| Literature DB >> 30965578 |
Xin-Ke Wang1, Xue Gong2, Fangbin Cao3, Yizhou Wang4, Guoping Zhang5, Feibo Wu6,7.
Abstract
The identification of gene(s) that are involved in Cd accumulation/tolerance is vital in developing crop cultivars with low Cd accumulation. We developed a doubled haploid (DH) population that was derived from a cross of Suyinmai 2 (Cd-sensitive) × Weisuobuzhi (Cd-tolerant) to conduct quantitative trait loci (QTL) mapping studies. We assessed chlorophyll content, traits that are associated with development, metal concentration, and antioxidative enzyme activity in DH population lines and parents under control and Cd stress conditions. A single QTL, designated as qShCd7H, was identified on chromosome 7H that was linked to shoot Cd concentration; qShCd7H explained 17% of the phenotypic variation. Comparative genomics, map-based cloning, and gene silencing were used in isolation, cloning, and functional characterization of the candidate gene. A novel gene HvPAA1, being related to shoot Cd concentration, was identified from qShCd7H. Sequence comparison indicated that HvPAA1 carried seven domains with an N-glycosylation motif. HvPAA1 is predominantly expressed in shoots. Subcellular localization verified that HvPAA1 is located in plasma membrane. The silencing of HvPAA1 resulted in growth inhibition, greater Cd accumulation, and a significant decrease in Cd tolerance. We conclude HvPAA1 is a novel plasma membrane-localized ATPase that contributes to Cd tolerance and accumulation in barley. The results provide us with new insights that may aid in the screening and development of Cd-tolerant and low-Cd-accumulation crops.Entities:
Keywords: BSMV-VIGS; HvPAA1; barley (Hordeum vulgare L.); cadmium tolerance and accumulation; quantitative trait loci (QTLs)
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30965578 PMCID: PMC6480696 DOI: 10.3390/ijms20071732
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Mol Sci ISSN: 1422-0067 Impact factor: 5.923
Phenotypes of the traits of growth and physiology and Cd tolerance indexes of the doubled haploid population from the cross between Suyinmai 2 and Weisuobuzhi.
| Parents | The Doubled Haploid Population (108 Lines) | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Traits | Suyinmai 2 | Weisuobuzhi | Skewness | Kurtosis | Min | Max | Mean | CV (%) | |
|
| |||||||||
| SDW | 0.40 | 0.70 * | 0.50 | 0.20 | 0.30 | 0.50 | 0.40 | 14.10 | |
| RDW | 0.10 | 0.20 * | 0.10 | 0.00 | 0.10 | 0.20 | 0.10 | 17.40 | |
| RL | 22.90 | 24.80 | 0.60 | 2.50 | 18.50 | 31.10 | 22.60 | 8.50 | |
| PH | 41.70 | 45.50 | 0.00 | 0.30 | 32.20 | 46.50 | 39.60 | 6.60 | |
| SPAD | 32.00 | 30.30 | 0.80 | 4.20 | 27.60 | 33.60 | 29.80 | 4.20 | |
| LPOD | 9.85 | 8.15 | 0.98 | 0.86 | 2.64 | 19.91 | 9.17 | 35.74 | |
| LAPX | 3.62 | 24.43 * | 3.64 | 21.79 | 5.04 | 63.30 | 15.07 | 48.86 | |
| LCAT | 0.46 | 0.37 | 0.06 | −1.01 | 0.10 | 0.94 | 0.47 | 47.82 | |
| RPOD | 32.59 | 25.56 | 2.16 | 10.95 | 17.90 | 89.45 | 36.37 | 24.44 | |
| RAPX | 15.90 | 8.27 * | 0.88 | 1.58 | 3.91 | 29.28 | 14.60 | 15.85 | |
| RCAT | 0.12 | 0.39 * | 1.44 | 1.48 | 0.13 | 2.11 | 0.65 | 23.53 | |
| ShMn | 30.49 | 44.27 * | −0.10 | −0.97 | 20.11 | 56.19 | 37.07 | 24.66 | |
| ShZn | 98.12 | 86.00 * | 1.16 | 3.14 | 71.17 | 167.81 | 94.48 | 16.47 | |
| RMn | 134.14 | 167.45 * | 0.79 | 1.48 | 90.82 | 245.09 | 135.32 | 21.50 | |
| RZn | 137.90 | 149.70 | 0.23 | −0.12 | 84.99 | 180.93 | 143.31 | 12.81 | |
|
| |||||||||
| SDW | 0.20 | 0.40 * | 0.60 | 1.10 | 0.20 | 0.40 | 0.30 | 15.30 | |
| RDW | 0.10 | 0.10 | 0.20 | 0.20 | 0.00 | 0.10 | 0.10 | 16.30 | |
| RL | 16.80 | 22.80 * | 0.50 | −0.20 | 16.10 | 23.40 | 19.20 | 8.80 | |
| PH | 21.20 | 23.60 | 0.70 | 1.10 | 20.30 | 29.50 | 23.70 | 7.30 | |
| SPAD | 27.10 | 29.00 | −0.10 | −0.50 | 22.80 | 30.10 | 26.70 | 6.20 | |
| LPOD | 35.81 | 15.03 * | 1.09 | 1.45 | 8.49 | 48.99 | 21.07 | 39.08 | |
| LAPX | 12.79 | 47.77 * | 0.25 | 1.62 | 6.01 | 65.02 | 20.68 | 60.48 | |
| LCAT | 0.30 | 0.12 | 2.65 | 6.79 | 0.10 | 2.78 | 0.47 | 119.43 | |
| RPOD | 43.14 | 28.05 * | −0.35 | 0.047 | 14.35 | 67.61 | 42.89 | 16.35 | |
| RAPX | 21.40 | 6.36 * | 0.72 | 0.99 | 4.23 | 46.49 | 18.68 | 17.20 | |
| RCAT | 0.13 | 0.91 * | 2.04 | 5.61 | 0.11 | 4.06 | 0.80 | 17.04 | |
| ShCd | 199.60 | 172.20 * | 0.10 | −0.40 | 98.32 | 213.70 | 156.70 | 15.80 | |
| ShMn | 30.80 | 45.90 * | 0.50 | 1.70 | 24.20 | 65.10 | 42.10 | 16.20 | |
| ShZn | 95.20 | 77.30 * | 2.60 | 16.40 | 61.50 | 173.00 | 86.70 | 15.20 | |
| RCd | 1861.10 | 2235.00 * | 0.10 | −0.30 | 1161.00 | 2749.70 | 1921.50 | 18.20 | |
| RMn | 127.40 | 188.30 * | 0.80 | 1.10 | 73.20 | 294.40 | 156.10 | 24.90 | |
| RZn | 158.80 | 169.00 | 0.60 | 2.30 | 76.30 | 248.20 | 157.90 | 15.70 | |
|
| |||||||||
| SDW | −36.3 | −34.4 | 0.2 | −0.7 | −41.3 | −0.2 | −21.3 | 48.1 | |
| RDW | −41.5 | −27.7 | 0.1 | 0.8 | −43.7 | −0.8 | −21.9 | 47.8 | |
| RL | −26.5 | −7.8 | −0.1 | 0.0 | −39.3 | −29.0 | −14.8 | 56.1 | |
| PH | −49.2 | −48.1 | 0.5 | −0.6 | −48.9 | −29.0 | −40.1 | 10.4 | |
| SPAD | −15.5 | −4.2 | −0.2 | 0.7 | −25.8 | −0.4 | −10.7 | 51.5 | |
| LPOD | 263.4 | 84.3 | 0.7 | −0.2 | 3.2 | 391.3 | 135.3 | 66.7 | |
| LAPX | 253.9 | 95.6 | 4.7 | 27.9 | 39.1 | 341.8 | 167.6 | 79.2 | |
| LCAT | −35.6 | −66.5 | 1.2 | 1.6 | −99.0 | 38.5 | −59.5 | 51.1 | |
| RPOD | −42.5 | 9.8 | 1.8 | 3.5 | 2.6 | 187.9 | 42.5 | 87.4 | |
| RAPX | 34.6 | 268.3 | 1.6 | 2.6 | 3.0 | 436.3 | 97.4 | 97.7 | |
| RCAT | −50.4 | 16.5 | 0.4 | −1.1 | −99.8 | −2.1 | −57.0 | 52.3 | |
Cd tolerance index (CTI) was calculated as CTI = (parameter under Cd stress − parameter under control)/parameter under the control) × 100%. * significant difference between the two parents Suyinmai 2 and Weisuobuzhi at the 0.05 level. SDW, shoot dry weight (g plant−1); RDW, root dry weight (g plant−1); RL, root length (cm); PH, plant height (cm); SPAD, SPAD value; LPOD, leaf POD activity (OD470 g−1 FW min−1); LAPX, leaf APX activity (mmol g−1 FW min−1); LCAT, leaf CAT activity (mmol g−1 FW min−1); RPOD, root POD activity; RAPX, root APX activity; RCAT, root CAT activity. ShCd, ShMn, ShZn, and RCd, RMn, RZn represent Cd, Mn, Zn concentrations (mg kg−1 DW) in shoots and roots, respectively. No Cd in plants was detected under control condition. CV (%), the coefficient of variation was presented as the absolute value of the ratio of the standard deviation to the mean value.
Figure 1Frequency distribution of cadmium (Cd) concentration in shoots and roots, and Cd accumulation per plant. Parents and 108 DH lines were grown in a nutrient solution containing 10 μM CdCl2 for 15 days. The data are represented as the mean of three replicates obtained from the spatial analysis. The solid arrow represents Weisuobuzhi (Cd-tolerant genotype) and the hollow arrow represents Suyinmai 2 (Cd-sensitive).
Quantitative trait loci (QTLs) identified under control and 10 µM Cd condition.
| Trait | QTL a | Chr. b | Position (cM) c | Interval (cM) d | Marker e | LOD f | R2 g (%) | Add h |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||||
| SPAD value |
| 3H | 91.88 | 5.88 | TP41927 | 2.82 | 11.30 | 0.42 |
| Plant height (cm) |
| 5H | 27.20 | 3.90 | Bmag323 | 2.83 | 11.40 | −0.90 |
|
| 5H | 42.46 | 2.81 | TP33838 | 3.26 | 13.00 | −0.95 | |
|
| 5H | 64.57 | 29.50 | TP63873 | 4.31 | 16.80 | −1.06 | |
|
| 5H | 84.09 | 17.50 | TP21896 | 3.77 | 14.90 | −1.03 | |
| Root length (cm) |
| 1H | 161.32 | 1.29 | TP13 | 2.87 | 11.50 | −0.66 |
| Leaf POD (OD470 g−1 FW min−1) |
| 5H | 233.32 | 3.91 | TP52094 | 2.86 | 11.50 | 1.12 |
| Root POD (OD470 g−1 FW min−1) |
| 5H | 84.09 | 4.00 | TP21896 | 2.73 | 10.90 | 3.05 |
| Leaf APX (mmol g−1 FW min−1) |
| 1H | 70.90 | 9.20 | EBmac0501 | 2.59 | 10.40 | −0.54 |
|
| ||||||||
| Plant height (cm) |
| 5H | 37.24 | 4.24 | TP20247 | 2.76 | 11.10 | −0.58 |
|
| 5H | 42.46 | 2.81 | TP33838 | 3.87 | 15.20 | −0.68 | |
|
| 5H | 43.76 | 5.97 | TP220 | 3.55 | 14.00 | −0.66 | |
|
| 5H | 55.47 | 11.94 | TP53164 | 3.55 | 14.10 | −0.62 | |
|
| 5H | 64.57 | 8.23 | TP13622 | 3.76 | 14.80 | −0.66 | |
|
| 5H | 88.09 | 13.27 | TP13479 | 3.80 | 15.00 | −0.67 | |
|
| 7H | 92.02 | 11.78 | TP26119 | 3.00 | 12.00 | −0.60 | |
|
| 7H | 100.78 | 5.13 | TP35770 | 2.81 | 11.50 | −0.59 | |
| Leaf POD (OD470 g−1 FW min−1) |
| 7H | 22.50 | 8.80 | Bmac0187 | 3.00 | 12.00 | 3.06 |
| Root Mn (μg g−1 DW) |
| 2H | 159.46 | 39.00 | TP48811 | 3.19 | 12.70 | −13.88 |
|
| 2H | 168.58 | 2.60 | TP10446 | 3.09 | 12.30 | −13.65 | |
|
| 3H | 107.69 | 54.17 | TP60843 | 3.46 | 13.70 | −14.36 | |
|
| 5H | 15.90 | 1.29 | HVM07 | 2.73 | 11.00 | 12.86 | |
|
| 5H | 94.60 | 5.11 | TP27265 | 3.07 | 12.30 | 13.60 | |
| Shoot Cd (μg g−1 DW) |
| 7H | 72.39 | 2.60 | TP30771 | 4.28 | 17.00 | 10.67 |
a QTLs are named by trait and chromosome; b The chromosome on which the QTL is mapped; c The position (in cM) of the QTL on the chromosome; d The genetic distance between two markers; e The marker at the maximum logarithm of odds (LOD) score for QTL; f The LOD score at the QTL; g The percentage of explained variance of the marker at QTL; h Additive effect, the estimated additive effect.
Figure 2Quantitative trait loci (QTL) significantly associated with different parameters linked to cadmium (Cd) tolerance in the Suyinmai 2 × Weisuobuzhi doubled haploid (DH) population obtained using the multiple QTL model (MQM) mapping method. QTLs in black and red were detected in control and 10 µM Cd conditions, respectively. The one- and two-logarithm of odds (LOD) support intervals for each of the QTLs, as calculated in Mapchart, are displayed on the right side of each linkage group.
Figure 3Logarithm of odds (LOD) score profiles for Cd tolerance in terms of shoot Cd concentration. The map positions are indicated along the abscissa. The LOD scores are indicated along the y-axis. The dashed lines represent the LOD score threshold (2.5) at a 0.05 error level for QTL detection.
Figure 4Protein structure and phylogenetic analysis of HvPAA1. (a) Amino acid sequence analysis based on the SMATR database. Some features and domains are not shown due to overlap with other annotations. (b) Amino acid sequence analysis based on the Protter database. (c) Phylogenetic tree constructed in MEGA7 using the neighbor-joining algorithm analysis method.
Figure 5Tissue expression and time-dependent expression patterns of HvPAA1 and the subcellular localization of HvPAA1. (a,b) qRT-PCR analysis of the relative transcript levels of HvPAA1 in different tissues and at different times in Zhenong 8. (c) Transient expression of GFP and HvPAA1-sGFP fusion protein in tobacco. Microscopic image on left shows GFP; the image on right shows the HvPAA1-sGFP fusion protein. The results represent an average (±SE) from three independent experiments. Different letters indicate significant differences among the treatments within three sampling data according to Duncan’s multiple range test with p < 0.05. The error bars represent the SE values.
Figure 6Functional assessment of HvPAA1 in Zhenong 8 using BSMV-VIGS (barley stripe mosaic virus- virus induced gene silencing). (a) Morphology of mock- or BSMV: HvPAA1-inoculated Zhenong 8 seedlings after 10 days of exposure to 5 µM Cd. Scale bars = 6 cm. (b) RT-PCR analysis of the relative transcript levels of HvPAA1 in Zhenong 8 leaves. Different letters indicate significant differences among the treatments within 3 sampling data (1, 5, 10 d after the initiation of Cd stress) according to Duncan’s multiple range test with p < 0.05. (c,d) Dry weights of mock- and BSMV:HvPAA1-inoculated Zhenong 8 plants. (e,f) Cd concentrations of mock- and BSMV:HvPAA1-inoculated Zhenong 8 plants grown in 5 µM Cd. (g) Cd accumulation in mock- and BSMV:HvPAA1-inoculated Zhenong 8 plants grown in 5 µM Cd. (h) root-to-shoot Cd transport ratio. Error bars represent the SE values. Different letters indicate significant differences between control and Cd treatment, between each sampling date, and between the mock- and BSMV:HvPAA1 inoculated seedlings according to Duncan’s multiple range tests with p < 0.05.