Chinese Science Bulletin

, Volume 53, Issue 23, pp 3666–3676 | Cite as

Analysis of genes differentially expressed during initial cellular dedifferentiation in cotton

  • HuaGuo Zhu
  • LiLi Tu
  • ShuangXia Jin
  • Li Xu
  • JiaFu Tan
  • FengLin Deng
  • XianLong Zhang
Articles/Plant Developmental Biology


The early phase of phytohormone induction is a vital stage of somatic embryogenesis. This phase includes a key process for acquiring cellular totipotency through cellular dedifferentiation. To unravel the molecular mechanism of cellular dedifferentiation in cotton, we constructed a cDNA library using the suppression subtractive hybridization method. A total of 286 differential cDNA clones were sequenced and identified. Among these clones, 112 unique ESTs were significantly up-regulated during the early phase of phytohormone induction, and 40.2% of the ESTs were first identified. GST was highly expressed from 6 to 24 h after induction with phytohormone treatment. PRPs were predominantly expressed and exhibited distinct expression patterns in different treatments, suggesting that they are closely related to cellular dedifferentiation in cotton. Putative GhSAMS, GhSAMDC, GhSAHH and GhACO3 involvement in SAM metabolism was identified in this library. The analysis of qRT-PCR showed that two remarkable increased expressions of the four SAM-related genes happened during the early phase of phytohormone induction, and that a highly positive correlation existed between GhSAMS and GhSAHH. The highest expression level of GhSAMS might be associated with its reentry into the cell cycle. The histological observations further showed that some cells accomplished cellular dedifferentiation and division within 72 h in 2,4-D treatment, and that cellular dedifferentiation might be regulated through two alterations in SAM-dependent transmethylation activity in cotton. In addition, the expression patterns of differential genes in different treatments disclosed the complicated interaction between 2, 4-D and kinetin.


cellular dedifferentiation cotton proline-rich protein SAM-dependent transmethylation suppression subtractive hybridization 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Vasil V, Hildebrandt A C. Differentiation of tobacco plants from single isolated cells in microcultures. Science, 1965, 150: 889–892PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Zhao J, Morozova N, Williams L, et al. Two phases of chromatin decondensation during dedifferentiation of plant cells: distinction between competence for cell fate switch and a commitment for S phase. J Biol Chem, 2001, 276: 22772–22778PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Nagata T, Ishida S, Hasezawa S, et al. Genes involved in the dedifferentiation of plant cells. Int J Dev Biol, 1994, 38: 321–327PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Marrs K A. The functions and regulation of glutathione S-transferases in plants. Annu Rev Plant Physiol, 1996, 47: 127–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Grosset J, Marty I, Chartier Y, et al. mRNAs newly synthesized by tobacco mesophyll protoplasts are wound-inducible. Plant Mol Biol, 1990, 15: 485–496PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Yu H J, Moon M S, Lee H S, et al. Analysis of cDNAs expressed during first cell division of petunia petal protoplast cultures using expressed sequence tags. Mol Cell, 1999, 9: 258–264Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jamet E, Durr A, Parmentier Y, et al. Is ubiquitin involved in the dedifferentiation of higher plant cells? Cell Differ Dev, 1990, 29: 37–46PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chitteti B R, Peng Z H. Proteome and phosphoproteome dynamic change during cell dedifferentiation in Arabidopsis. Proteomics, 2007, 7: 1473–1500PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Koukalova B, Fojtova M, Lim K Y, et al. Dedifferentiation of tobacco cells is associated with ribosomal RNA gene hypomethylation, increased transcription, and chromatin alterations. Plant Physiol, 2005, 139: 275–286PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Grafi G, Ben-Meir H, Avivi Y, et al. Histone methylation controls telomerase-independent telomere lengthening in cells undergoing dedifferentiation. Dev Biol, 2007, 306: 838–846PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rocha PSCF, Sheikh M, Melchiorre R, et al. The Arabidopsis HOMOLOGY-DEPENDENT GENE SILENCING1 gene codes for an S-adenosyl-L-homocysteine hydrolase required for DNA methylation-dependent gene silencing. Plant Cell, 2005, 17: 404–417PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Li Z Y, Chen S Y. Differential accumulation of the S-adenosylmethionine decarboxylase transcript in rice seedlings in response to salt and drought stresses. Theor Appl Genet, 2000, 100: 782–788CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ma X L, Wang Z L, Qi Y C, et al. Isolation of S-adenosylmethionine synthetase gene from Suaeda salsa and its differential expression under NaCl stress. Acta Botanica Sinica, 2003, 45: 1359–1365Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hao Y J, Zhang Z L, Kitashiba H, et al. Molecular cloning and functional characterization of two apple S-adenosylmethionine decarboxylase genes and their different expression in fruit development, cell growth and stress responses. Gene, 2005, 350: 41–50PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Weretilnyk E A, Alexander K J, Drebenstedt M, et al. Maintaining methylation activities during salt stress. The involvement of adenosine kinase. Plant Physiol, 2001, 125: 856–865PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Pereira L A, Todorova M, Cai X, et al. Methyl recycling activities are co-ordinately regulated during plant development. J Exp Bot, 2007, 58: 1083–1098PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Dovzhenko A, Bosco D C, Meurer J, et al. Efficient regeneration from cotyledon protoplasts in Arabidopsis thaliana. Protoplasma, 2003, 222: 107–111PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Quiroz-Figueroa F R, Fuentes-Cerda C F J, Rojas-Herrera R, et al. Histological studies on the developmental stages and differentiation of two different somatic embryogenesis systems of Coffea arabica. Plant Cell Rep, 2002, 20: 1141–1149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Zhu L F, Tu L L, Zeng F C, et al. An improved simple protocol for isolation of high quality RNA from Gossypium spp. suitable for cDNA library construction (in Chinese). Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2005, 31: 1657–1659Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Tu L L, Zhang X L, Liang S G, et al. Genes expression analyses of sea-island cotton (Gossypium barbadense L.) during fiber development. Plant Cell Rep, 2007, 26:1309–1320PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Tu L L, Zhang X L, Liu D Q, et al. Suitable internal control genes for qRT-PCR normalization in cotton fiber development and somatic embryogenesis. Chin Sci Bull, 2007, 52(22): 3110–3117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mc Fadden H G, Chapple R, De Feyter R, et al. Expression of pathogenesis-related genes in cotton stems in response to infection by Verticillium dahliae. Physiol Mol Plant Pathol, 2001, 58: 119–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kwak K J, Kim J Y, Kim Y O, et al. Characterization of transgenic Arabidopsis plants overexpressing high mobility group B Proteins under high salinity, drought or cold stress. Plant Cell Physiol, 2007, 48: 221–231PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Guo L, Wang Z Y, Lin H, et al. Expression and functional analysis of the rice plasma-membrane intrinsic protein gene family. Cell Res, 2006, 16: 277–286PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lurie S, Fallik E, Handros A, et al. The possible involvement of peroxidase in resistance to Botrytis cinerea in heat treated tomato fruit. Physio Mol Plant Pathol, 1997, 50: 141–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Mei X H, Hao Y L, Zhu H L, et al. Cloning of pectin methylesterase inhibitor from kiwi fruit and its high expression in Pichia pastoris. Enzyme Microb Tech, 2007, 40: 1001–1005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Parmentier Y, Durr A, Marbach J, et al. A novel wound-inducible extensin gene is expressed early in newly isolated protoplasts of Nicotiana sylvestris. Plant Mol Biol, 1995, 29: 279–292PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Xiang Y, Huang Y M, Xiong L Z. Characterization of stress-responsive CBL-interacting protein kinase genes in rice for stress tolerance improvement. Plant Physiol, 2007, 144: 1416–1428PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Nakano T, Nishiuchi T, Suzuki K, et al. Studies on transcriptional regulation of endogenous genes by ERF2 transcription factor in tobacco cells. Plant Cell Physiol, 2006, 47: 554–558PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Skoblinska B A, Kepczynski J, Szopa J. The identification of the ACC synthase and ACC oxidase genes in Amaranthus caudatus. Acta Biochim Pol, 2007, 54: 128Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Li J M, Nam K H. Regulation of brassinosteroid signaling by a GSK3/SHAGGY-Like kinase. Science, 2002, 295: 1299–1301PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Sahyoun N, McDonald O B, Farrell F, et al. Phosphorylation of a ras-related GTP-binding protein, Rap-1b, by a neuronal Ca2+/calmodulin-dependent protein kinase, CaM kinase Gr. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 1991, 88: 2643–2647PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Albrecht V, Ritz O, Linder S, et al. The NAF domain defines a novel protein-protein interaction module conserved in Ca2+-regulated kinases. EMBO J, 2001, 20: 1051–1063PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Aristarkhov A, Eytane E, Moghe A, et al. E2-C, a cyclin-selective ubiquitin carrier protein required for the destruction of mitotic cyclins. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 1996, 93: 4294–4299PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Xu W L, Wang X L, Wang H, et al. Molecular characterization and expression analysis of nine cotton GhEF1A genes encoding translation elongation factor 1A. Gene, 2007, 389: 27–35PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Wilk D J, Kurek I, Hogan P, et al. The cotton fiber zinc-binding domain of cellulose synthase A1 from Gossypium hirsutum displays rapid turnover in vitro and in vivo. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 2006, 103: 12191–12196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Liu Z, Haas A L, Diaz L A, et al. Characterization of a novel keratinocyte ubiquitin carrier protein. J Biol Chem, 1996, 271: 2817–2822PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Coenen C, Lomax T L, Coenen C, et al. Auxin cytokinin interactions in higher plants: old problems, new tools. Trends Plant Sci, 1997, 2: 351–356PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Shi Y H, Zhu S W, Mao X Z, et al. Transcriptome profiling, molecular biological, and physiological studies reveal a major role for ethylene in cotton fiber cell elongation. Plant Cell, 2006, 18: 651–664PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Okamoto S, Alexander L, Hosaka T, et al. Enhanced expression of S-adenosylmethionine synthetase causes overproduction of actinorhodin in Streptomyces coelicolor A3(2). J Bacteriol, 2003, 185: 601–609PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Jones P L, Wolffe A P. Relationships between chromatin organization and DNA methylation in determining gene expression. Semin Cancer Biol, 1999, 9: 339–347PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Causevic A, Delaunay A, Ounnar S, et al. DNA methylating and demethylating treatments modify phenotype and cell wall differentiation state in sugarbeet cell lines. Plant Physiol Bioch, 2005, 43: 681–691CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Science in China Press and Springer-Verlag GmbH 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • HuaGuo Zhu
    • 1
  • LiLi Tu
    • 1
  • ShuangXia Jin
    • 1
  • Li Xu
    • 1
  • JiaFu Tan
    • 1
  • FengLin Deng
    • 1
  • XianLong Zhang
    • 1
  1. 1.National Key Laboratory of Crop Genetic ImprovementHuazhong Agricultural UniversityWuhanChina

Personalised recommendations