Skip to main content
BMC Plant Biology logoLink to BMC Plant Biology
. 2018 Apr 19;18:67. doi: 10.1186/s12870-018-1286-5

Genome-wide analysis of family-1 UDP glycosyltransferases (UGT) and identification of UGT genes for FHB resistance in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)

Yi He 1,#, Dawood Ahmad 1,2,#, Xu Zhang 1, Yu Zhang 1, Lei Wu 1, Peng Jiang 1, Hongxiang Ma 1,
PMCID: PMC5909277  PMID: 29673318

Abstract

Background

Fusarium head blight (FHB), a devastating disease in wheat worldwide, results in yield loses and mycotoxin, such as deoxynivalenol (DON), accumulation in infected grains. DON also facilitates the pathogen colonization and spread of FHB symptoms during disease development. UDP-glycosyltransferase enzymes (UGTs) are known to contribute to detoxification and enhance FHB resistance by glycosylating DON into DON-3-glucoside (D3G) in wheat. However, a comprehensive investigation of wheat (Triticum aestivum) UGT genes is still lacking.

Results

In this study, we carried out a genome-wide analysis of family-1 UDP glycosyltransferases in wheat based on the PSPG conserved box that resulted in the identification of 179 putative UGT genes. The identified genes were clustered into 16 major phylogenetic groups with a lack of phylogenetic group K. The UGT genes were invariably distributed among all the chromosomes of the 3 genomes. At least 10 intron insertion events were found in the UGT sequences, where intron 4 was observed as the most conserved intron. The expression analysis of the wheat UGT genes using both online microarray data and quantitative real-time PCR verification suggested the distinct role of UGT genes in different tissues and developmental stages. The expression of many UGT genes was up-regulated after Fusarium graminearum inoculation, and six of the genes were further verified by RT-qPCR.

Conclusion

We identified 179 UGT genes from wheat using the available sequenced wheat genome. This study provides useful insight into the phylogenetic structure, distribution, and expression patterns of family-1 UDP glycosyltransferases in wheat. The results also offer a foundation for future work aimed at elucidating the molecular mechanisms underlying the resistance to FHB and DON accumulation.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12870-018-1286-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Keywords: UDP-glycosyltransferase, Fusarium head blight, Wheat, Expression pattern, Phylogeny, Deoxynivalenol

Background

Fusarium head blight (FHB) or scab, primarily caused by Fusarium graminearum, is one of the most devastating diseases in wheat and barley worldwide [1]. FHB infection not only results in heavy yield loss but also deteriorates grain quality due to the production of trichothecene mycotoxins such as deoxynivalenol (DON), nivalenol (NIV) and their acetylated forms 3 (or 15)-acetyl-4-deoxynivalenol, 4-acetylnivalenol or fusarenone X (FX), of which DON is one of the most important members [2]. The accumulation of DON and other toxins in the infected grains is making wheat unfit for human and livestock consumption posing a risk to world food security [3]. DON along with other trichothecenes also act as fungal virulence factors, facilitating the colonization and spread of scab symptoms within wheat spikes [2]. When the TRI5 gene was disrupted, the DON-nonproducing mutants of F. graminearum lacked the ability to spread in wheat spikes [4]. The resistance to DON accumulation is different in FHB infected wheat varieties, highlighting the involvement of a host resistance system during the course of DON production [1]. DON-3-glucoside (D3G), a non-toxic masked form of DON, has been observed in wheat grains in addition to DON and is stored in plant cell vacuoles [5]. Using their enzymatic defense system, plants convert DON into D3G as previously described for the first time in Arabidopsis [6]. The resistance to FHB infection and D3G accumulation in wheat grains is correlated with the ability of a higher conversion of DON into D3G [7]. DON conversion into D3G, a natural detoxification process in plants called glycosylation, along with other mechanisms of detoxification such as acetylation and de-epoxidation, reduce mycotoxin accumulation and are potential resistance factors against FHB [2, 5, 8].

Glycosylation is a widespread cellular modification reaction in all living organisms, attaching a carbohydrate to the hydroxyl or other functional group of a molecule in a biosynthetic pathway [9]. Glycosylation is a form of co-translational and post-translational modification altering the chemical property, sub-cellular location and activity of a variety of bio-molecules [10]. Glycosylation modifications are catalyzed by glycosyltransferase enzymes (GTs), which are highly divergent, polyphyletic and belong to a multigene family [11]. Glycosylation, in addition to other reactions, paves the way to the production of a huge variety of secondary metabolites in plants. GTs from different species can be classified into 94 families based on their amino acid sequence similarities, catalytic mechanisms as well as the presence of conserved sequence motifs according to the most recent update of CAZy (http://www.cazy.org/GlycosylTransferases.html). Among them, family-1 GTs are the most common glycosyltransferases in the plant kingdom generally catalyzing the process of glycosylation by transferring sugar moieties from activated donor molecules to acceptor molecules [5, 12, 13]. Family-1 GTs use uridine 5′-diphosphate sugars as the donor molecule; hence, they are also named uridine-diphosphate glycosyltransferases (UGTs) [14]. These enzymes act upon a huge variety of highly diverse and complex substrates in the plant kingdom such as flavonoids, terpenes, auxin, cytokinin, salicylic acid and many others to regulate plant growth, development, disease resistance and interaction with the environment [15]. The sequences at N-terminal region of these enzymes are highly diverse and are considered to be responsible for recognition of a variety of substrates. The C-terminal region on the other hand contains a conserved motif called Plant Secondary Product Glycosyltransferase (PSPG). The PSPG box is a unique, well conserved region of 44 amino acids found in all UGTs across all studied plant taxa [14, 16].

UDP-glycosyltransferases have been identified in various plant species, including Linum usitatissimum, Arabidopsis thaliana, Malus domestica, Vitis vinifera, Populus trichocarpa, Glycine max, Mimulus guttatus, Oryza sativa, Sorghum bicolor, Brachypodium distachyon, Zea mays, Gossypium raimondii, Gossypium arboreum, Gossypium hirsutum and most recently in Prunus persica, Brassica rapa, and Brassica oleracea with approximately more than 100 UGTs in all the higher plants investigated [15, 1722]. UGTs have been shown to display broad as well as selective substrate specificity in plants recognizing a wide range of acceptor molecules [23, 24]. The UGTs not only glycosylate acceptor molecules, such as anthocyanidins, flavonols, flavonoids, saponins, sterols terpenoids, phenylpropanoids and plant hormones, but also detoxify and deactivate xenobiotics and play a pivotal role in plant-pathogen interactions [9, 21].

Functioning of UGTs has been described in many plants such as Arabidopsis, kiwifruit and strawberry [2528]. Besides their various other attributes, UGT genes have also been demonstrated to contribute to FHB resistance in crops possibly through DON glycosylation [5]. Four highly DON inducible candidate GTs were identified in barley and one of them HvUGT13248 gene, the first monocot DON-glucosyltransferase, extended DON resistance in yeast and has since been expressed in Arabidopsis and wheat providing resistance against DON and other mycotoxins [2933]. Similarly, two DON detoxification genes conjugating DON to D3G have been identified in Brachypodium distachyon [19]. Recently the HvUGT-10 W1 gene isolated from an FHB resistant barley variety (10 W1) also conferred FHB tolerance [34]. In wheat only a few candidate UGT genes such as TaUGTB2, TaUGT1, TaUGT2, TaUGT3, TaUGT4, and TaUGT12887 have been identified and the later 4 genes have been shown to be closely related to FHB resistance; however, a large scale systematic investigation of UGTs in the wheat genome is still lacking [3539].

In this study we identified 179 UGT genes from wheat using the available sequenced wheat genome. The genetic relationships of these UGTs were determined using sequence alignment and phylogenetic tree analysis. The differential expression of genes in various wheat tissues as well as wheat spikes treated with F. graminearum vs control expressions patterns were analyzed using NCBI and universal microarray data and further confirmed through RT-qPCR analysis of the selected genes. This study will hopefully provide a baseline to conduct future functional characterization analysis of wheat UGT genes in order to understand the molecular mechanisms behind substrate specificity in general and especially the resistance to FHB and DON accumulation in crops.

Methods

Identification of UGT genes in wheat

The 44-amino acid conserved sequence of the PSPG motif was used as a query to search against the wheat genome database (TGACv1) at the Ensemble Plants (http://plants.ensembl.org/Triticum_aestivum/) by HMMER profile to identify members of the UGT protein family in wheat [9, 40]. The identified protein sequences of each UGT were further verified through the PFAM (http://pfam.xfam.org/) and the SMART (http://smart.embl-heidelberg.de/) databases to confirm the presence of the UDP-glycosyltransferase domain. The information (including amino acid length, transcript count and location) was also obtained from Ensemble Plants. The molecular weight (MW) and isoelectric point (PI) of each UGT protein were calculated using the online ExPASy program (http://web.expasy.org/compute_pi/) [41]. The subcellular localization of each UGT protein was predicted using the online CELLO v2.5 system (http://cello.life.nctu.edu.tw/cello.html) [42].

Sequence alignment and phylogenetic analysis

Multiple sequence alignments of the wheat UGT protein sequences were performed by MUSCLE (http://www.ebi.ac.uk/Tools/msa/muscle/). The phylogenetic tree was constructed using MEGA 7.0 software (http://www.megasoftware.net/) based on the full-length UGT protein sequences through a neighbor-joining algorithm using a 1000 bootstrap value [43].

Chromosomal locations

The genetic location of each UGT on the chromosomes was retrieved from the final TGACv1 map [40]. The genetic map of each UGT on the chromosome was modified from the primary map drawn by the MapInspect tool (http://mapinspect.software.informer.com/).

Intron mapping

The wheat UGT intron map was constructed by determining the intron positions, splice sites and phases. The intron phases were determined as described previously: the introns positioned between two triplet codons were defined as phase 0, introns positioned after the first base in the codon were defined as phase 1, and the introns positioned after the second base in the codon were defined as phase 2 [20].

Expression profile analysis

A genome-wide expression analysis of the wheat UGT genes in various organs and developmental stages was performed using high-throughput RNA sequence data from 5 organs (root, stem, leaf, spike and grain), each with 3 developmental stages (https://urgi.versailles.inra.fr/files/RNASeqWheat/) [44]. To analyze the expression profiles of the wheat UGT genes after F. graminearum inoculation, the Affymetrix wheat array data with wheat spikelets from the susceptible spring wheat cultivar Roblin inoculated with either water or F. graminearum strains that do or do not produce DON were downloaded (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo/) for further analysis (accession number GSE54554). The expression profiles of these UGT genes were generated by using MeV 4.7 software (https://sourceforge.net/projects/mev-tm4/files/mev-tm4/).

Plant materials and treatment

The wheat cultivar used in this study was Annong 8455, which is highly susceptible to FHB in China. The wheat plants were grown in a green house at 22 °C for 14-h light and 12 °C for 10-h dark at the Jiangsu Academy of Agricultural Sciences, China.

The early anthesis stage spikelets were chosen for further F. graminearum or water (CK) inoculation as described previously [45]. Approximately 10 μl of fungal suspension (1 × 106 conidia per mL) of F. graminearum or water was injected into the central spikelet of a spike during early anthesis. The inoculated spikes were covered with a plastic bag for 3 days.

RNA isolation and RT-qPCR analysis

To validate the expression pattern of the six selected genes, the total RNA was isolated from the root, stem, leaf, pre-emergence spikelet, pre-anthesis spikelet, and grains of 7, 14 and 21 days after flowering (DAF) using the Promega SV total RNA isolation system (Promega, United States), according to the manufacturer’s instructions. The RNA of the spikelets treated with water or F. graminearum after 2 and 4 days was also extracted in the same way. The first-strand cDNAs were synthesized from the total RNA by using the PrimeScript 1st strand cDNA Synthesis Kit (Takara Bio, Dalian, China), according to the manufacturer’s manual. Real-time PCR was performed with a Roche thermal cycler 96 using SYBR Green to detect gene expression. The wheat tubulin gene was used as an endogenous control. The gene specific primers used for RT-qPCR are listed in the Additional file 1: Table S1. The PCR conditions were as follows: 95 °C for 30 s, 95 °C for 5 s, 60 °C for 20 s and 72 °C for 10 s for 45 cycles. Data from the individual runs were collated using the 2−ΔΔCT method [46]. All the reactions were performed using at least three replicates.

Results

Identification of UGT genes in wheat

A nearly complete and accurate sequence assembly of the allohexaploid wheat reference accession, Chinese Spring (CS42), was released recently, enabling a more in-depth analysis of UGT genes in this key global crop [40]. The conserved UGT domain of 44 amino acids called the PSPG box was used in this study to identify the presence of UGT genes in the wheat genome [9]. A total of 179 putative UGT genes having an average length of 471 amino acids were identified and used for further analysis (Table 1). Most of the genes were in the range of 400 to 500 amino acids, while only a few genes were above 500 and below 300 amino acids in size and 1 to 3 transcripts were counted for these genes (Additional file 2: Figure S1). The theoretical isoelectric point (pI) and molecular weight (Mw) ranged from 4.77 to 10.32 (average pI = 5.79) and from 26.9 kDa to 76.5 kDa (average Mw = 50.9 kDa), respectively (Table 1). The theoretical cellular localization showed 22, 19, 5, 2 and 0.6% of the genes were localized only into the chloroplast, cytoplasm, plasma membrane, mitochondria and nucleus, respectively, while the rest of the genes were localized into any of these compartments (Table 1).

Table 1.

The list of the putative wheat UGT genes identified in this study

No. Gene stable ID Amino acid length Transcript count PI MW (kDa) Subcellular location Location
1 TRIAE_CS42_1AL_TGACv1_000152_AA0004850 569 2 5.6 62.3 Chloroplast Cytoplasmic TGACv1_000152_1AL: 34,636–36,800
2 TRIAE_CS42_1AL_TGACv1_000696_AA0017290 479 1 5.7 52.2 Cytoplasmic TGACv1_000696_1AL: 81,630–83,635
3 TRIAE_CS42_1AL_TGACv1_001147_AA0025960 456 1 5.3 49.3 Chloroplast Cytoplasmic PlasmaMembrane TGACv1_001147_1AL: 8789–10,755
4 TRIAE_CS42_1AL_TGACv1_001208_AA0027000 474 1 6 50.6 Mitochondrial PlasmaMembrane TGACv1_001208_1AL: 53,142–54,992
5 TRIAE_CS42_1AL_TGACv1_001652_AA0033630 324 1 6.2 35 PlasmaMembrane TGACv1_001652_1AL: 54,716–56,210
6 TRIAE_CS42_1AS_TGACv1_020318_AA0076580 505 3 5.3 55.2 Cytoplasmic Mitochondrial TGACv1_020318_1AS: 8106–11,995
7 TRIAE_CS42_1BL_TGACv1_031128_AA0108300 464 1 5.4 49.6 PlasmaMembrane TGACv1_031128_1BL: 73,386–75,090
8 TRIAE_CS42_1BL_TGACv1_032253_AA0127550 504 1 6 54.1 Chloroplast Cytoplasmic TGACv1_032253_1BL: 30,766–32,648
9 TRIAE_CS42_1BL_TGACv1_032609_AA0132000 451 1 6 48.4 PlasmaMembrane TGACv1_032609_1BL: 18,947–20,825
10 TRIAE_CS42_1BL_TGACv1_034076_AA0143330 423 1 5.9 45.3 Cytoplasmic Mitochondrial TGACv1_034076_1BL: 13,111–14,941
11 TRIAE_CS42_1BS_TGACv1_049891_AA0163670 536 1 5.5 58 Cytoplasmic Chloroplast TGACv1_049891_1BS: 3226–6480
12 TRIAE_CS42_1BS_TGACv1_050208_AA0169040 542 1 5.6 56.7 Chloroplast PlasmaMembrane TGACv1_050208_1BS: 22,661–24,740
13 TRIAE_CS42_1DL_TGACv1_061249_AA0190020 486 1 6 52.4 Cytoplasmic PlasmaMembrane TGACv1_061249_1DL: 118,022–119,855
14 TRIAE_CS42_1DL_TGACv1_061472_AA0196220 473 1 5.6 50.6 Cytoplasmic TGACv1_061472_1DL: 36,915–38,810
15 TRIAE_CS42_1DL_TGACv1_061688_AA0201770 386 1 6 42.6 Cytoplasmic TGACv1_061688_1DL: 38,929–45,276
16 TRIAE_CS42_1DL_TGACv1_062127_AA0209080 497 1 5.2 53 Chloroplast Cytoplasmic TGACv1_062127_1DL: 35,096–37,034
17 TRIAE_CS42_2AL_TGACv1_092977_AA0268460 496 2 5.9 53.3 Chloroplast PlasmaMembrane TGACv1_092977_2AL: 132,556–134,743
18 TRIAE_CS42_2AL_TGACv1_094039_AA0291500 363 1 6.7 37.6 Chloroplast PlasmaMembrane TGACv1_094039_2AL: 11,847–13,415
19 TRIAE_CS42_2AL_TGACv1_094526_AA0299210 444 1 5.5 47.4 PlasmaMembrane Chloroplast Cytoplasmic TGACv1_094526_2AL: 10,962–12,595
20 TRIAE_CS42_2AL_TGACv1_094669_AA0301250 493 1 5.7 53.5 Chloroplast PlasmaMembrane Cytoplasmic TGACv1_094669_2AL: 43,325–45,075
21 TRIAE_CS42_2AL_TGACv1_095609_AA0312870 479 1 5.4 51.7 Cytoplasmic TGACv1_095609_2AL: 23,136–25,080
22 TRIAE_CS42_2AS_TGACv1_112708_AA0343800 465 1 9 51 Mitochondrial Chloroplast TGACv1_112708_2AS: 5716–7407
23 TRIAE_CS42_2AS_TGACv1_113114_AA0351430 314 1 5 35.1 Cytoplasmic TGACv1_113114_2AS: 82,126–83,619
24 TRIAE_CS42_2AS_TGACv1_113164_AA0352370 474 1 5.5 51.6 Chloroplast TGACv1_113164_2AS: 56,381–58,985
25 TRIAE_CS42_2AS_TGACv1_113792_AA0360520 471 1 5.8 51.1 Chloroplast TGACv1_113792_2AS: 1565–3515
26 TRIAE_CS42_2AS_TGACv1_113792_AA0360550 470 1 5.4 50.6 Cytoplasmic Chloroplast TGACv1_113792_2AS: 12,613–15,275
27 TRIAE_CS42_2BL_TGACv1_132343_AA0436900 489 1 5.7 53.4 Chloroplast TGACv1_132343_2BL: 30,155–32,015
28 TRIAE_CS42_2BL_TGACv1_133391_AA0442380 485 1 5.4 51.3 Chloroplast PlasmaMembrane Cytoplasmic TGACv1_133391_2BL: 9937–11,795
29 TRIAE_CS42_2BS_TGACv1_146052_AA0454210 480 2 5.4 54.9 Cytoplasmic Chloroplast TGACv1_146052_2BS: 172,038–174,105
30 TRIAE_CS42_2BS_TGACv1_146052_AA0454220 234 1 5.2 26 Chloroplast Cytoplasmic TGACv1_146052_2BS: 175,207–176,915
31 TRIAE_CS42_2BS_TGACv1_146119_AA0455760 477 1 5.9 51.6 Chloroplast PlasmaMembrane TGACv1_146119_2BS: 73,276–75,131
32 TRIAE_CS42_2BS_TGACv1_146212_AA0458920 477 1 5.9 51.8 Chloroplast TGACv1_146212_2BS: 40,106–41,900
33 TRIAE_CS42_2BS_TGACv1_146276_AA0461240 458 1 6.2 49.8 Chloroplast TGACv1_146276_2BS: 43,496–45,300
34 TRIAE_CS42_2BS_TGACv1_146286_AA0461540 466 1 8.4 51.1 Chloroplast Mitochondrial TGACv1_146286_2BS: 86,006–87,750
35 TRIAE_CS42_2BS_TGACv1_146500_AA0466680 498 1 5.2 52.4 Chloroplast TGACv1_146500_2BS: 99,495–101,475
36 TRIAE_CS42_2BS_TGACv1_146843_AA0473870 505 1 6.4 53.9 Chloroplast PlasmaMembrane TGACv1_146843_2BS: 70,557–72,425
37 TRIAE_CS42_2BS_TGACv1_147441_AA0483230 477 1 6.1 50.8 Cytoplasmic TGACv1_147441_2BS: 41,416–43,450
38 TRIAE_CS42_2BS_TGACv1_147641_AA0485890 519 1 5.6 56.9 Chloroplast TGACv1_147641_2BS: 19,336–29,770
39 TRIAE_CS42_2DL_TGACv1_158399_AA0517610 492 1 5.4 54 Cytoplasmic TGACv1_158399_2DL: 87,645–89,545
40 TRIAE_CS42_2DL_TGACv1_159414_AA0537930 482 1 5.4 51.9 PlasmaMembrane Cytoplasmic TGACv1_159414_2DL: 9459–11,225
41 TRIAE_CS42_2DL_TGACv1_159743_AA0542200 469 1 5.5 51.3 Cytoplasmic TGACv1_159743_2DL: 29,369–31,464
42 TRIAE_CS42_2DL_TGACv1_160147_AA0547510 499 1 5.9 53.3 PlasmaMembrane Chloroplast TGACv1_160147_2DL: 11,782–13,675
43 TRIAE_CS42_2DL_TGACv1_160383_AA0549920 485 2 5.5 53.7 Cytoplasmic Mitochondrial Chloroplast TGACv1_160383_2DL: 17,866–19,990
44 TRIAE_CS42_2DL_TGACv1_160484_AA0550940 476 1 6.4 51.5 PlasmaMembrane TGACv1_160484_2DL: 22,697–24,835
45 TRIAE_CS42_2DS_TGACv1_177189_AA0568300 505 1 5 53.5 Chloroplast TGACv1_177189_2DS: 168,676–170,825
46 TRIAE_CS42_2DS_TGACv1_177304_AA0572860 462 1 5.2 49.6 PlasmaMembrane Cytoplasmic TGACv1_177304_2DS: 18,887–22,885
47 TRIAE_CS42_2DS_TGACv1_177710_AA0582890 508 2 5.4 55.8 Chloroplast TGACv1_177710_2DS: 37,388–39,565
48 TRIAE_CS42_2DS_TGACv1_177916_AA0587150 493 1 5.7 53.3 Chloroplast TGACv1_177916_2DS: 19,783–21,976
49 TRIAE_CS42_2DS_TGACv1_178033_AA0589680 467 1 6.4 50.9 Chloroplast TGACv1_178033_2DS: 37,145–39,412
50 TRIAE_CS42_2DS_TGACv1_178118_AA0591100 372 1 8.5 40 PlasmaMembrane TGACv1_178118_2DS: 56,233–58,495
51 TRIAE_CS42_2DS_TGACv1_178131_AA0591440 497 1 5.7 53 Chloroplast PlasmaMembrane Cytoplasmic TGACv1_178131_2DS: 31,516–33,382
52 TRIAE_CS42_2DS_TGACv1_178315_AA0594020 476 1 6 51.3 Chloroplast TGACv1_178315_2DS: 49,188–50,874
53 TRIAE_CS42_2DS_TGACv1_178795_AA0601130 469 1 6.3 50 Cytoplasmic TGACv1_178795_2DS: 43,800–45,517
54 TRIAE_CS42_3AL_TGACv1_194443_AA0633160 500 2 5.6 54.5 Cytoplasmic TGACv1_194443_3AL: 22,846–28,150
55 TRIAE_CS42_3AL_TGACv1_194677_AA0637610 475 1 5.5 51.5 Cytoplasmic Chloroplast TGACv1_194677_3AL: 53,009–55,235
56 TRIAE_CS42_3AL_TGACv1_194875_AA0641170 466 1 5.7 50.6 Cytoplasmic Chloroplast TGACv1_194875_3AL: 63,326–65,525
57 TRIAE_CS42_3AS_TGACv1_210937_AA0681620 414 1 5.3 44.4 Chloroplast Cytoplasmic TGACv1_210937_3AS: 119,816–121,716
58 TRIAE_CS42_3AS_TGACv1_211248_AA0687180 551 1 5 59.3 Cytoplasmic Chloroplast TGACv1_211248_3AS: 47,048–49,241
59 TRIAE_CS42_3AS_TGACv1_211655_AA0692640 472 1 5.3 50.6 Cytoplasmic TGACv1_211655_3AS: 41,556–44,305
60 TRIAE_CS42_3AS_TGACv1_211823_AA0694680 511 1 5.5 56.9 Cytoplasmic TGACv1_211823_3AS: 30,616–32,748
61 TRIAE_CS42_3AS_TGACv1_211823_AA0694700 492 1 5.4 54.7 Cytoplasmic TGACv1_211823_3AS: 44,976–46,896
62 TRIAE_CS42_3B_TGACv1_220919_AA0723700 472 1 6.1 51.3 Chloroplast TGACv1_220919_3B: 29,856–31,633
63 TRIAE_CS42_3B_TGACv1_220919_AA0723750 469 1 5.5 50.8 Chloroplast PlasmaMembrane TGACv1_220919_3B: 149,148–150,855
64 TRIAE_CS42_3B_TGACv1_221277_AA0735990 473 1 5.1 51 Cytoplasmic Chloroplast TGACv1_221277_3B: 36,097–37,935
65 TRIAE_CS42_3B_TGACv1_221877_AA0752320 496 1 5.4 54.8 Cytoplasmic TGACv1_221877_3B: 70,264–73,165
66 TRIAE_CS42_3B_TGACv1_221924_AA0753300 468 1 5.4 50.8 Cytoplasmic Chloroplast TGACv1_221924_3B: 38,292–39,921
67 TRIAE_CS42_3B_TGACv1_222356_AA0762980 464 1 5.3 50.9 PlasmaMembrane Chloroplast Cytoplasmic TGACv1_222356_3B: 55,147–57,245
68 TRIAE_CS42_3B_TGACv1_223815_AA0787850 461 1 5.2 50 Chloroplast Cytoplasmic TGACv1_223815_3B: 24,267–25,985
69 TRIAE_CS42_3B_TGACv1_224677_AA0799850 457 2 5.4 49.9 Chloroplast Cytoplasmic Mitochondrial TGACv1_224677_3B: 12,637–14,485
70 TRIAE_CS42_3B_TGACv1_228792_AA0827590 403 1 5.2 44.8 Cytoplasmic TGACv1_228792_3B: 13,838–16,085
71 TRIAE_CS42_3DL_TGACv1_249782_AA0856200 465 1 6 50.8 Cytoplasmic TGACv1_249782_3DL: 45,815–54,365
72 TRIAE_CS42_3DL_TGACv1_249823_AA0856930 481 1 5.4 52.8 Cytoplasmic TGACv1_249823_3DL: 53,186–55,160
73 TRIAE_CS42_3DL_TGACv1_251186_AA0878520 489 1 6.1 53.1 Chloroplast Mitochondrial TGACv1_251186_3DL: 6166–8082
74 TRIAE_CS42_3DL_TGACv1_251733_AA0884380 472 1 5.8 51.1 Chloroplast TGACv1_251733_3DL: 18,147–19,817
75 TRIAE_CS42_3DS_TGACv1_271859_AA0909590 560 1 5.4 51.4 Chloroplast Cytoplasmic Mitochondrial TGACv1_271859_3DS: 46,873–53,915
76 TRIAE_CS42_3DS_TGACv1_272095_AA0914550 443 1 5.5 48.2 Chloroplast Cytoplasmic TGACv1_272095_3DS: 18,456–20,253
77 TRIAE_CS42_3DS_TGACv1_272144_AA0915540 380 2 5.8 42.2 Cytoplasmic TGACv1_272144_3DS: 15,466–17,879
78 TRIAE_CS42_3DS_TGACv1_272561_AA0922330 498 1 5.7 53.7 Cytoplasmic Mitochondrial Chloroplast TGACv1_272561_3DS: 42,311–44,165
79 TRIAE_CS42_3DS_TGACv1_274000_AA0934260 484 1 5.3 51.8 Cytoplasmic TGACv1_274000_3DS: 16,535–18,425
80 TRIAE_CS42_4AL_TGACv1_288576_AA0952450 503 2 5.4 56.2 Chloroplast Mitochondrial Cytoplasmic TGACv1_288576_4AL: 121,655–123,785
81 TRIAE_CS42_4AL_TGACv1_291270_AA0993350 455 1 5.8 47 Chloroplast TGACv1_291270_4AL: 21,446–23,100
82 TRIAE_CS42_4AL_TGACv1_291728_AA0996300 507 1 4.9 54.4 Chloroplast Cytoplasmic TGACv1_291728_4AL: 4996–7190
83 TRIAE_CS42_4AL_TGACv1_292113_AA0997730 498 1 8.7 54.5 Mitochondrial TGACv1_292113_4AL: 17,011–18,815
84 TRIAE_CS42_4AL_TGACv1_292676_AA0999440 506 1 5 54.5 Chloroplast Cytoplasmic TGACv1_292676_4AL: 10,676–12,740
85 TRIAE_CS42_4AL_TGACv1_293019_AA1000030 452 1 6.6 49.7 Mitochondrial Cytoplasmic TGACv1_293019_4AL: 8872–10,875
86 TRIAE_CS42_4BL_TGACv1_320707_AA1046800 359 1 5.5 39.7 PlasmaMembrane Cytoplasmic TGACv1_320707_4BL: 6020–7485
87 TRIAE_CS42_4BS_TGACv1_327950_AA1079620 576 1 8.4 62.3 PlasmaMembrane Mitochondrial TGACv1_327950_4BS: 204,456–207,103
88 TRIAE_CS42_4BS_TGACv1_329322_AA1100160 455 1 6.1 47.2 Chloroplast TGACv1_329322_4BS: 51,826–53,691
89 TRIAE_CS42_4BS_TGACv1_329455_AA1101520 461 1 6.5 49.8 Chloroplast Cytoplasmic TGACv1_329455_4BS: 26,226–28,193
90 TRIAE_CS42_4BS_TGACv1_329471_AA1101760 567 1 7.2 61.6 PlasmaMembrane TGACv1_329471_4BS: 21,537–26,265
91 TRIAE_CS42_4BS_TGACv1_332581_AA1110480 461 1 5.8 49.5 Chloroplast Cytoplasmic PlasmaMembrane TGACv1_332581_4BS: 1227–3355
92 TRIAE_CS42_4DL_TGACv1_343563_AA1136610 474 1 5.4 51.3 Chloroplast TGACv1_343563_4DL: 21,876–23,872
93 TRIAE_CS42_4DL_TGACv1_344211_AA1144960 482 1 5.6 52.4 Chloroplast TGACv1_344211_4DL: 9685–11,555
94 TRIAE_CS42_5AL_TGACv1_374728_AA1207660 491 1 6 53.4 Cytoplasmic TGACv1_374728_5AL: 108,276–110,700
95 TRIAE_CS42_5AL_TGACv1_375188_AA1217460 429 1 5.9 46.3 Cytoplasmic Chloroplast PlasmaMembrane TGACv1_375188_5AL: 37,326–38,987
96 TRIAE_CS42_5AL_TGACv1_375684_AA1225590 475 2 5.8 51.2 Cytoplasmic Chloroplast TGACv1_375684_5AL: 54,671–56,869
97 TRIAE_CS42_5AL_TGACv1_375893_AA1228550 461 1 6.1 49.4 Mitochondrial TGACv1_375893_5AL: 47,896–49,580
98 TRIAE_CS42_5AL_TGACv1_375929_AA1229020 476 1 5.6 51.7 PlasmaMembrane TGACv1_375929_5AL: 57,318–59,915
99 TRIAE_CS42_5AL_TGACv1_376019_AA1230850 491 1 5.8 52.5 Cytoplasmic Mitochondrial TGACv1_376019_5AL: 40,796–42,980
100 TRIAE_CS42_5AL_TGACv1_377811_AA1249610 472 1 5.8 51.9 Chloroplast TGACv1_377811_5AL: 10,736–13,180
101 TRIAE_CS42_5BL_TGACv1_404184_AA1288910 490 1 5 53.3 Chloroplast TGACv1_404184_5BL: 196,689–198,409
102 TRIAE_CS42_5BL_TGACv1_404184_AA1288920 490 1 5.5 53.3 Chloroplast TGACv1_404184_5BL: 293,989–296,149
103 TRIAE_CS42_5BL_TGACv1_404233_AA1291500 506 1 5.3 54.9 Cytoplasmic TGACv1_404233_5BL: 154,317–156,325
104 TRIAE_CS42_5BL_TGACv1_404244_AA1291960 470 1 5.6 50.6 Cytoplasmic TGACv1_404244_5BL: 82,335–84,305
105 TRIAE_CS42_5BL_TGACv1_404293_AA1294180 497 1 5.7 53.7 Cytoplasmic Chloroplast TGACv1_404293_5BL: 93,246–95,160
106 TRIAE_CS42_5BL_TGACv1_404294_AA1294310 477 1 5.9 50.3 Chloroplast TGACv1_404294_5BL: 185,737–187,835
107 TRIAE_CS42_5BL_TGACv1_404418_AA1299240 471 1 5.6 50.8 Chloroplast Cytoplasmic TGACv1_404418_5BL: 207,022–208,895
108 TRIAE_CS42_5BL_TGACv1_405759_AA1334850 464 1 5.8 50.4 Mitochondrial PlasmaMembrane TGACv1_405759_5BL: 73,581–75,127
109 TRIAE_CS42_5BL_TGACv1_406257_AA1343160 473 1 6.1 51.2 Mitochondrial TGACv1_406257_5BL: 33,956–36,228
110 TRIAE_CS42_5BL_TGACv1_406579_AA1347330 491 3 5.4 53.3 Chloroplast Cytoplasmic TGACv1_406579_5BL: 19,551–21,635
111 TRIAE_CS42_5BL_TGACv1_406904_AA1351330 457 1 6.1 49.4 Chloroplast TGACv1_406904_5BL: 33,027–34,745
112 TRIAE_CS42_5BL_TGACv1_408090_AA1361610 374 1 5.3 40.7 Cytoplasmic TGACv1_408090_5BL: 6001–9585
113 TRIAE_CS42_5BS_TGACv1_424806_AA1391870 444 1 6.2 48.3 PlasmaMembrane Chloroplast TGACv1_424806_5BS: 5556–7050
114 TRIAE_CS42_5DL_TGACv1_433291_AA1408500 490 1 5.1 52.4 PlasmaMembrane Chloroplast TGACv1_433291_5DL: 25,092–26,905
115 TRIAE_CS42_5DL_TGACv1_434244_AA1432540 456 1 4.8 50.3 Chloroplast Cytoplasmic TGACv1_434244_5DL: 7506–11,405
116 TRIAE_CS42_5DL_TGACv1_435855_AA1455600 491 3 5.4 53.5 Chloroplast Cytoplasmic TGACv1_435855_5DL: 4016–6117
117 TRIAE_CS42_5DL_TGACv1_436083_AA1457870 455 2 5.6 50 Cytoplasmic TGACv1_436083_5DL:20522–22,605
118 TRIAE_CS42_5DS_TGACv1_456986_AA1480690 506 3 5.1 54.6 Chloroplast TGACv1_456986_5DS: 56,363–58,465
119 TRIAE_CS42_5DS_TGACv1_457896_AA1490570 454 1 6.5 49.3 PlasmaMembrane Chloroplast TGACv1_457896_5DS: 16,778–18,475
120 TRIAE_CS42_6AL_TGACv1_471580_AA1511220 492 1 5.8 53.3 Chloroplast Cytoplasmic TGACv1_471580_6AL: 48,286–50,301
121 TRIAE_CS42_6AL_TGACv1_472815_AA1526300 492 1 5.2 53.7 Cytoplasmic TGACv1_472815_6AL: 30,598–36,845
122 TRIAE_CS42_6AL_TGACv1_473165_AA1529140 486 2 5.6 53.1 Chloroplast TGACv1_473165_6AL: 22,571–24,615
123 TRIAE_CS42_6AS_TGACv1_486256_AA1558890 515 1 5.9 56.4 Chloroplast TGACv1_486256_6AS: 20,827–22,845
124 TRIAE_CS42_6AS_TGACv1_486559_AA1562640 480 1 5.4 52.6 Chloroplast TGACv1_486559_6AS: 45,174–47,285
125 TRIAE_CS42_6BL_TGACv1_499376_AA1580390 485 1 5.3 53.3 Chloroplast Cytoplasmic TGACv1_499376_6BL: 125,626–127,400
126 TRIAE_CS42_6BL_TGACv1_499650_AA1588270 377 1 5.9 40.6 Chloroplast TGACv1_499650_6BL: 164,606–166,056
127 TRIAE_CS42_6BL_TGACv1_499908_AA1594400 483 1 5.1 53.3 Cytoplasmic TGACv1_499908_6BL: 62,922–65,065
128 TRIAE_CS42_6BL_TGACv1_500434_AA1604570 464 1 6.2 50.1 Cytoplasmic TGACv1_500434_6BL:47486–50,072
129 TRIAE_CS42_6BL_TGACv1_500839_AA1610500 490 1 4.9 53.2 Cytoplasmic TGACv1_500839_6BL: 69,656–71,577
130 TRIAE_CS42_6BL_TGACv1_502282_AA1624090 484 1 5.3 53.2 Cytoplasmic TGACv1_502282_6BL: 7757–9575
131 TRIAE_CS42_6BS_TGACv1_513285_AA1637340 496 1 5.3 52.3 Chloroplast TGACv1_513285_6BS: 53,840–59,465
132 TRIAE_CS42_6BS_TGACv1_513359_AA1638830 478 1 5 51.8 Chloroplast Cytoplasmic TGACv1_513359_6BS: 87,396–89,178
133 TRIAE_CS42_6BS_TGACv1_513952_AA1652850 462 1 6.1 49.1 Mitochondrial Chloroplast TGACv1_513952_6BS: 89,206–91,232
134 TRIAE_CS42_6BS_TGACv1_514318_AA1658270 493 1 4.8 52.3 Cytoplasmic Chloroplast TGACv1_514318_6BS: 26,417–28,435
135 TRIAE_CS42_6DL_TGACv1_526838_AA1693090 511 1 10.3 57.2 Nuclear TGACv1_526838_6DL: 83,730–85,630
136 TRIAE_CS42_6DL_TGACv1_526838_AA1693100 527 1 5.5 57.5 Cytoplasmic TGACv1_526838_6DL: 91,545–93,815
137 TRIAE_CS42_6DL_TGACv1_527354_AA1702670 479 1 5.8 51.7 Chloroplast PlasmaMembrane Cytoplasmic TGACv1_527354_6DL: 31,226–34,990
138 TRIAE_CS42_6DL_TGACv1_528544_AA1714910 459 1 5.8 49.6 Cytoplasmic TGACv1_528544_6DL: 22,658–24,474
139 TRIAE_CS42_6DL_TGACv1_528747_AA1715930 388 1 5.2 43.7 Cytoplasmic TGACv1_528747_6DL: 19,746–21,729
140 TRIAE_CS42_6DL_TGACv1_529217_AA1717790 537 2 6.7 59 Mitochondrial TGACv1_529217_6DL: 7806–10,055
141 TRIAE_CS42_6DS_TGACv1_542680_AA1727420 511 1 7.3 55.4 Mitochondrial TGACv1_542680_6DS: 110,916–113,054
142 TRIAE_CS42_6DS_TGACv1_542696_AA1728130 480 1 5.5 52.3 Chloroplast Cytoplasmic TGACv1_542696_6DS: 29,236–31,123
143 TRIAE_CS42_6DS_TGACv1_543630_AA1742350 484 2 5.3 53 Chloroplast Cytoplasmic TGACv1_543630_6DS: 21,813–23,926
144 TRIAE_CS42_6DS_TGACv1_543780_AA1744110 496 1 4.8 52.8 Cytoplasmic Chloroplast TGACv1_543780_6DS: 23,657–25,745
145 TRIAE_CS42_7AL_TGACv1_556001_AA1752070 731 2 8.8 76.5 PlasmaMembrane Mitochondrial TGACv1_556001_7AL: 5064–14,615
146 TRIAE_CS42_7AL_TGACv1_556001_AA1752080 460 2 5.5 50.7 Chloroplast TGACv1_556001_7AL: 63,295–65,765
147 TRIAE_CS42_7AL_TGACv1_556054_AA1753810 488 1 5.7 53.3 Cytoplasmic Chloroplast IWGSC_CSS_7AL_4383366: 4–1333
148 TRIAE_CS42_7AL_TGACv1_556712_AA1769470 419 1 6 45 Chloroplast PlasmaMembrane Cytoplasmic TGACv1_556712_7AL: 76,829–78,415
149 TRIAE_CS42_7AL_TGACv1_558513_AA1793890 449 1 5.5 49.3 PlasmaMembrane TGACv1_558513_7AL: 9716–12,339
150 TRIAE_CS42_7AL_TGACv1_559924_AA1801280 467 2 6.1 49.9 Chloroplast PlasmaMembrane TGACv1_559924_7AL: 15,613–17,418
151 TRIAE_CS42_7AS_TGACv1_570575_AA1837870 507 1 5.5 54.7 Cytoplasmic TGACv1_570575_7AS: 49,636–52,320
152 TRIAE_CS42_7AS_TGACv1_571539_AA1848450 469 1 5.5 49.9 Chloroplast TGACv1_571539_7AS: 11,854–13,474
153 TRIAE_CS42_7AS_TGACv1_573368_AA1852750 442 1 5.6 47.6 Chloroplast Mitochondrial TGACv1_573368_7AS: 816–2486
154 TRIAE_CS42_7BL_TGACv1_576822_AA1856120 402 1 6.9 44 Chloroplast TGACv1_576822_7BL: 170,238–172,395
155 TRIAE_CS42_7BL_TGACv1_576994_AA1862270 463 1 5.4 50.9 Cytoplasmic PlasmaMembrane Mitochondrial TGACv1_576994_7BL: 67,842–69,505
156 TRIAE_CS42_7BL_TGACv1_577254_AA1870230 252 1 4.9 26.9 Cytoplasmic Chloroplast Extracellular TGACv1_577254_7BL: 76,415–77,415
157 TRIAE_CS42_7BL_TGACv1_577547_AA1878460 420 1 7.2 45.2 PlasmaMembrane Chloroplast TGACv1_577547_7BL: 29,086–30,601
158 TRIAE_CS42_7BL_TGACv1_579457_AA1907470 484 1 5.2 52.7 Chloroplast TGACv1_579457_7BL: 41,356–43,187
159 TRIAE_CS42_7BS_TGACv1_591871_AA1924040 397 1 5.1 29.3 Cytoplasmic Chloroplast TGACv1_591871_7BS: 76,246–80,992
160 TRIAE_CS42_7BS_TGACv1_592186_AA1932820 529 1 5 56.5 Chloroplast Cytoplasmic TGACv1_592186_7BS: 90,491–92,505
161 TRIAE_CS42_7BS_TGACv1_592546_AA1940110 482 1 6.1 52 PlasmaMembrane Mitochondrial TGACv1_592546_7BS: 65,246–67,190
162 TRIAE_CS42_7BS_TGACv1_593204_AA1949410 497 1 5.3 53.4 Chloroplast TGACv1_593204_7BS: 13,157–15,085
163 TRIAE_CS42_7BS_TGACv1_593321_AA1950440 465 1 5.8 50 PlasmaMembrane TGACv1_593321_7BS: 38,716–40,476
164 TRIAE_CS42_7BS_TGACv1_593432_AA1951550 470 1 5.8 51.4 Chloroplast TGACv1_593432_7BS: 27,150–29,205
165 TRIAE_CS42_7DL_TGACv1_603213_AA1978480 481 1 5.5 52.2 Chloroplast TGACv1_603213_7DL: 60,111–61,985
166 TRIAE_CS42_7DL_TGACv1_603403_AA1982990 421 1 5.4 43.7 Chloroplast PlasmaMembrane TGACv1_603403_7DL: 64,856–66,500
167 TRIAE_CS42_7DL_TGACv1_603951_AA1991550 458 1 5.3 49.8 Chloroplast PlasmaMembrane TGACv1_603951_7DL: 21,366–23,048
168 TRIAE_CS42_7DL_TGACv1_603951_AA1991560 453 1 5.3 49.1 Chloroplast PlasmaMembrane TGACv1_603951_7DL: 27,012–28,816
169 TRIAE_CS42_7DL_TGACv1_604766_AA2001560 438 1 5.6 47 Mitochondrial Chloroplast TGACv1_604766_7DL: 35,976–38,150
170 TRIAE_CS42_7DS_TGACv1_621774_AA2025670 478 1 5.2 50.8 Chloroplast TGACv1_621774_7DS: 76,896–78,775
171 TRIAE_CS42_7DS_TGACv1_622710_AA2044230 489 2 5.3 54.5 Cytoplasmic TGACv1_622710_7DS: 15,926–17,908
172 TRIAE_CS42_7DS_TGACv1_623144_AA2050000 447 1 5.8 48.4 Cytoplasmic Chloroplast TGACv1_623144_7DS: 33,046–34,980
173 TRIAE_CS42_7DS_TGACv1_624130_AA2059090 488 1 5.9 52.5 Mitochondrial PlasmaMembrane TGACv1_624130_7DS: 15,066–16,815
174 TRIAE_CS42_7DS_TGACv1_626811_AA2066910 480 1 5.7 50.7 PlasmaMembrane Chloroplast TGACv1_626811_7DS: 3831–5558
175 TRIAE_CS42_U_TGACv1_642463_AA2118110 489 1 6.2 52.4 Chloroplast TGACv1_642463_U: 55,580–57,595
176 TRIAE_CS42_U_TGACv1_642555_AA2119560 296 1 5.3 31.8 Chloroplast Cytoplasmic TGACv1_642555_U: 31,767–32,735
177 TRIAE_CS42_U_TGACv1_642847_AA2124040 479 1 5.9 51.5 Chloroplast PlasmaMembrane TGACv1_642847_U: 26,547–28,358
178 TRIAE_CS42_U_TGACv1_644603_AA2140590 673 1 7.6 72.7 Chloroplast TGACv1_644603_U: 19,926–22,260
179 TRIAE_CS42_U_TGACv1_658309_AA2151750 368 1 8.3 40.7 Chloroplast TGACv1_658309_U: 1–1355

Phylogenetic analysis of UGTs in wheat

The identified UGTs were subjected to phylogenetic analysis to see their grouping pattern and genetic relationships based on the 18 Arabidopsis UGTs sequences (Additional file 3: Table S2) [20, 22]. The wheat UGTs were clustered into 16 major phylogenetic groups, with a lack of Arabidopsis conserved phylogenetic group K (Fig. 1). The 14 UGT groups (A-N) described initially in Arabidopsis are considered as conserved groups, and all these groups except group K were found in this study [47]. The number of UGTs in each group varied, as group E, the largest of the groups, contained 37 UGT members, while group N, the smallest of the groups, had only one member. The three new groups identified in our study were O, P and Q containing 3, 13 and 36 UGT members, respectively.

Fig. 1.

Fig. 1

Phylogenetic analysis of bread wheat UGT family genes. The MUSCLE and MEGA 7 softwares were used for the sequence alignment and construction of the phylogenetic tree using the full length sequences of 179 wheat UGTs and 18 Arabidopsis UGTs

Genome distribution of wheat UGT genes

Based on the current wheat genome annotation information, the genetic mapping of UGT genes on wheat chromosomes was further investigated (Fig. 2). A total of 51, 67, and 61 UGT genes were non-randomly distributed in the A, B and D sub-genomes respectively (Table 1; Fig. 2). The number of UGTs varied from a minimum of 2 UGTs per chromosome to a maximum of 15 UGTs per chromosome among all the sub-genomes. Within the sub-genome A, chromosomes 6 and 2 had the minimum (5) and maximum (10) number of UGTs, respectively, and within sub-genome B, chromosomes 1 and 4 had the minimum (6) UGTs each, and its chromosome 5 had the maximum number (13) of UGTs.

Fig. 2.

Fig. 2

Chromosome distribution of 179 wheat UGT genes. The wheat UGTs were distributed among seven chromosomes and each of the 3 sub-genomes A, B and D. The different colored bars represent a chromosome and the name of each chromosome along with its sub-genome is mentioned, on top of each bar

Structure of wheat UGT genes

The exon-intron structure is important to know the possibility of existence of alternative isoforms of a gene product that if so, can contribute to the complexity of cellular constitution and compartmentalization. The UGTs identified in this study were searched for intron existence, intron size and phases of introns (Additional file 4: Table S3). Among the 179 UGT genes identified in this study, 81 UGTs (44.5%) contained introns and among the intron containing UGTs 60, 17 and 4 had 1, 2 and 3 introns, respectively (Additional file 4: Table S3). After mapping the introns to the amino acid sequence alignment, at least 10 intron insertion events numbered I-1 to I-10, as per their position in the protein sequence, were observed (Fig. 3). The intron (I-4) was the most widespread intron found across 38 sequences of wheat UGTs spread across groups A, B, D, E, F, G, H, I, J and Q. The phylogenetic group Q sequences had the highest number (27) of intron insertions, but only 6 different types of introns were found in this group; on the other hand, group A and D shared the highest number (7) of different types of intron insertions (Additional file 4: Table S3). A variable number of intron phases were observed for the UGT protein sequences showing abundance of 0 and 1 phases and scarcity of introns in phase 2. The most abundant phase was 0 (48%), followed by phase 1 (42%) and only 15% were in phase 2 (Additional file 4: Table S3).

Fig. 3.

Fig. 3

Distribution of introns among 81 wheat UGT genes. The map represents the intron positions (inverted triangles) and phases (different colors of the inverted triangles) on the amino acid (thick grey lines) residues encoded by the UGT genes. The red, green and blue colors represent the 0, 1 and 2 phases of introns, respectively. The scale on top represents the amino acid count of the UGT genes, and the numbers on the bottom represent the identity of each intron

Expression profiles of wheat UGT genes in various tissues at different developmental stages

To study the expression profiles of UGT genes during the life cycle of the wheat plant, the relative expression of UGT genes in the root, shoot, leaf, spike and grains each at three developmental stages were analyzed as per the Zadoks scale [44]. Using the online high-throughput RNA sequences data, the expression profiles of probes representing 109 wheat UGT genes were found and were further depicted as a heat map (Fig. 4; Additional file 5: Table S4). The specific expression profile at different developmental stages revealed that most of the genes were expressed at a specific time in each tissue. Among all only nine genes showed extensive expression in almost all of the tissues but not in all the developmental stages and two of these genes TRIAE_CS42_1BL_TGACv1_032609_AA0132000 and TRIAE_CS42_4AL_TGACv1_288576_AA0952450 showed the highest expression level in most of the tissues. The expression of most UGT genes varied in each organ at different developmental time course, like in grain, leaf, spike and stem the highest expression occurred at the Z85, Z71, Z39 and Z65 stages, respectively (Fig. 4). It was also noted that the highest number of genes were expressed in roots followed by leaves, stem, grains and spikes. None of the genes, except one in spikes, two in stem and three in roots, showed the highest expression in all three developmental stages of these organs. Over all approximately 57% UGTs were showing relatively high expression in the life cycle of the wheat plant based on this data (Fig. 4).

Fig. 4.

Fig. 4

Expression profiles of wheat UGT genes in five different tissues at three different developmental stages. The different colors represent the abundance of the transcripts. The developmental stages are denoted using the Zadoks scale

Expression profiles of wheat UGT genes under Fusarium graminearum treatment

In the present study, expression patterns of the UGT genes in response to F. graminearum strains producing DON or not after 2 and 4 days after inoculation were investigated using the online Affymetrix wheat array data (GSE54554) to study the roles of UGT genes in response to FHB resistance. The expression profile of UGT genes at 2 and 4 days after infection (DAI) compared to the control plants showed a differential expression pattern under infected conditions (Fig. 5; Additional file 6: Table S5). One of the most remarkable observations was that the number of genes showing extensive expression during F. graminearum stress producing DON was almost double that of the number of genes expressed during F. graminearum stress without DON at both 2 DAI and 4 DAI. Among all only 10 genes showed relative higher up-regulation at all circumstances of 2 and 4 DAI except for the control plants, while on the other hand 5 genes were clearly down regulated at all circumstances after F. graminearum inoculation (Fig. 5).

Fig. 5.

Fig. 5

Relative expression profiles of wheat UGT genes during Fg-DON and Fg + DON treatment. The wheat spikes were inoculated with the F. graminearum strain that did not produce DON (Fg-DON) as well as with the F. graminearum strain that produced DON (Fg + DON), with water as the control. Relative expression potential of UGT genes is represented by the scale of different colors. The red or green colors represent the higher or lower relative abundance, respectively, of each transcript in each sample

Validation of the expression of UGT genes by RT-qPCR

We employed RT-qPCR to validate the expression profile of the UGT genes in different tissues as well as during F. graminearum inoculation of spikes at different time intervals in wheat. A total of 6 UGT transcript sequences were selected to be used for expression profiling in the root, stem, spike and grains and were further employed for expression profiling of the UGT genes in F. graminearum inoculated spikes. The 6 UGT genes were TRIAE_CS42_4DL_TGACv1_343563_AA1136610, TRIAE_CS42_3B_TGACv1_228792_AA0827590, TRIAE_CS42_1AL_TGACv1_000696_AA0017290, TRIAE_CS42_3DS_TGACv1_274000_AA0934260, TRIAE_CS42_3DL_TGACv1_251733_AA0884380 and TRIAE_CS42_6BL_TGACv1_499376_AA1580390. The leaf tissues relative to the root and stem showed high expression of the 6 selected genes, in addition to a variable expression of the same genes in the leaf tissues (Fig. 6a). The spikelets at three different developmental stages did not show any noticeable expression of the tested genes (Fig. 6a). The transcript accumulation increased in grains with the development of grain maturity and highest expression was noted at the most mature stage (Fig. 6a). When the spikelets were inoculated with F. graminearum at two different time intervals, the results clearly indicated the extensive expression of the selected genes in F. graminearum inoculated spikes compared to the control plants (Fig. 6b-g). The gene TRIAE_CS42_TGACv1_228792_AA0827590 gave the highest relative expression at both time intervals in the F. graminearum inoculated spikes compared to the rest of the genes tested (Fig. 6f).

Fig. 6.

Fig. 6

Validation of the expression level of UGTs by qRT-PCR analysis. Expression confirmation assay of the six selected UGT genes were performed in various wheat tissues at different time intervals (a) and under F. graminearum treatment (b-g)

Discussion

The advent of genome sequencing and the availability of global genomic databases have made it possible to examine complex genomes such as wheat in much greater detail. The identification and validation of FHB resistance genes in wheat is one of the major focuses in the current era of molecular investigations, pertaining to high FHB related economic losses and grain contamination due to DON accumulation. Glycosylation is one of the most important modification and detoxification phenomenon of plant secondary metabolites [15, 48]. Glycosylation, mediated by plants’ indigenous UGTs, in addition to various cellular process and maintenance of cellular homeostasis, also plays a potential role in DON detoxification and FHB resistance. UGTs have been identified and analyzed in a few plant species such as Arabidopsis, flax, maize and cotton; however, they have not been identified on a large scale in wheat except in a few individual reports [14, 15, 20, 22].

In the present study we identified 179 putative family-1 UGT genes in wheat based on the Chinese Spring (CS42) reference sequence [40]. The exact number of family-1 UGT genes may be alterable in different wheat cultivars as substantial sequence differences such as nucleotides presence/absence are prevalent among cultivars including wheat. The 179 UGT protein sequences were further subjected to multiple sequence alignment and phylogenetic analysis. The multiple sequence alignment of wheat UGTs clearly showed high sequence divergence, especially at the N-terminus, revealing the diverse roles that UGTs play in the life of plants [15]. In this study, the phylogenetic analysis resulted in 16 different (A-Q) phylogenetic groups with one exception. The conserved group K previously described in other studies was absent in our findings, similarly in another study conserved group C was also not found in Gossypium hirsutum [15]. The loss of a phylogenetic group during evolution suggests either the loss of function or replacement by other factors [15]. In our study group E contained the highest number (37) of UGT genes leading to 21% of the total UGT genes identified in wheat. In Arabidopsis, flax and maize group E had 17, 22 and 35 UGT members, respectively, showing the expansion of group E in different plant species [21, 22]. The new groups O, P and Q were found in this investigation. Group Q, first discovered in maize having only 7 members, while in cotton this group was not found; on contrary, our study showed that group Q was not only found but was the 2nd largest group of UGTs in wheat consisting of 36 members [15, 22].

The UGTs distribution among the chromosomes showed a dispersion of UGTs across all the chromosomes of all the three wheat genomes. A similar pattern of UGTs dispersion was also observed in Arabidopsis and among the three species of cotton [15, 47]. Quantitative trait loci (QTLs) for the resistance to Fusarium head blight have also been found on all wheat chromosomes, and the most stable QTLs related to FHB resistance are supposed to be located on chromosome 3B, 5A and 6B [49], and here we have shown that these chromosomes have as many as 9, 7 and 10 family-1 UGTs, respectively, but the relationship with these QTLs and the exact role of these UGTs in resistance to FHB needs to be further studied. Introns, although do not contribute to protein sequences but their position and phases do affect the protein diversity and overall cellular functioning. Introns relative positions can predict certain clues like how genes and their corresponding proteins evolve and further contribute to the diversification of gene families [22, 50]. A total of 10 different intron insertions were identified in this study, while in other crops such as flax and maize 7 and 9 different introns were found, respectively [20, 22]. Among the 179 identified wheat UGTs, 55% lacked introns which is in accordance with previous reports on Arabidopsis, flax and maize of which 58%, 55% and 60% lack introns, respectively [20, 22, 47]. In our study, intron 5, found across phylogenetic groups A, B, D, E, F, H, I, J and Q, is considered as the most widespread and oldest intron. Similarly, intron 2 in Arabidopsis found in groups F-K, intron 3 and 4 in flax found in groups F-K, and intron 5 in maize found in groups F-J and N are considered the oldest and most widespread introns [20, 22, 47]. Consistent with other findings, we also observed the abundance of phase 0 and 1 introns compared to phase 2 introns [22]. The existence of different UGTs has been shown in various sub-cellular locations such as cytoplasm, vacuoles, endoplasmic reticulum as well as the membrane [5154]. DON accumulates in the cytoplasm, plasma membrane and chloroplasts of plant cells [55], and the UGT protein sequences identified in our study also have divergent sub-cellular localization and might lower DON toxicity if confronted in these organelles.

To better understand the roles of the wheat UGTs during the life cycle of wheat, we performed an expression analysis of online universal microarray data in certain tissues at different developmental stages. The microarray results have revealed probes that specifically match 61% of the identified wheat UGTs, and most of these genes have been expressed at least in a certain tissue during the life cycle of the wheat plant. Similarly, in other crops such as maize and flax it has been shown that 82% and 73% of the corresponding genes showed expression [20, 22]. The genes analyzed in different tissues, as per the microarray results, showed that 13%, 29%, 35%, 9% and 15% of the UGT genes displayed extensive overexpression in grains, leaf, root, spikes and stem, respectively, during all the various stages studied. Using selected UGT gene sequences, RT-qPCR also revealed a differential expression profile in most of the growth stages in certain wheat tissues, suggesting that the UGTs are opting for preferential expression in particular organs during the life cycle of the wheat plant.

FHB is a menace for agriculture crops, especially for wheat growing in the humid regions of the world, and current focus has been placed on understanding the molecular mechanisms behind FHB resistance and the development of germplasms resistant to FHB. It is important to outline the role of the UGTs identified in this study, if any, during the F. graminearum incidence that could further be utilized for the development of resistance against F. graminearum stress. As many other investigators have previously shown the involvement UGTs in host resistance against FHB both in wheat as well as in barley [33, 37]. In our study, the F. graminearum stress responsive genes analyzed using online microarray data revealed some interesting results that were further validated by expression analysis of selected UGT genes using RT-qPCR. The wheat spikes were inoculated with a mutated F. graminearum strain that does not produce DON (Fg-DON) as well as with an F. graminearum strain that produces DON (Fg + DON), with water as the control. An average of 27 and 59% of the UGT genes were up regulated after Fg-DON and Fg + DON inoculation, respectively, compared with the control at 2 DAI. On the other hand, an average of 32 and 69% of the UGT genes displayed up-regulation in the Fg-DON and Fg + DON inoculated plants, respectively, at 4 DAI compared to the control plants. The up-regulation of a high number of UGTs during Fg + DON inoculation is an indication of the wheat indigenous UGTs based DON responsive defense mechanism against FHB. The data also clearly show an extensive up-regulation of a high number of genes on the 4th day after Fg + DON inoculation, showing an increase in response as DON accumulation increases. These results were further confirmed through RT-qPCR amplification of 6 selected UGT genes, where the highest expression was evident at 4 DAI. These genes and validation of the microarray data using a resistant genotype such as Sumai 3 will be the subject of our ongoing research to further dissect the wheat indigenous defense mechanisms and to identify the resistance source underlying F. graminearum infection and DON detoxification.

Conclusions

This study gave a useful insight into the phylogenetic structure, distribution, and expression patterns of family-1 UDP glycosyltransferases of wheat. The results also offer a foundation for future work aimed at elucidating the molecular mechanisms underlying F. graminearum resistance and DON detoxification in one of the world’s most important cereal crops.

Additional files

Additional file 1: (10KB, xlsx)

Table S1. List of the selected UGT genes and their primers sequences used for the RT-qPCR expression assay. (XLSX 9 kb)

Additional file 2: (39KB, jpg)

Figure S1. The abundance of wheat UGT genes as per their amino acid sequence sizes. (JPG 38 kb)

Additional file 3: (10KB, xlsx)

Table S2. List of the Arabidopsis UGT genes used in this study for the identification of the phylogenetic groups. (XLSX 9 kb)

Additional file 4: (35.3KB, xlsx)

Table S3. The intron information of the wheat UGT genes. (XLSX 35 kb)

Additional file 5: (20.9KB, xlsx)

Table S4. Expression data of UGT genes in five different tissues at different developmental stages. (XLSX 20 kb)

Additional file 6: (35.8KB, xlsx)

Table S5. Expression data of UGT genes after F. graminearum inoculation. (XLSX 35 kb)

Acknowledgments

Funding

This work was partially supported by the National Key Project for the Research and Development of China (2016YFE0112900, 2016YFD0100500), China Agricultural Research System Program (CARS-03), National Natural Science Foundation of China (31561143004), Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu province, China (BK20170605) and European Union Horizon 2020 Mycokey project (EU678781).

Availability of data and materials

The datasets supporting the conclusions of this article are included within the article and its Additional files.

Abbreviations

DAI

Days after infection

DON

Deoxynivalenol

Fg

Fusarium graminearum

FHB

Fusarium head blight

GT

Glycosyltransferase enzymes

PSPG

Plant secondary product glycosyltransferase

QTL

Quantitative trait loci

UGT

UDP glycosyltransferases

Authors’ contributions

HM and YH designed the experiments. YH and DA carried out most of the experiments and analyzed the data. XZ, YZ, LW and PJ assisted in analyzing the data. DA, YH and HM wrote the article. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Footnotes

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12870-018-1286-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Contributor Information

Yi He, Email: heyi_yihe@163.com.

Dawood Ahmad, Email: dawood@aup.edu.pk.

Xu Zhang, Email: xuzhang@jaas.ac.cn.

Yu Zhang, Email: zhangyu2005.8@163.com.

Lei Wu, Email: wulei686@sina.com.

Peng Jiang, Email: hmjp2005@163.com.

Hongxiang Ma, Email: hongxiangma@163.com.

References

  • 1.Kosaka A, Manickavelu A, Kajihara D, Nakagawa H, Ban T. Altered gene expression profiles of wheat genotypes against Fusarium head blight. Toxins. 2015;7(2):604. doi: 10.3390/toxins7020604. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Boutigny AL, Richardforget F, Barreau C. Natural mechanisms for cereal resistance to the accumulation of Fusarium trichothecenes. Eur J Plant Pathol. 2008;121(4):411–423. doi: 10.1007/s10658-007-9266-x. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Pestka JJ, Zhou HR, Moon Y, Chung YJ. Cellular and molecular mechanisms for immune modulation by deoxynivalenol and other trichothecenes: unraveling a paradox. Toxicol Lett. 2004;153(1):61–73. doi: 10.1016/j.toxlet.2004.04.023. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Bai GH, Desjardins AE, Plattner RD. Deoxynivalenol-nonproducing fusarium graminearum causes initial infection, but does not cause disease spread in wheat spikes. Mycopathologia. 2002;153(2):91–98. doi: 10.1023/A:1014419323550. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Ovando-Martinez M, Ozsisli B, Anderson J, Whitney K, Ohm JB, Simsek S. Analysis of deoxynivalenol and deoxynivalenol-3-glucoside in hard red spring wheat inoculated with Fusarium graminearum. Toxins. 2013;5(12):2522–2532. doi: 10.3390/toxins5122522. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Poppenberger B, Berthiller F, Lucyshyn D, Sieberer T, Schuhmacher R, Krska R, Kuchler K, Glossl J, Luschnig C, Adam G. Detoxification of the Fusarium mycotoxin deoxynivalenol by a UDP-glucosyltransferase from Arabidopsis thaliana. J Biol Chem. 2003;278(48):47905–47914. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M307552200. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Lemmens M, Scholz U, Berthiller F, Dall'Asta C, Koutnik A, Schuhmacher R, Adam G, Buerstmayr H, Mesterhazy A, Krska R, et al. The ability to detoxify the mycotoxin deoxynivalenol colocalizes with a major quantitative trait locus for Fusarium head blight resistance in wheat. Mol Plant-Microbe Interact. 2005;18(12):1318–1324. doi: 10.1094/MPMI-18-1318. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Karlovsky P. Biological detoxification of the mycotoxin deoxynivalenol and its use in genetically engineered crops and feed additives. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2011;91(3):491–504. doi: 10.1007/s00253-011-3401-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Vogt T, Jones P. Glycosyltransferases in plant natural product synthesis: characterization of a supergene family. Trends Plant Sci. 2000;5(9):380–386. doi: 10.1016/S1360-1385(00)01720-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Muir T. Posttranslational modification of proteins: expanding nature's inventory. Angew Chem Int Edit. 2006;7:1623–1624. [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Mackenzie PI, Owens IS, Burchell B, Bock KW, Bairoch A, Belanger A, Fournel-Gigleux S, Green M, Hum DW, Iyanagi T, et al. The UDP glycosyltransferase gene superfamily: recommended nomenclature update based on evolutionary divergence. Pharmacogenetics. 1997;7(4):255–269. doi: 10.1097/00008571-199708000-00001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Pasquet JC, Changenet V, Macadre C, Boex-Fontvieille E, Soulhat C, Bouchabke-Coussa O, Dalmais M, Atanasova-Penichon V, Bendahmane A, Saindrenan P, et al. A Brachypodium UDP-glycosyltransferase confers root tolerance to deoxynivalenol and resistance to Fusarium infection. Plant Physiol. 2016;172(1):559–574. doi: 10.1104/pp.16.00371. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Lairson LL, Henrissat B, Davies GJ, Withers SG. Glycosyltransferases: structures, functions, and mechanisms. Annu Rev Biochem. 2008;77:521–555. doi: 10.1146/annurev.biochem.76.061005.092322. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Yonekura-Sakakibara K, Hanada K. An evolutionary view of functional diversity in family 1 glycosyltransferases. Plant J. 2011;66(1):182–193. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-313X.2011.04493.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Huang J, Pang CY, Fan SL, Song MZ, Yu JW, Wei HL, Ma QF, Li LB, Zhang C, Yu SX. Genome-wide analysis of the family 1 glycosyltransferases in cotton. Mol Gen Genomics. 2015;290(5):1805–1818. doi: 10.1007/s00438-015-1040-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Paquette SM, Jensen K, Bak S. A web-based resource for the Arabidopsis P450, cytochromes b5, NADPH-cytochrome P450 reductases, and family 1 glycosyltransferases. Phytochemistry. 2009;70(17–18):1940–1947. doi: 10.1016/j.phytochem.2009.08.024. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Wu BP, Gao LX, Gao J, Xu YY, Liu HR, Cao XM, Zhang B, Chen KS. Genome-wide identification, expression patterns, and functional analysis of UDP glycosyltransferase family in peach (Prunus persica L. Batsch) Front Plant Sci. 2017;8:389. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2017.00389. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Yu J, Fan H, Dossa K, Wang Z, Tao K. Genome-wide analysis of UDP-glycosyltransferase super family in Brassica rapa and Brassica oleracea reveals its evolutionary history and functional characterization. BMC Genomics. 2017;18(1):474. doi: 10.1186/s12864-017-3844-x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Schweiger W, Pasquet JC, Nussbaumer T, Paris MP, Wiesenberger G, Macadré C, Ametz C, Berthiller F, Lemmens M, Saindrenan P. Functional characterization of two clusters of Brachypodium distachyon UDP-glycosyltransferases encoding putative deoxynivalenol detoxification genes. Mol Plant Microbe In. 2013;26(7):781. doi: 10.1094/MPMI-08-12-0205-R. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Barvkar VT, Pardeshi VC, Kale SM, Kadoo NY, Gupta VS. Phylogenomic analysis of UDP glycosyltransferase 1 multigene family in Linum usitatissimum identified genes with varied expression patterns. BMC Genomics. 2012;13:175. doi: 10.1186/1471-2164-13-175. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Caputi L, Malnoy M, Goremykin V, Nikiforova S, Martens S. A genome-wide phylogenetic reconstruction of family 1 UDP-glycosyltransferases revealed the expansion of the family during the adaptation of plants to life on land. Plant J. 2012;69(6):1030. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-313X.2011.04853.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Li YJ, Li P, Wang Y, Dong RR, Yu HM, Hou BK. Genome-wide identification and phylogenetic analysis of Family-1 UDP glycosyltransferases in maize (Zea mays) Planta. 2014;239(6):1265–1279. doi: 10.1007/s00425-014-2050-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Lim EK, Baldauf S, Li Y, Elias L, Worrall D, Spencer SP, Jackson RG, Taguchi G, Ross J, Bowles DJ. Evolution of substrate recognition across a multigene family of glycosyltransferases in Arabidopsis. Glycobiology. 2003;13(3):139–145. doi: 10.1093/glycob/cwg017. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Taguchi G, Imura H, Maeda Y, Kodaira R, Hayashida N, Shimosaka M, Okazaki M. Purification and characterization of UDP-glucose: hydroxycoumarin 7-O-glucosyltransferase, with broad substrate specificity from tobacco cultured cells. Plant Sci. 2000;157(1):105–112. doi: 10.1016/S0168-9452(00)00270-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Yonekura-Sakakibara K, Fukushima A, Nakabayashi R, Hanada K, Matsuda F, Sugawara S, Inoue E, Kuromori T, Ito T, Shinozaki K, et al. Two glycosyltransferases involved in anthocyanin modification delineated by transcriptome independent component analysis in Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant J. 2012;69(1):154–167. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-313X.2011.04779.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Song C, Zhao S, Hong X, Liu J, Schulenburg K, Schwab W. A UDP-glucosyltransferase functions in both acylphloroglucinol glucoside and anthocyanin biosynthesis in strawberry (Fragaria x ananassa) Plant J. 2016;85(6):730. doi: 10.1111/tpj.13140. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Cheng J, Wei GC, Zhou H, Gu C, Vimolmangkang S, Liao L, Han YP. Unraveling the mechanism underlying the glycosylation and methylation of anthocyanins in peach. Plant Physiol. 2014;166(2):1044–1058. doi: 10.1104/pp.114.246876. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Montefiori M, Espley RV, Stevenson D, Cooney J, Datson PM, Saiz A, Atkinson RG, Hellens RP, Allan AC. Identification and characterisation of F3GT1 and F3GGT1, two glycosyltransferases responsible for anthocyanin biosynthesis in red-fleshed kiwifruit (Actinidia chinensis) Plant J. 2011;65(1):106–118. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-313X.2010.04409.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Schweiger W, Boddu J, Shin S, Poppenberger B, Berthiller F, Lemmens M, Muehlbauer GJ, Adam G. Validation of a candidate deoxynivalenol-inactivating UDP-glucosyltransferase from barley by heterologous expression in yeast. Mol Plant Microbe In. 2010;23(7):977–986. doi: 10.1094/MPMI-23-7-0977. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Gardiner SA, Boddu J, Berthiller F, Hametner C, Stupar RM, Adam G, Muehlbauer GJ. Transcriptome analysis of the barley-deoxynivalenol interaction: evidence for a role of glutathione in deoxynivalenol detoxification. Mol Plant Microbe Interact. 2010;23(7):962–976. doi: 10.1094/MPMI-23-7-0962. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Shin S, Torres-Acosta JA, Heinen SJ, McCormick S, Lemmens M, Paris MPK, Berthiller F, Adam G, Muehlbauer GJ. Transgenic Arabidopsis thaliana expressing a barley UDP-glucosyltransferase exhibit resistance to the mycotoxin deoxynivalenol. J Exp Bot. 2012;63(13):4731–4740. doi: 10.1093/jxb/ers141. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Li X, Shin S, Heinen S, Dill-Macky R, Berthiller F, Nersesian N, Clemente T, McCormick S, Muehlbauer GJ. Transgenic wheat expressing a barley UDP-glucosyltransferase detoxifies deoxynivalenol and provides high levels of resistance to Fusarium graminearum. Mol Plant Microbe Interact. 2015;28(11):1237–1246. doi: 10.1094/MPMI-03-15-0062-R. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Li X, Michlmayr H, Schweiger W, Malachova A, Shin S, Huang YD, Dong YH, Wiesenberger G, McCormick S, Lemmens M, et al. A barley UDP-glucosyltransferase inactivates nivalenol and provides Fusarium head blight resistance in transgenic wheat. J Exp Bot. 2017;68(9):2187–2197. doi: 10.1093/jxb/erx109. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Xing LP, He LQ, Xiao J, Chen QG, Li MH, Shang Y, Zhu YF, Chen PD, Cao AZ, Wang XE. An UDP-glucosyltransferase gene from barley confers disease resistance to Fusarium head blight. Plant Mol Biol Rep. 2017;35(2):224–236. doi: 10.1007/s11105-016-1014-y. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Ma X, Du XY, Liu GJ, Yang ZD, Hou WQ, Wang HW, Feng DS, Li AF, Kong LR. Cloning and characterization of a novel UDP-glycosyltransferase gene induced by DON from wheat. J Integr Agr. 2015;14(5):830–838. doi: 10.1016/S2095-3119(14)60857-1. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Lin FY, Lu QX, Xu JH, Shi JR. Cloning and expression analysis of two salt and Fusarium graminearum stress associated UDP-glucosyltransferases genes in wheat. Hereditas. 2008;30(12):1608–1614. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1005.2008.01608. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Ma LL, Shang Y, Cao AZ, Qi ZJ, Xing LP, Chen PD, Liu DJ, Wang XE. Molecular cloning and characterization of an up-regulated UDP-glucosyltransferase gene induced by DON from Triticum aestivum L. cv. Wangshuibai. Mol Biol Rep. 2010;37(2):785–795. doi: 10.1007/s11033-009-9606-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Zhou XH, Wang K, Du LP, Liu YW, Lin ZS, Ye XG. Effects of the wheat UDP-glucosyltransferase gene TaUGT-B2 on agrobacterium-mediated plant transformation. Acta Physiol Plant. 2017;39(1). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11738-016-2317-1.
  • 39.Schweiger W, Steiner B, Ametz C, Siegwart G, Wiesenberger G, Berthiller F, Lemmens M, Jia HY, Adam G, Muehlbauer GJ, et al. Transcriptomic characterization of two major Fusarium resistance quantitative trait loci (QTLs), Fhb1 and Qfhs.Ifa-5A, identifies novel candidate genes. Mol Plant Pathol. 2013;14(8):772–785. doi: 10.1111/mpp.12048. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Clavijo BJ, Venturini L, Schudoma C, Accinelli GG, Kaithakottil G, Wright J, Borrill P, Kettleborough G, Heavens D, Chapman H, et al. An improved assembly and annotation of the allohexaploid wheat genome identifies complete families of agronomic genes and provides genomic evidence for chromosomal translocations. Genome Res. 2017;27(5):885–896. doi: 10.1101/gr.217117.116. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Artimo P, Jonnalagedda M, Arnold K, Baratin D, Csardi G, de Castro E, Duvaud S, Flegel V, Fortier A, Gasteiger E, et al. ExPASy: SIB bioinformatics resource portal. Nucleic Acids Res. 2012;40:W597–W603. doi: 10.1093/nar/gks400. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Yu CS, Chen YC, Lu CH, Hwang JK. Prediction of protein subcellular localization. Proteins. 2006;64(3):643–651. doi: 10.1002/prot.21018. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Kumar S, Stecher G, Tamura K. MEGA7: molecular evolutionary genetics analysis version 7.0 for bigger datasets. Mol Biol Evol. 2016;33(7):1870–1874. doi: 10.1093/molbev/msw054. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Pingault L, Choulet F, Alberti A, Glover N, Wincker P, Feuillet C, Paux E. Deep transcriptome sequencing provides new insights into the structural and functional organization of the wheat genome. Genome Biol. 2015;16:29. doi: 10.1186/s13059-015-0601-9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Zhang X, Zhou M, Ren L, Bai G, Ma H, Scholten OE, Guo P, Lu W. Molecular characterization of Fusarium head blight resistance from wheat variety Wangshuibai. Euphytica. 2004;139(1):59–64. doi: 10.1007/s10681-004-2298-9. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Livak KJ, Schmittgen TD. Analysis of relative gene expression data using real-time quantitative PCR and the 2(−Delta Delta C(T)) method. Methods. 2012;25(4):402–408. doi: 10.1006/meth.2001.1262. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Li Y, Baldauf S, Lim EK, Bowles DJ. Phylogenetic analysis of the UDP-glycosyltransferase multigene family of Arabidopsis thaliana. J Biol Chem. 2001;276(6):4338–4343. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M007447200. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Wang J, Hou B. Glycosyltransferases:key players involved in the modification of plant secondary metabolites. Front Biol China. 2009;4(1):39–46. doi: 10.1007/s11515-008-0111-1. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Buerstmayr H, Ban T, Anderson JA. QTL mapping and marker-assisted selection for Fusarium head blight resistance in wheat: a review. Plant Breed. 2009;128(1):1–26. doi: 10.1111/j.1439-0523.2008.01550.x. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Rogozin IB, Lyons-Weiler J, Koonin EV. Intron sliding in conserved gene families. Trends Genet. 2000;16(10):430–432. doi: 10.1016/S0168-9525(00)02096-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Latchinian-Sadek L, Ibrahim RK. Flavonol ring B-specific O-glucosyltransferases: purification, production of polyclonal antibodies, and immunolocalization. Arch Biochem Biophys. 1991;289(2):230–236. doi: 10.1016/0003-9861(91)90466-V. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Leah JM, Worrall TL, Cobb AH. Isolation and characterisation of two glucosyltransferases from Glycine max associated with bentazone metabolism. Pestic Sci. 1992;34:81–87. doi: 10.1002/ps.2780340112. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Yazaki K, Inushima K, Kataoka M, Tabata M. Intracellular-localization of udpg-p-hydroxybenzoate glucosyltransferase and its reaction-product in Lithospermum cell-cultures. Phytochemistry. 1995;38(5):1127–1130. doi: 10.1016/0031-9422(94)00821-A. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Anhalt S, Weissenbock G. Subcellular-localization of luteolin glucuronides and related enzymes in rye mesophyll. Planta. 1992;187(1):83–88. doi: 10.1007/BF00201627. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Kang Z, Buchenauer H. Immunocytochemical localization of Fusarium toxins in infected wheat spikes by Fusarium culmorum. Physiol Mol Plant P. 1999;55(5):275–288. doi: 10.1006/pmpp.1999.0233. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Additional file 1: (10KB, xlsx)

Table S1. List of the selected UGT genes and their primers sequences used for the RT-qPCR expression assay. (XLSX 9 kb)

Additional file 2: (39KB, jpg)

Figure S1. The abundance of wheat UGT genes as per their amino acid sequence sizes. (JPG 38 kb)

Additional file 3: (10KB, xlsx)

Table S2. List of the Arabidopsis UGT genes used in this study for the identification of the phylogenetic groups. (XLSX 9 kb)

Additional file 4: (35.3KB, xlsx)

Table S3. The intron information of the wheat UGT genes. (XLSX 35 kb)

Additional file 5: (20.9KB, xlsx)

Table S4. Expression data of UGT genes in five different tissues at different developmental stages. (XLSX 20 kb)

Additional file 6: (35.8KB, xlsx)

Table S5. Expression data of UGT genes after F. graminearum inoculation. (XLSX 35 kb)

Data Availability Statement

The datasets supporting the conclusions of this article are included within the article and its Additional files.


Articles from BMC Plant Biology are provided here courtesy of BMC

RESOURCES