| Literature DB >> 26712829 |
Kyla J Morton1, Shangang Jia1, Chi Zhang2, David R Holding3.
Abstract
Reduced prolamin (zein) accumulation and defective endoplasmic reticulum (ER) body formation occurs in maize opaque endosperm mutants opaque2 (o2), floury2 (fl2), defective endosperm*B30 (DeB30), and Mucronate (Mc), whereas other opaque mutants such as opaque1 (o1) and floury1 (fl1) are normal in these regards. This suggests that other factors contribute to kernel texture. A liquid chromatography approach coupled with tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) proteomics was used to compare non-zein proteins of nearly isogenic opaque endosperm mutants. In total, 2762 proteins were identified that were enriched for biological processes such as protein transport and folding, amino acid biosynthesis, and proteolysis. Principal component analysis and pathway enrichment suggested that the mutants partitioned into three groups: (i) Mc, DeB30, fl2 and o2; (ii) o1; and (iii) fl1. Indicator species analysis revealed mutant-specific proteins, and highlighted ER secretory pathway components that were enriched in selected groups of mutants. The most significantly changed proteins were related to stress or defense and zein partitioning into the soluble fraction for Mc, DeB30, o1, and fl1 specifically. In silico dissection of the most significantly changed proteins revealed novel qualitative changes in lysine abundance contributing to the overall lysine increase and the nutritional rebalancing of the o2 and fl2 endosperm.Entities:
Keywords: Endosperm; maize; non-zein; opaque; proteome; stress.
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26712829 PMCID: PMC4762381 DOI: 10.1093/jxb/erv532
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Exp Bot ISSN: 0022-0957 Impact factor: 6.992
Fig. 1.Total proteins identified in all opaque mutants. A total of 2762 proteins were identified by LC-MS/MS in the non-zein fraction of the maize endosperm. The number of proteins identified in each sample is shown and the molecular basis of the mutation for each opaque is given for reference. W64A WT had the most identifiable proteins followed by fl2, Mc, o2, fl1, DeB30, and o1.
Fig. 2.Amino acid content analysis in non-zein proteins for o2, fl2, and o1 compared with WT. (A, C, E). Lysine (K) content was calculated for the top significant increased and decreased proteins in o2 (A), fl2 (C), and o1 (E), compared with WT. The average lysine content of the most increased (Up, blue) and decreased (Down, red) proteins, and all proteins (Average, green) were compared from the top 10 to the top 100. (B, D, F) The amino acid content data (blue, in percentage protein, w/w) in o2 (B), fl2 (D), and o1 (F) from Hunter (2002). Amino acid abbreviations are shown in alphabetical order, and Glx from Hunter (2002) was placed on both Glu (E) and Gln (Q).
Top contributing proteins for qualitative lysine increase in opaque endosperm mutants
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Up_ | C5XX52 | Glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase | 1.17E–05 | 8.31% | 1434.91 | 3561.00 | 51.03 |
| B6SHW9 | Ubiquitin fusion protein | 8.13E–04 | 13.18% | 307.84 | 549.44 | 17.56 | |
| B4FAL9 | Fructose-bisphosphate aldolase | 9.88E–06 | 8.45% | 853.65 | 1313.69 | 11.68 | |
| B4FT23 | 14-3-3-like protein | 1.05E–05 | 7.54% | 934.66 | 1551.91 | 10.06 | |
| C0PHR4 | Adenosylhomocysteinase | 1.69E–04 | 7.63% | 393.92 | 933.63 | 9.28 | |
| Down_ | B6SIX6 | Prolamin PPROL 17 | 6.02E–09 | 0.56% | 198.48 | 6.89 | 10.25 |
| P04698 | Zein-α PZ22.3 | 2.99E–10 | 0.37% | 192.40 | 23.41 | 9.36 | |
| B6SI09 | Aquaporin TIP3.1 | 5.57E–06 | 1.12% | 229.87 | 53.70 | 8.44 | |
| B6SJ53 |
| 3.00E–07 | 0.38% | 95.19 | 5.51 | 4.96 | |
| B6TIK6 | Sarcosine oxidase | 4.02E–11 | 3.13% | 179.24 | 24.79 | 4.29 | |
| Up_ | B6TNF1 | Calnexin | 5.01E–19 | 11.61% | 91.14 | 504.55 | 23.56 |
| P24067 | Luminal-binding protein 2 | 1.73E–16 | 9.35% | 325.06 | 910.99 | 20.16 | |
| A5A5E7 | Protein disulfide isomerase | 1.13E–05 | 9.36% | 930.61 | 1512.57 | 20.08 | |
| B4FT23 | 14-3-3-like protein | 1.81E–07 | 7.54% | 934.66 | 1624.69 | 11.25 | |
| Q5EUD5 | Protein disulfide isomerase | 4.24E–21 | 8.66% | 89.11 | 448.49 | 9.88 | |
| Down_ | Q09HU3 | Trypsin inhibitor (fragment) | 7.18E–11 | 1.57% | 747.33 | 141.23 | 26.30 |
| Q946V2 | Legumin 1 | 5.14E–12 | 2.48% | 1094.66 | 416.15 | 23.27 | |
| Q43706 | Sucrose synthase | 6.57E–07 | 5.15% | 1581.74 | 635.00 | 7.20 | |
| B6TIK6 | Sarcosine oxidase | 1.71E–15 | 3.13% | 179.24 | 1.08 | 4.95 | |
| C0LNQ9 | UDP-glucosyltransferase | 1.48E–06 | 2.34% | 179.24 | 60.37 | 4.24 |
P value is determined by doing pairwise comparisons between one genotype and WT in DESeq2.
Lysine content of each protein was calculated based on the downloaded protein sequences from the UniProt Database.
Norm_WT and Norm_MU are for the normalized abundances for WT, o2, and fl2, using raw abundance divided by the total abundance in one sample.
Contribution to lysine increase was calculated for one specific protein by using two factors: normalized abundance difference between mutant and WT, and lysine content difference against the average (5.91%).
The up-regulated and down-regulated proteins in o2 and fl2 are labeled as “Up” and “Down”, respectively, compared with WT.
An italicized protein name indicates an uncharacterized protein, which was annotated with significant a BLASTP homology search identifier.
Ten highest functional annotation clusters for all proteins identified in the maize non-zein endosperm fraction
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Annotation cluster 1 enrichment score: 4.47 | SMART | RNA recognition motif | 35 | 2.50E–06 |
| INTERPRO | Nucleotide-binding, α-β plait | 35 | 1.00E–04 | |
| INTERPRO | RNA recognition motif, RNP-1 | 35 | 1.50E–04 | |
| Annotation cluster 2 enrichment score: 4 | Biological Process | Intracellular transport | 28 | 4.30E–06 |
| Biological Process | Intracellular protein transport | 24 | 9.20E–06 | |
| Biological Process | Cellular protein localization | 24 | 1.60E–05 | |
| Biological Process | Cellular macromolecule localization | 24 | 1.60E–05 | |
| Biological Process | Protein transport | 34 | 1.80E–03 | |
| Biological Process | Establishment of protein localization | 34 | 1.80E–03 | |
| Biological Process | Protein localization | 34 | 3.20E–03 | |
| Annotation cluster 3 enrichment score: 3.5 | Cellular Component | Mitochondrial part | 29 | 4.30E–07 |
| Cellular Component | Organelle envelope | 26 | 5.60E–06 | |
| Cellular Component | Envelope | 26 | 9.00E–06 | |
| Cellular Component | Organelle membrane | 33 | 1.30E–05 | |
| Cellular Component | Mitochondrial membrane | 22 | 6.00E–05 | |
| Cellular Component | Mitochondrial envelope | 22 | 1.50E–04 | |
| Protein Keyword | Mitochondrion inner membrane | 7 | 3.80E–04 | |
| Cellular Component | Mitochondrial inner membrane | 16 | 3.30E–03 | |
| Cellular Component | Organelle inner membrane | 16 | 4.10E–03 | |
| Annotation cluster 4 enrichment score: 3.24 | Biological Process | Proteolysis | 65 | 2.10E–07 |
| Molecular Function | Peptidase activity | 50 | 3.20E–04 | |
| Molecular Function | Peptidase activity, acting on | 45 | 7.80E–04 | |
| Protein Keyword | Protease | 21 | 2.80E–02 | |
| Molecular Function | Endopeptidase activity | 27 | 4.30E–02 | |
| Annotation cluster 5 enrichment score: 3.15 | Biological Process | Nitrogen compound biosynthetic process | 48 | 3.60E–05 |
| Biological Process | Cellular amino acid biosynthetic process | 22 | 1.10E–03 | |
| Biological Process | Amine biosynthetic process | 23 | 1.70E–03 | |
| Biological Process | Organic acid biosynthetic process | 32 | 1.70E–03 | |
| Biological Process | Carboxylic acid biosynthetic process | 32 | 1.70E–03 | |
| Annotation cluster 6 enrichment score: 3.13 | Biological Process | Protein folding | 29 | 8.10E–06 |
| Protein Keyword | Chaperone | 15 | 3.30E–03 | |
| Molecular Function | Unfolded protein binding | 15 | 1.50E–02 | |
| Annotation cluster 7 enrichment score: 3.03 | SMART | Sm | 9 | 1.80E–04 |
| INTERPRO | Like-Sm ribonucleoprotein, eukaryotic and archaea-type | 9 | 6.50E–04 | |
| INTERPRO | Like-Sm ribonucleoprotein, core | 9 | 8.80E–04 | |
| Protein Keyword | viral nucleoprotein | 8 | 7.60E–03 | |
| Annotation cluster 8 enrichment score: 2.91 | INTERPRO | Universal stress protein A | 8 | 2.00E–04 |
| INTERPRO | Rossmann-like α/β/α sandwich fold | 14 | 2.20E–03 | |
| INTERPRO | UspA | 8 | 4.30E–03 | |
| Annotation cluster 9 enrichment score: 2.66 | Biological Process | Proteolysis | 65 | 2.10E–07 |
| Biological Process | Protein catabolic process | 29 | 3.40E–05 | |
| Biological Process | Cellular protein catabolic process | 26 | 8.10E–05 | |
| Biological Process | Proteolysis involved in cellular protein catabolic process | 26 | 8.10E–05 | |
| Biological Process | Macromolecule catabolic process | 32 | 1.60E–04 | |
| Biological Process | Cellular macromolecule catabolic process | 26 | 1.80E–04 | |
| Biological Process | Modification-dependent macromolecule catabolic process | 22 | 5.10E–04 | |
| Biological Process | Modification-dependent protein catabolic process | 22 | 5.10E–04 | |
| Protein Keyword | Ubl conjugation pathway | 12 | 8.70E–04 | |
| Protein Keyword | Ligase | 19 | 2.70E–03 | |
| SMART | UBCc | 10 | 1.30E–02 | |
| INTERPRO | Ubiquitin-conjugating enzyme, E2 | 10 | 3.70E–02 | |
| INTERPRO | Ubiquitin-conjugating enzyme/RWD-like | 10 | 4.10E–02 | |
| Annotation cluster 10 enrichment score: 2.48 | Cellular Component | Membrane-enclosed lumen | 15 | 3.40E–04 |
| Cellular Component | Mitochondrial matrix | 7 | 1.20E–03 | |
| Cellular Component | Mitochondrial lumen | 7 | 1.20E–03 | |
| Cellular Component | Intracellular organelle lumen | 12 | 4.70E–03 | |
| Cellular Component | Organelle lumen | 12 | 4.70E–03 |
The enrichment score is the negative log scale of geometric mean of each member’s Fisher’s exact P value transformed into a score within the annotation cluster. An enrichment score of 1.3 is equivalent to a non-log scale P value of 0.05.
Fig. 3.Protein over-representation analysis of opaque endosperm mutants. PageMan graphical visualization of enriched pathways for each opaque mutant and corresponding fold-change values compared with WT. Red boxes indicate increased abundance for proteins belonging to a specific function or annotation bin of the corresponding mutant, while blue indicates a lower abundance. Lines indicate upper and lower boundaries of each specific functional bin as determined by PageMan.
Indicator species analysis
ISA highlighted 1573 significant proteins (P<0.05) in at least one sample. Total proteins for each numbered group are given in parentheses.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 109 | WT+ | 378 |
| 45 |
| 64 |
| 42 | WT | 13 |
|
| 106 |
| 34 | WT | 43 | WT | 26 | WT | 32 | α-soluble NSF attachment protein | |
| WT | 73 |
| 31 |
| 30 |
| 16 | WT | 17 | WT | 5 |
|
| 65 | WT+ | 26 | WT | 29 | WT | 15 | WT | 7 | Indole-3-acetate β-glucosyltransferase | |
|
| 23 |
| 24 | WT+ | 20 | WT | 15 | WT | 4 | WT | 3 |
|
| 7 |
| 18 |
| 20 | WT | 10 | WT | 3 | Protein transport protein Sec61 β | |
|
| 4 |
| 10 | WT+ | 15 |
| 10 | ||||
Fig. 4.(A) PCA of all proteins identified experiment-wide. (B) PCA evaluating only proteins with significant fold changes (P<0.01; fold change >2 or <0.5) compared with W64A WT.
Fig. 5.Heat map of significant fold-changed proteins in mutants compared with W64A WT. Proteins are color coded by fold-change ratio values compared with WT. Red boxes indicate increased abundance in the corresponding mutant, while green indicates a lower abundance in the mutant. The dynamic range was from 7.4 to 0.2 fold change compared with WT where a value of 1 means equal abundance. Italic protein names indicate an uncharacterized protein, which is annotated with a significant BLASTP homology search identifier.