| Literature DB >> 25803831 |
Gema López-Martínez1, Mar Margalef-Català1, Francisco Salinas2, Gianni Liti2, Ricardo Cordero-Otero1.
Abstract
Recently, different dehydration-based technologies have been evaluated for the purpose of cell and tissue preservation. Although some early results have been promising, they have not satisfied the requirements for large-scale applications. The long experience of using quantitative trait loci (QTLs) with the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae has proven to be a good model organism for studying the link between complex phenotypes and DNA variations. Here, we use QTL analysis as a tool for identifying the specific yeast traits involved in dehydration stress tolerance. Three hybrids obtained from stable haploids and sequenced in the Saccharomyces Genome Resequencing Project showed intermediate dehydration tolerance in most cases. The dehydration resistance trait of 96 segregants from each hybrid was quantified. A smooth, continuous distribution of the anhydrobiosis tolerance trait was found, suggesting that this trait is determined by multiple QTLs. Therefore, we carried out a QTL analysis to identify the determinants of this dehydration tolerance trait at the genomic level. Among the genes identified after reciprocal hemizygosity assays, RSM22, ATG18 and DBR1 had not been referenced in previous studies. We report new phenotypes for these genes using a previously validated test. Finally, our data illustrates the power of this approach in the investigation of the complex cell dehydration phenotype.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25803831 PMCID: PMC4372426 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0119606
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Strains and plasmid used in the study.
| Strain | Relevant characteristics | References |
|---|---|---|
| BY4742 |
| [ |
| DBVPG6044 (WA |
| [ |
| DBVPG6044 (WA |
| [ |
| DBVPG6765 (WE |
| [ |
| DBVPG6765 (WE |
| [ |
| Y12 (SA |
| [ |
| YPS128 (NA |
| [ |
| WE/NA | WE | [ |
| WE/WA | WE | [ |
| WA/WE | WA | This work |
| WE/SA | WE | [ |
| 96 spores WE/NA | F1 from WE | [ |
| 96 spores WE/WA | F1 from WE | [ |
| 96 spores WE/SA | F1 from WE | [ |
| WA, |
| This work |
| WA, |
| This work |
| WA, |
| This work |
| WA, |
| This work |
| WA, |
| This work |
| WA, |
| This work |
| WA, |
| This work |
| WA, |
| This work |
| WA, |
| This work |
| WA, |
| This work |
| WA, |
| This work |
| WE, |
| This work |
| WE, |
| This work |
| WE, |
| This work |
| WE, |
| This work |
| WE, |
| This work |
| WE, |
| This work |
| WE, |
| This work |
| WE, |
| This work |
| WE, |
| This work |
| WE, |
| This work |
| WE, |
| This work |
| WE, |
| This work |
| WE, |
| This work |
| WE, |
| This work |
| WA/ | WA | This work |
| WA/ | WA | This work |
| WA/ | WA | This work |
| WA/ | WA | This work |
| WA/ | WA | This work |
| WA/ | WA | This work |
| WA/ | WA | This work |
| WA/ | WA | This work |
| WA/ | WA | This work |
| WA/ | WA | This work |
| WA/ | WA | This work |
| WA/ | WA | This work |
| WE/ | WE | This work |
| WE/ | WE | This work |
| WE/ | WE | This work |
| WE/ | WE | This work |
| WE/ | WE | This work |
| WE/ | WE | This work |
| WE/ | WE | This work |
| WE/ | WE | This work |
| WE/ | WE | This work |
| WE/ | WE | This work |
| WA/ | WA | This work |
|
| ||
| pNSU114 |
| [ |
Fig 1Viability rate variation after dehydration stress.
Viability rate values are shown on the y-axis for the 96 ranked segregants of the WE x WA cross (A), WE x NA cross (B), and WE x SA cross (C). Dots indicate segregants with transgressive phenotypes (exceeding two parental standard deviations, black), parental and hybrid strains (yellow), and segregants within the phenotypic range of the parental strains (green). D) Linkage analysis for dehydration stress tolerance from WE/WA segregants. The chromosomes are displayed on the x-axis, and LOD viability values, according to each molecular marker across the 16 yeast chromosomes, are displayed on the y-axis. The significant LOD score threshold is indicated by a red line and was determined by a permutation test. The significant QTLs are indicated by arrows.
The position in the genome, significance value, genes in the respective regions and the differences in the amino acid sequence for each gene in WE strain versus WA are described.
| Chromosome | QTL's | Position (cM) | LOD | Gene / Position | Position of amino acid change |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| VI | Y034w | 65 | 3.85 |
| 161 E → K; 240 S→G; 249 E→D; 251 T→S; 366 T→S; 399 V→A; 771 R→P; 1020 T→I; 1022 C→Y |
| BST1 | 84 | 5.11 |
| 202 A→T; 221 N→D; 253 A→P; 432 N→D; 438 K→M; 506 Q→L; 610K→R; 636S→W; 849 D→V | |
|
| 32 Δ→E; 33D→Y; 75 S→F; 177 E→G; 182 D→E | ||||
| HTX10 | 111 | 4.95 |
| 99 Q→R; 220 T→A; 258 G→A; 729 S→N; 759 I→V; 791 N→D; 902 C→Y; 1102 R→K; 1315 G→S; 1444 D→N; 1586 P→A; 1592 R→C; 1698 T→A; 1782 G→D; 1861 D→Y; 1900 I→V; 1971 M→I | |
| ARS605 | 136 | 4.93 | - | ||
| RPN11 | 153 | 4.50 |
| 109 V→I; 138 A→T; 149 V→A | |
| YFR016c | 180 | 3.32 |
| 120 S→N; 126 N→S; 333 A→S; 583 Δ→N; 1273 N→D; 1300 Y→H; 1524 G→E; 1604 R→M; 1780 P→S; 1878 I→M; 1882 S→A; 1884 Q→Δ | |
|
| 195 N→S | ||||
| ROG3 | 196 | 2.40 | - | ||
| XI | TRP3 | 37 | 2.72 |
| 29 S→G; 109 T→A |
| ARS1103 | 58 | 3.03 | - | ||
| YKT6 | 75 | 2.46 | - | ||
| FAS1 | 103 | 2.58 | - | ||
| TP05 | 121 | 3.10 |
| 131 G→R | |
| PIR1 | 142 | 2.34 |
| 228 E→K; 474 D→S; 619 S→N | |
|
| 223 Q→R; 286 K→E; 325 N→D | ||||
| AVT3 | 173 | 1.16 | - |
Allele without mismatch (-).
Fig 2Effect of knockout haploid strains on yeast viability after DRS.
The scale of viability (%) indicates the percentage of experimental values for the different strains. The values shown are means of n = 3 independent samples ± SD. *Significant differences (p≤0.01) between knockout and its own parental strains.
Fig 3Hybrid viability after DRS.
The scale of viability (%) indicates the percentage of experimental values for the different strains.
The values shown are the means of at least n = 3 independent samples ± SD. † Non-viable strain. *Significant differences at p≤0.01 between hemizygous strains. ‡ Significant differences at p≤0.01 between the hemizygous and reference strains.
Fig 4Phenotypic characterization of ATG18 and FAB1 alleles.
A) Hemizygous diploid Δatg18 cells showed different sporulation patterns. After 48 hours on 1% K-acetate, the counted asci were expressed as a percentage of total cells. B) Effect of nitrogen starvation on cell viability of the Δatg18 strains. The hybrid WE (Nat )/WA (Hyg ) (●), WA (Nat )/WE (Hyg ) (▲), WE/ATG18 (○), and WA/ATG18 (Δ) strains were grown until the mid-log phase in SD and then moved to SD-N. Aliquots were collected and plated on YPD at the indicated times. The scale of viability (%) indicates the percentage of viable cells for the different strains against the time in starvation medium. Values are the mean of triplicate measurements, and the standard deviation was less than 15%. C) FAB1 and ATG18 rescue cells from ionic-hyperosmotic stress at 37°C. Serial dilutions of heterozygous and hemizygous strain cells were plated on YPD medium, YPD medium containing 1 M NaCl, and 1 M sorbitol and grown at the indicated temperatures. D) Hemizygous cells show vacuole fragmentation and vacuole acidification deficiency. Each pair of image columns show phase microscopy of the same field, which shows cells stained with FM4-64 to visualize vacuole membrane, pH vacuolar dye cell blue Arg-CMAC, and the differential interference contrast (DIC) images.
Fig 5Phenotypic characterization of CBT1, RSM22, and DBR1 alleles.
A) CBT1 and RSM22 alleles did not show respiratory deficiency. Serial dilutions of heterozygous and hemizygous strain cells were plated on YPD medium and YPG medium containing 2% glycerol, which were grown at 28°C for one and two days, respectively. B) The hybrid carrying DBR1 shows defective competitive fitness. Optical density at 600 nm (OD600) was monitored every 10 min as a growth measure at 28°C of the strains in SD medium and SD medium containing 3.5 mM ZnCl2.