| Literature DB >> 23256040 |
Javier Carrera1, Santiago F Elena.
Abstract
The molecular mechanisms underlying viral pathogenesis are yet poorly understood owed to the large number of factors involved and the complexity of their interactions. Could we identify a minimal set of host transcription factors (TF) whose misregulation would result in the transcriptional profile characteristic of infected cells in absence of the virus? How many of such sets exist? Are all orthogonal or share critical TFs involved in specific biological functions? We have developed a computational methodology that uses a quantitative model of the transcriptional regulatory network (TRN) of Arabidopsis thaliana to explore the landscape of all possible re-engineered TRNs whose transcriptomic profiles mimic those observed in infected plants. We found core sets containing between six and 34 TFs, depending on the virus, whose in silico knockout or overexpression in the TRN resulted in transcriptional profiles that minimally deviate from those observed in infected plants.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2012 PMID: 23256040 PMCID: PMC3525979 DOI: 10.1038/srep01006
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Schematic representation of the methodology followed for this study.
(A) Reverse-engineering to reveal gene sub-networks differentially altered by viral infection. (B) Reprogramming cells to mimic the plant transcriptomic responses observed upon viral infection by using computational genome redesign.
Figure 2Computational methodology.
Schematic representation of the algorithm used to predict optimal redesigns of the A. thaliana TRN that mimics the alterations induced by viral infections on the plant transcriptome.
Figure 3Distributions of expression scores, S.
Histogram of the scores obtained in 50 optimization processes (blue bars) forced to mimic the plant transcriptome changes observed after infection with eight different viruses. In the optimization process, only TFs were considered in the scoring function (S). Random simulations were computed without imposing any selective pressure (red bars). Black line shows the score obtained using the transcriptional model inferred of A. thaliana.
Figure 4Heat maps comparing the expression profiles of TFs.
Expression profiles of the TFs measured in the infected plants, and predicted in the best-optimized and random transcriptomes. Note that under- and over-expressed genes are plotted in red and green colors, respectively.
Figure 5Statistics of the number of TFs perturbed and of the type of perturbation.
(A) Number of TFs to perturb (knockout/over-expression) proposed by the optimization process in which only TFs or all genes are considered in the scoring function (blue and red bars, respectively, in the upper panel). Grey bars show the number of TFs differentially expressed that were identified by gene expression upon infection with eight different viruses. We also show the intersection between the perturbed TFs proposed in the design and those with differentially altered gene expression (bottom panel). Random selections of TFs for designing simulating optimization processes without selective pressure were computed to test statistical significance (*** P < 0.001). (B) Percentages of over-expressed and (C) knockout TFs proposed to be perturbed in each design for the eight viruses. Error bars show SD from the 50 simulations.
Figure 6Measures of transcriptional information.
(A) Scheme to illustrate the topological properties in a context of the A. thaliana TRN between the perturbed TFs proposed by our methodology and those identified differentially altered under viral conditions. (B, C) Transcriptional information of all TFs proposed to be perturbed in the designs. Note that blue and red bars show TFs proposed by using our design methodology evaluating only TFs or all genes in the scoring function, respectively. Random undirected shortest paths were computed to evaluate the statistical significance of the topological distance between the TFs for designing with respect TFs selected randomly in the A. thaliana interactome (*** P < 0.001). Error bars show SD from the 50 simulations.
Figure 7Complexity of the proposed solutions.
(A, B) Relationship between the number of TFs proposed by the design algorithm to be perturbed, (C, D) their connectivity degree and (E, F) a combination of both variables, and the correlation (evaluated as Pearson correlation (A, C and E) or mutual information (B, D and F)) between the gene expression profiles of the wild-type plants and plants infected with each of the eight viruses. Only TFs were considered in the scoring function during the optimization process. (G) Average of the outgoing connectivity for TFs proposed for each virus. Note that average connectivity of all TFs of A. thaliana (TRN) was compared with respect to each virus to compute statistical differences (*** P < 0.05). Error bars show SD for the 50 simulations in (A, B) and SEM in (C, G).
Figure 8Histogram of the robustness of the TFs proposed by the design algorithm for the eight viruses (blue bars).
Only TFs were considered in the scoring function for designing. TFs with design robustness > 0.5 are described in Table 1. The red bar histograms correspond to the robustness of TFs selected from randomly re-engineered TRNs.
TFs proposed to be perturbed by the design methodology with a high robustness degree†
| Gene | Gene Annotation | Biological functions |
|---|---|---|
| CaLCuV | ||
| Zinc finger protein | Cold acclimation, hyperosmotic salinity response, photosynthetic acclimation, response to UV-B, response to chitin, response to cold, response to heat, response to light stimulus, response to oxidative stress and response to wounding | |
| — | Trichome branching | |
| Member of the DREB subfamily | ||
| Involved in regulation of anthocyanin biosynthesis | Regulation of anthocyanin biosynthetic process and response to jasmonic acid stimulus | |
| Member of the DREB subfamily+ | ||
| Encodes an auxin regulated activator | Blue light signaling pathway, gravitropism, lateral root development, lateral root primordium development, leaf development, phototropism, response to auxin stimulus and response to ethylene stimulus | |
| — | ||
| — | Multicellular organismal development | |
| Encodes a MADS box TF | Abscission, leaf senescence and regulation of flower development | |
| — | ||
| Belongs to auxin inducible gene family | Response to auxin stimulus | |
| Transcriptional activator of the NAC gene family | Formation of organ boundary, leaf development, multicellular organismal development, primary shoot apical meristem specification, regulation of timing of organ formation and secondary shoot formation | |
| Homeodomain-like superfamily protein | Response to abscisic acid stimulus, response to cadmium ion, response to ethylene stimulus, response to gibberellin stimulus, response to jasmonic acid stimulus, response to salicylic acid stimulus and response to salt stress | |
| NAC domain containing protein 97 | Multicellular organismal development | |
| MADS-box protein | Negative regulation of flower development, regulation of circadian rhythm, response to temperature stimulus and vernalization response | |
| WRKY family | ||
| — | ||
| TFIIB zinc-binding protein | ||
| IBM1 | DNA methylation on cytosine, flower development, histone H3-K9 demethylation, leaf development and pollen development | |
| Member of WRKY TF | Regulation of defense response | |
| — | Regulation of secondary cell wall biogenesis | |
| TF jumonji | ||
| Encodes an auxin-regulated activator | Blue light signaling pathway, gravitropism, lateral root development, lateral root primordium development, leaf development, phototropism, regulation of growth, response to auxin stimulus and response to ethylene stimulus | |
| Encodes a maternally expressed imprinted gene | ||
| RSM1 is a member of a family of MYB TFs | Embryo development ending in seed dormancy, gravitropism and response to red light | |
| — | ||
| Basic helix-loop-helix DNA-binding family protein | ||
| Member of the R2R3 factor gene family | Response to auxin stimulus, response to ethylene stimulus, response to jasmonic acid stimulus, response to salicylic acid stimulus and response to salt stress | |
| Member of the R2R3 factor gene family | Flavonol biosynthetic process | |
| Encodes a MADS-box | Negative regulation of flower development, negative regulation of short-day photoperiodism and flowering | |
| Member of the R2R3 factor gene family | Response to jasmonic acid stimulus and response to salt stress | |
| — | ||
| Encodes enhanced downy mildew 2 | Defense response to fungus, positive regulation of flower development, signal transduction and vegetative to reproductive phase transition of meristem | |
| Member of the MADS | Cellular response to auxin stimulus, embryo development ending in seed dormancy, fruit abscission, fruit dehiscence, gibberellin catabolic process, negative regulation of floral organ abscission, negative regulation of flower development, negative regulation of seed maturation, negative regulation of short-day photoperiodism, flowering and somatic embryogenesis | |
| Encodes homeobox protein HAT3 | ||
| Phytochrome-associated protein 1 | Response to auxin stimulus | |
| Encodes an | Cytokinin mediated signaling pathway, primary root development, regulation of anthocyanin metabolic process, regulation of chlorophyll biosynthetic process, response to cytokinin stimulus and shoot development | |
| Encodes a WUSCHEL-related homeobox gene | ||
| Basic pentacysteine 3 | ||
| A member of class I knotted1-like homeobox | Cytokinin mediated signaling pathway, response to ethylene stimulus and specification of carpel identity | |
| Homeobox-1 | ||
| — | ||
| Encodes a member of the | Actin filament bundle assembly | |
| Encodes a protein with a RNA recognition motif | ||
| Homeobox protein 24 | ||
| Belongs to one of the LOM genes | Cell differentiation, cell division, maintenance of shoot apical meristem identity and root hair cell tip growth | |
| Encodes a putative TF MYB29 | Defense response to fungus | |
†Degree of design robustness > 0.5.
+All genes showed biological functions related to regulation of transcription and DNA-dependent.
Notice that all genes showed were proposed in designs in which the scoring function evaluated only TFs in the optimization process.
Figure 9Commonalities among viruses in the proposed TFs.
(A) Number of common TFs proposed to be perturbed by the model (blue and red bars) and by 1000 random simulations (grey bars) for several viruses. (B, C) Neighbor-joining dendograms obtained from the similarity matrix computed from overlapping lists of TFs proposed to be perturbed in the different designs for the eight viruses. Note that only TFs ((B) and blue bars in (A)) or all genes ((C) and red bars in (A)) were considered in the scoring function for designing.