| Literature DB >> 31448544 |
Syed Shan-E-Ali Zaidi1,2,3, Rubab Zahra Naqvi1,2, Muhammad Asif1, Susan Strickler2, Sara Shakir1,2,3, Muhammad Shafiq1, Abdul Manan Khan1, Imran Amin1, Bharat Mishra4, M Shahid Mukhtar4, Brian E Scheffler5, Jodi A Scheffler6, Lukas A Mueller2, Shahid Mansoor1.
Abstract
Cultivated cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) is the most important fibre crop in the world. Cotton leaf curl disease (CLCuD) is the major limiting factor and a threat to textile industry in India and Pakistan. All the local cotton cultivars exhibit moderate to no resistance against CLCuD. In this study, we evaluated an exotic cotton accession Mac7 as a resistance source to CLCuD by challenging it with viruliferous whiteflies and performing qPCR to evaluate the presence/absence and relative titre of CLCuD-associated geminiviruses/betasatellites. The results indicated that replication of pathogenicity determinant betasatellite is significantly attenuated in Mac7 and probably responsible for resistance phenotype. Afterwards, to decipher the genetic basis of CLCuD resistance in Mac7, we performed RNA sequencing on CLCuD-infested Mac7 and validated RNA-Seq data with qPCR on 24 independent genes. We performed co-expression network and pathway analysis for regulation of geminivirus/betasatellite-interacting genes. We identified nine novel modules with 52 hubs of highly connected genes in network topology within the co-expression network. Analysis of these hubs indicated the differential regulation of auxin stimulus and cellular localization pathways in response to CLCuD. We also analysed the differential regulation of geminivirus/betasatellite-interacting genes in Mac7. We further performed the functional validation of selected candidate genes via virus-induced gene silencing (VIGS). Finally, we evaluated the genomic context of resistance responsive genes and found that these genes are not specific to A or D sub-genomes of G. hirsutum. These results have important implications in understanding CLCuD resistance mechanism and developing a durable resistance in cultivated cotton.Entities:
Keywords: zzm321990Gossypium hirsutumzzm321990; zzm321990WGCNAzzm321990; leaf curl disease; plant virus resistance; transcriptome
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31448544 PMCID: PMC7004920 DOI: 10.1111/pbi.13236
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Plant Biotechnol J ISSN: 1467-7644 Impact factor: 9.803
Figure 1Cotton leaf curl disease (CLCuD) symptoms and quantification on resistance and susceptible cotton genotypes. CLCuD‐resistant Gossypium hirsutum accession Mac7 plant (a) and CLCuD‐susceptible G. hirsutum accession karishma plant (b) with close view of back side of single leaves of Mac7 (c) and karishma (d). No symptoms of CLCuD observed on Mac7 where karishma maintained in the same glasshouse under the infestation of viruliferous whiteflies developed severe CLCuD symptoms. Characteristic CLCuD symptoms including leaf curling, leaf vein thickening and stunted growth can be clearly observed on susceptible cotton. Identification and quantification of CLCuD‐associated begomoviruses (e) and betasatellite (f) in susceptible and resistant cotton. qPCR with begomovirus and betasatellite primers is represented with blue and orange colours, respectively. HC represents healthy control. Nine samples of Mac7 (Mac‐07‐01–Mac‐07‐09) and four samples of susceptible genotype (Sus‐1–Sus‐4) were used in qPCR experiment. X‐axis indicates the concentration of respective component's concentration in nanograms per microgram of plant genomic DNA.
Figure 2RNA‐Seq pipeline and transcriptomic data analysis. (a) Schematic representation of RNA‐Seq workflow for Mac7 with and without the infestation of cotton leaf curl disease (CLCuD). Four biological replicates were used in each treatment. (b) RNA‐Seq reads mapped/unmapped and mapping percentage for each sample. Panel (c) and (d) indicate the distribution of log10 of FPKM (fragments per kilobase of transcript per million mapped reads) in each sample where q1 represents Mac7 CLCuD free and q2 represents Mac7 under CLCuD infestation. Panel (e) represents the phylogenetic tree based on log10FPKMs of each sample. Clear distribution of q1 and q2 in separate clades indicate that biological replicates for each treatment are true representatives of each condition and assure the reproducibility of experiment. Panel (f) shows the heatmap of differentially expressed genes (DEGs) in RNA‐Seq data of Mac7 under CLCuD infestation (Column 2: infected) as compared to CLCuD‐free Mac7 (Column 1: Control). Log2FPKM + 1 value was used to construct heatmap as indicated on the colour key; heatmap2 package in R was used to construct heatmap.
Figure 3Significant differentially expressed genes in Mac7 transcriptome and their validation with qPCR. Each graph in the figure indicates the level of the respective gene quantified using qPCR. In each graph, the green bar indicates the RNA level in CLCuD‐free Mac7, while red bar indicates the RNA level in CLCuD‐infected Mac7. Error bar indicates the variation among three replicates for each gene. The heatmap on the top left of figure provides the level of respective genes in RNA‐Seq data and quantified on base of Log2FPKM + 1.
Figure 4Weighted gene co‐expression network construction and co‐expressed network analysis for CLCuD‐responsive cotton genes in resistant genotype. (a) Resistant cotton genotype Mac7, under CLCuD infestation and CLCuD‐free conditions, was analysed by WGCNA using 1676 DEGs. Genes were clustered as per expression arrangements characterized by the dendrogram and topological overlap mapping metric (TOM) heatmap. Each line of the dendrogram corresponds to a gene. Clusters of similarly regulated genes are indicated as modules by a corresponding colour (black, blue, brown, green, grey, pink, red, turquoise and yellow) with a threshold minimum module size of 70 genes. The intensity of pink colouring in heatmap specifies high strength and green as no strength of correlation between pairs of genes on a direct scale and features hierarchical clustering dendrograms possessing a range of weighted correlations. (b) Weighted network illustrates correlations (edges) among the nodes (genes) with a weighted correlation threshold of ≥0.85. The network is composed of 7770 connections and 1564 genes organized in nine different modules. The node colour corresponds to modules identified via WGCNA. Nodes with high connectivity (≥25 connections, hubs) among different modules are indicated with increased node size. (c) Gene ontology analysis of gene IDs associated with highly correlated 52 hubs among 9 modules identified in WGCNA. GO analysis was performed using online tool agriGO. A key on the bottom right indicated the significance of GO terms and their association. (d) Highly connected nodes (hubs) within the co‐expression network are shown. Average degree of turquoise, blue and black modules are higher than the entire co‐expression network (9.936061381). (e) Clustering coefficient (degree to which a node is connected in a neighbourhood) for genes within each node in a box plot is illustrated. Turquoise, blue and black as well as two additional modules (pink and black) display significantly high average clustering coefficient than whole co‐expression network (0.580615941). (f) The information centrality (the flow of information between any two nodes in a connected network) for the largest component of co‐expression network (588 nodes) is presented. Turquoise, blue and black as well as pink modules display significantly increased information centrality compared to the entire network (0.00126154).
Geminivirus‐interacting genes and their regulation in Mac7
| Process | Host partner | Viral partner# | Function | Significance in Mac7 | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Transcription | SlNAC1/ATF1 | Ren | Nac transcription factor | Down | Selth |
| JDK | TrAP/C2 | Transcription factor | Down | Lozano‐Duran | |
| CYCD1;1 | Cyclin subunit of CD | Down | Ascencio‐Ibanez | ||
| CYCD3;1 | RBR | Transcription factor | Up | Ascencio‐Ibanez | |
| RKP | ICK/KRP | RING finger SPRY domain protein | Down | Lai | |
| SET7/9 | TrAP/C2 | H3K4 methyltransferase | Down | Lozano‐Duran | |
| NIG | NSP | Transport GTPase | Down | Carvalho | |
| cpHSC70 | MP | Plastid heat shock protein | Up | Lozano‐Duran | |
| HSC70 | Heat shock protein cognate 70 | Up | Lozano‐Duran | ||
| rpl10 | NIK | Ribosomal protein 10, NIK inhibitor | Up | Carvalho | |
| NsAK | NSP | PERK‐like receptor‐like kinase, wound‐induced | Down | Florentino | |
| BAM1 | C4 | CLAVATA1‐related receptor‐like kinase | Down | Lozano‐Duran | |
| LRR‐RLK | C4 | Down | Piroux | ||
| SnRK1 | TrAP/C2/BetaC1 | SNF1‐related kinase 1 | Down | Hao | |
| SnRK2.1 | SNF1‐related kinase 2 | Down | Lozano‐Duran | ||
| AtSK2/SlSK | C4 | Shaggy‐related kinase, meristem organization | Down | Dogra | |
| Protein metabolism | ATJ3 | REn | Co‐chaperone | Up | Lozano‐Duran |
| UBA1 | TrAP/C2 | Ubiquitin activating enzyme | Down | Lozano‐Duran | |
| UBC3 | BetaC1 | Ubiquitin activating enzyme | Down | Eini | |
| RHF2A | RING‐type E3 ubiquitin ligase | Down | Lozano‐Duran | ||
| Silencing/defence | ADK | TrAP/C2 | DNA methylation; cytokinin response | Up | Baliji |
| SAHH | BetaC1 | DNA methylation | Up | Yang | |
| GDU1,3 | Glutamine transport, SA pathway | Down | Chen | ||
| PR1 | Pathogenesis related protein, SA pathway | Down | Ascencio‐Ibanez | ||
| ACD6 | Regulator of salycilic acid pathway | Down | Yang | ||
| GSTF14 | Glutathione‐S‐transferase | Down | Yang | ||
| SKL2 | CP | Shikimate kinase | Up | Lozano‐Duran | |
| AT4CL1 | 4‐coumarate:CoA ligase | Down | Lozano‐Duran | ||
| AOC1 | Allene oxide cyclase | Down | Lozano‐Duran | ||
| Stress | F14P1.1 | C4 | Wounding induced | Down | Lozano‐Duran |
| RD21 | V2 | Dehydration responsive | Down | Lozano‐Duran | |
| PLP2 | Patatin‐like protein 2 | Down | Lozano‐Duran | ||
| Transmission | GroEL | CP | Protein chaperone | Up | Morin |
Figure 5Mapping of disease responsive genes in Mac7 on Gossypium hirsutum chromosomes. Chromosomes of subgenome A are indicated with At_ and D with Dt_. A ladder on the left indicates the length of chromosomes and distance between genes in mega bases (MB). Markings on each chromosome represent the respective CLCuD responsive genes in Mac7, and the corresponding numbers represent the gene IDs. The map indicates the clear even distribution of disease responsive genes among both subgenomes.
Figure 6Validation of transcriptomic data by virus‐induced gene silencing of selected genes in Mac7. (a) General methodology adopted for virus‐induced gene silencing (VIGS). Ten‐day old young plantlets of Mac7 were used for agro‐inoculation of plants with VIGS vectors. (b) After 12 days postinoculation, TRV:00 plants showed no change in phenotype, while the bleaching phenotype was observed in TRV:GrCLA plants confirming the efficiency of VIGS system. (c) RT‐PCR showing the down‐regulation of respective genes in silenced plants compared to TRV:00 plants. (d) Quantification of whitefly eggs and pupa on Mac7 VIGS plants 2 weeks post‐whitefly infestation. Error bars represents standard error among biological replicates, and *shows significance using Student's t‐test. (e) Quantification of whitefly adults on Mac7 VIGS plants 2 weeks post‐whitefly infestation. Error bars represents standard error among biological replicates, and *shows significance using Student's t‐test. (f) Semi‐quantitative PCR shows a minute virus titre in plants silenced for STK, E3 ligase and HSC80. The lower band of 107 bp with higher intensity indicates the cotton endogenous gene Sad1, and the upper band is 186 bp showing virus presence, M: 50 bp DNA marker. (g) Representative images of Mac7 VIGS plants after 2 weeks of whitefly infestation, and black arrows represent whitely eggs and pupae.