| Literature DB >> 34446550 |
Gwendolyn K Kirschner1, Serena Rosignoli2, Li Guo1, Isaia Vardanega1,2, Jafargholi Imani3, Janine Altmüller4, Sara G Milner5, Raffaella Balzano2, Kerstin A Nagel6, Daniel Pflugfelder6, Cristian Forestan2, Riccardo Bovina2, Robert Koller6, Tyll G Stöcker7, Martin Mascher5,8, James Simmonds9, Cristobal Uauy9, Heiko Schoof7, Roberto Tuberosa2, Silvio Salvi10, Frank Hochholdinger11.
Abstract
The root growth angle defines how roots grow toward the gravity vector and is among the most important determinants of root system architecture. It controls water uptake capacity, nutrient use efficiency, stress resilience, and, as a consequence, yield of crop plants. We demonstrated that the egt2 (enhanced gravitropism 2) mutant of barley exhibits steeper root growth of seminal and lateral roots and an auxin-independent higher responsiveness to gravity compared to wild-type plants. We cloned the EGT2 gene by a combination of bulked-segregant analysis and whole genome sequencing. Subsequent validation experiments by an independent CRISPR/Cas9 mutant allele demonstrated that egt2 encodes a STERILE ALPHA MOTIF domain-containing protein. In situ hybridization experiments illustrated that EGT2 is expressed from the root cap to the elongation zone. We demonstrated the evolutionary conserved role of EGT2 in root growth angle control between barley and wheat by knocking out the EGT2 orthologs in the A and B genomes of tetraploid durum wheat. By combining laser capture microdissection with RNA sequencing, we observed that seven expansin genes were transcriptionally down-regulated in the elongation zone. This is consistent with a role of EGT2 in this region of the root where the effect of gravity sensing is executed by differential cell elongation. Our findings suggest that EGT2 is an evolutionary conserved regulator of root growth angle in barley and wheat that could be a valuable target for root-based crop improvement strategies in cereals.Entities:
Keywords: CRISPR/Cas9; EGT2; barley; gravitropism; root angle
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34446550 PMCID: PMC8536364 DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2101526118
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A ISSN: 0027-8424 Impact factor: 11.205
Fig. 1.Root phenotype of egt2-1. (A) Wild-type and egt2-1 roots grown on germination paper, 7 d after germination (DAG). (Scale bar: 2 cm.) (B) Wild-type and egt2-1 roots grown in rhizotrons 26 DAG. (Scale bar: 10 cm.) (C) MRI pictures of wild-type and egt2-1 plants grown in soil 3 DAG. (Scale bar: 4 cm.) (D) Root angle of seminal roots 7 DAG; n = 40 per genotype in one experiment; two-tailed t test, **P < 0.01. (E) Lateral root angle 14 DAG; n = 8 to 9 per genotype in two independent experiments; two-tailed t test, **P < 0.01. (F) Wild-type and egt2-1 roots after rotation (time point 0) at indicated time points. (Scale bar: 1 cm.) (G) Root tip angle after rotation; plants 5 DAG were rotated by 90° (time 0), and the root tip angle was measured over time; n = 38 per genotype in three independent experiments; the two genotypes were compared between each other at the respective time points by a two-tailed t test, **P < 0.01. SD is depicted; to account for the different starting angles of the roots, all measurements were normalized to the starting angle of the roots at time 0.
Fig. 2.EGT2 encodes a SAM protein. (A) Association of SNP markers with seminal root angle across the barley genome as established by BSA in the F2 cross TM2835 (egt2-1, hypergravitropic roots) × cv. Barke (wt roots). The y-axis reports Δθ, an index accounting for the difference in allele-specific fluorescence signal between the two BSA DNA bulks, per SNP. (B) Gene structure of EGT2 (HORVU.MOREX.r2.5HG0370880.1) with mutations in egt2 (egt2-1: G to A transition and egt2-2: deletion); translational start site in wild type is shown as a black arrow and start site in the egt2-2 mutant as a gray arrow; exons are depicted as a gray box, introns are depicted by lines, and UTRs are depicted as white boxes. The red box indicates the sequence encoding for the SAM domain. (C) Exemplary pictures of wild-type (cv. Golden Promise) and mutant egt2-2 roots 7 DAG. (Scale bar: 2 cm.) (D) Seminal root angle of wild-type (cv. Golden Promise) and mutant egt2-2 7 DAG; n = 15 to 17 in two independent experiments. (E) Root angle of lateral roots 14 DAG; n = 16 to 18 in two independent experiments; two-tailed t test, *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01. (F) Exemplary pictures of wheat wild-type (WT/WT) and egt2 (mut/mut) roots, 7 DAG. (Scale bar: 1 cm.) (G) Root angle between second and third seminal root of wild-type (WT/WT) and egt2 (mut/mut) wheat seedling at 7 DAG; n = 18 and 39 for wild type and mutant, respectively. Wheat plants were derived from two independent segregating populations.
Fig. 3.Expression of EGT2. (A) RNA in situ hybridization of EGT2; negative controls (sense probes) are shown on the right. (Scale bar: 200 μm.) (B) qRT-PCR of EGT2 expression in combined root cap, meristem, and elongation zone samples after rotation of 90°; normalized to tubulin; two-tailed t test, *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01. (C) qRT-PCR of EGT2 expression in upper and lower flank of the elongation zone in roots after rotation by 90° for 6 h (as depicted in ); normalized to tubulin; two-tailed t test, **P < 0.01.
Fig. 4.RNA-seq reveals differences in cell wall-related processes in the elongation zone. (A) Wild-type and egt2-1 plants 3 DAG used for RNA isolation. (Scale bar: 1 cm.) Arrow heads point to exemplary roots used for RNA isolation (most vertical ones). (B) PCA of the 24 RNA-seq samples of the two genotypes and three tissues; first and second principal components collectively explain 82% of the variance. (C) Venn diagram showing up-regulated (upward arrow) and down-regulated (downward arrow) differentially expressed genes (DEGs) in the respective tissue. (D) Experimental setup: RNA of root cap, meristem, and 900 μm of the elongation zone were isolated. (E) Enriched GO terms for DEGs down-regulated in the elongation zone.