Abstract
Retroviruses and long terminal repeat (LTR) retrotransposons share a common structural organization. The main difference between these retroelements is the presence of a functional envelope (env) gene in retroviruses, which is absent or nonfunctional in LTR retrotransposons. Several similarities between these two groups of retroelements have been detected for the reverse transcriptase, gag, and integrase domains. Assuming that each of these domains shares a common ancestral sequence, several hypotheses could account for the emergence of retroviruses from LTR retrotransposons. In this context, the positions of elements such as gypsy and the members of the Ty3 subfamily are not clear, since they are classified as retroviruses but phylogenetically they are assigned to the LTR retrotransposon group. We compared the env gene products of these retroelements and identified two similar motifs in retroviruses and LTR retrotransposons. These two regions do not occur in the same order. If we assume that they are derived from the same ancestral sequence, this could result from independent acquisition of the various domains rather than the single acquisition of the whole env gene. However, we cannot exclude the possibility that the env gene was reorganized after being acquired. Trees based on these regions show that these two groups of elements are clearly distinguished. These trees are similar to those obtained from reverse transcriptase or integrase. In trees based on reverse transcriptase, the retroviruses with complete or partial env genes can be distinguished from the other LTR retrotransposons.
