, Volume 249, Issue 2, pp 583–600 | Cite as

Genome-wide identification and functional analysis of the splicing component SYF2/NTC31/p29 across different plant species

  • Yuan Tian
  • Mo-Xian Chen
  • Jing-Fang Yang
  • H. H. K. Achala
  • Bei Gao
  • Ge-Fei Hao
  • Guang-Fu Yang
  • Zhi-Yong Dian
  • Qi-Juan Hu
  • Di Zhang
  • Jianhua ZhangEmail author
  • Ying-Gao LiuEmail author
Original Article


Main conclusion

This study systematically identifies plant SYF2/NTC31/p29 genes from 62 plant species by a combinatory bioinformatics approach, revealing the importance of this gene family in phylogenetics, duplication, transcriptional, and post-transcriptional regulation.

Alternative splicing is a post-transcriptional regulatory mechanism, which is critical for plant development and stress responses. The entire process is strictly attenuated by a complex of splicing-related proteins, designated splicing factors. Human p29, also referred to as synthetic lethal with cdc forty 2 (SYF2) or the NineTeen complex 31 (NTC31), is a core protein found in the NTC complex of humans and yeast. This splicing factor participates in a variety of biological processes, including DNA damage repair, control of the cell cycle, splicing, and tumorigenesis. However, its function in plants has been seldom reported. Thus, we have systematically identified 89 putative plant SYF2s from 62 plant species among the deposited entries in the Phytozome database. The phylogenetic relationships and evolutionary history among these plant SYF2s were carefully examined. The results revealed that plant SYF2s exhibited distinct patterns regarding their gene structure, promoter sequences, and expression levels, suggesting their functional diversity in response to developmental cues or stress treatments. Although local duplication events, such as tandem duplication and retrotransposition, were found among several plant species, most of the plant species contained only one copy of SYF2, suggesting the existence of additional mechanisms to confer duplication resistance. Further investigation using the model dicot and monocot representatives Arabidopsis and rice SYF2s indicated that the splicing pattern and resulting protein isoforms might play an alternative role in the functional diversity.


Alternative splicing Gene expression Gene family Phylogenetics Plants Promoter 



This work was supported by the Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong Province (2018A030313030), Natural Science Foundation of Shandong Province (BS2015NY002), Funds of Shandong “Double Top” Program, the China Postdoctoral Science Foundation (2017M622801), Shenzhen Overseas Talents Innovation and Entrepreneurship Funding Scheme (The Peacock Scheme, KQTD201101) and Hong Kong Research Grant Council (AoE/M-05/12, AoE/M-403/16, GRF CUHK14160516, 14177617, 12100318).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Supplementary material

425_2018_3026_MOESM1_ESM.docx (347 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 347 kb)
425_2018_3026_MOESM2_ESM.docx (25 kb)
Supplementary material 2 (DOCX 25 kb)
425_2018_3026_MOESM3_ESM.pdf (3.3 mb)
Supplementary material 3 (PDF 3417 kb)


  1. Abdel-Ghany SE, Hamilton M, Jacobi JL, Ngam P, Devitt N, Schilkey F, Ben-Hur A, Reddy ASN (2016) A survey of the sorghum transcriptome using single-molecule long reads. Nat Commun 7:11706. Google Scholar
  2. Ashkenazy H, Abadi S, Martz E, Chay O, Mayrose I, Pupko T, Ben-Tal N (2016) ConSurf 2016: an improved methodology to estimate and visualize evolutionary conservation in macromolecules. Nucleic Acids Res 44:W344–W350Google Scholar
  3. Bai R, Yan C, Wan R, Lei J, Shi Y (2017) Structure of the post-catalytic spliceosome from Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Cell 171:1589–1598Google Scholar
  4. Benyehuda S, Dix I, Russell CS, Mcgarvey M, Beggs JD, Kupiec M (2000) Genetic and physical interactions between factors involved in both cell cycle progression and pre-mRNA splicing in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Genetics 156:1503–1517Google Scholar
  5. Boudet N, Aubourg S, Toffano-Nioche C, Kreis M, Lecharny A (2001) Evolution of intron/exon structure of DEAD helicase family genes in Arabidopsis, Caenorhabditis, and Drosophila. Genome Res 11:2101–2114Google Scholar
  6. Camacho C, Coulouris G, Avagyan V, Ma N, Papadopoulos J, Bealer K, Madden TL (2009) BLAST plus: architecture and applications. BMC Bioinform 10:421. Google Scholar
  7. Cao YY, Yang JF, Liu TY, Su ZF, Zhu FY, Chen MX, Fan T, Ye NH, Feng Z, Wang LJ (2017) A phylogenetically informed comparison of GH1 hydrolases between Arabidopsis and rice response to stressors. Front Plant Sci 8:350Google Scholar
  8. Chan SP, Kao DI, Tsai WY, Cheng SC (2003) The Prp19p-associated complex in spliceosome activation. Science 302:279–282Google Scholar
  9. Chanarat S, Strasser K (2013) Splicing and beyond: the many faces of the Prp19 complex. Biochim Biophys Acta 1833:2126–2134Google Scholar
  10. Chanarat S, Seizl M, Strässer K (2011) The Prp19 complex is a novel transcription elongation factor required for TREX occupancy at transcribed genes. Genes Dev 25:1147–1158Google Scholar
  11. Chang MS, Chang CL, Huang CJ, Yang YC (2000) p29, a novel GCIP-interacting protein, localizes in the nucleus. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 279:732–737Google Scholar
  12. Chang MS, Chen CY, Yeh HI, Fan CC, Huang CJ, Yang YC (2002) Cloning, expression, and genomic organization of mouse mp29 gene. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 299:241–246Google Scholar
  13. Chen W, Moore MJ (2015) Spliceosomes. Curr Biol 25:R181–R183Google Scholar
  14. Chen CH, Yu WC, Tsao TY, Wang LY, Chen HR, Lin JY, Tsai W, Cheng SC (2002) Functional and physical interactions between components of the Prp19p-associated complex. Nucleic Acids Res 30:1029Google Scholar
  15. Chen CH, Chu PC, Lee L, Lien HW, Lin TL, Fan CC, Chi P, Huang CJ, Chang MS (2012) Disruption of murine mp29/Syf2/Ntc31 gene results in embryonic lethality with aberrant checkpoint response. PLoS One 7:e33538. Google Scholar
  16. Chu PC, Yang YC, Lu YT, Chen HT, Yu LC, Chang MS (2006) Silencing of p29 affects DNA damage responses with UV irradiation. Cancer Res 66:8484–8491Google Scholar
  17. Chu PC, Wang TY, Lu YT, Chou CK, Yang YC, Chang MS (2009) Involvement of p29 in DNA damage responses and Fanconi anemia pathway. Carcinogenesis 30:1710–1716Google Scholar
  18. Coghlan A, Eichler EE, Oliver SG, Paterson AH, Stein L (2005) Chromosome evolution in eukaryotes: a multi-kingdom perspective. Trends Genet 21:673–682Google Scholar
  19. Conant GC, Birchler JA, Pires JC (2014) Dosage, duplication, and diploidization: clarifying the interplay of multiple models for duplicate gene evolution over time. Curr Opin Plant Biol 19:91–98Google Scholar
  20. Csaba K, Femke D, Nicolas V, Dóra S, Zsuzsa K (2012) The spliceosome-activating complex: molecular mechanisms underlying the function of a pleiotropic regulator. Front Plant Sci 3:9Google Scholar
  21. Dahan O, Kupiec M (2002) Mutations in genes of Saccharomyces cerevisiae encoding pre-mRNA splicing factors cause cell cycle arrest through activation of the spindle checkpoint. Nucleic Acids Res 30:4361–4370Google Scholar
  22. Fawcett JA, Maere S, Peer YVD (2009) Plants with double genomes might have had a better chance to survive the Cretaceous–Tertiary extinction event. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 106:5737–5742Google Scholar
  23. Guindon S, Dufayard JF, Lefort V, Anisimova M, Hordijk W, Gascuel O (2010) New algorithms and methods to estimate maximum-likelihood phylogenies: assessing the performance of PhyML 3.0. Syst Biol 59:307–321Google Scholar
  24. Guo J, Yang L, Huang J, Liu X, Qiu X, Tao T, Liu Y, He X, Ban N, Fan S, Sun G (2014) Knocking down the expression of SYF2 inhibits the proliferation of glioma cells. Med Oncol 31:101. Google Scholar
  25. Henriques JA, Moustacchi E (1980) Isolation and characterization of pso mutants sensitive to photo-addition of psoralen derivatives in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Genetics 95:273–288Google Scholar
  26. Henriques JA, Vicente EJ, da Leandro Silva KV, Schenberg AC (1989) PSO4: a novel gene involved in error-prone repair in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Mutat Res 218:111–124Google Scholar
  27. Hofberger JA, Nsibo DL, Govers F, Bouwmeester K, Schranz ME (2015) A complex interplay of tandem- and whole-genome duplication drives expansion of the L-type lectin receptor kinase gene family in the brassicaceae. Genome Biol Evol 7:720–734Google Scholar
  28. Jiao Y, Wickett NJ, Ayyampalayam S, Chanderbali AS, Landherr L, Ralph PE, Tomsho LP, Hu Y, Liang H, Soltis PS, Soltis DE, Clifton SW, Schlarbaum SE, Schuster SC, Ma H, Leebens-Mack J, dePamphilis CW (2011) Ancestral polyploidy in seed plants and angiosperms. Nature 473:97–100Google Scholar
  29. Johnson LS, Eddy SR, Portugaly E (2010) Hidden Markov model speed heuristic and iterative HMM search procedure. BMC Bioinform. Google Scholar
  30. Kliebenstein DJ, Lambrix VM, Reichelt M, Gershenzon J, Mitchell-Olds T (2001) Gene duplication in the diversification of secondary metabolism: tandem 2-oxoglutarate—dependent dioxygenases control glucosinolate biosynthesis in Arabidopsis. Plant Cell 13(3):681–693Google Scholar
  31. Kotake Y, Sagane K, Owa T, Mimorikiyosue Y, Shimizu H, Uesugi M, Ishihama Y, Iwata M, Mizui Y (2012) Splicing factor SF3b as a target of the antitumor natural product pladienolide. Nat Chem Biol 3(9):570Google Scholar
  32. Kuraoka I, Ito S, Wada T, Hayashida M, Lee L, Saijo M, Nakatsu Y, Matsumoto M, Matsunaga T, Handa H, Qin J, Nakatani Y, Tanaka K (2008) Isolation of XAB2 complex involved in pre-mRNA splicing, transcription, and transcription-coupled repair. J Biol Chem 283(2):940–950Google Scholar
  33. Leister D (2004) Tandem and segmental gene duplication and recombination in the evolution of plant disease resistance gene. Trends Genet 20(3):116–122Google Scholar
  34. Liu J, Chen N, Chen F, Cai B, Dal Santo S, Tornielli GB, Pezzotti M, Cheng ZM (2014a) Genome-wide analysis and expression profile of the bZIP transcription factor gene family in grapevine (Vitis vinifera). BMC Genom 15:281. Google Scholar
  35. Liu Y, Ni T, Xue Q, Lv L, Chen B, Cui X, Cui Y, Wang Y, Mao G, Ji L (2014b) Involvement of p29/SYF2/fSAP29/NTC31 in the progression of NSCLC via modulating cell proliferation. Pathology 211:36–42Google Scholar
  36. Lorkovic ZJ, Lehner R, Forstner C, Barta A (2005) Evolutionary conservation of minor U12-type spliceosome between plants and humans. RNA 11:1095–1107Google Scholar
  37. Loscher M, Fortschegger K, Ritter G, Wostry M, Voglauer R, Schmid J, Watters S, Rivett A, Ajuh P, Lamond A (2005) Interaction of U-box E3 ligase SNEV with PSMB4, the beta 7 subunit of the 20 S proteasome. Biochem J 388:593–603Google Scholar
  38. Madhani HD, Guthrie C (1994) Dynamic RNA–RNA interactions in the spliceosome. Annu Rev Genet 28:1–26Google Scholar
  39. Mei W, Boatwright L, Feng G, Schnable JC, Barbazuk WB (2017) Evolutionarily conserved alternative splicing across monocots. Genetics 207:465–480Google Scholar
  40. Michael F, Eric L, Brent P, Maqsudul A, Ray M, Damon L (2008) Many or most genes in Arabidopsis transposed after the origin of the order Brassicales. Genome Res 18:1924Google Scholar
  41. Paszkowski J (2015) Controlled activation of retrotransposition for plant breeding. Curr Opin Biotechnol 32:200–206Google Scholar
  42. Ramamoorthy R, Jiang SY, Kumar N, Venkatesh PN, Ramachandran S (2008) A comprehensive transcriptional profiling of the WRKY gene family in rice under various abiotic and phytohormone treatments. Plant Cell Physiol 49:865–879Google Scholar
  43. Reddy AS, Marquez Y, Kalyna M, Barta A (2013) Complexity of the alternative splicing landscape in plants. Plant Cell 25:3657–3683Google Scholar
  44. Schranz ME, Mohammadin S, Edger PP (2012) Ancient whole genome duplications, novelty and diversification: the WGD Radiation Lag-Time Model. Curr Opin Plant Biol 15:147–153Google Scholar
  45. Schwartz B, Yeung C, Meinke W (1994) Disruption of morphogenesis and transformation of the suspensor in abnormal suspensor mutants of Arabidopsis. Development 120:3235–3245Google Scholar
  46. Shi Y (2017a) Mechanistic insights into precursor messenger RNA splicing by the spliceosome. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 18:655Google Scholar
  47. Shi Y (2017b) The spliceosome: a protein-directed metalloribozyme. J Mol Biol 429:2640–2653Google Scholar
  48. Si YC, Shin ES, Park PJ, Dong WS, Hui KC, Kim D, Lee HH, Lee JH, Kim SH, Min JS (2007) Identification of mouse Prp19p as a lipid droplet-associated protein and its possible involvement in the biogenesis of lipid droplets. J Biol Chem 282:2456–2465Google Scholar
  49. Uehara T, Minoshima Y, Sagane K, Sugi NH, Mitsuhashi KO, Yamamoto N, Kamiyama H, Takahashi K, Kotake Y, Uesugi M (2017) Selective degradation of splicing factor CAPERα by anticancer sulfonamides. Nat Chem Biol 13:675Google Scholar
  50. Vijayraghavan U, Company M, Abelson J (1989) Isolation and characterization of pre-mRNA splicing mutants of Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Genes Dev 3(8):1206–1216Google Scholar
  51. Vlad IM, Balaji VS, Vikas CR, Ramani D, Larry S D (2008) Automatic online tuning for fast Gaussian summation. Adv Neural Inf Process SystGoogle Scholar
  52. Wahl MC, Will CL, Luhrmann R (2009) The spliceosome: design principles of a dynamic RNP machine. Cell 136:701–718Google Scholar
  53. Wan R, Yan C, Bai R, Huang G, Shi Y (2016) Structure of a yeast catalytic step I spliceosome at 3.4 Å resolution. Science 353:895–904Google Scholar
  54. Waterhouse A, Bertoni M, Bienert S, Studer G, Tauriello G, Gumienny R, Heer FT, de Beer TAP, Rempfer C, Bordoli L, Lepore R, Schwede T (2018) SWISS-MODEL: homology modelling of protein structures and complexes. Nucleic Acids Res 46:W296–W303Google Scholar
  55. Will CL, Luhrmann R (1997) Protein functions in pre-mRNA splicing. Curr Opin Cell Biol 9(3):320–328Google Scholar
  56. Will CL, Luhrmann R (2011) Spliceosome structure and function. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol 3(7):322–330Google Scholar
  57. Yuan S, Chan HCS, Hu Z (2017) Using PyMOL as a platform for computational drug design. Wires Comput Mol Sci 7:e1298. Google Scholar
  58. Zhang S, Shi W, Chen Y, Xu Z, Zhu J, Zhang T, Huang W, Ni R, Lu C, Zhang X (2015) Overexpression of SYF2 correlates with enhanced cell growth and poor prognosis in human hepatocellular carcinoma. Mol Cell Biochem 410:1–9Google Scholar
  59. Zhu FY, Chen MX, Ye NH, Shi L, Ma KL, Yang JF, Cao YY, Zhang Y, Yoshida T, Fernie AR (2017a) Proteogenomic analysis reveals alternative splicing and translation as part of the abscisic acid response in Arabidopsis seedlings. Plant J 91(3):518–533Google Scholar
  60. Zhu FY, Chen MX, Ye NH, Shi L, Ma KL, Yang JF, Cao YY, Zhang YJ, Yoshida T, Fernie AR, Fan GY, Wen B, Zhou R, Liu TY, Fan T, Gao B, Zhang D, Hao GF, Xiao S, Liu YG, Zhang JH (2017b) Proteogenomic analysis reveals alternative splicing and translation as part of the abscisic acid response in Arabidopsis seedlings. Plant J 91:518–533Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yuan Tian
    • 1
    • 2
  • Mo-Xian Chen
    • 2
    • 3
  • Jing-Fang Yang
    • 4
  • H. H. K. Achala
    • 4
  • Bei Gao
    • 3
  • Ge-Fei Hao
    • 4
  • Guang-Fu Yang
    • 4
  • Zhi-Yong Dian
    • 5
  • Qi-Juan Hu
    • 2
  • Di Zhang
    • 3
  • Jianhua Zhang
    • 2
    • 6
    Email author
  • Ying-Gao Liu
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.State Key Laboratory of Crop Biology, College of Life ScienceShandong Agricultural UniversityTaianChina
  2. 2.Shenzhen Research Institute, The Chinese University of Hong KongShenzhenChina
  3. 3.School of Life SciencesThe Chinese University of Hong KongShatinHong Kong
  4. 4.Key Laboratory of Pesticide and Chemical Biology, Ministry of Education, College of ChemistryCentral China Normal UniversityWuhanChina
  5. 5.Yongyi Biotechnology Co. LtdGuangzhouChina
  6. 6.Department of BiologyHong Kong Baptist University and State Key Laboratory of Agrobiotechnology, The Chinese University of Hong KongShatinHong Kong

Personalised recommendations