Molecular response to water stress in two contrasting Mediterranean pines (Pinuspinaster and Pinus pinea)

Plant Physiology and Biochemistry

Volumn 67, Issue , 2013, Pages 199-208

  Perdiguero, Pedro ^a,b   Barbero, María del Carmen ^a,b   Cervera, María Teresa ^a,b,c   Collada, Carmen ^a,b   Soto, Álvaro ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSIDAD POLITÉCNICA DE MADRID   (Spain)

^b INIA   (Spain)

^c Instituto Nacional de Investigación y Tecnología Agraria y Alimentaria   (Spain)

Author keywords

Drought; Mediterranean pines; Microarray; RT PCR

Indexed keywords

CONIFEROPHYTA; MAGNOLIOPHYTA; PINUS PINASTER; PINUS PINEA; TRACHEOPHYTA;

ADAPTATION; DEHYDRATION; DROUGHT; METABOLISM; PHYSIOLOGY; PINE; REPRODUCIBILITY; REVERSE TRANSCRIPTION POLYMERASE CHAIN REACTION;

ADAPTATION, PHYSIOLOGICAL; DEHYDRATION; DROUGHTS; PINUS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; REVERSE TRANSCRIPTASE POLYMERASE CHAIN REACTION;

EID: 84876332741     PISSN: 09819428     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.plaphy.2013.03.008     Document Type: Article

References (70)

1. IPCC Climate Change 2007-The Physical Science Basis: Working Group IContribution to the Fourth Assessment Report of the IPCC 2007, Cambridge University Press.
2. Huang G.T., Ma S.L., Bai L.P., Zhang L., Ma H., Jia P., Liu J., Zhong M., Guo Z.F. Signal transduction during cold, salt, and drought stresses in plants. Molecular Biology Reports 2012, 39:969-987.
3. Dubos C., Le Provost G., Pot D., Salin F., Lalane C., Madur D., Frigerio J.M., Plomion C. Identification and characterization of water-stress-responsive genes in hydroponically grown maritime pine (Pinus pinaster) seedlings. Tree Physiology 2003, 23:169-179.
4. Dubos C., Plomion C. Identification of water-deficit responsive genes in maritime pine (Pinus pinaster Ait.) roots. Plant Molecular Biology 2003, 51:249-262.
5. Heath L.S., Ramakrishnan N., Sederoff R.R., Whetten R.W., Chevone B.I., Struble C.A., Jouenne V.Y., Chen D.W., van Zyl L., Grene R. Studying the functional genomics of stress responses in loblolly pine with the Expresso microarray experiment management system. Comparative and Functional Genomics 2002, 3:226-243.
6. Lorenz W.W., Alba R., Yu Y.-S., Bordeaux J., Simoes M., Dean J. Microarray analysis and scale-free gene networks identify candidate regulators indrought-stressed roots of loblolly pine (P.taeda L.). BMC Genomics 2011, 12:264.
7. Lorenz W.W., Sun F., Liang C., Kolychev D., Wang H.M., Zhao X., Cordonnier-Pratt M.M., Pratt L.H., Dean J.F.D. Water stress-responsive genes in loblolly pine (Pinus taeda) roots identified by analyses of expressed sequence tag libraries. Tree Physiology 2006, 26:1-16.
8. Perdiguero P., Collada C., Barbero M.C., García Casado G., Cervera M.T., Soto Á. Identification of water stress genes in Pinus pinaster Ait. by controlled progressive stress and suppression-subtractive hybridization. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry 2012, 50:44-53.
9. Sathyan P., Newton R.J., Loopstra C.A. Genes induced by WDS are differentially expressed in two populations of aleppo pine (Pinus halepensis). Tree Genetics and Genomes 2005, 1:166-173.
10. Watkinson J.I., Sioson A.A., Vasquez-Robinet C., Shukla M., Kumar D., Ellis M., Heath L.S., Ramakrishnan N., Chevone B., Watson L.T., van Zyl L., Egertsdotter U., Sederoff R.R., Grene R. Photosynthetic acclimation is reflected in specific patterns of gene expression in drought-stressed loblolly pine. Plant Physiology 2003, 133:1702-1716.
11. Dubos C., Plomion C. Drought differentially affects expression of a PR-10 protein, in needles of maritime pine (Pinus pinaster Ait.) seedlings. Journal of Experimental Botany 2001, 52:1143-1144.
12. Padmanabhan V., Dias D.M.A.L., Newton R.J. Expression analysis of a gene family in loblolly pine (Pinus taeda L.) induced by water deficit stress. Plant Molecular Biology 1997, 35:801-807.
13. Perdiguero P., Barbero M.C., Cervera M.T., Soto Á., Collada C. Novel conserved segments are associated with differential expression patterns for Pinaceae dehydrins. Planta 2012, 236:1863-1874.
14. Velasco-Conde T., Yakovlev I., Majada J., Aranda I., Johnsen Ø. Dehydrins in maritime pine (Pinus pinaster) and their expression related to drought stress response. Tree Genetics and Genomes 2012, 8:957-973.
15. Eveno E., Collada C., Guevara M.A., Leger V., Soto A., Diaz L., Leger P., Gonzalez-Martinez S.C., Cervera M.T., Plomion C., Garnier-Gere P.H. Contrasting patterns of selection at Pinus pinaster Ait. drought stress candidate genes as revealed by genetic differentiation analyses. Molecular Biology and Evolution 2008, 25:417-437.
16. Aranda I., Alia R., Ortega U., Dantas A.K., Majada J. Intra-specific variability in biomass partitioning and carbon isotopic discrimination under moderate drought stress in seedlings from four Pinus pinaster populations. Tree Genetics and Genomes 2010, 6:169-178.
17. de Miguel M., Sánchez-Gómez D., Cervera M.T., Aranda I. Functional and genetic characterization of gas exchange and intrinsic water use efficiency in a full-sib family of Pinus pinaster Ait. in response to drought. Tree Physiology 2012, 32:94-103.
18. Lopez R., Aranda I., Gil L. Osmotic adjustment is a significant mechanism of drought resistance in Pinus pinaster and Pinus canariensis. Investigacion Agraria: Sistemas Y Recursos Forestales 2009, 18:159-166.
19. Picon C., Guehl J.M., Ferhi A. Leaf gas exchange and carbon isotope composition responses to drought in a drought-avoiding (Pinus pinaster) andadrought-tolerant (Quercus petraea) species under present and elevatedatmospheric CO2 concentrations. Plant Cell and Environment 1996, 19:182-190.
20. Vendramin G.G., Fady B., González-Martínez S.C., Hu F.S., Scotti I., Sebastiani F., Soto Á., Petit R.J. Genetically depauperate but widespread: the case of emblematic Mediterranean pine. Evolution 2008, 62:680-688.
21. Awada T., Radoglou K., Fotelli M.N., Constantinidou H.I.A. Ecophysiology of seedlings of three Mediterranean pine species in contrasting light regimes. Tree Physiology 2003, 23:33-41.
22. Valladares F., Pearcy R.W. Drought can be more critical in the shade than inthe sun: a field study of carbon gain and photo-inhibition in a Californianshrub during a dry El Nino year. Plant Cell and Environment 2002, 25:749-759.
23. Ruepp A., Zollner A., Maier D., Albermann K., Hani J., Mokrejs M., Tetko I., Guldener U., Mannhaupt G., Munsterkotter M., Mewes H.W. The FunCat, a functional annotation scheme for systematic classification of proteins from whole genomes. Nucleic Acids Research 2004, 32:5539-5545.
24. Dinakar C., Djilianov D., Bartels D. Photosynthesis in desiccation tolerant plants: energy metabolism and antioxidative stress defense. Plant Science 2012, 182:29-41.
25. Nakamoto H., Vígh L. The small heat shock proteins and their clients. Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences 2007, 64:294-306.
26. Savić J.A., Dragićević I.A.A., Pantelić D., Oljača J., Momčilović I. Expression of small heat shock proteins and heat tolerance in potato (Solanum tuberosum L.). Archives of Biological Sciences 2012, 64:135-144.
27. Soto A., Allona I., Collada C., Guevara M.-A., Casado R., Rodriguez-Cerezo E., Aragoncillo C., Gomez L. Heterologous expression of a plant small heat-shock protein enhances Escherichia coli viability under heat and cold stress. Plant Physiology 1999, 120:521-528.
28. Sun W., Van Montagu M., Verbruggen N. Small heat shock proteins and stress tolerance in plants. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA) - Gene Structure and Expression 2002, 1577:1-9.
29. Jiang C., Xu J., Zhang H.A.O., Zhang X., Shi J., Li M.I.N., Ming F. Acytosolic class I small heat shock protein, RcHSP17.8, of Rosa chinensis confers resistance to a variety of stresses to Escherichia coli, yeast and Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant, Cell & Environment 2009, 32:1046-1059.
30. Cho E., Choi Y. Anuclear-localized HSP70 confers thermoprotective activityand drought-stress tolerance on plants. Biotechnology Letters 2009, 31:597-606.
31. Vásquez-Robinet C., Watkinson J.I., Sioson A.A., Ramakrishnan N., Heath L.S., Grene R. Differential expression of heat shock protein genes in preconditioning for photosynthetic acclimation in water-stressed loblolly pine. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry 2010, 48:256-264.
32. Kimura M., Yamamoto Y.Y., Seki M., Sakurai T., Sato M., Abe T., Yoshida S., Manabe K., Shinozaki K., Matsui M. Identification of Arabidopsis genes regulated by high light-stress using cDNA microarray. Photochemistry and Photobiology 2003, 77:226-233.
33. Azevedo C., Santos-Rosa M.J., Shirasu K. The U-box protein family in plants. Trends in Plant Science 2001, 6:354-358.
34. Bruria H. Role of proline in plant response to drought and salinity. Handbook of Plant and Crop Stress 2010, 213-238. CRC Press. third ed. M. Pessarakli (Ed.).
35. Corcuera L., Gil-Pelegrin E., Notivol E. Aridity promotes differences in prolineand phytohormone levels in Pinus pinaster populations from contrasting environments. Trees: Structure and Function 2012, 26:799-808.
36. Cruz de Carvalho M.H. Drought stress and reactive oxygen species: production, scavenging and signaling. Plant Signaling & Behavior 2008, 3:156-165.
37. Mizoi J., Shinozaki K., Yamaguchi-Shinozaki K. AP2/ERF family transcription factors in plant abiotic stress responses. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA) - Gene Regulatory Mechanisms 2012, 1819:86-96.
38. Rushton P.J., Somssich I.E., Ringler P., Shen Q.J. WRKY transcription factors. Trends in Plant Science 2010, 15:247-258.
39. Zhou Q.Y., Tian A.G., Zou H.F., Xie Z.M., Lei G., Huang J., Wang C.M., Wang H.W., Zhang J.S., Chen S.Y. Soybean WRKY-type transcription factor genes, GmWRKY13, GmWRKY21, and GmWRKY54, confer differential tolerance to abiotic stresses in transgenic Arabidopsis plants. Plant Biotechnology Journal 2008, 6:486-503.
40. Campbell B., Hallengren J., Hannapel D. Accumulation of BEL1-like transcripts in solanaceous species. Planta 2008, 228:897-906.
41. Chen L.Q., Hou B.H., Lalonde S., Takanaga H., Hartung M.L., Qu X.Q., Guo W.J., Kim J.G., Underwood W., Chaudhuri B., Chermak D., Antony G., White F.F., Somerville S.C., Mudgett M.B., Frommer W.B. Sugar transporters for intercellular exchange and nutrition of pathogens. Nature 2010, 468:527-532.
42. Pedron L., Baldi P., Hietala A.M., La Porta N. Genotype-specific regulation of cold-responsive genes in cypress (Cupressus sempervirens L.). Gene 2009, 437:45-53.
43. Deepak S., Shailasree S., Kini R.K., Muck A., Mithöfer A., Shetty S.H. Hydroxyproline-rich glycoproteins and plant defence. Journal of Phytopathology 2010, 158:585-593.
44. Crouzet J., Trombik T., Fraysse Å.S., Boutry M. Organization and function of the plant pleiotropic drug resistance ABC transporter family. FEBS Letters 2006, 580:1123-1130.
45. Dallas P., Gottardo N., Firth M., Beesley A., Hoffmann K., Terry P., Freitas J., Boag J., Cummings A., Kees U. Gene expression levels assessed by oligonucleotide microarray analysis and quantitative real-time RT-PCR - how well do they correlate?. BMC Genomics 2005, 6:59.
46. Sánchez-Gómez D., Velasco-Conde T., Cano-Martín F.J., Ángeles Guevara M., Teresa Cervera M., Aranda I. Inter-clonal variation in functional traits in response to drought for a genetically homogeneous Mediterranean conifer. Environmental and Experimental Botany 2011, 70:104-109.
47. Cohen D. Expected efficiency of water utilization in plants under differentcompetition and selection regimes. Israel Journal of Botany 1970, 19:50-54.
48. Nguyen-Queyrens A., Ferhi A., Loustau D., Guehl J.M. Within-ring delta C-13spatial variability and interannual variations in wood cellulose of two contrasting provenances of Pinus pinaster. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 1998, 28:766-773.
49. Zhang J.W., Feng Z., Cregg B.M., Schumann C.M. Carbon isotopic composition, gas exchange, and growth of three populations of ponderosa pine differing in drought tolerance. Tree Physiology 1997, 17:461-466.
50. Fernandez M., Gil L., Pardos J.A. Effects of water supply on gas exchange in Pinus pinaster Ait. provenances during their first growing season. Annals of Forest Science 2000, 57:9-16.
51. Kozlowski T.T., Pallardy S.G. Physiology of Woody Plants 1996, Academic Press.
52. Levitt J. Responses of Plants to Environmental Stresses. Water, Radiation, Salt, and Other Stresses 1980, vol. II. Academic Press.
53. Canales J., Avila C., Cánovas F.M. Amaritime pine antimicrobial peptideinvolved in ammonium nutrition. Plant, Cell & Environment 2011, 34:1443-1453.
54. Goodger J.Q.D., Schachtman D.P. Nitrogen source influences root to shoot signaling under drought. Abiotic Stress Adaptation in Plants 2010, 165-173. Springer, Netherlands. A. Pareek, S.K. Sopory, H.J. Bohnert (Eds.).
55. Mirouze M., Paszkowski J. Epigenetic contribution to stress adaptation in plants. Current Opinion in Plant Biology 2012, 14:267-274.
56. Phillips J.R., Dalmay T., Bartels D. The role of small RNAs in abiotic stress. FEBS Letters 2007, 581:3592-3597.
57. Schena M., Shalon D., Davis R.W., Brown P.O. Quantitative monitoring of gene expression patterns with a complementary DNA microarray. Science 1995, 270:467-470.
58. Brinker M., van Zyl L., Liu W., Craig D., Sederoff R.R., Clapham D.H., von Arnold S. Microarray analyses of gene expression during adventitious root development in Pinus contorta. Plant Physiology 2004, 135:1526-1539.
59. Davey M., Graham N., Vanholme B., Swennen R., May S., Keulemans J. Heterologous oligonucleotide microarrays for transcriptomics in a non-model species; a proof-of-concept study of drought stress in Musa. BMC Genomics 2009, 10:436.
60. van Zyl L., von Arnold S., Bozhkov P., Chen Y., Egertsdotter U., MacKay J., Sederoff R.R., Shen J., Zelena L., Clapham D.H. Heterologous array analysis in Pinaceae: hybridization of Pinus taeda cDNA arrays with cDNA from needles and embryogenic cultures of P.taeda, P. sylvestris or Picea abies. Comparative and Functional Genomics 2002, 3:306-318.
61. Adie B.A.T., Perez-Perez J., Perez-Perez M.M., Godoy M., Sanchez-Serrano J.J., Schmelz E.A., Solano R. ABA is an essential signal for plant resistance to pathogens affecting JA biosynthesis and the activation of defenses in Arabidopsis. Plant Cell 2007, 19:1665-1681.
62. Smyth G.K., Speed T. Normalization of cDNA microarray data. Methods 2003, 31:265-273.
63. Smyth G.K. Linear Models and Empirical Bayes Methods for Assessing Differential Expression in Microarray Experiments 2004, The Berkeley Electronic Press.
64. Breitling R., Armengaud P., Amtmann A., Herzyk P. Rank products: a simple, yet powerful, new method to detect differentially regulated genes in replicated microarray experiments. FEBS Letters 2004, 573:83-92.
65. Hong F., Breitling R., McEntee C.W., Wittner B.S., Nemhauser J.L., Chory J. RankProd: a bioconductor package for detecting differentially expressed genes in meta-analysis. Bioinformatics 2006, 22:2825-2827.
66. Saeed A.I., Bhagabati N.K., Braisted J.C., Liang W., Sharov V., Howe E.A., Li J., Thiagarajan M., White J.A., Quackenbush J., Alan K., Brian O. TM4 Microarray Software Suite, Methods in Enzymology 2006, vol. 411:134-193. Academic Press.
67. Smyth G. Limma: linear models for microarray data. Bioinformatics and Computational Biology Solutions Using R and Bioconductor 2005, 397-420. Springer, New York. R. Gentleman, V.J. Carey, W. Huber, R.A. Irizarry, S. Dudoit (Eds.).
68. Al-Shahrour F.t., Minguez P., Tárraga J., Montaner D., Alloza E., Vaquerizas J.M., Conde L., Blaschke C., Vera J., Dopazo J. BABELOMICS: a systems biology perspective in the functional annotation of genome-scale experiments. Nucleic Acids Research 2006, 34:W472-W476.
69. Al-Shahrour F., Díaz-Uriarte R., Dopazo J. FatiGO: a web tool for finding significant associations of Gene Ontology terms with groups of genes. Bioinformatics 2004, 20:578-580.
70. Pfaffl M.W. Anew mathematical model for relative quantification in real-time RT-PCR. Nucleic Acids Research 2001, 29:e45.