Abstract
Grafting is a well-established practice to facilitate asexual propagation in horticultural and agricultural crops. It has become a method for studying molecular aspects of root-to-shoot and/or shoot-to-root signaling events. The objective of this study was to investigate differences in gene expression between the organs of the scion and rootstock of a homograft (Arabidopsis thaliana). MapMan and Gene Ontology enrichment analysis revealed differentially expressed genes from numerous functional categories related to stress responses in the developing flower buds and leaves of scion and rootstock. Meta-analysis suggested induction of drought-type responses in flower buds and leaves of the scion. The flower buds of scion showed over-representation of the transcription factor genes, such as Homeobox, NAC, MYB, bHLH, B3, C3HC4, PLATZ etc. The scion leaves exhibited higher accumulation of the regulatory genes for flower development, such as SEPALLATA 1–4, Jumonji C and AHL16. Differential transcription of genes related to ethylene, gibberellic acid and other stimuli was observed between scion and rootstock. The study is useful in understanding the molecular basis of grafting and acclimation of scion on rootstock.
Introduction
Grafting is a widely used and traditional method of asexual propagation in fruit crops which do not reproduce true-to-type from seed [1]. The benefits of grafting in vegetable crops are also being recognized in recent years [2]. Rootstocks influence the scion development in several ways, affecting the traits of agricultural interest, such as vegetative vigour, stress tolerance, yield, fruit quality etc. [2,3]. The controlling effect of rootstock over scion is possibly due to altered root-to-shoot and/or shoot-to-root chemical signaling [3]. Several studies on long-distance signaling via graft-union provide evidences for multiple types of mobile signals, such as hormones [4,5,6,7], proteins [8,9], ribonucleoprotein [10], RNAs [11], small RNAs [12,13,14,15,16], minerals [17,18] etc, conferring a wide range of effects on scion development.
Despite the wide use of grafting in agriculture, very little is known about the molecular mechanism of rootstock-regulation of scion’s phenotypes. Gene expression studies are useful approaches in understanding the genes involved in the effect of the rootstock. Transcriptional profiling in the scions of Prunus cerasus [19] and Malus domestica [20] revealed differences in the expression level of 99 and 116 transcripts, respectively, which could contribute to rootstock-regulation of biomass in scion. Recently, effect of heterografting has been examined on gene expression in scion [21] and graft interface [22] in Vitis vinifera. In the shoot apex of scion, grafted onto vigorous rootstock, the differentially expressed genes related to growth, stress, hormone signaling and hybrid vigour possibly confers vigour effects [21]. Up-regulation of stress response was notified at graft interface of heterografts, as compared to the homografts, suggesting that the tissues involved in graft-union could recognize and behaved differently in case of self or non-self grafting partner [22].
Grafting has become an experimental approach for studying plant biology, taking into account graft-transmissible long distance transport events and their impact on physiology of scion or rootstock, taking Arabidopsis thaliana as a model organism [23]. Since the first demonstration of inflorescence stem grafting in A. thaliana [24], several improvements have been made in the grafting protocol [23]. Recently, a modified wedge-style grafting of the primary inflorescence has been reported to obtain healthiest floral graft [25]. The aim of the study was to investigate the transcriptional profile in the organs of scion and rootstock in A. thaliana.
The present study analyses expression difference between scion and rootstock of a homograft in A thaliana. Microarray, a tool for accurate and high throughput gene expression analysis [26], was employed to examine transcriptome changes in the organs (flower bud and leaf) of scion and rootstock. The study furthers our understanding about the differential gene expression during flower and leaf development on scion and rootstock, and the genes involved in the acclimation of scion on rootstock after grafting.
Material and Methods
Plant material and growth conditions
The Arabidopsis thaliana var. Columbia-0 (Col-0) plants were used in the grafting experiments. The dried seeds were sterilized following the standard procedures, and were sown on Soilrite bed in pots. The pots were kept at 4°C in the dark for 2 days for stratification of seeds, and to synchronize seed germination. After stratification, the pots were shifted to PGC 20 growth chamber (Conviron, Canada) under long-day conditions (16-h light/8-h dark at 150 μmol m-2 s-1 irradiance) at 22°C ± 1°C and 65% humidity.
Homografting
Homografting was carried out on young inflorescence stems of A. thaliana plants of uniform age (4–5 weeks) and height (~10 cm), following the procedure described by Nisar et al. [25], with some modifications. The primary inflorescence stem was cut horizontally by using a razor blade, and immediately placed in a petri dish containing sterile water; this part was used as scion for grafting on the same plant. A drop of water was placed on the cut end of the primary inflorescence stem of the same plant, to be used as rootstock. A vertical incision (~1 cm) was made in rootstock and the scion was cut in a wedge shape. Cut ends of the scion and rootstock were attached and wrapped with a parafilm around the graft. A support of a stick was provided to the plant. The plant was covered with a plastic bag to maintain high humidity for three days. The grafting was performed on multiple plants. Three grafted plants showing the best scion growth and development were selected for the study. The newly emerged un-opened flower buds and leaves were harvested from the side branches of scion and rootstock, at the same time. Harvesting of the samples was performed during 10 to 20 days after the graft (DAG). The samples were immediately frozen in liquid nitrogen and stored at -80°C till further use. The experiment was done in three independent biological replicates.
RNA extraction and cDNA synthesis
Total RNA was extracted from the harvested leaf and flower bud samples using Spectrum Plant Total RNA kit (Sigma-Aldrich, USA), following the manufacturer’s instructions. On-column DNase (Sigma-Aldrich, USA) treatment was performed as instructed in the manual. The quality and concentration of total RNA were determined by using NanoQuant M200 Pro (Tecan) and agarose gel electrophoresis visualization. Double stranded cDNA synthesis, in vitro transcription to synthesize biotin labeled aRNA, purification and fragmentation of aRNA, and hybridization of arrays was performed following the protocol described in the technical manual of Affymetrix.
Microarray
Affymetrix Arabidopsis ATH1 Genome Array GeneChip was used for microarray experiment. Affymetrix ATH1 GeneChip, a 3’ in vitro transcription (3’ IVT) expression array, contains more than 22,500 probe sets, representing approximately 24K genes. Labeling and hybridization of ATH1 GeneChips (one sample per chip) was performed according to the manufacturer’s instructions (http://www.affymetrix.com/support/technical/manuals.affx). The hybridized arrays were processed by running fluidics script FS450_0004 on an Affymetrix GeneChip Fluidics Station 450 and scanned on Affymetrix GeneChip Scanner 3000. The quality of hybridization was verified according to the Affymetrix microarray standards. The expression console of Affymetrix’s GeneChip Command Console (AGCC) software was used for computing cell intensity data of probesets and their positional values from image file. The intensities of probe arrays were normalized by using GeneSpring GX v12 (Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, USA). The data has been submitted to NCBI (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov), with accession number GSE61631. Robust Multi-array normalization algorithm (RMA) values of probe sets were used for further statistical analysis. One-way ANOVA analysis was carried out in GeneSpring software with ‘Asymptotic’ p value computation and Benjamini-Hochberg false discovery rate (FDR) for multiple test correction (at p ≤ 0.05). The probe sets satisfying the criteria of p-value (≤ 0.05) and fold change (≥ 2) were used as differentially expressed genes for further analysis.
Functional annotation of the differentially expressed probe sets was obtained using the information available at TAIR (http://www.arabidopsis.org/tools/bulk/microarray/index.jsp) and PLEXdb (http://www.plexdb.org/modules/PD_general/tools.php). MapMan software was employed for visualization of differences in gene expression, and enrichment of functional categories in differentially expressed genes using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test (p value ≤ 0.05) [27,28].
Enrichment of Gene Ontology (GO) terms in the differentially expressed genes was performed using AgriGO analysis tool (http://bioinfo.cau.edu.cn/agriGO) [29], with Fisher tests and Bonferroni multiple testing correction (p ≤ 0.05). Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) categories was assigned by the plant gene set enrichment analysis toolkit (http://structuralbiology.cau.edu.cn/PlantGSEA/analysis.php) with fisher test function.
Quantitative RT-PCR
For the validation of microarray data, quantitative RT-PCR was performed for five randomly selected genes in three biological replicates. cDNA was prepared from 500 ng of total RNA using Transcriptor First Strand cDNA Synthesis Kit (Roche, USA) according to manufacturer’s instructions. Gene expression was analyzed using 2X QuantiTect SYBR Green (Qiagen, USA), with a 200 nM primer concentration in a qRT-PCR machine (7500 Fast Real-Time PCR System, Applied Biosystems), according to the manufacturer’s instructions. The expression of genes of interest was normalized using housekeeping gene (polyubiquitin 10; At4g05320) and relative change in gene expression was quantified as described previously [30].
Results and Discussion
Homografting
Homografting experiments were carried out on young primary inflorescence stems of Arabidopsis plants (Fig 1A). Though difficulties have been encountered in maintaining hydraulic turgor across the graft junction [23], with the recent developments in grafting technique [25], the integrity of the graft union formation has been improved. In a successful flowering stem graft, vascular connection is established by about 7 DAG [25]. The floral stem graft, which maintains shoot apical dominance with a taller primary stem, indicates a functional vascular connection at the graft junction [25]. Three floral stem grafts with the best scion growth and development (Fig 1B), indicating appropriate transport of water, nutrients and signalling molecules across the graft junction, were selected for the study. The longitudinal and transverse sections across the graft-junction (10 DAG) confirmed the establishment of vascular connections between scion and rootstock stems (Fig 1C–1E). Callus proliferation near the wedge junction (Fig 1D) is indicative of good regenerative growth, confirming the integrity of graft-union [25]. The newly emerged un-opened developing flower buds and leaves were harvested from the side branches of scion and rootstock (10–20 DAG), for gene expression analysis. At maturity, siliques of scion were comparable to that of rootstocks (Fig 1F–1I). However, the slight reduction in silique length and number of seeds could be due to grafting generated effects on scion development.
Fig 1. Homografting in A. thaliana plants.
(A) Representative Arabidopsis plants selected for floral stem wedge-grafting (scale 2.5 cm). (B) Grafted plants (scale 2.5 cm) selected for harvesting the newly emerged un-opened flower buds and leaves (scale 500 μm) from the side branches of scion (up) and rootstock (down). The arrow shows rootstock in the plants. (C) A floral stem graft (10 DAG) showing wedge junction (scale 5 mm). (D) A longitudinal section through the floral stem graft (10 DAG) showing callus proliferation (arrow) near the wedge junction (scale 1 mm). (E) A transverse section from middle of the floral stem graft (10 DAG) (scale 500 μm). (F) Siliques (scale 1 mm) and seeds (scale 500 μm) of rootstock, and (G) scion. (H) Bar diagram representing length, and (I) seed number in mature siliques of rootstock and scion. The error bars indicate standard error in three biological replicates.
Homografting alters the expression of many genes in flower buds and leaves
The transcriptional changes were examined in flower buds and leaves of scion and rootstock, emerged during 10 to 20 days after the homograft. A total of 840 genes were identified as differentially expressed, by two folds or more at p ≤ 0.05, in flower buds and/or leaves of scion and rootstock (Fig 2, S1 Table). The fold expression of five randomly selected genes was validated by qPCR analysis (S1 Fig). The differentially expressed genes have been further analyzed and discussed.
Fig 2. Venn diagram showing differentially expressed genes in flower bud and leaf (scion vs. rootstock; ≥ 2 fold change; p ≤ 0.05) (U = up-regulated, D = down-regulated).
The details of the genes have been given in S1 Table.
Divergent profiles of differentially expressed genes in flower buds and leaves
MapMan, AgriGO, and KEGG categorization of the differentially expressed genes revealed a differential level of accumulation of a divergent set of genes in flower buds and leaves of scion as compared to rootstock (Tables 1–6). Up-regulated hormonal metabolism was observed in flower buds of both scion and rootstock. However, several genes related to hormonal signaling pathways were over-represented in scion buds, conferring tolerance to stress [31]. Higher accumulation of the transcripts for Late Embryogenesis Abundant (LEA) proteins in flower buds of scion could protect cellular proteins from aggregation, under the abiotic stresses such as desiccation, osmotic stresses, temperature, salinity etc [32]. The transcription factors, such as homeobox genes, MADS box and MYB which express in responses to several stresses [33,34,35,36,37], and hormonal stimuli [33,38,39], were up-regulated in flower buds of the scion. In addition, a few genes involved in protein synthesis and photosynthesis were up-regulated in the flower buds of scion, as compared to that of rootstock (Table 1). In contrast to scion, genes associated with the MapMan functional categories of cellular processes, cell organization, CHO metabolism, and F-box proteins which are critical for the controlled degradation of cellular proteins, were up-regulated in the flower buds of rootstock (Table 1). This could be indicative of comparatively increased rate of cell division in flower buds of rootstock.
Table 1. MapMan functional categories (BINs) for significantly up-regulated (2 ≥ fold) genes in the flower buds of scion and rootstock.
| Bin number | Bin name | Elements | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Up-regulated in scion | |||
| 33.2 | Development late embryogenesis abundant | 5 | 2.48E-03 |
| 27.3.22 | RNA.regulation of transcription.HB,Homeobox transcription factor family | 7 | 3.03E-03 |
| 17 | Hormone metabolism | 25 | 2.60E-02 |
| 17.1 | Hormone metabolism.abscisic acid | 7 | 4.98E-02 |
| 17.1.3 | Hormone metabolism.abscisic acid.induced-regulated-responsive-activated | 2 | 2.59E-02 |
| 17.5 | Hormone metabolism.ethylene | 7 | 1.49E-02 |
| 17.5.1 | Hormone metabolism.ethylene.synthesis-degradation | 4 | 4.32E-03 |
| 29.2 | protein.synthesis | 5 | 2.95E-02 |
| 27.3.26 | RNA.regulation of transcription.MYB-related transcription factor family | 2 | 2.98E-02 |
| 27.3.24 | RNA.regulation of transcription.MADS box transcription factor family | 2 | 4.29E-02 |
| 1.1.1 | PS.lightreaction.photosystem II | 6 | 4.53E-02 |
| 1.1.1.2 | PS.light reaction.photosystem II.PSII polypeptide subunits | 6 | 4.53E-02 |
| Up-regulated in rootstock | |||
| 31 | Cell | 9 | 8.00E-04 |
| 31.1 | Cell organisation | 5 | 1.60E-03 |
| 17.5 | Hormone metabolism.ethylene | 5 | 2.74E-02 |
| 17.5.2 | Hormone metabolism.ethylene.signal transduction | 4 | 1.94E-02 |
| 3 | Minor CHO metabolism | 2 | 3.56E-02 |
| 3.4 | Minor CHO metabolism.myo-inositol | 2 | 3.56E-02 |
| 3.4.4 | Minor CHO metabolism.myo-inositol.myo inositol oxygenases | 2 | 3.56E-02 |
| 29.5.11.4.3.2 | Protein.degradation.ubiquitin.E3.SCF.FBOX | 3 | 4.47E-02 |
The details of the genes are given in S4 Table.
Table 6. KEGG categories for significantly up-regulated (2 ≥ fold) genes in the scion leaf.
| Description | Hits | Total | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Up-regulated in scion | |||
| Flavonoid biosynthesis | 2 | 19 | 6.39E-03 |
| Biosynthesis of phenylpropanoids | 5 | 247 | 0.0153 |
| Phenylpropanoid biosynthesis | 3 | 104 | 0.0238 |
| Up-regulated in rootstock | |||
| Alpha-Linolenic acid metabolism | 3 | 28 | 6.54E-04 |
| Metabolism of xenobiotics by cytochrome P450 | 2 | 21 | 7.04E-03 |
| Alanine, aspartate and glutamate metabolism | 2 | 41 | 0.0234 |
| Glutathione metabolism | 2 | 52 | 0.0356 |
| Plant-pathogen interaction | 3 | 138 | 0.043 |
The details of the genes are given in S4 Table.
Enrichment of Gene Ontology (AgriGO) terms in the differentially expressed genes revealed that most of the genes up-regulated in the flower buds of scion, belonged to the biological process of responses to different stimuli (chemical, abiotic stresses and hormone etc.), localization, transport, and oxidoreductase activities (Table 3). The GO terms related to microtubule-based movement and motor activities, involved in cytoskeleton organization and developmental processes [33], were enriched in flower buds of rootstock (Table 3). The leaves of scion showed a comparatively high level of accumulation of genes associated with transport and lipid metabolism (Tables 2 and 4). Rootstock leaves accumulated the transcripts predicted to be involved in responses to stress, biotic and abiotic stimuli, and defense and wound responses (Tables 2 and 4).
Table 3. AgriGO categories for significantly up-regulated (2 ≥ fold) genes in the flower buds of scion and rootstock.
| GO term | Ontology | Description | Contingency | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Up-regulated in scion | ||||
| GO:0010876 | P | Lipid localization | 11, 15, 435, 22464 | 7.9E-13 |
| GO:0009414 | P | Response to water deprivation | 18, 155, 428, 22324 | 8.6E-09 |
| GO:0009415 | P | Response to water | 18, 64, 428, 22315 | 1.9E-08 |
| GO:0009719 | P | Response to endogenous stimulus | 39, 748, 407, 21731 | 1E-07 |
| GO:0009725 | P | Response to hormone stimulus | 37, 687, 409, 21792 | 1E-07 |
| GO:0042221 | P | Response to chemical stimulus | 65, 1684, 381, 20795 | 3.4E-07 |
| GO:0009737 | P | Response to abscisic acid stimulus | 20, 255, 426, 22224 | 5.1E-07 |
| GO:0051179 | P | Localization | 61, 1621, 385, 20858 | 1.8E-06 |
| GO:0019915 | P | Lipid storage | 6, 15, 440, 22464 | 2.2E-06 |
| GO:0019953 | P | Sexual reproduction | 9, 56, 437, 22423 | 4.5E-06 |
| GO:0010033 | P | Response to organic substance | 41, 974, 405, 21505 | 8.9E-06 |
| GO:0009738 | P | Abscisic acid mediated signaling pathway | 9, 63, 437, 22416 | 1.1E-05 |
| GO:0015833 | P | Peptide transport | 9, 63, 437, 22416 | 1.1E-05 |
| GO:0006857 | P | Oligopeptide transport | 9, 63, 437, 22417 | 1.1E-05 |
| GO:0050896 | P | Response to stimulus | 94, 3107, 352, 19372 | 2.3E-05 |
| GO:0009788 | P | Negative regulation of abscisic acid mediated signaling pathway | 5, 14, 441, 22465 | 2.5E-05 |
| GO:0006810 | P | Transport | 55, 1556, 391, 20923 | 3.4E-05 |
| GO:0051234 | P | Establishment of localization | 55, 1562, 391, 20917 | 3.8E-05 |
| GO:0015979 | P | Photosynthesis | 12, 145, 434, 22334 | 6.1E-05 |
| GO:0022900 | P | Electron transport chain | 9, 84, 437, 22395 | 8.4E-05 |
| GO:0009628 | P | Response to abiotic stimulus | 41, 1083, 405, 21396 | 0.00009 |
| GO:0009968 | P | Negative regulation of signal transduction | 6, 34, 440, 22445 | 0.00011 |
| GO:0010648 | P | Negative regulation of cell communication | 6, 34, 440, 22446 | 0.00011 |
| GO:0055114 | P | Oxidation reduction | 13, 187, 433, 22292 | 0.00016 |
| GO:0009624 | P | Response to nematode | 7, 54, 439, 22425 | 0.00018 |
| GO:0006091 | P | Generation of precursor metabolites and energy | 16, 278, 430, 22201 | 0.00023 |
| GO:0009755 | P | Hormone-mediated signaling pathway | 14, 223,432, 22256 | 0.00024 |
| GO:0032870 | P | Cellular response to hormone stimulus | 14, 223,432, 22257 | 0.00024 |
| GO:0016491 | F | Oxidoreductase activity | 54, 1302, 392, 21177 | 4.7E-07 |
| GO:0005215 | F | Transporter activity | 48, 1128, 398, 21351 | 1.1E-06 |
| GO:0022857 | F | Transmembrane transporter activity | 37, 853, 409, 21626 | 1.3E-05 |
| GO:0022891 | F | Substrate-specific transmembrane transporter activity | 30, 677, 416, 21802 | 6.1E-05 |
| GO:0022804 | F | Active transmembrane transporter activity | 25, 521, 421, 21958 | 7.7E-05 |
| GO:0015144 | F | Carbohydrate transmembrane transporter activity | 10, 105, 436, 22374 | 8.5E-05 |
| GO:0022892 | F | Substrate-specific transporter activity | 33, 794, 413, 21685 | 8.6E-05 |
| GO:0015295 | F | Solute:hydrogen symporter activity | 9, 86, 437, 22393 | 9.9E-05 |
| GO:0005402 | F | Cation:sugar symporter activity | 9, 86, 437, 22394 | 9.9E-05 |
| GO:0005351 | F | Sugar:hydrogen symporter activity | 9, 86, 437, 22395 | 9.9E-05 |
| GO:0008324 | F | Cation transmembrane transporter activity | 20, 375, 426, 22104 | 0.00011 |
| GO:0015294 | F | Solute:cation symporter activity | 10, 111, 436, 22368 | 0.00013 |
| GO:0015293 | F | Symporter activity | 10,112, 436, 22367 | 0.00014 |
| GO:0009055 | F | Electron carrier activity | 22, 455, 424, 22024 | 0.00019 |
| GO:0051119 | F | Sugar transmembrane transporter activity | 9, 95, 437, 22384 | 0.0002 |
| GO:0016021 | C | Integral to membrane | 32, 510, 414, 21969 | 3.1E-08 |
| GO:0031224 | C | Intrinsic to membrane | 39, 858, 407, 21621 | 2.7E-06 |
| GO:0005576 | C | Extracellular region | 20, 378, 426, 22101 | 0.00012 |
| GO:0009523 | C | Photosystem II | 6, 39, 440, 22440 | 0.00022 |
| Up-regulated in rootstock | ||||
| GO:0007018 | P | Microtubule-based movement | 5, 51, 147, 22428 | 3.70E-05 |
| GO:0003777 | F | Microtubule motor activity | 5, 66, 147, 22413 | 0.00012 |
| GO:0003774 | F | Motor activity | 5, 87, 147, 22392 | 0.00039 |
The details of the genes are given in S4 Table.
Table 2. MapMan functional categories (BINs) for significantly up-regulated (2 ≥ fold) genes in the leaves of scion and rootstock.
| Bin number | Bin name | Elements | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Up-regulated in scion | |||
| 34 | Transport | 9 | 2.44E-02 |
| 34.99 | Transport.misc | 2 | 2.60E-02 |
| 11.6 | Lipid metabolism. Lipid transfer proteins | 3 | 3.79E-02 |
| Up-regulated in rootstock | |||
| 26 | Misc | 17 | 1.66E-03 |
| 26.16 | Misc.myrosinases-lectin-jacalin | 3 | 2.72E-02 |
| 29 | protein | 7 | 3.28E-02 |
| 27.3.26 | RNA.regulation of transcription.MYB-related transcription factor family | 2 | 4.74E-02 |
| 20.1.7.12 | Stress.biotic.PR-proteins.plant defensins | 2 | 4.92E-02 |
The details of the genes are given in S4 Table.
Table 4. AgriGO categories for significantly up-regulated (2 ≥ fold) genes in the leaves of scion and rootstock.
| GO term | Ontology | Description | Contingency | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Up-regulated in scion | ||||
| GO:0010876 | P | Lipid localization | 10, 15, 149, 22734 | 6.60E-16 |
| GO:0010584 | P | Pollen exine formation | 8, 14, 151, 22735 | 1.50E-12 |
| GO:0010927 | P | Cellular component assembly involved in Morphogenesis | 8, 18, 151, 22461 | 7.00E-12 |
| GO:0010208 | P | Pollen wall assembly | 8, 18, 151, 22462 | 7.00E-12 |
| GO:0048646 | P | Anatomical structure formation involved in Morphogenesis | 10, 85, 149, 22394 | 1.30E-09 |
| GO:0006869 | P | Lipid transport | 10, 113, 149, 22366 | 1.70E-08 |
| GO:0009555 | P | Pollen development | 9, 110, 150, 22369 | 1.70E-07 |
| GO:0012505 | C | Endomembrane system | 43, 2768, 116, 19711 | 4.70E-07 |
| GO:0022607 | P | Cellular component assembly | 11, 221, 148, 22258 | 7.90E-07 |
| GO:0048229 | P | Gametophyte development | 9, 163, 150, 22316 | 3.70E-06 |
| GO:0048869 | P | Cellular developmental process | 13, 386, 146, 22093 | 5.10E-06 |
| GO:0008289 | F | Lipid binding | 10, 227, 149, 22252 | 7.10E-06 |
| GO:0048856 | P | Anatomical structure development | 23, 1232, 136, 21247 | 2.30E-05 |
| GO:0032989 | P | Cellular component morphogenesis | 9, 221, 150, 22258 | 3.70E-05 |
| GO:0045229 | P | External encapsulating structure organization | 8, 179, 151, 22300 | 5.50E-05 |
| GO:0009791 | P | Post-embryonic development | 13, 501, 146, 21978 | 7.20E-05 |
| GO:0032501 | P | Multicellular organismal process | 24, 1479, 135, 21000 | 0.00013 |
| GO:0009653 | P | Anatomical structure morphogenesis | 12, 463, 147, 22016 | 0.00014 |
| GO:0033036 | P | Macromolecule localization | 11, 404, 148, 22075 | 0.00018 |
| GO:0007275 | P | Multicellular organismal development | 23, 1426, 136, 21053 | 0.0002 |
| GO:0032502 | P | Developmental process | 25, 1644, 134, 20835 | 0.00026 |
| GO:0044085 | P | Cellular component biogenesis | 11, 431, 148, 22048 | 0.0003 |
| GO:0044464 | C | Cell part | 111, 12783, 48, 9696 | 0.00056 |
| GO:0005623 | C | Cell | 111, 12783, 48, 9697 | 0.00056 |
| GO:0016747 | F | Transferase activity, transferring acyl groups other than amino-acyl groups | 7, 221, 152, 22258 | 0.0012 |
| GO:0030528 | F | Transcription regulator activity | 23, 1628, 136, 20851 | 0.0012 |
| GO:0008415 | F | Acyltransferase activity | 6, 165, 153, 22314 | 0.0013 |
| GO:0003700 | F | Transcription factor activity | 21, 1448, 138, 21031 | 0.0015 |
| Up-regulated in rootstock | ||||
| GO:0050896 | P | Response to stimulus | 51, 3107, 99, 19372 | 4.00E-10 |
| GO:0051707 | P | Response to other organism | 19, 465, 131, 22014 | 5.50E-10 |
| GO:0009607 | P | Response to biotic stimulus | 19, 507, 131, 21972 | 2.20E-09 |
| GO:0051704 | P | Multi-organism process | 20, 603, 130, 21876 | 6.00E-09 |
| GO:0006952 | P | Defense response | 19, 622, 131, 21857 | 5.20E-08 |
| GO:0010033 | P | Response to organic substance | 23, 974, 127, 21505 | 1.80E-07 |
| GO:0045087 | P | Innate immune response | 11, 265, 139, 22214 | 2.40E-06 |
| GO:0006955 | P | Immune response | 11, 280, 139, 22199 | 4.00E-06 |
| GO:0002376 | P | Immune system process | 11, 280, 139, 22199 | 4.00E-06 |
| GO:0006950 | P | Response to stress | 28, 1766, 122, 20713 | 1.70E-05 |
| GO:0042221 | P | Response to chemical stimulus | 27, 1684, 123, 20795 | 2.10E-05 |
| GO:0009723 | P | Response to ethylene stimulus | 7, 134, 143, 22354 | 4.40E-05 |
| GO:0009814 | P | Defense response, incompatible interaction | 6, 97, 144, 22382 | 6.50E-05 |
| GO:0010200 | P | Response to chitin | 6, 115, 144, 22364 | 0.00016 |
| GO:0009719 | P | Response to endogenous stimulus | 15, 748, 135, 21731 | 0.00017 |
| GO:0009611 | P | Response to wounding | 6, 132, 144, 22347 | 0.00032 |
| GO:0009753 | P | Response to jasmonic acid stimulus | 6, 146, 144, 22333 | 0.00054 |
| GO:0030246 | F | Carbohydrate binding | 7, 139, 143, 22340 | 5.50E-05 |
| GO:0012505 | C | Endomembrane system | 44, 2768, 106, 19711 | 2.70E-08 |
| GO:0005618 | C | Cell wall | 13, 514, 137, 21965 | 5.10E-05 |
| GO:0030312 | C | External encapsulating structure | 13, 518, 137, 21961 | 5.50E-05 |
The details of the genes are given in S4 Table.
The functional significance of genes was also explored by KEGG, which exhibited significant over-representation of genes associated with amino acid metabolism, and biosynthesis of other secondary metabolites such as alkaloids, stilbenoid, diarylheptanoid, and gingerol in flower buds (Table 5), and flavonoid and phenylpropanoid biosynthesis in leaf (Table 6) of scion. Alkaloids have several biological significance of being active stimulators, inhibitors and terminators of growth [40]. The genes could participate in several regulation mechanisms and confer protection against environmental stresses to the plant organs [41]. In rootstock, the genes associated with ascorbate, aldarate and inositol phosphate metabolism were up-regulated in flower buds (Table 5), whereas leaves exhibited active amino acid metabolism, glutathione and alpha-linolenic acid metabolism, and plant-pathogen interaction (Table 6).
Table 5. KEGG categories for significantly up-regulated (2 ≥ fold) genes in the flower buds of scion and rootstock.
| Description | Hits | Total | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Up-regulated in scion | |||
| Tropane, piperidine and pyridine alkaloid biosynthesis | 3 | 18 | 4.53E-03 |
| Cysteine and methionine metabolism | 5 | 64 | 5.25E-03 |
| Stilbenoid, diarylheptanoid and gingerol biosynthesis | 5 | 66 | 5.93E-03 |
| Limonene and pinene degradation | 5 | 69 | 7.05E-03 |
| Tyrosine metabolism | 3 | 24 | 9.27E-03 |
| Phenylalanine metabolism | 5 | 80 | 0.0124 |
| Methane metabolism | 5 | 82 | 0.0137 |
| Glyoxylate and dicarboxylate metabolism | 3 | 30 | 0.0161 |
| Biosynthesis of alkaloids derived from ornithine, lysine and nicotinic acid | 7 | 166 | 0.0231 |
| Fatty acid elongation in mitochondria | 1 | 2 | 0.0478 |
| Up-regulated in rootstock | |||
| Ascorbate and aldarate metabolism | 2 | 31 | 0.0137 |
| Inositol phosphate metabolism | 2 | 37 | 0.0188 |
The details of the genes are given in S4 Table.
Meta-analysis
Similarity search meta-analysis was performed against 3287 diverse collections of Arabidopsis microarray data sets listed in Genevestigator, by using the differentially expressed transcripts between scion and rootstock. The perturbation showing maximum similarity with our data comprised the transcriptional comparison between drought study vs control plants in flower buds and leaves (S2 Fig). The meta-analysis suggests that grafting induces drought-type responses in flower buds and leaves of scion, which could play a role in acclimation to grafting induced stresses.
Differential expression of transcription factors in flower buds and leaves
Out of about 25,500 genes, around 2000 transcription factor genes have been recognized in Arabidopsis genome [42]. Transcriptional regulation plays a pivotal role in temporal and spatial control over gene expression in plants. Altered expression levels of transcription factors were observed in flower buds and leaves developed on scion and rootstock (Fig 3).
Fig 3. A heatmap of differentially expressed transcripts related to transcription factors in flower bud and leaf (scion vs. rootstock; ≥ 2 fold change; p ≤ 0.05).
The color scale at the top of each heat map shows expression values in fold change. The details of the genes have been mentioned in S2 Table.
Homeobox transcription factor family (HB) genes were significantly up-regulated in flower buds (e.g. at2g18550, at2g46680, at4g36740, at5g66700 and at3g61890) and leaves of scion (at2g18550, at2g46680, at5g66700, at1g14440, at1g75240), as compared to rootstock. In several studies, the expression regulation of homeobox genes by different abiotic and biotic stimuli has been inferred [33,34,38,43]. The higher level of transcript accumulation of homeobox genes in the vegetative and reproductive organs of scion could be helpful in achieving tolerance to subsequent stresses after grafting.
MYB transcription factor super family play regulatory roles in differentiation, metabolism and development processes, and defense responses in plants [35]. Scion flower buds showed higher expression of MYB genes which are known to regulate and/or respond during cell cycle (at5g59780) [44], differentiation (trichome initiation) (at3g27920) [46], phenylpropanoide pathway (at1g22640) [46], abiotic stress responses (e.g. drought, light and wounding) (at1g06180) [45]and abiotic and biotic stimuli (at1g71030 and at5g58900) [47]. However, the expression of MYB35/TDF1 (at3g28470), essential for anther tapetum development [48], was observed down regulated by three folds in scion flower buds. This could be indicative of grafting effect on tapetum development. Surprisingly, up-regulation of the MYB genes was not observed in scion leaves at a significant level. On the other hand, rootstock leaves exhibited enhanced expression of the MYB-related genes having role in signal transduction (at5g06800) [49], and express in response to abiotic or biotic stimuli (at5g05790) [47].
Basic helix-loop-helix (bHLH) gene family members (about 160 in Arabidopsis) are universal transcription factors in eukaryotes; however, the biological roles of the bHLH genes are poorly understood in plants. Some of the bHLH TFs, up-regulated in scion flower buds, are known to participate in regulating biosynthesis of the sterol derivatives-brassinosteroids (at1g25330) [50], transcription of peroxidases to balance reactive oxygen species (ROS) (at2g47270) [51], early gynoecium development (at5g67110) [52], and double fertilization (at4g00050) [53]. Scion leaves showed enhanced level of expression of bHLH TFs which regulate stomata movement and photoperiodism (at1g51140) [53,54]and anthocyanin biosynthesis (at3g25710) [53].
The transcripts for B3-type TFs (at2g36080, at5g60140, at5g32460 and at3g46770), involved in flower development [55], and drought responsive PLATZ family TFs (at1g76590, at1g21000 and at1g31040) [53,56], were abundant in scion flower buds. Expression of stress-inducible NAC transcription factors (at5g39610, at5g13180, at1g52890, at1g01720, at4g28530 and at2g33480) was up-regulated at significant levels in scion flower buds. The NAC transcription factors have previously been shown to be ABA, drought and NaCl-inducible [57].
The ethylene response factor, AP2- RAP2.6 (at1g43160), was significantly up-regulated in scion flower buds. It functions in plant response to various abiotic and biotic stresses, possibly through ABA-dependent pathway [58,59]. The importance of RAP2.6 has been emphasized in achieving water-stress tolerance in plant tissues [59]. This was further corroborated by visualization of abundance of genes associated with phytohormones, mainly ABA, that could play important roles in mediating responses to various stresses in scion flower buds (Fig 3). Enhanced transcript accumulation of key regulators of sulfur assimilation pathway, LSU2 (at5g24660) [60]and HY5 (at5g11260) [61], could be indicative of implications of stress, presumably water stress [60], on the sulfur assimilation in scion flower buds. Drought conditions affect the regulation of sulfur assimilation in plant tissues, and it has been anticipated as a fertile ground for new discoveries connecting primary sulfur metabolism with the stress responses, mainly drought [62]. The expression elevation of bZIP1 (at5g49450), a positive regulator of plant tolerance to salt, osmotic and drought stresses [63], water-deficit stress related remorin family protein (at2g41870) [64]and the stress responsive heat shock C1 (at3g24520) [53]anticipates role of these genes in acclimating scion on rootstock.
The E genes of ABCDE model, SEPALLATA (SEP) 1–4, are essential for the normal development of petals, stamens, carpels and sepals [65]. SEP 1–4 genes (at5g15800, at3g02310, at1g24260 and at2g03710) were up-regulated in the leaves of scion, as compared to rootstock. Mutation in SEP genes leads to development of flowers composed of leaf-like organs, whereas, over-expression promotes early flowering without affecting floral morphology [66]. In addition, some other key regulators of flowering, Jumonji C and AHL16, were up-regulated in scion leaves. Jumonji C (at3g20810) is a histone demethylase which regulates the period length in Arabidopsis by chromatin remodeling [67]. AHL16 is an AT-hook DNA binding protein, which regulates vegetative to the reproductive phase transition of the meristem, and flowering time [68]. The enhanced level of transcripts for SEP 1–4, AHL16 and Jumonji C genes could be suggestive of the initiatives taken by scion for regulating flowering. The MYB transcription factor, ATRL2 (at2g21650), was highly expressed in rootstock leaves. The gene has been observed to be involved in stress responses [53,69], besides in ovule development and control of floral asymmetry [70]. Rootstock leaves showed elevated transcription of genes related to ethylene (at4g17500, at5g47220, at4g17490, at4g32800, at5g07580 and at1g13260) and gibberellic acid (at1g66350 and at5g56300). Thus, enhanced expression was observed for the genes related to ethylene and gibberellic acid in scion flower buds and rootstock leaves (Fig 4).
Fig 4. MapMan visualization of differentially expressed genes (scion vs. rootstock; p ≤ 0.05) assigned to the functional category of hormone metabolism in (A) flower bud, and (B) leaf.
The details of the genes have been mentioned in S3 table.
Highly expressed genes
A total of 18 genes (other than transcription factors) were identified with an expression difference (scion vs rootstock) of at least 8 folds in flower buds and leaves (Table 7). The transcript level of dehydration and ABA inducible genes- ABA responsive protein-related (at3g02480) [56], Histone H1-3 (at2g18050) [71], Responsive to ABA 18 dehydrin family protein (at5g66400) [71]and protein phosphatase 2C (at1g07430 and at3g11410) [72,73], were higher by many folds in scion flower buds and leaves (Table 7). This indicates existence of ABA-mediated signaling in scion which could help the scion organs in withstanding grafting related stress, such as water deficiency. This is further supported by higher level of expression of Late Embryogenesis Abundant-7 protein in scion buds which confers resistance to abiotic stresses and ABA sensitivity [74]. The grafting may induce ethylene production in scion flower buds, as suggested by the several fold up-regulation of 1-Aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylate (ACC) oxidase which is involved in the final step of ethylene production in plant tissues [75,76]. Expression of Cysteine Endopeptidase 1 was also found highly expressed, which could be related to ethylene regulation [77]or in response to stress stimuli [78]in scion flower buds. Another ethylene induced and flowering related gene, Xyloglucan Endotransglucosylase/hydrolase3 [79], was up-regulated in scion flower buds. In scion buds, no gene was down-regulated with a difference of at least 8 folds.
Table 7. Genes (other than TFs) showing at least 8-fold (bold) differential expression (scion vs rootstock) in flower buds and/or leaves.
| Putative gene function | GeneID | Fold Change in flower bud | Fold change in leaf |
|---|---|---|---|
| Histone H1-3 | at2g18050 | 27.04 | 8.24 |
| Responsive to ABA18 | at5g66400 | 20.01 | 1.59 |
| 2-Oxoglutarate-dependent dioxygenase | at2g25450 | 18.92 | 2.34 |
| ABA-responsive protein-related | at3g02480 | 18.69 | 8.70 |
| Cysteine proteinase | at5g50260 | 17.29 | 1.26 |
| 1-Aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylate (ACC) oxidase | at1g12010 | 16.33 | -1.19 |
| Late embryogenesis abundant protein | at1g52690 | 13.59 | 7.87 |
| Protein phosphatase2C | at1g07430 | 11.47 | 1.82 |
| Xyloglucan endotransglycosylase/hydrolase3 | at3g25050 | 11.15 | -1.00 |
| Response to cyclopentenone | at2g31945 | 9.34 | 5.48 |
| Cell wall / vacuolar inhibitor of fructosidase1 | at1g47960 | 9.29 | 1.96 |
| Cinnamyl-alcohol dehydrogenase (CAD) family | at1g09500 | 8.33 | 9.38 |
| Rapid alkalinization factor (RALF) family protein | at4g14020 | 8.03 | 1.48 |
| Cold Regulated Gene27 | at5g42900 | -1.06 | 9.91 |
| Defensin-like (DEFL) family protein | at3g59930 | 1.69 | 9.88 |
| Cinnamyl-alcohol dehydrogenase (CAD) family | at1g09500 | 8.33 | 9.38 |
| Lipid transfer protein4 | at5g59310 | 3.25 | 9.10 |
| Glucosinolate biosynthetic process | at3g45160 | 1.04 | -9.20 |
The details of the genes have been given in S4 Table.
Scion leaves showed higher accumulation of the transcripts for Histone H1-3, ABA-responsive protein-related, Cold Regulated Gene27 (at5g42900) [80], Defensin-like protein (at3g59930) [81], Cinnamyl-alcohol dehydrogenase (at1g09500) [81]and Lipid transfer protein4 (at5g59310) [81]. In rootstock leaves, the transcript for a gene of Glucosinolate biosynthetic process (at3g45160) was highly up-regulated. Glucosinolate biosynthesis is known to be involved in defense signaling pathways, and its expression is induced in response to salicylic acid, jasmonic acid, ethylene and wound [82]. It coincides with up-regulation of the transcripts related to salicylic acid, jasmonic acid, and ethylene in the rootstock leaves (Fig 4).
Conclusion
Grafting triggers differential expression of numerous genes related to stress, biotic and abiotic stimuli, hormonal pathway, and flowering etc. in flower buds and leaves of the scion and rootstock. The study is useful in understanding the molecular basis of grafting and the intermediates involved in the acclimation of scion on rootstock.
Supporting Information
The relative expression of the five genes was in agreement with the microarray fold change. The sequences of primers and details were provided in S5 Table.
(TIF)
The similarity search in Genevestigator, using the differentially expressed transcripts (scion vs. rootstock; ≥ 2 fold change; p ≤ 0.05) revealed perturbations (top 3) comparing transcriptome between the drought study vs. control plants in flower buds and leaves.
(TIF)
(XLSX)
(XLSX)
(XLSX)
(XLSX)
Acknowledgments
The authors thank Executive Director, National Agri-Food Biotechnology Institute (Department of Biotechnology, Government of India) for facilitating the research work. SPS gratefully acknowledges SERB, DST for the Young Scientist project, and AK to UGC-SAP-DRS1 fellowship.
Data Availability
The microarray experimental data has been submitted to NCBI (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov), with accession number GSE61631.
Funding Statement
This work was supported by Science and Engineering Research Board (SR/FT/LS-88/2011), Department of Science and Technology, Government of India.
References
- 1. Mudge K, Janick J, Scofield S, Goldschmidt EE. A history of grafting. Hoboken: John Wiley; 2009. [Google Scholar]
- 2. Lee J, Kubotab C, Tsaoc SJ, Bied Z, Echevarriae PH, Morra L, et al. Current status of vegetable grafting: Diffusion, grafting techniques, automation. Sci Hortic-Amsterdam 2010;127: 93–105. [Google Scholar]
- 3. Gregory PJ, Atkinson CJ, Bengough AG, Else MA, Fernandez-Fernandez F, Harrison RJ, et al. Contributions of roots and rootstocks to sustainable, intensified crop production. J Exp Bot 2013;64: 1209–1222. 10.1093/jxb/ers385 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4. El-Sharkawy I, El Kayal W, Prasath D, Fernandez H, Bouzayen M, Svircev AM, et al. Identification and genetic characterization of a gibberellin 2-oxidase gene that controls tree stature and reproductive growth in plum. J Exp Bot 2012;63: 1225–1239. 10.1093/jxb/err345 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5. Sorce C, Mariotti L, Lorenzi R, Massai R. Hormonal factors involved in the control of vigour of grafted peach [Prunus persica (L.) Batsch] trees and hybrid rootstocks. Adv Hortic Science 2007;21: 68–74. [Google Scholar]
- 6. Etehadnia M, Waterer D, De Jong H, Tanino KK. Scion and rootstock effects on aba-mediated plant growth regulation and salt tolerance of acclimated and unacclimated potato genotypes. J Plant Growth Regul 2008;27: 125–140. [Google Scholar]
- 7. Alonia B, Cohenb R, Karnia L, Aktasc H, Edelstein M. Hormonal signaling in rootstock—scion interactions. Sci Hortic-Amsterdam 2010;127: 119–126. [Google Scholar]
- 8. Corbesier L, Vincent C, Jang S, Fornara F, Fan Q, Searle I, et al. FT protein movement contributes to long-distance signaling in floral induction of Arabidopsis . Science 2007;316: 1030–1033. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9. Wang L, Yang M, Akinnagbe A, Liang H, Wang J, Ewald D. Bacillus thuringiensis protein transfer between rootstock and scion of grafted poplar. Plant Biol 2012;14: 745–750. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10. Ham BK, Brandom JL, Xoconostle-Cazares B, Ringgold V, Lough TJ, Lucas WJ. A polypyrimidine tract binding protein, pumpkin RBP50, forms the basis of a phloem-mobile ribonucleoprotein complex. Plant Cell 2009;21: 197–215. 10.1105/tpc.108.061317 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11. Harada T. Grafting and RNA transport via phloem tissue in horticultural plants. Sci Hortic-Amsterdam 2010;125: 545–550. [Google Scholar]
- 12. Molnar A, Melnyk CW, Bassett A, Hardcastle TJ, Dunn R, Baulcombe DC. Small silencing RNAs in plants are mobile and direct epigenetic modification in recipient cells. Science 2010;328: 872–875. 10.1126/science.1187959 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13. Kasai A, Bai S, Li T, Harada T. Graft-transmitted siRNA signal from the root induces visual manifestation of endogenous post-transcriptional gene silencing in the scion. PLoS One 2011;6: e16895 10.1371/journal.pone.0016895 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14. Bai S, Kasai A, Yamada K, Li T, Harada T. A mobile signal transported over a long distance induces systemic transcriptional gene silencing in a grafted partner. J Exp Bot 2011;62: 4561–4570. 10.1093/jxb/err163 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15. Brosnan CA, Mitter N, Christie M, Smith NA, Waterhouse PM, Carroll BJ. Nuclear gene silencing directs reception of long-distance mRNA silencing in Arabidopsis . Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2007;104: 14741–14746. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16. Zhang W, Kollwig G, Stecyk E, Apelt F, Dirks R, Kragler F. Graft-transmissible movement of inverted-repeat-induced siRNA signals into flowers. Plant J 2014;80: 106–121. 10.1111/tpj.12622 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17. Jiménez S, Pinochet J, Gogorcena Y, Betran J, Moreno MA. Influence of different vigour cherry rootstocks on leaves and shoots mineral composition. Sci Hortic-Amsterdam 2007;112: 73–79. [Google Scholar]
- 18. Ebel RC, Caylor A, Pitts J, Wilkins B. Mineral nutrition during establishment of Golden Delicious ‘Smoothee’ apples on dwarfing rootstocks and interstems. J Plant Nutr 2000;23: 1179–1192. [Google Scholar]
- 19. Prassinos C, J.H. K, Lang G, Iezzoni AF, Han KH. Rootstock-induced dwarfing in cherries is caused by differential cessation of terminal meristem growth and is triggered by rootstock-specific gene regulation. Tree Physiol 2009;29: 927–936. 10.1093/treephys/tpp027 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20. Jensen PJ, Makalowska I, Altman N, Fazio G, Praul C, Siela N, et al. Rootstock-regulated gene expression patterns in apple tree scions. Tree Genet Genomes 2010;6: 57–72. [Google Scholar]
- 21. Cookson SJ, Ollat N. Grafting with rootstocks induces extensive transcriptional re-programming in the shoot apical meristem of grapevine. BMC Plant Biol 2013;13: 147 10.1186/1471-2229-13-147 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22. Cookson SJ, Clemente Moreno MJ, Hevin C, Nyamba Mendome LZ, Delrot S, Magnin N, et al. Heterografting with nonself rootstocks induces genes involved in stress responses at the graft interface when compared with autografted controls. J Exp Bot 2014;65: 2473–2481. 10.1093/jxb/eru145 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23. Flaishman MA, Loginovsky K, Golobowich S, Lev-Yadun S. Arabidopsis thaliana as a model system for graft union development in homografts and heterografts. J Plant Growth Regul 2008;27: 231–239. [Google Scholar]
- 24. Tsukaya H, Takahashi T, Naito S, Komeda Y. Floral organ-specific and constitutive expression of an Arabidopsis thaliana heat-shock HSP18.2::GUS fusion gene is retained even after homeotic conversion of flowers by mutation. Mol Gen Genet 1993;237: 26–32. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25. Nisar N, Verma S, Pogson BJ, Cazzonelli CI. Inflorescence stem grafting made easy in Arabidopsis. Plant Methods 2012;8: 50 10.1186/1746-4811-8-50 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26. Malone JH, Oliver B. Microarrays, deep sequencing and the true measure of the transcriptome. BMC Biol 2011;9: 34 10.1186/1741-7007-9-34 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27. Thimm O, Blasing O, Gibon Y, Nagel A, Meyer S, Krüger P, et al. MAPMAN: a user-driven tool to display genomics data sets onto diagrams of metabolic pathways and other biological processes. Plant J 2004;37: 914–939. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28. Usadel B, Nagel A, Thimm O, Redestig H, Blaesing OE, Palacios-Rojas N, et al. Extension of the visualization tool MapMan to allow statistical analysis of arrays, display of corresponding genes, and comparison with known responses. Plant Physiol 2005;138: 1195–1204. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29. Du Z, Zhou X, Ling Y, Zhang Z, Su Z. agriGO: a GO analysis toolkit for the agricultural community. Nucleic Acids Res 2010;38: W64–70. 10.1093/nar/gkq310 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30. Singh SP, Pandey T, Srivastava R, Verma PC, Singh PK, Tuli R, et al. BECLIN1 from Arabidopsis thaliana under the generic control of regulated expression systems, a strategy for developing male sterile plants. Plant Biotechnol J 2010;8: 1005–1022. 10.1111/j.1467-7652.2010.00527.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31. Yang C, Liu J, Dong X, Cai Z, Tian W, Wang X. Short-term and continuing stresses differentially interplay with multiple hormones to regulate plant survival and growth. Mol Plant 2014;7: 841–855. 10.1093/mp/ssu013 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32. Goyal K, Walton LJ, Tunnacliffe A. LEA proteins prevent protein aggregation due to water stress. Biochem J 2005;388: 151–157. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33. Heyndrickx KS, Vandepoele K. Systematic identification of functional plant modules through the integration of complementary data sources. Plant Physiol 2012;159: 884–901. 10.1104/pp.112.196725 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34. Soderman E, Mattsson J, Engstrom P. The Arabidopsis homeobox gene ATHB-7 is induced by water deficit and by abscisic acid. Plant J 1996;10: 375–381. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35. Dubos C, Stracke R, Grotewold E, Weisshaar B, Martin C, et al. (2010) MYB transcription factors in Arabidopsis . Trends Plant Sci 15: 573–581. 10.1016/j.tplants.2010.06.005 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36. Wei B, Zhang RZ, Guo JJ, Liu DM, Li AL, Fan RC. Genome-wide analysis of the MADS-box gene family in Brachypodium distachyon . PLoS One 2014;9: e84781 10.1371/journal.pone.0084781 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37. Arora R, Agarwal P, Ray S, Singh AK, Singh VP, Tyagi AK, et al. MADS-box gene family in rice: genome-wide identification, organization and expression profiling during reproductive development and stress. BMC Genomics 2007;8: 242 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38. Son O, Cho HY, Kim MR, Lee H, Lee MS, Song E, et al. Induction of a homeodomain-leucine zipper gene by auxin is inhibited by cytokinin in Arabidopsis roots. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 2005;326: 203–209. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39. Shin R, Burch AY, Huppert KA, Tiwari SB, Murphy AS, Guilfoyle TJ, et al. The Arabidopsis transcription factor MYB77 modulates auxin signal transduction. Plant Cell 2007;19: 2440–2453. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40. Ziegler J, Facchini PJ. Alkaloid biosynthesis: metabolism and trafficking. Annu Rev Plant Biol 2008;59: 735–769. 10.1146/annurev.arplant.59.032607.092730 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41. Binder BY, Peebles CA, Shanks JV, San KY. The effects of UV-B stress on the production of terpenoid indole alkaloids in Catharanthus roseus hairy roots. Biotechnol Prog 2009;25: 861–865. 10.1002/btpr.97 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42. Riano-Pachon DM, Ruzicic S, Dreyer I, Mueller-Roeber B. PlnTFDB: an integrative plant transcription factor database. BMC Bioinformatics 2007;8: 42 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 43. Jain M, Khurana JP. Small RNA regulation of rice homeobox genes. Plant Signal Behav 2008;3: 1024–1025. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 44. Mu RL, Cao YR, Liu YF, Lei G, Zou HF, Liao Y, et al. An R2R3-type transcription factor gene AtMYB59 regulates root growth and cell cycle progression in Arabidopsis . Cell Res 2009;19: 1291–1304. 10.1038/cr.2009.83 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 45. Kirik V, Lee MM, Wester K, Herrmann U, Zheng Z, Oppenheimer D, et al. Functional diversification of MYB23 and GL1 genes in trichome morphogenesis and initiation. Development 2005;132: 1477–1485. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 46. Dubos C, Le Gourrierec J, Baudry A, Huep G, Lanet E, Debeaujon I, et al. MYBL2 is a new regulator of flavonoid biosynthesis in Arabidopsis thaliana . Plant J 2008;55: 940–953. 10.1111/j.1365-313X.2008.03564.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 47. Yanhui C, Xiaoyuan Y, Kun H, Meihua L, Jigang L, Zhaofeng G, et al. The MYB transcription factor superfamily of Arabidopsis: expression analysis and phylogenetic comparison with the rice MYB family. Plant Mol Biol 2006;60: 107–124. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 48. Zhu J, Chen H, Li H, Gao JF, Jiang H, Wang C, et al. Defective in Tapetal development and function 1 is essential for anther development and tapetal function for microspore maturation in Arabidopsis. Plant J 2008;55: 266–277. 10.1111/j.1365-313X.2008.03500.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 49. Contento AL, Kim SJ, Bassham DC. Transcriptome profiling of the response of Arabidopsis suspension culture cells to Suc starvation. Plant Physiol 2004;135: 2330–2347. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 50. Poppenberger B, Rozhon W, Khan M, Husar S, Adam G, Luschnig C, et al. CESTA, a positive regulator of brassinosteroid biosynthesis. EMBO J 2011;30: 1149–1161. 10.1038/emboj.2011.35 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 51. Tsukagoshi H, Busch W, Benfey PN. Transcriptional regulation of ROS controls transition from proliferation to differentiation in the root. Cell 2010;143: 606–616. 10.1016/j.cell.2010.10.020 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 52. Groszmann M, Paicu T, Alvarez JP, Swain SM, Smyth DR. SPATULA and ALCATRAZ, are partially redundant, functionally diverging bHLH genes required for Arabidopsis gynoecium and fruit development. Plant J 2011;68: 816–829. 10.1111/j.1365-313X.2011.04732.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 53. Ding Y, Liu N, Virlouvet L, Riethoven JJ, Fromm M, Avramova Z. Four distinct types of dehydration stress memory genes in Arabidopsis thaliana . BMC Plant Biol 2013;13: 229 10.1186/1471-2229-13-229 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 54. Takahashi Y, Ebisu Y, Kinoshita T, Doi M, Okuma E, Murata Y, et al. bHLH transcription factors that facilitate K(+) uptake during stomatal opening are repressed by abscisic acid through phosphorylation. Sci Signal 2013;6: ra48 10.1126/scisignal.2003760 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 55. Shao J, Liu X, Wang R, Zhang G, Yu F. The over-expression of an Arabidopsis B3 transcription factor, ABS2/NGAL1, leads to the loss of flower petals. PLoS One 2012;7: e49861 10.1371/journal.pone.0049861 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 56. Huang D, Wu W, Abrams SR, Cutler AJ. The relationship of drought-related gene expression in Arabidopsis thaliana to hormonal and environmental factors. J Exp Bot 2008;59: 2991–3007. 10.1093/jxb/ern155 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 57. de Torres-Zabala M, Truman W, Bennett MH, Lafforgue G, Mansfield JW, Rodriguez Egea P, et al. Pseudomonas syringae pv. tomato hijacks the Arabidopsis abscisic acid signalling pathway to cause disease. EMBO J 2007;26: 1434–1443. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 58. Zhu Q, Zhang J, Gao X, Tong J, Xiao L, Li W, et al. The Arabidopsis AP2/ERF transcription factor RAP2.6 participates in ABA, salt and osmotic stress responses. Gene 2010;457: 1–12. 10.1016/j.gene.2010.02.011 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 59. Krishnaswamy S, Verma S, Rahman MH, Kav NN. Functional characterization of four APETALA2-family genes (RAP2.6, RAP2.6L, DREB19 and DREB26) in Arabidopsis . Plant Mol Biol 2011;75: 107–127. 10.1007/s11103-010-9711-7 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 60. Lewandowska M, Wawrzynska A, Moniuszko G, Lukomska J, Zientara K, Piecho M, et al. A contribution to identification of novel regulators of plant response to sulfur deficiency: characteristics of a tobacco gene UP9C, its protein product and the effects of UP9C silencing. Mol Plant 2010;3: 347–360. 10.1093/mp/ssq007 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 61. Koprivova A, Calderwood A, Lee BR, Kopriva S. Do PFT1 and HY5 interact in regulation of sulfate assimilation by light in Arabidopsis? FEBS Lett 2014;588: 1116–1121. 10.1016/j.febslet.2014.02.031 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 62. Chan KX, Wirtz M, Phua SY, Estavillo GM, Pogson BJ. Balancing metabolites in drought: the sulfur assimilation conundrum. Trends Plant Sci 2013;18: 18–29. 10.1016/j.tplants.2012.07.005 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 63. Sun X, Li Y, Cai H, Bai X, Ji W, Ding X, et al. The Arabidopsis AtbZIP1 transcription factor is a positive regulator of plant tolerance to salt, osmotic and drought stresses. J Plant Res 2012;125: 429–438. 10.1007/s10265-011-0448-4 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 64. Bray EA. Classification of genes differentially expressed during water-deficit stress in Arabidopsis thaliana: an analysis using microarray and differential expression data. Ann Bot 2002;89 Spec No: 803–811. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 65. Ditta G, Pinyopich A, Robles P, Pelaz S, Yanofsky MF. The SEP4 gene of Arabidopsis thaliana functions in floral organ and meristem identity. Curr Biol 2004;14: 1935–1940. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 66. Huang F, Xu G, Chi Y, Liu H, Xue Q, Zhao T, et al. A soybean MADS-box protein modulates floral organ numbers, petal identity and sterility. BMC Plant Biol 2014;14: 89 10.1186/1471-2229-14-89 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 67. Lu SX, Knowles SM, Webb CJ, Celaya RB, Cha C, Siu JP, et al. The Jumonji C domain-containing protein JMJ30 regulates period length in the Arabidopsis circadian clock. Plant Physiol 2011;155: 906–915. 10.1104/pp.110.167015 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 68. Xu Y, Wang Y, Stroud H, Gu X, Sun B, Gan ES, et al. A matrix protein silences transposons and repeats through interaction with retinoblastoma-associated proteins. Curr Biol 2013;23: 345–350. 10.1016/j.cub.2013.01.030 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 69. Bricchi I, Bertea CM, Occhipinti A, Paponov IA, Maffei ME. Dynamics of membrane potential variation and gene expression induced by Spodoptera littoralis, Myzus persicae, and Pseudomonas syringae in Arabidopsis. PLoS One 2013;7: e46673. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 70. Baxter CE, Costa MM, Coen ES. Diversification and co-option of RAD-like genes in the evolution of floral asymmetry. Plant J 2007;52: 105–113. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 71. Ying S, Zhang DF, Fu J, Shi YS, Song YC, Wang TY, et al. Cloning and characterization of a maize bZIP transcription factor, ZmbZIP72, confers drought and salt tolerance in transgenic Arabidopsis. Planta 2011;235: 253–266. 10.1007/s00425-011-1496-7 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 72. Bhaskara GB, Nguyen TT, Verslues PE. Unique drought resistance functions of the highly ABA-induced clade A protein phosphatase 2Cs. Plant Physiol 2012;160: 379–395. 10.1104/pp.112.202408 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 73. Zhang J, Li X, He Z, Zhao X, Wang Q, Zhou B, et al. Molecular character of a phosphatase 2C (PP2C) gene relation to stress tolerance in Arabidopsis thaliana . Mol Biol Rep 2013;40: 2633–2644. 10.1007/s11033-012-2350-0 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 74. Zhao P, Liu F, Ma M, Gong J, Wang Q, Jia P, et al. Overexpression of AtLEA3-3 confers resistance to cold stress in Escherichia coli and provides enhanced osmotic stress tolerance and ABA sensitivity in Arabidopsis thaliana . Mol Biol (Mosk) 2011;45: 851–862. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 75. Kato M, Kamo T, Wang R, Nishikawa F, Hyodo H, Ikoma Y, et al. (2002) Wound-induced ethylene synthesis in stem tissue of harvested broccoli and its effect on senescence and ethylene synthesis in broccoli florets. Postharvest Biol Tec 24 69–78. [Google Scholar]
- 76. Stearns JC, Glick BR. Transgenic plants with altered ethylene biosynthesis or perception. Biotechnol Adv 2003;21: 193–210. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 77. Jones ML, Chaffin GS, Eason JR, Clark DG. Ethylene-sensitivity regulates proteolytic activity and cysteine protease gene expression in Petunia corollas . J Exp Bot 2005;56: 2733–2744. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 78. Howing T, Huesmann C, Hoefle C, Nagel MK, Isono E, Hückelhoven R, et al. Endoplasmic reticulum KDEL-tailed cysteine endopeptidase 1 of Arabidopsis (AtCEP1) is involved in pathogen defense. Front Plant Sci 2014;5: 58 10.3389/fpls.2014.00058 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 79. Singh AP, Dubey S, Lakhwani D, Pandey SP, Khan K, Dwivedi UN, et al. Differential expression of several xyloglucan endotransglucosylase/hydrolase genes regulates flower opening and petal abscission in roses. AoB PLANTS 2013;5: plt030. [Google Scholar]
- 80. Luhua S, Hegie A, Suzuki N, Shulaev E, Luo X, Cenariu D, et al. Linking genes of unknown function with abiotic stress responses by high-throughput phenotype screening. Physiol Plant 2013;148: 322–333. 10.1111/ppl.12013 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 81. van de Mortel JE, Almar Villanueva L, Schat H, Kwekkeboom J, Coughlan S, Moerland PD, et al. Large expression differences in genes for iron and zinc homeostasis, stress response, and lignin biosynthesis distinguish roots of Arabidopsis thaliana and the related metal hyperaccumulator Thlaspi caerulescens. Plant Physiol 2006;142: 1127–1147. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 82. Mikkelsen MD, Petersen BL, Glawischnig E, Jensen AB, Andreasson E, Halkier BA. Modulation of CYP79 genes and glucosinolate profiles in Arabidopsis by defense signaling pathways. Plant Physiol 2003;131: 298–308. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Supplementary Materials
The relative expression of the five genes was in agreement with the microarray fold change. The sequences of primers and details were provided in S5 Table.
(TIF)
The similarity search in Genevestigator, using the differentially expressed transcripts (scion vs. rootstock; ≥ 2 fold change; p ≤ 0.05) revealed perturbations (top 3) comparing transcriptome between the drought study vs. control plants in flower buds and leaves.
(TIF)
(XLSX)
(XLSX)
(XLSX)
(XLSX)
Data Availability Statement
The microarray experimental data has been submitted to NCBI (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov), with accession number GSE61631.