Advertisement

Plant Cell Reports

, Volume 34, Issue 7, pp 1239–1251 | Cite as

A highly efficient maize nucellus protoplast system for transient gene expression and studying programmed cell death-related processes

  • Jiang Chen
  • Qiang Yi
  • Qiaoheng Song
  • Yong Gu
  • Junjie Zhang
  • Yufeng Hu
  • Hanmei Liu
  • Yinghong Liu
  • Guowu Yu
  • Yubi HuangEmail author
Original Paper

Abstract

Key message

Conditions for the isolation and transfection of maize nucellus protoplasts were established. We demonstrated its utilization for protein expression, localization, protein–protein interaction, and the investigation of PCD-related processes.

Abstract

Plant protoplasts are an important and versatile cell system that is widely used in the analysis of gene characterization and diverse signaling pathways. Programmed cell death (PCD) occurs throughout the life of plants from embryogenesis to fertilization. The maize nucellus undergoes typical PCD during development of the embryo sac. The nucellus protoplast shows potential for use in research of PCD-related processes. No studies have reported previously the isolation and transfection of nucellus protoplasts. In this study, conditions for the isolation and transfection of maize nucellus protoplasts were established. The maize protoplast system can be used for protein expression, localization, and protein–protein interaction. We applied this system to investigate PCD-related processes. Quantitative real-time PCR analysis revealed that transient expression of MADS29 in the maize nucellus protoplast increases Cys-protease gene transcript level. In addition, β-glucuronidase and luciferase activity assays showed that MADS29 could enhance the promoter activities of the Cys-protease gene. Thus, we demonstrated the potential of a highly efficient maize nucellus protoplast system for transient gene expression and investigation of PCD-related processes.

Keywords

Protoplasts Maize nucellus PCD Transient expression Cys-protease 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No: 91435114), the National Key Basic Research Program of China (No: 2014CB138200), and the Research Fund for Excellent Doctoral Program of Sichuan Agriculture University. We acknowledge Dr. Huang Yanyan (Rice Research Institute, Sichuan Agricultural University, Sichuan) for the kind help of Confocal laser scanning microscopy, and Liang Yueyang (Rice Research Institute, Sichuan Agricultural University, Sichuan) and Zhang (School of Life Sciences, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou) for their support vectors for protein location.

Conflict of interest

All these authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

299_2015_1783_MOESM1_ESM.doc (8.6 mb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOC 8757 kb)

References

  1. Alonso JM, Stepanova AN, Solano R, Wisman E, Ferrari S, Ausubel FM, Ecker JR (2003) Five components of the ethylene-response pathway identified in a screen for weak ethylene-insensitive mutants in Arabidopsis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 100:2992–2997PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. An F, Zhao Q, Ji Y, Li W, Jiang Z, Yu X, Zhang C, Han Y, He W, Liu Y (2010) Ethylene-induced stabilization of ETHYLENE INSENSITIVE3 and EIN3-LIKE1 is mediated by proteasomal degradation of EIN3 binding F-box 1 and 2 that requires EIN2 in Arabidopsis. Plant Cell 22:2384–2401PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chen P, Yu L, Simon G, Petinakis E, Dean K, Chen L (2009) Morphologies and microstructures of cornstarches with different amylose–amylopectin ratios studied by confocal laser scanning microscope. J Cereal Sci 50:241–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Coll N, Epple P, Dangl J (2011) Programmed cell death in the plant immune system. Cell Death Differ 18:1247–1256PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Davey M, Cocking E (1972) Uptake of bacteria by isolated higher plant protoplasts. Nature 239:455–456CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Davey MR, Anthony P, Power JB, Lowe KC (2005) Plant protoplasts: status and biotechnological perspectives. Biotechnol Adv 23:131–171PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. DomõÂnguez F, Moreno J, Cejudo FJ (2001) The nucellus degenerates by a process of programmed cell death during the early stages of wheat grain development. Planta 213:352–360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Faraco M, Di Sansebastiano GP, Spelt K, Koes RE, Quattrocchio FM (2011) One protoplast is not the other! Plant Physiol 156:474–478PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Greenberg JT (1996) Programmed cell death: a way of life for plants. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 93:12094–12097PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Greenberg JT, Yao N (2004) The role and regulation of programmed cell death in plant–pathogen interactions. Cell Microbiol 6:201–211PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Greenwood JS, Helm M, Gietl C (2005) Ricinosomes and endosperm transfer cell structure in programmed cell death of the nucellus during Ricinus seed development. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 102:2238–2243PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hatsugai N, Kuroyanagi M, Yamada K, Meshi T, Tsuda S, Kondo M, Nishimura M, Hara-Nishimura I (2004) A plant vacuolar protease, VPE, mediates virus-induced hypersensitive cell death. Science 305:855–858PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hauptmann R, Ozias-Akins P, Vasil V, Tabaeizadeh Z, Rogers S, Horsch RB, Vasil I, Fraley R (1987) Transient expression of electroporated DNA in monocotyledonous and dicotyledonous species. Plant Cell Rep 6:265–270PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hu Y-F, Y-p Li, Zhang J, Liu H, Chen Z, Huang Y (2011) PzsS3a, a novel endosperm specific promoter from maize (Zea mays L.) induced by ABA. Biotechnol Lett 33:1465–1471PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Korsmeyer SJ (1999) BCL-2 gene family and the regulation of programmed cell death. Cancer Res 59:1693–1700Google Scholar
  16. Krens F, Molendijk L, Wullems G, Schilperoort R (1982) In vitro transformation of plant protoplasts with Ti-plasmid DNA. Nature 296:72–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Li J, Brader G, Palva ET (2008) Kunitz trypsin inhibitor: an antagonist of cell death triggered by phytopathogens and fumonisin b1 in Arabidopsis. Mol Plant 1:482–495PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lombardi L, Casani S, Ceccarelli N, Galleschi L, Picciarelli P, Lorenzi R (2007) Programmed cell death of the nucellus during Sechium edule Sw. seed development is associated with activation of caspase-like proteases. J Exp Bot 58:2949–2958PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lombardi L, Ceccarelli N, Picciarelli P, Sorce C, Lorenzi R (2010) Nitric oxide and hydrogen peroxide involvement during programmed cell death of Sechium edule nucellus. Physiol Plantarum 140:89–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lu C-A, Lim E-K, Yu S-M (1998) Sugar response sequence in the promoter of a rice α-amylase gene serves as a transcriptional enhancer. J Biol Chem 273:10120–10131PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lung S-C, Yanagisawa M, Chuong SD (2011) Protoplast isolation and transient gene expression in the single-cell C4 species, Bienertia sinuspersici. Plant Cell Rep 30:473–484PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Miao Y, Zentgraf U (2007) The antagonist function of Arabidopsis WRKY53 and ESR/ESP in leaf senescence is modulated by the jasmonic and salicylic acid equilibrium. Plant Cell 19:819–830PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Negrutiu I, Shillito R, Potrykus I, Biasini G, Sala F (1987) Hybrid genes in the analysis of transformation conditions. Plant Mol Biol 8:363–373PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ohyama K, Gamborg OL, Miller RA (1972) Uptake of exogenous DNA by plant protoplasts. Can J Bot 50:2077–2080CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Pennell RI, Lamb C (1997) Programmed cell death in plants. Plant Cell 9:1157PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Russell SD (1979) Fine structure of megagametophyte development in Zea mays L. Can J of Bot 57:1093–1110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ryan KM, Ernst MK, Rice NR, Vousden KH (2000) Role of NF-κB in p53-mediated programmed cell death. Nature 404:892–897PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Sambrook J, Russell DW, Russell DW (2001) Molecular cloning: a laboratory manual (3-volume set). Cold spring harbor laboratory press, Cold Spring Harbor, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  29. Sheen J (2001) Signal transduction in maize and Arabidopsis mesophyll protoplasts. Plant Physiol 127:1466–1475PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Suarez MF, Filonova LH, Smertenko A, Savenkov EI, Clapham DH, von Arnold S, Zhivotovsky B, Bozhkov PV (2004) Metacaspase-dependent programmed cell death is essential for plant embryogenesis. Curr Biol 14:R339–R340PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Thines B, Katsir L, Melotto M, Niu Y, Mandaokar A, Liu G, Nomura K, He SY, Howe GA, Browse J (2007) JAZ repressor proteins are targets of the SCFCOI1 complex during jasmonate signalling. Nature 448:661–665PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. van Doorn WG (2011) Classes of programmed cell death in plants, compared to those in animals. J Exp Bot 62:4749–4761PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Van Doorn W, Beers E, Dangl J, Franklin-Tong V, Gallois P, Hara-Nishimura I, Jones A, Kawai-Yamada M, Lam E, Mundy J (2011) Morphological classification of plant cell deaths. Cell Death Differ 18:1241–1246PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Veley KM, Maksaev G, Frick EM, January E, Kloepper SC, Haswell ES (2014) Arabidopsis MSL10 has a regulated cell death signaling activity that is separable from its mechanosensitive ion channel activity. Plant Cell 26:3115–3131PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Wu H, Cheung AY (2000) Programmed cell death in plant reproduction. Plant Mol Biol 44:267–281PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Yin L-L, Xue H-W (2012) The MADS29 transcription factor regulates the degradation of the nucellus and the nucellar projection during rice seed development. Plant Cell 24:1049–1065PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Yoo S-D, Cho Y-H, Sheen J (2007) Arabidopsis mesophyll protoplasts: a versatile cell system for transient gene expression analysis. Nature Protoc 2:1565–1572CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Zhang Y, Su J, Duan S, Ao Y, Dai J, Liu J, Wang P, Li Y, Liu B, Feng D (2011) A highly efficient rice green tissue protoplast system for transient gene expression and studying light/chloroplast-related processes. Plant Methods 7:30–43PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Zhang J, Chen J, Yi Q, Hu Y, Liu H, Liu Y, Huang Y (2014) Novel role of ZmaNAC36 in co-expression of starch synthetic genes in maize endosperm. Plant Mol Biol 84:359–369PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Zhu Z, An F, Feng Y, Li P, Xue L, Mu A, Jiang Z, Kim J-M, To TK, Li W (2011) Derepression of ethylene-stabilized transcription factors (EIN3/EIL1) mediates jasmonate and ethylene signaling synergy in Arabidopsis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 108:12539–12544PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jiang Chen
    • 1
  • Qiang Yi
    • 1
  • Qiaoheng Song
    • 3
  • Yong Gu
    • 1
  • Junjie Zhang
    • 2
  • Yufeng Hu
    • 3
  • Hanmei Liu
    • 2
  • Yinghong Liu
    • 1
  • Guowu Yu
    • 3
  • Yubi Huang
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Key Laboratory of Biology and Genetic Improvement of Maize in Southwest Region, Maize Research InstituteSichuan Agricultural UniversityChengduChina
  2. 2.College of Life ScienceSichuan Agricultural UniversityYa’anChina
  3. 3.College of AgricultureSichuan Agricultural UniversityChengduChina

Personalised recommendations