| Literature DB >> 24475250 |
Qiusheng Kong1, Jingxian Yuan1, Penghui Niu1, Junjun Xie1, Wei Jiang1, Yuan Huang1, Zhilong Bie1.
Abstract
Melon (Cucumis melo. L) is not only an economically important cucurbitaceous crop but also an attractive model for studying many biological characteristics. Screening appropriate reference genes is essential to reverse transcription quantitative real-time PCR (RT-qPCR), which is key to many studies involving gene expression analysis. In this study, 14 candidate reference genes were selected, and the variations in their expression in roots and leaves of plants subjected to biotic stress, abiotic stress, and plant growth regulator treatment were assessed by RT-qPCR. The stability of the expression of the selected genes was determined and ranked using geNorm and NormFinder. geNorm identified the two most stable genes for each set of conditions: CmADP and CmUBIep across all samples, CmUBIep and CmRPL in roots, CmRAN and CmACT in leaves, CmADP and CmRPL under abiotic stress conditions, CmTUA and CmACT under biotic stress conditions, and CmRAN and CmACT under plant growth regulator treatments. NormFinder determined CmRPL to be the best reference gene in roots and under biotic stress conditions and CmADP under the other experimental conditions. CmUBC2 and CmPP2A were not found to be suitable under many experimental conditions. The catalase family genes CmCAT1, CmCAT2, and CmCAT3 were identified in melon genome and used as target genes to validate the reliability of identified reference genes. The catalase family genes showed the most upregulation 3 days after inoculation with Fusarium wilt in roots, after which they were downregulated. Their levels of expression were significantly overestimated when the unsuitable reference gene was used for normalization. These results not only provide guidelines for the selection of reference genes for gene expression analyses in melons but may also provide valuable information for studying the functions of catalase family genes in stress responses.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24475250 PMCID: PMC3903635 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0087197
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Descriptions of melon candidate reference genes for RT-qPCR analysis.
| Gene name | Gene description | Unigene ID | Arabidopsis homolog | E-value | Primer sequence | Product size (bp) | E (%) |
|
| 18S ribosomal RNA | MU60789 | AT3G41768 | 0 | F:CGAGTCTGGTAATTGGAATGAGTA | 137 | 95.8 |
| R:CTACGAGCTTTTTAACTGCAACAA | |||||||
|
| β-actin | MU51303 | AT3G18780 | 0 | F:CCTGGTATCGCTGACCGTAT | 133 | 96.7 |
| R:TACTGAGCGATGCAAGGATG | |||||||
|
| Actin 7a | MU43164 | AT5G09810 | 0 | F:TCGTTCCTTCCTTCCTTCATTC | 120 | 104.8 |
| R:AGCCTTCACCATTCCAGTTC | |||||||
|
| ADP ribosylation factor 1 | MU47713 | AT1G23490 | 1e-125 | F:ATATTGCCAACAAGGCGTAGA | 93 | 99.3 |
| R:TGCCCGTAAACAAGGGATAAA | |||||||
|
| Elongation factor 1-α | MU45992 | AT5G60390 | 0 | F:CCACGAGTCTCTCCCAGAAG | 83 | 97.2 |
| R:CACGCTTGAGATCCTTGACA | |||||||
|
| Glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase C2 | MU54550 | AT1G13440 | 0 | F:CTGCCAAGGCTGTAGGTAAA | 100 | 103.6 |
| R:GTAAGGTCAACAACGGAGACA | |||||||
|
| Protein phosphatase 2A regulatory subunit A | MU43409 | AT1G69960 | 1e-104 | F:GGGACCGATGTGTGATCTCT | 129 | 95.6 |
| R:GTTAGCCCATTCGTGTGGTT | |||||||
|
| GTP-binding nuclear protein | MU45556 | AT5G20020 | 1e-106 | F:TGCACCCTTTGGACTTCTTC | 104 | 98.7 |
| R:GATGTAGTAGCCATCCCGTAAAC | |||||||
|
| Ribosomal protein L | MU45916 | AT1G04480 | 3e-97 | F:CGACAATACTGGAGCCAAGAA | 100 | 99.4 |
| R: | |||||||
|
| Ribosomal protein L2 | MU53752 | ATCG00830 | 0 | F:GAGCCGTAGACAGTCAAGTAAA | 111 | 96.0 |
| R:CTCTATGCCCTGCGGTAATG | |||||||
|
| 60S ribosomal protein L36a/L44 | MU54545 | ATCG00760 | 5e-31 | F:GAAGGGCAATGACACGAAAT | 127 | 97.6 |
| R: | |||||||
|
| α-Tubulin | MU45968 | AT1G04820 | 0 | F: | 100 | 97.3 |
| R:CCTGAGATACAAGACGGTTGAG | |||||||
|
| Ubiquitin conjugating enzyme E2 | MU64017 | AT2G02760 | 3e-79 | F:TTAGTGGTGCTCCCCAAGAC | 142 | 104.1 |
| R: | |||||||
|
| Ubiquitin extension protein | MU54467 | AT2G36170 | 4e-56 | F:AAGTGTGGACACAGCAACCA | 132 | 103.8 |
| R:AAGCCAAATGGCTCTAAGCA |
: Melon unigene ID in Melonomic database (https://melonomics.net/genome/) or Cucurbit Genomics Database (http://www.icugi.org/cgi-bin/ICuGI/index.cgi);
: Arabidopsis gene ID in TAIR database (http://www.arabidopsis.org/);
: F, forward primer; R, reverse primer;
: E, amplification efficiency.
Figure 1Expression profiles of melon candidate reference genes.
Expression data are displayed as Cp values for each reference gene in all samples. The line across the box indicates the median. The box indicates the 25th and 75th percentiles. Whiskers represent the maximum and minimum values.
Expression stability of candidate reference genes ranked by geNorm in different sample sets.
| All samples | Root subset | Leaf subset | Abiotic stress subset | Biotic stress subset | PGR subset | ||||||
| Gene | M | Gene | M | Gene | M | Gene | M | Gene | M | Gene | M |
|
| 0.75 |
| 0.42 |
| 0.56 |
| 0.58 |
| 0.26 |
| 0.34 |
|
| 0.79 |
| 0.68 |
| 0.63 |
| 0.68 |
| 0.55 |
| 0.46 |
|
| 0.84 |
| 0.72 |
| 0.72 |
| 0.74 |
| 0.63 |
| 0.56 |
|
| 0.87 |
| 0.78 |
| 0.76 |
| 0.78 |
| 0.74 |
| 0.66 |
|
| 0.94 |
| 0.86 |
| 0.81 |
| 0.86 |
| 0.80 |
| 0.76 |
|
| 1.01 |
| 0.91 |
| 0.86 |
| 0.97 |
| 0.90 |
| 0.81 |
|
| 1.08 |
| 0.97 |
| 0.98 |
| 1.06 |
| 0.96 |
| 0.90 |
|
| 1.18 |
| 1.02 |
| 1.11 |
| 1.15 |
| 1.05 |
| 1.03 |
|
| 1.28 |
| 1.06 |
| 1.25 |
| 1.24 |
| 1.12 |
| 1.17 |
|
| 1.44 |
| 1.12 |
| 1.38 |
| 1.37 |
| 1.19 |
| 1.37 |
|
| 1.57 |
| 1.21 |
| 1.56 |
| 1.51 |
| 1.36 |
| 1.52 |
|
| 1.86 |
| 1.53 |
| 1.83 |
| 1.93 |
| 1.64 |
| 1.71 |
|
| 2.09 |
| 1.81 |
| 2.09 |
| 2.26 |
| 1.88 |
| 1.93 |
: PGR subset, plant growth regulator treatment subset;
: M, stability measure;
: represents the optimal reference genes determined by pairwise variation analyses which are presented in Fig. 2. The recommended threshold of 0.15 is adopted.
Expression stability of candidate reference genes ranked by NormFinder in different sample sets.
| All samples | Root subset | Leaf subset | Abiotic stress subset | Biotic stress subset | PGR subset | ||||||
| Gene | SV | Gene | SV | Gene | SV | Gene | SV | Gene | SV | Gene | SV |
|
| 0.45 |
| 0.22 |
| 0.45 |
| 0.28 |
| 0.16 |
| 0.42 |
|
| 0.50 |
| 0.35 |
| 0.50 |
| 0.56 |
| 0.19 |
| 0.43 |
|
| 0.52 |
| 0.37 |
| 0.51 |
| 0.57 |
| 0.32 |
| 0.46 |
|
| 0.55 |
| 0.40 |
| 0.53 |
| 0.59 |
| 0.52 |
| 0.50 |
|
| 0.57 |
| 0.46 |
| 0.56 |
| 0.61 |
| 0.54 |
| 0.53 |
|
| 0.67 |
| 0.48 |
| 0.56 |
| 0.65 |
| 0.55 |
| 0.54 |
|
| 0.72 |
| 0.54 |
| 0.80 |
| 0.73 |
| 0.61 |
| 0.54 |
|
| 0.75 |
| 0.66 |
| 0.80 |
| 0.82 |
| 0.84 |
| 0.64 |
|
| 1.01 |
| 0.81 |
| 1.10 |
| 0.88 |
| 0.90 |
| 1.10 |
|
| 1.01 |
| 0.83 |
| 1.11 |
| 1.04 |
| 0.98 |
| 1.22 |
|
| 1.31 |
| 0.91 |
| 1.13 |
| 1.25 |
| 1.06 |
| 1.24 |
|
| 1.36 |
| 1.28 |
| 1.35 |
| 1.48 |
| 1.27 |
| 1.35 |
|
| 2.12 |
| 2.08 |
| 2.09 |
| 2.65 |
| 2.02 |
| 1.67 |
|
| 2.23 |
| 2.27 |
| 2.36 |
| 2.79 |
| 2.16 |
| 2.07 |
: PGR subset, plant growth regulator treatment subset;
: SV, stability value.
Figure 2Pairwise variation analyses of candidate reference genes in different sample sets.
Pairwise variation (V) was calculated using geNorm to determine the minimum number of reference genes required for accurate normalization in different sample sets. The asterisks indicate the value of pairwise variation less than the recommended 0.15 for each sample set. PGR subset represents the plant growth regulator treatment subset.
Figure 3Expression profiles of melon catalase family genes in response to Fusarium wilt infection in roots.
The relative expression levels of the catalase family genes were calculated as 2−ΔΔCp. The most stable genes identified by geNorm (CmTUA and CmACT) and NormFinder (CmRPL) and the least stable gene CmPP2A were used for normalization. For CmTUA and CmACT, the geometric mean was calculated and used for normalization. The relative expression levels are depicted as the mean±SD (standard deviation) calculated from three biological replicates.