RNA-Seq reveals new DELLA targets and regulation in transgenic GA-insensitive grapevines

Abstract

Background Gibberellins (GAs) and their regulator DELLA are involved in many aspects of plant growth and development and most of our current knowledge in the DELLA-facilitated GA signaling was obtained from the studies of annual species. To understand GA-DELLA signaling in perennial species, we created ten GA-insensitive transgenic grapevines carrying a DELLA mutant allele ( Vvgai1 ) in the background of Vitis vinifera ‘Thompson Seedless’ and conducted comprehensive analysis of their RNA expression profiles in the shoot, leaf and root tissues. Results The transgenic lines showed varying degrees of dwarf stature and other typical DELLA mutant phenotypes tightly correlated with the levels of Vvgai1 expression. A large number of differentially expressed genes (DEGs) were identified in the shoot, leaf and root tissues of the transgenic lines and these DEGs were involved in diverse biological processes; many of the DEGs showed strong tissue specificity and about 30% them carried a DELLA motif. We further discovered unexpected expression patterns of several key flowering induction genes VvCO, VvCOL1 and VvTFL1 . Conclusions Our results not only confirmed many previous DELLA study findings in annual species, but also revealed new DELLA targets and responses in grapevine, including the roles of homeodomain transcription factors as potential co-regulators with DELLA in controlling the development of grapevine which uniquely possess both vegetative and reproductive meristems at the same time. The contrasting responses of some key flowering induction pathway genes provides new insights into the divergence of GA-DELLA regulations between annual and perennial species in GA-DELLA signaling. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12870-019-1675-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Morphological Characterization of Flower Buds Development and Related Gene Expression Profiling at Bud Break Stage in Heterodichogamous Cyclocarya paliurus (Batal.) lljinskaja

“…Most genes associated with photoperiod pathway (cryptochrome circadian regulator 2 ( CpCRY2 ) [40], early flowering ( CpELF ), timing of CAB expression 1 ( CpTOC1 )) [42] and vernalization pathway (flower lucos C ( CpFLC ) and flower lucos D ( CpFLD )) [43] were assigned to level III. Level IV, the highest expression contained 2 genes (hexokinase ( CpHXK ) [44] and pyruvate kinase ( CpPK )) [45] belonging to metabolism of glucose, 3 genes responding to GA ( CpDELLA ) [46], CK (cyclin D3 ( CpCYCD3 )) [47], and IAA (auxin responsive GH3 gene family ( CpGH3 )) [38], respectively. Particularly, the expression of CpDEFICIENS [48] in later flowering type was much higher than that in first flowering type.…”

Multiple transcriptome comparisons reveal the essential roles of FLOWERING LOCUS T in floral initiation and SOC1 and SVP in floral activation in blueberry

“…In annual plants, SVP , independent of photoperiod and temperature, inhibits floral transition in the autonomous flowering pathway and promotes EARLY FLOWERING MYB PROTEIN (EFM) expression to suppress flowering ( Gregis et al, 2008 ; Fornara et al, 2010 ; Yan et al, 2014 ). In the other words, SVP was considered as a repressor in chilling-promoted flowering ( Li et al, 2010 ; Wu et al, 2017a ; Wu et al, 2017b ; Arro et al, 2019 ; Wang et al, 2021 ; Dong et al, 2022 ). In woody plants, SVP homologues were found to be either a positive or negative regulator in flowering depending on plant species and homolog ( Diaz-Riquelme et al, 2012 ; Li-Mallet et al, 2016 ; Wu et al, 2017a ; Wu et al, 2017b ; Arro et al, 2019 ; Kamal et al, 2019 ; Wang et al, 2021 ; Dong et al, 2022 ).…”

“…In the other words, SVP was considered as a repressor in chilling-promoted flowering ( Li et al, 2010 ; Wu et al, 2017a ; Wu et al, 2017b ; Arro et al, 2019 ; Wang et al, 2021 ; Dong et al, 2022 ). In woody plants, SVP homologues were found to be either a positive or negative regulator in flowering depending on plant species and homolog ( Diaz-Riquelme et al, 2012 ; Li-Mallet et al, 2016 ; Wu et al, 2017a ; Wu et al, 2017b ; Arro et al, 2019 ; Kamal et al, 2019 ; Wang et al, 2021 ; Dong et al, 2022 ). The results of this study using northern highbush blueberry ‘Aurora’ are consistent with that from previous reports in a southern highbush blueberry “Legacy”, confirming that chilling accumulation promotes expression of VcSVP ( Song and Chen, 2018b ).…”

“…However, the roles of SVP expression in flowering may vary among different SVP homologues. For example, in grape, SVP homologues were found to be inconsistent in either promoting or repressing flowering, which contrasts to the negative relationship in Arabidopsis (Diaz-Riquelme et al, 2012;Li-Mallet et al, 2016;Arro et al, 2019;Kamal et al, 2019;Dong et al, 2022). Blueberry SVP (VcSVP) expression in floral buds of southern highbush 'Legacy' and its mutant (Mu-Legacy) was upregulated after receiving sufficient chilling hours and downregulated in florescence (Song and Chen, 2018b).…”

<i>In Silico</i> Analysis of <i>Phalaenopsis Orchid Homeobox1</i> (<i>POH1</i>) Functional Gene for Shoot Development in <i>Phalaenopsis</i> Orchid

“…The interaction of them affects phytohormone regulation that is related to plant development (Niu & Fu 2022). The heterodimer modulates phytohormone by activating cytokinin and repressing gibberellin (Tadege 2013;Testone et al 2015;Marsch-Martínez & de Folter 2016), which correlates to shoot development (Wybouw & De Rybel 2019;Arro et al 2019). Not only for shoot development, but also KNOX protein linked up to the lignification process in dicot and monocot plants (Townsley et al 2013;Xu et al 2019), the diversity of leaf shape (Gao et al 2015;Wang et al 2022), and a necessary role in starchy storage organs (Dong et al 2019;Rüscher et al 2021).…”