Advertisement

Journal of Genetics

, 98:31 | Cite as

Phaseolus vulgaris genome possesses CAMTA genes, and phavuCAMTA1 contributes to the drought tolerance

  • Kobra Saeidi
  • Nasser ZareEmail author
  • Amin Baghizadeh
  • Rasool Asghari-Zakaria
Research Article
  • 12 Downloads

Abstract

Calmodulin-binding transcription activators (CAMTAs) are a family of transcription factors that play an important role in plants’ response to the various biotic and abiotic stresses. The common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) is one of the most important crops in the world and plays a pivotal role in sustainable agriculture. To date, the composition of CAMTA genes in genomes of Phaseolus species and their role in resistance to drought stress are not known. In this study, five PhavuCAMTA genes were characterized in common bean genome through bioinformatics analysis, the morphological and biochemical response of 23 Ph. vulgaris genotypes to different levels of drought stress were evaluated and the expression patterns of PhCAMTA1 in the leaf tissues of sensitive and tolerant genotypes were analysed. Gene structure, protein domain organization and phylogenetic analyses showed that the CAMTAs of Phaseolus were structurally similar and clustered into three groups as other plant CAMTAs. Genotypes showed a differential response to drought stress. Thus, the plant height, number of nodes and flower, total chlorophyll and total protein content, and activity of antioxidant enzymes (ascorbate peroxidase and catalase) in plants significantly influenced by genotype and drought stress interaction. Moreover, the resistant and susceptible genotypes were identified according to three-dimensional plots and the expression patterns of PhavuCAMTA1 gene were studied using real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction. The results of the present study serve as the basis for future functional studies on the Phaseolus CAMTA family.

Keywords

bioinformatics common bean calmodulin-binding transcription activators gene expression real-time quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors sincerely acknowledge Mohaghegh Ardabili University for funding of this research and Kerman Graduate University of Advanced Technology for services acquisition.

References

  1. Ambachew D. F, Mekbib A., Asfaw S. E. and Blair M. W. 2015 Trait associations in common bean genotypes grown under drought stress and field infestation by BSM bean fly. Crop J. 3, 305–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arnon D. I. 1949 Copper enzymes in isolated chloroplasts. polyphenoloxidase in Beta vulgaris. Plant Physiol. 24, 1–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Asada K. 1992 Ascorbate peroxidase – a hydrogen peroxide-scavenging enzyme in plants. Physiol. Plantarum. 85, 235–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Asfaw A. and Blair M. W. 2014 Quantification of drought tolerance in Ethiopian common bean varieties. J. Agric. Sci. 5, 124–139.Google Scholar
  5. Asfaw A., Blair M. W. and Struick P. 2012 Multi-environment quantitative trait locus analyses for photosynthate acquisition, accumulation and remobilization traits in a common bean. Genes. Genomes. Genet. 2, 579–595.Google Scholar
  6. Blum A. and Ebercon A. 1976 Genotypic responses in sorghum to drought stress. III. Free proline accumulation and drought resistance. Crop Sci. 16, 428–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bradford M. M. 1976 A rapid and sensitive method for the quantitation of microgram quantities of protein utilizing the principle of protein-dye binding. Anal. Biochem. 72, 248–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cakmak I. and Horst W. 1991 Effect of aluminium on lipid peroxidation, superoxide dismutase, catalase and peroxidase activities in root tip of soybean (Glycine max). Plant Physiol. 83, 463–468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Darkwa K., Ambachew D., Mohammed H., Asfaw A. and Blair M. W. 2016 Evaluation of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) genotypes for drought stress adaptation in Ethiopia. Crop J. 4, 367–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dawood M. G., Taie H. A., Nassar A., Abdelhamid M. T. and Schmidhalter U. 2014 The changes induced in the physiological, biochemical and anatomical characteristics of Vicia faba by the exogenous application of proline under seawater stress. S. Afr. J. Plant Soil 93, 54–63.Google Scholar
  11. Denby K. and Gehring C. 2005 Engineering drought and salinity tolerance in plants: lessons from genome-wide expression profiling in Arabidopsis. Trends Biotechnol. 23, 547–552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Desclaux D., Huynh T. and Roumet P. 2000 Identification of soybean plant characteristics that indicate the timing of drought stress. Crop Sci. 40, 716–722.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fahad S., Bajwa A. A., Nazir U., Anjum S. A., Farooq A., Zohaib A. et al. 2017 Crop production under drought and heat stress: plant responses and management options. Front Plant Sci. 8, 1147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Farooq M., Wahid A., Kobayashi N., Fujita D. and Basra S. M. A. 2009 Plant drought stress: effects, mechanisms and management. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 29, 185–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Farooq M., Hussain M., Wahid A. and Siddique K. H. M. 2012 Drought stress in plants: An overview. In Plant responses to drought stress from morphological to molecular features (ed. R. Aroca), pp. 1–36. Springer-Verlag, Germany.Google Scholar
  16. Flexas J., Bota J., Loreto F., Cornic G. and Sharkey T. D. 2004 Diffusive and metabolic limitations to photosynthesis under drought and salinity in C3 plants. Plant Biol. 6, 269–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hinkossa A., Gebeyehu S. and Zelleke H. 2013 Differential effects of post-flowering drought stress on growth and yield of the basic generations of two common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Popul. Sci. Technol. Arts. Res. J. 2, 22–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hu B., Jin J., Guo A.-Y., Zhang H., Luo J. and Gao G. 2015 GSDS 2.0: an upgraded gene feature visualization sever. Bioinformatics 31, 1296–1297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Koo S. C., Choi M. S., Chun H. J., Shin D. B., Park B. S. and Kim Y. 2009 The calmodulin-binding transcription factor OsCBT suppresses defense responses to pathogens in rice. Mol. Cells 27, 563–570.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kusvuran S. and Yildiz Dasgan H. 2017 Effects of drought stress on physiological and biochemical changes in Phaseolus vulgaris L. Legume Res. 40, 55–62.Google Scholar
  21. Kusvuran S., Kiran S. and Ellialtioglu P. P. 2016 Antioxidant enzyme activities and abiotic stress tolerance relationship in vegetable crops. In Abiotic and biotic stress in plants: recent advances and future perspectives (ed. K. Arun and C. Shanker), pp. 481–506. InTechOpen, London.Google Scholar
  22. Moumeni A., Satoh K. and Kondoh H. 2011 Comparative analysis of root transcriptome profiles of two pairs of drought-tolerant and susceptible rice near-isogenic lines under different drought stress. BMC Plant Biol. 11, 174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Nakano Y. and Asada K. 1981 Hydrogen peroxide is scavenged by ascorbate specific peroxidase in spinach chloroplasts. Plant Cell Physiol. 22, 867–880.Google Scholar
  24. Pandey N., Ranjan A., Pant P., Tripathi R. K., Ateek F., Pandey H. P. et al 2013 CAMTA 1 regulates drought responses in Arabidopsis thaliana. BMC Genomics 14, 216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Rahman H., Yang J., Xu Y. P., Munyampundu J. P. and Cai X. Z. 2016 Phylogeny of plant CAMTAs and role of AtCAMTAs in non-host resistance to Xanthomonas oryzae pv. oryzae. Front. Plant Sci. 7, 177.Google Scholar
  26. Ranjan A., Pandey N., Lakhwani D., Dubey N. K., Pathre U. V. and Sawant S. V. 2012 Comparative transcriptomic analysis of roots of contrasting Gossypium herbaceum genotypes revealing adaptation to drought. BMC Genomics 13, 680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Reddy A. S. N., Reddy V. S. and Golovkin M. 2000 A calmodulin binding protein from Arabidopsis is induced by ethylene and contains a DNA-binding motif. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 279, 762–769.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ribas-Carbo M., Taylor N. L., Giles L., Busquets S., Finnegan P. M., Day D. A. et al 2005 Effects of water stress on respiration in soybean leaves. Plant Physiol. 139, 466–473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Sakamoto T., Hashiguchi Y., Kurauchi E., Imamura M., Ishibashi Y., Muranaka S. et al 2012 Causative factors of decreasing flower number in cowpea under drought stress during flowering stage. Cryobiol. Cryotechnol. 58, 8I–85.Google Scholar
  30. Scandalios J. G. 1993 Oxygen stress and superoxide dismutases. Plant Physiol. 101, 7–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Sen A. 2012 Oxidative stress studies in plant tissue culture. In Antioxidant enzyme (ed. M. A. El-Missiry), pp. 59–88. InTechOpen, London.Google Scholar
  32. Shangguan L., Wang X., Leng X., Liu D., Ren G. and Tao R. 2014 Identification and bioinformatics analysis of signal responsive/calmodulin-binding transcription activators gene models in Vitis vinifera. Mol. Biol. Rep. 41, 2937– 2949.Google Scholar
  33. Siddiqui M. H., Al-Whaibi M. H., Sakran A. M., Basalah M. O. and Ali H. M. 2012 Effect of calcium and potassium on antioxidant system of Vicia faba L. under cadmium stress. Nn. J. Mol. Sci. 13, 6604–6619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Siddiqui M. H., Al-Khaishany M. Y., Al-Qutami M. A., Al-Whaibi M. H., Grover A., Ali H. M. et al 2015 Response of different genotypes of faba bean plant to drought stress. Nn. J. Mol. Sci. 16, 10214– 10227.Google Scholar
  35. Wang G., Zeng H., Hu X., Zhu Y., Chen Y. and Shen C. 2015 Identification and expression analyses of calmodulin-binding transcription activator genes in soybean. Plant Soil. 386, 205–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Yang T., Peng H., Whitaker B. D. and Conway W. S. 2012 Characterization of a calcium/calmodulin-regulated SR/CAMTA gene family during tomato fruit development and ripening. BMC Plant Biol. 12, 19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Yang T., Peng H., Whitaker B. D. and Jurick W. M. 2013 Differential expression of calcium/calmodulin-regulated SlSRs in response to abiotic and biotic stresses in tomato fruit. Physiol. Plantarum. 148, 445–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Yang Y., Sun T., Xu L., Pi E., Wang S. and Wang H. 2015 Genome-wide identification of CAMTA gene family members in Medicago truncatula and their expression during root nodule symbiosis and hormone treatments. Front. Plant Sci. 6, 459.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  39. Yue R., Lu C., Sun T., Peng T., Han X. and Qi J. 2015 Identification and expression profiling analysis of calmodulin-binding transcription activator genes in maize (Zea mays L.) under abiotic and biotic stresses. Fronti Plant Sci. 6, 576.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Indian Academy of Sciences 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Agronomy and Plant Breeding Department, Faculty of Agriculture and Natural ResourcesUniversity of Mohaghegh ArdabiliArdabil Iran
  2. 2.Department of Biotechnology, Institute of Science and High Technology and Environmental SciencesGraduate University of Advanced TechnologyKerman Iran

Personalised recommendations