| Literature DB >> 34961023 |
Shmuel Galili1, Joseph Hershenhorn2, Evgeny Smirnov2, Koichi Yoneyama3, Xiaonan Xie3, Orit Amir-Segev1, Aharon Bellalou1, Evgenia Dor2.
Abstract
Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) is a major pulse crop in Israel grown on about 3000 ha spread, from the Upper Galilee in the north to the North-Negev desert in the south. In the last few years, there has been a gradual increase in broomrape infestation in chickpea fields in all regions of Israel. Resistant chickpea cultivars would be simple and effective solution to control broomrape. Thus, to develop resistant cultivars we screened an ethyl methanesulfonate (EMS) mutant population of F01 variety (Kabuli type) for broomrape resistance. One of the mutant lines (CCD7M14) was found to be highly resistant to both Phelipanche aegyptiaca and Orobanche crenata. The resistance mechanism is based on the inability of the mutant to produce strigolactones (SLs)-stimulants of broomrape seed germination. LC/MS/MS analysis revealed the SLs orobanchol, orobanchyl acetate, and didehydroorobanchol in root exudates of the wild type, but no SLs could be detected in the root exudates of CCD7M14. Sequence analyses revealed a point mutation (G-to-A transition at nucleotide position 210) in the Carotenoid Cleavage Dioxygenase 7 (CCD7) gene that is responsible for the production of key enzymes in the biosynthesis of SLs. This nonsense mutation resulted in a CCD7 stop codon at position 70 of the protein. The influences of the CCD7M14 mutation on chickpea phenotype and chlorophyll, carotenoid, and anthocyanin content were characterized.Entities:
Keywords: anthocyanin; broomrape resistance; carotenoid; chickpea; chickpea phenotype; chlorophyll; strigolactone
Year: 2021 PMID: 34961023 PMCID: PMC8705912 DOI: 10.3390/plants10122552
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Plants (Basel) ISSN: 2223-7747
Figure 1Aboveground broomrape shoots in pots planted with WT F01 or the CCD7M14 mutant. The experiments were arranged in a completely randomized design with 10 replications (pots) per treatment. Lines show the percentages of infected plants, bars indicate the average numbers of aboveground shoots attached to the infected plants. (a) Infestation with P. aegyptiaca. (b) Infestation with O. crenata. Vertical lines indicate standard error of the mean (SEM). Lowercase letters indicate least-significant differences (LSD), based on the Tukey–Kramer honestly significant difference test (α = 0.05) between the chickpea lines.
Statistical analysis of the chickpea resistance experiments. The results were subjected to ANOVA. The experiments were conducted with ten replications. SEM—standard error of the mean, dF—Degrees of Freedom; F—F ratio, Prob > F—F probability.
| Parameter | Chickpea Line | Average Mean | SEM | dF | F | Prob > F |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||
| Broomrape number | WT F01 | 16.1 | 4.23 | 1 | 99.96 | <0.0001 |
| CCD7M14 | 1.6 | 1.78 | ||||
| Broomrape biomass (g) | WT F01 | 82.11 | 6.69 | 1 | 77.17 | <0.0001 |
| CCD7M14 | 7.93 | 5.15 | ||||
|
| ||||||
| Broomrape number | WT F01 | 13.6 | 3.48 | 1 | 9.6 | 0.0062 |
| CCD7M14 | 2.2 | 1.71 | ||||
| Broomrape biomass (g) | WT F01 | 109.74 | 10.92 | 1 | 54.92 | <0.0001 |
| CCD7M14 | 13.78 | 6.96 | ||||
Statistical analysis of the broomrape seed germination closed to chickpea roots. The results were subjected to ANOVA. The experiments were conducted with five replications. SEM—standard error of the mean, dF—Degrees of Freedom; F—F ratio, Prob > F—F probability.
| Broomrape | Chickpea Line | Average Mean | SEM | dF | F | Prob > F |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| WT F01 | 76.84 | 6.28 | 1 | 146.00 | <0.0001 |
| CCD7M14 | 0.72 | 0.45 | ||||
|
| WT F01 | 42.21 | 2.57 | 1 | 270.07 | <0.0001 |
| CCD7M14 | 0 | 0 |
Statistical analysis of the broomrape seed germination caused by root exudates. The results were subjected to ANOVA. The experiments were conducted with five replications. SEM—standard error of the mean, dF—Degrees of Freedom; F—F ratio, Prob > F—F probability.
| Root Exudates Concentration (μL/mL) | Chickpea Line | Average Mean | SEM | dF | F | Prob > F |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | WT F01 | 28.10 | 5.78 | 1 | 10.71 | 0.0307 |
| CCD7M14 | 9.02 | 0.77 | ||||
| 10 | WT F01 | 77.38 | 3.13 | 1 | 336.71 | <0.0001 |
| CCD7M14 | 15.94 | 1.19 | ||||
| 100 | WT F01 | 84.84 | 4.28 | 1 | 100.95 | 0.0006 |
| CCD7M14 | 34.95 | 2.52 |
Morphological characteristics of CCD7M14 compared to WT F01 chickpea.
| Parameters | Chickpea Line | |
|---|---|---|
| WT F01 | CCD7M14 | |
| Foliage biomass (g) | 242.8 ± 14.5 a | 210.2 ± 12.5 a |
| Root biomass (g) | 112.3 ± 8.3 a | 113.8 ± 37.2 a |
| Primary branch number | 7.0 ± 0.8 b | 12.0 ± 1.4 a |
| Primary branch length (cm) | 62.6 ± 2.0 a | 40.3 ± 4.0 b |
Data are presented as average mean of 5 replications with standard error of the mean (SEM). Lowercase letters indicate significant differences between the WT F01 and CCD7M14 according to LS means contrast test (α = 0.05).
Figure 2Morphological differences between WT F01 and CCD7M14. (a) One-month-old WT F01 (right) and CCD7M14 (left) plants grown in a net house. (b1,b2) Stem distribution on the lower section of the plants. (c) Primary branches of WT F01 (left) and CCD7M14 (right) plants. (d) Three-month-old WT F01 (left) and CCD7M14 (right) plants in the field.
Contents of carotenoids, chlorophyll, and anthocyanins (μg per 1 g of fresh leaf biomass) in the leaves of WT F01 and CCD7M14.
| Pigment | Leaf 1 | Leaf 3 | Leaf 5 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| WT F01 | CCD7M14 | WT F01 | CCD7M14 | WT F01 | CCD7M14 | |
| Chlorophyll a | 214.5 ± 9.2 a | 120.3 ± 15.1 b | 230.0 ± 30.0 a | 157.2 ± 9.5 b | 281.5 ± 48.9 a | 151.1 ± 30.6 b |
| Chlorophyll b | 183.9 ± 7.4 a | 56.0 ± 11.7 b | 184.3 ± 47.9 a | 74.5 ± 5.0 b | 200.0 ± 35.3 a | 65.2 ± 17.2 b |
| Total chlorophyll | 402.2 ± 11.5 a | 176.3 ± 26.5 b | 414.43 ± 80.5 a | 231.7 ± 6.1 b | 481.6 ± 56.7 a | 216.3 ± 53.2 b |
| Carotenoids | 62.1 ± 5.3 a | 35.1 ± 4.0 b | 66.5 ± 12.1 a | 35.8 ± 2.8 b | 61.3 ± 8.1 a | 27.2 ± 4.5 b |
| Anthocyanin | 9.7 ± 0.9 b | 33.2 ± 5.1 a | 15.2 ± 2.1 b | 32.6 ± 7.3 a | 11.9 ± 1.2 b | 29.3 ± 4.2 a |
Results are presented as average mean of 3 replications with standard error of the mean (SEM). Lowercase letters indicate significant differences between the WT F01 and CCD7M14 according to LS means contrast test (α = 0.05).
Figure 3Chickpea and tomato CCD7 protein sequence homology. The upper and lower sequences are of chickpea and tomato CCD7, respectively. Identical amino acids are indicated by a solid line, and similar amino acids are indicated by one or two dots according to their similarity levels. The mutated amino acid in CCD7 of broomrape-resistant line CCD7M14, at position 70 (84 according to tomato) is indicated in yellow and marked by an asterisk.
Figure 4The Blast results of DNA sequences (nucleotides 202–246) of WT F01 chickpea (upper line) and CCD7M14 (lower line). The G-to-A transition at position 210 is indicated in bold red letters.
Figure 5The Blast results of the protein sequences (amino acids 68–82 (82–96 in tomato)) of CCD7M14 (CCD7-14), F01 (WT CH), and tomato (TOM). The W-to-stop codon (*) transition at position 70 (84 in tomato) is indicated in green.
Primer sets used in this study.
| Primer Set | Exon | Forward Primer | Reverse Primer | Product Size (bp) | Sequenced Region (cDNA) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1 | AGCACATTTTGTTGCCAAGC | TCCTGCTTACATGAAATGCAAACT | 1090 | 1–529 |
| 2 | 1 | GAGTACGATCGAAAGACTGACTCG | TCCTGCTTACATGAAATGCAAACT | 551 | 522–776 |
| 3 | 2 | TACAAGGTGTACAACATTGAGT | ACTGCCAATTTGTTGGCATTTC | 599 | 777–908 |
| 4 | 3 | GAAATGCCAACAAATTGGCAGT | GCATGCTTAAATTTCATTTTGGA | 621 | 909–1043 |
| 5 | 4 | TCATGAGGGAGTAAATAATCAACA | TTTAATTCACGTTTTATGTCGGT | 623 | 1044–1316 |
| 6 | 5 | AGGGACAAAAATTATCGGCTT | CTTAGGATAAACCACACATAGATAG | 361 | 1317–1404 |
| 7 | 6 | CCAATTAAGATGTTCGAGAGCT | ACATGGACAAATCTATAACGACA | 747 | 1405–1710 |
| 8 | 7 | AGTAATAGCTAATCAAAACGGGT | TTGGATTTCCAAGAGTCCAAT | 686 | 1711–1872 |