Role of sweet potato <i>GST</i> genes in abiotic stress tolerance revealed by genomic and transcriptomic analyses

Soviguidi, Deka Reine Judesse; Liu, Yi; Pan, Rui; Abou-Elwafa, Salah Fatouh; Rao, Li-Ping; Abel, Sefasi; Zhang, Wen-Ying; Yang, Xin-Sun

doi:10.1590/1984-70332022v22n1a02

Deka Reine Judesse Soviguidi

Ministry of Education/Hubei Collaborative Innovation Center for Grain Industry, Yangtze University, Engineering Research Centre of Ecology and Agricultural Use of Wetland, Jingzhou 43.4025, China.

Hubei Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Institute of Food Corps/Hubei Sweet potato Engineering and Technology Research Centre, Hubei Key Laboratory of Food Crops Germplasm and Genetic Improvement, Wuhan 43.0064, China

Yi Liu

Ministry of Education/Hubei Collaborative Innovation Center for Grain Industry, Yangtze University, Engineering Research Centre of Ecology and Agricultural Use of Wetland, Jingzhou 43.4025, China.

Hubei Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Institute of Food Corps/Hubei Sweet potato Engineering and Technology Research Centre, Hubei Key Laboratory of Food Crops Germplasm and Genetic Improvement, Wuhan 43.0064, China

Rui Pan

Ministry of Education/Hubei Collaborative Innovation Center for Grain Industry, Yangtze University, Engineering Research Centre of Ecology and Agricultural Use of Wetland, Jingzhou 43.4025, China.

Salah Fatouh Abou-Elwafa

Assiut University, College of Agriculture, Agronomy Department, Assiut 71.526, Egypt

Li-Ping Rao

Ministry of Education/Hubei Collaborative Innovation Center for Grain Industry, Yangtze University, Engineering Research Centre of Ecology and Agricultural Use of Wetland, Jingzhou 43.4025, China.

Hubei Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Institute of Food Corps/Hubei Sweet potato Engineering and Technology Research Centre, Hubei Key Laboratory of Food Crops Germplasm and Genetic Improvement, Wuhan 43.0064, China

Sefasi Abel

Lilongwe University of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Faculty of Agriculture, Horticulture Department, P.O. Box 219, Lilongwe, Malawi

Wen-Ying Zhang ^** E-mail: wyzhang@yangtzeu.edu.cn:

Ministry of Education/Hubei Collaborative Innovation Center for Grain Industry, Yangtze University, Engineering Research Centre of Ecology and Agricultural Use of Wetland, Jingzhou 43.4025, China.

http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9926-4115

Xin-Sun Yang

Hubei Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Institute of Food Corps/Hubei Sweet potato Engineering and Technology Research Centre, Hubei Key Laboratory of Food Crops Germplasm and Genetic Improvement, Wuhan 43.0064, China

* E-mail: wyzhang@yangtzeu.edu.cn:

Figures (4)
Tables (1)

Thumbnail

Figure 1. Phylogenetic
tree representing relationships among sweet potato and Arabidopsis GSTs. The colors indicate distinct subfamilies of the GST gene family. GST proteins in Arabidopsis with the prefix ‘At’ indicate ‘AtGST’. MEGA 7, Neighbor-Joining method and 1000 replicates for the bootstrap test were used to generate the tree. Percentage bootstrap scores of >50% were displayed.

Thumbnail

Figure 2. Sequence
analysis of sweet potato GST genes. (A) Phylogenetic tree generated using MEGA 7 software, (B) motif pattern of GST genes, (C) conserved domain, (D) GST gene structure. The GST proteins in the four plots (A, B, C, D) are in the same order.

Thumbnail

Figure 3. Transcript
analysis of the 51 GSTs. Longitudinal direction indicates the varieties EC16 and FS7-6 and developmental stages S1 (stage 1: 65 days) and S2 (stage 2: 85 days). Horizontal direction indicates the 51 sweet potato GST genes. High expression levels are shown in red and low levels in blue (A). GST gene expression levels of sweet potato varieties Lizixiang (L) and ND98 (N) in response to salinity stress. Treatment at 0, 12 and 48 h. L0; Lizixiang at 0 h, L12; Lizixiang at 12 h, L48; Lizixiang at 48 h, N0; ND98 at 0 h, N12; ND98 at 12 h and N48; ND98 at 48 h. The colors represent the gene transcript levels (FPKM value) (B).

Thumbnail

Figure 4. Transcript
level of the GSTs. itb01g15260, itb09g30700, itb11g02640, itb11g03220, itb11g07110, itb11g07120, itb13g03940, itb14g03990, itb14g04110 and itb15g08190 had the highest expression levels in the varieties EC16 and FS7-6 and two developmental stages (65- and 85-day-old plants) (A). Expression analysis of GSTs under salinity (B), drought (C) and oxidative (D) stresses. Samples of each treatment were collected at 0, 6, 12 and 24 h after stress induction. Data were normalized to the β-actin gene. * and ** indicate significant differences compared to 0 h at P < 0.05 and P < 0.01 (t-test), respectively.

Thumbnail

Table 1. Characteristics
of the identified 51 GST genes of sweet potato

Order	Locus ID	CDS length (bp)	Protein length (aa)	MW (KDa)	pI	Predicted subcellular localization
1	itb01g15260	1131	376	41.18	8.78	Periplasmic
2	itb01g20560	663	220	25.69	5.51	Cytoplasmic
3	itb01g20590	669	222	25.49	5.01	Cytoplasmic
4	itb01g20600	648	215	24.98	5.12	Cytoplasmic
5	itb01g20610	669	222	25.81	5.59	Cytoplasmic
6	itb01g20620	684	227	26.05	5.33	Cytoplasmic
7	itb01g20640	666	221	25.36	6.71	Cytoplasmic
8	itb01g20650	669	222	25.64	6.18	Cytoplasmic
9	itb01g35330	981	326	36.51	8.7	Periplasmic
10	itb02g09490	663	220	25.48	5.33	Cytoplasmic
11	itb02g16280	702	233	26.87	5.6	Cytoplasmic
12	itb02g20780	675	224	25.91	5.89	Cytoplasmic
13	itb04g03890	666	221	25.68	5.4	Cytoplasmic
14	itb06g23080	669	222	25.36	4.85	Cytoplasmic
15	itb06g25110	744	247	28.37	5.26	Cytoplasmic
16	itb06g25120	714	237	26.99	5.42	Cytoplasmic
17	itb07g03710	1089	362	40.26	8.73	Outer membrane
18	itb08g03140	966	321	36.17	8.75	Periplasmic
19	itb08g06500	396	131	14.89	5.91	Cytoplasmic
20	itb08g15840	693	230	25.37	5.48	Cytoplasmic
21	itb08g15850	681	226	25.32	5.42	Cytoplasmic
22	itb09g30700	723	240	27.49	8.99	Cytoplasmic
23	itb10g18320	669	222	25.67	5.19	Cytoplasmic
24	itb11g02640	705	234	26.85	5.15	Cytoplasmic
25	itb11g02650	705	234	26.99	5.55	Cytoplasmic
26	itb11g03220	660	219	25.33	5.83	Cytoplasmic
27	itb11g03240	669	222	25.87	6.16	Cytoplasmic
28	itb11g03250	669	222	25.86	5.55	Cytoplasmic
29	itb11g03260	1170	389	43.69	8.83	Cytoplasmic
30	itb11g07110	711	236	26.93	5.29	Periplasmic
31	itb11g07120	804	267	30.3	6.84	Periplasmic
32	itb12g01870	675	224	25.29	5.3	Cytoplasmic
33	itb12g06130	333	110	12.91	9.19	Cytoplasmic
34	itb12g10540	672	223	25.25	6.4	Cytoplasmic
35	itb13g02460	657	218	25.1	6.01	Cytoplasmic
36	itb13g03920	723	240	27.19	8.87	Cytoplasmic
37	itb13g03940	720	239	27.03	5.77	Cytoplasmic
38	itb13g24640	684	227	25.94	5.81	Cytoplasmic
39	itb14g03990	678	225	24.78	5.97	Periplasmic
40	itb14g04060	687	228	25.61	5.34	Cytoplasmic
41	itb14g04110	684	227	25.23	5	Cytoplasmic
42	itb15g08110	672	223	25.19	5.56	Cytoplasmic
43	itb15g08120	660	219	25.16	6.55	Cytoplasmic
44	itb15g08130	672	223	25.25	5.92	Cytoplasmic
45	itb15g08150	678	225	25.3	5.91	Cytoplasmic
46	itb15g08160	573	190	21.51	6.54	Cytoplasmic
47	itb15g08170	672	223	24.92	6.92	Cytoplasmic
48	itb15g08180	675	224	25.25	6.02	Cytoplasmic
49	itb15g08190	672	223	25.31	5.54	Cytoplasmic
50	itb15g08200	672	223	25.18	5.65	Cytoplasmic
51	itb15g08210	759	252	28.38	5.67	Cytoplasmic

[1] * E-mail: wyzhang@yangtzeu.edu.cn:

Brasil

Brasil

Role of sweet potato GST genes in abiotic stress tolerance revealed by genomic and transcriptomic analyses

Abstract