| Literature DB >> 30279377 |
May Alqurashi1,2, Marco Chiapello3, Chantal Bianchet4, Francesco Paolocci5, Kathryn S Lilley6, Christoph Gehring7,8.
Abstract
Abiotic stresses are considered the most deleterious factor affecting growth and development of plants worldwide. Such stresses are largely unavoidable and trigger adaptive responses affecting different cellular processes and target different compartments. Shotgun proteomic and mass spectrometry-based approaches offer an opportunity to elucidate the response of the proteome to abiotic stresses. In this study, the severe drought or water-deficit response in Arabidopsis thaliana was mimicked by treating cell suspension callus with 40% polyethylene glycol for 10 and 30 min. Resulting data demonstrated that 310 proteins were differentially expressed in response to this treatment with a strict ±2.0-fold change. Over-representation was observed in the gene ontology categories of 'ribosome' and its related functions as well as 'oxidative phosphorylation', indicating both structural and functional drought responses at the cellular level. Proteins in the category 'endocytosis' also show significant enrichment and this is consistent with increased active transport and recycling of membrane proteins in response to abiotic stress. This is supported by the particularly pronounced enrichment in proteins of the endosomal sorting complexes that are required for membrane remodelling. Taken together, the findings point to rapid and complex physiological and structural changes essential for survival in response to sudden severe drought stress.Entities:
Keywords: abiotic stress; drought; endosomal sorting complex; oxidative phosphorylation; ribosome
Year: 2018 PMID: 30279377 PMCID: PMC6313886 DOI: 10.3390/proteomes6040038
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Proteomes ISSN: 2227-7382
Figure 1Arabidopsis thaliana cell viability assessed with FDA after treatment with 40% PEG. (A) Control (mock-treatment) cell count under bright-field microscope. The bar indicates 100 µm. (B) Control (mock-treatment) cells under the fluorescent microscope. (C) Cells after 0.5 h treatment under bright-field microscope. (D) Cells after 0.5 h treatment under fluorescent microscope. (E) Cells 24 h post-treatment under bright-field microscope. (F) Cells 24 h post-treatment under fluorescent microscope. (G) Diagram showing a comparison between control and treated cells after 0.5 h treatment and 24 h post-treatment; a, non-significant change (>0.05); b, significant change (<0.05).
Figure 2Diagrams showing the distribution of TMT-labelled sample after applying bioinformatics analysis. (A) Normalisation on the peptide level using variance stabilising normalisation. (B) Normalisation on the protein level using median. (C) Heatmap showing normal correlation with distinct distribution between the control and the treated samples. Control, C; 10 min treatment, T10; 30 min treatment; T30.
Figure 3Bar chart showing numbers of proteins ordered according to biological process term at 10 and 30 min treatments of TMT-labelled group. Green bars indicate increased abundance while red bars indicate decreased abundance.
Top regulated proteins after 10- and 30-min treatments
| Accession | Annotation | Average 10 min | Average 30 min | Adjusted | Adjusted | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| AT3G52300 | ATP synthase D chain, mitochondrial | 2.25 | 1.60 | 1.51 × 10−4 | 2.93 × 10−3 |
| AT5G16060 | Cytochrome C oxidase biogenesis protein Cmc1-like | 2.24 | 1.48 | 1.04 × 10−4 | 2.93 × 10−3 | |
| AT2G43535 | Defensin-like protein 196 | 1.84 | 1.58 | 2.05 × 10−4 | 2.93 × 10−3 | |
| AT5G59320 | Lipid transfer protein 3 | 1.85 | 1.73 | 3.64 × 10−3 | 1.11 × 10−2 | |
| AT3G51600 | Lipid transfer protein 5 | 2.33 | 2.25 | 2.40 × 10−3 | 7.03 × 10−3 | |
| AT2G02050 | NADH-ubiquinone oxidoreductase B18 subunit, putative | 2.68 | 1.89 | 1.04 × 10−4 | 2.93 × 10−3 | |
| AT1G29990 | Prefoldin 6 | 2.35 | 1.70 | 1.04 × 10−4 | 2.93 × 10−3 | |
| AT5G55125 | Ribosomal protein L31 | 2.18 | 1.40 | 1.04 × 10−4 | 2.93 × 10−3 | |
| AT2G30410 | Tubulin folding cofactor A (KIESEL) | 2.25 | 1.53 | 1.26 × 10−4 | 2.93 × 10−3 | |
| AT5G03660 | Unknown Protein | 2.29 | 1.39 | 1.89 × 10−4 | 6.61 × 10−3 | |
| AT3G05070 | Unknown protein | 2.22 | 1.52 | 8.56 × 10−4 | 1.38 × 10−2 | |
| AT4G15790 | Unknown protein | 2.18 | 1.72 | 1.40 × 10−4 | 2.93 × 10−3 | |
|
| AT3G49010 | 60S ribosomal protein L13-1 | −3.14 | −2.82 | 6.80 × 10−4 | 3.29 × 10−3 |
| AT5G63550 | DEK domain-containing chromatin associated protein | −1.72 | −1.67 | 4.38 × 10−4 | 2.93 × 10−3 | |
| AT2G18020 | Embryo defective 2296 | −1.99 | −1.63 | 7.50 × 10−4 | 5.76 × 10−3 | |
| AT4G30800 | Nucleic acid-binding, OB-fold-like protein | −2.11 | - | 4.55 × 10−2 | - | |
| AT3G09500 | Ribosomal L29 family protein | −2.28 | −1.97 | 1.76 × 10−3 | 8.87 × 10−3 | |
| AT5G23900 | Ribosomal protein L13e family protein | −2.48 | −2.26 | 1.53 × 10−3 | 6.24 × 10−3 | |
| AT5G64670 | Ribosomal protein L18e/L15 superfamily protein | −1.91 | −1.72 | 7.38 × 10−3 | 2.36 × 10−2 | |
| AT5G46430 | Ribosomal protein L32e | −1.95 | −1.79 | 1.71 × 10−2 | 4.28 × 10−2 | |
| AT5G02450 | Ribosomal protein L36e family protein | −2.85 | −2.41 | 1.69 × 10−3 | 9.10 × 10−3 | |
| AT3G04920 | Ribosomal protein S24e family protein | −2.16 | − | 5.19 × 10−3 | - | |
| AT5G20290 | Ribosomal protein S8e family protein | −2.35 | −1.90 | 1.79 × 10−3 | 1.25 × 10−2 | |
| AT1G52300 | Zinc-binding ribosomal protein family protein | −2.48 | −2.56 | 7.14 × 10−3 | 1.35 × 10−2 |
Top 10 positively co-expressed proteins with the 3 unknown proteins of interest after the drought stress
| Unknown Protein | Score | Accession | Annotation |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 0.5949 | AT5G51940 | Non-catalytic subunit of nuclear DNA-dependent RNA polymerases |
| 0.5940 | AT1G11240 | Ribosomal RNA-processing protein | |
| 0.5939 | AT3G56510 | RNA-binding (RRM/RBD/RNP motifs) family protein | |
| 0.5907 | AT2G44860 *§ | Ribosomal protein L24e family protein | |
| 0.5886 | AT2G45520 | Coiled-coil protein | |
| 0.5810 | AT1G79200 | Stigma/style cell-cycle inhibitor 1 | |
| 0.5739 | AT4G27380 | Hypothetical protein | |
| 0.5666 | AT5G59460 | Scarecrow-like transcription factor 11 | |
| 0.5617 | AT4G37090 | UDP- | |
| 0.5563 | AT1G16740 | Ribosomal protein L20 | |
|
| 0.6690 | AT4G30330 | Small nuclear ribonucleoprotein family protein |
| 0.6363 | AT2G19720 | Ribosomal protein S15A B | |
| 0.6255 | AT5G61130 | Plasmodesmata callose-binding protein 1 | |
| 0.6135 | AT4G00810 | 60S acidic ribosomal protein family | |
| 0.6094 | AT3G06680 | Ribosomal L29e protein family | |
| 0.6073 | AT4G15000 *§ | Ribosomal L27e protein family | |
| 0.6070 | AT3G23390 * | Zinc-binding ribosomal protein family protein | |
| 0.6051 | AT4G35950 | A member of ROP GTPases gene family-like | |
| 0.6042 | AT2G27970 | CDK-subunit 2 | |
| 0.6030 | AT3G59650 | Mitochondrial ribosomal protein L51/S25/CI-B8 family protein | |
|
| 0.5496 | AT1G29990*§ | Prefoldin 6 |
| 0.5419 | AT2G18040 * | Peptidylprolyl cis/trans isomerase, NIMA-interacting 1 | |
| 0.4990 | AT1G29850 *§ | Double-stranded DNA-binding family protein | |
| 0.4950 | AT1G66410 | Calmodulin 4 | |
| 0.4877 | AT5G41210 | Glutathione S-transferase theta 1/Glutathione S-transferase tau 12 | |
| 0.4871 | AT4G35570 * | High mobility group B5 | |
| 0.4824 | AT3G50360 *§ | Calmodulin 20/Centrin 2 | |
| 0.4790 | AT2G29960 * | Cyclophilin 5/peptidylprolyl cis/trans-isomerase 19-4 | |
| 0.4570 | AT5G46020 | 28 kDa heat/acid-stable phosphoprotein-like protein | |
| 0.4556 | AT4G30480 | Tetratricopeptide repeat 1 |
* Differentially expressed protein in the TMT-labelled group. § Differentially expressed protein in the TMT-labelled group with at least ±2.0-fold change.
Figure 4Expression levels the three unknowns of interest showing increased expression level to ABA and drought stress. Protein A (AT3G05070) is represented as a green dot, protein B (AT4G15790) is represented as a blue dot while protein C (AT5G03660) is represented as a red dot.
Figure 5Cytoscape network of protein A interactome. Protein A (AT3G05070) is represented in the centre (red) and two of the interacting proteins (blue) are present in this study. Dotted edges represent predicted interactions and solid edges represent the protein complementary assay interaction.