| Literature DB >> 24224045 |
Ya-Na Zhu1, Dong-Qiao Shi, Meng-Bin Ruan, Li-Li Zhang, Zhao-Hong Meng, Jie Liu, Wei-Cai Yang.
Abstract
Abiotic stress is a major environmental factor that limits cotton growth and yield, moreover, this problem has become more and more serious recently, as multiple stresses often occur simultaneously due to the global climate change and environmental pollution. In this study, we sought to identify genes involved in diverse stresses including abscisic acid (ABA), cold, drought, salinity and alkalinity by comparative microarray analysis. Our result showed that 5790, 3067, 5608, 778 and 6148 transcripts, were differentially expressed in cotton seedlings under treatment of ABA (1 μM ABA), cold (4°C), drought (200 mM mannitol), salinity (200 mM NaCl) and alkalinity (pH=11) respectively. Among the induced or suppressed genes, 126 transcripts were shared by all of the five kinds of abiotic stresses, with 64 up-regulated and 62 down-regulated. These common members are grouped as stress signal transduction, transcription factors (TFs), stress response/defense proteins, metabolism, transport facilitation, as well as cell wall/structure, according to the function annotation. We also noticed that large proportion of significant differentially expressed genes specifically regulated in response to different stress. Nine of the common transcripts of multiple stresses were selected for further validation with quantitative real time RT-PCR (qRT-PCR). Furthermore, several well characterized TF families, for example, WRKY, MYB, NAC, AP2/ERF and zinc finger were shown to be involved in different stresses. As an original report using comparative microarray to analyze transcriptome of cotton under five abiotic stresses, valuable information about functional genes and related pathways of anti-stress, and/or stress tolerance in cotton seedlings was unveiled in our result. Besides this, some important common factors were focused for detailed identification and characterization. According to our analysis, it suggested that there was crosstalk of responsive genes or pathways to multiple abiotic or even biotic stresses, in cotton. These candidate genes will be worthy of functional study under diverse stresses.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 24224045 PMCID: PMC3818253 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0080218
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1Number and the level of transcripts identified as differentially expressed in cotton seedlings under abiotic stress conditions.
The y-axis indicates the treatment of different stress. pH, pH=11; ABA, 1μM ABA; Man, 200mM mannitol; Cold, 4°C; NaCl, 200mM NaCl. The x-axis indicates the number of differentially expressed genes (DEGs), the columns with different color show the fold change of corresponding DEGs. A. up-regulated; B. down-regulated.
Figure 2Functional classification of transcripts in cotton seedlings under different abiotic stress conditions.
Functional classification of the transcripts was performed using the biological process category of GO Analysis Toolkit and Database for Agricultural Community (http://bioinfo.cau.edu.cn/agriGO/). The x-axis indicates the proportion of the genes expressed in each GO. pH, pH=11; ABA, 1μM ABA; Man, 200mM mannitol; Cold, 4°C; NaCl, 200mM NaCl. The transcripts with fold change greater than 2 or less than 0.5 (only GO term IDs with P ≤ 0.05) were listed. A. up-regulated; B. down-regulated.
Figure 3Venn diagram of transcripts identified as up (A) and down (B) regulated in cotton seedings under different abiotic stress conditions.
pH, pH=11; ABA, 1μM ABA; Man, 200mM mannitol; Cold, 4°C; NaCl, 200mM NaCl.
No. of transcripts involved in different functional groups commonly changed under ABA, cold, drought, high-salinity and pH stress.
| Putative Function | No. | Description |
|---|---|---|
|
| ||
| Rector-like protein kinase | 2 | alpha-glucan water dikinase 1, alpha-glucan water dikinase 1 |
| Protein phosphatase | 2 | Protein phosphatase 2C 77, protein phosphatase 2C 12 |
| Phosphorylase | 3 | ATPHS2, α-glucan phosphorylase isozyme H, starch phosphorylase |
| Chaperone protein | 2 | Chaperone DnaJ-domain containing protein, Tetratricopeptide repeat domain-containing protein |
| Ubiquitin-fold modifier | 1 | Ubiquitin-fold modifier 1 |
| Lignin biosynthesis protein | 1 | Cinnamoyl-CoA reductase like protein |
| Transcription factor | 2 | NAC domain containing protein 47, SCPL20 |
| Stress/defense response | 4 | Bifunctional Nucleases in basal defense response 1, Bifunctional Nucleases in basal defense response 1, SAP domain-containing protein, putative PAP_fibrillin |
| Detoxification | 5 | Putative thiamine biosynthesis protein, putative thiamine biosynthesis protein, putative thiamine biosynthesis protein, thiazole biosynthetic enzyme, |
| Photosynthesis | 1 | Chlororespiratory reduction 3 |
| Metabolism | 3 | Protein like SEX4 1, phenylalanine ammonia-lyase 1, MAR-binding filament-like protein 1 |
| Electron transport system | 1 | NDH-dependent cyclic electron flow 1 |
| Transporter | 2 | Copper transporter 1, nitrate transporter 1.5 |
| Unknown protein | 35 | Unknown protein |
|
| ||
| Rector-like protein kinase | 1 | Protein kinase family protein |
| Protein phosphatase | 1 | Serine theronine protein phosphatase PP1 |
| F-box protein | 2 | EID1-like F-box protein 2, EIN3-binding F-box protein 1 |
| Chaperone protein | 1 | TCP-1/cpn60 chaperonin family protein |
| Phosphorylase | 1 | C2 calcium/lipid-binding and phosphoribosyltransferase C-terminal domain-containing protein |
| Ribosomal protein | 1 | 60S ribosomal protein L4-1 |
| Post-translational modification | 1 | Carboxypeptidase |
| Transcription factor | 1 | Scarecrow transcription factor |
| Heat shock protein | 2 | Heat shock protein cognate 70, HSP20 family protein |
| Hormone | 3 | DELLA protein RGA, putative 12-oxophytodienoate reductase, 4-coumarate--CoA ligase-like 7 |
| Stress/defense response | 1 | Immediate-early salicylate-induced glucosyltransferase |
| Phototropic response | 1 | Root phototropism protein 2 |
| Sulfotransferase | 1 | Flavonol sulfotransferase-like protein |
| Cell wall biosunthesis | 2 | Cellulose synthase, pectinesterase 3 |
| Metabolism | 6 | HXXXD-type acyl-transferase-like protein, putative 3-isopropylmalate dehydratase large subunit, beta-xylosidase 1, glucan endo-1,3-beta-D-glucosidase, OSJNBa0088H09.3, Nitrate reductase (NADH) |
| Transporter | 2 | Nitrate transporter 1.4, nitrate transporter 1.4 |
| Other | 3 | Leucine-rich repeat-containing protein, putative elongation factor 2, putative elongation factor 2 |
| Unknown protein | 32 | Unknown protein |
Figure 4Quantitative real-time PCR validation for selected transcripts.
The columns indicate the qRT-PCR values of CK (white bar), ABA (red bar), Cold (light blue bar), Man (dark blue bar), NaCl (purple bar) and pH (yellow bar), respectively. The columns (grey bar) indicate the relative microarray expression value of crossponding stress treatment. CK, control plants; pH, pH=11; ABA, 1μM ABA; Man, 200mM mannitol; Cold, 4°C; NaCl, 200mM NaCl.
Summary of differentially expressed transcription factors (TFs) under ABA, cold, drought, high-salinity and pH stress conditions.
|
|
| |||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| WRKY | 15 | 19.0 | 10 | 18.5 | 17 | 17.5 | 0 | 0 | 19 | 19.6 |
| NAC | 1 | 1.3 | 0 | 0 | 11 | 11.3 | 1 | 12.5 | 2 | 2.1 |
| MYB | 6 | 7.6 | 6 | 11.1 | 8 | 8.2 | 1 | 12.5 | 8 | 8.2 |
| AP2-ERF | 6 | 7.6 | 14 | 25.9 | 18 | 18.6 | 0 | 0 | 16 | 16.5 |
| C2H2 like Zinc finger | 5 | 6.3 | 13 | 24.1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 12.5 | 10 | 10.3 |
| Auxin response factor | 5 | 6.3 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3.1 | 1 | 12.5 | 2 | 2.1 |
| G-box | 3 | 3.8 | 2 | 3.7 | 2 | 2.1 | 1 | 12.5 | 3 | 3.1 |
| bHLH | 4 | 5.1 | 1 | 1.9 | 3 | 3.1 | 2 | 25.0 | 3 | 3.1 |
| bZIP | 5 | 6.3 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 6.2 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 4.1 |
| TCP | 2 | 2.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Other | 27 | 34.2 | 8 | 14.8 | 29 | 29.9 | 1 | 12.5 | 30 | 30.9 |
| Total | 79 | 100 | 54 | 100 | 97 | 100 | 8 | 100 | 97 | 100 |
|
|
| |||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| WRKY | 1 | 3.6 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 6.25 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| NAC | 2 | 7.1 | 1 | 3.4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4.3 |
| MYB | 2 | 7.1 | 4 | 13.8 | 1 | 6.25 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 8.7 |
| ERF | 6 | 21.4 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 6.25 | 3 | 30.0 | 3 | 13.0 |
| C2H2 like Zinc finger | 3 | 10.7 | 1 | 3.4 | 1 | 6.25 | 3 | 30.0 | 4 | 17.4 |
| Auxin response factor | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4.3 |
| G-box | 1 | 3.6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| bZIP | 1 | 3.6 | 3 | 10.3 | 1 | 6.25 | 3 | 30.0 | 2 | 8.7 |
| bHLH | 0 | 0 | 2 | 6.9 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| TCP | 1 | 3.6 | 1 | 3.4 | 1 | 6.25 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Other | 11 | 39.3 | 17 | 58.6 | 10 | 62.5 | 1 | 10.0 | 10 | 43.5 |
| Total | 28 | 100 | 29 | 100 | 16 | 100 | 10 | 100 | 23 | 100 |
Percentage refers to the ratio of transcripts of each TF family relative to total up-regulated or down-regulated TFs identified in the microarray data.