| Literature DB >> 23894339 |
Massimo Reverberi1, Marta Punelli, Valeria Scala, Marzia Scarpari, Paolo Uva, Wieslawa I Mentzen, Andrea L Dolezal, Charles Woloshuk, Flavia Pinzari, Anna A Fabbri, Corrado Fanelli, Gary A Payne.
Abstract
Aspergillus flavus is a cosmopolitan fungus able to respond to external stimuli and to shift both its trophic behaviour and the production of secondary metabolites, including that of the carcinogen aflatoxin (AF). To better understand the adaptability of this fungus, we examined genetic and phenotypic responses within the fungus when grown under four conditions that mimic different ecological niches ranging from saprophytic growth to parasitism. Global transcription changes were observed in both primary and secondary metabolism in response to these conditions, particularly in secondary metabolism where transcription of nearly half of the predicted secondary metabolite clusters changed in response to the trophic states of the fungus. The greatest transcriptional change was found between saprophytic and parasitic growth, which resulted in expression changes in over 800 genes in A. flavus. The fungus also responded to growth conditions, putatively by adaptive changes in conidia, resulting in differences in their ability to utilize carbon sources. We also examined tolerance of A. flavus to oxidative stress and found that growth and secondary metabolism were altered in a superoxide dismutase (sod) mutant and an alkyl-hydroperoxide reductase (ahp) mutant of A. flavus. Data presented in this study show a multifaceted response of A. flavus to its environment and suggest that oxidative stress and secondary metabolism are important in the ecology of this fungus, notably in its interaction with host plant and in relation to changes in its lifestyle (i.e. saprobic to pathogenic).Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23894339 PMCID: PMC3716879 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0068735
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
List of top differentially expressed genes (FDR<0.01) in different phases of A. flavus 3357 growth.
| Comparison | probe | gene function/protein | log2ratio | 2−αCt |
|
| 2043.m00004_at | oxidoreductase, short-chain dehydrogenase reductase, pseudogene | 0,4 | |
|
| 1918.m01406_at | Fungal specific transcription factor domain containing protein | 5,4 | 6,5 |
|
| 2258.m00410_at | expressed protein-related | 5,3 | |
|
| 1918.m01405_at | Major Facilitator Superfamily protein, membrane transporter | 7,2 | 7,5 |
|
| 2911.m00243_at | kelch-domain protein, putative, cell polarity protein | −0,4 | -0.1 |
|
| 2689.m00650_at | MED7 protein, transcriptional initiation | -1,0 | −2,1 |
|
| 2258.m00669_at | GTP binding protein (Gtp1), putative | −0,7 | −0,5 |
|
| 1918.m01221_at | Histidine acid phosphatase family protein | −2,1 | −0,17 |
|
| 2634.m00339_at | hypothetical protein | −1,7 | |
|
| 1918.m00961_at | Protein similar to CwfJ C-terminus 1 containing protein | 0,8 | |
|
| 1866.m00688_at | pectin methylesterase, putative | 2,5 | 4,8 |
|
| 2856.m00234_at | MSF multidrug transporter, putative | 2,15 | |
|
| 1569.m00043_at | G protein-coupled receptor alpha-related | 1,93 | 6,49 |
|
| 2856.m00485_at | Glycosyl-hydrolases family 16 protein | 0,6 | |
|
| 1866.m00614_at | Mismatched base pair and cruciform dna recognition protein, putative | 2,75 | |
|
| 2911.m00773_s_at | NADH oxidase, putative | 1,5 | |
|
| 1918.m01408_s_at | NAD dependent epimerase dehydratase family protein | 3,9 | |
|
| 1918.m00745_at | pH domain containing protein | 0,5 | |
|
| 2842.m00344_at | Glutathione S-transferase, C-terminal domain containing protein | 0,4 | 3,26 |
|
| 2856.m00371_at | alpha-glucosidase alpha-amylase, putative | −3,4 | |
|
| 2368.m00161_at | TPR Domain containing protein | −0,3 | |
|
| 2368.m00464_at | oxidoreductase, zinc-binding dehydrogenase family protein | −1,2 | |
|
| 1569.m00528_at | oxidoreductase, short chain dehydrogenase reductase family protein | −6,6 | −0,68 |
|
| 1569.m00529_at | ABC-2 type transporter family protein | −5,7 | |
|
| 2043.m00037_at | elastinolytic metalloproteinase Mep, putative | −3,4 | |
|
| 2689.m00427_at | Gamma-glutamyltranspeptidase family protein | −0,8 | |
|
| 2689.m00458_at | D-isomer specific 2-hydroxyacid dehydrogenase, NAD binding domain containing protein | −1,7 | |
|
| 2689.m00291_at | phytase, putative 1866.m00203_at TRNA binding domain containing protein | −1,4 |
In particular, the expression profile of the chemotrophic (chemo) phase has been compared with the gene profile expressed during the growth on basal medium (flask) and the whole gene expression of the fungus during the pathogenic phase, i.e. during the ear colonization (in vivo) was compared with the gene expression of A. flavus during the growth on dead maize kernels (sapro). Gene expression changes were calculated by both log2 of microarray expression ratio (log2 ratio), and, for a chosen subset of genes (indicated in bold characters), as relative expression by a SYBR Green Real Time PCR approach.
Biological processes from Gene Ontology (GO-BP) collection that are differentially expressed in chemo vs flask or in vivo vs sapro comparisons.
| Chemo vs Flask | In-vivo vs Sapro | |||||
| SETID | GO-Term | # genes | Chemo | p-value | In-vivo | p-value |
| GO:0005975 | carbohydrate metabolic process | 172 | Up | 0 | Down | 0 |
| GO:0055114 | Oxidation reduction | 588 | Up | 0,0015 | Down | 0,0145 |
| GO:0008643 | carbohydrate transport | 51 | Up | 0 | ||
| GO:0006098 | pentose-phosphate shunt | 13 | Up | 0,001 | ||
| GO:0008654 | phospholipid biosynthetic process | 19 | Up | 0,0035 | ||
| GO:0006979 | response to oxidative stress | 9 | Up | 0,0195 | ||
| GO:0006164 | purine nucleotide biosynthetic process | 5 | Down | 0,024 | Down | 0,004 |
| GO:0009073 | aromatic amino acid family biosynthetic process | 10 | Down | 0,0105 | Down | 0,0215 |
| GO:0000059 | protein import into nucleus, docking | 7 | Down | 0,009 | ||
| GO:0006807 | nitrogen compound metabolic process | 25 | Down | 0,0015 | ||
| GO:0006270 | DNA replication initiation | 6 | Down | 0,0125 | ||
| GO:0009116 | nucleoside metabolic process | 9 | Down | 0 | Down | 0,0245 |
| GO:0015931 | nucleobase, nucleoside, nucleotide and nucleic acid transport | 12 | Down | 0,0005 | Down | 0,049 |
| GO:0006412 | translation | 130 | Down | 0 | ||
| GO:0006886 | intracellular protein transport | 35 | Down | 0,0115 | ||
| GO:0006813 | potassium ion transport | 4 | Down | 0,0095 | ||
| GO:0008033 | tRNA processing | 8 | Down | 0,0095 | ||
| GO:0006397 | mRNA processing | 22 | Down | 0,005 | ||
| GO:0006511 | ubiquitin-dependent protein catabolic process | 34 | Down | 0,0025 | ||
| GO:0009086 | methionine biosynthetic process | 5 | Down | 0,0005 | ||
| GO:0006508 | proteolysis | 131 | Down | 0,0005 | ||
| GO:0009072 | aromatic amino acid family metabolic process | 11 | Down | 0,0025 | ||
| GO:0008152 | metabolic process | 614 | Down | 0 | ||
| GO:0006559 | L-phenylalanine catabolic process | 4 | Down | 0,011 | ||
| GO:0009228 | thiamin biosynthetic process | 4 | Down | 0,012 | ||
| GO:0006730 | one-carbon compound metabolic process | 4 | Down | 0,012 | ||
Figure 1Hierarchical clustering based on the carbon source utilization profiles after 24, 48, 96 and 168 h of incubation of cultures started from conidia isolated from the four trophic phases (in vivo, sapro, flask and chemo).
The gray horizontal lines indicate distance measures of the carbon source utilization profiles and describe the metabolic similarity between the phases at different incubation intervals. The dendrograms show the progressive grouping of the data (and therefore the higher or lower similarity between trophic phases) along the microplates incubation period (24, 48, 96 and 168 h).
One-way ANOVA for Time 48-hours incubation.
| C | F | IV | S | |||||
| Water | 0.642 | B | 0.375 | AB | 0.206 | A | 0.223 | A |
| Heptoses | 1.436 | B | 0.470 | A | 0.248 | A | 0.255 | A |
| Hexoses | 1.130 | B | 1.089 | B | 0.515 | A | 0.495 | A |
| Pentoses | 0.939 | B | 1.116 | B | 0.415 | A | 0.490 | A |
| Sugar acids | 1.152 | BC | 1.540 | C | 0.795 | AB | 0.582 | A |
| Hexosamines | 1.571 | C | 0.926 | B | 0.472 | A | 0.379 | A |
| Polyols | 1.428 | B | 1.598 | B | 0.578 | A | 0.530 | A |
| Polysaccharides | 1.104 | C | 0.834 | BC | 0.432 | A | 0.568 | AB |
| Oligosaccharides | 1.221 | B | 0.999 | B | 0.357 | A | 0.424 | A |
| Glucosides | 1.345 | B | 1.242 | B | 0.466 | A | 0.438 | A |
| Peptides | 1.139 | BC | 1.434 | C | 0.952 | AB | 0.661 | A |
| L-amino acids | 1.172 | B | 1.494 | C | 0.926 | AB | 0.670 | A |
| Biogenic and heterocyclic amines | 1.046 | C | 1.225 | C | 0.479 | B | 0.110 | A |
| TCA-cycle intermediates | 1.178 | B | 1.214 | B | 0.921 | B | 0.293 | A |
| Aliphatic organic acids | 0.785 | B | 0.523 | AB | 0.646 | AB | 0.219 | A |
| Others | 0.926 | B | 0.976 | B | 0.478 | A | 0.382 | A |
The ANOVA, followed by Tukey's HSD t-test, was run on respiration values (OD490 readings) after 48 h of incubation. Statistically significant differences (p<0.001) in substrate use between the growth phases (C = chemo, F = flask, IV = in vivo, S = sapro) are marked with different letters (A, B, C, D).
One-way ANOVA for Time 96-hours incubation.
| C | F | IV | S | |||||
| water | 0.624 | B | 0.540 | B | 0.154 | A | 0.190 | A |
| Heptoses | 1.475 | C | 0.650 | B | 0.213 | A | 0.203 | A |
| Hexoses | 1.787 | C | 1.642 | C | 1.255 | B | 1.055 | A |
| Pentoses | 1.592 | B | 1.483 | B | 1.134 | A | 0.983 | A |
| Sugar acids | 1.278 | B | 1.606 | C | 0.882 | A | 1.043 | A |
| Hexosamines | 1.715 | C | 1.048 | B | 0.768 | A | 0.763 | A |
| Polyols | 2.357 | B | 2.344 | B | 1.545 | A | 1.370 | A |
| Polysaccharides | 1.485 | C | 1.031 | B | 0.889 | AB | 0.802 | A |
| Oligosaccharides | 2.055 | C | 1.406 | B | 1.198 | AB | 0.993 | A |
| Glucosides | 2.211 | D | 1.758 | C | 1.370 | B | 1.076 | A |
| Peptides | 1.378 | B | 1.920 | C | 1.347 | B | 1.097 | A |
| L-amino acids | 1.537 | C | 1.752 | C | 1.021 | A | 1.271 | B |
| Biogenic and heterocyclic amines | 1.273 | C | 1.676 | D | 0.776 | B | 0.549 | A |
| TCA-cycle intermediates | 1.325 | B | 1.700 | C | 1.009 | B | 0.523 | A |
| Aliphatic organic acids | 1.473 | C | 1.199 | BC | 0.971 | B | 0.286 | A |
| Others | 1.408 | B | 1.442 | B | 0.779 | A | 0.791 | A |
The ANOVA, followed by Tukey's HSD t-test, was run on respiration values (OD490 readings) after 96 hours of incubation. Statistically significant differences (p<0.001) in substrate use between the growth phases (C = chemo, F = flask, IV = in vivo, S = sapro) are marked with different letters (A, B, C, D).
Figure 2Scatter plot of the first two principal components from the Principal Coordinate Analysis of the carbon source utilization profiles of conidia conidia isolated from the four trophic phases (in vivo-IV, sapro-S, flask-F and chemo- C) after 24, 48, 72, 96 and 168 h of incubation.
Analysis of fungal growth (mg/mL dry weight, d.w. or as ng fungal DNA/g maize seeds) and AFB1 synthesis (ng/mL) of WT, Δsod and Δahp strains of A. flavus disrupted in a Mn-dependent superoxide dismutase (acc. N. AFLA033420) or in an alkyl hydroperoxide reductase (acc. N. AFLA019280) respectively, grown for different time intervals (3–7 d) in flask, chemo, sapro and in vivo phases as described above.
| Fungal growth | ||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
| |||||||||
| WT | Δsod | Δahp | WT | Δsod | Δahp | WT | Δsod | Δahp | WT | Δsod | Δahp | |
| 3d | 2.1±0.1 | 1.9±0.2 | 1.8±0.5 | 2.5±0.3 | 2.0±0.2 | 1.9±0.1 | 1.5±0.1 | 0.7±0.3 | 0.7±0.2 | 1.0±0.5 | 0.5±0.1 | 0.4±0.1 |
| 4d | 2.6±0.3 | 2.5±0.6 | 2.4±0.3 | 2.9±0.1 | 2.2±0.4 | 2.2±0.3 | 15.1±2.5 | 3.2±0.6 | 2.5±0.3 | 12±0.3 | 2.5±0.5 | 2.1±0.3 |
| 5d | 2.7±0.5 | 2.6±1.0 | 2.5±0.2 | 3.0±1.0 | 2.5±0.7 | 2.3±0.2 | 18.2±3.5 | 6.5±0.9 | 3.7±0.5 | 15±2.2 | 5.1±0.9 | 4.5±0.6 |
| 6d | 3.5±0.1 | 2.9±0.3 | 2.8±0.9 | 3.8±0.5 | 2.7±0.6 | 2.5±0.4 | 21.3±1.1 | 15.8±3.3 | 8.5±1.5 | 18±1.5 | 15.2±2.1 | 7.1±0.5 |
| 7d | 3.9±0.8 | 2.9±0.1 | 2.9±0.2 | 4.2±0.3 | 2.8±0.1 | 2.7±0.5 | 32.6±2.2 | 21.2±4.1 | 13.5±2.2 | 25±3.2 | 20.3±1.5 | 12.2±2.2 |
The results are expressed as mean values (± SE) of a total of 6 independent replicates.
Secondary metabolite (sec-met) clusters which are differentially expressed in chemo vs flask or in vivo vs sapro comparisons.
| Chemo vs Flask | In vivo vs Sapro | ||||||
| Collection | Sec-Met cluster ID | Backbone gene | # genes | Chem | p-value | In-vivo | p-value |
| Sec-met | 11 | Nonribosomal peptide synthetase-like enzyme, putative | 11 | Up | 0 | Up | 0 |
| Sec-met | 1 | Polyketide synthase, putative | 9 | Up | 0.0015 | ||
| Sec-met | 15 | Dimethylallyl tryptophan synthase, putative | 12 | Up | 0.002 | ||
| Sec-met | 31 | 14 | Up | 0.0075 | Down | 0.0035 | |
| Sec-met | 34 | 8 | Up | 0.034 | |||
| Sec-met | 23 | Polyketide synthase, putative | 17 | Up | 0.041 | Down | 0 |
| Sec-met | 50 | 7 | Down | 0 | |||
| Sec-met | 21 | amino acid adenylation domain containing protein | 36 | Down | 0.024 | ||
| Sec-met | 42 | Polyketide synthase, putative | 11 | Down | 0.01 | ||
| Sec-met | 48 | Nonribosomal peptide synthetase-like enzyme, putative | 20 | Down | 0 | ||
| Sec-met | 8 | Polyketide synthase, putative | 9 | Down | 0 | ||
| Sec-met | 55 | Dimethylallyl tryptophan synthase, putative | 4 | Up | 0.011 | ||
| Sec-met | 47 | Nonribosomal peptide synthetase-like enzyme, putative | 5 | Up | 0.005 | ||
| Sec-met | 32 | 19 | Up | 0 | |||
| Sec-met | 5 | Polyketide synthase PksP | 3 | Down | 0.001 | ||
| Sec-met | 37 | Nonribosomal peptide synthetase-like enzyme, putative | 3 | Down | 0.0235 | ||
| Sec-met | 45 | Nonribosomal peptide synthetase-like enzyme, putative | 16 | Up | 0.0005 | ||
| Sec-met | 22 | Nonribosomal peptide synthetase, putative | 6 | Down | 0.0275 | ||
| Sec-met | 16 | 2 | Down | 0.0495 | |||
| Sec-met | 19 | Dimethylallyl tryptophan synthase, putative | 6 | Down | 0.0205 | ||
| Sec-met | 4 | Nonribosomal peptide synthetase, putative | 4 | Down | 0.025 | ||
| Sec-met | 35 | 5 | Down | 0.0145 | |||
| Sec-met | 54 | aflC/pksA/pksL1/polyketide synthase | 30 | Down | 0 | Up | 0 |
| Sec-met | 10 | 3 | Down | 0.0005 | |||
Figure 3Expression profiles of the 14 genes in the ETP (epipolythiodioxopiperazines) secondary metabolite gene cluster.
Relative expression values of individual replicates are shown. The expression level of each gene was normalized across all samples and is represented by a color whose intensity corresponds to the magnitude of deviation (σ) from the mean. The color-coded scale for normalized expression values maps is located at the right of the figure. Flask, replicates for A. flavus 3357 strain grown on CD medium; sapro, replicates for the A. flavus 3357 strain grown on dead maize kernels; chemo, replicates for the A. flavus 3357 strain grown in presence of injured viable maize kernels into the flask; in vivo, replicates for the A. flavus 3357 strain grown on the kernels into ears on the plant.
Figure 4Plot of the local co-expression values (i.e. correlation between the expression of the neighboring genes).
Groups of neighboring genes with correlation exceeding a threshold of 0.5 (marked by a red line) are identified as co-expressed clusters. Larger co-expressed clusters, with at least five members, are denoted by blue bars. Secondary metabolite clusters from Georgianna et al. (2010), identified with SMURF algorithm, are denoted by green bars. The nepA gene is indicated, inside the cluster 32, by red bar. The numbers on x axis indicate gene indexes along the contig. The individual panels are described in the Results section.