| Literature DB >> 24416168 |
Kedong Xu1, Xiaohui Huang2, Manman Wu2, Yan Wang3, Yunxia Chang2, Kun Liu1, Ju Zhang1, Yi Zhang1, Fuli Zhang1, Liming Yi2, Tingting Li2, Ruiyue Wang2, Guangxuan Tan1, Chengwei Li1.
Abstract
Transient transformation is simpler, more efficient and economical in analyzing protein subcellular localization than stable transformation. Fluorescent fusion proteins were often used in transient transformation to follow the in vivo behavior of proteins. Onion epidermis, which has large, living and transparent cells in a monolayer, is suitable to visualize fluorescent fusion proteins. The often used transient transformation methods included particle bombardment, protoplast transfection and Agrobacterium-mediated transformation. Particle bombardment in onion epidermis was successfully established, however, it was expensive, biolistic equipment dependent and with low transformation efficiency. We developed a highly efficient in planta transient transformation method in onion epidermis by using a special agroinfiltration method, which could be fulfilled within 5 days from the pretreatment of onion bulb to the best time-point for analyzing gene expression. The transformation conditions were optimized to achieve 43.87% transformation efficiency in living onion epidermis. The developed method has advantages in cost, time-consuming, equipment dependency and transformation efficiency in contrast with those methods of particle bombardment in onion epidermal cells, protoplast transfection and Agrobacterium-mediated transient transformation in leaf epidermal cells of other plants. It will facilitate the analysis of protein subcellular localization on a large scale.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24416168 PMCID: PMC3885512 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0083556
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1Agrobacterium mediated in planta transient transoformationin living onion epidermal cells.
(A–F) Operational process of the modified agroinfiltration, (A) Onion bulb without outer scales, (B, C) The cut onion bulb prepared for subsequent injection, (D) The injection of Agrobacteria, (E) Bind injected cut scales together with elastic for further incubation, scale bar = 2.5 cm. (F) The magnification of injection location, scale bar = 4 mm. (G–V) Onion epidermal cells were transformed with constructs of pCM1205-RFP (G, H, I and J), pLPGM202 (K, L, M and N), pLPGM413 (O, P, Q and R) and pLPGM113 (S, T, U and V). Bright field images (G, K, O and S), UV excited fluorescence images (L, P, T and H), UV excited DAPI staining images (I, M, Q and U) and the merged images of fluorescence and DAPI (J, N, R and V), scale bar = 10 µm.
Figure 2Schematic diagram of forming agroinfiltration bubble by injecting agroinfiltration liquid into the interface between adaxial epidermis and mesophyll of onion bulb scale.
(A) Syringe. (B) Agroinfiltration liquid. (C) Mesophyll of onion bulb scale. (D) Adaxial epidermis of onion bulb scale.
Effects of bacterial concentrations and durations of agroinfiltration.
| Agroinfiltration durations | Transient transformation efficiencies (%) by using infiltration of | ||
| 0.05 (OD600) | 0.10 (OD600) | 0.15 (OD600) | |
| 24 h | 3.30±0.259 cC | 12.03±0.282 dD | 5.10±0.216 dD |
| 48 h | 4.30±0.240 bB | 23.77±0.274 cC | 12.37±0.256 bB |
| 72 h | 13.10±0.326 aA | 43.87±0.431 aA | 22.53±0.335 aA |
| 96 h | 4.77±0.164 bB | 17.97±0.282 bB | 7.70±0.199 cC |
Note: three samples per combination of bacterial concentration and infiltration duration were investigated for ten 2 mm2 epidermal areas. Each efficiency value represents the mean of transformation efficiencies of thirty replicates of 2 mm2 epidermal areas from three samples, and the standard errors were calculated by using Excel. Different capital and lowercase letters within the same column exhibit significant difference at the 1% and 5% probability level according to the Duncan test of SPSS 10.0 statistic analysis.
Effects of different components of agroinfiltration liquid (OD600 = 0.10).
| Infiltration components | Transient transformation efficiencies (%) of different agroinfiltration durations | |||
| 24 h | 48 h | 72 h | 96 h | |
| Complete components | 12.93±0.262 aA | 22.97±0.376 aA | 43.88±0.330 aA | 15.68±0.070 aA |
| D-glucose- | 0.15±0.014 fF | 0.91±0.013 gG | 2.61±0.040 gG | 2.40±0.031 hG |
| CaCl2- | 1.21±0.050 eE | 2.43±0.047 fF | 5.99±0.036 fF | 2.55±0.045 gG |
| MES-KOH- | 3.30±0.048 cC | 5.24±0.059 dD | 13.32±0.089 bB | 6.88±0.081 cC |
| BAP- | 2.13±0.062 dD | 4.21±0.049 eE | 8.28±0.043 dD | 5.67±0.043 dD |
| Silwet L-77- | 7.22±0.083 bB | 10.07±0.126 bB | 12.71±0.082 cC | 9.43±0.045 bB |
| MgCl2- | 2.42±0.065 dD | 6.34±0.040 cC | 8.39±0.040 dD | 4.32±0.029 eE |
| AS- | 1.15±0.041 eE | 4.39±0.044 eE | 7.29±0.253 eE | 3.42±0.054 fF |
Note: three samples per unit of infiltration components were investigated for ten 2 mm2 epidermal areas. Each efficiency value represents the mean of transformation efficiencies of thirty replicates of 2 mm2 epidermal areas from three samples (the percentage of positive cells in total cells per unit area), and the standard errors were calculated by using Excel. Different capital and lowercase letters within the same column exhibit significant difference at the 1% and 5% probability level according to the Duncan test of SPSS 10.0 statistic analysis. The symbol “-”, represents that the agroinfiltration liquid included all the components except the referred component.
Comparison of agroinfiltration and particle bombardment methods on transformation in onion epidermis.
| Comparison items | Transient transformation methods | |
| Agroinfiltration | Particle bombardment | |
| Transformation time | One day (about 12.93% transformation efficiency) | One day (about 4.67% transformation efficiency) |
| Cost | Low | High |
| Special equipment | Not needed | Biolistic equipment |
| Transformation efficiency (%) | 43.73±0.23 | 4.67±0.11 |
Note: three samples per unit of infiltration components were investigated for ten 2 mm2 epidermal areas. The efficiency value represents the mean of transformation efficiencies of thirty replicates of 2 mm2 epidermal areas from three samples (the percentage of positive cells in total cells per unit area) in the part of transformation efficiency, and the standard errors were calculated by using Excel.
Comparison of transient transformation efficiencies in different plant materials by using agroinfiltration.
| Plant materials | Transient transformation efficiencies (%) by using infiltration of | |||
| 24 h | 48 h | 72 h | 96 h | |
| Arabidopsis(Col-0) | 1.31±0.041 cC | 2.56±0.066 cC | 1.79±0.043 cC | 1.63±0.053 cC |
| Tobacco(Xanthi) | 1.93±0.044 bB | 4.97±0.051 bB | 6.54±0.074 bB | 5.22±0.035 bB |
| Onion(Hongtaiyang) | 12.34±0.098 aA | 23.38±0.243 aA | 43.35±0.343 aA | 14.99±0.082 aA |
Note: three samples per material were investigated for ten 2 mm2 areas of agroinfiltrated epidermal cells. Each efficiency value represents the mean of transformation efficiencies of thirty replicates of 2 mm2 epidermal areas from three samples (the percentage of positive cells in total cells per unit area), and the standard errors were calculated by using Excel. Different capital and lowercase letters within the same column exhibit significant difference at the 1% and 5% probability level according to the Duncan test of SPSS 10.0 statistic analysis. For onion two-day pretreatment was conducted before agroinfiltration.
Effects of different pretreatment time of onion before Agrobacterium infection.
| Pretreatment time | Transient transformation efficiencies (%) by using infiltration of | |||
| 24 h | 48 h | 72 h | 96 h | |
| 0 h | 2.78±0.052 cC | 5.97±0.066 cC | 8.74±0.056 dC | 5.20±0.048 dD |
| 24 h | 8.10±0.068 bB | 15.01±0.158 bB | 24.10±0.279 cB | 13.17±0.272 cC |
| 48 h | 12.93±0.203 aA | 22.43±0.436 aA | 42.40±0.309 bA | 15.77±0.298 bB |
| 72 h | 13.03±0.286 aA | 22.10±0.480 aA | 43.57±0.513 aA | 17.71±0.276 aA |
Note: three repeat samples for each treatment were investigated by observing ten 2 mm2 epidermal areas of each sample. Each efficiency value represents the mean of transformation efficiencies of thirty replicates of 2 mm2 epidermal areas from three samples (the percentage of positive cells in total cells per unit area), and the standard errors were calculated by using Excel. Different capital and lowercase letters within the same column exhibit significant difference at the 1% and 5% probability level according to the Duncan test of SPSS 10.0 statistic analysis.