alexa Comparative Genomic Analysis of ADP-ribose-1-monophosphatase in 19 Arabidopsis thaliana Ecotypes | Open Access Journals
ISSN: 2153-0602
Journal of Data Mining in Genomics & Proteomics
Make the best use of Scientific Research and information from our 700+ peer reviewed, Open Access Journals that operates with the help of 50,000+ Editorial Board Members and esteemed reviewers and 1000+ Scientific associations in Medical, Clinical, Pharmaceutical, Engineering, Technology and Management Fields.
Meet Inspiring Speakers and Experts at our 3000+ Global Conferenceseries Events with over 600+ Conferences, 1200+ Symposiums and 1200+ Workshops on
Medical, Pharma, Engineering, Science, Technology and Business

Comparative Genomic Analysis of ADP-ribose-1-monophosphatase in 19 Arabidopsis thaliana Ecotypes

Huifang Jiang#, Haichao Wei#, Chunyun Jiang, Wei Sun, Wen Dong, Nini Chen, Hui Zhang, Yanxiu Zhao and Zenglan Wang*

Key Lab of Plant Stress Research, Life Science College, Shandong Normal University, 88 Wenhua East Road, Jinan 250014, China

#Authors contributed equally

*Corresponding Author:
Zenglan Wang
Key Lab of Plant Stress Research
Life Science College
Shandong Normal University
88 Wenhua East Road
Jinan 250014, China
Tel: 86-531-86180764
Fax: 86-531-86180764
E-mail: [email protected]

Received date: November 05, 2012; Accepted date: December 26, 2012; Published date: January 03, 2013

Citation: Jiang H, Wei H, Jiang C, Sun W, Dong W, et al. (2012) Comparative Genomic Analysis of ADP-ribose-1′′-monophosphatase in 19 Arabidopsis thaliana Ecotypes. J Data Mining Genomics Proteomics 3:122. doi: 10.4172/2153-0602.1000122

Copyright: © 2012 Jiang H, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Visit for more related articles at Journal of Data Mining in Genomics & Proteomics

Abstract

ADP-ribose-1′′-monophosphatase containing A1pp or MACRO domain is an important processing enzyme in cells, participating in splicing the t-RNA procedures and catalyzing ADP-ribose-1′′- monophosphate into ADP-ribose. We identified two genes, AT1G69340 and AT2G40600, in Arabidopsis thaliana and found that, although there were many differences in amino acid, the spatial structure of conserved region was similar. We also analyzed the difference in sequence of promoter, coding region and untranslated region using the data from the whole genome of 19 ecotypes and compared both genes’ expression in different tissues in Col-0 and in seedlings in 19 ecotypes based on AtGenExpress database and the RNA-seq data, respectively. We found the same gene had different expression patterns in some ecotypes and the two genes had the similar expression patterns except in floral organs and seeds according to the data of Col-0. These results implied that the regulatory mechanisms of these genes’ expressions had changed in these ecotypes for the diversities of transcription factors and transcription factor binding sites. Above all, our research will provide some information for description of the gene function and the ecotype candidates used to study the genes’ function.

Keywords

Comparative genomic analysis; Appr-1′′-pase; Arabidopsis thaliana ecotype; MACRO; 3D structure; RNA-seq

Introduction

ADP-ribose-1′′-monophosphatase (Appr-1′′-pase) which contains A1pp or MACRO domain is an important processing enzyme in cells, participating in pre-tRNA splicing and catalyzing ADP-ribose-1- phosphate (Appr-1′′-p) pase into ADP-ribose [1,2]. In this pre-tRNA splicing, a specific phosphotransferase changes the spliced tRNA into ADP-ribose- 1′′, 2′′-cyclic phosphate (Appr>p). Appr>p will become ADP-ribose-1-phosphate ADP-ribose-1-phosphate (Appr-1′′-p) under cyclic phosphodiesterase (CPDase) [3-6], and ADP-ribose-1- phosphate (Appr-1′′-p) will be further hydrolyzed into ADP-ribose [6]. ADP-ribose pyrophosphatase (ADPRase) catalyzes the ADPribose into ribose-5-phosphate and AMP [7]. It has been suggested that Appr>p, or its hydrolysis product, may play some unknown regulatory functions in the cell.

A1pp or MACRO domain is composed of 130~190 amino acids and can bind ADP-ribose [8]. Early research of YBR022W in yeast finds that A1pp domain is associated with the activity of Appr-1′′-p processing enzyme [6]. Kumaran et al. [2] find instead of the Appr-1′′- pase generally exists as a dimer when they analyze the crystal structure of YMX7_YEAST protein in yeast. The monomer is consisted of two domains, with 200 (16–219) residues forming α/β domains and 60 (220–279) residues forming a helical bundle. The core of α/β domain forms a hydrophobic region which makes the two monomers into a dimer [2]. Appr-1′′-pase together with ADP-ribose can form an Appr- 1′′-pase: ADP-ribose complex. The crystal structure of this complex shows that ADP-ribose can bind with β-sheet of A1pp (or MACRO) domain [2,9].

MACRO domains are ancient, highly evolutionarily conserved domains. They exist in many species, for example, homo (marcroH2A) [10], bacteria (POA8D6) [11], archaeal (O59182) [12]. But the MACRO domain family has few members in species. A1pp or MACRO domains can recognize the ADP-ribose or poly (ADP-ribose) and participate in ADP ribosylation which plays an important role in complex biological processes, such as DNA damage and repair [13,14], transcriptional activation and repression [15], microtubule formation [16], telomere biology [17,18], insulator activation [19], mitosis [16,20], cell proliferation and differentiation [21-24], apoptosis [25,26] and programmed cell death [27].

The MACRO domain family has high divergence among each member. Perhaps, these variances are correlated with their biological functions. We know each member of MACRO gene family can take part in different biological processes, however the functions of MACRO domain proteins in plants are known little. In our work, we used Appr- 1-p as Keyword to search the related genes in Arabidopsis genome on TAIR10 and found that ADP-ribose-1′′-monophosphatase family had only two members, AT1G69340 and AT2G40600, which are two novel genes. To better study the function of both genes, we compared the promoters, coding sequence (CDS), amino acid sequence, untranslated region (UTR) of these two genes using the whole genomic data of 19 Arabidopsis thaliana ecotypes [28]. We compared the 3D structures of AT2G40600 in 19 Arabidopsis thaliana ecotypes using ESyPred3D Web Server 1.0. Moreover, we analyzed gene transcriptome data of these ecotypes and acquired their different expression patterns. According to our results, we hope to understand the relationship between diversity in gene conservation and expression patterns and to select the suitable ecotypes to study the gene function.

Materials and Methods

Data collection

Appr-1′′-pase contained A1pp or MACRO domain. We used Appr-1-p as keyword to search the related genes in Arabidopsis genome on TAIR10, and we found only two members, AT1G69340 and AT2G40600, had the potential to be Appr-1′′-p processing enzyme. Further, we used both genes as query to search other homologous genes on TAIR10.

Multiple sequence alignment and analysis

We extracted the A1pp or MACRO domain using simple modular architecture research tool (SMART, http://smart.embl-heidelberg.de/). Using DNAstar tool (http://www.dnastar.com/) with default parameters, we performed multiple sequence alignments on the obtained sequences of the A1pp or MACRO domains. We used weblogo 3.3 (http://weblogo.threeplusone.com/) to estimate the siteby- site variation and used ESyPred3D Web Server 1.0 (http://www.fundp.ac.be/sciences/biologie/urbm/bioinfo/esypred/) to predict the 3D structure of MACRO domain of YMX7_YEAST, AT1G69340 and AT2G40600, and the structures of AT2G40600 in 19 ecotypes. These 3D structures were shown with VEGA ZZ2.4.0 (http://www.vegazz.net/).

To gain the divergence and identity of AT1G69340 and AT2G40600 among 19 Arabidopsis ecotypes (Table 1), we chose the sequence of promoter (2 Kb regions upstream of the start codon), CDS, UTR, amino acid and performed multiple alignment analysis of each sequence using DNAstar and Clustalx 2.0 (http://www.clustal.org/). We used TESS (http://www.cbil.upenn.edu/cgi-bin/tess/tess) to predict transcription factors binding sites in DNA sequences using site or consensus strings and positional weight matrices from the TRANSFAC, JASPAR, IMD, and CBIL-Gibbs Mat database with the default parameters (http://www.cbil.upenn.edu/cgi-bin/tess/tess?RQ=WELCOME). All the genomic sequences are from the web site (http://mus.well.ox.ac.uk/19genomes).

Accession Origin AIMS Stock Centre
Bur-0 Ireland CS6643
Can-0 Canary Isles CS6660
Col-0 Columbia CS6673
Ct-1 Italy CS6674
Edi-0 Scotland CS6688
Hi-0 Netherlands CS6736
Kn-0 Lithuania CS6762
Ler-0 Poland, formerly Germany CS20
Mt-0 Libya CS1380
No-0 Germany CS6805
Oy-0 Norway CS6824
Po-0 Germany CS6839
Rsch-4 Russia CS6850
Sf-2 Spain CS6857
Tsu-0 Japan CS6874
Wil-2 Russia CS6889
Ws-0 Russia CS6891
Wu-0 Germany CS6897
Zu-0 Germany CS6902

Table 1: The 19 different ecotypes of Arabidopsis thaliana.

Expression profile analysis

We used AtGenExpress database (http://jsp.weigelworld.org/expviz/expviz.jsp) to detect the expression patterns of AT1G69340 and AT2G40600 in different development stages and different organs in ecotype Col-0 [29]. We also analyzed the diversity of both gene expressions in seedling period in 19 ecotypes using RNA-seq data from the website (http://mus.well.ox.ac.uk/19genomes) (all data were normalized by RPKM (Reads Per Kilobase per Million mapped reads) and constructed expression profile with software R 2.12.0 (http://cran.r-project.org/bin/windows/base/old/2.12.0/).

Results

The identification of Appr-1′′-pase gene

Appr-1′′-pase has A1pp or MACRO domain which is associated with the activity of Appr-1′′-P processing enzyme, so we used Appr-1-p as keyword to search related genes in Arabidopsis genome, and only found AT1G69340 and AT2G40600, which encodes 562, 257 amino acid residues, respectively. To be sure if there were only these two genes, we used both genes as query to search in TAIR10. At last, we found there were no other genes having the processing enzyme activity except AT1G69340 and AT2G40600.

We compared the amino acids of both proteins and found that the two proteins had few consensus sites (Figure 1). We further used SMART to predict the conservation domain of both proteins and found AT1G69340 had MACRO domain and SEC14 domain, whereas AT2G40600 had only MACRO domain (Figure 1).

data-mining-genomics-amino-acid-alignment

Figure 1: The amino acid alignment between AT1G69340 and AT2G40600 in Col-0. The solid line below the sequence was the conserved regions of A1pp or MACRO domain and the dashed line stood for SEC-14 domain in AT1G69340 and AT2G40600.

The crystal structure of YMX7_YEAST protein in yeast has been reported. We want to know if the difference of the amino acid residues will change the spatial structure of MACRO or A1pp domain. Extracting the A1pp or MACRO domain of YMX7_YEAST, AT1G69340 and AT2G40600 with SMART database, we got the alignments of them and the statistic of site-by-site analysis (Figure 2). The result showed that the amino acid sequence of the A1pp or MACRO domain among the three proteins had high diversity. In spite of this, the predicted 3D structure of the MACRO domain of each protein demonstrated that the ADP-ribose binding regions (α/β domains) were the same (Figure 1S).

data-mining-genomics-site-by-site-variation

Figure 2: The site-by-site variation analysis of A1pp domains among AT1G69340, AT2G40600 and YMX7_YEAST. We extracted the conserved domain of AT1G69340, AT2G40600 and YMX7_YEAST by SMART. We took the alignment of the three proteins, and then gained the site-by-site statistic of the conserved domain using weblogo 3.3 (http://weblogo.threeplusone.com/). Error bars indicated an approximate 95% Bayesian confidence interval. The information content of a site (bits) is defined as the relative entropy of the monomers at the site to the background distribution.

The analysis of AT1G69340 and AT2G40600 in 19 ecotypes

To estimate if there are changes in gene structures of AT1G69340 and AT2G40600 in 19 ecotypes (Table 1), we analyzed the sequences of each gene among the 19 ecotypes at the level of protein and nucleic acid, respectively.

The analysis of amino acid sequence of AT1G69340 and AT2G40600 in 19 ecotypes: We got the divergence and identity of amino acid sequence of AT1G69340 and AT2G40600 in 19 ecotypes using DNAstar tool (Table 1S). The result showed that in 19 ecotypes, the amino acid sequence had no variations in AT1G69340 while small difference in AT2G40600: the 139th site A was changed into E and the 235th site V was changed into I in zu and edi compared with other ecotypes (Supplement 1,2). Moreover, to explain whether the amino acid residue variations give rise to potential protein structural or functional changes, we further analyzed the 3D structure of AT2G40600 in 19 ecotypes and found that the spatial structures of AT2G40600 in all the ecotypes had no changes (Figure 2S).

The analysis of CDS of AT1G69340 and AT2G40600 in 19 ecotypes: We compared the CDS of AT1G69340 and AT2G40600 in 19 ecotypes and got the divergence and identity (Table 2). The result showed the 383th site A and 404th site A of AT1G69340 in his were turned into C and T compared with other ecotypes, respectively. The 175th site C of AT1G69340 in ler, no, mt, ws, edi, wil was turned into T compared with other ecotypes. The 175th site A of AT1G69340 in sf was turned into C. The 143th site T, 388th site C and 705th site G of AT2G40600 in zu and edi were turned into G, A, A compared with other ecotypes, respectively (Supplement 3,4).

A: The identity and divergence of AT1G69340 CDS among 19 ecotypes
  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
1   99.9 99.9 99.8 99.8 99.8 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.8 99.9 99.8 99.9 99.8 99.9 99.8 99.9 99.9
2 0.1   100.0 99.9 99.9 99.9 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 99.9 100.0 99.9 100.0 99.9 100.0 99.9 100.0 100.0
3 0.1 0.0   99.9 99.9 99.9 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 99.9 100.0 99.9 100.0 99.9 100.0 99.9 100.0 100.0
4 0.2 0.1 0.1   100.0 100.0 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 100.0 99.9 100.0 99.9 100.0 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9
5 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0   100.0 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 100.0 99.9 100.0 99.9 100.0 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9
6 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0   99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 100.0 99.9 100.0 99.9 100.0 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9
7 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1   100.0 100.0 100.0 99.9 100.0 99.9 100.0 99.9 100.0 99.9 100.0 100.0
8 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0   100.0 100.0 99.9 100.0 99.9 100.0 99.9 100.0 99.9 100.0 100.0
9 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0   100.0 99.9 100.0 99.9 100.0 99.9 100.0 99.9 100.0 100.0
10 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0   99.9 100.0 99.9 100.0 99.9 100.0 99.9 100.0 100.0
11 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1   99.9 100.0 99.9 100.0 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9
12 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1   99.9 100.0 99.9 100.0 99.9 100.0 100.0
13 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1   99.9 100.0 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9
14 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1   99.9 100.0 99.9 100.0 100.0
15 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1   99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9
16 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1   99.9 100.0 100.0
17 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1   99.9 99.9
18 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1   100.0
19 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0  
1-19 stood for hi, kn, rsch, ler, no, mt, col, can, bur, wu, ws, zu, edi, ct, wil, tsu, sf, po and oy, right upper region stood for the identity and the left bottom region stood for divergence
B: The identity and divergence of AT2G40600 CDS among 19 ecotypes
  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
1   100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 99.6 99.6 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
2 0.0   100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 99.6 99.6 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
3 0.0 0.0   100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 99.6 99.6 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
4 0.0 0.0 0.0   100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 99.6 99.6 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0   100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 99.6 99.6 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0   100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 99.6 99.6 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0   100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 99.6 99.6 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0   100.0 100.0 100.0 99.6 99.6 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0   100.0 100.0 99.6 99.6 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
10 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0   100.0 99.6 99.6 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
11 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0   99.6 99.6 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
12 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4   100.0 99.6 99.6 99.6 99.6 99.6 99.6
13 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.0   99.6 99.6 99.6 99.6 99.6 99.6
14 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.4   100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
15 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.4 0.0   100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
16 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.4 0.0 0.0   100.0 100.0 100.0
17 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0   100.0 100.0
18 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0   100.0
19 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0  

Table 2: The identity and divergence of AT1G69340 and AT2G40600 CDS among 19 ecotypes.

The analysis of 5’-UTR of AT1G69340 and AT2G40600 in 19 ecotypes: Through the alignments of 5’-UTR of AT1G69340 and AT2G40600 in 19 ecotypes, we found there were no variations in 5’-UTR of AT2G40600, while there was a variation in 142th site of AT1G69340 in ler (G was turned into C) compared with other ecotypes (Supplement 5,6).

The analysis of promoter of AT1G69340 and AT2G40600 in 19 ecotypes: Taking the 2 Kb regions before ATG in genome as their promoters, we compared promoter sequence of AT1G69340 and AT2G40600 in Col-0 (Figure 3) and got the identity between them was 46%. Further, we performed the alignment of AT1G69340 and AT2G40600 promoters in 19 ecotypes, respectively and got the divergence and identity (Table 3). The result showed high conservation of promoter sequence in different ecotypes (Supplement 7,8) in AT1G69340, their identities were above 96.4%; in AT2G40600, their identities were above 99.7%. To gain the detail of promoter, we used TESS to predict the cis-elements in the promoter regions (Tables 2S, 3S). From these results, we found that among 19 ecotypes, the number of transcription factor binding sites of AT1G69340 and AT2G40600 changed in the range of 612 ± 9 and 662 ± 5, respectively (Figure 4), but the difference was not up to a great degree, which was consistent with the high identity of promoter sequence of each gene in 19 ecotypes. Compared with AT1G69340, AT2G40600 promoters had more transcription factor binding sites (Figure 4). Although the number of transcription factors binding in the promoter of each gene also had no large difference among 19 ecotypes, the categories of the transcription factors were highly different. In Col-0, the number of specific transcription factors of AT1G69340 and AT2G40600 was 69 and 68, respectively. The difference in transcription factor types showed the same trend in other 18 ecotypes (Tables 2S and 3S).

A: The identity and divergence of AT1G69340 promoter region among 19 ecotypes
  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
1   99.9 99.9 99.9 99.3 99.9 99.9 99.9 100.0 99.9 99.9 99.9 100.0 99.9 99.8 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9
2 0.1   100.0 99.9 99.3 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.8 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9
3 0.1 0.0   99.9 99.3 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.8 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9
4 0.1 0.1 0.1   99.5 100.0 99.9 99.9 99.9 100.0 100.0 99.9 99.9 100.0 99.9 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
5 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.5   99.4 99.5 99.3 99.3 99.4 99.4 99.3 99.3 99.5 99.3 99.4 99.4 99.5 99.4
6 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.6   99.9 99.9 99.9 100.0 100.0 99.9 99.9 100.0 99.9 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
7 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.5 0.0   99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.8 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9
8 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.7 0.1 0.1   99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.8 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9
9 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.7 0.1 0.0 0.1   99.9 99.9 99.9 100.0 99.9 99.8 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9
10 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1   100.0 99.9 99.9 100.0 99.9 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
11 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0   99.9 99.9 100.0 99.9 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
12 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.7 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1   99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9
13 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.7 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1   99.9 99.8 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9
14 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1   99.9 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
15 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.7 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1   99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9
16 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1   100.0 100.0 100.0
17 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0   100.0 100.0
18 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0   100.0
19 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0  
1-19 stood for col , bur, can, edi, hi , kn, po, ler, rsch, mt, sf , no, tsu, oy, wil, ws, wu, zu and ct, right upper region stood for the identity and the left bottom region stood for divergence
B: The identity and divergence of AT2G40600 promoter region among 19 ecotypes
  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
1   99.8 99.8 99.8 99.8 99.8 99.8 99.8 99.8 99.8 99.8 99.7 99.8 99.8 99.9 99.8 100.0 99.8 99.8
2 0.2   100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 99.9 100.0 99.9 100.0 100.0 99.8 100.0 100.0 99.9 99.9 99.8 100.0 99.9
3 0.2 0.0   100.0 100.0 100.0 99.9 100.0 99.9 100.0 100.0 99.8 100.0 100.0 99.9 99.9 99.8 100.0 99.9
4 0.2 0.0 0.0   100.0 100.0 99.9 100.0 99.9 100.0 100.0 99.8 100.0 100.0 99.9 99.9 99.8 100.0 99.9
5 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0   100.0 99.9 100.0 99.9 100.0 100.0 99.8 100.0 100.0 99.9 99.9 99.8 100.0 99.9
6 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0   99.9 100.0 99.9 100.0 100.0 99.8 100.0 100.0 99.9 99.9 99.8 100.0 99.9
7 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1   99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.7 99.9 99.9 99.8 99.9 99.8 99.9 99.8
8 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1   99.9 100.0 100.0 99.8 100.0 100.0 99.9 99.9 99.8 100.0 99.9
9 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1   99.9 99.9 99.8 99.9 99.9 99.9 100.0 99.8 99.9 99.9
10 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1   100.0 99.8 100.0 100.0 99.9 99.9 99.8 100.0 99.9
11 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0   99.8 100.0 100.0 99.9 99.9 99.8 100.0 99.9
12 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2   99.8 99.8 99.8 99.8 99.7 99.8 99.8
13 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2   100.0 99.9 99.9 99.8 100.0 99.9
14 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0   99.9 99.9 99.8 100.0 99.9
15 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1   99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9
16 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1   99.8 99.9 99.9
17 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.2   99.8 99.8
18 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2   99.9
19 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1  

Table 3: The identity and divergence of AT1G69340 and AT2G40600 promoter region among 19 ecotypes.

data-mining-genomics-alignment-promoter

Figure 3: The alignment of promoter between AT1G69340 and AT2G40600 in Col-0.

data-mining-genomics-transcription-factor-binding-sites

Figure 4: The number of transcription factor binding sites of both genes’ promoter. The number of transcription factor binding sites in 19 ecotypes by TESS searching.

The expression pattern of AT1G69340 and AT2G40600 in 19 ecotypes

Using AtGenExpress database, we analyzed the expression patterns of AT1G69340 and AT2G40600 in different tissues and development periods in ecotype Col-0 (Figure 5). The results showed both genes had the similar expression patterns except in floral organs and seeds. In floral organs and seeds, the expression of AT2G40600 was less than AT1G69340. To further gain the expression information of these two genes in same tissue and same development stage of different ecotypes, we analyzed RNA-seq database (Figure 6) and found that the expression of the two genes in 19 ecotypes were difference: the expression of AT2G40600 was higher than AT1G69340 in different ecotypes except in zu; especially, in bur, ct and mt, the expression of AT2G40600 was high as 2 times as AT1G69340. Moreover, we found the same gene had different expression in different ecotypes: the expression of AT1G69340 in ws was 1.4 times as in rsch; the expression of AT2G40600 in bur was 2.6 times as in zu (Figure 6).

data-mining-genomics-expression-pattern

Figure 5: The expression pattern of AT1G69340, AT2G40600 in different tissues in Col-0. We got the expression data from AtGenExpress database, and used software R 2.12.0 to make the expression profile.

data-mining-genomics-ecotypes-during-seedling-stage

Figure 6: The expression pattern of AT1G69340, AT2G40600 in 19 ecotypes during seedling stage. All the data were from the web site (http://mus.well.ox.ac.uk/19genomes) (all data was normalized by RPKM (Reads Per Kilobase per Million mapped reads)). “The color scale corresponds to the mean expression of a gene. Red represents low expression, while green represents high expression.”

Discussion

In the present study, we identified two Appr-1′′-pases, AT1G69340 and AT2G40600, containing A1pp or MACRO domain in Arabidopsis thaliana genome with bioinformatics methods. Searching SMART database, we found AT1G69340 had another domain—SEC14 domain. The SEC14-containing proteins have different functions. The SEC14- only proteins are bona fide lipid transport proteins and the multidomain SEC14-containing proteins have more complex functions in signal transduction, transport, and organelle biology [30]. Perhaps AT1G69340 could also play more functions and involved in more biological processes because of the SEC-14 domain (Figure 1).

The previous research on yeast shows that Asn (80), Asp (90), His (145) are the functional sites of A1pp [2]. We compared amino acid sequence and 3D structure of conserved A1pp domian among YMX7_ YEAST, AT1G69340 and AT2G40600 (Figures 2 and 1S). Our work showed that although the amino acid sequence of conserved region had major variations, the functional domains (α/β domains) were conserved. So they could have the similar function of ADP-ribose-1′′- monophosphatase.

At present, the functions of AT1G69340 and AT2G40600 aren’t very clear. To interpret their functional difference in different ecotypes, we analyzed the sequence of amino acids, CDS, UTR, promoters and the transcriptome of AT1G69340 and AT2G40600 in 19 Arabidopsis thaliana ecotypes. Together with all the results, we found there were a few variations in both genes’ structures. The sequence of AT1G69340 at amino acid level had no changes among different ecotypes, whereas there were some single-base substitutions at CDS level: compared with other ecotypes, the 383th site A and 404th site A in his were turned into C and T, respectively; the 175th site C in ler, no, mt, ws, edi, wil was turned into T; the 175th site A in sf was turned into C. The CDS of AT2G40600 had a few bases replaced in zu and edi. In zu and edi, the 143th site T was turned into G, the 388th site C was turned into A and the 705th site G was turned into A; as a result, the corresponding codon of the 388th site GCA (residue A) was turned into GAA (residue E), the 705th site GTT (residue V) was turned into ATT (residue I) (Tables 1S and 2, Supplement 1-4).

The alignment of 5’-UTR showed that 23 nt of AT2G40600 had no variations among 19 ecotypes, and in 234 base pairs of AT1G69340, only -142 site G was replaced by C in ler compared with other ecotypes (Supplement 5,6). It suggested that both AT2G40600 and AT1G69340 had no difference in translation regulation among 19 ecotypes.

The analysis results of promoter showed high conservation among different ecotypes (Table 3, Supplement 7, 8): in AT1G69340, their identities were above 96.4%; in AT2G40600, their identities were above 99.7%. We predicted the potential transcription factors and transcription factor binding sites using TESS (Figure 4), the results showed that the number of cis-acting elements and trans-acting factors in AT1G69340 promoter had no large difference in 19 ecotypes and so was in AT2G40600, which was consistent with the results of promoter sequence alignment of each gene among 19 ecotypes. The detailed analysis on the transcription factors demonstrated that among 19 ecotypes, the types of the transcription factors binding in promoter region of each gene were different. The result of RNA-seq showed the expression of AT1G69340 and AT2G40600 had some differences: in ws, the expression of AT1G69340 was 1.4 times as in rsch; the expression of AT2G40600 in bur was 2.6 times as in zu (Figure 6). These results may be ascribed to the small difference in cis-acting elements and the types of transcription factors binding in promoter region of each gene in 19 ecotypes. So we thought that the expression of the same gene in different ecotypes existed different regulation mechanism.

The data from AtGenExpress database showed the expression patterns of AT1G69340 and AT2G40600 in different organs were similar except in floral organs and seeds. In floral organs and seeds, the expression of AT2G40600 was less than AT1G69340 (Figure 5). The data of RNA-seq showed that among 19 ecotypes, the expression of both genes in seedlings also exhibited some differences. The expression of AT2G40600 was more than AT1G69340 in all other ecotypes except in zu (Figure 6), and in bur, ct and mt, the expression of AT2G40600 was 2 times as that of AT1G69340. These results were perhaps because of the differences both in promoter diversities including the changes in the sequences and the number of cis-acting elements, and in the types of transcription factors between the two genes. Although the AT2G4060 and AT1G69340 were homologous genes, the regulation of their expression was complex.

Based on the above results, we proposed the optimal ecotypes used to gene function studies must meet two principles. Firstly, the expression of the gene in the ecotype was relatively high compared with other ecotypes; secondly, the expression difference of the homologous genes was obvious. So, we chose ct or bur to study the function of AT2G40600 and chose zu or no to research the function of AT1G69340.

In our work, we got AT1G69340 and AT2G40600 containing A1pp or MACRO domain in Arabidopsis thaliana. After analyzing the structures of both genes, we got the conclusion that the structures of the promoter, 5’-UTR and CDS of each gene had high identities among different ecotypes. We analyzed the relationship between gene structure and expression, including the same gene in different ecotypes and different genes in the same ecotype and found the expression profiles had some differences. The analysis of amino acid sequence showed high diversities in both proteins, but the 3D structures of their MACRO domains were very similar. So they could possess the similar functions. These works exposes the differences in the same gene in genomic structure and gene expression in different ecotypes and will provide a clue for further study of gene functions and for the candidate ecotype suitable to functional analysis.

Acknowledgement

This work was supported in part by the National Basic Research Program of China (Grant No. 2012CB114204), the Natural Science Foundation of Shandong Province, China (Grant No. ZR2010CM036), and by Science and Technology Development Planing of Shandong Province, China (Grant No. 2012GGB01136).

References

Select your language of interest to view the total content in your interested language
Post your comment

Share This Article

Relevant Topics

Article Usage

  • Total views: 11650
  • [From(publication date):
    December-2012 - Nov 18, 2017]
  • Breakdown by view type
  • HTML page views : 7870
  • PDF downloads : 3780
 

Post your comment

captcha   Reload  Can't read the image? click here to refresh

Peer Reviewed Journals
 
Make the best use of Scientific Research and information from our 700 + peer reviewed, Open Access Journals
International Conferences 2017-18
 
Meet Inspiring Speakers and Experts at our 3000+ Global Annual Meetings

Contact Us

Agri & Aquaculture Journals

Dr. Krish

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9040

Biochemistry Journals

Datta A

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9037

Business & Management Journals

Ronald

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9042

Chemistry Journals

Gabriel Shaw

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9040

Clinical Journals

Datta A

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9037

Engineering Journals

James Franklin

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9042

Food & Nutrition Journals

Katie Wilson

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9042

General Science

Andrea Jason

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9043

Genetics & Molecular Biology Journals

Anna Melissa

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9006

Immunology & Microbiology Journals

David Gorantl

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9014

Materials Science Journals

Rachle Green

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9039

Nursing & Health Care Journals

Stephanie Skinner

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9039

Medical Journals

Nimmi Anna

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9038

Neuroscience & Psychology Journals

Nathan T

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9041

Pharmaceutical Sciences Journals

Ann Jose

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9007

Social & Political Science Journals

Steve Harry

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9042

 
© 2008- 2017 OMICS International - Open Access Publisher. Best viewed in Mozilla Firefox | Google Chrome | Above IE 7.0 version
adwords