Molecular Breeding

, 37:52 | Cite as

Identification and characterization of two waterlogging responsive alcohol dehydrogenase genes (AdADH1 and AdADH2) in Actinidia deliciosa

  • Ji-Yu Zhang
  • Sheng-Nan Huang
  • Yue-Hong Chen
  • Gang Wang
  • Zhong-Ren Guo
Article

Abstract

Previous study showed that two alcohol dehydrogenase genes (ADHs) were significantly upregulated in roots of Actinidia deliciosa after treatment with waterlogging using Illumina sequencing technology. Those two ADH genes, named AdADH1 and AdADH2, were isolated from A. deliciosa in this study. QRT-PCR analysis showed that AdADH1 and AdADH2 expression levels were significantly increased in A. deliciosa after treatment with waterlogging, NaCl, 4 °C, and heat stresses, but not ABA and drought stresses. The changes of AdADH1 and AdADH2 expression levels during waterlogging were much higher than those during other stresses. We examined the response to abiotic stresses in transgenic Arabidopsis lines in which the A. deliciosa AdADH1 and AdADH2 genes were introduced under the control of a constitutive promoter, respectively. Overexpression of A. deliciosa AdADH1 or AdADH2 in Arabidopsis could enhance waterlogging tolerance at five week old seedlings. However, the function of AdADH1 for waterlogging resistance was much better than that of AdADH2. Arabidopsis overexpressing AdADH1 gene could enhance the resistance to cold stress at five week old seedlings, but AdADH2 could not. Overexpression of AdADH1 gene enhances the resistance to salt stress at the stage of seed germination and in seedlings, and overexpression of AdADH2 gene enhances the resistance to salinity stress at the stage of seed germination but not in seedlings. However, transgenic Arabidopsis overexpressing AdADH1 or AdADH2 could not enhance to the osmotic stress at the stage of seed germination and in seedlings. These results indicated that A. deliciosa AdADH1 plays an important role in resistance to waterlogging, salinity, and cold stresses, but not drought stress, and AdADH2 plays an important role in resistance to waterlogging and salinity stresses, but not cold and drought stresses.

Keywords

Abiotic stresses Actinidia deliciosa AdADH1 AdADH2 Waterlogging Transgenic Arabidopsis 

Abbreviations

ABA

Abscisic acid

ADH

Alcohol dehydrogenase

CaMV

Cauliflower mosaic virus

HRE1/2

Hypoxia responsive ERF1/2

IBA

Indole-3-butytric acid

MS

Murashige and Skoog

PDC

Pyruvate decarboxylase

qRT-PCR

Real time quantitative RT-PCR

WT

Wild type

Notes

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) (31401854) and grants from the Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province (G rants No BK20140760).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

11032_2017_653_MOESM1_ESM.docx (19 kb)
Supplemental Table 1 Primers used for this paper (DOCX 19 kb)
11032_2017_653_Fig6_ESM.gif (55 kb)
Supplemental Fig. 1

Derived amino acid sequences alignment of AdADH1 and AdADH2 with proteins from Oryza sativa (OsADH1, Genbank accession no. AAF34414; OsADH2, Genbank accession no. AAF34412) and Vitis vinifera (VvADH1, Genbank accession no. NP_001268079; VvADH2, Genbank accession no. NP_001268083). Dots indicate that amino acids sequences are conserved. The major functional domains are indicated, along with the binding sites of catalytic (solid triangle) and structural (solid diamond) Zn ions. (GIF 55 kb)

11032_2017_653_MOESM2_ESM.tif (3.5 mb)
High Resolution Image (TIFF 3541 kb)
11032_2017_653_Fig7_ESM.gif (30 kb)
Supplemental Fig. 2

Phylogenetic analyses of ADH proteins. The deduced amino acids sequences were obtained from the NCBI, the species and the accession numbers are indicated. The phylogenetic tree was conducted using the MEGA5 based on the full-length amino acid sequences. Bootstrap analysis with 1000 replicates was performed to obtain confidence levels for the branches of the tree. (GIF 30 kb)

11032_2017_653_MOESM3_ESM.tif (3 mb)
High Resolution Image (TIFF 3045 kb)
11032_2017_653_Fig8_ESM.gif (207 kb)
Supplemental Fig. 3

Comparison of germination rates and root length between AdADH1 transgenic (ADH1–1, ADH1–2, ADH1–3) and wild-type (WT) lines under NaCl stresses. A photograph was taken 10 d after seed germination of WT and transgenic Arabidopsis plants in MS medium containing various concentrations of NaCl (a). Germination rates (c) in WT and transgenic plants grown in MS (control) or MS supplemented with various concentrations of NaCl for 7 d. Germination rates results are presented as mean ± SD from three independent experiments (at least 50 seeds of each line were grown for each experiment). Four day old seedlings of WT and transgenic seedlings which were germinated just from MS agar medium were transferred to MS medium containing different concentrations of NaCl. The phenotypic (b) and root length (c) were measured after 7 days. The experiments were carried out on three replicates of 30 seedlings. The results from one set of experiments are shown. Double asterisks indicate significant differences compared with WT lines values (P < 0.01). (GIF 207 kb)

11032_2017_653_MOESM4_ESM.tif (12 mb)
High Resolution Image (TIFF 12277 kb)
11032_2017_653_Fig9_ESM.gif (200 kb)
Supplemental Fig. 4

Comparison of germination rates and root length between AdADH2 transgenic (ADH2–1, ADH2–2, ADH2–3) and wild-type (WT) lines under NaCl stresses. A photograph was taken 10 d after seed germination of WT and transgenic Arabidopsis plants in MS medium containing various concentrations of NaCl (a). Germination rates (b) in WT and transgenic plants grown in MS (control) or MS supplemented with various concentrations of NaCl for 7 d. Germination rates results are presented as mean ± SD from three independent experiments (at least 50 seeds of each line were grown for each experiment). Four day old seedlings of WT and transgenic seedlings which were germinated just from MS agar medium were transferred to MS medium containing different concentration of NaCl. The phenotypic (c) and rooting length (d) were measured after 7 days. The experiments were carried out on three replicates of 30 seedlings. The results from one set of experiments are shown. Double asterisks indicate significant differences compared with WT lines values (P < 0.01). (GIF 200 kb)

11032_2017_653_MOESM5_ESM.tif (13.1 mb)
High Resolution Image (TIFF 13390 kb)
11032_2017_653_Fig10_ESM.gif (119 kb)
Supplemental Fig. 5

Comparison of germination rates and root length between AdADH1 transgenic (ADH1–1, ADH1–2, ADH1–3) and wild-type (WT) lines under mannitol stresses. A photograph was taken after 10 d of seed germination of WT and transgenic Arabidopsis plants in MS medium containing various concentrations of mannitol (a). Germination rates (b) in WT and transgenic plants grown in MS (control) or MS supplemented with various concentrations of mannitol for 7 d. Germination rates results are presented as mean ± SD from three independent experiments (at least 50 seeds of each line were grown for each experiment). Four day old seedlings of WT and transgenic seedlings which were germinated just from MS agar medium were transferred to MS medium containing 0.15 M mannitol. The phenotypic (c) and rooting length (d) were measured after 7 days. The experiments were carried out on three replicates of 30 seedlings. The results from one set of experiments are shown. (GIF 119 kb)

11032_2017_653_MOESM6_ESM.tif (4.2 mb)
High Resolution Image (TIFF 4292 kb)
11032_2017_653_Fig11_ESM.gif (116 kb)
Supplemental Fig. 6

Comparison of germination rates and root length between AdADH2 transgenic (ADH2–1, ADH2–2, ADH2–3) and wild-type (WT) lines under mannitol stresses. A photograph was taken after 10 d of seed germination of WT and transgenic Arabidopsis plants in MS medium containing various concentrations of mannitol (a). Germination rates (c) in WT and transgenic plants grown in MS (control) or MS supplemented with various concentrations of mannitol for 7 d. Germination rates results are presented as mean ± SD from three independent experiments (at least 50 seeds of each line were grown for each experiment). Four day old seedlings of WT and transgenic seedlings which were germinated just from MS agar medium were transferred to MS medium containing 0.15 M mannitol. The phenotypic (b) and rooting length (d) were measured after 7 days. The experiments were carried out on three replicates of 30 seedlings. The results from one set of experiments are shown. (GIF 115 kb)

11032_2017_653_MOESM7_ESM.tif (4 mb)
High Resolution Image (TIFF 4080 kb)

References

  1. Bruxelles CL, Peacock WJ, Dennis ES, Dolferus R (1996) Abscisic acid induces the alcohol dehydrogenase gene in Arabidopsis. Plant Physiol 111:381–391CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. Cai BH, Zhang JY, Gao ZH, Qu SC, Tong ZG, Mi L, Qiao YS, Zhang Z (2008) An improved method for isolation of total RNA from the leavesof Fragaria spp. Jiangsu J Agric Sci 24:875–877Google Scholar
  3. Christianson JA, Llewellyn DJ, Dennis ES, Wilson IW (2010) Global gene expression responses to waterlogging in roots and leaves of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) Plant Cell Physiol 51:21–37CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Christie PJ, Hahn M, Walbot V (1991) Low-temperature accumulation of alcohol dehydrogenase-1 mRNA and protein activity in maize and rice. Plant Physiol 95:699–706CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. Chung HJ, Ferl RJ (1999) Arabidopsis alcohol dehydrogenase expression in both shoots and roots is conditioned by root growth environment. Plant Physiol 121(2):429–436CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. Clough SJ, Bent AF (1998) Floral dip: a simplified method for agrobacterium -mediated transformation of Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant J 16(6):735–743CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Conley TR, Peng H-P, Shih M-C (1999) Mutations affecting induction of glycolytic and fermentative genes during germination and environmental stresses in Arabidopsis. Plant Physiol 119:599–607CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. Davik J, Koehler G, From B, Torp T, Rohloff J, Eidem P, Wilson RC, Sønsteby A, Randall SK, Alsheikh M (2012) Dehydrin, alcohol dehydrogenase, and central metabolite levels are associated with cold tolerance in diploid strawberry (Fragaria spp.) Planta 237:265–277CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Diab AA, Kantety RV, Ozturk NZ, Benscher D, Nachit MM, Sorrells ME (2008) Drought - inducible genes and differentially expressed sequence tags associated with components of drought tolerance in durum wheat. Sci Res Essay 3:9–26Google Scholar
  10. Dolferus R, Jacobs M, Peacock WJ, Dennis ES (1994) Differential interactions of promoter elements in stress responses of the Arabidopsis Adh gene. Plant Physiol 105:1075–1087CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. Fukuda T, Yokoyama J, Nakamura T, Song I-J, Ito T, Ochiai T, Kanno A, Kameya T, Maki M (2005) Molecular phylogeny and evolution of alcohol dehydrogenase (Adh) genes in legumes. BMC Plant Biol 5:6CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. Garabagi F, Duns G, Strommer J (2005) Selective recruitment of Adh genes for distinct enzymatic functions in Petunia hybrida. Plant Mol Biol 58:283–294CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Gibbs D, Lee S, Isa N, Gramuglia S, Fukao T, Bassel G, Correia C, Corbineau F, Theodoulou F, Bailey-Serres J (2011) Homeostatic response to hypoxia is regulated by the N-end rule pathway in plants. Nature 479:415–418CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. Harberd N, Edwards K (1982) The effect of a mutation causing alcohol dehydrogenase deficiency on flooding tolerance in barley. New Phytol 90:631–644CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ismond K, Dolferus R, Pauw M, Dennis E, Good A (2003) Enhanced low oxygen survival in arabidopsis through increased metabolic flux in the fermentative pathway. Plant Physiol 132:1292–1302CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. Jackson MB, Colmer TD (2005) Response and adaptation by plants to flooding stress. Ann Bot 96:501–505CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. Jacobs M, Dolferus R, Van Den Bosshe V (1988) Isolation and biochemical analysis of ethyl methyl sulfonate induced alcohol dehydrogenase null mutants of Arabidopsis thaliana (L.) Heynth. Biochem Genet 26:102–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Jarillo JA, Leyva A, Salinas J, M-Z M (1993) Low temperature induces the accumulation of alcohol dehydrogenase mRNA in Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant Physiol 101:833–837CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. Johnson JR, Cobb BC, Drew MC (1994) Hypoxic induction of anoxia tolerance in roots of Adh1 null Zea mays L. Plant Physiol 105:61–67CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. Kürsteiner O, Dupuis I, Kuhlemeier C (2003) The pyruvate decarboxylase1 gene of Arabidopsis is required during anoxia but not other environmental stresses. Plant Physiol 132:968–978CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. Kato-Noguchi H (1999) Flooding induction of alcohol dehydrogenase in shoots and roots of barley. Acta Physiol Plant 21:17–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kato-Noguchi H, Yasuda Y (2007) Effect of low temperature on ethanolic fermentation in rice seedlings. J Plant Physiol 164:1013–1018CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Komatsu S, Kobayashi Y, Nishizawa K, Nanjo Y, Furukawa K (2010a) Comparative proteomics analysis of differentially expressed proteins in soybean cell wall during flooding stress. Amino Acids 39:1435–1449CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Komatsu S, Sugimoto T, Hoshino T, Nanjo Y, Furukawa K (2010b) Identification of flooding stress responsible cascades in root and hypocotyl of soybean using proteome analysis. Amino Acids 38:729–738CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Komatsu S, Thibaut D, Hiraga S, Kato M, Chiba M, Hashiguchi A, Tougou M, Shimamura S, Yasue H (2011) Characterization of a novel flooding stress-responsive alcohol dehydrogenase expressed in soybean roots. Plant Mol Biol 77:309–322CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Komatsu S, Yamamoto R, Nanjo Y, Mikami Y, Yunokawa H, Sakata K (2009) A comprehensive analysis of the soybean genes and proteins expressed under flooding stress using transcriptome and proteome techniques. J Proteome Res 8:4766–4778CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Kosmacz M, Parlanti S, SchwarzlÄNder M, Kragler F, Licausi F, Van Dongen JT (2015) The stability and nuclear localization of the transcription factor RAP2.12 are dynamically regulated by oxygen concentration. Plant Cell Environ 38:1094–1103CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Liang Y, Yan J-p, Tan X-l (2012) Effects of salt-stress on expression of ADH3 and ALDH in radicle of rice (Oryza sativa). Hubei Agric Sci 51:2870–2872Google Scholar
  29. Licausi F (2011) Regulation of the molecular response to oxygen limitations in plants. New Phytol 190:550–555CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Licausi F, Kosmacz M, Weits DA, Giuntoli B, Giorgi FM, Voesenek LACJ, Perata P, van Dongen JT (2011) Oxygen sensing in plants is mediated by an N-end rule pathway for protein destabilization. Nature 479:419–422CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Licausi F, Van Dongen JT, Giuntoli B, Novi G, Santaniello A, Geigenberger P, Perata P (2010) HRE1 and HRE2, two hypoxia-inducible ethylene response factors, affect anaerobic responses in Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant J 62:302–315CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Lin K-H, Lin C-H, Chan M-T, Lo H-F (2010) Identification of flooding-response genes in eggplant roots by suppression subtractive hybridization. Plant Mol Biol Report 28:212–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Liu Z, Adams KL (2007) Expression partitioning between genes duplicated by polyploidy under abiotic stress and during organ development. Curr Biol 17:1669–1674CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Livak KJ, Schmittgen TD (2001) Analysis of relative gene expression data using real-time quantitative PCR and the 2−ΔΔCT method. Methods 25:402–408CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Matsumura H, Takano T, Takeda G, Uchimiya H (1998) Adh1 is transcriptionally active but its translational product is reduced in a rad mutant of rice (Oryza sativa L.), which is vulnerable to submergence stress. Theor Appl Genet 97:1197–1203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Min T, Yin X-r, Shi Y-n, Luo Z-r, Yao Y-c, Grierson D, Ferguson IB, Chen K-s (2012) Ethylene-responsive transcription factors interact with promoters of ADH and PDC involved in persimmon (Diospyros kaki) fruit de-astringency. J Exp Bot 63:6393–6405CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  37. Nanjo Y, Skultety L, Ashraf Y, Komatsu S (2010) Comparative proteomic analysis of early- stage soybean seedlings responses to flooding by using gel and gel-free techniques. J Proteome Res 9:3989–4002CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Narsai R, Whelan J (2013) How unique is the low oxygen response? An analysis of the anaerobic response during germination and comparison with abiotic stress in rice and Arabidopsis. Front Plant Sci 4:349CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  39. Peters JS, Frenkel C (2004) Relationship between alcohol dehydrogenase activity and low-temperature in two maize genotypes, Silverado F1 and Adh1 Adh2 doubly null. Plant Physiol Biochem 42:841–846CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Rahman M, Grover A, Peacock W, Dennis E, Ellis M (2001) Effects of manipulation of pyruvate decarboxylase and alcohol dehydrogenase levels on the submergence tolerance of rice. Aust J Plant Physiol 28:1231–1241Google Scholar
  41. Rossmann M, Moras D, Olsen K (1974) Chemical and biological evolution of a nucleotide-binding protein. Nature 250:194–199CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Savé R, Serrano L (1986) Some physiological and growth responses of kiwi fruit (Actinidia chinensis) to flooding. Physiol Plant 66(1):75–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Senthil-Kumar M, Hema R, Suryachandra TR, Ramegowda HV, Gopalakrishna R, Rama N, Udayakumar M, Mysore KS (2010) Functional characterization of three water deficit stress-induced genes in tobacco and Arabidopsis: an approach based on gene down regulation. Plant Physiol Biochem 48:35–44CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Stewart A, Mccarrison AM (1992) The role of phytophthora cryptogea and waterlogging in root rot kiwifruit. J Phytopathol 136(3):194–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Strommer J (2011) The plant ADH gene family. Plant J 66:128–142CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Tacconi G, Paltrinieri S, Mejia JF, Fuentealba SP, Bertaccini A, Tosi L, Giacopini A, Mazzucchi U, Favaron F, Sella L, Bertaiola F (2015) Vine decline in kiwifruit: climate change and effect on waterlogging and phytophthora in north italy. Acta Hortic 1096:93–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Tamang BG, Magliozzi JO, Maroof MAS, Fukao T (2014) Physiological and transcriptomic characterization of submergence and reoxygenation responses in soybean seedlings. Plant Cell Environ 37:2350–2360PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Tamura K, Peterson D, Peterson N, Stecher G, Nei M, Kumar S (2011) MEGA5: molecular evolutionary genetics analysis using maximum likelihood, evolutionary distance, and maximum parsimony methods. Mol Biol Evol 28:2731–2739CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  49. Tesniere C (2005) Effects of genetic manipulation of alcohol dehydrogenase levels on the response to stress and the synthesis of secondary metabolites in grapevine leaves. J Exp Bot 57:91–99CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Tougou M, Hashiguchi A, Yukawa K, Nanjo Y, Hiraga S, Nakamura T, Nishizawa K, Komatsu S (2012) Responses to flooding stress in soybean seedlings with the alcohol dehydrogenase transgene. Plant Biotechnol 29:301–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Voesenek LACJ, Bailey-Serres J (2015) Flood adaptive traits and processes: an overview. New Phytol 206:57–73CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Yin D, Chen S, Chen F, Guan Z, Fang W (2009) Morphological and physiological responses of two chrysanthemum cultivars differing in their tolerance to waterlogging. Environ Exp Bot 67:87–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Yin D, Ni D, Song L, Zhang Z (2013) Isolation of an alcohol dehydrogenase cDNA from and characterization of its expression in chrysanthemum under waterlogging. Plant Sci 212:48–54CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. Yin X-R, Allan AC, Xu Q, Burdon J, Dejnoprat S, Chen K-S, Ferguson IB (2012) Differential expression of kiwifruit ERF genes in response to postharvest abiotic stress. Postharvest Biol Technol 66:1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Zhang J-Y, Huang S-N, Mo Z-H, Xuan J-P, Jia X-D, Wang G, Guo Z-R (2015a) De novo transcriptome sequencing and comparative analysis of differentially expressed genes in kiwifruit under waterlogging stress. Mol Breed 35:208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Zhang J-y, Qu S-c, Dong C, Gao Z-h, Qiao Y-s, Zhang Z (2010) Utility and construction of full-length cDNA library of Malus hupehensis post-introduced with salicylic acid. Acta Bot Boreal -Occident Sin 30:1527–1533Google Scholar
  57. Zhang J, Wang G, Huang S, Xuan J, Jia X, Guo Z (2015b) Functions of alcohol dehydrogenase family in abiotic stress responses in plants. Chin Agric Sci Bull 31:246–250Google Scholar
  58. Zhang JY, Qiao YS, Lv D, Gao ZH, Qu SC, Zhang Z (2012) Malus hupehensis NPR1 induces pathogenesis-related protein gene expression in transgenic tobacco. Plant Biol 14:46–56CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ji-Yu Zhang
    • 1
  • Sheng-Nan Huang
    • 1
  • Yue-Hong Chen
    • 2
  • Gang Wang
    • 1
  • Zhong-Ren Guo
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of BotanyJiangsu Province and Chinese Academy of SciencesNanjingChina
  2. 2.Nanjing Institute of Agricultural Science in Jiangsu Hilly RegionNanjingChina

Personalised recommendations