Genome-wide in silico identification of phospholipase D (PLD) gene family from Corchorus capsularis and Corchorus olitorius: reveals their responses to plant stress.
Gene expression and abiotic stress
Jute
Phospholipase D
Plant growth
Journal
Journal, genetic engineering & biotechnology
ISSN: 2090-5920
Titre abrégé: J Genet Eng Biotechnol
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 101317150
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
11 Feb 2022
11 Feb 2022
Historique:
received:
21
09
2021
accepted:
30
01
2022
entrez:
11
2
2022
pubmed:
12
2
2022
medline:
12
2
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Plant grows in nature facing various types of abiotic stresses for their normal growth and development. During abiotic stress, plants evolve different types of mechanisms to survive in a hostile environment. Phospholipase D (PLD) plays important role in the regulation of diverse cellular processes including stress responses in plants. Member of PLD genes are well studied in different model plants; however, their functions in the jute are not clear yet. In the present study, a total of 12 and 11 PLD genes were identified in the genome of C. capsularis and C. olitorius, respectively. The presence of the two conserved HKD motifs in PLD genes except for CoPLDδ-2 in jute suggests their strong lipase activity. Twenty different motifs were found in the identified PLD genes, and PLD-β1, PLD-γ1, and all members of PLD-δ1 of both jute species contained the highest number of motifs. Phylogenetic analysis showed the close evolutionary relationship among the five groups of jute PLD proteins along with the PLD proteins from Arabidopsis. Tissue-specific expression pattern of PLDα1-2, PLD-α2, PLDβ1, PLDγ1, and PLDδ1 of two jute species suggested their involvement in plant growth and development. However, the expression pattern of PLDα1-2, PLDα1-3, PLD-α4, PLDδ1, and PLDδ3 indicated their association during waterlogging stress. In addition, PLD-α2, PLDβ1, and PLDδ2 seemed to be involved in drought stress as well as salinity stress. This genome-wide identification of jute PLD genes from C. capsularis and C. olitorius will help to further functional characterization of the PLD genes for developing stress-tolerant jute variety.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Plant grows in nature facing various types of abiotic stresses for their normal growth and development. During abiotic stress, plants evolve different types of mechanisms to survive in a hostile environment. Phospholipase D (PLD) plays important role in the regulation of diverse cellular processes including stress responses in plants. Member of PLD genes are well studied in different model plants; however, their functions in the jute are not clear yet.
RESULT
RESULTS
In the present study, a total of 12 and 11 PLD genes were identified in the genome of C. capsularis and C. olitorius, respectively. The presence of the two conserved HKD motifs in PLD genes except for CoPLDδ-2 in jute suggests their strong lipase activity. Twenty different motifs were found in the identified PLD genes, and PLD-β1, PLD-γ1, and all members of PLD-δ1 of both jute species contained the highest number of motifs. Phylogenetic analysis showed the close evolutionary relationship among the five groups of jute PLD proteins along with the PLD proteins from Arabidopsis. Tissue-specific expression pattern of PLDα1-2, PLD-α2, PLDβ1, PLDγ1, and PLDδ1 of two jute species suggested their involvement in plant growth and development. However, the expression pattern of PLDα1-2, PLDα1-3, PLD-α4, PLDδ1, and PLDδ3 indicated their association during waterlogging stress. In addition, PLD-α2, PLDβ1, and PLDδ2 seemed to be involved in drought stress as well as salinity stress.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
This genome-wide identification of jute PLD genes from C. capsularis and C. olitorius will help to further functional characterization of the PLD genes for developing stress-tolerant jute variety.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35147846
doi: 10.1186/s43141-022-00311-w
pii: 10.1186/s43141-022-00311-w
pmc: PMC8837719
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
28Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
Nat Plants. 2017 Jan 30;3:16223
pubmed: 28134914
J Genet Eng Biotechnol. 2021 Mar 24;19(1):46
pubmed: 33761027
Plant Cell Physiol. 2019 Jul 1;60(7):1556-1566
pubmed: 31073607
Nucleic Acids Res. 2020 Mar 18;48(5):2209-2219
pubmed: 31943056
Plant J. 2006 Feb;45(3):358-68
pubmed: 16412083
Nat Biotechnol. 2004 Apr;22(4):427-33
pubmed: 15004566
Front Plant Sci. 2015 Nov 09;6:977
pubmed: 26617619
Mol Biol Evol. 2018 Jun 1;35(6):1547-1549
pubmed: 29722887
Front Plant Sci. 2013 Oct 29;4:425
pubmed: 24194741
BMC Genomics. 2002;3:2
pubmed: 11876823
Trends Pharmacol Sci. 1996 May;17(5):182-5
pubmed: 8669123
PLoS One. 2017 Oct 23;12(10):e0185863
pubmed: 29059212
Front Genet. 2019 Jun 11;10:529
pubmed: 31244883
Curr Opin Plant Biol. 2002 Oct;5(5):408-14
pubmed: 12183179
Plant Cell. 2000 Nov;12(11):2237-46
pubmed: 11090221
BMC Plant Biol. 2010 Jun 18;10:117
pubmed: 20565843
J Biol Chem. 2008 Jan 4;283(1):461-468
pubmed: 17962199
Cell Res. 2007 Oct;17(10):881-94
pubmed: 17876344
FEBS J. 2007 May;274(10):2672-81
pubmed: 17459102
Plant Physiol. 2002 Mar;128(3):1057-68
pubmed: 11891260
J Biol Chem. 1994 Aug 12;269(32):20312-7
pubmed: 8051126
Mol Biol Evol. 1987 Jul;4(4):406-25
pubmed: 3447015
Infect Immun. 2010 May;78(5):1952-62
pubmed: 20194595
Plant Physiol. 2005 Oct;139(2):566-73
pubmed: 16219918
J Genet Eng Biotechnol. 2021 Nov 09;19(1):173
pubmed: 34751850
BMC Plant Biol. 2008 Apr 28;8:49
pubmed: 18442365
J Plant Res. 2012 Jul;125(4):569-78
pubmed: 22161123
PLoS One. 2016 May 23;11(5):e0156281
pubmed: 27213891
J Genet Eng Biotechnol. 2021 Aug 21;19(1):124
pubmed: 34420115
Sci Rep. 2017 Nov 29;7(1):16565
pubmed: 29185475
Protoplasma. 2018 Jul;255(4):1195-1204
pubmed: 29455366
Genes (Basel). 2017 Sep 18;8(9):
pubmed: 28927022
Plant J. 2001 Oct;28(2):135-44
pubmed: 11722757
Front Plant Sci. 2017 Jun 19;8:913
pubmed: 28674540
Biochim Biophys Acta. 1998 Jan 23;1389(3):222-72
pubmed: 9512651
Curr Opin Plant Biol. 2006 Oct;9(5):515-22
pubmed: 16877031
Annu Rev Plant Biol. 2003;54:265-306
pubmed: 14502992
Sci China Life Sci. 2016 Feb;59(2):130-41
pubmed: 26718354
Nucleic Acids Res. 2007 Jul;35(Web Server issue):W585-7
pubmed: 17517783