Advertisement

Theoretical and Applied Genetics

, Volume 132, Issue 7, pp 1931–1941 | Cite as

QTL mapping for maize starch content and candidate gene prediction combined with co-expression network analysis

  • Feng Lin
  • Ling Zhou
  • Bing He
  • Xiaolin Zhang
  • Huixue Dai
  • Yiliang Qian
  • Long Ruan
  • Han ZhaoEmail author
Original Article

Abstract

Key message

A major QTL Qsta9.1 was identified on chromosome 9, combined with GWAS, and co-expression network analysis showed that GRMZM2G110929 and GRMZM5G852704 are the potential candidates for association with maize kernel starch content.

Abstract

Increasing maize kernel starch content may not only lead to higher maize kernel yields and qualities, but also help meet industry demands. By using the intermated B73 × Mo17 population, QTLs were mapped for starch content in this study. A major QTL Qsta9.1 was detected in a 1.7 Mb interval on chromosome 9 and validated by allele frequency analysis in extreme tails of a newly constructed segregating population. According to genome-wide association study (GWAS) based on genotyping of a natural population, we identified a significant SNP for starch content within the ORF region of GRMZM5G852704_T01 colocalized with QTL Qsta9.1. Co-expression network analysis was also conducted, and 28 modules were constructed during six seed developmental stages. Functional enrichment was performed for each module, and one module showed the most possibility for the association with carbohydrate-related processes. In this module, one transcripts GRMZM2G110929_T01 located in the Qsta9.1 assigned 1.7 Mb interval encoding GLABRA2 expression modulator. Its expression level in B73 was lower than that in Mo17 across all seed developmental stages, implying the possibility for the candidate gene of Qsta9.1. Our studies combined GWAS, mRNA profiling, and traditional QTL analyses to identify a major locus for controlling seed starch content in maize.

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by Grant from National key research and development program of China (2017YFD0102005), Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province, China (BK20160582), National Natural Science Foundation of China (31601315), Key Research and Development Program of Jiangsu Province (BE2017365), and Project of Science and Technology of Anhui Province (1604a0702021).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical standards

The experiments carried out in this study comply with the ethical standards in China.

Supplementary material

122_2019_3326_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (32 kb)
Supplementary Table S1 The list of 149 maize inbred lines used in association study (PDF 32 kb)
122_2019_3326_MOESM2_ESM.pdf (49 kb)
Supplementary Table S2 The list of 116 transcripts predicted at the major QTL Qsta9.1 region (PDF 48 kb)
122_2019_3326_MOESM3_ESM.pdf (3 mb)
Supplementary Table S3 The list of 28 modules constructed by WGCNA involving 16,808 transcripts (PDF 3078 kb)
122_2019_3326_MOESM4_ESM.pdf (88 kb)
Supplementary Table S4 Functions enriched in each module analyzed by using SEA tool (PDF 87 kb)
122_2019_3326_MOESM5_ESM.pdf (65 kb)
Supplementary Fig. S1 Cross-validation error plot indicating the choice of the appropriate K value (PDF 64 kb)
122_2019_3326_MOESM6_ESM.pdf (234 kb)
Supplementary Fig. S2 The population structure of 149 maize inbred lines. A: Population structure analysis using ADMIXTURE. Each color represents a single population. The numbers of clusters (K) were set from 2–10. The 149 lines were divided into seven groups. B: PCA of the 149 lines. Individuals from the same group are represented by the same color. C: A neighbor-joining tree of the 149 lines (PDF 233 kb)
122_2019_3326_MOESM7_ESM.pdf (203 kb)
Supplementary Fig. S3 Quantile–quantile plot of SNPs for both general linear model (GLM) and mixed linear model (MLM) (PDF 203 kb)
122_2019_3326_MOESM8_ESM.pdf (54 kb)
Supplementary Fig. S4 Manhattan plots of the association of SNPs with starch content with GLM analysis. Genome position is shown along the x-axis divided by chromosome, and the − log10P for association is shown on the y-axis (PDF 53 kb)
122_2019_3326_MOESM9_ESM.pdf (98 kb)
Supplementary Fig. S5 Comparison of the protein sequences of GRMZM5G852704_T01 between B73 and Mo17. Query: B73, Sbjct: Mo17 (PDF 97 kb)

References

  1. Alexander DH, Novembre J, Lange K (2009) Fast model-based estimation of ancestry in unrelated individuals. Genome Res 19:1655–1664CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. Ashikari M, Matsuoka M (2006) Identification, isolation and pyramiding of quantitative trait loci for rice breeding. Trends Plant Sci 11:344–350CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Baron KN, Schroeder DF, Stasolla C (2014) GEm-Related 5 (GER5), an ABA and stress-responsive GRAM domain protein regulating seed development and inflorescence architecture. Plant Sci 223:153–166CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Benjamini Y, Hochberg Y (1995) Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J R Stat Soc Ser B Methodol 57:289–300Google Scholar
  5. Bradbury PJ, Zhang Z, Kroon DE, Casstevens TM, Ramdoss Y, Buckler ES (2007) TASSEL: software for association mapping of complex traits in diverse samples. Bioinformatics 23:2633–2635CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Cameron JW, Teas HJ (1954) Carbohydrate relationships in developing and mature endosperms of brittle and related maize genotypes. Am J Bot 41:50–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cho K, Cho KS, Sohn HB, Ha IJ, Hong SY, Lee H, Kim YM, Nam MH (2016) Network analysis of the metabolome and transcriptome reveals novel regulation of potato pigmentation. J Exp Bot 67:1519–1533CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. Choe E, Drnevich J, Williams MM (2016) Identification of crowding stress tolerance co-expression networks involved in sweet corn yield. PLoS ONE 11:e0147418CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. Chourey PS (1981) Genetic control of sucrose synthetase in maize endosperm. Mol Gen Genet 184:372–376CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chourey PS, Nelson OE (1976) The enzymatic deficiency conditioned by the shrunken-1 mutations in maize. Biochem Genet 14:1041–1055CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Clark D, Dudley JW, Rocheford TR, LeDeaux JR (2006) Genetic analysis of corn kernel chemical composition in the random mated 10 generation of the cross of generations 70 of IHO × ILO. Crop Sci 46:807–819CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Conesa A, Götz S, García-Gómez JM, Terol J, Talón M, Robles M (2005) Blast2GO: a universal tool for annotation, visualization and analysis in functional genomics research. Bioinformatics 21:3674–3676CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Cook JP, McMullen MD, Holland JB, Tian F, Bradbury P, Ross-Ibarra J, Buckler ES, Flint-Garcia SA (2012) Genetic architecture of maize kernel composition in the nested association mapping and inbred association panels. Plant Physiol 158:824–834CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Cox MP, Peterson DA, Biggs PJ (2010) SolexaQA: at-a-glance quality assessment of illumina second-generation sequencing data. BMC Bioinform 11:485CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Das S, Meher PK, Rai A, Bhar LM, Mandal BN (2017) Statistical approaches for gene selection, hub gene identification and module interaction in gene co-expression network analysis: an application to aluminum stress in Soybean (Glycine max L.). PLoS ONE 12:e0169605CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. Dickinson DB, Preiss J (1969) Presence of ADP-glucose pyrophosphorylase in shrunken-2 and brittle-2 mutants of maize endosperm. Plant Physiol 44:1058–1062CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. DiLeo MV, Strahan GD, den Bakker M, Hoekenga OA (2011) Weighted correlation network analysis (WGCNA) applied to the tomato fruit metabolome. PLoS ONE 6:e26683CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. Downs GS, Bi YM, Colasanti J, Wu W, Chen X, Zhu T, Rothstein SJ, Lukens LN (2013) A developmental transcriptional network for maize defines coexpression modules. Plant Physiol 161:1830–1843CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. Downs GS, Liseron-Monfils C, Lukens LN (2014) Regulatory motifs identified from a maize developmental coexpression network. Genome 57:181–184CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Du J, Wang S, He C, Zhou B, Ruan YL, Shou H (2017) Identification of regulatory networks and hub genes controlling soybean seed set and size using RNA sequencing analysis. J Exp Bot 68:1955–1972PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. Dudley JW, Clark D, Rocheford TR, LeDeaux JR (2007) Genetic analysis of corn kernel chemical composition in the random mated 7 generation of the cross of generations 70 of IHP × ILP. Crop Sci 47:45–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ferreira SS, Hotta CT, Poelking VG, Leite DC, Buckeridge MS, Loureiro ME, Barbosa MH, Carneiro MS, Souza GM (2016) Co-expression network analysis reveals transcription factors associated to cell wall biosynthesis in sugarcane. Plant Mol Biol 91:15–35CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. Guo Y, Yang X, Chander S, Yan J, Zhang J, Song T, Li J (2013) Identification of unconditional and conditional QTL for oil, protein and starch content in maize. Crop J 1:34–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hennen-Bierwagen TA, Myers AM (2013) Genomic specification of starch biosynthesis in maize endosperm. In: Becraft PW (ed) Seed Genomics, pp 123–137Google Scholar
  25. Hinz M, Wilson IW, Yang J, Buerstenbinder K, Llewellyn D, Dennis ES, Sauter M, Dolferus R (2010) Arabidopsis RAP2.2: an ethylene response transcription factor that is important for hypoxia survival. Plant Physiol 153:757–772CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. Itkin M, Heinig U, Tzfadia O, Bhide AJ, Shinde B, Cardenas PD, Bocobza SE, Unger T, Malitsky S, Finkers R, Tikunov Y, Bovy A, Chikate Y, Singh P, Rogachev I, Beekwilder J, Giri AP, Aharoni A (2013) Biosynthesis of antinutritional alkaloids in Solanaceous crops is mediated by clustered genes. Science 341:175–179CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Jeon JS, Ryoo N, Hahn TR, Walia H, Nakamura Y (2010) Starch biosynthesis in cereal endosperm. Plant Physiol Biochem 48:383–392CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Langfelder P, Horvath S (2008) WGCNA: an R package for weighted correlation network analysis. BMC Bioinform 9:559CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Langmead B, Trapnell C, Pop M, Salzberg SL (2009) Ultrafast and memory-efficient alignment of short DNA sequences to the human genome. Genome Biol 10:1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Laughnan JR (1953) The effect of the sh2 factor on carbohydrate reserves in the mature endosperm of maize. Genetics 38:485–499PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  31. Leal LG, López C, López-Kleine L (2014) Construction and comparison of gene co-expression networks shows complex plant immune responses. PeerJ 2:e610CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  32. Letunic I, Bork P (2016) Interactive tree of life (iTOL) v3: an online tool for the display and annotation of phylogenetic and other trees. Nucleic Acids Res 44:W242–W245CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  33. Li C, Huang Y, Huang R, Wu Y, Wang W (2018) The genetic architecture of amylose biosynthesis in maize kernel. Plant Biotechnol J 16:688–695CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Lin RC, Park HJ, Wang HY (2008) Role of Arabidopsis RAP2.4 in regulating light- and ethylene-mediated developmental processes and drought stress tolerance. Mol Plant 1:42–57CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Liseron-Monfils C, Ware D (2015) Revealing gene regulation and associations through biological networks. Curr Plant Biol 3–4:30–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Liu N, Xue Y, Guo Z, Li W, Tang J (2016) Genome-wide association study identifies candidate genes for starch content regulation in maize kernels. Front Plant Sci 7:1046PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  37. Lv Y, Liu Y, Zhao H (2016) mInDel: a high-throughput and efficient pipeline for genome-wide InDel marker development. BMC Genom 17:290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Mauri N, Fernández-Marcos M, Costas C, Desvoyes B, Pichel A, Caro E, Gutierrez C (2016) GEM, a member of the GRAM domain family of proteins, is part of the ABA signaling pathway. Sci Rep 6:22660CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  39. Meng L, Li H, Zhang L, Wang J (2015) QTL IciMapping: integrated software for genetic linkage map construction and quantitative trait locus mapping in biparental populations. Crop J 3:269–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Miller GL (1959) Use of dinitrosalicylic acid reagent for determination of reducing sugar. Anal Chem 31:426–428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Obertello M, Shrivastava S, Katari MS, Coruzzi GM (2015) Cross-species network analysis uncovers conserved nitrogen-regulated network modules in rice. Plant Physiol 168:1830–1843CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  42. Palumbo MC, Zenoni S, Fasoli M, Massonnet M, Farina L, Castiglione F, Pezzotti M, Paci P (2014) Integrated network analysis identifies fight-club nodes as a class of hubs encompassing key putative switch genes that induce major transcriptome reprogramming during grapevine development. Plant Cell 26:4617–4635CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  43. Petricka JJ, Schauer MA, Megraw M, Breakfield NW, Thompson JW, Georgiev S, Soderblom EJ, Ohler U, Moseley MA, Grossniklaus U, Benfey PN (2012) The protein expression landscape of the Arabidopsis root. Proc Natl Acad Sci 109:6811–6818CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Purcell S, Neale B, Todd-Brown K, Thomas L, Ferreira MAR, Bender D, Maller J, Sklar P, de Bakker PIW, Daly MJ, Sham PC (2007) PLINK: a tool set for whole-genome association and population-based linkage analyses. Am J Hum Genet 81:559–575CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  45. Séne M, Causse M, Damerval C, Thévenot C, Prioul JL (2000) Quantitative trait loci affecting amylose, amylopectin and starch content in maize recombinant inbred lines. Plant Physiol Biochem 38:459–472CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Shaik R, Ramakrishna W (2013) Genes and co-expression modules common to drought and bacterial stress responses in Arabidopsis and rice. PLoS ONE 8:e77261CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  47. Thirunavukkarasu N, Sharma R, Singh N, Shiriga K, Mohan S, Mittal S, Mittal S, Mallikarjuna MG, Rao AR, Dash PK, Hossain F, Gupta HS (2017) Genomewide expression and functional interactions of genes under drought stress in maize. Int J Genomics 2017:2568706CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  48. Trapnell C, Williams BA, Pertea G, Mortazavi A, Kwan G, Van Baren MJ, Salzberg SL, Wold BJ, Pachter L (2010) Transcript assembly and quantification by RNA-Seq reveals unannotated transcripts and isoform switching during cell differentiation. Nat Biotechnol 28:511–515CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  49. Tsai CY, Nelson OE (1966) Starch-deficient maize mutant lacking adenosine diphosphate glucose pyrophosphorylase activity. Science 151:341–343CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Wang YZ, Li JZ, Li YL, Wei MG, Li XH, Fu JF (2010) QTL detection for grain oil and starch content and their associations in two connected F2:3 populations in high-oil maize. Euphytica 174:239–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Wang T, Wang M, Hu S, Xiao Y, Tong H, Pan Q, Xue J, Yan J, Li J, Yang X (2015) Genetic basis of maize kernel starch content revealed by high-density single nucleotide polymorphism markers in a recombinant inbred line population. BMC Plant Biol 15:288CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  52. Wassom JJ, Wong JC, Martinez E, King JJ, DeBaene J, Hotchkiss JR, Mikkilineni V, Bohn MO, Rocheford TR (2008) QTL associated with maize kernel oil, protein, and starch concentrations; kernel mass; and grain yield in Illinois high Oil × B73 backcross-derived lines. Crop Sci 48:243–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Xu H, Wang X, Chen J (2010) Overexpression of the Rap2.4f transcriptional factor in Arabidopsis promotes leaf senescence. Sci China Life Sci 53:1221–1226CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. Yang G, Dong Y, Li Y, Wang Q, Shi Q, Zhou Q (2013) Verification of QTL for grain starch content and its genetic correlation with oil content using two connected RIL populations in high-oil maize. PLoS ONE 8:e53770CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  55. Zhang J, Lu X, Song X, Yan J, Song T, Dai J, Rocheford T, Li J (2008) Mapping quantitative trait loci for oil, starch, and protein concentrations in grain with high-oil maize by SSR markers. Euphytica 162:335–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Zhang H, Jin T, Huang Y, Chen J, Zhu L, Zhao Y, Guo J (2015) Identification of quantitative trait loci underlying the protein, oil and starch contents of maize in multiple environments. Euphytica 205:169–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Zinkgraf M, Liu L, Groover A, Filkov V (2017) Identifying gene coexpression networks underlying the dynamic regulation of wood-forming tissues in Populus under diverse environmental conditions. New Phytol 214:1464–1478CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Feng Lin
    • 1
  • Ling Zhou
    • 1
  • Bing He
    • 1
  • Xiaolin Zhang
    • 1
  • Huixue Dai
    • 2
  • Yiliang Qian
    • 3
  • Long Ruan
    • 3
  • Han Zhao
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Provincial Key Laboratory of Agrobiology, Institute of Crop Germplasm and BiotechnologyJiangsu Academy of Agricultural SciencesNanjingChina
  2. 2.Nanjing Institute of Vegetable SciencesNanjingChina
  3. 3.Anhui Academy of Agricultural SciencesHefeiChina

Personalised recommendations