Open Access

Comparative metabolic and transcriptional analysis of a doubled diploid and its diploid citrus rootstock (C. junos cv. Ziyang xiangcheng) suggests its potential value for stress resistance improvement

  • Feng-Quan Tan1,
  • Hong Tu1,
  • Wu-Jun Liang1,
  • Jian-Mei Long1,
  • Xiao-Meng Wu1,
  • Hong-Yan Zhang1 and
  • Wen-Wu Guo1Email author
BMC Plant Biology201515:89

https://doi.org/10.1186/s12870-015-0450-4

Received: 24 September 2014

Accepted: 5 February 2015

Published: 18 March 2015

Abstract

Background

Polyploidy has often been considered to confer plants a better adaptation to environmental stresses. Tetraploid citrus rootstocks are expected to have stronger stress tolerance than diploid. Plenty of doubled diploid citrus plants were exploited from diploid species for citrus rootstock improvement. However, limited metabolic and molecular information related to tetraploidization is currently available at a systemic biological level. This study aimed to evaluate the occurrence and extent of metabolic and transcriptional changes induced by tetraploidization in Ziyang xiangcheng (Citrus junos Sieb. ex Tanaka), which is a special citrus germplasm native to China and widely used as an iron deficiency tolerant citrus rootstock.

Results

Doubled diploid Ziyang xiangcheng has typical morphological and anatomical features such as shorter plant height, larger and thicker leaves, bigger stomata and lower stomatal density, compared to its diploid parent. GC-MS (Gas chromatography coupled to mass spectrometry) analysis revealed that tetraploidization has an activation effect on the accumulation of primary metabolites in leaves; many stress-related metabolites such as sucrose, proline and γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA) was remarkably up-regulated in doubled diploid. However, LC-QTOF-MS (Liquid chromatography quadrupole time-of-flight mass spectrometry) analysis demonstrated that tetraploidization has an inhibition effect on the accumulation of secondary metabolites in leaves; all the 33 flavones were down-regulated while all the 6 flavanones were up-regulated in 4x. By RNA-seq analysis, only 212 genes (0.8% of detected genes) are found significantly differentially expressed between 2x and 4x leaves. Notably, those genes were highly related to stress-response functions, including responses to salt stress, water and abscisic acid. Interestingly, the transcriptional divergence could not explain the metabolic changes, probably due to post-transcriptional regulation.

Conclusion

Taken together, tetraploidization induced considerable changes in leaf primary and secondary metabolite accumulation in Ziyang xiangcheng. However, the effect of tetraploidization on transcriptome is limited. Compared to diploid, higher expression level of stress related genes and higher content of stress related metabolites in doubled diploid could be beneficial for its stress tolerance.

Keywords

Citrus Doubled diploid Stress tolerance Primary and secondary metabolism Transcriptome

Background

Polyploidy is a common biological phenomenon and plays an important role in evolutionary history of plants [1-3]. Almost all angiosperms have undergone at least one round of whole-genome duplication in the course of their evolution [4,5]. Polyploids are classified into autopolyploids and allopolyploids. The first comes from doubling a diploid genome. And the latter arises from the combination of two or more sets of divergent genomes [6,7]. Many major crop plants including wheat (allohexaploid), cotton (allotetraploid), oilseed rape (allotetraploid), sweet potato (autotetraplooid), rice and maize (paleopolyploid) are polyploids. Moreover, polyploidy cultivars are prevalent in fruit plants, such as banana (triploid), grape (tetraploid), kiwifruit and persimmon (hexaploid), strawberry (octaploid). Phenotypic variations caused by polyploidization possess the potential to improve agricultural productivity and efficiency, especially in increasing biomass and stress tolerance.

Polyploidy has a significant influence on morphology and physiology of newly formed offspring. Compared with the corresponding diploids, autopolyploids tend to have larger cells, which result in the enlargement of single organs, such as leaves, flowers and seeds [8,9]. Physiological traits such as plant height, growth rate, flowering time, and fertility also can be altered by polyploidization [10-12]. It has been shown that tetraploidization might significantly increase stress tolerance [13,14].

A limited number of studies have investigated metabolic changes caused by autopolyploidization, and those studies focused on only specific metabolites [12]. The production of alkaloids was enhanced in artificial autotetraploids Hyoscyamus niger [15]. More artemisinin was produced in hairy roots of autotetraploid Artemisia annua [16]. Similarly, essential oils were accumulated much more in autotetraploid aromatic grasses (Cymbopogon) [17]. Moreover, the concentration of some metabolites like GAs (glycoalkaloids) were differentially influenced by autotetraploidy, increasing the content of minor GAs and decreasing the content of major GAs in autotetraploid Solanum commersonii [18].

Gene expression variations caused by allopolyploidization have been widely reported in many species including Arabidopsis [19,20], citrus [21], maize [22], and tobacco [23]. However, the studies on autopolyploidization aimed at identifying the alterations of genome expression patterns are relatively less than those on allopolyploidization. It is probably because autopolyploidy has long been viewed as less frequent and less important. The number of the genes differentially expressed between diploid and autotetraploid potato was about 10% [24]. A much lower rate (less than 2%) was observed when autotetraploid Arabidopsis was compared with diploid progenitor [25]. Similarly, study performed in autotetraploid and diploid Rangpur lime (Citrus limonia) showed about 1% variation in transcriptome [26]. Notably, the differentially expressed genes induced by autotetraploidization were highly related to stress response [14,25].

Citrus is one most important fruit crop in the world. However, citrus production is influenced by many environmental stresses including drought, salinity and extreme temperature [27]. Citrus rootstock improvement is required to cope with these abiotic stresses. Ziyang xiangcheng is a local citrus rootstock originated from southwest China. It was considered a putative hybrid of Citrus ichangensis and Citrus reticulata [28]. Because of its excellent performance in biotic and abiotic stresses, it has been widely used as a citrus rootstock in China [28,29]. Citrus rootstocks are propagated through polyembryonic seeds and genetically identical to the maternal plant [30-32]. The majority of citrus genotypes are apomictic, and all the apomictic embryos originate from nucellar cells [30]. Tetraploidization events are frequent in apomictic citrus genotypes [30,33]. Doubled diploid seedlings in apomictic genotypes are considered to arise from somatic chromosome doubling of maternal cells and should be genetically identical to the seed source tree [30,31]. Recent studies demonstrate that genome doubling is often considered to confer plants a better adaptability to various environmental stresses [13,14,33,34]. Therefore, doubled diploid citrus rootstocks were expected to have substantial advantage over diploid in stress tolerance. In our previous citrus breeding program, we obtained plenty of spontaneous doubled diploids from various citrus rootstock varieties, including Ziyang xiangcheng (Citrus junos Sieb. ex Tanaka) [35,36].

To test the effects of tetraploidization on Ziyang xiangcheng, we performed comparative metabolic and transcriptional analysis of doubled diploid and its diploid parent. Our results revealed that doubled diploid Ziyang xiangcheng had a distinct metabolic phenotype, compared with diploid. Many stress related metabolites such as sucrose, proline and GABA were enhanced in doubled diploid. However, less than 1% of genes were differentially expressed between doubled diploid and its diploid parent. Interestingly, these differentially expressed genes were highly related to stress response.

Results

Ploidy determination and analysis of genetic constitution

Eight uniform 4× seedlings out of previously identified fifteen doubled diploids were selected and further verified by flow cytometry. These eight 4× seedlings together with thirteen 2× seedlings were then analyzed by the SSR markers. All the SSR makers revealed that the eight 4× and nine 2× plants possessed the same alleles (Additional file 1). This signified that the 4× seedlings derived from genome doubling of the 2× genotype. And three diploids with heterozygous loci (Additional file 1) were excluded for further study.

Morphological changes following tetraploidization

In order to investigate morphological changes caused by tetraploidization, morphological analysis on plant height, stem diameter, leaf area, leaf thickness, stomata size and density was conducted. Compared to 2×, 4× has typical tetraploid morphological features, such as shorter plant height, larger and thicker leaf, larger stomata size and lower stomata density (Figure 1 and Additional file 2). Additionally, enlargement in leaf structure of 4x was observed by anatomical analysis (Additional files 3 and 4).
Figure 1

Morphological characterization of 2× and 4× Ziyang xiangcheng. (A) 2× and 4× seedlings; (B) Leaves of 2× and 4×; (C), (D) Stomata size of 2× and 4×; (E), (F) Stomata density of 2× and 4×.

Changes of primary metabolic profiles following tetraploidization

In order to investigate the effect of tetraploidization on primary metabolism, leaf samples of double diploid and diploid lines were analyzed by using an established GC-MS platform [37]. A total of 30 metabolites were identified by using an available chromatogram library. Utilizing the quantification internal standard, the content of every metabolite was calculated (Table 1).
Table 1

24 of 30 primary metabolites were significantly accumulated in 4× Ziyang xiangcheng

Compound

2× (mean ± SE) a

4× (mean ± SE)

Flod change

P-value

Trend b

Sugars

     

Turanose

7.64 ± 0.37

9.65 ± 0.87

1.3

  

Galactose

1.15 ± 0.16

5.97 ± 1.09

5.2

0.01

up

Fructose

41.48 ± 6.07

100.74 ± 4.67

2.4

0.01

up

Glucose

15.16 ± 1.54

55.49 ± 7.59

3.7

0.05

up

Sucrose

4403.79 ± 25.33

9472.04 ± 785.87

2.2

0.01

up

Glucopyranose

93.03 ± 6.78

86.91 ± 9.97

0.9

  

Arabinose

36.55 ± 2.03

176.59 ± 29.03

4.8

0.01

up

Mannose

50.12 ± 2.86

185.1 ± 25.59

3.7

0.01

up

Myo-inositol

460.53 ± 12.61

634.93 ± 49.72

1.4

0.01

up

Organic acids

     

Ethanedioic acid

21.9 ± 1.29

223.95 ± 16.25

10.2

0.01

up

Succinic acid

21.07 ± 2.24

26.3 ± 2.24

1.2

  

citric acid

23.06 ± 1.75

98.79 ± 1.42

4.3

0.01

up

Isocitric acid

1132.63 ± 22.07

2067.81 ± 33.25

1.8

0.01

up

GABA

1.13 ± 0.04

35.55 ± 4.88

31.5

0.01

up

2-Ketoglutaric acid

63.8 ± 6.7

50.41 ± 0.79

0.8

  

Malic acid

349.14 ± 42.51

1891.19 ± 90.58

5.4

0.01

up

2,3,4-Trihydroxybutyric acid

50.89 ± 2.74

235.16 ± 10.28

4.6

0.01

up

2-Keto-d-gluconic acid

8.45 ± 0.69

32.15 ± 1.17

3.8

0.01

up

Amino acids

     

Glycine

4.23 ± 0.22

16.29 ± 1.45

3.9

0.01

up

Alanine

ND

11.59 ± 3.02

  

up

Threonine

ND

4.01 ± 0.61

  

up

Proline

ND

109.17 ± 14.01

  

up

Serine

ND

8.07 ± 1.75

  

up

Acetyl-lysine

ND

39.55 ± 3.48

  

up

Fatty acids

     

Octadecanoic acid

77.69 ± 7.32

123.2 ± 6.8

1.6

0.01

up

Octadecanoic acid,2,3-bisoxypropylester

167.7 ± 13.83

352 ± 19.42

2.1

0.01

up

Hexadecanoic acid

19.53 ± 1.46

36.06 ± 2.05

1.8

0.01

up

Hexadecanoic acid,2,3-bisoxypropylester

41.66 ± 3.67

55.75 ± 5.24

1.3

  

Alcohols

     

Glycerol

204.19 ± 13.38

559.62 ± 63.31

3.3

0.01

up

Rhamnitol

61.76 ± 5.93

73.17 ± 3.98

1.2

  

The quantities of metabolites were analyzed using GC-MS, and their levels were normalized to ribitol and calculated as ug per g fresh weight of leaves. The data presented represent mean ± SE of six biological repetitions of leaves collected from eight plants per line. aND represents the metabolite was not detected due to low concentration. bUp represents the metabolite is up-regulated in 4× as compared to 2× (Student’s t-test).

Principal component analysis (PCA) served as an unsupervised statistical method to study the differences of the major metabolites of 4× and 2× (Figure 2). Parameters of the PCA model based on the primary metabolic data were: two principle components were calculated by cross validation, 58.6% of variables can be explained by first component and 17.2% of variables can be explained by the second component. A clear separation trend could be observed in the score plot (Figure 2), implying that extensive changes in the major metabolites were induced by tetraploidization.
Figure 2

Principal component analysis of GC-MS metabolite profiling data from 4× and 2× leaves. First two components could explain 75.8% of the metabolite variance. Component 1 explained 58.6% of the variance and component 2 explained 17.2%.

Among the 30 metabolites, the levels of 24 metabolites in 4× leaves were significantly higher than those in 2×. But no significant changes in the rest 4 metabolites were observed. This indicated that tetraploidization has an activation effect on the accumulation of primary metabolites in leaves. Seven sugars were significantly accumulated in 4× (Table 1). It should be noted that in 4×, there was a 2.2-fold increase in the content of sucrose, which was the main sugar. Seven of nine identified organic acids exhibited 1.8- and 10.2-fold higher concentrations (Table 1), including γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA). Six amino acids, namely, glycine, alanine, threonine, proline, serine, and lysine, were detected in 4×, while only one amino acid, namely, glycine was detected in 2×. In addition, the content of three fatty acids and one alcohol in 4× increased (Table 1).

Changes of secondary metabolic profiles following tetraploidization

To test whether the alteration of the ploidy has an influence on the level of leaf secondary metabolism, we performed non-targeted metabolite analysis using LC-QTOF-MS metabolomics technologies. In total, 3254 mass signals were detected in positive mode. PCA was performed to promote the classification of the metabolic phenotypes and the identification of the differential metabolites. The PCA effectively clusters biological replicates of the metabolomes of 2× and 4× into two categories, demonstrating extensive changes in the secondary metabolism caused by tetraploidization (Figure 3). Of these mass signals, 898 mass signals were significantly different between 4× and 2× (corrected p-value <0.05). 196 signals were up-regulated, and 702 signals were down-regulated in 4×, reflecting a decreased trend of secondary metabolite accumulation in 4×.
Figure 3

Principal component analysis of LC-QTOF-MS metabolite profiling data from 4× and 2× leaves. First two components could explain 49.3% of metabolite variance. Component 1 explained 32.8% of the variance and component 2 explained 16.5%.

Significantly changed metabolites were analyzed by LC-ESI/MS/MS to obtain structure information. A total of 9 metabolites, namely, narirutin, naringin, hesperidin, neohesperidin, didymin, sinensetin, limonin, nobiletin and nomilin were identified by matching their mass spectra and retention time with known standards. The other 34 metabolites were tentatively identified according to ESI-MS fragmentation patterns (Table 2). These identified metabolites were mainly comprised of phenolic flavonoids, including 6 flavanones and 33 flavones. These flavones were mainly made up of polymethoxyflavones (PMFs), which are widely distributed in citrus. These identified metabolites also included an aromatic amine (octopamine), a cinnamic acid (coumaric acid) and two limonoids (limonin and nomilin). Notably, all the 33 identified flavones were down-regulated in 4×, while all the 6 flavanones were up-regulated.
Table 2

Identified metabolites showing statistically significant changes between 2× and 4× Ziyang xiangcheng

Peak no.

RT (min)

Component name

[M + H] +

MS/MS fragments

Family

Trend c

1

1.0

Octopamineb

154

91

Alkaloid

up

2

5.2

Coumaric acidb

165

147/120/65/91

Cinnamic Acid

down

3

8.8

Narirutina

581

273/434

Flavanone

up

4

8.9

Neodiosminb

609

301/463

Flavone

down

5

9.0

Naringina

581

273

Flavanone

up

6

9.1

Hesperidina

611

303

Flavanone

up

7

9.3

Neohesperidina

611

303

Flavanone

up

8

9.9

Brutieridinb

755

303

Flavanone

up

9

10.5

Didymina

595

287

Flavanone

up

10

10.6

PMFs-1b

359

344/329/298

Flavone

down

11

11.2

PMFs-2b

359

329/344

Flavone

down

12

11.5

PMFs-3b

375

360/345

Flavone

down

13

11.6

PMFs-4b

359

298/326/344

Flavone

down

14

11.8

PMFs-5b

359

326/344

Flavone

down

15

12.4

PMFs-6b

389

359/341/374

Flavone

down

16

12.5

PMFs-7b

359

329/344

Flavone

down

17

12.5

Isosinensetinb

373

343

Flavone

down

18

12.7

PMFs-8b

403

373/388

Flavone

down

19

12.8

PMFs-9b

389

359/374

Flavone

down

20

12.8

PMFs-10b

375

317/342

Flavone

down

21

12.9

PMFs-11b

419

389/371/404

Flavone

down

22

13.0

PMFs-12b

403

373/327/388

Flavone

down

23

13.1

PMFs-13b

345

330/315

Flavone

down

24

13.3

Sinensetina

373

343/312/329/357

Flavone

down

25

13.3

PMFs-14b

343

328/313

Flavone

down

26

13.6

PMFs-15b

345

330/284/312

Flavone

down

27

13.6

PMFs-16b

405

375/390

Flavone

down

28

13.7

Limonina

471

161/425

Limonoid

up

29

13.7

PMFs-17b

375

360/345/317

Flavone

down

30

14.0

PMFs-18b

359

343/329

Flavone

down

31

14.2

Nomilina

515

161

Limonoid

down

32

14.2

Nobiletina

403

373

Flavone

down

33

14.3

Tetramethyl-O-scutellareinb

343

313/282/299

Flavone

down

34

14.4

PMFs-19b

389

331/356/313/374

Flavone

down

35

14.5

PMFs-20b

359

329/346

Flavone

down

36

14.8

Heptamethoxyflavoneb

433

418/403

Flavone

down

37

15.0

PMFs-21b

343

313/328

Flavone

down

38

15.0

PMFs-22b

359

298/326/343

Flavone

down

39

15.2

PMFs-23b

419

389/404

Flavone

down

40

15.8

PMFs-24b

405

375/347/357/390

Flavone

down

41

15.9

PMFs-25b

389

359/374/341

Flavone

down

42

16.5

PMFs-26b

419

389/404

Flavone

down

43

16.9

5-Demethyl tangeretinb

359

344/329/301

Flavone

down

[M + H]+, protonated molecular ion. aIdentified by matching their retention time and mass spectra with known standard. bPutatively identified using ESI-MS fragmentation patterns. cRelative increased (up) or decreased (down) concentration in 4× as compared to 2×. Student’s t-test was used and a p-value of less than 0.05 was considered significant. PMFs, polymethoxyflavones.

Global transcriptome analysis

To investigate global transcriptome changes caused by tetraploidization, four cDNA libraries of 2× and 4× mature leaves were constructed. These libraries were sequenced by Illumina Hiseq 2500 platform. And 50 bp single-end reads were then generated. In total, 25,860,712 raw reads were generated from 2× and a total of 24,428,874 raw reads came from 4× (Additional file 5). After we removed reads containing adapter, reads containing poly-N, and low quality reads from raw data, 25,830,902 and 24,402,540 clean reads remained in 2× and 4×, respectively. The GC-contents were 43.30% in 2× and 43.16% in 4× respectively. To assess the sequencing quality, the reads were mapped to the Citrus sinensis reference genome. Of the two groups of duplicate data, 11,115,785 (86.06%) and 11,383,064 (88.14%) reads successfully mapped were generated from 2×-1-2×-2 and 11,250,774 (88.87%) and 10,531,271(89.69%) reads from 4×-1-4×-2 (Additional file 6).

More than 50% of the genes were expressed at a low level (<3 RPKM) and less than 8% of genes were expressed at a high level (>15 RPKM) in all samples (Additional file 7). Notably, there were no obvious differences between 2× and 4× in the percentage of genes at low, medium and high expression levels. This suggested tetraploidization didn’t have an effect on the inhibition or activation of gene expression.

Genes with an adjusted p-value <0.05 found by DESeq (R package, version 1.10.1) were assigned as differentially expressed. Totally 24073 genes were detected in all samples, while only 212 genes (0.8% of detected genes) were significantly differentially expressed between 2× and 4× seedling leaves. Of 212 DEGs, 96 genes were up-regulated and 116 genes were down-regulated in 4×, relative to 2×. For up-regulated genes, differences ranged from1.4-fold to 12.5- fold; for down-regulated genes, differences ranged from 1.4-fold and 13.4- fold. These results indicated that the range of gene expression changes between 2× and 4× was very limited.

The functional gene ontology annotation of these DEGs was further performed by using Blast2Go software. 163 out of the 212 DEGs were assigned to at least one term in GO biological process, cellular component, and molecular function categories. Then the DEGs were classified into 38 subcategories in terms of function, almost covering all important categories of biological processes and molecular functions (Figure 4). In the biological process category, metabolic process and cellular process were the two largest groups, suggesting that extensive metabolic activities were taking place in 4× leaves. In the cellular component category, cell and cell part represented two major sub-categories, while catalytic and binding were dominant in molecular function category.
Figure 4

GO categories of the DEGs between 2× and 4× Ziyang xiangcheng. 163 out of the 212 DEGs were assigned to 957 GO annotations, which were divided into three categories: biological processes, cellular components, and molecular functions.

GO enrichment analysis was performed by using BiNGO [38]. In biological process category, DEGs were found to be highly related to stress-response functions, such as response to salt stress, to water, and to abscisic acid (Figure 5). This indicated that some processes related to stress were induced in response to tetraploidization. The other two functions, namely anion transport and polyamine catabolic process, were also significantly enriched (Figure 5). In molecular function category, only two terms were overrepresented, namely, inorganic anion transmembrane transporter activity, inorganic phosphate transmembrane transporter activity (Figure 5). In cellular component category, no terms were overrepresented.
Figure 5

Significantly enriched GO categories in DEGs between 2× and 4× Ziyang xiangcheng. The colored nodes represent the significantly over-represented GO terms. The colored bar shows the significance.

To identify the biological pathways in which the DEGs were involved, we mapped DEGs to the reference canonical pathways in KEGG. In total, 40 out of 212 DEGs were assigned to 46 KEGG pathways. The two largest clusters were metabolic pathways with 19 members and biosynthesis of secondary metabolites with 13 members (Additional file 8). It indicated that many DEGs involved in metabolic process in 4×. However, no KEGG terms was over-represented in DEGs.

To validate the RNA-seq data, the following top 10 up-regulated functionally characterized genes were selected for qPCR assays: Fe(II)/ascorbate oxidase (SRG1, Cs9g09290), UDP-glucoronosyl/UDP-glucosyltransferase family protein (UGT, Cs5g11620), myb family transcription factor (RL6, Cs3g24870), caffeic acid O-methyltransferase (COMT, orange1.1 t02085), aminocyclopropane 1-carboxylic acid oxidase (ACO, Cs9g08990), u-box armadillo repeat protein (PUB19, Cs7g08470), ethylene response factor (ERF4, Cs1g07950), tracheary element vacuolar protein (XCP1, Cs2g27860), glycosyltransferase (GATL9, Cs7g07900), ethylene response factor (ERF9, Cs2g05620) (Additional file 9). As shown in Figure 6, all the 10 genes were verified to be up-regulated by qPCR analysis, although their fold changes differed from the result of RNA-seq. Notably, six of these genes, namely, SRG1 [39], COMT [40], ACO [41], PUB19 [42], ERF4 [43] and ERF9 [44] were involved in abiotic stress response.
Figure 6

Expression analysis of top 10 up-regulated functionally characterized DEGs in 4× Ziyang xiangcheng by qPCR.

Discussion

Stress related metabolites were significantly up-regulated in doubled diploid Ziyang xiangcheng

Metabolic alterations induced by tetraploidization might confer plant a better adaptation to environmental stresses. Primary metabolites are required for growth, development and interactions of plants with their environment [45]. In this study, most of the detected primary metabolites were up-regulated in 4× Ziyang xiangcheng (Table 1). It indicated that tetraploidization had an activation effect on primary metabolism. These up-regulated metabolites include sugars, amino acids, organic acids, and fatty acids. Notably, these metabolites play an important role during plant adaptations to environmental stresses.

Sugars are involved in various abiotic stresses. They have several functions in plants suffering abiotic stresses: acting as osmoprotectants to maintain osmotic balance and stabilize macromolecules or as metabolite signaling molecules to activate specific signal transduction pathway, and providing energy source to recover from water deficit [46,47]. Accumulation of sugars is strongly correlated with improved plant stress tolerance to drought stress [46,48,49]. For example, sucrose accumulates in almost all desiccation-tolerant flowering plants [50] and fern [51]. In this study, seven out of nine detected sugars including sucrose, glucose and fructose were up-regulated in 4×, which implied 4× might have advantages over 2× under drought stress.

A case in point is that increased levels of proline correlate with enhanced stress tolerance [48,52]. Proline was considered to have several functions under stress conditions, including osmotic adjusting, reactive oxygen species (ROS) scavenger and protection of proteins from denaturation [52-54]. Therefore, higher concentration of proline might promote abiotic stress tolerance in 4×. Additionally, Yobi et al. [55] found that desiccation-tolerant species Selaginella lepidophylla had significantly higher concentration of sugars, sugar alcohols and amino acids than desiccation-sensitive species Selaginella moellendorffii. Compared to 2×, higher concentration of stress metabolites in 4× might be also beneficial for the cultivar grafted on it. A study performed on Rangpur lime (Citrus limonia) rootstock demonstrated that tetraploids increase drought tolerance via enhanced constitutive root abscisic acid production [26]. In that study, diploid and tetraploid clones of Rangpur lime rootstocks were grafted with 2× Valencia Delta sweet orange (Citrus sinensis) scions, named V/2×RL and V/4×RL, respectively; V/4×RL leaves had greater abscisic acid (ABA) content under normal condition, compared to V/2×RL [26]. Studies of Arabidopsis polyploids revealed that the content of leaf potassium and rubidium was evaluated in in diploid leaves on shoots grafted to tetraploid roots, whereas leaves from tetraploid shoots grafted to diploid roots showed the same leaf K as diploid [13]. So we may presume that a distinct metabolic phenotype would be observed between the scion cultivars grafted on 4× and 2× Ziyang xiangcheng respectively. Higher content of stress-related metabolites in 4× might be beneficial for the cultivar grafted on it. In addition, tetraploid rootstock may also have a dwarfing effect on scion cultivar being grafted on it, compared with the diploid rootstock [56].

Gene expression divergence caused by tetraploidization is involved with stress response

A small genome expression change was observed between diploid and autotetraploid according to studies performed on several species. In Paspalum notatum and Isatis indigotica, about 0.6% and 4% variations in transcript abundance were detected between diploid and autotetraploid by using the Arabidopsis thaliana whole genome gene chip [57,58]. In Arabidopsis thaliana Col-0 ecotype and Ler-0 ecotype, Yu et al. [25] found about 1% and 0.1% variations between diploid and autotetraploid, respectively. We found less than 1% genes were differentially expressed between diploid and doubled diploid Ziyang xiangcheng. A similar number of genes were also detected between diploid and tetraploid Citrus limonia [26]. These studies altogether with our study suggested that the effect of genome doubling on gene expression is relatively limited. Here, we should point out that the 4× Ziyang xiangcheng came from doubling a hybrid (C. ichangensis × C. reticulata). Theoretically, the doubled diploid should be an allotetraploid rather than an autotetraploid (doubling a homozygous diploid) [6]. Therefore, the expression pattern of doubled diploid Ziyang xiangcheng should consist with the one of an allotetraploid rather than the one of an autotetraploid. Genome expression changes in allotetraploids are considered to be more strongly affected by genome hybridization than by changes in ploidy levels [19,59]. So we presume that a relatively large change in genome expression could be detected between doubled diploid Ziyang xiangcheng and its putative parents (C. ichangensis and C. reticulata). Herein, we only focused on the effect of genome doubling on gene expression.

Genes involved in the response to abscisic acid and abiotic stimulus, were differentially expressed following genome doubling according to GO enrichment analysis (Figure 5). This indicates that 4× Ziyang xiangcheng might be able to respond to abiotic stresses in a flexible and fast way, to some extent [14]. Interestingly, the phenomenon that tetraploidization influences the expression of genes involved in hormone and abiotic stress responses was also reported in autotetraploid A. thaliana [14,25]. We also found that the expression of genes involved in ion transport was also affected by genome doubling. It is known that ion transport is highly related to salt tolerance [60].

Higher potassium accumulation and salinity tolerance has been found in Arabidopsis polyploids [13]. The higher potassium accumulation might be partly due to altered expression of genes involved in ion transport.

Moreover, six out of ten top up-regulated genes were involved in ABA- and stress-related process (Additional file 9). The first gene, namely SRG1, was associated with senescence-related processes, encoding a member of the Fe(ll)/ascorbate oxidase superfamily protein, and its expression was induced under drought and heat stress [61,62]. Caffeic acid O-methyltransferases encoded by COMT genes are key enzymes of lignin biosynthesis [63], affecting cell wall structure, and COMT was up-regulated by drought stress in maize [40]. ACO genes encode 1-aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylate (ACC) oxidases which catalyze the reaction from ACC to ethylene [64], and water stress induced ACO gene expression in sunflower leaves was previously reported [65]. PUB19 encodes a U-Box E3 ubiquitin ligase and it was up-regulated by drought, salt, and cold stress and ABA [42]. The last two genes, namely ERF4 and ERF9, which are the members of the ERF/AP2 transcription factor family, are involved in various reactions to abiotic stresses [66]; these two genes bind to the GCC box, DRE/CRT, CE1 elements, and they acted as repressors of gene transcription, enhancing plant tolerance to multiple stresses [67]. Overexpression of ERF4 gene increased tolerance to salt and drought stress in Arabidopsis [66]. These reports, together with our results suggest 4× Ziyang xiangcheng may be pre-adapted to abiotic stresses, compared to 2×.

The transcriptome divergence cannot explain the metabolic changes

In order to integrate leaf transcriptome data with the metabolic profiling, attention was focused on the DEGs involved in metabolic pathway. Among these DEGs, 40 were assigned to 46 pathways and no significantly enriched KEEG pathways were found. It implies that the limited DEGs involve in a wide range of pathways, but their functions are dispersive.

To a great extent, the accumulation pattern of the DEGs encoding proteins or enzymes involved in metabolic processes was not consistent with the differences observed in the metabolite profiling (Additional file 10). Most of the detected sugars, amino acids and fatty acids were significantly accumulated in 4×. However, most of the genes involved in these metabolic processes were down-regulated in 4×. For example, the sucrose content of 4x leaves was 2-fold than that of 2×. But the gene encoding sucrose synthase was significantly down-regulated in 4×. In another example, in flavone and flavonol biosynthesis, only one gene, namely, COMT was differentially expressed between 4× and 2×. The gene encoding a caffeic acid O-methyltransferase, positively regulates flavonoid biosynthetic process and may be involved in PMFs (polymethoxyflavones) synthesis [68]. Theoretically, the up-regulation of COMT should promote the accumulation of PMFs in 4×. However, all detected PMFs were down-regulated in 4×. The discordance between transcriptomic and metabolomic data is probably related to several factors. First, it is not easy to find a strict correlation between metabolite accumulation and gene expression because of the complexity in metabolic networks [69,70]. Second, small RNAs, including microRNAs and small interfering RNAs might play an important role in some gene regulation [71]. Third, reactivation of transposable elements (TEs) following polyploidization in synthetic hexaploid wheats (Triticum) was considered to participate in regulation of the transcription of neighbouring genes [72]. At last, post-translational modifications may contribute to the discordance between transcriptomic and metabolomic data. The transcriptome divergence might not reflect the protein divergence between 4× and 2× Ziyang xiangcheng, leading to the discordance. In support of this hypothesis, percentage of differentially accumulated proteins between autotetraploid and diploid Arabidopsis thaliana that matched the differentially expressed genes was relatively low, due to post-transcriptional regulation and translational modifications of proteins during polyploidization [73]. Similarly, transcriptional changes do not explain differential protein regulation in resynthesized Brassica napus allotetraploids [74].

Conclusions

Our results suggest that tetraploidization has multi-level effects on Ziyang xiangcheng. Morphological and anatomical traits like leaf thickness, stoma number, stomatal density and vessel size were altered as a consequence of tetraploidization. The metabolic phenotype was also significantly altered following tetraploidization and many stress-related metabolites, such as sucrose, proline and GABA were significantly up-regulated in 4×. However, relatively small transcriptome alterations were induced by tetraploidization. Notably, the transcriptome alterations were highly related to hormone and stress responses, and many top up-regulated genes in 4× were associated with stress response. Interestingly, the transcriptional divergence could not adequately explain the metabolic changes, probably due to post-transcriptional regulation. Compared to diploid, higher expression level of stress related genes and higher content of stress related metabolites in doubled diploid could be beneficial for its stress tolerance. Our data will help better understanding the consequences caused by polyploidization and be valuable for citrus rootstock breeding in the future.

Methods

Plant materials

Seeds of diploid (2n = 2× = 18) Ziyang xiangcheng (Citrus junos Sieb. ex Tanaka) were collected and provided by Professor Keling Chen, Institute of Horticulture Research, Sichuan Provincial Academy of Agricultural Science, China. Seeds were grown in pots filled with commercial soil in the greenhouse. Doubled diploid and diploid Ziyang xiangcheng were prepared by Liang et al. [30]. Thirteen uniform 1-year-old 2× and eight uniform 1-year-old 4× seedlings were respectively selected and transplanted in commercial soil. Seedlings were grown in the greenhouse under natural photoperiod conditions and they were irrigated twice a week. The ploidy levels of these seedlings were determined by flow cytometry (CyFlow Space, Partec, Germany). The genetic constitution of these seedlings was further analyzed by the published SSR markers [75,76], namely, Ci01C09, Ci06A05b, Ci07C07, Ci07E06, mCrCIR08A03, CCSM40, CCSM46, CCSM69.

Sampling

Fully expended leaves (from fourth or fifth leaf from the top, 3–5 month old, from the spring flush of the current season) were collected in the morning. The leaves being used for metabolic and transcriptional profiling were immediately frozen in liquid nitrogen and stored at −80°C.

Morphological and anatomic analysis

Leaf thickness and area was determined using a micrometer and a portable area meter (Yaxin-1241, Beijing), respectively. Three leaves of each individual seedling were measured. SEM analysis was performed using one leaf of each individual plant according to the method described by Yi et al. [77]. Photographs were taken to measure stomatal size and density. About 60 stomata were measured for each genotype.

Samples were fixed, dehydrated and embedded according to Hu et al. [78]. Transverse sections about 1–5 μm thick were cut using a Leica Ultracut R ultramicrotome (Leica, Bensheim, Germany). The sections were stained with Toluidine Blue O (Aldrich, Milwaukee) and photographed with a BX61 fluorescence microscope (Olympus, Tokyo). The morphometrical analysis was performed using Image-Pro Plus 6.0 software (Media Cybernetics, USA).

The primary metabolic profiling

Six independent plants were used as biological replicates, and about five leaves were sampled from each plant in primary metabolic profiling. Non-targeted metabolite profiling was carried out by GC-MS using a modified method described by Yun et al. [37]. A total of 200 mg ground leaf samples were extracted in 2,700 μl methanol and ribitol solution (300 μl, 0.2 mg ml−1) was added as an internal standard. The samples were centrifuged, dried and derivatized. GC-MS analysis was performed by using a Thermo Trace GC Ultra, coupled with Thermo Fisher a DSQ II mass spectrometer (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA). Metabolites were identified by using an available chromatogram library and PCA analysis was performed by using the software Simca-P (Ver 11, Umetrics, Umea, Sweden).

The secondary metabolic profiling

Six independent plants were used as biological replicates, and about five leaves were sampled from each plant in secondary metabolic profiling. The secondary metabolic profiling was performed by LC-QTOF-MS using a modified method according to Yun et al. [37]. 100 mg freeze-dried powder was extracted with 80% methanol over night at 4°C. The mixture was centrifuged and filtered. Then, the metabolic profiling were performed using a QTOF 6520 mass spectrometer (Agilent Technologies, Palo Alto, CA, USA) coupled to a 1200 series Rapid Resolution HPLC system.

The raw data was processed by Agilent Mass Hunter Qualitative Analysis (version B. 04.00, Aglient Technologies) and Mass Profiler Software (version B.02.02, Aglient Technologies). Then PCA analysis was performed using the filtered and normalized data. Metabolite identification was carried out by comparing mass spectra and retention time with those of authentic standards. Nine authentic standards, namely, narirutin, naringin, hesperidin, neohesperidin, didymin, sinensetin, limonin, nomilin, and nobiletin were obtained from Sigma Chemical Co. (St. Louis, MO).

RNA sequencing and data analysis

Leaves from four plants were pooled as an independent biological replicate and leaves from other four trees were pooled as the other independent biological replicate in transcriptomic analysis. Total RNA extraction and a quality assessment were performed according to the protocol described by Zheng et al. [79]. RNA Samples were sent to Novogene Bioinformatics Technology Co. Ltd (Beijing), where the libraries were constructed. Sequencing libraries were generated from 3 μg total RNA using NEBNext Ultra RNA Library Prep Kit (NEB, USA) and sequenced on an IlluminaHiseq 2500 platform and 50 bp single-end reads were generated.

Clean reads were obtained by removing reads containing adapter, reads containing ploy-N and low quality reads from raw data and were aligned to the Citrus sinensis genome [80] (http://211.69.128.148/orange/index.php) using TopHat (2.0.9) software [81]. To estimate gene expression level, RPKM of each gene was calculated based on the length of the gene and reads count mapped to this gene. Genes RPKM values were calculated based on all the uniquely mapped reads. The genes with RPKMs ranging from 0 to 3 were considered at a low expression level; the genes with RPKMs ranging from 3 to 15 at a medium expression level; and the genes with RPKMs above15 at high expression level.

Differential expression analysis was implemented using the DESeq R package (1.10.1) [82]. Genes with an adjusted P-value <0.05 found by DESeq were assigned as differentially expressed. GO (Gene Ontology) annotation was performed by using Blast2GO software (GO association done by a BLASTX against the NCBI NR database). Then GO enrichment analysis of differentially expressed genes was performed by the BiNGO plugin for Cytoscape [38]. Over-presented GO terms were identified by using a hypergeometric test with a significance threshold of 0.05 after a Benjamini and Hochberg FDR correction [83]. KEGG enrichment analysis of differentially expressed genes was performed by KOBAS (2.0) software [84].

Verification of RNA-seq by q-PCR

To test the reliability of RNA-seq, a set of top ten up-regulated genes in 4× were selected for qRT-PCR. Specific primers were designed with the Primer Express software (Applied Biosystems) and synthesized by Sangon (Shanghai, China). The cDNA was synthesized from 1 μg of total RNA using PrimeScript RT reagent Kit (Takara, Dalian, China). Real-time RT–PCR was performed on the ABI 7500 Real-Time PCR System (Applied Biosystems) using the 2× SYBR green PCRmaster mix (Applied Biosystems). Three independent biological replicates were analyzed for each sample and data were indicated as mean ± SE (n = 3).

Availability of supporting data

Raw sequencing data is available through the Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) under accession NO. GSE65416 at website: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo/query/acc.cgi?acc=GSE65416.

Abbreviations

2×: 

Diploid Ziyang xiangcheng

4×: 

Doubled diploid Ziyang xiangcheng

GAs: 

Glycoalkaloids

GC-MS: 

Gas chromatography coupled to mass spectrometry

LC- QTOF- MS: 

Liquid chromatography quadrupole time-of-flight mass spectrometry

PCA: 

Principal component analysis

GABA: 

γ-aminobutyric acid

PMFs: 

Polymethoxyflavones

DEGs: 

Differentially expressed genes

ROS: 

Reactive oxygen species

Declarations

Acknowledgments

This research was financially supported by the National NSF of China (nos. 31125024, 31221062), the Ministry of Education of China (no. IRT13065), and the Ministry of Agriculture of China (no. 201203075). The authors thank Prof. Ping Liu in Foreign Language College (HZAU) for her effort to polish the language.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Key Laboratory of Horticultural Plant Biology (Ministry of Education), Key Laboratory of Horticultural Crop Biology and Genetic Improvement (Central Region) (Ministry of Agriculture), College of Horticulture and Forestry Sciences, Huazhong Agricultural University

References

  1. Otto SP, Whitton J. Polyploid incidence and evolution. Annu Rev Genet. 2000;34:401–37.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Comai L. The advantages and disadvantages of being polyploid. Nat Rev Genet. 2005;6:836–46.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Doyle JJ, Flagel LE, Paterson AH, Rapp RA, Soltis DE, Soltis PS, et al. Evolutionary genetics of genome merger and doubling in plants. Annu Rev Genet. 2008;42:443–61.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Wendel JF. Genome evolution in polyploids. Plant Molecular Evolution. 2000;42:225–49.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  5. Adams KL, Wendel JF. Polyploidy and genome evolution in plants. Curr Opin Plant Biol. 2005;8:135–41.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Chen ZJ. Genetic and epigenetic mechanisms for gene expression and phenotypic variation in plant polyploids. Annu Rev Plant Biol. 2007;58:377.View ArticlePubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Doyle JJ, Egan AN. Dating the origins of polyploidy events. New Phytol. 2010;186:73–85.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Abel S, Becker H. The effect of autopolyploidy on biomass production in homozygous lines of Brassica rapa and Brassica oleracea. Plant Breed. 2007;126:642–3.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  9. Li X, Yu E, Fan C, Zhang C, Fu T, Zhou Y. Developmental, cytological and transcriptional analysis of autotetraploid Arabidopsis. Planta. 2012;236:579–96.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Yao H, Kato A, Mooney B, Birchler JA. Phenotypic and gene expression analyses of a ploidy series of maize inbred Oh43. Plant Mol Biol. 2011;75:237–51.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Martin SL, Husband BC. Whole genome duplication affects evolvability of flowering time in an autotetraploid plant. PLoS One. 2012;7:e44784.View ArticlePubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Cohen H, Tel-Zur N. Morphological changes and self-incompatibility breakdown associated with autopolyploidization in Hylocereus species (Cactaceae). Euphytica. 2012;184:345–54.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  13. Chao DY, Dilkes B, Luo H, Douglas A, Yakubova E, Lahner B, et al. Polyploids exhibit higher potassium uptake and salinity tolerance in Arabidopsis. Science. 2013;341:658–9.View ArticlePubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. del Pozo JC, Ramirez-Parra E. Deciphering the molecular bases for drought tolerance in Arabidopsis autotetraploids. Plant Cell Environ. 2014. doi:10.1111/pce.12344.Google Scholar
  15. Lavania U, Srivastava S. Enhanced productivity of tropane alkaloids and fertility in artificial autotetraploids of Hyoscyamus niger L. Euphytica. 1991;52:73–7.Google Scholar
  16. De Jesus-Gonzalez L, Weathers P. Tetraploid Artemisia annua hairy roots produce more artemisinin than diploids. Plant Cell Rep. 2003;21:809–13.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Lavania UC, Srivastava S, Lavania S, Basu S, Misra NK, Mukai Y. Autopolyploidy differentially influences body size in plants, but facilitates enhanced accumulation of secondary metabolites, causing increased cytosine methylation. Plant J. 2012;71:539–49.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Caruso I, Lepore L, De Tommasi N, Dal Piaz F, Frusciante L, Aversano R, et al. Secondary metabolite profile in induced tetraploids of wild Solanum commersonii Dun. Chem Biodivers. 2011;8:2226–37.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Wang J, Tian L, Lee HS, Wei NE, Jiang H, Watson B, et al. Genomewide nonadditive gene regulation in Arabidopsis allotetraploids. Genetics. 2006;172:507–17.View ArticlePubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Ni Z, Kim ED, Ha M, Lackey E, Liu J, Zhang Y, et al. Altered circadian rhythms regulate growth vigour in hybrids and allopolyploids. Nature. 2008;457:327–31.View ArticlePubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Bassene J, Froelicher Y, Dubois C, Ferrer R, Navarro L, Ollitrault P, et al. Non-additive gene regulation in a citrus allotetraploid somatic hybrid between C. reticulata Blanco and C. limon (L.) Burm. Heredity. 2009;105:299–308.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Riddle NC, Jiang H, An L, Doerge R, Birchler JA. Gene expression analysis at the intersection of ploidy and hybridity in maize. Theor Appl Genet. 2010;120:341–53.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Bombarely A, Edwards KD, Sanchez-Tamburrino J, Mueller LA. Deciphering the complex leaf transcriptome of the allotetraploid species Nicotiana tabacum: a phylogenomic perspective. BMC Genomics. 2012;13:406.View ArticlePubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Stupar RM, Bhaskar PB, Yandell BS, Rensink WA, Hart AL, Ouyang S, et al. Phenotypic and transcriptomic changes associated with potato autopolyploidization. Genetics. 2007;176:2055–67.View ArticlePubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Yu Z, Haberer G, Matthes M, Rattei T, Mayer KF, Gierl A, et al. Impact of natural genetic variation on the transcriptome of autotetraploid Arabidopsis thaliana. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010;107:17809–14.View ArticlePubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Allario T, Brumos J, Colmenero-Flores JM, Tadeo F, Froelicher Y, Talon M, et al. Large changes in anatomy and physiology between diploid Rangpur lime (Citrus limonia) and its autotetraploid are not associated with large changes in leaf gene expression. J Exp Bot. 2011;62:2507–19.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Gong XQ, Liu JH. Genetic transformation and genes for resistance to abiotic and biotic stresses in Citrus and its related genera. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult. 2013;113:137–47.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  28. Liu JJ, Chen KL, Hu Q, Yang M, Zhou QM, Li HW, et al. Preliminary study on Ziyang xiangcheng (Citrus junos Sieb ex Tanaka), a special local citrus germplasm. Southwest China J Agric Sci. 2008;21:1658–60 (in Chinese with English abstract).Google Scholar
  29. Zhou GF, Peng SA, Liu YZ, Wei QJ, Han J, Islam MZ. The physiological and nutritional responses of seven different citrus rootstock seedlings to boron deficiency. Trees. 2014;28:295–307.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  30. Aleza P, Froelicher Y, Schwarz S, Agustí M, Hernández M, Juárez J, et al. Tetraploidization events by chromosome doubling of nucellar cells are frequent in apomictic citrus and are dependent on genotype and environment. Ann Bot. 2011;108:37–50.View ArticlePubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Rao MN, Soneji JR, Chen C, Huang S, Gmitter Jr FG. Characterization of zygotic and nucellar seedlings from sour orange-like citrus rootstock candidates using RAPD and EST-SSR markers. Tree Genet Genom. 2008;4:113–24.Google Scholar
  32. Ruiz C, Breto MP, Asins M. A quick methodology to identify sexual seedlings in citrus breeding programs using SSR markers. Euphytica. 2000;112:89–94.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  33. Saleh B, Allario T, Dambier D, Ollitrault P, Morillon R. Tetraploid citrus rootstocks are more tolerant to salt stress than diploid. C R Biol. 2008;331:703–10.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Mouhaya W, Allario T, Brumos J, Andrés F, Froelicher Y, Luro F, et al. Sensitivity to high salinity in tetraploid citrus seedlings increases with water availability and correlates with expression of candidate genes. Funct Plant Biol. 2010;37:674–85.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  35. Liang WJ, Xie KD, Guo DY, Xie ZZ, Yi HL, Guo WW. Spontaneous generation and SSR molecular characterization of autotetraploids in ten citrus rootstocks. J Fruit Sci. 2014;31:1–6 (in Chinese with English abstract).Google Scholar
  36. Liang WJ, Xie KD, Guo DY, Xie ZZ, Xu Q, Yi HL, et al. Spontaneous generation and SSR characterization of polyploids from ten citrus cultivars. Acta Hort Sin. 2014;41:409–16 (in Chinese with English abstract).Google Scholar
  37. Yun Z, Gao H, Liu P, Liu S, Luo T, Jin S, et al. Comparative proteomic and metabolomic profiling of citrus fruit with enhancement of disease resistance by postharvest heat treatment. BMC Plant Biol. 2013;13:44.View ArticlePubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Maere S, Heymans K, Kuiper M. BiNGO: a Cytoscape plugin to assess overrepresentation of gene ontology categories in biological networks. Bioinformatics. 2005;21:3448–9.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Zhang X, Ju HW, Chung MS, Huang P, Ahn SJ, Kim CS. The RR-type MYB-like transcription factor, AtMYBL, is involved in promoting leaf senescence and modulates an abiotic stress response in Arabidopsis. Plant Cell Physiol. 2011;52:138–48.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Vincent D, Lapierre C, Pollet B, Cornic G, Negroni L, Zivy M. Water deficits affect caffeate O-methyltransferase, lignification, and related enzymes in maize leaves. A proteomic investigation. Plant Physiol. 2005;137:949–60.View ArticlePubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Yuan R, Wu Z, Kostenyuk IA, Burns JK. G-protein-coupled α2A-adrenoreceptor agonists differentially alter citrus leaf and fruit abscission by affecting expression of ACC synthase and ACC oxidase. J Exp Bot. 2005;56:1867–75.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Liu YC, Wu YR, Huang XH, Sun J, Xie Q. AtPUB19, a U-box E3 ubiquitin ligase, negatively regulates abscisic acid and drought responses in Arabidopsis thaliana. Mol Plant. 2011;4:938–46.View ArticlePubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Ding Y, Liu N, Virlouvet L, Riethoven JJ, Fromm M, Avramova Z. Four distinct types of dehydration stress memory genes in Arabidopsis thaliana. BMC Plant Biol. 2013;13:229.View ArticlePubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Mizoi J, Shinozaki K, Yamaguchi-Shinozaki K. AP2/ERF family transcription factors in plant abiotic stress responses. Biochim Biophys Acta. 1819;2012:86–96.Google Scholar
  45. Neilson EH, Goodger JQ, Woodrow IE, Moller BL. Plant chemical defense: at what cost? Trends Plant Sci. 2013;18:250–8.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Couee I, Sulmon C, Gouesbet G, El Amrani A. Involvement of soluble sugars in reactive oxygen species balance and responses to oxidative stress in plants. J Exp Bot. 2006;57:449–59.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Patterson JH, Newbigin E, Tester M, Bacic A, Roessner U. Metabolic responses to salt stress of barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) cultivars, Sahara and Clipper, which differ in salinity tolerance. J Exp Bot. 2009;60:4089–103.View ArticlePubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Vinocur B, Altman A. Recent advances in engineering plant tolerance to abiotic stress: achievements and limitations. Curr Opin Biotechnol. 2005;16:123–32.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Seki M, Umezawa T, Urano K, Shinozaki K. Regulatory metabolic networks in drought stress responses. Curr Opin Plant Biol. 2007;10:296–302.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Ghasempour H, Gaff D, Williams R, Gianello R. Contents of sugars in leaves of drying desiccation tolerant flowering plants, particularly grasses. Plant Growth Regul. 1998;24:185–91.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  51. Farrant JM, Lehner A, Cooper K, Wiswedel S. Desiccation tolerance in the vegetative tissues of the fern Mohria caffrorum is seasonally regulated. Plant J. 2009;57:65–79.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Krasensky J, Jonak C. Drought, salt, and temperature stress-induced metabolic rearrangements and regulatory networks. J Exp Bot. 2012;63:1593–608.View ArticlePubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Vendruscolo ECG, Schuster I, Pileggi M, Scapim CA, Molinari HBC, Marur CJ, et al. Stress-induced synthesis of proline confers tolerance to water deficit in transgenic wheat. J Plant Physiol. 2007;164:1367–76.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. Verbruggen N, Hermans C. Proline accumulation in plants: a review. Amino Acids. 2008;35:753–9.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Yobi A, Wone BW, Xu W, Alexander DC, Guo L, Ryals JA, et al. Comparative metabolic profiling between desiccation-sensitive and desiccation-tolerant species of Selaginella reveals insights into the resurrection trait. Plant J. 2012;72:983–99.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. Grosser JW, Gmitter Jr FG. Protoplast fusion for production of tetraploids and triploids: applications for scion and rootstock breeding in citrus. Plant Cell Tiss Org Cult. 2011;104:343–57.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  57. Martelotto LG, Ortiz JPA, Stein J, Espinoza F, Quarin CL, Pessino SC. A comprehensive analysis of gene expression alterations in a newly synthesized Paspalum notatum autotetraploid. Plant Sci. 2005;169:211–20.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  58. Lu B, Pan X, Zhang L, Huang B, Sun L, Li B, et al. A genome-wide comparison of genes responsive to autopolyploidy in Isatis indigotica using Arabidopsis thaliana Affymetrix genechips. Plant Mol Biol Rep. 2006;24:197–204.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  59. Auger DL, Gray AD, Ream TS, Kato A, Coe EH, Birchler JA. Nonadditive gene expression in diploid and triploid hybrids of maize. Genetics. 2005;169:389–97.View ArticlePubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. Zhu JK. Regulation of ion homeostasis under salt stress. Curr Opin Plant Biol. 2003;6:441–5.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. Rizhsky L, Liang H, Shuman J, Shulaev V, Davletova S, Mittler R. When defense pathways collide. The response of Arabidopsis to a combination of drought and heat stress. Plant Physiol. 2004;134:1683–96.View ArticlePubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. Schafleitner R, Gutierrez Rosales RO, Gaudin A, Alvarado Aliaga CA, Martinez GN, Tincopa Marca LR, et al. Capturing candidate drought tolerance traits in two native Andean potato clones by transcription profiling of field grown plants under water stress. Plant Physiol Biochem. 2007;45:673–90.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. Tu Y, Rochfort S, Liu Z, Ran Y, Griffith M, Badenhorst P, et al. Functional analyses of caffeic acid O-methyltransferase and cinnamoyl-CoA-reductase genes from perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne). Plant Cell. 2010;22:3357–73.View ArticlePubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. Barry CS, Blume B, Bouzayen M, Cooper W, Hamilton AJ, Grierson D. Differential expression of the 1-aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylate oxidase gene family of tomato. Plant J. 1996;9:525–35.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. Ouvrard O, Cellier F, Ferrare K, Tousch D, Lamaze T, Dupuis JM, et al. Identification and expression of water stress-and abscisic acid-regulated genes in a drought-tolerant sunflower genotype. Plant Mol Biol. 1996;31:819–29.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. Seo YJ, Park JB, Cho YJ, Jung C, Seo HS, Park SK, et al. Overexpression of the ethylene-responsive factor gene BrERF4 from Brassica rapa increases tolerance to salt and drought in Arabidopsis plants. Mol Cells. 2010;30:271–7.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. Miller G, Suzuki N, Ciftci-Yilmaz S, Mittler R. Reactive oxygen species homeostasis and signalling during drought and salinity stresses. Plant Cell Environ. 2010;33:453–67.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. Ballester A-R, Teresa Lafuente M, González-Candelas L. Citrus phenylpropanoids and defence against pathogens. Part II: Gene expression and metabolite accumulation in the response of fruits to Penicillium digitatum infection. Food Chem. 2013;136:285–91.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. Fontaine J-X, Tercé-Laforgue T, Armengaud P, Clément G, Renou J-P, Pelletier S, et al. Characterization of a NADH-dependent glutamate dehydrogenase mutant of Arabidopsis demonstrates the key role of this enzyme in root carbon and nitrogen metabolism. Plant Cell. 2012;24:4044–65.View ArticlePubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. Fernie AR, Stitt M. On the discordance of metabolomics with proteomics and transcriptomics: coping with increasing complexity in logic, chemistry, and network interactions scientific correspondence. Plant Physiol. 2012;158:1139–45.View ArticlePubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. Ha M, Lu J, Tian L, Ramachandran V, Kasschau KD, Chapman EJ, et al. Small RNAs serve as a genetic buffer against genomic shock in Arabidopsis interspecific hybrids and allopolyploids. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009;106:17835–40.View ArticlePubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. Parisod C, Alix K, Just J, Petit M, Sarilar V, Mhiri C, et al. Impact of transposable elements on the organization and function of allopolyploid genomes. New Phytol. 2010;186:37–45.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. Ng DW, Zhang C, Miller M, Shen Z, Briggs S, Chen Z. Proteomic divergence in Arabidopsis autopolyploids and allopolyploids and their progenitors. Heredity. 2011;108:419–30.View ArticlePubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. Marmagne A, Brabant P, Thiellement H, Alix K. Analysis of gene expression in resynthesized Brassica napus allotetraploids: transcriptional changes do not explain differential protein regulation. New Phytol. 2010;186:216–27.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. Froelicher Y, Dambier D, Bassene J, Costantino G, Lotfy S, Didout C, et al. Characterization of microsatellite markers in mandarin orange (Citrus reticulata Blanco). Mol Ecol Resour. 2008;8:119–22.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  76. Cristofani-Yaly M, Novelli VM, Bastianel M, Machado MA. Transferability and level of heterozygosity of microsatellite markers in Citrus species. Plant Mol Biol Rep. 2011;29:418–23.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  77. Yi B, Zeng F, Lei S, Chen Y, Yao X, Zhu Y, et al. Two duplicate CYP704B1-homologous genes BnMs1 and BnMs2 are required for pollen exine formation and tapetal development in Brassica napus. Plant J. 2010;63:925–38.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. Hu Z, Zhang M, Wen Q, Wei J, Yi H, Deng X, et al. Abnormal microspore development leads to pollen abortion in a seedless mutant of ‘Ougan’mandarin (Citrus suavissima Hort. ex Tanaka). J Am Soc Hortic Sci. 2007;132:777–82.Google Scholar
  79. Zheng BB, Wu XM, Ge XX, Deng XX, Grosser JW, Guo WW. Comparative transcript profiling of a male sterile cybrid pummelo and its fertile type revealed altered gene expression related to flower development. PLoS One. 2012;7:e43758.View ArticlePubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  80. Xu Q, Chen LL, Ruan X, Chen D, Zhu A, Chen C, et al. The draft genome of sweet orange (Citrus sinensis). Nat Genet. 2013;45:59–66.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  81. Kim D, Pertea G, Trapnell C, Pimentel H, Kelley R, Salzberg SL. TopHat2: accurate alignment of transcriptomes in the presence of insertions, deletions and gene fusions. Genome Biol. 2013;14:R36.View ArticlePubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. Anders S, Huber W. Differential expression analysis for sequence count data. Genome Biol. 2010;11:R106.View ArticlePubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  83. Benjamini Y, Hochberg Y. Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J R Stat Soc Series B Stat Methodol. 1995;57:289–300.Google Scholar
  84. Xie C, Mao X, Huang J, Ding Y, Wu J, Dong S, et al. KOBAS 2.0: a web server for annotation and identification of enriched pathways and diseases. Nucleic Acids Res. 2011;39 Suppl 2:316–22.View ArticleGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© Tan et al.; licensee BioMed Central. 2015

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Advertisement