist-neutralist debate, with one extreme considering that most splice variants are mere “mistakes” of the splicing process (Pickrell et al. 2010), and the other extreme considering that alternative splicing is at the core of complexity in multicellular organisms, as it increases the genome coding potential and allows for a large repertoire of cell types (Chen et al. 2014).

In their manuscript, Bénitière, Necsulea and Duret set the cursor towards the neutralist end of the gradient and test the hypothesis of whether the high alternative splice rate in “complex” organisms corresponds to a high rate of splicing “mistakes”, arising from the limit imposed by the drift barrier effect on the power of natural selection to increase accuracy (Bush et al. 2017). In their preprint, the authors convincingly show that in metazoans a fraction of the variation of alternative splicing rate is explained by variation in proxies of population size, so that species with smaller Ne display higher alternative splice rates. They communicate further that abundant splice variants tend to preserve the reading frame more often than low-frequency splice variants, and that the nucleotide splice signals in abundant splice variants display stronger evidence of purifying selection than those in low-frequency splice variants. From all the evidence presented in the manuscript, the authors interpret that “variation in alternative splicing rate is entirely driven by variation in the efficacy of selection against splicing errors”.

The authors honestly present some of the limitations of the data used for the analyses, regarding i) the quality of the proxies used for Ne (i.e. body length, longevity and dN/dS ratio); ii) the heterogeneous nature of the RNA sequencing datasets (full organisms, organs or tissues; different life stages, sexes or conditions); and iii) mostly short RNA reads that do not fully span individual introns. Further, data from bacteria do not verify the herein communicated trends, as it has been shown that bacterial species with low population sizes do not display higher transcription error rates (Traverse and Ochman 2016). Finally, it will be extremely interesting to introduce a larger evolutionary perspective on alternative splicing rates encompassing unicellular eukaryotes, in which an intriguing interplay between alternative splicing and gene duplication has been communicated (Hurtig et al. 2020).

The manuscript from Bénitière, Necsulea and Duret makes a significant advance to our understanding of the diversity, the origin and the physiology of post-transcriptional and post-translational mechanisms by emphasising the fundamental role of non-adaptive evolutionary processes and the upper limits to splicing accuracy set by genetic drift.

References

Bénitière F, Necsulea A, Duret L. 2023. Random genetic drift sets an upper limit on mRNA splicing accuracy in metazoans. bioRxiv, ver. 4 peer-reviewed and recommended by Peer Community in Evolutionary Biology. https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.12.09.519597 

Blencowe BJ. 2017. The Relationship between Alternative Splicing and Proteomic Complexity. Trends Biochem Sci 42:407–408. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tibs.2017.04.001

Bush SJ, Chen L, Tovar-Corona JM, Urrutia AO. 2017. Alternative splicing and the evolution of phenotypic novelty. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 372:20150474. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2015.0474

Chen L, Bush SJ, Tovar-Corona JM, Castillo-Morales A, Urrutia AO. 2014. Correcting for differential transcript coverage reveals a strong relationship between alternative splicing and organism complexity. Mol Biol Evol 31:1402–1413. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msu083

Chow LT, Gelinas RE, Broker TR, Roberts RJ. 1977. An amazing sequence arrangement at the 5’ ends of adenovirus 2 messenger RNA. Cell 12:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/0092-8674(77)90180-5

Hurtig JE, Kim M, Orlando-Coronel LJ, Ewan J, Foreman M, Notice L-A, Steiger MA, van Hoof A. 2020. Origin, conservation, and loss of alternative splicing events that diversify the proteome in Saccharomycotina budding yeasts. RNA 26:1464–1480. https://doi.org/10.1261/rna.075655.120

Marasco LE, Kornblihtt AR. 2023. The physiology of alternative splicing. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 24:242–254. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41580-022-00545-z

Pan Q, Shai O, Lee LJ, Frey BJ, Blencowe BJ. 2008. Deep surveying of alternative splicing complexity in the human transcriptome by high-throughput sequencing. Nat Genet 40:1413–1415. https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.259

Pickrell JK, Pai AA, Gilad Y, Pritchard JK. 2010. Noisy splicing drives mRNA isoform diversity in human cells. PLoS Genet 6:e1001236. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1001236

Traverse CC, Ochman H. 2016. Conserved rates and patterns of transcription errors across bacterial growth states and lifestyles. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 113:3311–3316. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1525329113

Tress ML, Abascal F, Valencia A. 2017. Alternative Splicing May Not Be the Key to Proteome Complexity. Trends Biochem Sci 42:98–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tibs.2016.08.008

Wang ET, Sandberg R, Luo S, Khrebtukova I, Zhang L, Mayr C, Kingsmore SF, Schroth GP, Burge CB. 2008. Alternative isoform regulation in human tissue transcriptomes. Nature 456:470–476. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature07509

26 Oct 2021
article picture

Large-scale geographic survey provides insights into the colonization history of a major aphid pest on its cultivated apple host in Europe, North America and North Africa

The evolutionary puzzle of the host-parasite-endosymbiont Russian doll for apples and aphids

Recommended by based on reviews by Pedro Simões and 1 anonymous reviewer

Each individual multicellular organism, each of our bodies, is a small universe. Every living surface -skin, cuticle, bark, mucosa- is the home place to milliards of bacteria, fungi and viruses. They constitute our microbiota. Some of them are essential for certain organisms. Other could not live without their hosts. For many species, the relationship between host and microbiota is so close that their histories are inseparable. The recognition of this biological inextricability has led to the notion of holobiont as the organism ensemble of host and microbiota. When individuals of a particular animal or plant species expand their geographical range, it is the holobiont that expands. And these processes of migration, expansion and colonization are often accompanied by evolutionary and ecological innovations in the interspecies relationships, at the macroscopic level (e.g. novel predator-prey or host-parasite interactions) and at the microscopic level (e.g. changes in the microbiota composition). From the human point of view, these novel interactions can be economically disastrous if they involve and threaten important crop or cattle species. And this is especially worrying in the present context of genetic standardization and intensification for mass-production on the one hand, and of climate change on the other.

With this perspective, the international team led by Amandine Cornille presents a study aiming at understanding the evolutionary history of the rosy apple aphid Dysaphis plantaginea Passerini, a major pest of the cultivated apple tree Malus domestica Borkh (1). The apple tree was probably domesticated in Central Asia, and later disseminated by humans over the world in different waves, and it was probably introduced in Europe by the Greeks. It is however unclear when and where D. plantaginea started parasitizing the cultivated apple tree. The ancestral D. plantaginea could have already infected the wild ancestor of current cultivated apple trees, but the aphid is not common in Central Asia. Alternatively, it may have gained access only later to the plant, possibly via a host jump, from Pyrus to Malus that may have occurred in Asia Minor or in the Caucasus. In the present preprint, Olvera-Vázquez and coworkers have analysed over 650 D. plantaginea colonies from 52 orchards in 13 countries, in Western, Central and Eastern Europe as well as in Morocco and the USA. The authors have analysed the genetic diversity in the sampled aphids, and have characterized as well the composition of the associated endosymbiont bacteria. The analyses detect substantial recent admixture, but allow to identify aphid subpopulations slightly but significantly differentiated and isolated by distance, especially those in Morocco and the USA, as well as to determine the presence of significant gene flow. This process of colonization associated to gene flow is most likely indirectly driven by human interactions. Very interestingly, the data show that this genetic diversity in the aphids is not reflected by a corresponding diversity in the associated microbiota, largely dominated by a few Buchnera aphidicola variants. In order to determine polarity in the evolutionary history of the aphid-tree association, the authors have applied approximate Bayesian computing and machine learning approaches. Albeit promising, the results are not sufficiently robust to assess directionality nor to confidently assess the origin of the crop pest. Despite the large effort here communicated, the authors point to the lack of sufficient data (in terms of aphid isolates), especially originating from Central Asia. Such increased sampling will need to be implemented in the future in order to elucidate not only the origin and the demographic history of the interaction between the cultivated apple tree and the rosy apple aphid. This knowledge is needed to understand how this crop pest struggles with the different seasonal and geographical selection pressures while maintaining high genetic diversity, conspicuous gene flow, differentiated populations and low endosymbiontic diversity.

References

  1. Olvera-Vazquez SG, Remoué C, Venon A, Rousselet A, Grandcolas O, Azrine M, Momont L, Galan M, Benoit L, David GM, Alhmedi A, Beliën T, Alins G, Franck P, Haddioui A, Jacobsen SK, Andreev R, Simon S, Sigsgaard L, Guibert E, Tournant L, Gazel F, Mody K, Khachtib Y, Roman A, Ursu TM, Zakharov IA, Belcram H, Harry M, Roth M, Simon JC, Oram S, Ricard JM, Agnello A, Beers EH, Engelman J, Balti I, Salhi-Hannachi A, Zhang H, Tu H, Mottet C, Barrès B, Degrave A, Razmjou J, Giraud T, Falque M, Dapena E, Miñarro M, Jardillier L, Deschamps P, Jousselin E, Cornille A (2021) Large-scale geographic survey provides insights into the colonization history of a major aphid pest on its cultivated apple host in Europe, North America and North Africa. bioRxiv, 2020.12.11.421644, ver. 3 peer-reviewed and recommended by Peer Community in Evolutionary Biology. https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.12.11.421644

 

13 Dec 2018
article picture

A behavior-manipulating virus relative as a source of adaptive genes for parasitoid wasps

Genetic intimacy of filamentous viruses and endoparasitoid wasps

Recommended by based on reviews by Alejandro Manzano Marín and 1 anonymous reviewer

Viruses establish intimate relationships with the cells they infect. The virocell is a novel entity, different from the original host cell and beyond the mere combination of viral and cellular genetic material. In these close encounters, viral and cellular genomes often hybridise, combine, recombine, merge and excise. Such chemical promiscuity leaves genomics scars that can be passed on to descent, in the form of deletions or duplications and, importantly, insertions and back and forth exchange of genetic material between viruses and their hosts.
In this preprint [1], Di Giovanni and coworkers report the identification of 13 genes present in the extant genomes of members of the Leptopilina wasp genus, bearing sound signatures of having been horizontally acquired from an ancestral virus. Importantly the authors identify Leptopilina boulardi filamentous virus (LbFV) as an extant relative of the ancestral virus that served as donor for the thirteen horizontally transferred genes. While pinpointing genes with a likely possible viral origin in eukaryotic genomes is only relatively rare, identifying an extant viral lineage related to the ancestral virus that continues to infect an extant relative of the ancestral host is remarkable. But the amazing evolutionary history of the Leptopilina hosts and these filamentous viruses goes beyond this shared genes. These wasps are endoparasitoids of Drosophila larvae, the female wasp laying the eggs inside the larvae and simultaneously injecting venom that hinders the immune response. The composition of the venoms is complex, varies between wasp species and also between individuals within a species, but a central component of all these venoms are spiked structures that vary in morphology, symmetry and size, often referred to as virus-like particles (VLPs).
In this preprint, the authors convincingly show that the expression pattern in the Leptopilina wasps of the thirteen genes identified to have been horizontally acquired from the LbFV ancestor coincides with that of the production of VLPs in the female wasp venom gland. Based on this spatio-temporal match, the authors propose that these VLPs have a viral origin. The data presented in this preprint will undoubtedly stimulate further research on the composition, function, origin, evolution and diversity of these VLP structures, which are highly debated (see for instance [2] and [3]).

References

[1] Di Giovanni, D., Lepetit, D., Boulesteix, M., Ravallec, M., & Varaldi, J. (2018). A behavior-manipulating virus relative as a source of adaptive genes for parasitoid wasps. bioRxiv, 342758, ver. 5 peer-reviewed and recommended by PCI Evol Biol. doi: 10.1101/342758
[2] Poirié, M., Colinet, D., & Gatti, J. L. (2014). Insights into function and evolution of parasitoid wasp venoms. Current Opinion in Insect Science, 6, 52-60. doi: 10.1016/j.cois.2014.10.004
[3] Heavner, M. E., Ramroop, J., Gueguen, G., Ramrattan, G., Dolios, G., Scarpati, M., ... & Govind, S. (2017). Novel organelles with elements of bacterial and eukaryotic secretion systems weaponize parasites of Drosophila. Current Biology, 27(18), 2869-2877. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2017.08.019

07 Jul 2017
article picture

Negative frequency-dependent selection is frequently confounding

Unmasking the delusive appearance of negative frequency-dependent selection

Recommended by based on reviews by David Baltrus and 2 anonymous reviewers

Explaining the processes that maintain polymorphisms in a population has been a fundamental line of research in evolutionary biology. One of the main mechanisms identified that preserves genetic diversity is negative frequency-dependent selection (NFDS), which constitutes a powerful framework for interpreting the presence of persistent polymorphisms. Nevertheless, a number of patterns that are often explained by invoking NFDS may also be compatible with, and possibly more easily explained by, different processes.
In the present manuscript [1], Brisson acknowledges first that genuine NFDS has been instrumental for our understanding on the dynamics that perpetuate polymorphisms, and that the power and importance of NFDS cannot be disregarded. Second, the author aims at identifying certain of the processes that may result in maintenance of genetic diversity, and whose outcome may be mistaken for NFDS, namely directional selection in changing environments, density-dependent fitness, multiple niche selection and community diversity. The author claims that systematic resort to NFDS as explanatory device may have lead to its application to systems where it does not apply or that do not fulfil the basic assumptions of NFDS. The author struggles in the text to provide with a precise, verbal definition of NFDS, and the exchanges with the reviewers during the recommendation process show that agreeing on such a verbal definition of NFDS is not trivial. Probably a profound mathematical formulation of the varying value of a genotype’s fitness relative to other competing ones as a function of their frequency (developing further the synthesis by Heino [2]) may still be wanting. Indeed, the text is intended for a broad audience of evolutionary biologists with operational mathematical knowledge and interest in models, rather than for modellers or biomathematicians. Nevertheless, the manuscript is rich in references to original literature, elaborates on interesting lines of thought and discussion and will hopefully trigger novel experimental and formal research to clarify the role of NFDS and to discern between alternative mechanisms that may render similar patterns of maintenance of genetic diversity.

References

[1] Brisson D. 2017. Negative frequency-dependent selection is frequently confounding. bioRxiv 113324, ver. 3 of 20th June 2017. doi: 10.1101/113324

[2] Heino M, Metz JAJ and Kaitala V. 1998. The enigma of frequency-dependent selection. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 13: 367-370. doi: 1016/S0169-5347(98)01380-9

avatar

BRAVO IgnacioORCID_LOGO

  • Laboratory MIVEGEC (CNRS IRD Univ Montpellier), Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), Montpellier, France
  • Evolutionary Applications, Evolutionary Epidemiology, Experimental Evolution, Genome Evolution, Molecular Evolution, Other, Phylogenetics / Phylogenomics, Systematics / Taxonomy
  • recommender

Recommendations:  4

Reviews:  0

Areas of expertise
Academic Career 2015->> Research Director. French National Center for Scientific Research (CNRS), Montpellier, France. 2011-2015 Head of the Infections and Cancer Laboratory. Catalan Institute of Oncology (ICO), Barcelona, Spain. 2008-2011 Ramón y Cajal Research Fellow. Centre for Public Health Research (CSISP). Valencia. Spain. 2007-2008 Junior Professorship. Institute for Evolution and Biodiversity. University Münster, Münster, Germany. 2006. EMBO Short term fellowship (3 months). Laboratory Prof. Dr. Hervé Philippe. Université de Montréal, Canada. 2006-2007 Research Scientist. Laboratory Prof. Dr. Lutz Gissmann, Genome Modifications and Carcinogenesis, German Cancer Research Centre, Heidelberg, Germany. 2002-2006 Postdoctoral researcher. Laboratory Prof. Dr. Ángel Alonso Cell Differentiation, German Cancer Research Centre, Heidelberg, Germany. 1998-2002 PhD in Biology. 2002. Universidad de León, Spain. Selected recent publications Pimenoff V, Mendes de Oliveira C, Bravo IG. Transmission between Archaic and Modern Human Ancestors during the Evolution of the Oncogenic Human Papillomavirus 16. Mol Biol Evol. 2017 Jan;34(1):4-19. doi: 10.1093/molbev/msw214. Nicolás-Párraga S, Gandini C, Pimenoff VN, Alemany L, de Sanjosé S, Bosch FX and Bravo IG*. HPV16 variants distribution in invasive cancers of the cervix, vulva, vagina, penis, and anus. Cancer Med. 2016 Oct;5(10):2909-2919. doi: 10.1002/cam4.870. Mengual-Chuliá B, Bedhomme S, Lafforgue G, Elena SF, Bravo IG. Assessing parallel gene histories in viral genomes. BMC Evol Biol. 2016 Feb 5;16(1):32. doi: 10.1186/s12862-016-0605-4. Félez-Sánchez M, Trösemeier JH, Bedhomme S, González-Bravo MI, Kamp C, Bravo IG. Cancer, Warts, or Asymptomatic Infections: Clinical Presentation Matches Codon Usage Preferences in Human Papillomaviruses. Genome Biol Evol. 2015 Jul 1;7(8):2117-35. doi: 10.1093/gbe/evv129. Bravo IG and Félez-Sánchez M. “Papillomaviruses: viral evolution, cancer and evolutionary medicine". Evol Med Public Health. 2015 Jan 28;2015(1):32-51. doi: 10.1093/emph/eov003. Garcia-Perez, R, Ibanez C, Godinez JM, Arechiga N, Garin I, Perez-Suarez G, de Paz O, Juste J, Echevarria JE, Bravo IG.
 “Novel papillomaviruses in free-ranging Iberian bats: no virus-host co-evolution, no strict host specificity and hints for recombination”. 
Genome Biol Evol (2014) 6(1):94-104. doi: 10.1093/gbe/evt211 Godínez JM, Nicolás-Párraga S, Pimenoff VN, Mengual-Chuliá B, Muñoz N, Bosch FX, Sánchez GI, McCloskey J, Bravo IG. “Phylogenetically related, clinically different: human papillomaviruses 6 and 11 variants distribution in genital warts and in laryngeal papillomatosis”. Clin Microbiol Infect. (2014) 20(6):O406-13. doi: 10.1111/1469-0691.12420.