Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2021 Mar 11;16(3):e0248054. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0248054

Revealing the high variability on nonconserved core and mobile elements of Austropuccinia psidii and other rust mitochondrial genomes

Jaqueline Raquel de Almeida 1, Diego Mauricio Riaño Pachón 2, Livia Maria Franceschini 1, Isaneli Batista dos Santos 1, Jessica Aparecida Ferrarezi 1, Pedro Avelino Maia de Andrade 1, Claudia Barros Monteiro-Vitorello 1, Carlos Alberto Labate 1, Maria Carolina Quecine 1,*
Editor: Minou Nowrousian3
PMCID: PMC7951889  PMID: 33705433

Abstract

Mitochondrial genomes are highly conserved in many fungal groups, and they can help characterize the phylogenetic relationships and evolutionary biology of plant pathogenic fungi. Rust fungi are among the most devastating diseases for economically important crops around the world. Here, we report the complete sequence and annotation of the mitochondrial genome of Austropuccinia psidii (syn. Puccinia psidii), the causal agent of myrtle rust. We performed a phylogenomic analysis including the complete mitochondrial sequences from other rust fungi. The genome composed of 93.299 bp has 73 predicted genes, 33 of which encoded nonconserved proteins (ncORFs), representing almost 45% of all predicted genes. A. psidii mtDNA is one of the largest rust mtDNA sequenced to date, most likely due to the abundance of ncORFs. Among them, 33% were within intronic regions of diverse intron groups. Mobile genetic elements invading intron sequences may have played significant roles in size but not shaping of the rust mitochondrial genome structure. The mtDNAs from rust fungi are highly syntenic. Phylogenetic inferences with 14 concatenated mitochondrial proteins encoded by the core genes placed A. psidii according to phylogenetic analysis based on 18S rDNA. Interestingly, cox1, the gene with the greatest number of introns, provided phylogenies not congruent with the core set. For the first time, we identified the proteins encoded by three A. psidii ncORFs using proteomics analyses. Also, the orf208 encoded a transmembrane protein repressed during in vitro morphogenesis. To the best of our knowledge, we presented the first report of a complete mtDNA sequence of a member of the family Sphaerophragmiacea.

Introduction

Rust fungi, classified as the most devastating diseases worldwide, are widely distributed in nature [1]. Austropuccinia psidii [2,3] is an obligate biotrophic plant pathogen that is the causal agent of myrtle rust. This pathogen has evolved specialized structures, such as haustoria, formed within the host tissue to efficiently acquire nutrients and suppress host defenses [4,5].

Myrtle rust, first described as occurring on leaves of Psidium guajava L. (Psidium pomiferum L.) (Myrtaceae) in Brazil [2], can now infect various species within the genus Eucalyptus [6,7]. Quecine et al. [8] suggested that it is most likely due to its high genetic variability within populations [8]. In South America, rust is a significant threat to Eucalyptus grandis, one of the most cultivated species. Moreover, it is becoming significant to Myrtle species in its origin center Australia. To date, 358 native species from 49 genera identified in Australia were susceptible to rust [9]. There are several efforts to improve knowledge about the biology of A. psidii, such as the sequencing of its nuclear genome [1013]; proteomic of urediniospores [14]; effects of cuticular waxes on fungal germination [15]; confirmation of its sexual life cycle [12,16]; among others. Recently, taxonomic studies have led to the reclassification of A. psidii. A maximum-likelihood phylogenetic analysis using the sequences of the nuclear ribosomal RNA genes suggested that A. psidii does not belong to Puccinia but should be within the new genus Austropuccinia of Pucciniales in the redefined family Sphaerophragmiaceae [3].

Fungal mitochondrial genomes are typically small, circular, and double-stranded DNA molecules. These genomes usually harbor at least 14 protein-coding conserved genes, namely, apocytochrome b (cob); three subunits of the cytochrome c oxidase (cox1, cox2, cox3); seven subunits of the NADH subunits (nad1, nad2, nad3, nad4, nad4L, nad5, and nad6); three subunits of the ATP synthase (atp6, atp8, atp9); as well as the large and small ribosomal RNA (rRNA) subunits (rnl and rns); a set of tRNAs genes; and the RNA subunit of the mitochondrial RNase P (rnpB). The genomes also present a variable number of groups-I and -II introns that may bear homing endonuclease genes (HEGs) with LAGLIDADG or GIY-YIG motifs [1719]. HEGs are selfish genetic mobile elements that encode site-specific-sequence-tolerant DNA endonucleases. The catalytic activity of HEGs promotes their propagation by introducing DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) into alleles lacking the endonuclease-coding sequence and by the subsequent repair of these DSBs via homologous recombination using the endonuclease-containing allele as a template [20]. mtDNA also harbors numerous repetitive sequences, besides introns and plasmids, known as mtDNA instability agents, generating variability within fungal mitochondrial genomes [21,22]. According to Kolesnikova et al. [23], the variation in mtDNA size in four different Armillaria species is due to variable numbers of mobile genetic elements, introns, and plasmid-related sequences. Most Armillaria introns contained open reading frames (ORFs) related to homing endonucleases of the LAGLIDADG and GIY-YIG families.

Mitochondrial genomes evolve independently of and faster than the nuclear genome [24]. It is often useful as a valuable source of information to study systematics and evolutionary biology in eukaryotes where insufficient phylogenetic signals have accumulated in nuclear genes [17,25]. For instance, Song et al. [26] resolved some incongruences of Dothideomycetes phylogeny using the mitochondrial genome of many phytopathogens belonging to this Class [26]. The availability of mitochondrial genome sequences provides valuable information about genome organization and enables evaluating structural rearrangements using comparative studies [27]. The high rate of polymorphism frequently found within introns or intergenic regions of well-conserved mitochondrial genes makes these sequences useful for genetic diversity studies, both among and within populations [2831].

In addition to its role in energy production and other essential cellular processes, mitochondria may also participate in fungal pathogenesis [25]. For instance, mitochondrial β-oxidation plays an essential role in vegetative growth, conidiation, appressorial morphogenesis, and pathogenesis progression in M. oryzae [31]. The methylation of the mitochondrial genome is an epigenetic mechanism affecting the adaptation and pathogenicity of Candida albicans [32]. Furthermore, mitochondrial metabolic functions are targets for pathogen control [33,34].

Based on the critical role of mitochondria to phytopathogenic fungi and the need to better understand the myrtle rust causal agent, we sequenced, assembled, and annotated the A. psidii mitochondrial genome. We thoroughly characterized the genome’s gene content and organization, codon usage, and repetitive elements. We also explored the evolutionary dynamics of the mitochondrial genomes of rust fungi by a comparative mtDNA focused on mobile element analysis. Finally, throughproteomic approaches, we identified three previously hypothetical mitochondrial proteins unique to A. psidii.

Materials and methods

DNA sequencing and mitochondrial genome assembly

A. psidii monopustular isolate MF-1 was previously obtained from E. grandis [35]. The high-molecular-weight DNA of MF-1 was obtained from urediniospores using the DNeasy Plant mini kit (Qiagen). A NanoVue spectrophotometer quantified the extracted DNA, and the quality was checked by agarose gel electrophoresis. Total DNA was used to generate libraries for 454 pyrosequencing (Roche), PacBio SMRT sequencing on an RSII instrument (Pacific Biosciences), and sequencing by synthesis on a MiSeq Instrument (Illumina).

We obtained A. psidii mtDNA sequences by mining reads from 454 and MiSeq platforms using mitochondrial reference genomes.

Complete mitochondrial genome sequences from all available species of representative rust fungi (Pucciniales) were obtained from the NCBI database and Puccinia’s comparative genomics projects of the Broad Institute (Table 1).

Table 1. Complete mitochondrial genome of rust pathogens used in present work.

Reference organisms Data source * Pathogen’s characteristics
Phakopsora meibomiae Puerto_Rico NCBI (NC_014352.1) Causal agent of American rust. It occurs mainly in soybean crops.
Phakopsora pachyrhizi Taiwan_72–1 NCBI (NC_014344.1) Causal agent of Asian soybean rust. It occurs mainly in soybean crops.
Puccinia graminis f. sp. tritici Puccinia—Group Database Broad Institute Causal agent of stem rust. It occurs in wheat, barley, rye, triticale and some other species of Poaceae (Gramineae).
Puccinia striiformis PST-78 Puccinia—Group Database Broad Institute Causal agent of wheat yellow rust, which occurs in crops of wheat and barley.
Puccinia triticina 1-1BBBD-race-1 Puccinia—Group Database Broad Institute Causal agent of wheat leaf rust.
Moniliophthora perniciosa NCBI (NC_005927.1) Causal agent of "witches’ broom disease" of the cocoa tree.

Mining was performed using the Mirabait program in the MIRA package using the MITObim approach. All steps were performed using modules of the MIRA sequence assembler software in “mapping mode” to map reads to a reference and create new reference sequences; and an in silico-baiting module, which is used to extract reads that precisely match a given reference across a number of n k-mers of length k (defaults n = 1 and k = 31) from the entire set of reads [36]. Finally, mitochondrial reference genomes were used to mapping single molecule sequencing reads from SMRT platform using basic local aligment using BlasR packge (https://github.com/PacificBiosciences/blasr) developed by PacificBioscicnce [37].

The assembly of the A. psidii mitochondrial genome from reads and subreads of MiSeq, 454, and SMRT platforms were performed using SPAdes v. 3.7 (http://cab.spbu.ru/files/release3.7.0/manual.html) with automatic coverage cutoff [38]. QUAST v. 4.0 (http://bioinf.spbau.ru/quast) was used to compute assembly metrics and validate assembly quality [39,40]. All computational analyses were performed according to software tutorials.

Annotation of the mitochondrial genome

A. psidii mitochondrial genome was annotated using the default parameters of MFannot (https://github.com/BFL-lab/Mfannot) [41] and GeSeq (https://chlorobox.mpimp-golm.mpg.de/geseq.html) [42]. The annotation was adjusted manually using the BLASTx tool available in the NCBI, restricting the similarity search to the "Pucciniales" order (taxid:5258). The Genome Vx tool (http://wolfe.ucd.ie/GenomeVx/) was used to plot each gene’s position and orientation from the mitochondrial genome of A. psidii.

For the identification of the transfer RNAs (tRNAs), the tRNAscan-SE software (http://lowelab.ucsc.edu/tRNAscan-SE/) was used with default parameters [43]. The GC content analysis of the mitochondrial genome was performed with program Genomics % GC Content Calculator (http://www.sciencebuddies.org/science-fair-projects/project_ideas/Genom_GC_Calculator.shtml).

The complete sequence of the mitochondrial genome of A. psidii was deposited in GenBank (accession number MN018834).

Comparative and phylogenetic analysis of rust mtDNAs

Comparative and phylogenetic analyses were performed among the rust mtDNA from A. psidii, P. graminis f. sp. tritici, P. triticina, P. striiformis, P. meibomiae, and P. pachyrizi (Table 1). The mitochondrial genome sequence of Moniliophtora perniciosa (NC_005927.1) was used as an outgroup [44]. The mitochondrial genomes of P. graminis f. sp. tritici, P. triticina, and P. striiformis, P. meibomiae, P. pachyrhizi, M. perniciosa were reannotated using MFannot and GeSeq and manually verified to avoid errors in comparative and phylogenetic analyses. The nonconserved ORF (ncORFs) from all mtDNA rust fungi were annotated by BLAST analysis. We defined as ncORFs all predicted ORFs that did not belong to the mitochondrial core protein-encoding genes. We also used the tRNAscan-SE software and Genomics % GC Content Calculator to identify tRNAs and GC% content in the rust mtDNAs.

The fourteen conserved mitochondrial protein sequences were used for phylogenetic analyses: cytochrome c oxidase (cob, cox1, cox2, cox3), ATP synthase subunits (atp6, atp8, atp9), and NADH dehydrogenase subunits (nad1, nad2, nad3, nad4, nad4L, nad5, and nad6). Protein sequences were aligned with MUSCLE implemented in MEGA X [45]. Poorly aligned amino acid regions were removed using TrimAl (http://trimal.cgenomics.org/) [46]. Proper evolutionary models for phylogenetic inference were computed with MrModeltest v. 2.3 (https://github.com/nylander/MrModeltest2) [47] using the Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC). Specifically, mtREV24 was determined as the best model for cob, LG+I+F for cox1, cpREV for cox2; WAG+I+F for cox3; mtREV24+G for atp6; mtREV24 for atp8; mtREV24+I for atp9; mtREV24 for nad1; WAG+I+F for nad2; mtREV24+G for nad3; JTT+I+F for nad4, cpREV for nad4L; WAG+G+I+F for nad5; JTT+G+F for nad6. The 14 protein sequences of each pathogen were concatenated using Mesquite software v. 3.2 (https://www.mesquiteproject.org/) [48], and Bayesian phylogenetic inference was carried out with MrBayes v. 3.2.7 (https://nbisweden.github.io/MrBayes/download.html). The Bayesian analysis included two separate runs of 1 x 107 generations, sampled every 1000 generations, and 25% of the initial generations.

In addition, the phylogenetic relationship of A. psidii within rust fungi was evaluated using the 18S rDNA and cox1 genes. Multiple sequence alignments were generated with MUSCLE [49], trimmed with TrimAl, and selected the best evolutionary model described above (LG+I+F for cox1, T92+G+I for 18S rDNA). The phylogenetic tree was inferred as previously mentioned using MrBayes.

Proteomics analysis

Data processing, protein identification, and relative quantitative analyses of proteomics data were performed using the raw data previously obtained by Quecine et al. [14] using the ProteinLynx Global Server (PLGS- v 2.5.1). The reanalysis of the A. psidii proteome was performed to validate the presence of hypothetical proteins in the A. psidii mitochondrial genome. The processing parameters were set, according to Quecine et al. [14]. Briefly, to identify the proteins, the intensities of the spectra were calculated by the stoichiometric method, according to the internal standard, the sequence of rabbit phosphorylase (Uniprot entry: P00489), by MSE analysis [50] and normalized using the PLGS auto normalization function. Protein identifications were obtained with the embedded ion accounting algorithm of PLGS software searching into the A. psidii mitochondrial proteins appended in the internal standard. All protein hits were identified with confidence of >95%.

A database was created based on the predicted proteins obtained from the manual annotation of the mitochondrial genome of A. psidii, as well as on mitochondrial protein sequences of P. graminis f. sp. tritici, P. triticina, P. striiformis (Broad Institute’s Puccinia—Group Database). Protein identification was obtained with the embedded ion accounting algorithm of PLGS software. After PLGS 2.5.1 analysis, the data were manually inspected, and the parameters obtained using MassPivot v. 101 were included: (i) the average amount (fmol) of protein, (ii) the average score of proteins, and (iii) the average amount of matched peptides to each protein.

For the hypothetical proteins found on the proteomics data, we performed additional in silico analyses. The peptide sequences were obtained by EMBOSS Transeq (https://www.ebi.ac.uk/Tools/st/emboss_transeq/) and then the conserved motifs evaluated by MOTIF, GenomeNet of the Kyoto University Bioinformatics Center (http://www.genome.jp/tools/motif/).

RT-qPCR analysis

To validate the proteomic analysis, gene expression of the three ncORFs, orf174, orf205, orf208, identified by mass spectrometry, was evaluated by RT-qPCR during the fungal in vitro morphogenesis as described below. The set of primers for ncORFs was generated using OligoPerfect™ Designer software (http://tools.lifetechnologies.com/content). The presence of dimers and hairpins was verified using Oligo Analysis Tool software (http://www.operon.com/tools/oligo-analysistool.aspx). The genes of beta-tubulin and elongation factor were used as references [51] (Table 2).

Table 2. Primers used in this study.

Target gene Primer Sequence 5’- 3’ Reference
beta-tubulin BTub1 GGACTCTGTTTTAGATGTCGTC Bini et al. 2017
BTub3 TTGATGGACTGATAGGGTAGCG Bini et al. 2017
elongation factor EF5 CAGTTATGGAAGTTTGAAACTCC Bini et al. 2017
EF2 GACAATAAGCTGTCGAACACCAAGG Bini et al. 2017
orf174 Po174F GGCACACGACCTCTGTACCT This study
Po174R TTCACAAGATGCAGGCTCAC This study
orf205 Po205F TGCAGAGAAGGATGCACAAC This study
Po205R TCAAAAGCATGAACCATTCG This study
orf208 Po208F GAAGGTAAGCGGGAGGGTA This study
Po208R TTCTACCCCGTTCTATTCTATCC This study

In vitro morphogenesis experiment: A. psidii urediniospores from the monopustular isolate MF-1 were inoculated on dialysis membranes on agar-water medium (8 g L-1) amended with 0.5% of olive oil [52,53]. Dialysis membranes were sampled at each interval: zero hours after inoculation (h.a.i.), 6 h.a.i. (absence of germination), 12 h.a.i. (germination tubes formation), and 24 h.a.i. (appressoria formation) [35]. Total RNA of four biological replicates for each time was isolated using a spin column procedure employing a Spectrum Plant Total RNA Extraction Kit (Sigma-Aldrich). RNA isolation procedure followed the manufacturer’s protocol, including on-column DNase digestion (Sigma-Aldrich). RNA concentration and A260/A280 ratios were measured for each sample by a NanoVue Spectrophotometer (GE Healthcare). Quantified RNA samples were stored at -80°C. One μg of each RNA sample was reverse-transcribed to cDNA using a High Capacity cDNA Reverse Transcription Kit (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, USA), employing random hexamer primers. Reverse-transcribed samples were stored at −20°C. The RT-qPCR reactions were prepared in a final volume of 12.5 μl containing 6.25 μl of Platinum® SYBR® Green qPCR SuperMix-UDG, 10 pmol of each primer set, 2.5 μl cDNA (1:20) and 1.75 μl ultrapure water. The samples were amplified in an iCycler IQ® Real-Time PCR Detection System (Bio-Rad) with the following conditions: 95°C for 15 min (1x); 95°C for 15 sec, 58°C for 30 sec, 72°C for 30 sec (45x); and 71 cycles of 60–95°C with a progressive increase of 0.5°C per cycle (melting). Each sample was analyzed in two technical duplicates.

Reaction efficiencies were analyzed using the LinRegPCR program (version 11.0), and the relative expression values were calculated by the Pfaffl method [54] using the REST software (Relative Expression Software Tool) [55]. The Pairwise Fixed Reallocation Randomization Test calculated the differential expression with 1000 bootstrap iterations, and the analyzed intervals were 6–0 h.a.i., 12–0 h.a.i. and 24–0 h.a.i.

Results

Mitochondrial genome of A. psidii

The mt genome assembly resulted in two contigs: 62,940 bp and 30,490 bp. By using CAP3 [56], the contigs were joined with a small overlapping region (approximately 70 bp), confirmed by PCR, resulting in a single contig of 93.299 bp (Fig 1). The A. psidii mitochondrial genome sequence presented a GC content of 37.39%, very similar to other published rust mtDNA.

Fig 1. The mitochondrial genome of Austropuccinia psidii MF-1.

Fig 1

The mitochondrial view was obtained by the Genome Vx tool (http://wolfe.ucd.ie/GenomeVx/).

Mitochondrial genome annotation

The MFannot predicted 73 different ORFs. Among them, the 14 mitochondrial core protein-coding genes were identified (Table 3). The results showed that 23 tRNA genes and all other 14 core genes transcribe from the same DNA strand clockwise (Fig 1). Details of A. psidii MF-1 core proteins were presented in S1 Table.

Table 3. Predicted genes of Autropuccinia psidii MF-1 mitochondrial genome.

Predicted genes Encoded protein Interesting features
Respiratory chain proteins
Complex I
nad1 NADH dehydrogenase subunit 1 contiguous and in phase with orf162
nad2 NADH dehydrogenase subunit 2
nad3 NADH dehydrogenase subunit 3
nad4 NADH dehydrogenase subunit 4
nad4L NADH dehydrogenase subunit 4L
nad5 NADH- dehydrogenase subunit 5
nad6 NADH- dehydrogenase subunit 6
Complex III
cob Cytochrome b 4 introns
I2—group = ID
I3 and I4 -group = IA(5’)
Complex IV
cox1 Cytochrome c oxidase subunit 1 11 introns
group II–I1 and I2
group = IA–I5 and I12
group = IB–I3, I4, I7, I8,
I9, I10 and I11
group = ID–I6
cox2 Cytochrome c oxidase subunit 2 1 intron
cox3 Cytochrome c oxidase subunit 3 alternative ATG start pos 17117
Complex V
atp6 ATP synthase subunit a
atp8 ATP synthase subunit b 1 intron
atp9 ATP synthase subunit 9 alternative ATG start pos 85321
rRNA
Rns -
Rnl -
Other proteins
rpnB recombination-promoting nuclease RpnB
ncORFs
orf99 hypothetical protein Intergenic ncORF
orf100 hypothetical protein Intergenic ncORF; in opposite strand of nad6
orf101 LAGLIDADG endonuclease Intronic ncORF (cox2-I1)
orf104 hypothetical protein Intergenic ncORF;
in same sequence oposite strand of ATP9
orf115 hypothetical protein Intergenic ncORF
orf116 hypothetical protein Intergenic ncORF; TTG upstream: 27503
orf118_1 hypothetical protein Intergenic ncORF
orf118_2 LAGLIDADG endonuclease Intronic ncORF (cox1-I9) First aa- Tyr
orf120 hypothetical protein Intergenic ncORF
orf123_1 hypothetical protein Intergenic ncORF
orf123_2 hypothetical protein Intergenic ncORF
orf125 hypothetical protein Intergenic ncORF
orf128 hypothetical protein Intergenic ncORF
orf130 hypothetical protein Intergenic ncORF
orf132 hypothetical protein Intergenic ncORF
orf153 hypothetical protein Intergenic ncORF; TTG upstream: 64208
orf162 hypothetical protein nad2 gene contínuos and in phase with orf162
orf166 DEAD/DEAH box helicase dominion Intergenic ncORF
orf171 LAGLIDADG endonuclease Intronic ncORF (cox1-I9); First aa- Glu;
orf174 hypothetical protein Intergenic ncORF
orf175 LAGLIDADG endonuclease Intronic ncORF (cox1-I4)
orf192 hypothetical protein Intergenic ncORF
orf205 hypothetical protein Intergenic ncORF; TTG upstream: 26703
orf208 hypothetical protein Intergenic ncORF
orf241 LAGLIDADG endonuclease Intronic ncORF (cob-I2) First aa–Ser
orf252 ribosomal protein S3 Intergenic ncORF
orf311 LAGLIDADG endonuclease Intronic ncORF (cox1-I7); Codon alternative para UGA para Trp
orf319 LAGLIDADG endonuclease Intronic ncORF (cox1-I10) First aa–Ile
orf337 LAGLIDADG endonuclease Intronic ncORF (cox1-I8) First aa–Gln
orf363 LAGLIDADG endonuclease Intronic ncORF (cox1-I3) First aa- Gly
orf669 reverse transcriptase Intronic ncORF (atp8 I1)
orf688 reverse transcriptase Intronic ncORF (cox1-I2) First aa- Gly
orf717 reverse transcriptase Intronic ncORF(cox1-I1) First aa- Thr

Besides, we identified 33 nonconserved ORFs (ncORFs). The ncORFs represent approximately 45% of the total genes found in this genome. We identified intronic ncORFs in 11 introns of conserved genes (one in the cob, one in the cox2, and 9 in the cox1 genes). These ncORFs encode for a ribosomal protein, LAGLIDADG endonucleases, and reverse transcriptases (RT) (Table 3). Some of the ncORFs have alternative start codons. In contrast to the conserved core genes, the ncORFs were found on both strands (S2 Table). In other rust mtDNA, only LAGLIDADG endonucleases were detected as HEG (S3 Table).

The mitochondrial genome was screened for codon usage, and the genes were analyzed for their start and stop codons (S1 and S2 Tables). Among the predicted genes, the ’AUG’ was the initiation codon in all 14 conserved core genes. However, in ncORFs, the start codons ’UAU’, ’GAA’, ’AGU’, ’UGA’, ’CAA’, ’GGU’, ’GCC’, and ’ACG’ were found. The most frequent stop codon was ’UAA’ (Fig 2).

Fig 2. Column diagram of the Austropuccinia psidii mtDNA codon usage.

Fig 2

The diagram represents the codons (x-axis) and percentages of their occurrence (y-axis) in the A. psidii mitochondrial genome.

Rust mtDNA comparative phylogenetic analysis

Among the six rust mtDNA evaluated, A. psidii had the largest number of genes and mtDNA size, followed by Puccinia spp. (77,600 bp on average). The Phakospsora spp. had the smallest rust mitochondrial genome (32,172 bp on average). The GC content of A. psidii mtDNA did not differ from other rust mtDNAs. The Phakospsora spp. mtDNA lacked the rpnB gene. The organization of core genes was conserved among the rust mitochondrial genomes (Fig 3A and 3B). However, the total size of intronic and intergenic regions among them was highly variable. A. psidii has the largest amount of ncORF sequences (Fig 3C) and intronic sequences.

Fig 3. Comparison of the mitochondrial genome from Austropuccinia psidii and other rust.

Fig 3

(A) General comparison of mitochondrial genome content among A. psidii and P. graminis, P. striiformis, P. triticina, P. meibomiae and P. pachyrhizi, (B) Organization of core genes among the rust mitochondrial genomes, (C) Proportions of ceORFs, rRNA, tRNA, intronic and intergenic ncORFs, intron and intergenic content in the rust mitochondrial genomes.

Genes cox1 and cob presented introns in mtDNA of all rust pathogens (Table 4). Almost all of the introns detected in six of all the genes carried some HEG. The number of LAGLIDADG endonucleases encoded in intronic ncORF ranged from three in the soybean rust (P. pachyrhizi) to nine in A. psidii. Compared with other rust pathogens, A. psidii showed a higher diversity of HEGs and intron groups: nine LAGLIDADG endonucleases, three reverse transcriptases, and six intron group IA, eight IB, two ID, and two II (S4 and S5 Tables).

Table 4. Number of introns in conserved protein-coding genes in mtDNA of rust pathogens.

Rust pathogens atp8 cob cox1 cox2 nad4 nad5 Total
A. psidii 1 5 12 1 19
P. meibomiae 1 4 5
P. pachyrhizi 1 4 5
P. graminis 2 5 1 1 2 11
P. striiformis 2 6 1 1 1 11
P. triticina 2 7 1 1 11

Rust mtDNAs encode a similar number of tRNA genes. Only A. psidii has two tRNAs for glutamic acid (Glu) and a unique anticodon for lysine (Lys) (Table 5).

Table 5. tRNAs present in the rust pathogens mtDNA.

Amino Acid P. meibomiae P. pachyrhizi P. graminis P. striiforms P. triticinia A. psidii
Anticodon Anticodon Anticodon Anticodon Anticodon Anticodon
Ala TGC TGC TGC TGC TGC TGC
Arg TCG TCG TCG TCG TCG TCG
TCT TCT TCT TCT TCT TCT
Asn GTT GTT GTT GTT GTT GTT
Asp GTC GTC GTC GTC GTC GTC
Cys GCA GCA GCA GCA GCA GCA
Gln TTG TTG TTG - TTG TTG
Glu TTC TTC TTC TTC TTC TTC
- - - - - TCC
Gly TCC TCC TCC TCC TCC -
His GTG GTG GTG GTG GTG GTG
Ile GAT GAT - GAT GAT GAT
Leu TAG TAG TAG TAG TAG TAG
Lys TTT TTT TTT TTT TTT TTT
CTT CTT CTT CTT CTT -
Met CAT CAT CAT CAT CAT CAT
CAT CAT CAT CAT CAT CAT
Phe GAA GAA GAA GAA GAA GAA
Pro TGG TGG TGG TGG TGG TGG
Ser GCT GCT GCT GCT GCT GCT
TGA TGA TGA TGA TGA TGA
Sup TCA TCA TCA TCA TCA TCA
Thr TGT TGT TGT TGT TGT TGT
Tyr GTA GTA - GTA GTA GTA
Val TAC TAC TAC TAC TAC TAC
24 24 22 23 24 23

We compared the phylogeny using all 14 core proteins encoded by the mtDNA with the one of the cox1. The results showed that the multigene approach supported A. psidii as a sister clade to Puccinia spp. However, using cox1, the result was different, A. psidii clustered with Phakospsora spp., although with low branch support (Fig 4A and 4B). The 18S rDNA-based phylogenetic analysis corroborated the clustering of A. psidii as a sister clade of Puccinia spp. (S1 Fig).

Fig 4. Maximum likelihood phylogenetic tree of rust mtDNA.

Fig 4

The phylogeny analyses were based on the whole genome (A) and cox1 (B) sequences. The sequences were aligned using the MUSCLE The statistical method Maximum Likelihood (bootstrap test with 1000 repetitions) and the Hasegawa—Kishino—Yano model were used for the phylogenetic tree construction. The numbers above tree nodes represent the bootstrap support values. M. perniciosa was used as an out-group.

Proteomic and RT-qPCR analysis

Of the 33 ncORFs found in A. psidii mtDNA, we identified three of them in a previously generated proteomic dataset [14]: orf174, orf205, and orf208. Only orf174 was present in other rust fungi, such as P. graminis. Orf205 and orf208 were unique to mtDNA of A. psidii (S6 Table). Using the software MOTIF, we found a conserved domain in orf174, identified as belonging to DNA topoisomerase I superfamily cl27598. Orf205 has two conserved domains: one similar to the peroxidase family2 and another described as DUF2070. The orf208 has the DUF2070 domain, as well (S7 Table).

We performed RT-qPCR analysis to confirm the expression of orf174, orf205, and orf208 during fungal in vitro morphogenesis. Only the expression of orf208 was detected. We observed a gradual downregulation of the expression during the development of germinative tubes and appressorium formation (Fig 5).

Fig 5. RT-qPCR analysis of orf208 gene.

Fig 5

Expression analysis of orf208 from A. psidii MF-1 in three different times of in vitro fungal development. Expression values were normalized with beta-tubulin and elongation factor as a housekeeping reference Pfaffl [54]. Values represent the expression ratio of the orf208 gene. Bars represent the mean for three replicates, and error bars show the standard error of the mean. Asterisks indicate values that differ significantly (P_0.05) between 0 and 6, 12 or 24 h after inoculation as determined by the method of Pfaffl et al. [55].

Discussion

Compared with other mtDNAs rust pathogens used in the present study, A. psidii had one of the largest ones. Fungal mitochondrial genomes are highly variable in size, ranging from 12 kb in the mycoparasite Rozella allomyces [57] to 235.8 kb of the fungus Rhizoctonia solani [58]. The mtDNA size variability may occur among organisms from the same species. The mtDNA from P. striiformis f. sp. tritici ranged 102,521 [59], approximately 25% bigger than the mtDNA from P. striiformis PST-78, used in the present study. Several factors contribute to size variations, including the proliferation of noncoding sequences such as short tandem repeats, gene duplication followed by inactivation, intron expansion, and incorporation of foreign sequences from different sources [25,58,60]. According to Medina et al. [25], within Dikarya in general, Basidiomycetes mtDNA is highly variable in gene order compared to Ascomycetes. Furthermore, while in Basidiomycetes, mtDNAs have genes usually encoded on both strands, in Ascomycetes, they are encoded in only one. Interestingly in A. psidii and other evaluated rust mtDNAs, the core genes are in the same strand.

The large size of A. psidii mtDNA is partially associated with the abundance of ncORF. ncORFs are frequently reported in fungal mitochondrial genomes [6165], but their origin and function are still unknown. For instance, the variable sizes of the mitochondrial genomes of Colletotrichum species are due, in part, to the presence or absence of ncORFs and intronic sequences [66]. The large mtDNA size of Phlebia radiata (156 kbp) also harbors a large number of introns and long intergenic regions [63].

A. psidii had the largest number of ncORFs in intronic regions among the mtDNAs assessed in this work. Many of the ncORFs were related to HEGS, primarily LAGLIDADG endonucleases. Queiroz et al. [66] observed that C. lindemuthianum contains just one intronic ncORF encoding a LAGLIDADG endonuclease. However, more than one intronic ncORF encoding LAGLIDADG endonucleases were found in rust mtDNA. HEGs can expand mtDNA size, cause genome rearrangements, gene duplications, and import exogenic nucleotide sequences through horizontal gene transfer (HGT) [67,68]. HEGs may also be involved in the spread of group I introns between distant species [69,70].

Concerning the HEGs found in rust mtDNA, we identified only LAGLIDADG encoding genes. These sequences are self-splicing and play relevant roles in processes associated with genome evolution [71]. Many group I intron-encoded LAGLIDADG proteins function as maturases assisting in RNA splicing [7275]. This activity described in fungi such as Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Saccharomyces capensis, Aspergillus nidulans [73,75,76], suggests that endonuclease and maturase activities are close in function and evolution to LAGLIDADG proteins encoded by group-I introns in rust fungi [77]. GIY-YIG ORFs have been reported in introns of fungal mitochondria [77,78]. However, no GIY-YIG endonucleases were found in rust mtDNA.

Mobile elements, including HEGs, play a crucial role in the expansion of fungal mitochondrial genomes. We observed a relationship between the genome size and total mobile elements hosted in intronic sequences in rust fungi. The number of introns is highly variable among mitochondrial genomes; for example, Fusarium graminearum has 34 group-I introns [79], whereas Mycosphaerella graminicola has no introns [80]. Ambrosio et al. [81] revealed that 48.7% of C. cacaofunesta mtDNA was composed of introns. The number of intron groups in rust fungi mtDNA ranged between 3–18 to P. meibomiae and A. psidii, respectively. There is a lack of available complete mtDNA sequence of Pucciniales. Thus, our research may bring a significant contribution to the comprehension and phylogeny of this group. In our studies using mtDNA from Pucciniales, phylogenetic analyses revealed that according to core genes, A. psidii was confidently a sister clade of Puccinia spp. This result is in agreement with the 18S rDNA phylogenetic analysis. Similarly, Zhang et al. [82] observed a congruency between nuclear ribosomal RNA and mitochondrial protein-based trees to Cordyceps militaris. Our phylogeny data demonstrated that mitochondrial core genes are an alternative for determining phylogenetic relationships among rust fungi, as shown in other species of fungi and other organisms [8385].

We need broader taxon sampling to include all the phylogenetic diversity of the group and achieve a robust phylogeny and evolutionary trajectory, including the mobile element. The mobile genetic elements and features such as the number of introns per gene and similar positions were more similar between A. psidii—Puccinia spp. than that of A. psidii–Phakopsora.

Interestingly, comparing only cox1 from complete mtDNA of the six Pucciniales, A. psidii was closer to Phakopsora spp, although with notably low branch support. This data supports the fact that since the degree of conservation and organization of genes may vary according to the group studied, a preliminary analysis is essential to select "a priori" reliable phylogenetic markers [25]. Mitochondrial genes, such as cox1, were widely used for barcoding many groups of organisms, although with less identification power in the fungal kingdom due to the rapid evolution of their mt genomes [27]. Wang et al. [86] demonstrated that the frequent heteroplasmy and recombination in the mitochondrial genomes of Thelephora ganbajun resulted in two types of introns in different sites of cox1 with varying frequencies among the isolates. Allelic association analyses of the observed mitochondrial polymorphic nucleotide in cox1 sites suggested that mtDNA recombination is frequent in natural populations of this fungus. Li et al. [87] assembled the mtDNAs of Pleurotus citrinopileatus and Pleurotus platypus and observed thirteen classes of introns (Pcls) within the cox1 gene. The number and class of Pcls varied among different Pleurotus species, indicating that the introns in cox1 directed the mitochondrial genome rearrangements. Only concatenated mitochondrial protein sequences were suitable as molecular markers for phylogenetic analysis of Pleurotus spp.

We identified three out of the 33 ncORFs in our previous proteomic datasets [14]. The only conserved region of these proteins was the DUF2070 domains, with TM-regions found in orf208 and orf205. According to Tang et al. [88], the mitochondrial membrane protein FgLetm1, containing DUF2070, regulates mitochondrial integrity, production of endogenous reactive oxygen species and mycotoxin biosynthesis in Fusarium graminearum. The authors obtained ΔFgLetm1 mutant that significantly reduced endogenous ROS levels, decreased mycotoxin deoxynivalenol biosynthesis, and attenuated virulence in planta. Thus, we suggest that orf208 and orf205 encode a transmembrane protein that may be related to fungal pathogenicity. According to the RT-qPCR results, the only transcribed gene was orf208. The gene was down-regulated during the fungal morphogenesis.

. Nine of the 33 ncORFs identified in the A. psidii mtDNA presented alternative start codons. We strongly believe that they are not pseudogenes. It is known that mtDNA and other plastid genomes are composed of a significant number of genes with alternative codons, most of them related with mobile elements [89,90]. The nine ncORFs (orf118_2, orf171, orf241, orf311, orf319, orf337, orf363, orf688, orf717) with alternative start codons were associated with mobile elements that may be related to the evolution of the mtDNA in progress [77,91]. More assays using different stimuliand assays carried out in planta should be performed to validate the ncORFs presence encoding protein to help understandthe function of these ncORFs in mtDNA A. psidii. We also showed the first experimental evidence of three new mitochondrial proteins exclusive of A. psidii. Furthermore, the functional characterization of these proteins and their association with particular mitochondrial pathways or during host interaction is a valuable tool to elucidate important biological features of myrtle rust disease.

Supporting information

S1 Fig. Maximum likelihood phylogenetic tree of rust pathogens based on 18S rDNA partial sequences obtained from the GenBank nucleotide sequence database.

The accession numbers are in parentheses. The sequences were aligned using the MUSCLE method. For the phylogenetic tree construction, the statistical methods Maximum Likelihood, the Bootstrap method test with 1000 repetitions, and the Hasegawa—Kishino—Yano model were performed. The numbers above tree nodes represent the bootstrap support values. M. perniciosa was used as an out-group.

(DOCX)

S1 Table. Conserved gene features of the Austropuccinia psidii MF-1 mitochondrial genome.

(DOCX)

S2 Table. Nonconserved ORFs (ncORFs) features of the Austropuccinia psidii MF-1 mitochondrial genome.

(DOCX)

S3 Table. Nonconserved ORFs (ncORFs) features in mtDNA rust pathogens.

(DOCX)

S4 Table. Number of LAGLIDADG endonucleases and intron types present in introns of six genes gene in mtDNA of rust pathogens.

(DOCX)

S5 Table. Features of introns characterized in mtDNA of rust pathogens.

(DOCX)

S6 Table. Nonconserved ORFs (ncORFs) in mtDNA Austropuccinia psidii MF-1 shared by other rust pathogens.

(DOCX)

S7 Table. Conserved domain in unknown function proteins found in Austropuccinia psidii.

(DOCX)

Acknowledgments

We thank Dr. Thais Regiani for supporting the proteomic analysis. We are grateful for the efforts of Dr. Andressa Peres Bini in developing the previous RT-qPCR protocol analyses.

Data Availability

The complete sequence of the mitochondrial genome of A. psidii has been deposited in GenBank (accession number MN018834).

Funding Statement

This study was supported by Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo FAPESP (Grant 2014/16804-4). We thank FAPESP for the fellowship award to JRA (2016/16868-8) and LMF (2015/14344-9). We also thank Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES) for the fellowship award to IBS and Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq) to JAF and PAMA.

References

  • 1.Dean R, Van Kan JAL, Pretorius ZA, Hammond-Kosack KE, Di Pietro A, Spanu PD et al. The top 10 fungal pathogens in molecular plant pathology. Mol. Plant Pathol. 2012;13,414–430. 10.1111/j.1364-3703.2011.00783.x [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Winter G. Repertorium. Rabenhorstii fungi europaei et extraeuraopaei. Centuria XXXI et XXXII. 1884. Hedwigia, 23, 164–175.
  • 3.Beenken L. Austropuccinia: a new genus name for the myrtle rust Puccinia psidii placed within the redefined family Sphaerophragmiaceae (Pucciniales). Phytotaxa. 2017;297 (1), 53–61. 10.11646/phytotaxa.297.1.5 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Dodds PN, Rafiqi M, Gan PHP, Hardham AR, Jones DA, Ellis JG. Effectors of biotrophic fungi and oomycetes: pathogenicity factors and triggers of host resistance. New Phytol. 2009;183, 993–1000. 10.1111/j.1469-8137.2009.02922.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Graça RN, Ross-Davis AL, Klopfenstein NB, Kim MS, Peever TL, Cannon PG et al. Rust disease of eucalypts, caused by Puccinia psidii, did not originate via host jump from guava in Brazil. Mol. Ecol. 2013;22,6033e6047. 10.1111/mec.12545 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Junghans DT, Alfenas AC, Brommonschenkel SH, Oda S, Mello EJ, Grattapaglia D. Resistance to rust (Puccinia psidii Winter) in Eucalyptus: mode of inheritance and mapping of a major gene with RAPD markers. Theor. Appl. Genet. 2003;108: 175e180. 10.1007/s00122-003-1415-9 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Machado PD, Glen M, Pereira OL, Silva AA, Alfenas AC. Epitypification of Puccinia psidii, causal agent of guava rust. Trop. Plant Pathol. 2015;40, 5–12. 10.1007/s40858-014-0002-8 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Quecine MC, Bini AP , Romagnoli EM, Andreote FD, Moon DH, Labate CA. Genetic variability of Puccinia psidii populations revealed by PCR-DGGE and T-RFLP markers. Plant Dis. 2014;98, 16–23. 10.1094/PDIS-03-13-0332-RE [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Makinson RO. Myrtle Rust reviewed: The impacts of the invasive plant pathogen Austropuccinia psidii on the Australian environment. Plant Biosecurity Cooperative Research Centre, Canberra. 2018 [Cited 13 August 2020]. Available from: http://www.apbsf.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Myrtle-Rust-reviewed-June-22-2018-web.pdf.
  • 10.Tan MK, Collins D, Chen Z, Englezou A, Wilkins MR. A brief overview of the size and composition of the myrtle rust genome and its taxonomic status. Mycol. 2014;5,2, 52–63. 10.1080/21501203.2014.919967 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Sandhu KS, Karaoglu H, Zhang P, Park RF. Simple sequence repeat markers support the presence of a single genotype of Puccinia psidii in Australia. Plant Pathology. 2015;65(7), 1084–1094. 10.1111/ppa.12501 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.McTaggart AR, Shuey LS, Granados GM, du Plessis E, Fraser S, Barnes I et al. Evidence that Austropuccinia psidii may complete its sexual life cycle on Myrtaceae. Plant Pathol. 2017;67(3), 729–734. 10.1111/ppa.12763 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Tobias PA, Schwessinger B, Deng CH, Wu C, Dong C, Sperschneider J et al. Austropuccinia psidii, causing myrtle rust, has a gigabase-sized genome shaped by transposable elements. BioRxiv. 2020.03.18.996108; 10.1101/2020.03.18.996108 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Quecine MC, Leite TF, Bini AP, Regiani T, Franceschini LM, Budzinski IGF et al. Label free quantitative proteomic analysis of Puccinia psidii uredospores reveals differences of fungal populations infecting eucalyptus and guava. PlosOne. 2016;11, p.e0145343. 10.1371/journal.pone.0145343 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Santos IB, Lopes MS, Bini AP, Tschoeke BAP, Verssani BAW, Figueredo EF et al. The Eucalyptus Cuticular Waxes Contribute in Preformed Defense Against Austropuccinia psidii. Front. Plant Sci. 2019;9:1978. 10.3389/fpls.2018.01978 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.McTaggart AR, du Plessis E, Roux J, Barnes I, Fraser S, Granados GM et al. Sexual reproduction in populations of Austropuccinia psidii. Eur J Plant Pathol. 2020;156:537–545. 10.1007/s10658-019-01903-y [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Bullerwell CE, Lang BF. Fungal evolution: the case of the vanishing mitochondrion. Curr. Opin. Microbiol. 2005;8(4), 362–369. 10.1016/j.mib.2005.06.009 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Borriello R, Bianciotto V, Orgiazzi A, Lumini E, Bergero R. Sequencing and comparison of the mitochondrial COI gene from isolates of Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi belonging to Gigasporaceae and Glomeraceae families. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 2014;75(1), 1–10. 10.1016/j.ympev.2014.02.012 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Lambowitz AM, Belfort M. Mobile bacterial group II introns at the crux of eukaryotic evolution. Microbiol. Spectr. 2015;3(1), MDNA3-0050-2014. 10.1128/microbiolspec.MDNA3-0050-2014 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Hurst GDD, Werren JH. The role of selfish genetic elements in eukaryotic evolution. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2001;2(8), 597–606. 10.1038/35084545 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Lang BF, Laforest MJ, Burger G. Mitochondrial introns: a critical view. Trends Genet. 2007;23(3), 119–125. 10.1016/j.tig.2007.01.006 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Wu B, Hao W. Horizontal transfer and gene conversion as an important driving force in shaping the landscape of mitochondrial introns. G3/ Genes|Genomes|Genet. 2014;4(4), 605–612. 10.1534/g3.113.009910 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Kolesnikova AI, Putintseva YA, Simonov EP, Biriukov VV, Oreshkova NV, Pavlov IN et al. Mobile genetic elements explain size variation in the mitochondrial genomes of four closely-related Armillaria species. BMC Genomics. 2019;20, 351. 10.1186/s12864-019-5732-z [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Ballard JWO, Whitlock MC. The incomplete natural history of mitochondria. Mol. Ecol. 13, 729–744. Mol. Ecol. 2004;13, 729–44. 10.1046/j.1365-294x.2003.02063.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Medina R, Franco MEE, Bartel LC, Alcántara VM, Saparrat MCN, Balatti PA. Fungal mitogenomes: relevant features to planning plant disease management. Front. Microbiol. 2020;11:978. 10.3389/fmicb.2020.00978 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Song N, Geng Y, Li X. The mitochondrial genome of the phytopathogenic fungus Bipolaris sorokiniana and the utility of mitochondrial genome to infer phylogeny of Dothideomycetes. Front. Microbiol. 2020;11:863. 10.3389/fmicb.2020.00863 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Nadimi M, Daubois L, Hijri M. Mitochondrial comparative genomics and phylogenetic signal assessment of mtDNA among arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 2016;98, 74–83. 10.1016/j.ympev.2016.01.009 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Pantou MP, Kouvelis VN, Typas MA. The complete mitochondrial genome of Fusarium oxysporum: insights into fungal mitochondrial evolution. Gene. 2008;419, 7–15. 10.1016/j.gene.2008.04.009 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Kim JO, Choi KY, Han JH, Choi I-Y, Lee YH, Kim KS. The complete mitochondrial genome sequence of the ascomycete plant pathogen Colletotrichum acutatum. Mitochondrial DNA A DNA Mapp. Seq. Anal. 2015;1736, 1–2. 10.3109/19401736.2015.1101556 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Jiménez-Becerril MF, Hernández-Delgado S, Solís-Oba M, González Prieto JM. Analysis of mitochondrial genetic diversity of Ustilago maydis in Mexico. Mitochondrial DNA A DNA Mapp. Seq. Anal. 2016;29(1):1–8. 10.1080/24701394.2016.1229776 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Aliyu SR, Lin L, Chen X, Abdul W, Lin Y, Otieno FJ et al. Disruption of putative short-chain acyl CoA dehydrogenases compromised free radical scavenging, conidiogenesis, and pathogenesis of Magnaporthe oryzae. Fungal Genetics and Biology. 2019;127,23–34. 10.1016/j.fgb.2019.02.010 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Bartelli TF, Bruno DCF, Briones MRS. Evidence for mitochondrial genome methylation in the yeast Candida albicans: a potential novel epigenetic mechanism affecting adaptation and pathogenicity? Front. Genet. 2018;29;9,166. 10.3389/fgene.2018.00166 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Chang AL, Doering TL. Maintenance of mitochondrial morphology in Cryptococcus neoformans is critical for stress resistance and virulence. MBio. 2018;6;9(6). pii e01375–18. 10.1128/mBio.01375-18 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Kretschmer M, Lambie S, Croll D, Kronstad JW. Acetate provokes mitochondrial stress and cell death in Ustilago maydis. Mol. Microbiol. 2017;107, 488–507. 10.1111/mmi.13894 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Leite TF, Moon DH, Lima ACM, Labate CA, Tanaka FAO. A simple protocol for whole leaf preparation to investigate the interaction between Puccinia psidii and Eucalyptus grandis. Australas. Plant Pathol. 2013;42, 79–84. 10.1007/s13313-012-0179-6 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Hahn C, Bachmann L, Chevreux B. Reconstructing mitochondrial genomes directly from genomic next-generation sequencing reads—a baiting and iterative mapping approach, Nucleic Acids Res. 2013; 41(13), e129. 10.1093/nar/gkt371 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Chaisson MJ, Glenn T. Mapping single molecule sequencing reads using basic local alignment with successive refinement (BLASR): application and theory. BMC Bioinformatics. 2012;13, 238. 10.1186/1471-2105-13-238 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Bankevich A, Nurk S, Antipov D, Gurevich AA, Dvorkin M, Kulikov AS et al. SPAdes: a new genome assembly algorithm and its applications to single-cell sequencing. J. Comput. 2012;19(5), 455–477. 10.1089/cmb.2012.0021 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Gurevich A, Saveliev V, Vyahhi N, Tesler G. QUAST: quality assessment tool for genome assemblies. Bioinform. 2013;29(8), 1072–1075. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btt086 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Hasegawa M, Kishino H, Yano T. Dating of the human-ape splitting by a molecular clock of mitochondrial DNA. J. Mol. Evol. 1985;22, 160–174. 10.1007/BF02101694 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Beck N, Lang BF. Mfannot. 2010 [cited 25 March 2019] Available from: http://megasun.bch.umontreal.ca/cgi-bin/mfannot/mfannotInterface.pl.
  • 42.Tillich M, Lehwark P, Pellizzer T, Ulbricht-Jones ES, Fischer A, Bock R, et al. GeSeq–versatile and accurate annotation of organelle genomes. Nucl. Acids Res. 2017;45: W6–W11. 10.1093/nar/gkx391 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Lowe TM, Eddy SR. tRNAscan-SE: a program for improved detection of transfer RNA genes in genomic sequence. Nucl. Acids Res. 1997;25,955–964. 10.1093/nar/25.5.955 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Formighieri EF, Tiburcio RA, Armas ED, Medrano FJ, Shimo H, Carels N et al. The mitochondrial genome of the phytopathogenic basidiomycete Moniliophthora perniciosa is 109 kb in size and contains a stable integrated plasmid. Mycol. Res. 2008;112, 1136–1152. 10.1016/j.mycres.2008.04.014 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.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. 10.1093/molbev/msw054 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Capella-Gutierrez S, Silla-Martinez JM, Gabaldon T. trimAl: a tool for automated alignment trimming in large-scale phylogenetic analyses. Bioinformatics. 2009;25,1972–1973. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btp348 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Nylander JAA. MrModeltest v2. Program distributed by the author. Evolutionary Biology Centre, Uppsala University. 2004. [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Maddison WP, Maddison DR. Mesquite: a modular system for evolutionary analysis. Version 3.51. 2018 [cited 4 April 2019]. Available from: http://www.mesquiteproject.org.
  • 49.Edgar RC. MUSCLE: multiple sequence alignment with high accuracy and high throughput. Nucleic Acids Res. 2004, 32, 1792–179. 10.1093/nar/gkh340 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Silva JC, Gorenstein MV, Li G-Z, Vissers JPC, Geromanos SJ. Absolute quantification of proteins by LCMSE: a virtue of parallel MS acquisition. Mol Cell Proteomics. 2006;5(1):144–56. 10.1074/mcp.M500230-MCP200 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Bini AB, Quecine MQ, da Silva TM, Silva LD, Labate CA. Development of a quantitative real-time PCR assay using SYBR Green for early detection and quantification of Austropuccinia psidii in Eucalyptus grandis. Euro. J. Plant Pathol. 2018;150,735–746. 10.1007/s10658-017-1321-7 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Bini AP. Estudo molecular do desenvolvimento de Puccinia psidii Winter in vitro e no processo de infecção em Eucalyptus grandis. PhD thesis, Escola Superior de Agricultura Luiz de Queiroz, Brazil. 2016. Available from: https://teses.usp.br/teses/disponiveis/11/11137/tde-10112016-161846/pt-br.php.
  • 53.Lopes MS. Identificação in silico e perfil transcricional de genes candidatos a efetores de Austropuccinia psidii. Master’s dissertation, Escola Superior de Agricultura “Luiz de Queiroz”/USP, Brazil. 2017. Available from: https://teses.usp.br/teses/disponiveis/11/11137/tde-22032018-145215/pt-br.php.
  • 54.Pfaffl MW. A new mathematical model for relative quantification in real-time RT-PCR. Nucl. Acids Res. 2001;29:e45. 10.1093/nar/29.9.e45 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Pfaffl MW, Horgan GW, Dempfle L. Relative expression software tool (REST©) for group-wise comparison and statistical analysis of relative expression results in real-time PCR. Nucl. Acids Res. 2002;30:e36. 10.1093/nar/30.9.e36 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Huang X, Madan A. CAP3: A DNA sequence assembly program. Genome Res. 1999;9, 868–877. 10.1101/gr.9.9.868 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.James TY, Pelin A, Bonen L, Ahrendt S, Sain D, Corradi N, et al. Shared signatures of parasitism and phylogenomics unite Cryptomycota and microsporidia. Curr. Biol. 2013;23(16), 1548–1553. 10.1016/j.cub.2013.06.057 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Losada L, Pakala SB, Fedorova ND, Joardar V, Shabalina SA, Hostetler J et al. Mobile elements and mitochondrial genome expansion in the soil fungus and potato pathogen Rhizoctonia solani AG-3. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 2014;352(2), 165–173. 10.1111/1574-6968.12387 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Li C, Lu X, Zhang Y, Liu Na, Li C, Zheng W. The complete mitochondrial genomes of Puccinia striiformis f. sp. tritici and Puccinia recondita f. sp. tritici, Mitochondrial DNA B. 2020. 5(1), 29–30. 10.1080/23802359.2019.1674744 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Burger G, Gray MW, Lang BF. Mitochondrial genomes: anything goes. Trends Genet. 2003;19(12), 709–716. 10.1016/j.tig.2003.10.012 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61.Jelen V, De Jonge R, Van De Peer Y, Javornik B, Jakše J. Complete mitochondrial genome of the Verticillium-wilt causing plant pathogen Verticillium nonalfalfae. PLoS One. 2016;11(2), e0148525. 10.1371/journal.pone.0148525 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62.Li Y, Hu XD, Yang RH, Hsiang T, Wang K, Liang DQ et al. Complete mitochondrial genome of the medicinal fungus Ophiocordyceps sinensis. Sci. Rep. 2015;5(1),13892. 10.1038/srep13892 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63.Salavirta H, Oksanen I, Kuuskeri J, Mäkelä M, Laine P, Paulin L, et al. Mitochondrial genome of Phlebia radiata is the second largest (156 kbp) among fungi and features signs of genome flexibility and recent recombination events. PLoS One. 2014;9(5),e97141. 10.1371/journal.pone.0097141 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 64.Torriani SFF, Penselin D, Knogge W, Felder M, Taudien S, Platzer M et al. Comparative analysis of mitochondrial genomes from closely related Rhynchosporium species reveals extensive intron invasion. Fungal Genet. Biol. 2014;62, 34–42. 10.1016/j.fgb.2013.11.001 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65.Zhang S, Wang X-N, Zhang X-L, Liu X-Z, Zhang Y-J. Complete mitochondrial genome of the endophytic fungus Pestalotiopsis fici: features and evolution. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2017;101(4):1593–1604. 10.1007/s00253-017-8112-0 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 66.Queiroz CB, Santana MF, Vidigal PMP, Queiroz MV. Comparative analysis of the mitochondrial genome of the fungus Colletotrichum lindemuthianum, the causal agent of anthracnose in common beans. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2018;102, 2763–2778. 10.1007/s00253-018-8812-0 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 67.Beaudet D, Nadimi M, Iffis B, Hijri M. Rapid mitochondrial genome evolution through invasion of mobile elements in two closely related species of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi. PLoS One. 2013;8(4), e60768. 10.1371/journal.pone.0060768 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 68.Joardar V, Abrams NF, Hostetler J, Paukstelis PJ, Pakala S, Pakala SB et al. Sequencing of mitochondrial genomes of nine Aspergillus and Penicillium species identifies mobile introns and accessory genes as main sources of genome size variability. BMC Genomics. 2012;13(1), 698. 10.1186/1471-2164-13-698 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 69.Gonzalez P, Barroso G, Labarère J. Molecular analysis of the split cox1 gene from the Basidiomycota Agrocybe aegerita: relationship of its introns with homologous Ascomycota introns and divergence levels from common ancestral copies. Gene. 1998;220, 45–53. 10.1016/s0378-1119(98)00421-1 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 70.Vaughn JC, Mason MT, Sper-Whitis GL, Kuhlman P, Palmer JD. Fungal origin by horizontal transfer of a plant mitochondrial group I intron in the chimeric coxI gene of Peperomia. J Mol Evol. 1995;41(5):563–72. 36. 10.1007/BF00175814 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 71.Schuster A, Lopez JV, Becking LE, Kelly M, Pomponi SA, Wörheide G et al. Evolution of group I introns in Porifera: new evidence for intron mobility and implications for DNA barcoding. BMC Evol Biol. 2017;17:82. 10.1186/s12862-017-0928-9 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 72.Chi SI, Dahl M, Emblem Å, Johansen SD. Giant group I intron in a mitochondrial genome is removed by RNA back-splicing. BMC Mol Biol. 2019. 20(1), 16. 10.1186/s12867-019-0134-y [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 73.Ho Y, Kim SJ, Waring RB. A protein encoded by a group I intron in Aspergillus nidulans directly assists RNA splicing and is a DNA endonuclease. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1997. 94(17), 8994–9. 10.1073/pnas.94.17.8994 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 74.Schafer B, Wilde B, Massardo DR, Manna F, Giudice LD, Wolf K. A mitochondrial group I intron in fission yeast encodes a matures and is mobile in crosses. Curr Genet. 1994. 25, 33–341. 10.1007/BF00351487 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 75.Monteilhet C, Dziadkowiec D, Szczepanek T, Lazowska J. Purification and characterization of the DNA cleavage and recognition site of I-ScaI mitochondrial group I intron encoded endonuclease produced in Escherichia coli, Nucleic Acids Res. 2000. 28(5), 1245–1251. 10.1093/nar/28.5.1245 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 76.Van Ommen GJB, Boer PH, Groot GSP, de Haan M, Roosendaal E, Grivell LA, et al. Mutations affecting RNA splicing and the interaction of gene expression of the yeast mitochondrial loci cob and oxi-3. Cell. 1980. 20(1), 173–183. 10.1016/0092-8674(80)90245-7 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 77.Chevalier BS, Stoddard BL. Homing endonucleases: structural and functional insight into the catalysts of intron/intein mobility. Nucleic Acids Res. 2001. 29(18): 3757–3774. 10.1093/nar/29.18.3757 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 78.Zubaer A, Wai A, Hausner G. The fungal mitochondrial Nad5 pan-genic intron landscape, Mitochondrial DNA Part A. 2019. 30(8), 835–842. 10.1080/24701394.2019.1687691 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 79.Al-Reedy RM, Malireddy R, Dillman CB, Kennell JC. Comparative analysis of Fusarium mitochondrial genomes reveals a highly variable region that encodes an exceptionally large open reading frame. Fungal Genet. Biol. 2012;49(1), 2–14. 10.1016/j.fgb.2011.11.008 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 80.Torriani SFF, Goodwin SB, Kema GHJ, Pangilinan JL, McDonald BA. Intraspecific comparison and annotation of two complete mitochondrial genome sequences from the plant pathogenic fungus Mycosphaerella graminicola. Fungal Genetics and Biology. 2008;45(5)628–637. 10.1016/j.fgb.2007.12.005 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 81.Ambrosio AB, Nascimento LC, Oliveira BV, Teixeira PJPL, Tiburcio RA, Thomazella DPT et al. Global analyses of Ceratocystis cacaofunesya mitochondria: from genome to proteome. BMC Genomics 2013;14(91). 10.1186/1471-2164-14-91 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 82.Zhang Y, Zhang S, Zhang G, Liu X, Wang C, Xu J. Comparison of mitochondrial genomes provides insights into intron dynamics and evolution in the caterpillar fungus Cordyceps militaris. Fungal Genet. Biol. 2015;77, 95–107. 10.1016/j.fgb.2015.04.009 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 83.Aguileta G, De Vienne DM, Ross ON, Hood ME, Giraud T, Petit E, et al. High variability of mitochondrial gene order among fungi. Genome Biol. Evol. 2014;6(2), 451–465. 10.1093/gbe/evu028 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 84.Robicheau BM, Young AP, Labutti K, Grigoriev IV, Walker AK. The complete mitochondrial genome of the conifer needle endophyte, Phialocephala scopiformis DAOMC 229536 confirms evolutionary division within the fungal Phialocephala fortinii s.l.—Acephala appalanata species complex. Fungal Biol. 2017;121(3), 212–221. 10.1016/j.funbio.2016.11.007 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 85.Shen XY, Li T, Chen S, Fan L, Gao J, Hou CL. Characterization and phylogenetic analysis of the mitochondrial genome of Shiraia bambusicola reveals special features in the order of Pleosporales. PLoS One. 2015;10(3):e0116466. 10.1371/journal.pone.0116466 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 86.Wang P, Sha T, Zhang Y, Cao Y, Mi F, Liu C et al. Frequent heteroplasmy and recombination in the mitochondrial genomes of the basidiomycete mushroom Thelephora ganbajun. Sci. Rep. 2017;9;7(1), 1626. 10.1038/s41598-017-01823-z [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 87.Li Q, Chen C, Xiong C, Jin X, Chen Z, Huang W. Comparative mitogenomics reveals large-scale gene rearrangements in the mitochondrial genome of two Pleurotus species. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2018;102(14), 6143–6153. 10.1007/s00253-018-9082-6 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 88.Tang G, Zhang C, Ju Z, Zheng S, Wen Z, Xu S, et al. The mitochondrial membrane protein FgLetm1 regulates mitochondrial integrity, production of endogenous reactive oxygen species and mycotoxin biosynthesis in Fusarium graminearum. Mol. Plant Pathol. 2018, 19(7), 1595–1611. 10.1111/mpp.12633 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 89.Zoschke R, Nakamura M, Liere K, Sugiura M, Börner T, Schmitz-Linneweber C. An organellar maturase associates with multiple group II introns. Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010;107:3245–3250. 10.1073/pnas.0909400107 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 90.Keren I, Bezawork-Geleta A, Kolton M, Maayan I, Belausov E, Levy M, et al. AtnMat2, a nuclear-encoded maturase required for splicing of group-II introns in Arabidopsis mitochondria. RNA. 2009;15:2299–2311. 10.1261/rna.1776409 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 91.Jia W, Higgs PG, Codon usage in mitochondrial genomes: distinguishing context-dependent mutation from translational selection. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2008. 25(2). 339–351, 10.1093/molbev/msm259 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Minou Nowrousian

25 Sep 2020

PONE-D-20-26480

Revealing the high variability on nonconserved core and mobile elements of Austropuccinia psidii and other rust mitochondrial genomes

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Quecine,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please address all questions and comments raised by the reviewers. With respect to point 3 raised by reviewer 2, I realize that obtaining additional RNA-seq or proteomics data is outside of the the scope of this study, especially during the current coronavirus pandemic, but please make sure that you have used all available data or otherwise indicate where additional data might be needed to distinguish true genes from pseudogenes.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Nov 09 2020 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Minou Nowrousian

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. PLOS requires an ORCID iD for the corresponding author in Editorial Manager on papers submitted after December 6th, 2016. Please ensure that you have an ORCID iD and that it is validated in Editorial Manager. To do this, go to ‘Update my Information’ (in the upper left-hand corner of the main menu), and click on the Fetch/Validate link next to the ORCID field. This will take you to the ORCID site and allow you to create a new iD or authenticate a pre-existing iD in Editorial Manager. Please see the following video for instructions on linking an ORCID iD to your Editorial Manager account: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xcclfuvtxQ

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Partly

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: N/A

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: This is a well-prepared manuscript describing the mitochondrial genome of A. psidii, a rust fungus. It is of interest to the plant pathogenic fungi research community. I have several minor comments.

1. line 22, upon first mentioning, it is unclear what is "most species".

2. line 125, the sequence mining analysis is not described in detail enough that it can be reproduced.

3. line 153, same problem with the "Blast" analysis, which should be spelled as "BLAST".

4. Several another computational analysis throughout the manuscript were also not described in detail enough.

5. ClustalW is a relatively old tool. I think newer alignment tools like MAFFT, or MUSCLE, could help the authors achieve better alignment quality.

6. line 415, this section in discussion reads more like a reiteration of results. The authors should speculate a bit more as to why a trans-membrane protein is down-regulated during morphogenesis. What potential role it might play?

Reviewer #2: In the present manuscript, the mitochondrial genome of the rust fungus Austropuccinia psidii was sequenced and annotated. Besides the mitochondrial core genes, a large number of non-conserved predicted genes were identified in this genome, some of which have an alternative start codon. Three of the latter were confirmed by analysis of an existing proteome dataset. Only for one of them, expression was detectable at the RNA level. It is downregulated during infectious development. In parallel, the mitochondrial genes also enable phylogenetic comparisons which overall aligns well with the 28S phylogeny.

While additional mitochondrial genome sequences for rust fungi are of value to the community and the descriptive analysis is well-done, in the present state the manuscript appears premature. I suppose, the dataset originates from whole genome sequencing, and the mitochondrial genome was analysed separately. The manuscript would benefit from rewriting so that one or a few main findings are put into focus that shape the storyline.

I was left with these open questions:

1. What is the main point that is really special/novel about this mitochondrial genome?

2. The choice of genomes for comparison is not well explained. For example, two additional genomes from Puccinia striiformis f. sp. tritici (Pst) CY32 and P. recondita f. sp. tritici (Pt) HnZU18-3 were published last year. Why are these excluded? In particular since the former is larger than the A. psidii genome sequenced here.

3. Out of 33 ncORFs only 3 have support in proteome data, and of these only one is found at the RNA level. I would like to see more data supporting the predicted ORFs, e.g. from RNAseq or additional proteome analysis. In particular the ones with alternative start codons: could these be pseudogenes?

4. The homing endonucleases, in particular the GIY type, are highlighted. is there any evidence that they shaped evolution in this family?

Additional points:

Overall: the English language needs to be corrected by a native speaker. There are minor mistakes throughout the entire manuscript.

Line 23 and throughout the manuscript: In my opinion, it should be rust fungi, not fungi rusts. But please verify with a native speaker.

Line 113 and 236-239: It seems a lot to use 3 different sequencing methods for a mitochondrial genome. Please explain the contribution of each of the datasets to the final genome assembly.

Table 1: Please explain the choice of mitochondrial genomes chosen for comparison in the table heading. Also, readability might be improved by re-formatting the table.

Line 236: Here, I am missing an explanation of the quality parameters. What makes this assembly best?

Line 239: When reading this, I wondered if 37 % GC is typical. Later this information is given, but this is one example that illustrates why I would like the storyline to improve.

Table 3 and table 4: Both tables are rather lengthy. I would suggest to move them to the supplements are excel files, so that the reader can filter e.g. by position. For the main text, extract the most relevant features and make corresponding tables that only show, what is also discussed in the text. Orientation for example could also be included in fig. 1.

Line 324: orf414 should be orf 208

Line 326 and 330: Please adjust formatting of the reference.

Line 356: Reference is missing

Discussion: The more specific parts of the discussion could be moved to the results section to streamline the manuscript. In my view this would make the result section more interesting to read, and the discussion could focus on the highlight and the open questions of mitochondrial genome research.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2021 Mar 11;16(3):e0248054. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0248054.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


9 Feb 2021

February 4th, 2021

LETTER RESPONSE

Dear Academic Editor

Dr. Minou Nowrousian

PlosOne

This is a summary of the revision made in the manuscript entitled “Revealing the high variability on nonconserved core and mobile elements of Austropuccinia psidii and other rust mitochondrial genomes” (PONE-D-20-26480). We are grateful for the contributions made by the editor and reviewers. We tried to answer all the questions and we have also accepted all the suggestions made by them. The response to editor and reviewers’ comments is enclosed.

We look forward to hearing from you.

Best regards,

Maria Carolina Quecine

Response to Editor

We are grateful for the opportunity to resubmit our manuscript. We believe that all reviewer’s comments collaborated with the manuscript’s improvement.

• Concerning your observation “With respect to point 3 raised by reviewer 2, I realize that obtaining additional RNA-seq or proteomics data is outside of the the scope of this study, especially during the current coronavirus pandemic, but please make sure that you have used all available data or otherwise indicate where additional data might be needed to distinguish true genes from pseudogenes”, we confirm a non-available data from A. psidii to distinguish genes from pseudogenes. Thank you for your understanding about the limitation to obtain new data under the coronavirus pandemic. We also believe that it is outside of the scope of this study, however we carefully investigated about pseudogenes and A. psidii mtDNA as described below and with more detail in response to reviewer 2.

We agree that some ncORFs may be pseudogenes, however this possibility is not strong and we appointed some information to support our view. Firstly, we revised the alternative start and stop codons that were found in the ncORFs from A. psidii. A new annotation was made in MFannot and revised the result manually. In first draft we found 12 ncORFs harboring alternative star or stop codons (orf118_2,, orf123_1, orf162, orf171, orf174, orf241, orf311, orf319, orf337, orf363, orf688, orf717). From the new annotation, we observed that ncORFs, orf123_1, orf162 and orf174 were wrong characterized. The correct stop codon in orf123_1 is UAG. Similar mistake were observed in orf162 and orf174 in these ncORFs the stop codon are UAG and UAA respectively. All these mistakes were corrected in the manuscript.

Moreover, it is known that the presence of alternative codons is an indicative of pseudogenes. However, it is also known that mtDNA and other plastids genomes are composed with a great amount of genes with alternative codons, most of them related with mobile elements with functionality as the maturases (Zoschke et al. 2010, Keren et al. 2009). The 9 ncORFs (orf118_2, orf171, orf241, orf311, orf319, orf337, orf363, orf688, orf717) with alternative start codons that were found in mtDNA from A. psidii are associated with mobile elements. Most pseudogenes arise as copies of functional genes, either directly by DNA duplication or indirectly by reverse transcription of an mRNA transcript (Zheng et al. 2007). To verify this hypothesis we blasted our sequences with the own A. psidii mtDNA and with mtDNA from other rust mtDNA including CY32 and HnZU18-3 organisms. None similarity was found, except with the previously annotated mobile elements. Thus, the review of ncORFs with alternative start codons support previously studies that describe alternative start codons with mobile elements related with the evolution of the mtDNA in progress (Wenli et al. 2008, Chevalier and Stoddard 2001). The discussion about this question was added in the discussion section and we hope that have improved the manuscript.

References:

Chevalier BS, Stoddard BL. Homing endonucleases: structural and functional insight into the catalysts of intron/intein mobility. Nucleic Acids Res. 2001. 29(18): 3757–3774.doi: 10.1093/nar/29.18.3757

Keren I, Bezawork-Geleta A, Kolton M, Maayan I, Belausov E, Levy M, et al. AtnMat2, a nuclear-encoded maturase required for splicing of group-II introns in Arabidopsis mitochondria. RNA. 2009;15:2299–2311. doi: 10.1261/rna.1776409.

Wenli Jia, Paul G. Higgs, Codon Usage in Mitochondrial Genomes: Distinguishing Context-Dependent Mutation from Translational Selection, Molecular Biology and Evolution, Volume 25, Issue 2, February 2008, Pages 339–351, https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msm259

Zheng D, Frankish A, Baertsch R, Kapranov P, Reymond A, Choo SW, et al. Pseudogenes in the ENCODE regions: Consensus annotation, analysis of transcription, and evolution. Genome Res. 2007;17:839–851. doi: 10.1101/gr.5586307.

Zoschke R, Nakamura M, Liere K, Sugiura M, Börner T, Schmitz-Linneweber C. An organellar maturase associates with multiple group II introns. Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010;107:3245–3250. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0909400107.

Response to Reviewer 1

Thank you for considering our manuscript well prepared. We really appreciated all comments that certainly will improve our manuscript. The answers concerning the reviewer’s comments are listed below:

• Concerning the comment “Line 22, upon first mentioning, it is unclear what is "most species"”, we changed the phrase using “many fungal groups”.

• We agree with the observation “line 125, the sequence mining analysis is not described in detail enough that it can be reproduced”. Thus, we rewrote the methodology “Mining was performed using the Mirabait program in the MIRA package using the MITObim approach. All steps are performed using modules of the MIRA sequence assembler software, which is used in mapping mode to map reads to a reference and create new reference sequences; and an in silico-baiting module, which is used to extract reads that precisely match a given reference across a number of n k-mers of length k (defaults n= 1 and k = 31) from the entire set of reads [36].”. We also replaced the reference [36] with the current version of program specific to mitochondrial analysis that was used for us.

36. Hahn C, Bachmann L, Chevreux B. Reconstructing mitochondrial genomes directly from genomic next-generation sequencing reads—a baiting and iterative mapping approach, Nucleic Acids Res. 2013; 41(13), e129. doi:10.1093/nar/gkt371.

• Thank you for appointing the “BLAST spelling mistake” in line 153. It was corrected.

• We completely agree with the comment “Several another computational analysis throughout the manuscript were also not described in detail enough”. However, we worried to write a very long descriptive section without some substantial contribution to readers that can found the information from the software manual, downloading the programs and running each one according to their needs and specification. The programs used to bioinformatic analyses are often updated, so an information on a publication concerning the computational programs is very fast out of date. Thus, to improve the manuscript with some computational analysis details, we opted to include the site where the readers can download each program, the correspondent manual and where the readers can obtain more information how to run the programs. We also included the phrase “All computational analyses were performed according to software tutorials”. Moreover as possible, some details concerning the programs were also included in the manuscript.

• According the suggestion to use MUSCLE instead ClustalW to align the sequences, we performed a new alignment and did not obtained different results. However to improve the information to the readers we replaced the program in the methodology.

48, Edgar RC. MUSCLE: multiple sequence alignment with high accuracy and high throughput. Nucleic Acids Res. 2004, 32, 1792-179. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkh340.

• We agree that in “some parts of discussion reinterred our results”, thus, we rewrote some paragraphs: excluding some information or changing the position of information to result section as requested. As instance, “The number of LAGLIDADG endonucleases encoded in intronic ncORF on rust pathogen mtDNAs ranges between three in the soybean rust (P. pachyrhizi) and nine in A. psidii.”and “ Compared with other rust pathogens, A. psidii showed a higher diversity of HEGs and intron groups: nine LAGLIDADG endonucleases, three reverse transcriptases, and six intron group IA, eight IB, two ID and two II” information were remove from discussion to result section.

• Finally, as suggested by the reviewer 1 we speculated the role of orf208 and orf205 on A. psidii’s pathogenesis. “According to Tang et al. [87] the mitochondrial membrane protein FgLetm1, containing DUF2070, regulates mitochondrial integrity, production of endogenous reactive oxygen species and mycotoxin biosynthesis in Fusarium graminearum. The authors obtained ΔFgLetm1 mutant that showed significantly reduction on endogenous ROS levels, decreased mycotoxin deoxynivalenol biosynthesis and attenuated virulence in planta. Thus, we suggest that orf208 and orf205 encode a transmembrane protein that may be related with the fungal pathogenicity”

87. Tang G, Zhang C, Ju Z, Zheng S, Wen Z, Xu S, Chen Y, Ma Z. The mitochondrial membrane protein FgLetm1 regulates mitochondrial integrity, production of endogenous reactive oxygen species and mycotoxin biosynthesis in Fusarium graminearum. Mol. Plant Pathol. 2018, 19(7), 1595-1611. doi:10.1111/mpp.12633.

Response to Reviewer 2

Thank you for recognize our manuscript as well done. We appreciated all observation made by the Reviewer 2. The suggestion made certainly contributed with the correction of few mistakes as well with the improvement of our manuscript. We made clearer the novelty of our research as well as our findings and tried to explain it below.

• We agree with the observation “The manuscript would benefit from rewriting so that one or a few main findings are put into focus that shape the storyline”. Thus, in abstract and also in other sections we rewrote and emphasized some information to make clear the novelty of our research. As instance: “A. psidii mtDNA is one of the largest rust mtDNA sequenced to date, most likely due to the abundance of ncORFs”; “Mobile genetic elements invading intron sequences may have played significant roles size but not in the shaping the structure of rust mitochondrial genome.”; “The mtDNA from rust fungi are highly syntenic.”; “Interestingly, cox1, the gene with the greatest number of introns, provided phylogenies not congruent with the core set.”; “To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report of a complete mtDNA of .A psidii, belonging to a representative of the family Sphaerophragmiacea. Our comparative mtDNA analyses also improved the knowledge concerning the biology of others rust pathogens” were included in the manuscript.

We would like to make clear to Reviewer 2 that the major contribution of our research is a detailed study of mtDNA from A. psidii and at the first time from other rust pathogens. To our knowledge none previous publication have compared the mtDNA among members of this important group of pathogen. We made a new annotation of the mtDNA of five rust pathogens, investigated the synteny inner this group, considering and making a very detailed investigation about the present of introns and intronic genes in each core gene (Table 4, S1 Table, S2 Table, S3 Table, S4 Table, S5 Table and S6 Table).

We also would like to emphasize that A. psidii and its mtDNA has interesting aspects that deserve be detailed and discussed as made in the present research. This pathogens has a very interesting unclear information concerning its biology and its mtDNA may support clarify them, for instance, recently, taxonomic studies have led to the reclassification of A. psidii. A maximum-likelihood phylogenetic analysis using the sequences of the nuclear ribosomal RNA genes suggested that A. psidii does not belong to the genus Puccinia but instead should be within the new genus Austropuccinia of Pucciniales in the redefined family Sphaerophragmiaceae. More information about its mtDNA may contribute to validate this new classification. Moreover is the first report of a mitochondrial genome belonging to a representative of the family Sphaerophragmiacea.

Among mtDNA from rust pathogens, our research is the first one that tried to prove the presence of prediction of “hypothetical gene” from ncORFs. Using proteomic data we proved the prediction of 3, approximately 10% of ncORFs. Two of those were found exclusively in A. psidii mtDNA. We also proved the expression by RT-qPCR of one of those three, orf208 that according to literature may has function related with pathogenesis in Fusarium graminearum. This information was included in the discussion “According to Tang et al. [87] the mitochondrial membrane protein FgLetm1, containing DUF2070, regulates mitochondrial integrity, production of endogenous reactive oxygen species and mycotoxin biosynthesis in Fusarium graminearum. The authors obtained ΔFgLetm1 mutant that showed significantly reduction on endogenous ROS levels, decreased mycotoxin deoxynivalenol biosynthesis and attenuated virulence in planta. Thus, we suggest that orf208 and orf205 encode a transmembrane protein that may be related with the fungal pathogenicity”. We also highlight that a profile of ncORF from A. psidii may support the discussion of expressed genes in further studies of this pathogen.”

Finally, the observation of a non-congruence of phylogenetic analyses of 14 concatenated mtDNA core genes, 18S rDNA with cox1 is an importance contribution of our research. The recent classification used LSU-SSU barcode sequences genes, some mitochondrial genes reveled in our research may support A. psidii classification.

87. Tang G, Zhang C, Ju Z, Zheng S, Wen Z, Xu S, Chen Y, Ma Z. The mitochondrial membrane protein FgLetm1 regulates mitochondrial integrity, production of endogenous reactive oxygen species and mycotoxin biosynthesis in Fusarium graminearum. Mol. Plant Pathol. 2018, 19(7), 1595-1611. doi:10.1111/mpp.12633.

• Concerning the question, “The choice of genomes for comparison is not well explained. For example, two additional genomes from Puccinia striiformis f. sp. tritici (Pst) CY32 and P. recondita f. sp. tritici (Pt) HnZU18-3 were published last year. Why are these excluded? In particular since the former is larger than the A. psidii genome sequenced here.” we would like to inform that all analyses from our manuscript were made in 2019, unhappily before the publication Li et al. (2020). We used just the mitogenomes available during the analyses. We believe that the analyses without the mtDNA from CY32 and HnZU18-3 did not influenced our main discoveries based on the relevance of ncORFs in A. psidii mtDNA evolution, the validation of 3 “hypothetical proteins” and additional information of intronic and mobile elements in mtDNA rust pathogens. However, our manuscript was improved with additional information concerning the mtDNA from CY32 and HnZU18-3 as instance: “The mtDNA from P. striiformis f. sp. tritici ranged 102,521 [58], approximately 25% bigger than the mtDNA from P. striiformis PST-78, used in the present study” in discussion section.

58. Li C, Lu X, Zhang Y, Liu Na, Li C, Zheng W. The complete mitochondrial genomes of Puccinia striiformis f. sp. tritici and Puccinia recondita f. sp. tritici, Mitochondrial DNA B. 2020. 5(1), 29-30. doi: 10.1080/23802359.2019.1674744.

• We really appreciated the observation and question “Out of 33 ncORFs only 3 have support in proteome data, and of these only one is found at the RNA level. I would like to see more data supporting the predicted ORFs, e.g. from RNAseq or additional proteome analysis. In particular the ones with alternative start codons: could these be pseudogenes?”. We regret to inform that we did not have additional data to support the prediction of all mtDNA A. psidii ncORFs. However, the publication of ncORFs profile of A. psidii mtDNAand other rust mtDNA may be used to other research groups or us in further analyses.

From the 33 ncORFs found by in silico analysis, 3 were validated from proteomic analyses, some remaining 30 ncDNA may be pseudogenes. However, this possibility is not strong and we appointed some information to support our view in the present letter as well explained about it in the discussion. This observation raised by the reviewer certainly made the manuscript more interesting to readers.

Firstly, we revised the alternative start and stop codons that were found in the ncORFs from A. psidii. A new annotation was made in MFannot and revised the result manually. In first draft we found 12 ncORFs harboring alternative star or stop codons (orf118_2,, orf123_1, orf162, orf171, orf174, orf241, orf311, orf319, orf337, orf363, orf688, orf717). From the new annotation, we observed that ncORFs, orf123_1, orf162 and orf174 were wrong characterized. The correct stop codon in orf123_1 is UAG. Similar mistake were observed in orf162 and orf174 in these ncORFs the stop codon are UAG and UAA respectively. All these mistakes were corrected in the manuscript (old Table 4, currently S2 Table).

It is known that the presence of alternative codons is an indicative of pseudogenes. However, it is also known that mtDNA and other plastids genomes are composed with a great amount of genes with alternative codons, most of them related with mobile elements with functionality as the maturases (Zoschke et al. 2010, Keren et al. 2009). The 9 ncORFs (orf118_2, orf171, orf241, orf311, orf319, orf337, orf363, orf688, orf717) with alternative start codons that were found in mtDNA from A. psidii are associated with mobile elements. Moreover, it is known that most pseudogenes arise as copies of functional genes, either directly by DNA duplication or indirectly by reverse transcription of an mRNA transcript. To verify this hypothesis we blasted our sequences with the own A. psidii mtDNa and with mtDNA from other organism. None similarity was found, except with the previously annotated mobile elements. Thus, the review of ncORFs with alternative start codons support previously studies that describe alternative start codons with mobile elements related with the evolution of the mtDNA in progress (Jia and Higgs 2008, Chevalier and Stoddard, 2001). The discussion about this question was included in the discussion section “Some pseudogenes have as characteristic the presence of start or stop codons. Among the 33 ncORFs present in A. psidii mtDNA, nine harbor start alternative códons. We strong believe that they are not pseudogenes because it is also known that mtDNA and other plastids genomes are composed with a great amount of genes with alternative codons, most of them related with mobile elements with functionality as the maturases [88, 89]. The 9 ncORFs (orf118_2, orf171, orf241, orf311, orf319, orf337, orf363, orf688, orf717) with alternative start codons that were found in A. psidii mtDNA are associated with mobile elements, that may be related with the evolution of the mtDNA in progress [76, 90]. More assays using different stimuli, as well as assays carried out in planta, should be perfomerd to validate the ncORFs presence enconding protein to help the understanding the function of these ncORFs in mtDNA A. psidii”.

76. Chevalier BS, Stoddard BL. Homing endonucleases: structural and functional insight into the catalysts of intron/intein mobility. Nucleic Acids Res. 2001. 29(18): 3757–3774.doi: 10.1093/nar/29.18.375.

88. Zoschke R, Nakamura M, Liere K, Sugiura M, Börner T, Schmitz-Linneweber C. An organellar maturase associates with multiple group II introns. Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010;107:3245–3250. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0909400107.

89. Keren I, Bezawork-Geleta A, Kolton M, Maayan I, Belausov E, Levy M, et al. AtnMat2, a nuclear-encoded maturase required for splicing of group-II introns in Arabidopsis mitochondria. RNA. 2009;15:2299–2311. doi: 10.1261/rna.1776409.

90. Jia W, Higgs PG, Codon usage in mitochondrial genomes: distinguishing context-dependent mutation from translational selection. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2008. 25(2). 339–351, doi: 10.1093/molbev/msm259.

• We appreciated the question “the homing endonucleases, in particular the GIY type, are highlighted. is there any evidence that they shaped evolution in this family?”, thus, we rewrote the discussion including also a paragraph about it “Many group I intron-encoded LAGLIDADG proteins also function as maturases that assist in RNA splicing [71, 72, 73, 74). This activity was described in some fungi as Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Saccharomyces capensis, Aspergillus nidulans mitochondria [72, 74, 75] suggesting that endonuclease and maturase activity to be closely coupled in both the function and evolution of LAGLIDADG proteins encoded within group I introns also in rust pathogens [76]. GIY-YIG ORFs have also been reported in introns of fungal mitochondria [76, 77]. However, any GIY-YIG endonuclease was found in rust mtDNA”. Our study is the first detailed ncORF catalogue including HEGs present in A. psidii mtDNA as well as of other rust pathogens.

71. Chi SI, Dahl M, Emblem Å, Johansen SD. Giant group I intron in a mitochondrial genome is removed by RNA back-splicing. BMC Mol Biol. 2019 20(1), 16. doi: 10.1186/s12867-019-0134-y.

72. Ho Y, Kim SJ, Waring RB. A protein encoded by a group I intron in Aspergillus nidulans directly assists RNA splicing and is a DNA endonuclease. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1997. 94(17), 8994-9. doi: 10.1073/pnas.94.17.8994.

73. Schafer B, Wilde B, Massardo DR, Manna F, Giudice LD, Wolf K. A mitochondrial group I intron in fission yeast encodes a matures and is mobile in crosses. Curr Genet. 1994. 25, 33-341. doi: 10.1007/BF00351487.

74. Monteilhet C, Dziadkowiec D, Szczepanek T, Lazowska J. Purification and characterization of the DNA cleavage and recognition site of I-ScaI mitochondrial group I intron encoded endonuclease produced in Escherichia coli, Nucleic Acids Res. 2000. 28(5), 1245–1251. doi:10.1093/nar/28.5.1245

75. Van Ommen GJB, Boer PH, Groot GSP, de Haan M, Roosendaal E, Grivell LA, Haid A, Schweyen RJ. Mutations affecting RNA splicing and the interaction of gene expression of the yeast mitochondrial loci cob and oxi-3. Cell. 1980. 20(1), 173-183. doi:10.1016/0092-8674(80)90245-7

76. Chevalier BS, Stoddard BL. Homing endonucleases: structural and functional insight into the catalysts of intron/intein mobility. Nucleic Acids Res. 2001. 29(18): 3757–3774.doi: 10.1093/nar/29.18.375.

77. Zubaer A, Wai A, Hausner G. The fungal mitochondrial Nad5 pan-genic intron landscape, Mitochondrial DNA Part A. 2019. 30(8), 835-842. doi: 10.1080/24701394.2019.1687691.

• We improved the English in the manuscript using the edition service from American Journal Expert. The certificate is enclosed below.

• We agree with the observation “throughout the manuscript: in my opinion, it should be rust fungi, not fungi rusts.”, thus, we edited the English and rust fungi was used in whole manuscript.

• Concerning the use of 3 different sequencing methods for a mitochondrial genome, we know that is unnecessary and unusual. We would like to explain that our initial proposal was to obtain the nuclear genome. However during our research we faced with a complex and big genome to A. psidii. Recent publications estimated 1 GB (McTaggart et al. 2018, Tobias et al. 2020). Thus, during our working in nuclear genome of A. psidii MF-1, we obtained the mtDNA of MF-1. There is not mtDNA data available to a representative member of the family Sphaerophragmiacea and also any comparative analyses of rust mtDNA. Thus, we decided that should be worthy to publish the mtDNA A.psidii analyses separately of nuclear assembled genome that is progress.

Tobias PA, Schwessinger B, Deng CH , Wu C, Dong C, Sperschneider J, Jones A, Smith GR, Tibbits J, Chagné D, Park RF. Long read assembly of the pandemic strain of Austropuccinia psidii (myrtle rust) reveals an unusually large (gigabase sized) and repetitive fungal genome, bioRxiv preprint doi: 10.1101/2020.03.18.996108.

McTaggart AR, Duong TA, Le VQ, Shuey LS, Smidt W, Naidoo S, Wingfield MJ, Wingfield BD.Chromium sequencing: the doors open for genomics of obligate plant pathogens, BioTechniques. 2018, 65 : 253 – 257. doi: 10.2144/btn-2018-0019.

• Concerning the comment “line 236: here, I am missing an explanation of the quality parameters. What makes this assembly best?”, we agree that it was confusing and we rewrote this phrase in the manuscript “the mt genome assembly resulted in two contigs: 62,940 bp and 30,490 bp”

• We agree with the comment “line 239: When reading this, I wondered if 37 % GC is typical. Later this information is given, but this is one example that illustrates why I would like the storyline to improve.”. It is really an example of the relevance of a storyline, we rewrote all manuscript to improve it. Moreover, we included the information “very similar to other published rust mtDNA” in the results section.

• According to the suggestion made “Table 3 and table 4: Both tables are rather lengthy. I would suggest to move them to the supplements are excel files, so that the reader can filter e.g. by position. For the main text, extract the most relevant features and make corresponding tables that only show, what is also discussed in the text. Orientation for example could also be included in fig. 1”, we merged the relevant information of Table 3 and Table 4 creating a new current Table 3 and moved the old Table 3 and Table 4 to supplementary material, current S1 Table and S2 Table respectively

• The mistakes “Line 324: orf414 should be orf 208”, “Line 326 and 330: Please adjust formatting of the reference” and “Line 356: Reference is missing” were corrected in the manuscript.

• We agree with the comment “Discussion: The more specific parts of the discussion could be moved to the results section to streamline the manuscript. In my view this would make the result section more interesting to read, and the discussion could focus on the highlight and the open questions of mitochondrial genome research.”. Thus, all discussion was rewrote, some information was moved to result section and new ones included in the discussion.

We hope to have answered all questions,

Sincerely,

Maria Carolina Quecine

Attachment

Submitted filename: Almeida et al - Response to Reviewers.docx

Decision Letter 1

Minou Nowrousian

11 Feb 2021

PONE-D-20-26480R1

Revealing the high variability on nonconserved core and mobile elements of Austropuccinia psidii and other rust mitochondrial genomes

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Quecine,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

The following spelling/wording errors should be corrected:

1. Line 24: Please change "fungi rusts" to "rust fungi" (and make sure that this is the case throughout the text).

2. Line 104: should be "through" (not though)?

3. Line 272: Sentence is not quite clear. Should it be something like "in contrast to the conserved core genes, the ncORFs were found on both strands"?

4. Lines 329-330: M. perniciosa should be in italics.

5. Line 356: Please correct spelling mistakes in "mtDNA", "size" and "occur".

6. Please check the text again for other spelling errors etc.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Mar 28 2021 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Minou Nowrousian

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2021 Mar 11;16(3):e0248054. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0248054.r004

Author response to Decision Letter 1


17 Feb 2021

Response to Editor

We are grateful for the opportunity to resubmit again our manuscript. All mistakes were corrected in the manuscript.

1. Line 24: Please change "fungi rusts" to "rust fungi" (and make sure that this is the case throughout the text).

R: We replaced “fungi rusts” to “rust fungi” in all manuscript.

2. Line 104: should be "through" (not though)?

R: Certainly, the correct spelling is “through”. It was corrected in the manuscript

3. Line 272: Sentence is not quite clear. Should it be something like "in contrast to the conserved core genes, the ncORFs were found on both strands"?

R: We agree that the sentence “The ncORFs diferentlly of conserved core genes were found in both strand” was confusing and it was replaced by “In contrast to the conserved core genes, the ncORFs were found on both strands” as suggested the editor.

4. Lines 329-330: M. perniciosa should be in italics.

R: We put in italics the name M. perniciosa

5. Line 356: Please correct spelling mistakes in "mtDNA", "size" and "occur".

6. Please check the text again for other spelling errors etc.

R: We verified carefully the whole manuscript and all mistakes were corrected.

We hope to have answered all questions,

Sincerely,

Maria Carolina Quecine

Attachment

Submitted filename: Almeida et al - Response Letter.docx

Decision Letter 2

Minou Nowrousian

19 Feb 2021

Revealing the high variability on nonconserved core and mobile elements of Austropuccinia psidii and other rust mitochondrial genomes

PONE-D-20-26480R2

Dear Dr. Quecine,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Minou Nowrousian

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Acceptance letter

Minou Nowrousian

26 Feb 2021

PONE-D-20-26480R2

Revealing the high variability on nonconserved core and mobile elements of Austropuccinia psidii and other rust mitochondrial genomes

Dear Dr. Quecine:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Minou Nowrousian

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

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

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Fig. Maximum likelihood phylogenetic tree of rust pathogens based on 18S rDNA partial sequences obtained from the GenBank nucleotide sequence database.

    The accession numbers are in parentheses. The sequences were aligned using the MUSCLE method. For the phylogenetic tree construction, the statistical methods Maximum Likelihood, the Bootstrap method test with 1000 repetitions, and the Hasegawa—Kishino—Yano model were performed. The numbers above tree nodes represent the bootstrap support values. M. perniciosa was used as an out-group.

    (DOCX)

    S1 Table. Conserved gene features of the Austropuccinia psidii MF-1 mitochondrial genome.

    (DOCX)

    S2 Table. Nonconserved ORFs (ncORFs) features of the Austropuccinia psidii MF-1 mitochondrial genome.

    (DOCX)

    S3 Table. Nonconserved ORFs (ncORFs) features in mtDNA rust pathogens.

    (DOCX)

    S4 Table. Number of LAGLIDADG endonucleases and intron types present in introns of six genes gene in mtDNA of rust pathogens.

    (DOCX)

    S5 Table. Features of introns characterized in mtDNA of rust pathogens.

    (DOCX)

    S6 Table. Nonconserved ORFs (ncORFs) in mtDNA Austropuccinia psidii MF-1 shared by other rust pathogens.

    (DOCX)

    S7 Table. Conserved domain in unknown function proteins found in Austropuccinia psidii.

    (DOCX)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Almeida et al - Response to Reviewers.docx

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Almeida et al - Response Letter.docx

    Data Availability Statement

    The complete sequence of the mitochondrial genome of A. psidii has been deposited in GenBank (accession number MN018834).


    Articles from PLoS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES