Abstract
Grasses are among the most resilient plants, and some can survive prolonged desiccation in semiarid regions with seasonal rainfall. However, the genetic elements that distinguish grasses that are sensitive versus tolerant to extreme drying are largely unknown. Here, we leveraged comparative genomic approaches with the desiccation-tolerant grass Eragrostis nindensis and the related desiccation-sensitive cereal Eragrostis tef to identify changes underlying desiccation tolerance. These analyses were extended across C4 grasses and cereals to identify broader evolutionary conservation and divergence. Across diverse genomic datasets, we identified changes in chromatin architecture, methylation, gene duplications, and expression dynamics related to desiccation in E. nindensis. It was previously hypothesized that transcriptional rewiring of seed desiccation pathways confers vegetative desiccation tolerance. Here, we demonstrate that the majority of seed-dehydration-related genes showed similar expression patterns in leaves of both desiccation-tolerant and -sensitive species. However, we identified a small set of seed-related orthologs with expression specific to desiccation-tolerant species. This supports a broad role for seed-related genes, where many are involved in typical drought responses, with only a small subset of crucial genes specifically induced in desiccation-tolerant plants.
Original language | English (US) |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 10079-10088 |
Number of pages | 10 |
Journal | Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America |
Volume | 117 |
Issue number | 18 |
DOIs | |
State | Published - May 5 2020 |
Funding
19. G. Davidse, T. Hoshino, B. K. Simon, Chromosome counts of Zimbabwean grasses (Poaceae) and an analysis of polyploidy in the grass flora of Zimbabwe. S. Afr. J. Bot. 52, 521–528 (1986). Materials and Methods Accessions of E. nindensis (PI 410063) and E. tef (PI 524434) were obtained from the US Department of Agriculture Germplasm Resources Information Network (http://www.ars-grin.gov/). Methodological details of plant growth conditions, water-deficit treatments, nucleic acid isolation, genome assembly, comparative genomics, expression analysis, Bisulfite-Seq, and ChIP-seq are described in SI Appendix, Supplemental Materials and Methods. Data Availability. The raw PacBio data, Illumina DNA-seq, RNA-seq data, Bisulfite-seq, and ChIP-seq are available from the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) Short Read Archive. E. nindensis RNAseq data can be found under BioProject accession no. PRJNA548129 and PRJNA548367, and E. tef RNAseq data can be found under BioProject accession no. PRJNA548000. Bisulfite-seq and ChIP-seq for E. nindensis can be found under BioProject acession no. PRJNA548367. The E. nindensis V2.1 genome can be downloaded from NCBI BioProject accession no. PRJNA622516 and CoGe (ID 54689). Code used to analyze the expression data is available on GitHub (https://github.com/pardojer23/VanBuren_Lab_ Genomics_Tools). ACKNOWLEDGMENTS. We thank Yao Cao for help with DAPI staining and karyotyping, Alan Yocca for assistance with his Ka/Ks pipeline, and Scott Pardo for reviewing the reporting of statistical results. This work is supported by NSF Grant MCB‐1817347 (to R.V.) and by predoctoral training award T32-GM110523 from the National Institute of General Medical Sciences of the NIH (to J.P.). Hannah Chay was supported by the High School Honors Science, Math, and Engineering Program at Michigan State University. 20. R. Roodt, J. J. Spies, Chromosome studies in the grass subfamily Chloridoideae. II. An analysis of polyploidy. Taxon 52, 736–746 (2003). 21. L.-Y. Chen et al., The bracteatus pineapple genome and domestication of clonally propagated crops. Nat. Genet. 51, 1549–1558 (2019). 22. M. S. Campbell et al., MAKER-P: A tool kit for the rapid creation, management, and quality control of plant genome annotations. Plant Physiol. 164, 513–524 (2014). 23. Z. G. Ginbot, J. M. Farrant, Physiological response of selected Eragrostis species to water-deficit stress. Afr. J. Biotechnol. 10, 10405–10417 (2011). 24. T. M. Hinckley, J. P. Lassoie, S. W. Running, Temporal and spatial variations in the water status of forest trees. For. Sci. 24, a0001–z0001 (1978). 25. P. Good, Permutation Tests: A Practical Guide to Resampling Methods for Testing Hypotheses (Springer, New York,1994). 26. S. Magadum, U. Banerjee, P. Murugan, D. Gangapur, R. Ravikesavan, Gene duplica-tion as a major force in evolution. J. Genet. 92, 155–161 (2013). 27. K. Goyal, L. J. Walton, A. Tunnacliffe, LEA proteins prevent protein aggregation due to water stress. Biochem. J. 388, 151–157 (2005). 28. Y. Olvera-Carrillo, J. Luis Reyes, A. A. Covarrubias, Late embryogenesis abundant proteins: Versatile players in the plant adaptation to water limiting environments. Plant Signal. Behav. 6, 586–589 (2011). 29. R. VanBuren, J. Pardo, C. Man Wai, S. Evans, D. Bartels, Massive tandem proliferation of ELIPs supports convergent evolution of desiccation tolerance across land plants. Plant Physiol. 179, 1040–1049 (2019). 30. N. A. Eckardt, A new chlorophyll degradation pathway. Plant Cell 21, 700 (2009). 31. N. Schenk et al., The chlorophyllases AtCLH1 and AtCLH2 are not essential for senescence-related chlorophyll breakdown in Arabidopsis thaliana. FEBS Lett. 581, 5517–5525 (2007). 32. J.-M. Kim, T. Sasaki, M. Ueda, K. Sako, M. Seki, Chromatin changes in response to drought, salinity, heat, and cold stresses in plants. Front. Plant Sci. 6, 114 (2015). 33. S. Footitt, K. Müller, A. R. Kermode, W. E. Finch-Savage, Seed dormancy cycling in Arabidopsis: Chromatin remodelling and regulation of DOG1 in response to seasonal environmental signals. Plant J. 81, 413–425 (2015). 34. J. Mitra, G. Xu, B. Wang, M. Li, X. Deng, Understanding desiccation tolerance using the resurrection plant Boea hygrometrica as a model system. Front. Plant Sci. 4, 446 (2013). 35. H. W. M. Hilhorst, M. D. Costa, J. M. Farrant, A footprint of plant desiccation toler-ance. Does it exist? Mol. Plant 11, 1003–1005 (2018). 36. F. S. Howe, H. Fischl, S. C. Murray, J. Mellor, Is H3K4me3 instructive for transcription activation? BioEssays 39, 1–12 (2017). 37. V. Chinnusamy, J.-K. Zhu, Epigenetic regulation of stress responses in plants. Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 12, 133–139 (2009). 38. P. Berjak, Unifying perspectives of some mechanisms basic to desiccation tolerance across life forms. Seed Sci. Res. 16, 1–15 (2006). 39. D. Challabathula, Q. Zhang, D. Bartels, Protection of photosynthesis in desiccation-tolerant resurrection plants. J. Plant Physiol. 227, 84–92 (2018). 40. M. Griesmann et al., Phylogenomics reveals multiple losses of nitrogen-fixing root nodule symbiosis. Science 361, eaat1743 (2018). PLANT BIOLOGY Downloaded at Elsevier Science London on May 7, 2020 41. M. Nagaraju et al., Genome-scale identification, classification, and tissue specific ex-pression analysis of late embryogenesis abundant (LEA) genes under abiotic stress conditions in Sorghum bicolor L. PLoS One 14, e0209980 (2019). 42. M. H. Cruz de Carvalho, Drought stress and reactive oxygen species: Production, scavenging and signaling. Plant Signal. Behav. 3, 156–165 (2008). 43. E. A. Kido et al., Expression dynamics and genome distribution of osmoprotectants in soybean: Identifying important components to face abiotic stress. BMC Bioinformatics 14 (suppl. 1), S7 (2013). 44. N. Bies-Ethève et al., Inventory, evolution and expression profiling diversity of the LEA (late embryogenesis abundant) protein gene family in Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant Mol. Biol. 67, 107–124 (2008). 45. L. Song et al., A transcription factor hierarchy defines an environmental stress re-sponse network. Science 354, aag1550 (2016). 46. F. Parcy et al., Regulation of gene expression programs during Arabidopsis seed de-velopment: Roles of the ABI3 locus and of endogenous abscisic acid. Plant Cell 6, 1567–1582 (1994). 47. J. Ooms, K. M. Leon-Kloosterziel, D. Bartels, M. Koornneef, C. M. Karssen, Acquisition of desiccation tolerance and longevity in seeds of Arabidopsis thaliana (A compara-tive study using abscisic acid-insensitive abi3 mutants). Plant Physiol. 102, 1185–1191 (1993). 48. R. Lyall et al., Vegetative desiccation tolerance in the resurrection plant Xerophyta humilis has not evolved through reactivation of the seed canonical LAFL regulatory network. Plant J., 10.1111/tpj.14596 (2019). 49. J. Derek Bewley, K. Bradford, H. Hilhorst, H. Nonogaki, Seeds: Physiology of Devel-opment, Germination and Dormancy (Springer Science & Business Media, 2012). 50. J. Verdier et al., A regulatory network-based approach dissects late maturation pro-cesses related to the acquisition of desiccation tolerance and longevity of Medicago truncatula seeds. Plant Physiol. 163, 757–774 (2013). 51. C. Hutin et al., Early light-induced proteins protect Arabidopsis from photooxidative stress. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 100, 4921–4926 (2003). 52. C. Baroux, S. Pien, U. Grossniklaus, Chromatin modification and remodeling during early seed development. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 17, 473–479 (2007). 53. E. Wolny, A. Braszewska-Zalewska, D. Kroczek, R. Hasterok, Histone H3 and H4 acetylation patterns are more dynamic than those of DNA methylation in Brachy-podium distachyon embryos during seed maturation and germination. Protoplasma 254, 2045–2052 (2017). 54. M. van Zanten, A. Carles, Y. Li, W. J. J. Soppe, Control and consequences of chromatin compaction during seed maturation in Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant Signal. Behav. 7, 338–341 (2012). ACKNOWLEDGMENTS. We thank Yao Cao for help with DAPI staining and karyotyping, Alan Yocca for assistance with his Ka/Ks pipeline, and Scott Pardo for reviewing the reporting of statistical results. This work is supported by NSF Grant MCB‐1817347 (to R.V.) and by predoctoral training award T32-GM110523 from the National Institute of General Medical Sciences of the NIH (to J.P.). Hannah Chay was supported by the High School Honors Science, Math, and Engineering Program at Michigan State University.
Keywords
- Desiccation tolerance
- Drought
- Evolution
- Grasses
- Rewiring
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- General