| Literature DB >> 33603547 |
Yuxia Lu1, Jisu Wu1, Ruomei Wang1, Yueming Yan1,2.
Abstract
Thinopyrum intermedium (2n = 6x = 42, E1E1E2E2XX) serves as an important gene source of desirable traits for genetic improvement of wheat cultivars resistant to stresses. This study used the comparative proteomic approach to identify stress defense related proteins in the developing grains of common wheat (Zhongmai 8601)-Thinopyron intermedium 7XL/7DS translocation line YW642 and to explore their potential values for improving wheat stress resistance. Two-dimensional electrophoresis identified 124 differentially accumulated protein spots representing 100 unique proteins, which mainly participated in stress defense, energy metabolism, protein metabolism and folding and storage protein synthesis. Among these, 16 were unique and 35 were upregulated in YW642. The upregulated DAPs were mainly involved in biotic and abiotic stress defense. Further cis-elements analysis of these stress-related DAP genes revealed that phytohormone responsive elements such as ABREs, G-box, CGTCA-motif and TGACG-motif, and environment responsive element As-1 were particularly abundant, which could play important roles in response to various stressors. Transcription expression analysis by RNA-seq and qRT-PCR demonstrated a large part of the stress-related DAP genes showed an upregulated expression in the early-to-middle stages of grain development. Our results proved that Thinopyron intermedium contains abundant stress responsive proteins that have potential values for the genetic improvement of wheat stress resistance.Entities:
Keywords: 7XL/7DS translocation; grain development; proteome; stress defense; transcript expression
Year: 2020 PMID: 33603547 PMCID: PMC7878943 DOI: 10.1270/jsbbs.19133
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Breed Sci ISSN: 1344-7610 Impact factor: 2.086
Fig. 1.Phenotype comparison between Zhongmai 8601 and Zhongmai 8601-Thinopyron intermedium 7XL/7DS translocation line YW642. A. Plant morphology; B. Spike morphology; C. Grain morphological characteristics during development.
Fig. 2.Differential proteome identification of grain proteome in the Zhongmai 8601 and Zhongmai 8601-Thinopyron intermedium 7XL/7DS translocation line YW642. A. 2-DE images of grain proteome at 30 DPA in YW642. The 35 upregulated and 16 unique DAP spots in YW642 are numbered; B. 2-DE images of grain proteome at 30 DPA in Zhongmai 8601. The 70 downregulated DAPs in Zhongmai 8601 are numbered; C. The Venn diagram of the DAP spots between Zhongmai 8601 and YW642 and their changes at five grain developmental stages. The numbers in parenthesis indicate the number of unique DAPs; The upward arrows indicate upregulation and the downward arrows indicate downregulation. DPA, days post anthesis.
Classification of stress-related differentially accumulated proteins (DAPs) identified by MALDI-TOF/TOF-MS from Zhongmai 8601 and Zhongmai 8601-Thinopyron intermedium 7XL/7DS translocation line YW642
| Protein Name (Spot ID) | Protein Score | Protein Score C.I.% | Total Ion C.I.% | Subcellular location prediction | Expression ratio (ZmX/ZM) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 15 DPA | 20 DPA | 25 DPA | 30 DPA | 45 DPA | ||||||
| Biotic stress | ||||||||||
| Translationally-controlled tumor protein (12) | 552 | 100 | 100 | 0.037 | Cyto | 1:0.8 | 1:0.9 | 1:1.4 | 1:2.4 | 1:1.6 |
| Basic endochitinase C (13) | 125 | 100 | 100 | 0.009 | Vacu | 1:0 | 1:0.7 | 1:1.5 | 1:1.9 | 1:1.9 |
| Disease resistance protein RPP8 (20) | 48 | 100 | 100 | 0.019 | Cyto | 1:1 | 1:1.9 | 1:1.5 | 1:1.6 | 1:1.2 |
| Class II chitinase (22) | 128 | 100 | 100 | 0.034 | Vacu | 1:2.6 | 1:2.5 | 1:2.6 | 1:0.8 | 1:0.8 |
| Disease resistance protein RPM1 (34) | 53 | 100 | 100 | 0.026 | Cyto | 0:0 | 0.1:0 | 1:0.7 | 1:1.3 | 1:1.2 |
| Translationally controlled tumor protein (37) | 264 | 100 | 100 | 0.034 | Cyto | 0:0 | 1:1.9 | 1:1.5 | 1:1.8 | 1:1.2 |
| Thaumatin-like protein (42) | 344 | 100 | 100 | 0.004 | Chlo* | 1:2.8 | 1:2.1 | 1:1.2 | 1:2.0 | 0.4:0 |
| Disease resistance protein RPM1 (45) | 49 | 100 | 100 | 0.035 | Cyto | 1:1.6 | 1:1.6 | 1:0.7 | 1:2.1 | 1:1.0 |
| Basic endochitinase C (55) | 130 | 100 | 100 | 0.037 | Vacu | 0:0 | 0:0.3 | 0:0.8 | 1:2.2 | 0:0 |
| Class II chitinase (57) | 133 | 100 | 100 | 0.048 | Vacu | 1:0.9 | 1:1.6 | 1:0.9 | 1:2.0 | 1:1.5 |
| PR-4, partial (109) | 57 | 100 | 100 | 0.009 | Wall | 0:0 | 0:0 | 0:0 | 0:0.2 | 0:0 |
| Detoxification | ||||||||||
| Lactoylglutathione lyase (1) | 129 | 100 | 100 | 0.031 | Nucl | 1:0.7 | 1:0.1 | 1:0.6 | 1:1.9 | 1:1.4 |
| Peroxidase 1 (36) | 340 | 100 | 100 | 0.021 | Extr | 1:1.6 | 1:1.8 | 1:1.5 | 1:1.1 | 1:1.2 |
| Glucose and ribitol Dehydrogenase-like protein (38) | 264 | 100 | 100 | 0.009 | Cyto | 0:0.1 | 1:1.5 | 1:0.9 | 1:1.2 | 0.2:0 |
| Glucose and ribitol Dehydrogenase-like protein (39) | 264 | 100 | 100 | 0.009 | Cyto | 0:0 | 1:0.8 | 1:0.4 | 1:0.3 | 1:0.4 |
| Lactoylglutathione lyase (40) | 382 | 100 | 100 | 0.024 | Cyto | 1:1.2 | 1:0.9 | 0.1:0 | 1:1.8 | 0.1:0 |
| Glutathione S-transferase (43) | 200 | 100 | 100 | 0.028 | Cyto | 0:0 | 0:0.1 | 1:0.8 | 1:1.2 | 1:1.5 |
| Catalase isozyme 1 (59) | 426 | 100 | 100 | 0.048 | Pero | 1:0.9 | 1:0.5 | 1:0.5 | 1:0.8 | 1:1.2 |
| Betaine-aldehyde dehydrogenase (60) | 433 | 100 | 100 | 0.035 | Chlo* | 1:1.7 | 1:0.7 | 0:0 | 0:0 | 1:0.7 |
| Aldose reductase (80) | 1030 | 100 | 100 | 0.047 | Cyto | 0:0 | 1:1.2 | 1:1.1 | 1:0.7 | 1:0.3 |
| Peroxidase 1 (82) | 228 | 100 | 100 | 0.032 | Extr | 1:1.6 | 1:0.6 | 1:1.1 | 1:1.6 | 1:1.9 |
| Dehydroascorbate reductase (84) | 812 | 100 | 100 | 0.037 | Cyto* | 1:1.6 | 1:1.6 | 1:1.9 | 1:1.4 | 1:0.3 |
| Oxalate oxidase 2 (85) | 97 | 100 | 100 | 0.036 | Cyto | 0:0 | 1:0.7 | 0:0 | 0:0 | 1:0 |
| Peroxiredoxin-2C (87) | 118 | 100 | 95 | 0.047 | Cyto | 1:1.6 | 0:0 | 0:0 | 0:0.2 | 1:1.6 |
| Superoxide dismutase (90) | 124 | 100 | 100 | 0.011 | Mito | 0:0 | 1:1.8 | 1:0.9 | 1:1.9 | 1:1.5 |
| Glucose and ribitol Dehydrogenase-like protein (92) | 225 | 100 | 100 | 0.021 | Cyto | 1:1 | 1:1.8 | 1:0.7 | 1:1.6 | 1:6 |
| Stress responsive protein 1 (106) | 379 | 100 | 100 | 0.039 | Cyto | 1:1.4 | 1:1.7 | 1:0.6 | 1:0.7 | 1:0.3 |
| Thiol-specific antioxidant protein (116) | 427 | 100 | 100 | 0.013 | Nucl | 0:0.1 | 0:0.1 | 0:0.1 | 0:0.1 | 0:0.1 |
| Protein degradation | ||||||||||
| Formate dehydrogenase (7) | 196 | 100 | 100 | 0.023 | Cyto | 1:1.2 | 1:0.8 | 1:0.7 | 1:1 | 1:0.2 |
| ATP-DAP sendent zinc metalloprotease FTSH 2 (14) | 53 | 100 | 100 | 0.039 | Chlo | 0:0.1 | 1:2.7 | 1:2.2 | 1:1.8 | 1:2.4 |
| 20S proteasome alpha subunit D (41) | 99 | 100 | 100 | 0.029 | Cyto | 1:10.0 | 1:8.0 | 1:8.8 | 1:5.0 | 1:3.4 |
| 20S proteasome beta 5 subunit (112) | 100 | 100 | 100 | 0.026 | Cyto | 0:0 | 0:0 | 0:0.2 | 0:0.3 | 0:0 |
| 26S proteasome non-ATPase regulatory subunit 14 (124) | 182 | 100 | 100 | 0.034 | Cyto | 0:0.1 | 0:0 | 0:0 | 0:0.1 | 0:0 |
| Protein repairation | ||||||||||
| Serpin-N3.2 (10) | 278 | 100 | 100 | 0.047 | Extr | 0:0 | 1:0.6 | 1:0.3 | 1:0.5 | 1:0.1 |
| Heat shock protein 101 (11) | 741 | 100 | 100 | 0.028 | Cyto | 1:0.6 | 1:0.6 | 1:0.6 | 1:0.9 | 1:2.6 |
| Heat shock protein 101 (16) | 916 | 100 | 100 | 0.018 | Cyto | 1:1.3 | 1:0.2 | 1:0.3 | 1:1.1 | 1:0.6 |
| Serpin-Z2B (29) | 79 | 100 | 98 | 0.03 | Mito | 0:0 | 1:1.6 | 1:0.9 | 1:1.8 | 1:1.5 |
| Serpin 1 (30) | 490 | 100 | 100 | 0.019 | Mito | 0:0 | 1:0.6 | 1:0.3 | 1:0.6 | 1:0.4 |
| Serpin-Z2B (32) | 712 | 100 | 100 | 0.034 | Chlo | 1:0.6 | 1:0.3 | 1:0.7 | 1:0.7 | 1:0.9 |
| Serpin-N3.2 (54) | 867 | 100 | 100 | 0.031 | Chlo | 1:2.2 | 1:3.0 | 0:0 | 0:0.1 | 1:2.0 |
| Serpin-N3.2 (76) | 385 | 100 | 100 | 0.018 | Chlo | 0.1:0 | 0:0 | 0:0 | 0:0.1 | 1.1 |
| Serpin 1 (78) | 500 | 100 | 100 | 0.048 | Mito | 1:0.6 | 1:0.6 | 1:0.6 | 1:0.6 | 1:0.2 |
| Heat shock protein 70 (101) | 531 | 100 | 100 | 0.032 | Cyto* | 1:1.8 | 1:1.7 | 1:1.1 | 1:1.4 | 1:2.1 |
| Serpin-N3.2 (103) | 620 | 100 | 100 | 0.016 | Chlo | 1:0.8 | 1:0.6 | 1:0.6 | 1:1.1 | 0.1:0 |
| Serpin 1 (118) | 582 | 100 | 100 | 0.012 | Mito | 0:0.1 | 0:0.1 | 0:0 | 0:0.1 | 0:0 |
Red represents the upregulated DAPs in YW642.
*represents the subcellular localization of these proteins verified by wheat protoplast cells.
ZmX, wheat-Thinopyron intermedium 7XL/7DS translocation line YW642; ZM, Zhongmai 8601.
Fig. 3.Principal component analysis (PCA) of protein samples and DAP spots. A. PCA of individual protein samples in Zhongmai 8601 and YW642; B. Scatter diagram of 367 protein spots separated in Zhongmai 8601 and YW642. ZmX, wheat-Thinopyron intermedium 7XL/7DS translocation line YW642; ZM, Zhongmai 8601.
Fig. 4.Functional classification and subcellular localization of the identified DAPs. A. Functional classification of the DAPs in Zhongmai 8601 and YW642; B. Subcellular localization prediction of DAPs in Zhongmai 8601 and YW642; C. Subcellular localization assay via wheat protoplast cells. GFP: GFP fluorescence signal. Green fluorescence indicates the location of DAPs; Chlorophyll: chlorophyll autofluorescence signal; Red fluorescent signal indicates the location of chloroplasts in protoplasts; Bright light: field of bright light; Merged: emergence of the GFP fluorescence signal, chlorophyll autofluorescence signal and bright light field; Control: 16318-35S-GFP empty vector. Scale bar = 10 μm. BADH (betaine-aldehyde dehydrogenase), TLP (thaumatin-like protein), HSP70 (heat shock protein 70) and DHAR (dehydroascorbate reductase).
Fig. 5.Protein expression clustering analysis of DAPs in Zhongmai 8601 and YW642. The numbers are protein spot IDs listed in Supplemental Table 5.
Composition of the cis-acting elements in the 1500 bp upstream promoter regions of the DAP genes
| DAP genes* | Phytohormone responsive elements | Environmental stress-related elements | Total | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| P-box | GARE-motif | TGA-element | ERE | TGACG-motif | CGTCA-motif | G-box | ABRE | LTR | As-1 | GC-motif | ARE | MBS | TC-rich repeats | |||
| 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 6 | 4 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 22 | ||
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 5 | ||
| 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 9 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 17 | ||
| 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 12 | ||
| 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 16 | ||
| 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 16 | ||
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 9 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 20 | ||
| 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 8 | ||
| 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 13 | ||
| 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 10 | ||
| 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 6 | 4 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 20 | ||
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 9 | ||
| 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 14 | ||
| 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 16 | ||
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 6 | 4 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 19 | ||
| 0 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 9 | ||
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 14 | ||
| 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 6 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 23 | ||
| 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 14 | ||
| 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 7 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 18 | ||
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 6 | 1 | 0 | 24 | ||
| Total | 7 | 11 | 10 | 9 | 30 | 34 | 51 | 67 | 16 | 34 | 5 | 16 | 16 | 13 | 319 | |
* Numbers in brackets indicate the DAP spots corresponding to Supplemental Table 5.
Fig. 6.Expression profiles of the stress-related and upregulated DAP genes in different tissues, organs and periods by RNA-seq analysis.
Fig. 7.qRT-PCR analysis of seven representative DAP genes during grain development of Zhongmai 8601 and YW642. agpl, ADP-glucose pyrophosphorylase large subunit; TLP, thaumatin-like protein; rbcS, ribulose-1,5-bisphosphate carboxylase/oxygenase small subunit; BADH, betaine-aldehyde dehydrogenase; DHAR, dehydroascorbate reductase. Statistically significant differences are calculated based on an independent Student’s t-tests: * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01.