| Literature DB >> 35043161 |
Lili Ma1,2, Qing Wang1, Yanyan Zheng1, Jing Guo3, Shuzhi Yuan1, Anzhen Fu1, Chunmei Bai1, Xiaoyan Zhao1, Shufang Zheng1, Changlong Wen1, Shaogui Guo1, Lipu Gao1, Donald Grierson4, Jinhua Zuo1, Yong Xu1.
Abstract
The Cucurbitaceae is one of the most genetically diverse plant families in the world. Many of them are important vegetables or medicinal plants and are widely distributed worldwide. The rapid development of sequencing technologies and bioinformatic algorithms has enabled the generation of genome sequences of numerous important Cucurbitaceae species. This has greatly facilitated research on gene identification, genome evolution, genetic variation and molecular breeding of cucurbit crops. So far, genome sequences of 18 different cucurbit species belonging to tribes Benincaseae, Cucurbiteae, Sicyoeae, Momordiceae and Siraitieae have been deciphered. This review summarizes the genome sequence information, evolutionary relationship, and functional genes associated with important agronomic traits (e.g., fruit quality). The progress of molecular breeding in cucurbit crops and prospects for future applications of Cucurbitaceae genome information are also discussed.Entities:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35043161 PMCID: PMC8969062 DOI: 10.1093/hr/uhab057
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Hortic Res ISSN: 2052-7276 Impact factor: 7.291
Overview of genome sequences of Cucurbitaceae plant s.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2009 | Sanger and Illumina |
| ‘Chinese long’ inbred line 9930 | 7 | 243.50 | 19.80 | 1.14 | 177.30 (72.80%) | 24.00 | 26 682 | ||
| 2011 | 454, Sanger-Celera/Arachne | Cucumber [ | B10 | 7 | 323.00 | 23.28 | 0.32 | 16.09 | 26 587 | |||
| 2012 | 454 pyrosequencing and Sanger |
| Double-haploid line DHL92 | 12 | 375.00 | 18.20 | 4.68 | 316.30 (87.52%) | 291.90 (80.77%) | 19.70 | 27 427 | |
| 2012 | Cucumber [ | Gy14 | 7 | 193.00 | 173.10 (89.90%) | |||||||
| 2013 | Illumina |
| Inbred line 97 103 | 11 | 353.50 | 26.38 | 2.38 | 330.00 (93.48%) | 45.20 | 23 440 | ||
| 2013 | Illumina | Wild | PI183967 (CG0002) | 7 | 204.80 | 119.00 | 4.20 | 31.10 | 23 836 | |||
| 2016 | Illumina | Luo-han-guo [ | 14 | 420.15 | 34.15 | 0.10 | ||||||
| 2017 | Illumina |
| Inbred line USVL1VR-Ls | 11 | 313.40 | 28.30 | 8.70 | 308.00 (98.30%) | 284.00 (90.60%) | 95.40 | 46.90 | 22 472 |
| 2017 | Illumina |
| Inbred line OHB3-1 | 11 | 285.50 | 21.90 | 1.10 | 172.00 (60.20%) | 95.80 | 15.30 | 45 859 | |
| 2017 | Illumina | Squash [ | Cultivar ‘Rimu’ | 20 | 271.40 | 40.70 | 3.70 | 211.40 (77.90%) | 201.20 (74.14%) | 95.50 | 40.30 | 32 076 |
| 2017 | Illumina | Pumpkin [ | Cultivar ‘Rifu’ | 20 | 269.90 | 40.50 | 4.00 | 238.50 (88.40%) | 221.30 (82.00%) | 95.90 | 40.60 | 32 205 |
| 2018 | Illumina HiSeq 2000 |
| MU-CU-16 | 20 | 263.00 | 110.00 | 1.80 | 214.10 (81.40%) | 92.10 | 37.80 | 27 870 | |
| 2018 | Illumina, SMRT | Luo-han-guo [ | Variety ‘Qingpiguo’ | 14 | 469.50 | 432.38 | 89.20 | 51.14 | 30 565 | |||
| 2019 | Illumina |
| ‘Chang Bougi’ | 12 | 344.00 | 15.00 | 1.00 | 52.00 | 36 235 | |||
| 2019 | Illumina |
| SW3 | 12 | 354.00 | 25.00 | 1.60 | 54.00 | 38 173 | |||
| 2019 | PacBio, BioNano, Hi-C and genetic maps |
| Inbred line 97 103 | 11 | 365.10 | 2300.00 | 21.90 | 362.70 (99.30%) | 96.80 | 55.55 | 22 596 | |
| 2019 | Illumina | Watermelon [ | ‘Charleston Gray’ | 11 | 396.40 | 36.70 | 7.47 | 382.50 (96.50%) | 379.20 (95.66%) | 91.80 | 49.17 | 22 546 |
| 2019 | Illumina, SMRT sequencing and Hi-C |
| ‘Payzawat’ | 12 | 386.00 | 2860.00 | 380.79 (98.53%) | 363.76 (95.53%) | 92.78 | 49.80 | 22 924 | |
| 2019 | Illumina, Illumina MiSeq, and PacBio RS II |
| SMH-JMG-627 | 20 | 228.80 | 463.40 | 0.62 | 93.20 | 34.10 | 28 298 | ||
| 2019 | PacBio, 10X Genomics, and Hi-C technologies |
| ‘Chinese long’ inbred line 9930 | 7 | 226.20 | 8900.00 | 11.50 | 211.00 (93.30%) | 36.43 | 24 317 | ||
| 2019 | Illumina and PacBio |
| Inbred line B227 | 12 | 913.00 | 68.50 | 3.40 | 859.00 (94.10%) | 91.00 | 75.50 | 27 467 | |
| 2020 | Illumina and PacBio | Cucumber [ | B10 | 7 | 342.29 | 858.00 | 91.30 | 27 271 | ||||
| 2020 | PacBio | Melon [ | DHL92 | 12 | 357.64 | 714.00 | 343.00 (96.00%) | 94.80 | 29 980 | |||
| 2020 | ONT, Bionano optical map, Illumina HiSeq, mate pair, and linkage map information | Melon [ | ‘Harukei-3’ | 12 | 378.00 | 8600.00 | 17.50 | 95.30 | 55.82 | 33 829 | ||
| 2020 | Nanopore and Hi-C | Snake gourd [ | 11 | 919.76 | 20110.00 | 82.12 | 918.80 (99.89%) | 95.38 | 80.03 | 22 874 | ||
| 2020 | PacBio and Hi-C |
| 13 | 669.00 | 5000.00 | 53.00 | 91.60 | 62.18 | 31 661 | |||
| 2020 | Illumina, PacBio, 10× Genomics and Hi-C |
| Inbred line P93075 | 13 | 656.19 | 8800.00 | 48.76 | 63.81 | 25 508 | |||
| 2020 | SMRT and Chicago/Hi-C | Ridge gourd [ | Inbred line AG-4 | 13 | 734.60 | 0.79 | 92.70 | 62.17 | 32 233 | |||
| 2020 | SMRT and Chicago/Hi-C | Sponge gourd [ | Inbred line SO-3 | 13 | 689.80 | 0.58 | 93.00 | 56.78 | 43 828 | |||
| 2020 | PacBio and Hi-C | Bitter gourd [ | OHB3-1 | 11 | 302.99 | 9898.00 | 25.37 | 291.70 (96.27%) | 96.40 | 52.52 | ||
| 2020 | Illumina | Bitter gourd [ | ‘Dali-11’ | 11 | 293.60 | 62.60 | 3.30 | 251.30 (85.50%) | 96.70 | 41.50 | 26 427 | |
| 2020 | Illumina | Bitter gourd [ | TR | 11 | 296.30 | 16.10 | 0.60 | 97.10 | 39.90 | 28 827 | ||
| 2021 | Illumina and PacBio | Silver-seed gourd [ | 20 | 255.20 | 1205.50 | 12.10 | 98.80 | 92.80 | 30 592 | |||
| 2021 | Illumina and PacBio | Silver-seed gourd [ | SMH-JMG-627 | 20 | 231.60 | 447.00 | 11.70 | 99.97 | 93.20 | 27 998 | ||
| 2021 | Illumina |
| 12 | 297.50 | 220.95 | 14.06 | 268.90 (90.4%) | 262.40 (88.2%) | 93.50 | 23 864 | ||
| 2021 | Illumina, SMRT, Hi-C, and BioNano optical mapping |
| 19 | 540.75 | 6596.00 | 27.20 | 525.78 (97.23%) | 490.71 (93.33%) | 50.98 | 45 687 | ||
| 2021 | SMRT and Hi-C |
| CM27 (PI 482460) | 12 | 329.00 | 2900.00 | 316.82 (97.99%) | 316.82 (97.99%) | 93.54 | 42.63 | 29 214 | |
| 2021 | SMRT and Hi-C |
| IVF77 | 12 | 364.00 | 490.00 | 339.72 (96.31%) | 339.72 (96.31%) | 93.26 | 51.11 | 27 073 | |
| 2021 | Illumina, SMRT | Bottle gourd [ | ‘Hangzhou Gourd’ | 11 | 297.00 | 11200.00 | 28.40 | 95.50 | 44.99 | 23 541 | ||
| 2021 | Nanopore and Hi-C | Chayote [ | 14 | 608.17 | 8400.00 | 46.56 | 606.42 (99.71%) | 598.48 (98.41%) | 95.62 | 65.94 | 28 237 |
BUSCOs, Benchmarking Universal Single-Copy Orthologs; SMRT, single-molecule real-time; Hi-C, high-throughput chromosome conformation capture.
Figure 1Phylogenetic tree based on the reported phylogenetic relationships of 17 Cucurbitaceae species. Orange stars indicate cucurbit-specific WGD (CucWGD) events. Tribes are listed to the right of the tree.
Reported estimates of divergence and evolution of members of the Cucurbitaceae.
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 5–12 | 45 | 4–14 |
| 8.4–11.8 | 30 | ||
| 4–14 | 46 | ||
| 10.1 | 37 | ||
| 6.06–6.94 | 34 | ||
| 12.59 | 28 | ||
| 9 | 44 | ||
| 8.2–10.0 | 42 | ||
| 9.63 | 40 | ||
| 6.8 | 39 | ||
| 9.6 | 26 | ||
| 10 | 30 | ||
|
| 4.5 | 26 | 4.5 |
|
| 17.85 | 28 | 17.85 |
|
| 14–27 | 45 | 10–30 |
| 10.4–14.6 | 30 | ||
| 12–30 | 46 | ||
| 13.8 | 37 | ||
| 18.34–19.75 | 34 | ||
| 16 | 28 | ||
| 13.0–15.7 | 42 | ||
| 15.11 | 40 | ||
| 14.9 | 39 | ||
| 21.4 | 26 | ||
| 10–14 | 30 | ||
|
| 16.3 | 37 | 16.3–18.1 |
| 18.1 | 40 | ||
| 16.8 | 39 | ||
|
| 40.9 | 44 | 40.9 |
|
| 48–77 | 45 | 29.2–96 |
| 29.2–41 | 30 | ||
| 39–96 | 46 | ||
| 36.1 | 37 | ||
| 44.1 ± 14 | 35 | ||
| 34.94–37.24 | 34 | ||
| 33.3–40.4 | 42 | ||
| 44.06 | 40 | ||
| 41.6 | 39 | ||
| 49.8 | 26 | ||
|
| 3.04–3.84 | 34 | 3.04–7.3 |
| 5.3–7.3 | 42 | ||
| 4.81 | 40 | ||
|
| 13.9 | 28 | 13.9 |
|
| 3.9–5.4 | 42 | 3–16 |
| 3–16 | 46 | ||
| 3–13 | 45 | ||
| 6.3 | 39 | ||
|
| 3.98 ± 1.7 | 35 | 3.98 ± 1.7 |
|
| 27–45 | 46 | 27–45 |
|
| 7.97 | 40 | 7.97 |
|
| 33–47 | 45 | 29–55 |
| 29–55 | 46 |
Figure 2The cucurbitacin biosynthesis pathway in melon, cucumber, and watermelon.
Figure 3Genes involved in fruit quality in Cucurbitaceae plants
Identified DEGs related to fruit quality from transcriptome data in Cucurbitaceae plants.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cucumber ( |
|
|
|
|
|
| Melon ( |
|
|
| No data |
|
| Watermelon ( |
|
|
|
|
|
| Bitter gourd ( |
|
|
|
|
|
| Bottle gourd ( | No data |
|
|
|
|
| Zucchini ( |
|
|
|
|
|
| Pumpkin ( |
|
|
|
|
|
| Snake gourd ( |
|
|
|
|
|
| Chayote ( |
|
|
|
|
|
List of resequenced species of Cucurbitaceae plants.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2012 |
| 20 | 5–16× | 6 784 860 | 965 006 | 31 |
| 2013 |
| 115 | 18.3× | 3 305 010 | 336 081 | 15 |
| 2019 |
| 1175 | 4.71–18.92× | 5 678 165 | 957 421 | 25 |
| 2019 |
| 414 | 14.5× | 19 725 853 | 6 675 290 | 32 |
| 2019 |
| 146 | 15.68× | 16 183 153 | 2 190 214 | 37 |
| 2019 |
| 50 | 18× | 1 761 822 | 735 486 | 24 |
| 2020 |
| 60 | - | 6 135 286 | 41 | |
| 2020 |
| 189 | 8.8–37.8 | 14 450 193 | 1 588 578 | 42 |
| 2021 |
| 50 | 2 004 276 | 399 664 | 8 | |
| 2021 |
| 40 | 12× | 1 688 333 | 247 969 | 28 |