Patterns of Metabolite Changes Identified from Large-Scale Gene Perturbations in Arabidopsis Using a Genome-Scale Metabolic Network

Metabolomics enables quantitative evaluation of metabolic changes caused by genetic or environmental perturbations. However, little is known about how perturbing a single gene changes the metabolic system as a whole and which network and functional properties are involved in this response. To answer this question, we investigated the metabolite profiles from 136 mutants with single gene perturbations of functionally diverse Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) genes. Fewer than 10 metabolites were changed significantly relative to the wild type in most of the mutants, indicating that the metabolic network was robust to perturbations of single metabolic genes. These changed metabolites were closer to each other in a genome-scale metabolic network than expected by chance, supporting the notion that the genetic perturbations changed the network more locally than globally. Surprisingly, the changed metabolites were close to the perturbed reactions in only 30% of the mutants of the well-characterized genes. To determine the factors that contributed to the distance between the observed metabolic changes and the perturbation site in the network, we examined nine network and functional properties of the perturbed genes. Only the isozyme number affected the distance between the perturbed reactions and changed metabolites. This study revealed patterns of metabolic changes from large-scale gene perturbations and relationships between characteristics of the perturbed genes and metabolic changes.Rational and quantitative assessment of metabolic changes in response to genetic modification (GM) is an open question and in need of innovative solutions. Nontargeted metabolite profiling can detect thousands of compounds, but it is not easy to understand the significance of the changed metabolites in the biochemical and biological context of the organism. To better assess the changes in metabolites from nontargeted metabolomics studies, it is important to examine the changed metabolites in the context of the genome-scale metabolic network of the organism.Metabolomics is a technique that aims to quantify all the metabolites in a biological system (Nikolau and Wurtele, 2007; Nicholson and Lindon, 2008; Roessner and Bowne, 2009). It has been used widely in studies ranging from disease diagnosis (Holmes et al., 2008; DeBerardinis and Thompson, 2012) and drug discovery (Cascante et al., 2002; Kell, 2006) to metabolic reconstruction (Feist et al., 2009; Kim et al., 2012) and metabolic engineering (Keasling, 2010; Lee et al., 2011). Metabolomic studies have demonstrated the possibility of identifying gene functions from changes in the relative concentrations of metabolites (metabotypes or metabolic signatures; Ebbels et al., 2004) in various species including yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae; Raamsdonk et al., 2001; Allen et al., 2003), Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana; Brotman et al., 2011), tomato (Solanum lycopersicum; Schauer et al., 2006), and maize (Zea mays; Riedelsheimer et al., 2012). Metabolomics has also been used to better understand how plants interact with their environments (Field and Lake, 2011), including their responses to biotic and abiotic stresses (Dixon et al., 2006; Arbona et al., 2013), and to predict important agronomic traits (Riedelsheimer et al., 2012). Metabolite profiling has been performed on many plant species, including angiosperms such as Arabidopsis, poplar (Populus trichocarpa), and Catharanthus roseus (Sumner et al., 2003; Rischer et al., 2006), basal land plants such as Selaginella moellendorffii and Physcomitrella patens (Erxleben et al., 2012; Yobi et al., 2012), and Chlamydomonas reinhardtii (Fernie et al., 2012; Davis et al., 2013). With the availability of whole genome sequences of various species, metabolomics has the potential to become a useful tool for elucidating the functions of genes using large-scale systematic analyses (Fiehn et al., 2000; Saito and Matsuda, 2010; Hur et al., 2013).Although metabolomics data have the potential for identifying the roles of genes that are associated with metabolic phenotypes, the biochemical mechanisms that link functions of genes with metabolic phenotypes are still poorly characterized. For example, we do not yet know the principles behind how perturbing the expression of a single gene changes the metabolic system as a whole. Large-scale metabolomics data have provided useful resources for linking phenotypes to genotypes (Fiehn et al., 2000; Roessner et al., 2001; Tikunov et al., 2005; Schauer et al., 2006; Lu et al., 2011; Fukushima et al., 2014). For example, Lu et al. (2011) compared morphological and metabolic phenotypes from more than 5,000 Arabidopsis chloroplast mutants using gas chromatography (GC)- and liquid chromatography (LC)-mass spectrometry (MS). Fukushima et al. (2014) generated metabolite profiles from various characterized and uncharacterized mutant plants and clustered the mutants with similar metabolic phenotypes by conducting multidimensional scaling with quantified metabolic phenotypes. Nonetheless, representation and analysis of such a large amount of data remains a challenge for scientific discovery (Lu et al., 2011). In addition, these studies do not examine the topological and functional characteristics of metabolic changes in the context of a genome-scale metabolic network. To understand the relationship between genotype and metabolic phenotype, we need to investigate the metabolic changes caused by perturbing the expression of a gene in a genome-scale metabolic network perspective, because metabolic pathways are not independent biochemical factories but are components of a complex network (Berg et al., 2002; Merico et al., 2009).Much progress has been made in the last 2 decades to represent metabolism at a genome scale (Terzer et al., 2009). The advances in genome sequencing and emerging fields such as biocuration and bioinformatics enabled the representation of genome-scale metabolic network reconstructions for model organisms (Bassel et al., 2012). Genome-scale metabolic models have been built and applied broadly from microbes to plants. The first step toward modeling a genome-scale metabolism in a plant species started with developing a genome-scale metabolic pathway database for Arabidopsis (AraCyc; Mueller et al., 2003) from reference pathway databases (Kanehisa and Goto, 2000; Karp et al., 2002; Zhang et al., 2010). Genome-scale metabolic pathway databases have been built for several plant species (Mueller et al., 2005; Zhang et al., 2005, 2010; Urbanczyk-Wochniak and Sumner, 2007; May et al., 2009; Dharmawardhana et al., 2013; Monaco et al., 2013, 2014; Van Moerkercke et al., 2013; Chae et al., 2014; Jung et al., 2014). Efforts have been made to develop predictive genome-scale metabolic models using enzyme kinetics and stoichiometric flux-balance approaches (Sweetlove et al., 2008). de Oliveira Dal’Molin et al. (2010) developed a genome-scale metabolic model for Arabidopsis and successfully validated the model by predicting the classical photorespiratory cycle as well as known key differences between redox metabolism in photosynthetic and nonphotosynthetic plant cells. Other genome-scale models have been developed for Arabidopsis (Poolman et al., 2009; Radrich et al., 2010; Mintz-Oron et al., 2012), C. reinhardtii (Chang et al., 2011; Dal’Molin et al., 2011), maize (Dal’Molin et al., 2010; Saha et al., 2011), sorghum (Sorghum bicolor; Dal’Molin et al., 2010), and sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum; Dal’Molin et al., 2010). These predictive models have the potential to be applied broadly in fields such as metabolic engineering, drug target discovery, identification of gene function, study of evolutionary processes, risk assessment of genetically modified crops, and interpretations of mutant phenotypes (Feist and Palsson, 2008; Ricroch et al., 2011).Here, we interrogate the metabotypes caused by 136 single gene perturbations of Arabidopsis by analyzing the relative concentration changes of 1,348 chemically identified metabolites using a reconstructed genome-scale metabolic network. We examine the characteristics of the changed metabolites (the metabolites whose relative concentrations were significantly different in mutants relative to the wild type) in the metabolic network to uncover biological and topological consequences of the perturbed genes.     

Multiscale Metabolic Modeling: Dynamic Flux Balance Analysis on a Whole-Plant Scale

Plant metabolism is characterized by a unique complexity on the cellular, tissue, and organ levels. On a whole-plant scale, changing source and sink relations accompanying plant development add another level of complexity to metabolism. With the aim of achieving a spatiotemporal resolution of source-sink interactions in crop plant metabolism, a multiscale metabolic modeling (MMM) approach was applied that integrates static organ-specific models with a whole-plant dynamic model. Allowing for a dynamic flux balance analysis on a whole-plant scale, the MMM approach was used to decipher the metabolic behavior of source and sink organs during the generative phase of the barley (Hordeum vulgare) plant. It reveals a sink-to-source shift of the barley stem caused by the senescence-related decrease in leaf source capacity, which is not sufficient to meet the nutrient requirements of sink organs such as the growing seed. The MMM platform represents a novel approach for the in silico analysis of metabolism on a whole-plant level, allowing for a systemic, spatiotemporally resolved understanding of metabolic processes involved in carbon partitioning, thus providing a novel tool for studying yield stability and crop improvement.Plants are of vital significance as a source of food (Grusak and DellaPenna, 1999; Rogalski and Carrer, 2011), feed (Lu et al., 2011), energy (Tilman et al., 2006; Parmar et al., 2011), and feedstocks for the chemical industry (Metzger and Bornscheuer, 2006; Kinghorn et al., 2011). Given the close connection between plant metabolism and the usability of plant products, there is a growing interest in understanding and predicting the behavior and regulation of plant metabolic processes. In order to increase crop quality and yield, there is a need for methods guiding the rational redesign of the plant metabolic network (Schwender, 2009).Mathematical modeling of plant metabolism offers new approaches to understand, predict, and modify complex plant metabolic processes. In plant research, the issue of metabolic modeling is constantly gaining attention, and different modeling approaches applied to plant metabolism exist, ranging from highly detailed quantitative to less complex qualitative approaches (for review, see Giersch, 2000; Morgan and Rhodes, 2002; Poolman et al., 2004; Rios-Estepa and Lange, 2007).A widely used modeling approach is flux balance analysis (FBA), which allows the prediction of metabolic capabilities and steady-state fluxes under different environmental and genetic backgrounds using (non)linear optimization (Orth et al., 2010). Assuming steady-state conditions, FBA has the advantage of not requiring the knowledge of kinetic parameters and, therefore, can be applied to model detailed, large-scale systems. In recent years, the FBA approach has been applied to several different plant species, such as maize (Zea mays; Dal’Molin et al., 2010; Saha et al., 2011), barley (Hordeum vulgare; Grafahrend-Belau et al., 2009b; Melkus et al., 2011; Rolletschek et al., 2011), rice (Oryza sativa; Lakshmanan et al., 2013), Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana; Poolman et al., 2009; de Oliveira Dal’Molin et al., 2010; Radrich et al., 2010; Williams et al., 2010; Mintz-Oron et al., 2012; Cheung et al., 2013), and rapeseed (Brassica napus; Hay and Schwender, 2011a, 2011b; Pilalis et al., 2011), as well as algae (Boyle and Morgan, 2009; Cogne et al., 2011; Dal’Molin et al., 2011) and photoautotrophic bacteria (Knoop et al., 2010; Montagud et al., 2010; Boyle and Morgan, 2011). These models have been used to study different aspects of metabolism, including the prediction of optimal metabolic yields and energy efficiencies (Dal’Molin et al., 2010; Boyle and Morgan, 2011), changes in flux under different environmental and genetic backgrounds (Grafahrend-Belau et al., 2009b; Dal’Molin et al., 2010; Melkus et al., 2011), and nonintuitive metabolic pathways that merit subsequent experimental investigations (Poolman et al., 2009; Knoop et al., 2010; Rolletschek et al., 2011). Although FBA of plant metabolic models was shown to be capable of reproducing experimentally determined flux distributions (Williams et al., 2010; Hay and Schwender, 2011b) and generating new insights into metabolic behavior, capacities, and efficiencies (Sweetlove and Ratcliffe, 2011), challenges remain to advance the utility and predictive power of the models.Given that many plant metabolic functions are based on interactions between different subcellular compartments, cell types, tissues, and organs, the reconstruction of organ-specific models and the integration of these models into interacting multiorgan and/or whole-plant models is a prerequisite to get insight into complex plant metabolic processes organized on a whole-plant scale (e.g. source-sink interactions). Almost all FBA models of plant metabolism are restricted to one cell type (Boyle and Morgan, 2009; Knoop et al., 2010; Montagud et al., 2010; Cogne et al., 2011; Dal’Molin et al., 2011), one tissue or one organ (Grafahrend-Belau et al., 2009b; Hay and Schwender, 2011a, 2011b; Pilalis et al., 2011; Mintz-Oron et al., 2012), and only one model exists taking into account the interaction between two cell types by specifying the interaction between mesophyll and bundle sheath cells in C4 photosynthesis (Dal’Molin et al., 2010). So far, no model representing metabolism at the whole-plant scale exists.Considering whole-plant metabolism raises the problem of taking into account temporal and environmental changes in metabolism during plant development and growth. Although classical static FBA is unable to predict the dynamics of metabolic processes, as the network analysis is based on steady-state solutions, time-dependent processes can be taken into account by extending the classical static FBA to a dynamic flux balance analysis (dFBA), as proposed by Mahadevan et al. (2002). The static (SOA) and dynamic optimization approaches introduced in this work provide a framework for analyzing the transience of metabolism by integrating kinetic expressions to dynamically constrain exchange fluxes. Due to the requirement of knowing or estimating a large number of kinetic parameters, so far dFBA has only been applied to a plant metabolic model once, to study the photosynthetic metabolism in the chloroplasts of C3 plants by a simplified model of five biochemical reactions (Luo et al., 2009). Integrating a dynamic model into a static FBA model is an alternative approach to perform dFBA.In this study, a multiscale metabolic modeling (MMM) approach was applied with the aim of achieving a spatiotemporal resolution of cereal crop plant metabolism. To provide a framework for the in silico analysis of the metabolic dynamics of barley on a whole-plant scale, the MMM approach integrates a static multiorgan FBA model and a dynamic whole-plant multiscale functional plant model (FPM) to perform dFBA. The performance of the novel whole-plant MMM approach was tested by studying source-sink interactions during the seed developmental phase of barley plants.     

Metabolite Profiles of Maize Leaves in Drought,Heat, and Combined Stress Field Trials Reveal the Relationship between Metabolism and Grain Yield

The development of abiotic stress-resistant cultivars is of premium importance for the agriculture of developing countries. Further progress in maize (Zea mays) performance under stresses is expected by combining marker-assisted breeding with metabolite markers. In order to dissect metabolic responses and to identify promising metabolite marker candidates, metabolite profiles of maize leaves were analyzed and compared with grain yield in field trials. Plants were grown under well-watered conditions (control) or exposed to drought, heat, and both stresses simultaneously. Trials were conducted in 2010 and 2011 using 10 tropical hybrids selected to exhibit diverse abiotic stress tolerance. Drought stress evoked the accumulation of many amino acids, including isoleucine, valine, threonine, and 4-aminobutanoate, which has been commonly reported in both field and greenhouse experiments in many plant species. Two photorespiratory amino acids, glycine and serine, and myoinositol also accumulated under drought. The combination of drought and heat evoked relatively few specific responses, and most of the metabolic changes were predictable from the sum of the responses to individual stresses. Statistical analysis revealed significant correlation between levels of glycine and myoinositol and grain yield under drought. Levels of myoinositol in control conditions were also related to grain yield under drought. Furthermore, multiple linear regression models very well explained the variation of grain yield via the combination of several metabolites. These results indicate the importance of photorespiration and raffinose family oligosaccharide metabolism in grain yield under drought and suggest single or multiple metabolites as potential metabolic markers for the breeding of abiotic stress-tolerant maize.The increasing world population coupled to environmental deterioration is creating ever greater pressure on our capacity for sustainable food productivity. Alongside biotic stresses, abiotic stresses such as drought, heat, salinity, and nutrient deficiency greatly reduce yields in crop fields either when present alone or in combination. Breeding for more resilient crops, therefore, is one of the major approaches to cope with the increasing challenges in world agriculture. Considerable research effort has thus been invested in order to dissect plant responses to individual stresses at various levels (for review, see Urano et al., 2010; Lopes et al., 2011; Obata and Fernie, 2012), but the interaction between different stresses has been far less investigated (Cairns et al., 2012b, 2013; Suzuki et al., 2014). In general, the combination of stresses additively affects plant physiology (i.e. the symptoms of the individual stresses appear simultaneously) and synergistically diminishes the yield and productivity of plants (Keleş and Öncel, 2002; Giraud et al., 2008; Vile et al., 2012; Suzuki et al., 2014). The molecular responses, however, are not simply additive and are rarely predicted from the responses to individual stresses (Rizhsky et al., 2002, 2004; Prasch and Sonnewald, 2013; Rasmussen et al., 2013). Information from carefully controlled greenhouse experiments has begun to dissect the molecular mechanisms by which plants, in particular Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana), respond to drought and temperature stresses (Skirycz et al., 2010, 2011; Skirycz and Inzé, 2010; Bowne et al., 2012; Tardieu, 2012; Verkest et al., 2015). Our knowledge of the molecular basis of the responses of crop species in a field environment, however, is considerably less well advanced (Araus et al., 2008; Cabrera-Bosquet et al., 2012). That said, a large number of genotypes have been generated on the basis of their resistance to both biotic and abiotic stresses (for review, see Bänziger et al., 2006; Takeda and Matsuoka, 2008; Cooper et al., 2014), and the genome sequencing and molecular characterization of a range of stress-tolerant plant species have recently been reported (Wu et al., 2012; Ma et al., 2013; Bolger et al., 2014; Tohge et al., 2014). These studies are not only important as basic research for further studies in crops but also are a prerequisite in the development of molecular marker-based approaches to improve crop tolerance to stress.As a first step toward this goal, a deeper understanding of the plant responses to the stressful environment, especially those to multiple stress conditions under field conditions, is crucial for the improvement of stress-tolerant crops. This is important on two levels: (1) in the field, singular abiotic stresses are rare; and (2) yield and stress adaptation are complex traits that render breeding gains slower than would be expected under optimal conditions (Bruce et al., 2002). Recent studies have revealed that the response of plants to combinations of two or more stress conditions is unique and cannot be directly extrapolated from their responses to the different stresses when applied individually. This would be a result of complex combinations of different, and sometimes opposing, responses in signaling pathways, including those that may interact and inhibit one another (Prasch and Sonnewald, 2013; Rasmussen et al., 2013; Suzuki et al., 2014).Maize (Zea mays) is grown in over 170 million ha worldwide, of which 130 million ha are in less-developed countries (FAO, 2014). In sub-Saharan Africa, maize is a staple crop; however, yields in this region have stagnated at less than 2 tons ha⁻¹, while maize yields worldwide have continued to increase (Cairns et al., 2012a). Low yields in sub-Saharan Africa are largely associated with drought stress (DS) and low soil fertility (Bänziger and Araus, 2007). Additionally, simulation studies indicate that maize yield in Africa is likely to be significantly impaired by heat stress (HS; Lobell and Burke, 2010; Lobell et al., 2011), such as can be anticipated as a result of the changes in climate predicted for the coming decades (Müller et al., 2011). Moreover, the sensitivity of maize yield to heat is exacerbated under drought conditions (Lobell et al., 2011; Cairns et al., 2012a, 2012b, 2013). Therefore, the development of maize germplasm tolerant to drought and heat conditions is of utmost importance to both increase yields and offset predicted yield losses under projected climate change scenarios (Easterling et al., 2007), especially in sub-Saharan Africa. While direct selection for grain yield under DS has resulted in admirable gains in grain yield under stress (Bänziger et al., 2006; Cairns et al., 2013), further improvement requires the incorporation of additional selection traits (Cairns et al., 2012a, 2012b). In recent years, genetic and phenotypic markers have been searched extensively for drought tolerance of maize by high-throughput genomic and phenotyping approaches, respectively (Tuberosa and Salvi, 2006; Wen et al., 2011; Araus et al., 2012; Cairns et al., 2013; Prasanna et al., 2013; Araus and Cairns, 2014; Tsonev et al., 2014). Moreover, metabolic markers started to draw attention due to their close relationship with yield phenotypes (Fernie and Schauer, 2009; Redestig et al., 2011; Riedelsheimer et al., 2012a, 2012b; Witt et al., 2012; Degenkolbe et al., 2013). The accumulation of some metabolites has been reported to be directly related to the performance of potato (Solanum tuberosum) cultivars in beetle resistance in the field (Tai et al., 2014). Additionally, identical genomic regions were mapped as both agronomic and metabolic quantitative trait loci in field-grown maize and wheat (Triticum aestivum), indicating the utility of metabolic traits for breeding selection (Riedelsheimer et al., 2012b; Hill et al., 2015). A recent study showed that genetic gains in maize grain yield under DS were higher using a molecular marker-based approach than conventional breeding (Beyene et al., 2015).Here, we focused on the relationship between leaf metabolites and grain yield under drought, heat, and simultaneous drought and heat conditions in the field. The negative effect of DS on maize yield is especially acute during the reproductive stage between tassel emergence and early grain filling (Grant et al., 1989), when it is believed to induce premature seed desiccation and to limit grain filling. Grain is more susceptible to DS than vegetative tissues; therefore, the prediction of grain yield from the physiological parameter of leaves is a challenge (Sangoi and Salvador, 1998; Khodarahmpour and Hamidi, 2011). Nevertheless, maize yield is dependent on both the assimilate supply to the kernel (source) and the potential of the kernel to accommodate this assimilate (sink potential; Jones and Simmons, 1983). Breeding for modern temperate hybrids has focused more on the sink potential, particularly under stress conditions (Tollenaar and Lee, 2006); therefore, there should be considerable potential remaining to improve source ability. DS and HS would be anticipated largely to affect leaf metabolism and especially photosynthesis, compromising the source capacity of leaves (Chaves et al., 2009; Lawlor and Tezara, 2009; Osakabe et al., 2014). In keeping with this, drought was found to have the most dramatic effect on the metabolite composition in leaves compared with other organs in our previous greenhouse experiments (Witt et al., 2012). Since the source ability is closely related to leaf metabolism, the leaf metabolite profile should have a close relationship to grain yield particularly under conditions of stress. Given that several recent studies have indicated the importance of metabolic preadaptation to various stress tolerances in plants (Sanchez et al., 2011; Benina et al., 2013), we also postulate that basal metabolite levels under optimal growth conditions could be correlated to stress tolerance. In order to test this, metabolite profiles of the leaf blades of 10 hybrids were analyzed in field experiments conducted at the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT) subtropical experimental station in 2010 and 2011 in which the plants were exposed to singular or combined drought and heat stresses (DS+HS; Cairns et al., 2012a, 2013). The results are discussed both in the context of current models of stress tolerance and with respect to their practical implications for future breeding strategies.     

Calcineurin B-Like Protein-Interacting Protein Kinase CIPK21 Regulates Osmotic and Salt Stress Responses in Arabidopsis

The role of calcium-mediated signaling has been extensively studied in plant responses to abiotic stress signals. Calcineurin B-like proteins (CBLs) and CBL-interacting protein kinases (CIPKs) constitute a complex signaling network acting in diverse plant stress responses. Osmotic stress imposed by soil salinity and drought is a major abiotic stress that impedes plant growth and development and involves calcium-signaling processes. In this study, we report the functional analysis of CIPK21, an Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) CBL-interacting protein kinase, ubiquitously expressed in plant tissues and up-regulated under multiple abiotic stress conditions. The growth of a loss-of-function mutant of CIPK21, cipk21, was hypersensitive to high salt and osmotic stress conditions. The calcium sensors CBL2 and CBL3 were found to physically interact with CIPK21 and target this kinase to the tonoplast. Moreover, preferential localization of CIPK21 to the tonoplast was detected under salt stress condition when coexpressed with CBL2 or CBL3. These findings suggest that CIPK21 mediates responses to salt stress condition in Arabidopsis, at least in part, by regulating ion and water homeostasis across the vacuolar membranes.Drought and salinity cause osmotic stress in plants and severely affect crop productivity throughout the world. Plants respond to osmotic stress by changing a number of cellular processes (Xiong et al., 1999; Xiong and Zhu, 2002; Bartels and Sunkar, 2005; Boudsocq and Lauriére, 2005). Some of these changes include activation of stress-responsive genes, regulation of membrane transport at both plasma membrane (PM) and vacuolar membrane (tonoplast) to maintain water and ionic homeostasis, and metabolic changes to produce compatible osmolytes such as Pro (Stewart and Lee, 1974; Krasensky and Jonak, 2012). It has been well established that a specific calcium (Ca²⁺) signature is generated in response to a particular environmental stimulus (Trewavas and Malhó, 1998; Scrase-Field and Knight, 2003; Luan, 2009; Kudla et al., 2010). The Ca²⁺ changes are primarily perceived by several Ca²⁺ sensors such as calmodulin (Reddy, 2001; Luan et al., 2002), Ca²⁺-dependent protein kinases (Harper and Harmon, 2005), calcineurin B-like proteins (CBLs; Luan et al., 2002; Batistič and Kudla, 2004; Pandey, 2008; Luan, 2009; Sanyal et al., 2015), and other Ca²⁺-binding proteins (Reddy, 2001; Shao et al., 2008) to initiate various cellular responses.Plant CBL-type Ca²⁺ sensors interact with and activate CBL-interacting protein kinases (CIPKs) that phosphorylate downstream components to transduce Ca²⁺ signals (Liu et al., 2000; Luan et al., 2002; Batistič and Kudla, 2004; Luan, 2009). In several plant species, multiple members have been identified in the CBL and CIPK family (Luan et al., 2002; Kolukisaoglu et al., 2004; Pandey, 2008; Batistič and Kudla, 2009; Weinl and Kudla, 2009; Pandey et al., 2014). Involvement of specific CBL-CIPK pair to decode a particular type of signal entails the alternative and selective complex formation leading to stimulus-response coupling (D’Angelo et al., 2006; Batistič et al., 2010).Several CBL and CIPK family members have been implicated in plant responses to drought, salinity, and osmotic stress based on genetic analysis of Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) mutants (Zhu, 2002; Cheong et al., 2003, 2007; Kim et al., 2003; Pandey et al., 2004, 2008; D’Angelo et al., 2006; Qin et al., 2008; Tripathi et al., 2009; Held et al., 2011; Tang et al., 2012; Drerup et al., 2013; Eckert et al., 2014). A few CIPKs have also been functionally characterized by gain-of-function approach in crop plants such as rice (Oryza sativa), pea (Pisum sativum), and maize (Zea mays) and were found to be involved in osmotic stress responses (Mahajan et al., 2006; Xiang et al., 2007; Yang et al., 2008; Tripathi et al., 2009; Zhao et al., 2009; Cuéllar et al., 2010).In this report, we examined the role of the Arabidopsis CIPK21 gene in osmotic stress response by reverse genetic analysis. The loss-of-function mutant plants became hypersensitive to salt and mannitol stress conditions, suggesting that CIPK21 is involved in the regulation of osmotic stress response in Arabidopsis. These findings are further supported by an enhanced tonoplast targeting of the cytoplasmic CIPK21 through interaction with the vacuolar Ca²⁺ sensors CBL2 and CBL3 under salt stress condition.     

Characterization of the Possible Roles for B Class MADS Box Genes in Regulation of Perianth Formation in Orchid

To investigate sepal/petal/lip formation in Oncidium Gower Ramsey, three paleoAPETALA3 genes, O. Gower Ramsey MADS box gene5 (OMADS5; clade 1), OMADS3 (clade 2), and OMADS9 (clade 3), and one PISTILLATA gene, OMADS8, were characterized. The OMADS8 and OMADS3 mRNAs were expressed in all four floral organs as well as in vegetative leaves. The OMADS9 mRNA was only strongly detected in petals and lips. The mRNA for OMADS5 was only strongly detected in sepals and petals and was significantly down-regulated in lip-like petals and lip-like sepals of peloric mutant flowers. This result revealed a possible negative role for OMADS5 in regulating lip formation. Yeast two-hybrid analysis indicated that OMADS5 formed homodimers and heterodimers with OMADS3 and OMADS9. OMADS8 only formed heterodimers with OMADS3, whereas OMADS3 and OMADS9 formed homodimers and heterodimers with each other. We proposed that sepal/petal/lip formation needs the presence of OMADS3/8 and/or OMADS9. The determination of the final organ identity for the sepal/petal/lip likely depended on the presence or absence of OMADS5. The presence of OMADS5 caused short sepal/petal formation. When OMADS5 was absent, cells could proliferate, resulting in the possible formation of large lips and the conversion of the sepal/petal into lips in peloric mutants. Further analysis indicated that only ectopic expression of OMADS8 but not OMADS5/9 caused the conversion of the sepal into an expanded petal-like structure in transgenic Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) plants.The ABCDE model predicts the formation of any flower organ by the interaction of five classes of homeotic genes in plants (Yanofsky et al., 1990; Jack et al., 1992; Mandel et al., 1992; Goto and Meyerowitz, 1994; Jofuku et al., 1994; Pelaz et al., 2000, 2001; Theißen and Saedler, 2001; Pinyopich et al., 2003; Ditta et al., 2004; Jack, 2004). The A class genes control sepal formation. The A, B, and E class genes work together to regulate petal formation. The B, C, and E class genes control stamen formation. The C and E class genes work to regulate carpel formation, whereas the D class gene is involved in ovule development. MADS box genes seem to have a central role in flower development, because most ABCDE genes encode MADS box proteins (Coen and Meyerowitz, 1991; Weigel and Meyerowitz, 1994; Purugganan et al., 1995; Rounsley et al., 1995; Theißen and Saedler, 1995; Theißen et al., 2000; Theißen, 2001).The function of B group genes, such as APETALA3 (AP3) and PISTILLATA (PI), has been thought to have a major role in specifying petal and stamen development (Jack et al., 1992; Goto and Meyerowitz, 1994; Krizek and Meyerowitz, 1996; Kramer et al., 1998; Hernandez-Hernandez et al., 2007; Kanno et al., 2007; Whipple et al., 2007; Irish, 2009). In Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana), mutation in AP3 or PI caused identical phenotypes of second whorl petal conversion into a sepal structure and third flower whorl stamen into a carpel structure (Bowman et al., 1989; Jack et al., 1992; Goto and Meyerowitz, 1994). Similar homeotic conversions for petal and stamen were observed in the mutants of the AP3 and PI orthologs from a number of core eudicots such as Antirrhinum majus, Petunia hybrida, Gerbera hybrida, Solanum lycopersicum, and Nicotiana benthamiana (Sommer et al., 1990; Tröbner et al., 1992; Angenent et al., 1993; van der Krol et al., 1993; Yu et al., 1999; Liu et al., 2004; Vandenbussche et al., 2004; de Martino et al., 2006), from basal eudicot species such as Papaver somniferum and Aquilegia vulgaris (Drea et al., 2007; Kramer et al., 2007), as well as from monocot species such as Zea mays and Oryza sativa (Ambrose et al., 2000; Nagasawa et al., 2003; Prasad and Vijayraghavan, 2003; Yadav et al., 2007; Yao et al., 2008). This indicated that the function of the B class genes AP3 and PI is highly conserved during evolution.It has been thought that B group genes may have arisen from an ancestral gene through multiple gene duplication events (Doyle, 1994; Theißen et al., 1996, 2000; Purugganan, 1997; Kramer et al., 1998; Kramer and Irish, 1999; Lamb and Irish, 2003; Kim et al., 2004; Stellari et al., 2004; Zahn et al., 2005; Hernandez-Hernandez et al., 2007). In the gymnosperms, there was a single putative B class lineage that duplicated to generate the paleoAP3 and PI lineages in angiosperms (Kramer et al., 1998; Theißen et al., 2000; Irish, 2009). The paleoAP3 lineage is composed of AP3 orthologs identified in lower eudicots, magnolid dicots, and monocots (Kramer et al., 1998). Genes in this lineage contain the conserved paleoAP3- and PI-derived motifs in the C-terminal end of the proteins, which have been thought to be characteristics of the B class ancestral gene (Kramer et al., 1998; Tzeng and Yang, 2001; Hsu and Yang, 2002). The PI lineage is composed of PI orthologs that contain a highly conserved PI motif identified in most plant species (Kramer et al., 1998). Subsequently, there was a second duplication at the base of the core eudicots that produced the euAP3 and TM6 lineages, which have been subject to substantial sequence changes in eudicots during evolution (Kramer et al., 1998; Kramer and Irish, 1999). The paleoAP3 motif in the C-terminal end of the proteins was retained in the TM6 lineage and replaced by a conserved euAP3 motif in the euAP3 lineage of most eudicot species (Kramer et al., 1998). In addition, many lineage-specific duplications for paleoAP3 lineage have occurred in plants such as orchids (Hsu and Yang, 2002; Tsai et al., 2004; Kim et al., 2007; Mondragón-Palomino and Theißen, 2008, 2009; Mondragón-Palomino et al., 2009), Ranunculaceae, and Ranunculales (Kramer et al., 2003; Di Stilio et al., 2005; Shan et al., 2006; Kramer, 2009).Unlike the A or C class MADS box proteins, which form homodimers that regulate flower development, the ability of B class proteins to form homodimers has only been reported in gymnosperms and in the paleoAP3 and PI lineages of some monocots. For example, LMADS1 of the lily Lilium longiflorum (Tzeng and Yang, 2001), OMADS3 of the orchid Oncidium Gower Ramsey (Hsu and Yang, 2002), and PeMADS4 of the orchid Phalaenopsis equestris (Tsai et al., 2004) in the paleoAP3 lineage, LRGLOA and LRGLOB of the lily Lilium regale (Winter et al., 2002), TGGLO of the tulip Tulipa gesneriana (Kanno et al., 2003), and PeMADS6 of the orchid P. equestris (Tsai et al., 2005) in the PI lineage, and GGM2 of the gymnosperm Gnetum gnemon (Winter et al., 1999) were able to form homodimers that regulate flower development. Proteins in the euAP3 lineage and in most paleoAP3 lineages were not able to form homodimers and had to interact with PI to form heterodimers in order to regulate petal and stamen development in various plant species (Schwarz-Sommer et al., 1992; Tröbner et al., 1992; Riechmann et al., 1996; Moon et al., 1999; Winter et al., 2002; Kanno et al., 2003; Vandenbussche et al., 2004; Yao et al., 2008). In addition to forming dimers, AP3 and PI were able to interact with other MADS box proteins, such as SEPALLATA1 (SEP1), SEP2, and SEP3, to regulate petal and stamen development (Pelaz et al., 2000; Honma and Goto, 2001; Theißen and Saedler, 2001; Castillejo et al., 2005).Orchids are among the most important plants in the flower market around the world, and research on MADS box genes has been reported for several species of orchids during the past few years (Lu et al., 1993, 2007; Yu and Goh, 2000; Hsu and Yang, 2002; Yu et al., 2002; Hsu et al., 2003; Tsai et al., 2004, 2008; Xu et al., 2006; Guo et al., 2007; Kim et al., 2007; Chang et al., 2009). Unlike the flowers in eudicots, the nearly identical shape of the sepals and petals as well as the production of a unique lip in orchid flowers make them a very special plant species for the study of flower development. Four clades (1–4) of genes in the paleoAP3 lineage have been identified in several orchids (Hsu and Yang, 2002; Tsai et al., 2004; Kim et al., 2007; Mondragón-Palomino and Theißen, 2008, 2009; Mondragón-Palomino et al., 2009). Several works have described the possible interactions among these four clades of paleoAP3 genes and one PI gene that are involved in regulating the differentiation and formation of the sepal/petal/lip of orchids (Tsai et al., 2004; Kim et al., 2007; Mondragón-Palomino and Theißen, 2008, 2009). However, the exact mechanism that involves the orchid B class genes remains unclear and needs to be clarified by more experimental investigations.O. Gower Ramsey is a popular orchid with important economic value in cut flower markets. Only a few studies have been reported on the role of MADS box genes in regulating flower formation in this plant species (Hsu and Yang, 2002; Hsu et al., 2003; Chang et al., 2009). An AP3-like MADS gene that regulates both floral formation and initiation in transgenic Arabidopsis has been reported (Hsu and Yang, 2002). In addition, four AP1/AGAMOUS-LIKE9 (AGL9)-like MADS box genes have been characterized that show novel expression patterns and cause different effects on floral transition and formation in Arabidopsis (Hsu et al., 2003; Chang et al., 2009). Compared with other orchids, the production of a large and well-expanded lip and five small identical sepals/petals makes O. Gower Ramsey a special case for the study of the diverse functions of B class MADS box genes during evolution. Therefore, the isolation of more B class MADS box genes and further study of their roles in the regulation of perianth (sepal/petal/lip) formation during O. Gower Ramsey flower development are necessary. In addition to the clade 2 paleoAP3 gene OMADS3, which was previously characterized in our laboratory (Hsu and Yang, 2002), three more B class MADS box genes, OMADS5, OMADS8, and OMADS9, were characterized from O. Gower Ramsey in this study. Based on the different expression patterns and the protein interactions among these four orchid B class genes, we propose that the presence of OMADS3/8 and/or OMADS9 is required for sepal/petal/lip formation. Further sepal and petal formation at least requires the additional presence of OMADS5, whereas large lip formation was seen when OMADS5 expression was absent. Our results provide a new finding and information pertaining to the roles for orchid B class MADS box genes in the regulation of sepal/petal/lip formation.     

Focus on Ethylene: Ethylene and the Regulation of Physiological and Morphological Responses to Nutrient Deficiencies

To cope with nutrient deficiencies, plants develop both morphological and physiological responses. The regulation of these responses is not totally understood, but some hormones and signaling substances have been implicated. It was suggested several years ago that ethylene participates in the regulation of responses to iron and phosphorous deficiency. More recently, its role has been extended to other deficiencies, such as potassium, sulfur, and others. The role of ethylene in so many deficiencies suggests that, to confer specificity to the different responses, it should act through different transduction pathways and/or in conjunction with other signals. In this update, the data supporting a role for ethylene in the regulation of responses to different nutrient deficiencies will be reviewed. In addition, the results suggesting the action of ethylene through different transduction pathways and its interaction with other hormones and signaling substances will be discussed.When plants suffer from a mineral nutrient deficiency, they develop morphological and physiological responses (mainly in their roots) aimed to facilitate the uptake and mobilization of the limiting nutrient. After the nutrient has been acquired in enough quantity, these responses need to be switched off to avoid toxicity and conserve energy. In recent years, different plant hormones (e.g. ethylene, auxin, cytokinins, jasmonic acid, abscisic acid, brassinosteroids, GAs, and strigolactones) have been implicated in the regulation of these responses (Romera et al., 2007, 2011, 2015; Liu et al., 2009; Rubio et al., 2009; Kapulnik et al., 2011; Kiba et al., 2011; Iqbal et al., 2013; Zhang et al., 2014).Before the 1990s, there were several publications relating ethylene and nutrient deficiencies (cited in Lynch and Brown [1997] and Romera et al. [1999]) without establishing a direct implication of ethylene in the regulation of nutrient deficiency responses. In 1994, Romera and Alcántara (1994) published an article in Plant Physiology suggesting a role for ethylene in the regulation of Fe deficiency responses. In 1999, Borch et al. (1999) showed the participation of ethylene in the regulation of P deficiency responses. Since then, evidence has been accumulating in support of a role for ethylene in the regulation of both Fe (Romera et al., 1999, 2015; Waters and Blevins, 2000; Lucena et al., 2006; Waters et al., 2007; García et al., 2010, 2011, 2013, 2014; Yang et al., 2014) and P deficiency responses (Kim et al., 2008; Lei et al., 2011; Li et al., 2011; Nagarajan and Smith, 2012; Wang et al., 2012, 2014c). Both Fe and P may be poorly available in most soils, and plants develop similar responses under their deficiencies (Romera and Alcántara, 2004; Zhang et al., 2014). More recently, a role for ethylene has been extended to other deficiencies, such as K (Shin and Schachtman, 2004; Jung et al., 2009; Kim et al., 2012), S (Maruyama-Nakashita et al., 2006; Wawrzyńska et al., 2010; Moniuszko et al., 2013), and B (Martín-Rejano et al., 2011). Ethylene has also been implicated in both N deficiency and excess (Tian et al., 2009; Mohd-Radzman et al., 2013; Zheng et al., 2013), and its participation in Mg deficiency has been suggested (Hermans et al., 2010).In this update, we will review the information supporting a role for ethylene in the regulation of different nutrient deficiency responses. For information relating ethylene to other aspects of plant mineral nutrition, such as N₂ fixation and responses to excess of nitrate or essential heavy metals, the reader is referred to other reviews (for review, see Maksymiec, 2007; Mohd-Radzman et al., 2013; Steffens, 2014).