Contrasting gene expression patterns in grain of high and low asparagine wheat genotypes in response to sulphur supply.
Acrylamide
Amino acid metabolism
Asparagine synthetase
Crop composition
Food safety
RNA-seq
Sulphur
Triticum aestivum
Wheat
bZIP
Journal
BMC genomics
ISSN: 1471-2164
Titre abrégé: BMC Genomics
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100965258
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 Aug 2019
01 Aug 2019
Historique:
received:
01
05
2019
accepted:
23
07
2019
entrez:
3
8
2019
pubmed:
3
8
2019
medline:
24
12
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Free asparagine is the precursor for acrylamide formation during cooking and processing of grains, tubers, beans and other crop products. In wheat grain, free asparagine, free glutamine and total free amino acids accumulate to high levels in response to sulphur deficiency. In this study, RNA-seq data were acquired for the embryo and endosperm of two genotypes of bread wheat, Spark and SR3, growing under conditions of sulphur sufficiency and deficiency, and sampled at 14 and 21 days post anthesis (dpa). The aim was to provide new knowledge and understanding of the genetic control of asparagine accumulation and breakdown in wheat grain. There were clear differences in gene expression patterns between the genotypes. Sulphur responses were greater at 21 dpa than 14 dpa, and more evident in SR3 than Spark. TaASN2 was the most highly expressed asparagine synthetase gene in the grain, with expression in the embryo much higher than in the endosperm, and higher in Spark than SR3 during early development. There was a trend for genes encoding enzymes of nitrogen assimilation to be more highly expressed in Spark than SR3 when sulphur was supplied. TaASN2 expression in the embryo of SR3 increased in response to sulphur deficiency at 21 dpa, although this was not observed in Spark. This increase in TaASN2 expression was accompanied by an increase in glutamine synthetase gene expression and a decrease in asparaginase gene expression. Asparagine synthetase and asparaginase gene expression in the endosperm responded in the opposite way. Genes encoding regulatory protein kinases, SnRK1 and GCN2, both implicated in regulating asparagine synthetase gene expression, also responded to sulphur deficiency. Genes encoding bZIP transcription factors, including Opaque2/bZIP9, SPA/bZIP25 and BLZ1/OHP1/bZIP63, all of which contain SnRK1 target sites, were also expressed. Homeologues of many genes showed differential expression patterns and responses, including TaASN2. Data on the genetic control of free asparagine accumulation in wheat grain and its response to sulphur supply showed grain asparagine levels to be determined in the embryo, and identified genes encoding signalling and metabolic proteins involved in asparagine metabolism that respond to sulphur availability.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Free asparagine is the precursor for acrylamide formation during cooking and processing of grains, tubers, beans and other crop products. In wheat grain, free asparagine, free glutamine and total free amino acids accumulate to high levels in response to sulphur deficiency. In this study, RNA-seq data were acquired for the embryo and endosperm of two genotypes of bread wheat, Spark and SR3, growing under conditions of sulphur sufficiency and deficiency, and sampled at 14 and 21 days post anthesis (dpa). The aim was to provide new knowledge and understanding of the genetic control of asparagine accumulation and breakdown in wheat grain.
RESULTS
RESULTS
There were clear differences in gene expression patterns between the genotypes. Sulphur responses were greater at 21 dpa than 14 dpa, and more evident in SR3 than Spark. TaASN2 was the most highly expressed asparagine synthetase gene in the grain, with expression in the embryo much higher than in the endosperm, and higher in Spark than SR3 during early development. There was a trend for genes encoding enzymes of nitrogen assimilation to be more highly expressed in Spark than SR3 when sulphur was supplied. TaASN2 expression in the embryo of SR3 increased in response to sulphur deficiency at 21 dpa, although this was not observed in Spark. This increase in TaASN2 expression was accompanied by an increase in glutamine synthetase gene expression and a decrease in asparaginase gene expression. Asparagine synthetase and asparaginase gene expression in the endosperm responded in the opposite way. Genes encoding regulatory protein kinases, SnRK1 and GCN2, both implicated in regulating asparagine synthetase gene expression, also responded to sulphur deficiency. Genes encoding bZIP transcription factors, including Opaque2/bZIP9, SPA/bZIP25 and BLZ1/OHP1/bZIP63, all of which contain SnRK1 target sites, were also expressed. Homeologues of many genes showed differential expression patterns and responses, including TaASN2.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Data on the genetic control of free asparagine accumulation in wheat grain and its response to sulphur supply showed grain asparagine levels to be determined in the embryo, and identified genes encoding signalling and metabolic proteins involved in asparagine metabolism that respond to sulphur availability.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31370780
doi: 10.1186/s12864-019-5991-8
pii: 10.1186/s12864-019-5991-8
pmc: PMC6676566
doi:
Substances chimiques
Transcription Factors
0
Asparagine
7006-34-0
Sulfur
70FD1KFU70
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
628Subventions
Organisme : Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council
ID : BB/I020918/1
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council
ID : SWBio iCASE DTP Studentship
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council
ID : BB/P016855/1
Pays : United Kingdom
Références
Nature. 2002 Oct 3;419(6906):448-9
pubmed: 12368844
Nature. 2002 Oct 3;419(6906):449-50
pubmed: 12368845
Adv Genet. 2003;49:111-84
pubmed: 12779252
Plant J. 1992 Sep;2(5):791-7
pubmed: 1302632
J Agric Food Chem. 2003 Jul 30;51(16):4782-7
pubmed: 14705913
Trends Plant Sci. 2004 Jan;9(1):13-7
pubmed: 14729214
J Plant Physiol. 2005 Jan;162(1):81-9
pubmed: 15700423
Plant Physiol Biochem. 2005 Jul;43(7):669-79
pubmed: 16087344
J Agric Food Chem. 2006 Nov 15;54(23):8951-5
pubmed: 17090146
Plant Cell. 2006 Nov;18(11):3235-51
pubmed: 17114350
Plant Biotechnol J. 2006 Jul;4(4):409-18
pubmed: 17177806
J Agric Food Chem. 2007 May 16;55(10):4271-7
pubmed: 17455956
Nature. 2007 Aug 23;448(7156):938-42
pubmed: 17671505
Nucleic Acids Res. 2008 Jun;36(10):3420-35
pubmed: 18445632
J Agric Food Chem. 2009 Feb 11;57(3):1013-21
pubmed: 19143525
Ann Bot. 2009 Jul;104(1):1-7
pubmed: 19376782
Ann Bot. 2010 Feb;105(2):197-203
pubmed: 20007158
J Agric Food Chem. 2010 Feb 10;58(3):1959-69
pubmed: 20055414
Plant Biotechnol J. 2012 Apr;10(3):328-40
pubmed: 22070093
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1990 Jan;87(1):46-50
pubmed: 2296602
J Cereal Sci. 2013 May;57(3):463-470
pubmed: 23805028
J Cereal Sci. 2013 Sep;58(2):255-262
pubmed: 24748715
J Cereal Sci. 2016 Mar;68:122-131
pubmed: 27110058
J Agric Food Chem. 2016 Dec 28;64(51):9689-9696
pubmed: 27977182
Food Chem. 2018 Jan 15;239:304-313
pubmed: 28873573
Front Plant Sci. 2018 Jan 15;8:2237
pubmed: 29379512
Sci Rep. 2018 Feb 6;8(1):2499
pubmed: 29410526
Plant Physiol. 2018 May;177(1):12-23
pubmed: 29592862
Food Energy Secur. 2018 Feb;7(1):e00126
pubmed: 29938110
Plant Mol Biol. 1995 Mar;27(6):1235-40
pubmed: 7766906
FASEB J. 1994 Feb;8(2):192-200
pubmed: 8119490
Plant J. 1993 Aug;4(2):343-55
pubmed: 8220485
Plant Cell. 1993 Feb;5(2):227-36
pubmed: 8453304
Plant Cell. 1997 Feb;9(2):171-84
pubmed: 9061949
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1997 Jul 8;94(14):7685-90
pubmed: 9207153
Plant Mol Biol. 1998 Jul;37(5):735-48
pubmed: 9678569
Mol Gen Genet. 1998 Nov;260(4):388-94
pubmed: 9870704