| Literature DB >> 31510927 |
Junqin Wen1, Fangling Jiang1, Yiqun Weng2, Mintao Sun1, Xiaopu Shi1, Yanzhao Zhou1, Lu Yu1, Zhen Wu3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: High temperature is one of the major abiotic stresses in tomato and greatly reduces fruit yield and quality. Identifying high-temperature stress-responsive (HSR) genes and breeding heat-tolerant varieties is an effective way to address this issue. However, there are few reports on the fine mapping of heat-tolerance quantitative trait locus (QTL) and the identification of HSR genes in tomato. Here, we applied three heat tolerance-related physiological indexes, namely, relative electrical conductivity (REC), chlorophyll content (CC) and maximum photochemical quantum efficiency (Fv/Fm) of PSII (photosystem II), as well as the phenotypic index, the heat injury index (HII), and conventional QTL analysis combined with QTL-seq technology to comprehensively detect heat-tolerance QTLs in tomato seedlings. In addition, we integrated the QTL mapping results with RNA-seq to identify key HSR genes within the major QTLs.Entities:
Keywords: Heat tolerance; QTL-seq; RNA-seq; Tomato
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31510927 PMCID: PMC6739936 DOI: 10.1186/s12870-019-2008-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Plant Biol ISSN: 1471-2229 Impact factor: 4.215
Basic statistics of three heat tolerance indexes of the parental lines and F2 population
| Physiological indexes | Parents | F2 population | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LA1698 | LA2093 | Mean | Range | Stdev. | Skewness | Kurtisos | |
| REC | 0.61* | 0.45 | 0.63 | 0.21–0.81 | 0.13 | −1.59 | 2.16 |
| CC | 2.49 | 2.98* | 2.81 | 2.08–3.39 | 0.28 | −0.16 | − 0.39 |
| Fv/Fm | 0.72 | 0.77* | 0.68 | 0.49–0.80 | 0.06 | −0.25 | 0.04 |
REC indicates relative electrical conductivity, CC indicates chlorophyll content, Fv/Fm indicates maximum photochemical quantum efficiency. Level of significant differences are shown (* P < 0.05)
Conventional QTL analysis for heat tolerance-related physiological indexes in the F2 population
| Trait | CH | QTLa | Peak Position (cM)b | Flanking markersc | Location (Mb)d | LODe | PVE (%)f | Addg |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| REC | 1 |
| 52.0 |
| 24.10–80.54 | 11.59 | 6.70 | −0.13 |
| 1 |
| 71.0 |
| 80.54–80.70 | 10.62 | 5.81 | −0.17 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| 2 |
| 47.0 |
| 43.48–48.33 | 5.41 | 5.66 | −0.19 | |
| 3 |
| 119.0 |
| 68.62–70.04 | 3.24 | 1.04 | −0.05 | |
| 9 |
| 18.0 |
| 1.11–4.01 | 2.60 | 2.14 | 0.07 | |
| 12 |
| 13.0 |
| 3.79–36.67 | 9.13 | 5.70 | 0.18 | |
| CC | 1 |
| 118.38 |
| 75.06–81.64 | 3.70 | 1.71 | −0.06 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| 2 |
| 0.01 |
| 39.71–40.00 | 3.52 | 4.86 | 0.05 | |
| Fv/Fm | 5 | 1.51 |
| 2.53–2.73 | 2.50 | 6.94 | 0.18 | |
| 12 | 80.29 |
| 54.37–63.56 | 3.00 | 8.80 | 0.03 |
REC indicates relative electrical conductivity, CC indicates chlorophyll content, Fv/Fm indicates maximum photochemical quantum efficiency
The consistent QTLs qCC-1-5 and qREC-1-3 on chromosome 1 are shown in bold
athe QTLs for REC, CC and Fv/Fm are temporarily named ‘qREC, qCC and qF/F + number of chromosome + number of QTL’
bThe position of heat tolerance-related QTLs
cFlanking markers of heat tolerance-related QTLs
dThe physical position of flanking markers linked with heat tolerance QTLs
ePeak LOD value of the QTL
fThe phenotypic variation explained by the putative QTL
gAdditive effect. A positive value indicates that the genes derived from heat tolerance parent LA2093 contributed to increased heat tolerance, and the negative value indicates that genes originated from LA1698 reduce the effect on tomato heat tolerance
Fig. 1Identification of heat injury index in the F2 population. (a) The high-quality genomic DNA isolated from leaves of 20 each of the heat-sensitive (the plants at the left of the dotted line) and heat-tolerant (the plants at the right of the dotted line) mapping individuals was pooled at an equal ratio (amount) to constitute an HSB (Heat-sensitive bulk) and HTB (Heat-tolerant bulk) sample, respectively. (b) The heat injury degree of the F2 population was visually scored with the scale criterion from 0 to 4. The score of 0 meant no obvious heat damage on plants; The score of 1 meant the plant had few leaves wilted and slightly curled at edge; The score of 2 indicated that the plant had 3–4 leaves wilted and badly crimped at edge; The score of 3 represented that the whole plant wilted due to dehydration; The score of 4 described that the plant died
Fig. 2SNP-index graphs of HSB, HTB, and ∆(SNP-index) graphs from QTL-seq analysis. X-axis denotes the position (Mb) of 12 chromosomes of tomato and Y-axis represents the SNP-index of HSB (Heat-sensitive bulk), HTB (Heat-tolerant bulk) and ΔSNP-index of HTB-HSB. SNP-index was estimated based on 1 Mb physical interval with a 10 kb sliding window. Using the statistical confidence intervals under the null hypothesis of no QTL (P < 0.01), the Δ(SNP-index) graph was plotted. 12 QTLs were identified on chromosome 1, 2 and 7 (1–2 Mb interval) with the criteria that the SNP-index near to 0 and 1 in HSB and HTB, respectively, and the Δ(SNP-index) was above the confidence value 0.5 (at significance level P < 0.01)
QTLs for heat injury index detected by QTL-seq
| CH | QTLa | Chromosome Location(Mb)b | Interval (Mb)c | SNP-index of HTBd | SNP-index of HSBe | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Start | End | Mean | Maximum | Mean | Minimum | |||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| chr7 |
| 10.08 | 11.56 | 1.48 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| chr7 |
| 12.11 | 13.49 | 1.38 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| chr7 |
| 21.94 | 23.08 | 1.14 | 1 | 1 | 0.4 | 0.4 |
| chr7 |
| 24.79 | 26.90 | 2.11 | 0.9 | 1 | 0.23 | 0 |
| chr7 |
| 36.83 | 38.82 | 1.99 | 1 | 1 | 0.32 | 0 |
| chr7 |
| 40.45 | 42.44 | 1.99 | 0.6 | 0.6 | 0 | 0 |
| chr7 |
| 45.75 | 46.88 | 1.13 | 0.86 | 1 | 0.23 | 0 |
| chr7 |
| 50.87 | 52.20 | 1.33 | 1 | 1 | 0.32 | 0 |
The consistent intervals observed with conventional QTL mapping and QTL-seq are shown in bold
athe QTLs for HII are temporarily named ‘qHII (Heat injury index) + number of chromosome + number of QTL’
bThe Physical position of QTLs for HII
cThe interval (Mb) of QTLs related to HII
dThe mean and maximum value of SNP-index in HTB
eThe mean and minimum value of SNP-index in HSB
Fig. 3Chromosomal location of genes within the major genomic regions of chromosome 1 and 2. The physical (bp) positions and identity of the genes, markers, QTL intervals mapped on the chromosomes were specified on the left and right side of the chromosomes, respectively. The flanking markers linked with QTLs for heat tolerance that identified by conventional QTL mapping were marked with red italic. The QTL intervals detected by QTL-Seq were represented with green italic ‘QTL-s’ and ‘QTL-e’. 91 DEGs was found in target genomic regions
Fig. 4(a) Statistics of expressed genes from LA1698_0-VS-LA1698_4 and LA2093_0-VS-LA2093_4. Red and blue pillars represent the significant down and up DEGs with fold change ≥2 or ≤ − 2 and P-value ≤0.001, respectively. (b) Venn diagram representing the numbers of DEGs from LA1698_0-VS-LA1698_4 and LA2093_0-VS-LA2093_4. 2780 genes were coexpressed in both parents, 906 genes were expressed only in the heat-sensitive parent LA1698, and 1001 genes were expressed only in the heat-tolerant genotype LA2093
Fig. 5GO (a) and KEGG (b) enrichment of DEGs. The bubble diagram shows the degree of enrichment of GO and KEGG terms in three categories. By default, the top 20 GO terms with the lowest Q-values were used in the diagram. The X-axis represents the enrichment ratio, and the Y-axis denotes the GO term or KEGG pathway. The size of bubbles indicates the number of genes annotated to a certain GO term or KEGG pathway, and the color represents the Q-value, where the darker the color is, the smaller the Q-value is
Fig. 6The heat map analysis of the expression of 25 DEGs underlying the major QTLs. The average log signal expression values of genes in various times and parents were denoted at the top with a color scale, in which green, black and red color indicated the low, medium and high level of expression, respectively. The samples and genes used for expression profiling were indicated on the top and right side of the heat map. The expression level of 0 h of parents was used as control and actin was used as the endogenous control in qRT-PCR analysis. The expression level of genes calculated by three independent biological replicates with three technical replicates in qRT-PCR assay. Twelve candidate genes showing pronounced differential expression in parents during high-temperature stress were detected. Four genes (Gene ID numbers were: 101252525, 101,265,863, 101,251,744, and 543,944) were further screened from the 12 candidate genes by combining GO and KEGG function analysis: SlGST, SlUBC5, SlCathB2, and SlARG1