| Literature DB >> 28176454 |
Jun-Jun Liu1, Richard A Sniezko2, Arezoo Zamany1, Holly Williams1, Ning Wang1,3, Angelia Kegley2, Douglas P Savin2, Hao Chen1, Rona N Sturrock1.
Abstract
Molecular breeding incorporates efficient tools to increase rust resistance in five-needle pines. Susceptibility of native five-needle pines to white pine blister rust (WPBR), caused by the non-native invasive fungus Cronartium ribicola (J.C. Fisch.), has significantly reduced wild populations of these conifers in North America. Major resistance (R) genes against specific avirulent pathotypes have been found in several five-needle pine species. In this study, we screened genic SNP markers by comparative transcriptome and genetic association analyses and constructed saturated linkage maps for the western white pine (Pinus monticola) R locus (Cr2). Phenotypic segregation was measured by a hypersensitive reaction (HR)-like response on the needles and disease symptoms of cankered stems post inoculation by the C. ribicola avcr2 race. SNP genotypes were determined by HRM- and TaqMan-based SNP genotyping. Saturated maps of the Cr2-linkage group (LG) were constructed in three seed families using a total of 34 SNP markers within 21 unique genes. Cr2 was consistently flanked by contig_2142 (encoding a ruvb-like protein) and contig_3772 (encoding a delta-fatty acid desaturase) across the three seed families. Cr2 was anchored to the Pinus consensus LG-1, which differs from LGs where other R loci of Pinus species were mapped. GO annotation identified a set of NBS-LRR and other resistance-related genes as R candidates in the Cr2 region. Association of one nonsynonymous SNP locus of an NBS-LRR gene with Cr2-mediated phenotypes provides a valuable tool for marker-assisted selection (MAS), which will shorten the breeding cycle of resistance screening and aid in the restoration of WPBR-disturbed forest ecosystems.Entities:
Keywords: SNP genotyping; candidate gene approach; genetic map; marker-assisted selection; white pine blister rust
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28176454 PMCID: PMC5552481 DOI: 10.1111/pbi.12705
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Plant Biotechnol J ISSN: 1467-7644 Impact factor: 9.803
Figure 1Research steps towards the identification of Cr2 candidates and development of diagnostic markers for Cr2 selection using an integrated genomics strategy. (a) Three types of seed families were used in the present study: resistant segregating (Cr2/cr2), susceptible (cr2/cr2) and resistant composite (Cr2/−) seed families. (b) Transcriptomes assembled and SNP data mined by RNA‐seq analysis were available from previous reports (Liu et al., 2013b, 2014), provided candidate genes and in silico SNP data set for step (d). (c) Phenotyping by rust inoculation provided samples and phenotypic data of the resistant (Cr2/−) composite seed families for association analysis at step (e); it also provided samples and phenotypic data of resistant segregating (Cr2/cr2) seed families for step (f). (d) SNP loci were selected from candidate genes and by comparison of transcriptomes between resistant (Cr2/−) and susceptible (cr2/cr2) trees or between P. monticola and P. taeda. SNP genotyping was performed using HRM and TaqMan technologies. (e) Association analysis was performed based on resistance‐related phenotypic and SNP genotypic data from composite seed families. (f) Cr2 mapping was performed using three resistant segregating (Cr2/cr2) seed families and it localized genes in the Cr2 region and anchored Cr2 on the Pinus consensus LG‐1. (g) The mapped genes were subjected to gene ontology (GO) analysis by BLAST2GO and expression analysis using RNA‐seq data. (h) Marker validation for Cr2 diagnosis in breeding programmes was performed by TaqMan genotyping arrays.
Association analysis of SNP genotypic data with phenotypic traits (Cr2‐mediated resistance) using TASSEL
| Trait | Gene ID | SNP marker ID | marker_p | perm_p | marker_ Rsq | marker _df | error df | Mapped |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SUS | Putative cr2 | Putative | 0 | 1.00E−05 | 1 | 1 | 277 | Yes |
| SUS | contig_41490 | snp41490‐1778M | 6.57E−60 | 1.00E−05 | 0.90071 | 2 | 118 | Yes |
| SUS | contig‐4105 | snp4105‐1000S | 1.04E−63 | 1.00E−05 | 0.80936 | 2 | 175 | Yes |
| SUS | contig_41490 | snp41490‐1618R | 1.30E−38 | 1.00E−05 | 0.65938 | 2 | 162 | Yes |
| SUS | contig_11322 | snp11322‐121R | 3.87E−33 | 1.00E−05 | 0.57802 | 2 | 173 | Yes |
| SUS | contig_1471 | snp1471‐201S | 5.02E−31 | 1.00E−05 | 0.54947 | 2 | 175 | Yes |
| SUS | contig_573 | snp573‐186Y | 2.22E−24 | 1.00E−05 | 0.47511 | 2 | 169 | Yes |
| SUS | contig_3772 | snp3772‐739R | 3.24E−23 | 1.00E−05 | 0.44669 | 2 | 175 | Yes |
| SUS | contig_11322 | snp11322‐190K | 3.86E−21 | 1.00E−05 | 0.40172 | 2 | 183 | No |
| SUS | contig_3772 | snp3772‐1107Y | 2.04E−19 | 1.00E−05 | 0.37845 | 2 | 181 | Yes |
| SUS | contig_3772 | snp3772‐858Y | 2.19E−19 | 1.00E−05 | 0.37154 | 2 | 185 | No |
| SUS | contig_3186 | snp3186‐356W | 2.09E−06 | 5.60E−04 | 0.15083 | 2 | 160 | No |
| SUS | contig_3704 | snp3704‐190S | 2.95E−05 | 0.00627 | 0.10887 | 2 | 181 | No |
marker_P: P value from the F‐test on the SNP marker.
perm_p: P value from the F‐test on the marker after correction by 100 000 permutations.
marker_Rsq: R 2 for the marker after fitting other model terms (population structure).
marker_df: Degree freedom of marker.
error_df: Degree freedom of residual error.
Figure 2Genotyping of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) using high‐resolution melt (HRM) analysis. PCR fragments were amplified from the targeted Pinus monticola genes. (a) Aligned melt curves for snp11322‐121R in seed family #3566. (b) Aligned melt curves for snp573‐186R in seed family #1974. (c) Difference plot for snp11322‐121R in seed family #3566. (d) Difference plot for snp573‐186R in seed family #1974.
BLASTn search of 21 Pinus monticola Cr2‐linked genes against P. taeda genes mapped on the consensus linkage groups
| Gene ID | Lowest | Pita gene ID | Sequence description | Mapped SNP loci (ID) | Mapped SNP loci (n) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| contig_4105 | 0.00E+00 | 0_18435 (1363356) | f‐box kelch repeat protein | snp4105‐24R, snp4105‐1000S | 2 |
| contig_1471 | 1.65E−82 | CL199Contig3 | Plasma membrane associated protein | snp1471‐201S | 1 |
| contig_13194 | 0.00E+00 | 0_17655 (1362576) | Bromodomain‐containing protein 9 | snp13194‐1071Y, snp13194‐1820R | 2 |
| contig_9279 | 0.00E+00 | 2_2559 (1354522) | atp synthase subunit b chloroplastic | snp9279‐576Y | 1 |
| contig_34906 | 0.00E+00 | ContigId:Contig5830 | Probable alanine–trna chloroplastic isoform x1 | snp34906‐864K | 1 |
| contig_8821 | 0.00E+00 | ContigId:Contig5113 | Peptidase m23 | snp8821‐877Y | 1 |
| contig_12508 | 0.00E+00 | 2_5726 (1371316) | o‐glucosyltransferase rumi homolog | snp12508‐611Y, snp12508‐1460R | 2 |
| contig_2142 | 0.00E+00 | 2_9847 (1375437) | ruvb‐like 2 | snp2142‐980Y, snp2142‐1542K | 2 |
| contig_186209 | 0.00E+00 | 0_14523 (1359444) | Uncharacterized loc101202700 | snp186209‐285M, snp186209‐573Y, snp186209‐681R | 3 |
| contig_7093 | 0.00E+00 | ContigId:Contig828 | Trichoplein keratin filament‐binding isoform x4 | snp7093‐883K | 1 |
| contig_2711 | 0.00E+00 | ContigId:Contig1913 | Methylthioribose kinase | snp2711‐366Y | 1 |
| contig_33357 | 0.00E+00 | 2_3136 (1376615) | DnaJ/HSP40 | snp33357‐554S | 1 |
| contig_29619 | 0.00E+00 | 0_2366 (1353774) | Uridine‐cytidine kinase c isoform x1 | snp29619‐877Y, snp29619‐2150R | 2 |
| contig_41490 | 3.41E−18 | 0_848 (1376507) | Truncated tir‐nbs‐lrr protein | snp41490‐654Y, snp41490‐1618R, snp41490‐1778M, snp41490‐2928R, snp41490‐3491Y | 5 |
| contig_58688 | 6.08E−17 | 0_4134 (1382924) | nbs‐lrr protein | snp58688‐438M | 1 |
| contig_176313 | 1.22E−11 | 0_335 (1377266) | nbs‐lrr protein | snp176313‐250K | 1 |
| contig_189504 | 8.33E−05 | 0_4134 (1382924) | nbs‐lrr protein | snp189504‐477R | 1 |
| contig_13287 | 4.06E−02 | 0_9466 (1365041) | Proline‐rich protein | snp13287‐508R, snp13287‐956Y | 2 |
| contig_573 | 8.60E−02 | 0_13169 (1358090) | Pyruvate dehydrogenase (acetyl‐transferring) mitochondrial | snp573‐186Y | 1 |
| contig_11322 | 9.88E−02 | 0_9001 (1364576) | f‐box lrr‐repeat protein 14 | snp11322‐121R | 1 |
| contig_3772 | 2.38E−01 | 0_16998 (1361919) | Delta ‐fatty‐acid desaturase‐like | snp3772‐739R, snp3772‐1107Y | 2 |
Six genes were selected by association analysis, and other 15 genes were selected by comparative transcriptome analysis.
E‐values as indicators for gene homology levels between pine species were calculated by BLASTn using CLC Genomics Workbench (v.5.5).
Pinus taeda (Pita) gene identifications were based on Westbrook et al. (2015).
Putative functions of western white pine genes were predicted by a BLASTx search against the NCBI nr database using BLAST2GO.
Figure 3Genetic linkage maps of Pinus monticola Cr2 using SNP markers in seed families #3566, #3592 and #1974. Two SNP markers, snp2142‐980Y and snp3772‐739R, flanking Cr2 consistently across three seed families are shown by red lines. Two SCAR markers from previous work are included in the seed family #3566.
Figure 4Syntenic relationship between Pinus monticola Cr2‐linkage group and P. taeda consensus LG‐1. A dot plotting was performed using map position data of the Pinus highly conserved genes mapped in both species. P. taeda genetic map data were based on two previous reports: (a) Westbrook et al. (2015), (b) Neves et al. (2014).
Figure 5Transcript expression profiles of Pinus monticola Cr2‐linked genes by RNA‐seq analysis. Gene expression levels were evaluated by RPKM using the CLC program. Needles and stems were sampled from 6‐month‐old and 2‐year‐old seedlings, respectively. N 0_DPI: needles were sampled to analyse regulation of transcripts in response to infection by Cronartium ribicola at 0 day post infection (0_dpi); N‐Res 4_DPI: needles of resistant (Cr2/−) seedlings were sampled at 4 days post infection; N‐Sus 4_DPI: needles of susceptible (cr2/cr2) seedlings were sampled at 4 days post infection; St‐Res: healthy stem tissues were sampled from resistant (Cr2/−) seedlings (cankered‐free); and St‐Sus: cankered stems of susceptible (cr2/cr2) seedlings) were samples at 13 months post infection. Different letters indicate significant differences among sample sets (Kal's test and t‐test, P < 0.05 corrected by the false discovery rate‐FDR).
Figure 6Genotyping of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) using TaqMan technology. Allelic discrimination of SNP genotypes was plotted using TaqMan assay snp41490‐1778M among individual samples. Genomic DNA was extracted from megagametophyte tissues (a), or needle tissues (b). The genotypes (A/A) and (A/C) with linkage to resistance are in red and green, and the genotype (C/C) with linkage to susceptibility is in blue, respectively.
Genotype and phenotype (G × P) match rate of western white pine seed families used in breeding programmes
| Seed family ID | Genotypes of snp41490‐1778M | Subtotal | Phenotype | G × P match rate | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A/A | A/C | C/C | ||||
| Composite seed families ( | 93 | 159 | 7 | 259 | Res | 0.97 |
| 2 | 13 | 235 | 250 | Sus | 0.94 | |
| OR Res parental trees (Cr2/ | 2 | 16 | 1 | 19 | Res | 0.95 |
| BC Res parental trees (Cr2/ | 2 | 25 | 13 | 40 | Res or Sus | na |
| (BC_#3671) X Wind (W) | 15 | 15 | Sus | 1 | ||
| (BC_#3674) X W | 2 | 13 | 15 | Sus | 0.87 | |
| Seed families ( | ||||||
| (03014‐150 x w) X (03015‐022 x 03013‐002) | 11 | 11 | Sus | |||
| (06025‐532 x w) x (06025‐504) | 12 | 12 | Sus | |||
| (05014‐124 x w) x (05015‐030 x 03013‐015) | 9 | 9 | Sus | |||
| (06024‐506) X (06024‐504 x 511) | 9 | 9 | Sus | |||
| (18034‐389) X (18034‐380) | 11 | 11 | Sus | |||
| (21105‐052) X W | 8 | 8 | Sus | |||
| (05082‐413) X W | 10 | 10 | Sus | |||
| (05081‐003) X W | 11 | 11 | Sus | |||
| (03024‐783) X W | 4 | 4 | Sus | |||
| (03024‐784) X W | 2 | 5 | 7 | Sus | ||
| (03024‐856) X W | 2 | 5 | 7 | Sus | ||
| (06125‐568) X W | 1 | 3 | 4 | Sus | ||
| (06025‐308) X W | 4 | 4 | Sus | |||
| (06025‐532) X W | 6 | 6 | Sus | |||
| (03014‐158) X W | 1 | 1 | Sus | |||
| (03024‐042) X W | 1 | 1 | Sus | |||
| (03124‐791) X W | 4 | 4 | Sus | |||
| (03125‐847) X W | 1 | 5 | 6 | Sus | ||
| (06025‐316) X W | 1 | 1 | Sus | |||
| (05014‐009) X W | 1 | 1 | 3 | 5 | Sus | |
| (05014‐007) X W | 1 | 1 | Sus | |||
| (05014‐028) X W | 1 | 1 | Sus | |||
| (05014‐029) X W | 3 | 2 | 5 | Sus | ||
| (05014‐124) X W | 4 | 4 | Sus | |||
| (05015‐030) X W | 9 | 9 | Sus | |||
| Sub‐total | 4 | 7 | 140 | 151 | Sus | 0.92 |
| Total | 103 | 222 | 424 | 749 | 0.95 | |
*Two BC seed families were not tested for disease resistance, and they were presumed to be susceptible based on data from breeding programmes (Hunt, 2004).