| Literature DB >> 34202586 |
Renata Orłowska1, Katarzyna A Pachota1, Wioletta M Dynkowska1, Agnieszka Niedziela1, Piotr T Bednarek1.
Abstract
A plant genome usually encompasses different families of transposable elements (TEs) that may constitute up to 85% of nuclear DNA. Under stressful conditions, some of them may activate, leading to sequence variation. In vitro plant regeneration may induce either phenotypic or genetic and epigenetic changes. While DNA methylation alternations might be related, i.e., to the Yang cycle problems, DNA pattern changes, especially DNA demethylation, may activate TEs that could result in point mutations in DNA sequence changes. Thus, TEs have the highest input into sequence variation (SV). A set of barley regenerants were derived via in vitro anther culture. High Performance Liquid Chromatography (RP-HPLC), used to study the global DNA methylation of donor plants and their regenerants, showed that the level of DNA methylation increased in regenerants by 1.45% compared to the donors. The Methyl-Sensitive Transposon Display (MSTD) based on methylation-sensitive Amplified Fragment Length Polymorphism (metAFLP) approach demonstrated that, depending on the selected elements belonging to the TEs family analyzed, varying levels of sequence variation were evaluated. DNA sequence contexts may have a different impact on SV generated by distinct mobile elements belonged to various TE families. Based on the presented study, some of the selected mobile elements contribute differently to TE-related SV. The surrounding context of the TEs DNA sequence is possibly important here, and the study explained some part of SV related to those contexts.Entities:
Keywords: DNA methylation; MSTD; androgenesis; barley; transposable elements
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34202586 PMCID: PMC8268840 DOI: 10.3390/ijms22136783
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Mol Sci ISSN: 1422-0067 Impact factor: 5.923
Figure 1DNA methylation content (global methylation) based on RP-HPLC analyses. The a, b, c, Games–Howell post hoc test grouping. D-donor plants grouped together; R68–R72-regenerants obtained from successive donor plants.
Figure 2An example of Methyl-Sensitive Transposon Display (MSTD) profile generated with BAGY-1-C2043 and CpG-GCA selective primers. The Acc65I/MseI (a) and KpnI/MseI (b) reflected DNA profiles obtained with various restriction enzymes. Line D represents DNA profiles of the donor, lines 1–20 DNA profiles of the same regenerants obtained from different digestions.
Percentage of polymorphic loci (%P) and Shannon’s information index (I) for MSTD data amplified from plant materials.
| MSTD Platform | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Plant Material 1 |
|
|
|
|
| D | 30.88 | 0.167 | 47.03 | 0.248 |
| R68 | 41.93 | 0.138 | 56.94 | 0.230 |
| R69 | 40.51 | 0.141 | 53.54 | 0.220 |
| R70 | 41.08 | 0.134 | 54.39 | 0.224 |
| R72 | 38.81 | 0.128 | 52.97 | 0.223 |
|
| 38.64 | 0.142 | 52.97 | 0.229 |
|
| 2.01 | 0.004 | 1.63 | 0.004 |
1 D-donor plants grouped together; R68–R72-regenerants obtained from successive donor plants; KpnI/MseI (K) and Acc65I/MseI-KpnI/MseI (M) MSTD platforms; SE—standard error of the mean.
The MSTD characteristics related to regenerants (R68–R72) obtained from various donor plants and analyzed within different TE families (TE).
| Molecular Characteristics (%) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Regenerants | TCIV | SV | DMV | DNMV |
| R68 | 24.23 | 13.42 | 3.40 | 1.94 |
| R69 | 20.79 | 10.42 | 3.64 | 1.43 |
| R70 | 26.90 | 14.00 | 4.04 | 2.40 |
| R72 | 20.27 | 11.52 | 3.41 | 0.93 |
| Molecular characteristics (%) | ||||
| TE family/mobile element/class | TCIV | SV | DMV | DNMV |
| CACTA/ | 30.49 | 17.15 | 4.88 | 1.96 |
| LARD/ | 14.65 | 7.69 | 2.57 | 0.95 |
| TRIM/Cassandra/(I-retrotransposon) | 33.32 | 16.78 | 3.67 | 1.97 |
| Ty1- | 14.75 | 9.99 | 1.78 | 1.06 |
| Ty1- | 16.79 | 7.38 | 4.83 | 2.40 |
The arrangement of simple main effects describing differences in mean sequence variation scores of the regenerant groups, derived from four donor plants by TE families evaluated based on univariate tests.
| TE Family/Mobile Element/Class | Sum of Squares | df | Mean Square |
| Sig. | Partial | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CACTA/ | Contrast | 62.440 | 3 | 20.813 | 4.121 | 0.007 | 0.032 |
| Error | 1919.203 | 380 | 5.051 | ||||
| LARD/ | Contrast | 70.068 | 3 | 23.356 | 4.624 | 0.003 | 0.035 |
| Error | 1919.203 | 380 | 5.051 | ||||
| TRIM/ | Contrast | 375.049 | 3 | 125.016 | 24.753 | 0.000 | 0.163 |
| Error | 1919.203 | 380 | 5.051 | ||||
| Ty1-copia/ | Contrast | 251.187 | 3 | 83.729 | 16.578 | 0.000 | 0.116 |
| Error | 1919.203 | 380 | 5.051 | ||||
| Ty1- | Contrast | 157.457 | 3 | 52.486 | 10.392 | 0.000 | 0.076 |
| Error | 1919.203 | 380 | 5.051 | ||||
1 Each F tests the simple effects of the donor within each level combination of the other effects shown. These tests are based on the linearly independent pairwise comparisons among the estimated marginal means. Computed using α = 0.05.
The arrangement of simple main effects describing differences in mean sequence variation scores of the regenerant groups, derived from four donor plants by TE families, was evaluated based on univariate tests at α = 0.05.
| Regenerant Group | Sum of Squares | df | Mean Square |
| Sig. | Partial | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R68 | Contrast | 1364.547 | 4 | 341.137 | 67.545 | 0.000 | 0.416 |
| Error | 1919.203 | 380 | 5.051 | ||||
| R69 | Contrast | 2231.930 | 4 | 557.982 | 110.480 | 0.000 | 0.538 |
| Error | 1919.203 | 380 | 5.051 | ||||
| R70 | Contrast | 2100.922 | 4 | 525.230 | 103.995 | 0.000 | 0.523 |
| Error | 1919.203 | 380 | 5.051 | ||||
| R72 | Contrast | 1797.460 | 4 | 449.365 | 88.974 | 0.000 | 0.484 |
| Error | 1919.203 | 380 | 5.051 | ||||
1 Each F tests the simple effects of mobile elements belonged to various TE families within each level combination of the other effects shown. These tests are based on the linearly independent pairwise comparisons among the estimated marginal means.
Figure 3Estimated marginal means of sequence variation (SV) for mobile elements belonged to five TE families within each of the regenerant groups derived from respective donor plants.
Figure 4Homogeneous subsets of (a) regenerant groups derived from donor plants and (b) mobile elements belonging to five TE families based on SV and evaluated using the Ryan–Einot–Gabriel–Welsch Range post hoc tests. R68–R72-regenerants obtained from successive donor plants. Sukkula (LARD), BARE-1 (Ty1-copia), BAGY-1 (Ty3-gypsy), Cassandra (TRIM), and Balduin (CACTA)—mobile elements belonging to families of transposable elements.
Multiple regression results verifying whether DNM and DNMV in different DNA sequence contexts explain sequence variation related to the respective asymmetric and symmetric contexts without focusing on the role of groups of regenerants derived from D68, D69, D70, and D72 donor plants.
| Model | B | 95% CI for B | SE B |
| R2 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LL | UL | |||||
| CHH_SV(CHH_DMV, CHH_DNMV, CHH_DMV x CHH_DNMV)) 1 | 0.166 | |||||
| constant | 3.951 *** | 3.5 | 4.4 | 0.23 | ||
| CHH_DMV | 0.671 *** | 0.51 | 0.83 | 0.082 | 0.414 | |
| CHH_DNMV | 1.164 *** | 0.78 | 1.554 | 0.918 | 0.327 | |
| CHH_DMV x CHH_DNMV | –0.394 *** | –0.59 | –0.019 | 0.103 | –0.223 | |
| CHH_DMV x CHH_DNMV | –0.394 *** | –0.59 | –0.019 | 0.103 | –0.223 | |
| CHG_SV(CHG_DMV_CHG_DNMV, CHG_DMV x CHG_DNMV)) | 0.162 | |||||
| constant | 1.931 *** | 1.61 | 2.26 | 0.165 | ||
| CHG_DMV | 0.777 *** | 0.53 | 1.03 | 0.127 | 0.323 | |
| CHG_DNMV | 1.135 *** | 0.72 | 1.55 | 0.213 | 0.291 | |
| CHG_DMV x CHG_DNMV | 0.17 | –0.33 | 0.67 | 0.254 | 0.037 | |
| CG_SV(CG_DMV, CG_DNMV, CG_DMV x CG_DNMV)) | 0.198 | |||||
| constant | 2.611 *** | 2.31 | 2.91 | 0.151 | ||
| CG_DMV | 0.732 *** | 0.53 | 0.93 | 0.101 | 0.413 | |
| CG_DNMV | 0.903 *** | 0.63 | 1.18 | 0.139 | 0.413 | |
| CG_DMV x CG_DNMV | –0.268 *** | –0.42 | –0.12 | 0.075 | –0.266 | |
1 due to the Durbin–Watson statistics d = 0.69 the coefficients are not reliable. *** significance at p < 0.0005. x - interaction
Regression results verifying whether DNM and DNMV in different DNA sequence contexts explain sequence variation related to the respective TE families.
| Mobile Element/TE Family | Model |
| R2 | Durbin–Watson Statistics | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| data | data | ||||
| CHH_SV:CHH_DMV, CHH_DNMV, CHH_DMV x CHH_DNMV | 0.021 | 0.996 | 0 | 0.759 | |
| CHG_SV:CHG_DMV, CHG_DNMV, CHG_DMV x CHG_DNMV | 0.523 | 0.668 | 0.02 | 1.985 | |
| CG_SV:CG_DMV, CG_DNMV, CG_DMV x CG_DNMV | 0.394 | 0.758 | 0 | 1.083 | |
| CHH_SV:CHH_DMV, CHH_DNMV, CHH_DMV x CHH_DNMV | 1.273 | 0.29 | 0.01 | - | |
| CHG_SV:CHG_DMV, CHG_DNMV ***, CHG_DMV x CHG_DNMV | 6.371 | 0.001 | 0.169 | 1.289 | |
| CG_SV:CG_DMV, CG_DNMV, CG_DMV*CG_DNMV | 6.782 |
| 0.18 | 1.534 | |
| CHH_SV:CHH_DMV, CHH_DNMV, CHH_DMV x CHH_DNMV | 3.157 |
| 0.076 | 0.083 | |
| CHG_SV:CHG_DMV, CHG_DNMV, CHG_DMV x CHG_DNMV | 4.04 |
| 0.104 | 1.947 | |
| CG_SV:CG_DMV, CG_DNMV, CG_DMV x CG_DNMV | 3.056 |
| 0.072 | 1.644 | |
| CHH_SV:CHH_DMV, CHH_DNMV, CHH_DMV x CHH_DNMV | 0.893 | 0.449 | 0 | - | |
| CHG_SV:CHG_DMV, CHG_DNMV, CHG_DMV x CHG_DNMV | 0.324 | 0.8 | 0 | - | |
| CG_SV:CG_DMV, CG_DNMV, CG_DMV x CG_DNMV | 0.444 | 0.51 | 0 | - | |
| CHH_SV:CHH_DMV, CHH_DNMV *, CHH_DMV*CHH_DNMV | 5.6 |
| 0.149 | 0.466 | |
| CHG_SV:CHG_DMV ***, CHG_DNMV ***, CHG_DMV x CHG_DNMV | 38.106 |
| 0.585 | 2.092 | |
| CG_SV:CG_DMV, CG_DNMV, CG_DMV x CG_DNMV | 11.387 |
| 0.283 | 1.88 |
1p—significance of the model; *** or * indicate significance of independent variables at p = 0.0005 or 0.05, respectively. x - interaction