| Literature DB >> 32710609 |
Johanna Stock1, Andrea Bräutigam1, Michael Melzer1, Gerd Patrick Bienert1, Boyke Bunk2, Manuela Nagel1, Jörg Overmann2,3, E R Joachim Keller1, Hans-Peter Mock1.
Abstract
Storage of meristematic tissue at ultra-low temperatures offers a mean to maintain valuable genetic resources from vegetatively reproduced plants. To reveal the biology underlying cryo-stress, shoot tips of the model plant Arabidopsis thaliana were subjected to a standard preservation procedure. A transcriptomic approach was taken to describe the subsequent cellular events which occurred. The cryoprotectant treatment induced the changes in the transcript levels of genes associated with RNA processing and primary metabolism. Explants of a mutant lacking a functional copy of the transcription factor WRKY22 were compromised for recovery. A number of putative downstream targets of WRKY22 were identified, some related to phytohormone-mediated defense, to the osmotic stress response, and to development. There were also alterations in the abundance of transcript produced by genes encoding photosynthesis-related proteins. The wrky22 mutant plants developed an open stomata phenotype in response to their exposure to the cryoprotectant solution. WRKY22 probably regulates a transcriptional network during cryo-stress, linking the explant's defense and osmotic stress responses to changes in its primary metabolism. A model is proposed linking WRKY53 and WRKY70 downstream of the action of WRKY22.Entities:
Keywords: Abiotic stress; cryoprotectant; shoot tip; stomatal closure; transcription factor; transcriptomics; ultra-low temperature
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32710609 PMCID: PMC7475261 DOI: 10.1093/jxb/eraa224
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Exp Bot ISSN: 0022-0957 Impact factor: 6.992
Fig. 1.Schematic overview of the long-term storage protocol. Phase I, excision of shoot tips; phase II, gradual reduction in explant hydration by treatment with cryoprotectant; phase III, recovery from cryopreservation over 25 d. PVS2, Plant Vitrification Solution 2. *Sampled for RNA-seq analysis.
Fig. 2.Regrowth of Arabidopsis T-DNA mutant explants. The proportion of recovered plantlets after a 25 d recovery period of (A) the WT and mutants pr5, wrky22, sqd1, mbf1C, and asp, and (B) the wrky22.1 and wrky22.2 mutants and a transgenic wrky22.1 mutant plant harboring the transgene 35S:comp. The bars represent the mean % of successful regeneration, with its associated SD. The performance of the mutants was compared with that of the WT using the Win Fisher test (***P≤0.001, n≥90). (C–J) The appearance of recovered plantlets derived from shoot tips of (C, D) WT, (E, F) transgenic wrky22.1 mutant plant harboring the 35S:comp, (G, H) wrky22.1 mutant, and (I, J) wrky22.2 mutant showing (C–G, I) regenerated and (H, J) surviving but non-recovering shoot tips. Scale bar=1 mm.
Fig. 3.Relative abundance of WRKY22 transcripts present in Arabidopsis WT explants. Six-week-old Columbia seedlings were sampled at each stages of the cryopreservation/acclimation process. After shoot tip preparation (phase I), stepwise cellular dehydration and cryoprotection using Plant Vitrification Solution 2 (PVS2, phase II), and post-cryogenic recovery (phase III), transcript levels were detected by qRT–PCR using specific primers. The data represent means ±SD from four independent biological replicates (n=4). ** and *: means differ at P≤0.01 and ≤0.05, respectively, using one-way ANOVA followed by Holm–Sidak post-hoc test.
Fig. 4.The effect of cryo-stress on the cellular ultrastructure of the shoot tip of the WT and the wrky22.1 mutant. (A) Schematic view of the shoot tip, showing the first three layers of the apical dome. (B–M) Transmission electron micrographs of meristematic cells visualized after phases I–III. (B–G) WT, (H–M) wrky22.1. CW, cell wall; M, mitochondrion; N, nucleus; P, plastid; PG, plastoglobulus; V, vacuole.
Fig. 5.The transcriptome of WT shoot tip explants at the end of phases I–III. (A) The analysis identified 12 067 genes as changed with respect to their transcript abundance between phases I and II, and 6349 between phases II and III (P-value <0.01 after multiple hypothesis correction). Genes associated with a P value <10–100 are labeled with their AGI code. (B) The MapMan bins of the DEGs identified in the contrasts phases II versus I and III versus II. Red indicates increased abundance and blue decreased abundance, with the color intensity reflecting the fold of differential gene expression. (C) A principal component analysis confirms the difference between the three phases.
Fig. 6.GO term enrichment and MapMan functional assignment of the WT transcriptome. Enriched GO terms among the regulated genes in the contrast (A) phase II versus I and (B) phase III versus II; enriched GO terms among genes with higher abundance are shown in red and among lower abundance in blue. (C) MapMan mapping of RNA–protein synthesis. Each square represents the transcription of a single gene within a given pathway. Hochberg-corrected transcripts with higher abundance are shown in red, and lower abundance in blue. The color intensity reflects the fold of differential gene expression.
The 50 most highly up-regulated genes in the WT explants identified in the contrast phase II versus I
| Locus | FC | Gene name | Mapman functional description | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 | AT4G12490 | 6.1 |
| misc.protease inhibitor |
| 3 | AT3G46280 | 5.0 |
| signalling.receptor kinases |
| 4 | AT2G26150 | 4.9 |
| stress.abiotic.heat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 6 | AT1G69880 | 4.8 |
| redox.thioredoxin |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 9 | AT4G22470 | 4.6 |
| misc.protease inhibitor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 13** | AT3G51240 | 4.4 |
| secondary metabolism.flavonoids |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 15 | AT1G17180 | 4.4 |
| misc.glutathione S transferases |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 17** | AT1G16410 | 4.3 |
| secondary metabolism.sulfur-containing |
| 18 | AT2G16060 | 4.1 |
| redox.heme |
| 19** | AT5G13930 | 4.1 |
| secondary metabolism.flavonoids |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 22 | AT5G39580 | 4.0 |
| misc.peroxidases |
| 23 | AT2G15620 | 3.9 |
| N-metabolism.nitrate metabolism |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 26 | AT5G41670 | 3.9 |
| OPP.oxidative |
| 27 | AT3G46230 | 3.9 |
| stress.abiotic.heat |
| 28** | AT5G07990 | 3.9 |
| secondary metabolism.flavonoids |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 30 | AT1G51820 | 3.9 |
| signalling.receptor kinases.misc |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 33 | AT1G02820 | 3.8 |
| development |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 35 | AT5G40850 | 3.8 |
| tetrapyrrole synthesis |
| 36 | AT1G51850 | 3.8 |
| signalling.receptor kinases.misc |
| 37 | AT4G33070 | 3.7 |
| fermentation.PDC |
| 38 | AT1G24280 | 3.7 |
| OPP.oxidative |
| 39** | AT5G23010 | 3.7 |
| secondary metabolism.sulfur-containing |
| 40 | AT4G12480 | 3.7 |
| misc.protease inhibitor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 42 | AT4G12500 | 3.6 |
| misc.protease inhibitor |
| 43 | AT1G78050 | 3.6 |
| glycolysis.unclear |
| 44 | AT1G14120 | 3.6 |
| misc.oxidases |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 47 | AT2G03230 | 3.5 |
| not assigned.unknown |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MapMan bins consistent with GO term enrichment are shown in bold. Genes labeled with an asterisk have been associated in the literature with either the drought stress response (*) or products of secondary metabolism (**).
The 50 most highly down-regulated genes in the WT explants identified in the contrast phase II versus I
| Locus | FC | Gene Name | Mapman Functional Description | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 | AT1G31580 | –7.6 |
| stress.biotic |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4* | AT1G20440 | –6.5 |
| stress.abiotic.unspecified |
| 5 | AT1G17710 | –6.5 |
| misc.acid and other phosphatases |
| 6 | AT1G26945 | –6.4 |
| not assigned.unknown |
| 7 | AT5G45890 | –6.2 |
| protein.degradation |
| 8 | AT1G20190 | –5.9 |
| cell wall.modification |
| 9* | AT1G29395 | –5.9 |
| not assigned.no ontology |
| 10 | AT1G52690 | –5.9 |
| development |
| 11 | AT3G09922 | –5.8 |
| not assigned.unknown |
| 12 | AT1G56220 | –5.8 |
| development.unspecified |
| 13 | AT2G45130 | –5.7 |
| stress.abiotic |
| 14* | AT1G73330 | –5.7 |
| stress.biotic |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 16 | AT5G24490 | –5.6 |
| protein.synthesis.ribosomal protein |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 19 | AT3G56240 | –5.5 |
| metal handling |
| 20 | AT5G14565 | –5.3 |
| micro RNA, natural antisense |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 25* | AT1G20450 | –5.2 |
| stress.abiotic.unspecified |
| 26 | AT2G41870 | –5.2 |
| RNA.regulation of transcription |
| 27 | AT3G16670 | –5.2 |
| not assigned.unknown |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 30 | AT5G06760 | –5.1 |
| development |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 32 | AT3G55240 | –5.1 |
| not assigned.unknown |
| 33 | AT5G37970 | –5.0 |
|
|
| 34* | AT4G25490 | –5.0 |
| RNA.regulation of transcription |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 36 | AT2G47015 | –5.0 |
| micro RNA, natural antisense |
| 37 | AT1G75380 | –5.0 |
| stress.abiotic.touch/wounding |
| 38 | AT1G67265 | –4.9 |
| development.unspecified |
| 39 | AT1G52190 | –4.9 |
| transport.peptides and oligopeptides |
| 40 | AT5G49360 | –4.9 |
| cell wall.degradation |
| 41 | AT1G01470 | –4.9 |
| development |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 44 | AT1G18870 | –4.9 |
| Co-factor and vitamine metabolism |
| 45 | AT2G17040 | –4.9 |
| development.unspecified |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 47 | AT1G73540 | –4.8 |
| nucleotide metabolism |
| 48 | AT5G39520 | –4.8 |
| not assigned.unknown |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 50 | AT1G28330 | –4.7 |
| development.unspecified |
MapMan bins consistent with GO term enrichment are shown in bold. Genes labeled with an asterisk have been associated in the literature with either the drought stress response (*) or products of secondary metabolism (**)
Fig. 7.GO term enrichment and MapMan functional assignment of the wrky22 mutant transcriptome. Enriched GO terms among the regulated genes in the contrast (A) phase II and (B) phase III in the wrky22.1 mutant over the WT. Enriched GO terms among genes with higher abundance are shown in red and with lower abundance in blue. (C) MapMan mapping of primary metabolism. Each square represents the transcription of a single gene within a given pathway. Hochberg-corrected transcripts with higher abundance are shown in red, and lower abundance in blue. The color intensity reflects the fold of differential gene expression. TCA, tricarboxylic acid cycle.
Fig. 8.Crosstalk between transcription factors associated with WRKY22 activity. (A) A heatmap identifying putative interaction partners with WRKY22 during phase II belonging to the AP2-EREBP, MYB, and WRKY transcription factor family. Genes differentially expressed between phases II and I in WT explants were chosen on the basis of a log2 fold change of >1.5, and in the wrky22.1 mutant explants on the basis of a log2 fold change >1.3. Red indicates increased abundance and blue decreased abundance, with the color intensity reflecting the fold of differential gene expression. Genes repressed by WRK22 are indicated by a red arrow, and those promoted by it by a black arrow. (B) Assignment of function in the context of the biotic and/or abiotic stress response: 1(Park ), 2(Al-Abdallat ), 3 (Novillo ), 4(Sakuma ), 5(Matías-Hernández ), 6(Kang ), 7(Chen ), 8(Loreti ), 9(Tominaga-Wada ), 10(Wang ), 11(Baxter ), 12(Sun ), 13(Sun and Yu, 2015), 14(Miao and Zentgraf, 2007), 15(Li ), 16(Chen ), 17(Guo and Qin, 2016), 18(Rizhsky ).
DEGs identified in explants from the contrast phase II versus I in the WT, on the basis of a log2 fold change threshold of 1.5, and in the phase II wrky22.1 mutant versus the WT, on the basis of a log2 fold change threshold of 1.3
| Locus | WT II/I | KO II | Description | Mapman functional description | Reference | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | AT1G01470 | –4.9 | 1.4 |
| development.late embryogenesis abundant |
|
| 2 | AT1G12610 | –3.9 | 1.7 |
| RNA.regulation of transcription.AP2/EREBP |
|
| 3 | AT4G25490 | –5.0 | 1.7 |
| RNA.regulation of transcription.AP2/EREBP |
|
| 4 | AT4G25470 | –4.3 | 1.7 |
| RNA.regulation of transcription.AP2/EREBP |
|
| 5 | AT4G25480 | –2.1 | 1.4 |
| RNA.regulation of transcription.AP2/EREBP |
|
| 6 | AT5G21960 | –1.6 | 1.4 |
| RNA.regulation of transcription.AP2/EREBP |
|
| 7 | AT2G47520 | 6.1 | –1.9 |
| RNA.regulation of transcription.AP2/EREBP |
|
| 8 | AT2G47460 | 1.8 | 1.8 |
| RNA.regulation of transcription.MYB |
|
| 9 | AT3G27220 | 2.4 | –1.8 |
| RNA.regulation of transcription.MYB |
|
| 10 | AT3G56400 | –2.5 | 1.3 |
| RNA.regulation of transcription.WRKY |
|
| 11 | AT4G23810 | –2.0 | 1.3 |
| RNA.regulation of transcription.WRKY |
|
| 12 | AT1G29860 | –1.9 | 1.6 |
| RNA.regulation of transcription.WRKY | Guo and Quin, 2016 |
| 13 | AT4G11650 | –4.2 | 1.3 |
| stress.abiotic |
|
| 14 | AT3G24520 | –3.8 | 1.4 |
| RNA.regulation.transcription.HSF |
|
| 15 | AT1G20440 | –6.5 | 2.2 |
| stress.abiotic.unspecified |
|
| 16 | AT1G20450 | –5.1 | 1.6 |
| stress.abiotic.unspecified |
|
| 17 | AT5G66400 | –4,5 | 1.6 |
| stress.abiotic.unspecified |
|
| 18 | AT1G73330 | –5.6 | 2.8 |
| stress.biotic.PR-proteins.proteinase inhibitors |
|
| 19 | AT3G62410 | –4.0 | 1.5 |
| PS.calvin cycle |
|
| 20 | AT3G54050 | –3.7 | 1.5 |
| PS.calvin cycle.FBPase |
|
| 21 | AT1G32060 | –4.0 | 1.5 |
| PS.calvin cycle.PRK |
|
| 22 | AT2G39730 | –4.0 | 1.6 |
| PS.calvin cycle.rubisco interacting |
|
| 23 | AT1G29395 | –5.8 | 1.6 |
| not assigned.no ontology |
|
| 24 | AT1G62480 | –4.0 | 1.3 |
| signalling.calcium |
|
| 25 | AT4G17340 | –4.3 | 1.4 |
| transport.Major Intrinsic Proteins.TIP |
|
Gene functions are assigned either by MapMan analysis or from the literature in the context of the regulation of osmotic stress.
Fig. 9.Changes in stomatal aperture induced by WRKY22 in the presence of ABA and PVS2. (A) WT, (B) wrky22.1 mutant, (C) wrky22.2 mutant. The stomatal aperture ratio (length/width) was calculated from 80 stomata in three biological replicates; SD (n=3). Statistical significance was calculated using one-way ANOVA followed by Holm–Sidak post-hoc test. Mean values marked by the same letter did not differ significantly from one another (P≤0.001).
Fig. 10.A proposed function for WRKY22 during the cryopreservation process. WRKY22 suppresses the transcription of WRKY53 and WRKY70, resulting in an altered salicylic acid (SA)-mediated wounding response and an altered osmotic stress response as suggested by the changed stomatal opening behavior. The open stomata phenotype exhibited by the wrky22.1 mutant results in a greater volume of H2O loss and CO2 fixation, and a change to the chloroplasts’ capacity. A higher energy demand may limit the trade-off between growth and defense, resulting in the mutant explants suffering a compromised level of post-cryopreservation recovery.