Identification of differentially expressed proteins between hybrid and parents in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) seedling leaves

  • Xiao Song
  • Zhongfu NiEmail author
  • Yingyin Yao
  • Yinhong Zhang
  • Qixin SunEmail author
Original Paper


In spite of commercial use of heterosis in agriculture, the molecular basis of heterosis is poorly understood. To gain a better understanding of the molecular basis of wheat heterosis, we carried out a comparative proteomic analysis in seedling leaves between wheat hybrid and parents. Common wheat (Triticum aestivum L., 2n = 6x = 42, AABBDD) Line 3338 and spelt wheat (Triticum spelta L., 2n = 6x = 42, AABBDD) Line 2463 were used to produce a heterotic F1 hybrid. The expression patterns of the total proteins were compared in seedling leaves between hybrid and its parents by using two-dimensional gel electrophoresis with two pH ranges for the first dimension separation. Among ~900 protein spots reproducibly detected, 49 protein spots were identified as being differentially expressed between hybrid and its parental lines (P < 0.05) for more than 1.5-folds. Six possible modes of differential expression were observed, including high- and low-parent dominance, underdominance, and overdominance, uniparent silencing and uniparent dominance. Moreover, 30 of the 49 differentially expressed protein spots were identified, which were involved in metabolism, signal transduction, energy, cell growth and division, disease and defense, secondary metabolism. These results indicated that wheat hybridization can cause protein expression differences between hybrid and its parents; these proteins were involved in diverse physiological process pathways, which might be responsible for the observed heterosis.


Protein Spot Differential Expression Pattern Rubisco Activase Wheat Hybrid Differential Protein Expression 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.





Adenosine diphosphate


Adenosine triphosphate


Best-parent heterosis


Chemical hybridizing agent


3-[(3-Cholamidopropyl)-dimethylammonio]-1-propane sulfonate


A-cyano-4-hydroxycinnamic acid


Differential display reverse transcript


Down-regulated in hybrid




Fructose-1,6-bisphosphate aldolase


Gene ontology


High-dominant in hybrid


Isoelectric focusing


Low-dominant in hybrid


Leaf dry weight


Leaf fresh weight


Leucine-rich repeat protein


Mid-parent heterosis


Mass spectrometry


Peptide map fingerprinting


Post translational modification


Rubisco activase


Rubisco large subunit


Suppression subtractive hybridization


Two-dimensional gel electrophoresis


Trifluoroacetic acid


Toll/interleukin-1 receptor


Total leaf number


Total tiller number


Dominant expression of uniparental proteins in hybrids


Dominant expression of uniparental proteins but not in hybrids


Up-regulated in hybrid



The authors wish to thank Mr. Jidong Feng for his assistance in mass spectrometry analysis. This work was financially supported by National Basic Research Program of China (2007CB109000), National Natural Science Foundation of China (30671297), Program for New Century Excellent Talents in University (No. NCET-05-0131) and 863 Project of China.

Supplementary material

122_2008_890_MOESM1_ESM.doc (592 kb)
Supplementary Table 1 t-test for the protein spot accumulation differences between wheat hybrid and parents (DOC 592 kb)


  1. Anderson L, Seilhamer J (1997) A comparison of selectedmRNA and protein abundances in human liver. Electrophoresis 18:533–537PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baginsky S, Kleffmann T, von Zychlinski A, Gruissem W (2005) Analysis of shotgun proteomics and RNA profiling data from Arabidopsis thaliana chloroplasts. J Proteome Res 4:637–640PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bevan M, Bancroft I, Bent E, Love K, Goodman H, Dean C, Bergkamp R, Dirkse W (1998) Analysis of 1.9 Mb of contiguous sequence from chromosome 4 of the Arabidopsis thaliana. Nature 391:485–488PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Broughton W-J, Dilworth M-J (1971) Control of leghaemoglobin synthesis in snake beans. Biochem J 125:1075–1080PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Corbin R-W, Paliy O, Yang F, Shabanowitz J, Platt M, Lyons C-E, Root K, McAuliffe J, Jordan M-I, Kustu S, Soupene E, Hunt D-F (2003) Toward a protein profile of Escherichia coli: comparison to its transcription profile. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 100:9232–9237PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Damerval C, Hebert Y, De Vienne D (1987) Is the polymorphism of protein amounts related to phenotypic variability? A comparison of two-dimensional electrophoresis data with morphological traits in maize. Theor Appl Genet 74:194–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Day D-A, Tuite M-F (1998) Post-transcriptional gene regulatory mechanisms in eukaryotes: an overview. J Endocrinol 157:361–371PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Donnelly B-E, Madden R-D, Ayoubi P, Porter D-R, Dillwith J-W (2005) The wheat(Triticum aestivum L.) leaf proteome. Proteomics 5:1624–1633PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dunne A, Ejdebäck M, Ludidi P-L, O’Neill L-A, Gay N-J (2003) Structural complementarity of Toll/Interleukin-1 Receptor domains in Toll-like Receptors and the adaptors Mal and MyD88. J Biol Chem 278:41443–41451PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fedoroff N (2000) Transposons and genome evolution in plants. Proc Natl Acad Sci 97:7002–7007PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Forsthoefel N-R, Cutler K, Port M-D, Yamamoto T, Vernon D-M (2005) PIRLs: a novel class of plant intracellular leucine-rich repeat proteins. Plant Cell Physiol 46:913–922PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Frost D, Way H, Howles P, Luck J, Manners J, Hardham A, Finnegan J, Ellis J (2004) Tobacco Transgenic for the flax rust resistance gene L expresses allele-specific activation of defense responses. MPMI 17:224–232PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gonella J-A, Peterson P-A (1978) Isozyme relatedness of inbred lines of maize and performance of their hybrids. Maydica 23:55–61Google Scholar
  14. Guo M, Rupe M-A, Zinselmeier C, Habben J, Bowen B-A, Smith O-S (2004) Allelic variation of gene expression in maize hybrids. Plant Cell 16:1707–1716PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gygi S-P, Rochon Y, Franza B-R, Aebersold R (1999) Correlation between protein and mRNA abundance in yeast. Mol Cell Biol 19:1720–1730PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Hadjinov M-I, Scherbok V-S, Benko N-I, Gusev V-P, Sukhorzhevokaya T-B, Voronova L-P (1982) Interrelationships between isozymic diversity and combining ability in maize lines. Maydica 27:135–149Google Scholar
  17. Heidrich-Sobrinho E, Cordeiro A-R (1975) Codominant isoenzymic allela as markers of genetic diversity correlated with heterosis in maize (Zea mays L.). Theor Appl Genet 46:197–199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Holmes-Davis R, Tanaka C-K, Vensel W-H, HurkmanW-J McCormick S (2005) Proteome mapping of mature pollen of Arabidopsis thaliana. Proteomics 5:4864–4884PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Huang Y, Li L-H, Chen Y, Li X-H, Xu C-G, Wang S-P, Zhang Q-F (2006) Comparative analysis of gene expression at early seedling stage between a rice hybrid and its parents using a cDNA microarray of 9198 uni-sequences. Sci China 49:519–529Google Scholar
  20. Hunter R-B, Kannenberg L-W (1971) Isozyme characterization of corn (Zea mays) inbreds and its relationship to single cross hybrid performance. Can J Genet Cytol 13:197–199Google Scholar
  21. Kashkush K, Feldman M, Levy A-A (2003) Transcriptional activation of retrotransposons alters the expression of adjacent genes in wheat. Nature Genet 33:102–106PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kumar A, Bennetzen J-L (1999) Plant retrotransposon. Annu Rev Genet 33:479–532PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Leonardi A, Damerval C, De Vienne D (1987) Inheritance of protein amounts: comparison of two-dimensional electrophoresis patterns of leaf sheath of two maize lines (Zeamays L.) and their hybrids. Genet Res 50:1–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mack P-D, Kapelnikov A, Heifetz Y, Bender M (2006) Mating-responsive genes in reproductive tissues of female Drosophila melanogaster. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 103:10358–10363PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Martin T, Frommer W-B, Salanoubat M, Willmitzer L (1993) Expression of an Arabidopsis sucrose synthase gene indicates a role in metabolization of sucrose both during phloem loading and in sink organs. Plant J. 4:367–377PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Matuschke I, Mishra RR, Qaim M (2007) Adoption and impact of hybrid wheat in India. World Dev 35:1422–1435CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Mills D-A, Richter M-L (1991) Nucleotide binding to the isolated β subunit of the chloroplast ATP synthase. J Biol Chem 266:7440–7444PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Mooney B-P, Miernyk J-A, Greenlief C-M, Thelen J-J (2006) Using quantitative proteomics of Arabidopsis roots and leaves to predict metabolic activity. Physiol Plant 128:237–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Nature Signaling Gateway (2007) Nature publishing group. Cited 29 Oct 2007
  30. Ni Z-F, Sun Q-X, Wu L-M, Xie C-J (2002) Differential gene expression between wheat hybrids and their parental inbreds in primary roots. Acta Bot Sin 44:457–462Google Scholar
  31. Ni Z-F, Sun Q-X, Liu Z-Y (2000) Identification of a hybrid-specific expressed gene encoding novel RNA-binding protein in wheat seedling leaves using differential display of mRNA. Mol Gen Genet 263:934–938PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Noir S, Brautigam A, Colby T, Schmidt J, Panstruga R (2005) A reference map of the Arabidopsis thaliana mature pollen proteome. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 337:1257–1266PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Porubleva L, Velden K-V, Kothari S, Oliver D-J, Chitnis P-R (2001) The proteome of maize leaves: use of gene sequences and expressed sequence tag data for identification of proteins with peptide mass fingerprints. Electrophoresis 22:1724–1738PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Ramagli L-S (1999) Quantifying protein in 2-D PAGE solubilization buffers. Methods Mol Biol 112:99–103PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Romagnoli S, Maddaloni M, Livini C, Motto M (1990) Relationship between gene expression and hybrid vigor in primary root tips of young maize. Theor Appl Genet 80:769–775CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Seo Y-S, Jeon J-SE, Rojas M-R, Gilbertson R-L (2007) Characterization of a novel Toll/interleukin-1 receptor (TIR)-TIR gene differentially expressed in common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris cv. Othello) undergoing a defence response to the geminivirus Bean dwarf mosaic virus. Mol Plant Pathol 8:151–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Song X, Ni Z-F, Yao Y-Y, Xie C-J, Li Z-X, Wu H-Y, Zhang Y-H, Sun Q-X (2007) Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) root proteome and differentially expressed root proteins between hybrid and parents. Proteomics 7:3538–3557PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Sun Q-X, Ni Z-F, Liu Z-Y (1999) Differential gene expression between wheat hybrids and their parental inbreds in seedling leaves. Euphytica 106:117–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sun Q-X, Wu L-M, Ni Z-F, Meng F-R, Wang Z-K, Lin Z (2004) Differential gene expression patterns in leaves between hybrids and their parental inbreds are correlated with heterosis in a wheat diallel cross. Plant Sci 166:651–657CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Swanson-Wagner R-A, Jia Y, DeCook R, Borsuk L-A, Nettleton D, Schnable P-S (2006) All possible modes of gene action are observed in a global comparison of gene expression in a maize F 1 hybrid and its inbred parents. Proc Natl Acad Sci 103:6805–6810PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Tsaftaris A-S (1987) Isozymes in plant breeding. In: Rattazzi MC, Scandalios GJ, Whitt GS (eds) Isozymes: current topics in biological and medical research. Alan R. Liss, New York, pp 103–119Google Scholar
  42. Tsuyoshi M, Nobuaki H, Kazuko Y-S, Hiroshi K, Kazuo S (1994) Cloning and sequencing of a nove1 serine/threonine protein kinase in Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant Physiol 106:1229–1230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Wang Z-K, Ni Z-F, Wu H-L, Nie X-L, Sun Q-X (2006) Heterosis in root development and differential gene expression between hybrids and their parental inbreds in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Theor Appl Genet 113:1283–1294PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Wu L-M, Ni Z-F, Meng F-R, Lin Z, Sun Q-X (2003) Cloning and characterization of leaf cDNAs that are differentially expressed between wheat hybrids and their parents. Mol Gen Genet 270:281–286Google Scholar
  45. Xia Q, Hendrickson E-L, Zhang Y, Wang T, Taub F, Moore B-C, Porat I, Whitman W-B, Hackett M, Leigh J-A (2006) Quantitative proteomics of the archaeon Methanococcus maripaludis validated by microarray analysis and real time PCR. Mol Cell Proteomics Feb 24:868–881CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Xiong L-Z, Yang G-P, Xu C-G, Zhang Q-F, Maroof M-A-S (1998) Relationships of differential gene expression in leaves with heterosis and heterozygosity in a rice diallel cross. Mol Breed 4:129–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Yao Y-Y, Ni Z-F, Zhang Y-H, Chen Y, Ding Y-H, Han Z-F, Liu Z-Y, Sun Q-X (2005) Identification of differentially expressed genes in leaf and root between wheat hybrid and its parental inbreds using PCR-based cDNA subtraction. Plant Mol Biol 58:367–384PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Zhang Y-H, Ni Z-F, Yao Y-Y, Zhao J, Sun Q-X (2006) Analysis of genome-wide gene expression in root of wheat hybrid and its parents inbreds using Barley1 GeneChip. Prog Nat Sci 16:712–720CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Key Laboratory of Crop Heterosis and Utilization (MOE)China Agricultural UniversityBeijingChina
  2. 2.State Key Laboratory for AgrobiotechnologyChina Agricultural UniversityBeijingChina
  3. 3.Key Laboratory of Crop Genomics and Genetic Improvement (MOA)China Agricultural UniversityBeijingChina
  4. 4.Beijing Key Laboratory of Crop Genetic ImprovementChina Agricultural UniversityBeijingChina
  5. 5.National Plant Gene Research Centre (Beijing)BeijingChina

Personalised recommendations