Multiple abiotic stimuli are integrated in the regulation of rice gene expression under field conditions

  1. Anne Plessis
  2. Christoph Hafemeister
  3. Olivia Wilkins
  4. Zennia Jean Gonzaga
  5. Rachel Sarah Meyer
  6. Inês Pires
  7. Christian Müller
  8. Endang M Septiningsih
  9. Richard Bonneau
  10. Michael Purugganan  Is a corresponding author
  1. Plymouth University, United Kingdom
  2. New York University, United States
  3. International Rice Research Institute, Philippines
  4. Simons Foundation, New York, United States
  5. Texas A&M University, United States

Abstract

Plants rely on transcriptional dynamics to respond to multiple climatic fluctuations and contexts in nature. We analyzed genome-wide gene expression patterns of rice (Oryza sativa) growing in rainfed and irrigated fields during two distinct tropical seasons and determined simple linear models that relate transcriptomic variation to climatic fluctuations. These models combine multiple environmental parameters to account for patterns of expression in the field of co-expressed gene clusters. We examined the correspondence of our environmental models between tropical and temperate field conditions, using previously published data. We found that field type and macroclimate had broad impacts on transcriptional responses to environmental fluctuations, especially for genes involved in photosynthesis and development. Nevertheless, variation in solar radiation and temperature at the timescale of hours had reproducible effects across environmental contexts. These results provide a basis for broad-based predictive modeling of plant gene expression in the field.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Anne Plessis

    School of Biological Sciences, Plymouth University, Plymouth, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Christoph Hafemeister

    Department of Biology, Center for Genomics and Systems Biology, New York University, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Olivia Wilkins

    Department of Biology, Center for Genomics and Systems Biology, New York University, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Zennia Jean Gonzaga

    International Rice Research Institute, Metro Manila, Philippines
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Rachel Sarah Meyer

    Department of Biology, Center for Genomics and Systems Biology, New York University, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Inês Pires

    Department of Biology, Center for Genomics and Systems Biology, New York University, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Christian Müller

    Simons Center for Data Analysis, Simons Foundation, New York, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Endang M Septiningsih

    Department of Soil and Crop Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Richard Bonneau

    Department of Biology, Center for Genomics and Systems Biology, New York University, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Michael Purugganan

    Department of Biology, Center for Genomics and Systems Biology, New York University, New York, United States
    For correspondence
    mp132@nyu.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Daniel J Kliebenstein, University of California, Davis, Denmark

Version history

  1. Received: April 29, 2015
  2. Accepted: November 25, 2015
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: November 26, 2015 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: December 31, 2015 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2015, Plessis et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 3,731
    views
  • 810
    downloads
  • 36
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Anne Plessis
  2. Christoph Hafemeister
  3. Olivia Wilkins
  4. Zennia Jean Gonzaga
  5. Rachel Sarah Meyer
  6. Inês Pires
  7. Christian Müller
  8. Endang M Septiningsih
  9. Richard Bonneau
  10. Michael Purugganan
(2015)
Multiple abiotic stimuli are integrated in the regulation of rice gene expression under field conditions
eLife 4:e08411.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.08411

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.08411

Further reading

    1. Computational and Systems Biology
    Maksim Kleverov, Daria Zenkova ... Alexey A Sergushichev
    Research Article

    Transcriptomic profiling became a standard approach to quantify a cell state, which led to accumulation of huge amount of public gene expression datasets. However, both reuse of these datasets or analysis of newly generated ones requires significant technical expertise. Here we present Phantasus - a user-friendly web-application for interactive gene expression analysis which provides a streamlined access to more than 96000 public gene expression datasets, as well as allows analysis of user-uploaded datasets. Phantasus integrates an intuitive and highly interactive JavaScript-based heatmap interface with an ability to run sophisticated R-based analysis methods. Overall Phantasus allows users to go all the way from loading, normalizing and filtering data to doing differential gene expression and downstream analysis. Phantasus can be accessed on-line at https://alserglab.wustl.edu/phantasus or can be installed locally from Bioconductor (https://bioconductor.org/packages/phantasus). Phantasus source code is available at https://github.com/ctlab/phantasus under MIT license.

    1. Computational and Systems Biology
    2. Evolutionary Biology
    Ryan T Bell, Harutyun Sahakyan ... Eugene V Koonin
    Research Article

    A comprehensive census of McrBC systems, among the most common forms of prokaryotic Type IV restriction systems, followed by phylogenetic analysis, reveals their enormous abundance in diverse prokaryotes and a plethora of genomic associations. We focus on a previously uncharacterized branch, which we denote coiled-coil nuclease tandems (CoCoNuTs) for their salient features: the presence of extensive coiled-coil structures and tandem nucleases. The CoCoNuTs alone show extraordinary variety, with three distinct types and multiple subtypes. All CoCoNuTs contain domains predicted to interact with translation system components, such as OB-folds resembling the SmpB protein that binds bacterial transfer-messenger RNA (tmRNA), YTH-like domains that might recognize methylated tmRNA, tRNA, or rRNA, and RNA-binding Hsp70 chaperone homologs, along with RNases, such as HEPN domains, all suggesting that the CoCoNuTs target RNA. Many CoCoNuTs might additionally target DNA, via McrC nuclease homologs. Additional restriction systems, such as Type I RM, BREX, and Druantia Type III, are frequently encoded in the same predicted superoperons. In many of these superoperons, CoCoNuTs are likely regulated by cyclic nucleotides, possibly, RNA fragments with cyclic termini, that bind associated CARF (CRISPR-Associated Rossmann Fold) domains. We hypothesize that the CoCoNuTs, together with the ancillary restriction factors, employ an echeloned defense strategy analogous to that of Type III CRISPR-Cas systems, in which an immune response eliminating virus DNA and/or RNA is launched first, but then, if it fails, an abortive infection response leading to PCD/dormancy via host RNA cleavage takes over.