Advertisement

Journal of Plant Growth Regulation

, Volume 38, Issue 4, pp 1412–1427 | Cite as

RNA-Seq Analysis Reveals Differential Responses of Potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) Plantlets Cultured in vitro to Red, Blue, Green, and White Light-emitting Diodes (LEDs)

  • Lili Chen
  • Yadong Yang
  • Ying Jiang
  • Jie Zhao
  • Huadong Zang
  • Xiaofen Wang
  • Yuegao Hu
  • Xuzhang XueEmail author
Article

Abstract

Differentially expressed genes (DEGs), morphological changes, and leaf ultrastructure alterations of “Zhong Shu 3” potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) plantlets in vitro cultured under red (R), blue (B), green (G), or white (W) LEDs were analyzed using RNA sequencing (RNA-Seq) method. In total, 2160, 774, and 1335 DEGs were identified in plantlets that received R, B, and G LEDs, respectively, compared to W LEDs (the control). Higher expression of expasin, xyloglucan glycosyltransferase, actin, and tubulin genes were associated with the largest leaf area under B and W LEDs. Neatly arranged spongy and palisade cells were observed in plantlets exposed to R LEDs, accompanied by upregulated expression of all the DEGs enriched for “anatomical structure development” and “anatomical structure arrangement” biological processes. Well-developed chloroplasts with developed inner membranes in plantlets under B LEDs were associated with the upregulation of most DEGs enriched for gene ontology (GO) terms of the chloroplast and chloroplast membrane systems. In addition, different light qualities induced different gene expression patterns, many of which were involved in metabolic pathways, such as the “porphyrin and chlorophyll metabolism pathway Ko00860.” Regulation of these genes might explain the higher or lower contents of photosynthetic pigments. Although R and G LEDs triggered shade stress in potato plantlets in vitro, the health index of plantlets grown under B LEDs was higher than that grown under W LEDs. Our results provide insights into the responses of potato plantlets to different light qualities at the transcriptomic level and may contribute to the improvement of potato plantlet in vitro propagation from light spectrum aspects.

Keywords

RNA-seq Light quality Leaf anatomical structure Chloroplast ultrastructure Potato plantlet in vitro 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the National High Technology Research and Development Program of China (2013 AA 103005). The authors thank researcher Liping Jin for her providing plant materials.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

344_2019_9944_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (619 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (PDF 619 KB)

References

  1. Aksenova NP, Konstantinova TN, Sergeeva LI, Machachkova I, Golyanoversuskaya SA (1994) Morphogenesis of potato plants in vitro. I. effect of light quality and hormones. J Plant Growth Regul 13:143–146.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00196378 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Chai LJ, Li YM, Chen SW, Perl A, Zhao FX, Ma HQ (2014) RNA sequencing reveals high resolution expression change of major plant hormone pathway genes after young seedless grape berries treated with gibberellin. Plant Sci 229:215–224.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plantsci.2014.09.010 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Chen M, Chory J, Fankhauser C (2004) Light signal transduction in higher plants. Annu Rev Genet 38:87–117.  https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.genet.38.072902.092259 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Chen LL, Xue XZ, Yang YD, Chen F, Zhao J, Wang XX, Khan AT (2018) Effects of red and blue LEDs on in vitro growth and microtuberization of potato single-node cuttings. Front Agr Sci Eng 5:197–205.  https://doi.org/10.15302/j-fase-2018224 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Eckardt NA (2012) Mapping the barley chloroplast transcriptome. Plant Cell 24:3.  https://doi.org/10.1105/tpc.112.240112 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. Gratani L (2014) Plant phenotypic plasticity in response to environmental factors. Adv Bot 14:1–17.  https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/208747 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Guyer L, Salinger K, Krugel U, Hortensteiner S (2018) Catalytic and structural properties of pheophytinase, the phytol esterase involved in chlorophyll breakdown. J Exp Bot 69:879–889.  https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erx326 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Halterman D, Guenthner J, Collinge S, Butler N, Douches D (2015) Biotech potatoes in the 21st century: 20 years since the first biotech potato. Am J Potato Res 93:1–20.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12230-015-9485-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hernández R, Eguchi T, Deveci M, Kubota C (2016) Tomato seedling physiological responses under different percentages of blue and red photon flux ratios using LEDs and cool white fluorescent lamps. Sci Hortic 213:270–280.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2016.11.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kariola T, Brader G, Li J, Palva ET (2005) Chlorophyllase 1, a damage control enzyme, affects the balance between defense pathways in plants. Plant Cell 17:282–294.  https://doi.org/10.1105/tpc.104.025817 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. Li CX, Xu ZG, Dong RQ, Chang SX, Wang LZ, Khalil-Ur-Rehman M, Tao JM (2017) An RNA-Seq analysis of grape plantlets grown in vitro reveals different responses to blue, green, red LED light, and white fluorescent light. Front Plant Sci 8:78.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2017.00078 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. Liu MX, Xu ZG, Guo SR, Tang CM, Liu XY, Jao XL (2014) Evaluation of leaf morphology, structure and biochemical substance of balloon flower (Platycodon grandiflorum (Jacq.) A. DC.) plantlets in vitro under different light spectra. Sci Hortic 174:112–118.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2014.05.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Loggini B, Scartazza A, Brugnoli E, Navari-Izzo F (1999) Antioxidative defense system, pigment composition, and photosynthetic efficiency in two wheat cultivars subjected to drought. Plant Physiol 119:1091–1099.  https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.119.3.1091 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. Ma XF, Wang YP, Liu MX, Xu JM, Xu ZG (2015) Effects of green and red lights on the growth and morphogenesis of potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) plantlets in vitro. Sci Hortic 190:104–109.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2015.01.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Macedo AF, Leal-Costa MV, Tavares ES, Lage CLS, Esquibel MA (2011) The effect of light quality on leaf production and development of in vitro-cultured plants of Alternanthera brasiliana Kuntze. Environ Exp Bot 70:43–50.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envexpbot.2010.05.012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Mao XZ, Cai T, Olyarchuk JG, Wei LP (2005) Automated genome annotation and pathway identification using the KEGG Orthology (KO) as a controlled vocabulary. Bioinformatics 21:3787–3793.  https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/bti430 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. Martirosyan YT, Dilovarova TA, Martirosyan VV, Kreslaversuskii VD, Kosobryukhov AA (2016) Photosynthetic apparatus of potato plants (Solanum tuberosum L.) grown in vitro as influenced by different spectral composition of LED radiation. Agric Biol 51:680–687.  https://doi.org/10.15389/agrobiology.2016.5.680eng CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Meng QW, Runkle ES (2017) Moderate-intensity blue radiation can regulate flowering, but not extension growth, of several photoperiodic ornamental crops. Environ Exp Bot 134:12–20.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envexpbot.2016.10.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Milinkovic M, Horstra CB, Rodoni BC, Nicolas ME (2012) Effects of age and pretreatment of tissue-cultured potato plants on subsequent minituber production. Potato Res 55:15–25.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11540-011-9203-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Murashige T, Skoog F (1962) A revised medium for rapid growth and bioassays with tobacco tissue cultures. Physiol Plantarum 15:473–497.  https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1399-3054.1962.tb08052.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ohmiya A, Sasaki K, Nashima K, Oda-Yamamizo C, Hirashima M, Sumitomo K (2017) Transcriptome analysis in petals and leaves of chrysanthemums with different chlorophyll levels. BMC Plant Biol 17:1–15.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s12870-017-1156-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. OuYang FQ, Mao JF, Wang JH, Zhang SG, Li Y (2015) Transcriptome Analysis Reveals that Red and Blue Light Regulate Growth and Phytohormone Metabolism in Norway Spruce [Picea abies (L.) Karst]. Plos ONE 10:1–19.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0127896 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Park Y, Runkle ES (2017) Far-red radiation promotes growth of seedlings by increasing leaf expansion and whole-plant net assimilation. Environ Exp Bot 136:41–49.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envexpbot.2016.12.013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Roumeliotis E, Kloosterman B, Oortwijn M, Lange T, Visser RGF, Bachem CWB (2013) Down regulation of StGA3ox genes in potato results in altered GA content and affect plant and tuber growth characteristics. J Plant Physiol 170:1228–1234.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jplph.2013.04.003 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Schefe JH, Lehmann KE, Buschmann IR, Unger T, Funke-Kaiser H (2006) Quantitative real-time RT-PCR data analysis: current concepts and the novel “gene expression’s C-T difference” formula. J Mol Med-Jmm 84:901–910.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00109-006-0097-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Schellenberger CB, Jungandreas A, Jakob T, Weisheit W, Mittag M, Wilhelm C (2013) Blue light is essential for high light acclimation and photoprotection in the diatom Phaeodactylum tricornutum. J Exp Bot 64:483–493.  https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/ers340 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Seabrook JEA (2005) Light effects on the growth and morphogenesis of potato (Solanum tuberosum) in vitro a review. Am J Potato Res 82:353–367.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02871966 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Sergeeva LI, Machackova I, Konstantinova TN, Golyanoversuskaya SA, Eder J, Zaltsman OO, Hanus J, Aksenova NP (1994) Morphogenesis of potato plants in vitro. II. endogenous levels, distribution, and metabolism of IAA and cytokinins. J Plant Growth Regul 13:147–152.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00196379 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Smith JL, Burritt DJ, Bannister P (2000) Shoot dry weight, chlorophyll and UV-B-absorbing compounds as indicators of a plant’s sensitivity to UV-B radiation. Ann Bot 86:1057–1063.  https://doi.org/10.1006/anbo.2000.1270 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Su NN, Wu Q, Shen ZG, Xia K, Cui J (2014) Effects of light quality on the chloroplastic ultrastructure and photosynthetic characteristics of cucumber seedlings. Plant Growth Regul 73:227–235.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10725-013-9883-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Tadesse M, Lommen WJM, Struik PC (2000) Effects of in vitro treatments on leaf area growth of potato transplants during acclimatisation. Plant Cell Tiss Org 61:59–67.  https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006442420153 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Vinterhalter D, Vinterhalter B, Orbović V (2012) Photo- and gravitropic bending of potato plantlets obtained in vitro from single-node explants. J Plant Growth Regul 31:560–569.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00344-012-9266-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Wang XY, Xu XM, Cui J (2015) The importance of blue light for leaf area expansion, development of photosynthetic apparatus, and chloroplast ultrastructure of Cucumis sativus grown under weak light. Photosynthetica 53:213–222.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11099-015-0083-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Wilson DA, Weigel RC, Wheeler RM, Sager JC (1993) Light spectral quality effects on the growth of potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) nodal cuttings in vitro. In Vitro Cell Dev 29:5–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Wu Q, Su NN, Shen WB, Cui J (2014) Analyzing photosynthetic activity and growth of Solanum lycopersicum seedlings exposed to different light qualities. Acta Physiol Plant 36:1411–1420.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11738-014-1519-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Young MD, Wakefield MJ, Smyth GK, Oshlack A (2010) Gene ontology analysis for RNA-seq: accounting for selection bias. Genome Biol 11:1–12.  https://doi.org/10.1186/gb-2010-11-2-r14 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Yu WW, Liu Y, Song LL, Jacobs DF, Du XH, Ying YQ, Shao QS, Wu JS (2016) Effect of differential light quality on morphology, photosynthesis, and antioxidant enzyme activity in camptotheca acuminata seedlings. J Plant Growth Regul 36:148–160.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00344-016-9625-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Zheng L, Van Labeke MC (2017a) Chrysanthemum morphology, photosynthetic efficiency and antioxidant capacity are differentially modified by light quality. J Plant Physiol 213:66–74.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jplph.2017.03.005 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Zheng L, Van Labeke MC (2017b) Long-term effects of red- and blue-light emitting diodes on leaf anatomy and photosynthetic efficiency of three ornamental pot plants. Front Plant Sci 8:917.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2017.00917 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  40. Zienkiewicz M, Drozak A, Wasilewska W, Baclawska I, Przedpelska-Wasowicz E, Romanowska E (2015) The short-term response of Arabidopsis thaliana (C3) and Zea mays (C4) chloroplasts to red and far red light. Planta 242:1479–1493.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00425-015-2392-3 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lili Chen
    • 1
  • Yadong Yang
    • 1
  • Ying Jiang
    • 1
  • Jie Zhao
    • 1
  • Huadong Zang
    • 1
  • Xiaofen Wang
    • 1
  • Yuegao Hu
    • 1
  • Xuzhang Xue
    • 2
    Email author
  1. 1.College of Agronomy and BiotechnologyChina Agricultural UniversityBeijingPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.Beijing Research Center for Intelligent Equipment in AgricultureBeijing Academy of Agriculture and Forestry SciencesBeijingPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations