Next Article in Journal
The Impact of Natural Compounds on S-Shaped Aβ42 Fibril: From Molecular Docking to Biophysical Characterization
Previous Article in Journal
Comprehensive Genome Analysis on the Novel Species Sphingomonas panacis DCY99T Reveals Insights into Iron Tolerance of Ginseng
Previous Article in Special Issue
Affinities of Terminal Inverted Repeats to DNA Binding Domain of Transposase Affect the Transposition Activity of Bamboo Ppmar2 Mariner-Like Element
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
IJMS
Volume 21
Issue 6
10.3390/ijms21062021
ijms-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

On the Trail of Tetu1: Genome-Wide Discovery of CACTA Transposable Elements in Sunflower Genome

by
Maria Ventimiglia
,
Claudio Pugliesi
,
Alberto Vangelisti
,
Gabriele Usai
,
Tommaso Giordani
,
Lucia Natali
,
Andrea Cavallini
and
Flavia Mascagni
*
Department of Agriculture, Food and Environment (DAFE), University of Pisa, Via del Borghetto, 80-56124 Pisa, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2020, 21(6), 2021; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms21062021
Submission received: 2 March 2020 / Revised: 13 March 2020 / Accepted: 14 March 2020 / Published: 16 March 2020
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Transposable Elements and Phenotypic Variation in Plants)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Much has been said about sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.) retrotransposons, representing the majority of the sunflower’s repetitive component. By contrast, class II transposons remained poorly described within this species, as they present low sequence conservation and are mostly lacking coding domains, making the identification and characterization of these transposable elements difficult. The transposable element Tetu1, is a non-autonomous CACTA-like element that has been detected in the coding region of a CYCLOIDEA (CYC) gene of a sunflower mutant, tubular ray flower (turf). Based on our knowledge of Tetu1, the publicly available genome of sunflower was fully scanned. A combination of bioinformatics analyses led to the discovery of 707 putative CACTA sequences: 84 elements with complete ends and 623 truncated elements. A detailed characterization of the identified elements allowed further classification into three subgroups of 347 elements on the base of their terminal repeat sequences. Only 39 encode a protein similar to known transposases (TPase), with 10 TPase sequences showing signals of activation. Finally, an analysis of the proximity of CACTA transposons to sunflower genes showed that the majority of CACTA elements are close to the nearest gene, whereas a relevant fraction resides within gene-encoding sequences, likely interfering with sunflower genome functionality and organization.

1. Introduction

Transposable elements (TEs) are dynamic genomic sequences capable of moving within the host genome by specific transposition mechanisms. TEs are very heterogeneous sequences and, with just a few exceptions, have been found in all eukaryotic genomes [1].
In plants, these elements often constitute the majority of genomic DNA, ranging from a minimum value of 15% of the smallest genomes as Arabidopsis spp., to more than 85% of the larger genomes, such as Zea mays ssp. mays and Hordeum vulgare [2,3]. Transposons have been conventionally classified: Class I elements, or retrotransposons (REs), by far the most numerous in animal and plant genomes, and Class II elements, or DNA transposons. RE elements transpose using a copy-and-paste mechanism, resulting in an identical copy of the starting element, whereas DNA transposons exploit a cut-and-paste mechanism, resulting in the excision of the sequence from the original locus [4]. In both cases, the TEs may integrate into new genomic loci, possibly affecting gene expression and function with consequent effects on phenotype, representing a crucial source of genetic variation [5,6,7,8]. These integrations may also result in peculiar phenomena where fragments of structural genes can be caught, rearranged, and subsequently transcribed by TEs during their transposition mechanisms, contributing to the evolution of novel chimeric genes [8,9].
Among TEs, CACTA represents one of the most widespread superfamilies of Class II transposons. CACTA is found in most genomes, spanning from algae [10] to vascular plants [11,12,13,14] and animals [15]. CACTA elements can reorganize host genomes, altering the structure and regulation of individual genes through several processes, such as transposition, insertion, excision, chromosome rupture, and ectopic recombination [16]. In maize, the classic enhancer/suppressor mutator (En/Spm) element was the first CACTA element identified independently by Peterson [17] and McClintock [18] and molecularly characterized by Pereira et al. [11].
The terminal regions of all identified CACTA TEs have a similar sequence organization. In particular, CACTA elements have terminal inverted repeats (TIRs) ranging from 10 to 28 bp, terminating with characteristic CACTA and TAGTG sequences flanked by target-site duplication (TSD) motifs, and several copies of sub-terminal repeats (TRs), ranging from 10 to 20 bp, which are repeated in a direct and inverted orientation. The low sequence conservation of TIRs and TRs makes the identification of CACTA elements difficult unless a transposase (TPase)-like domain is present in the body region. Based on the presence or absence of the TPase domain, CACTA elements can be considered autonomous or non-autonomous, respectively [19]. CACTA transposition is based on the formation of a hairpin structure with the two complementary TIRs and the binding of TPase to TRs [16]. If TIRs or TRs are deleted, transposition ceases. In Triticeae genomes, based on both structural similarity of TRs and phylogenetic analysis of multiple TR sequence alignments, CACTA TEs have been classified in distinct clades (e.g., Caspar, TAT-1, Mandrake, Isaac, Balduin, Jorge, and Enac) [19]. In the past few decades, many other CACTA elements were found in plants, such as Tam1 from snapdragon, Tgm1 from soybean, Tdc1 from carrot, Cs1 from sorghum, Tpn1 from Japanese morning glory, Ps1 from Petunia hybrida, Pis1 from pea, Tnr3 and Tnr12 from rice, and Cac1 from Arabidopsis thaliana [1,12,13,16,19,20].
A CYCLOIDEA (CYC) gene of sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.), named HaCYC2c, plays a key role in establishing the zygomorphic symmetry of ray flowers (Figure 1A). The sunflower mutant tubular ray flower (turf) is characterized by a shift of sterile ray flowers from zygomorphic to near-actinomorphic and hermaphrodite disk-like flowers (Figure 1B). Previous studies showed that a spontaneous insertion of a non-autonomous CACTA-like element (Figure 1C), known as the transposable element of turf1 (Tetu1), in the coding region of the HaCYC2c gene generates the turf mutant [20]. In particular, the insertion of Tetu1 in the TEOSINTE BRANCHED1/CYCLOIDEA/PROLIFERATING NUCLEAR ANTIGEN CELL FACTOR (TCP) 1 and 2 motif of the turf-HaCYC2c gene changes the reading frame for the encoded protein, inserting a premature stop codon in the sequence [20,21,22]. In sunflower, a similar phenotype, called tubular-rayed, caused by the insertion of a Class I TE in the HaCYC2c gene, was also described [23].
The genome of sunflower was estimated to be about 3.6 Gbp [24] and is composed of more than 81% TEs, of which the overwhelming majority are REs, mostly long terminal repeats (LTR) REs [25]. The DNA TEs were estimated to represent less than 3% of the nuclear DNA, whereas the CACTA superfamily represents about 0.13% [26]. Notably, only a few active CACTA elements were identified in sunflower [20,21,23].
Starting from our knowledge of the Tetu1 element, we performed a genome-wide analysis of CACTA elements into the sunflower reference genome, i.e., the HanXRQ inbred line [24], to estimate their abundance, gene proximity, and related expression patterns.

2. Results

2.1. Identification of Putative CACTA Transposon Sequences in the Sunflower Genome

A genome-wide discovery of CACTA TEs was performed on the available sunflower reference genome sequence, exploiting the complete CACTA elements characterized by Badouin et al. [24] and Tetu1 [20] as queries.
We identified 707 new putative CACTA sequences: 84 elements with complete ends (i.e., elements in which both TIRs present an intact CACTA motif) and 623 truncated elements (an annotation reporting the coordinates and features of the isolated elements can be found in Supplementary Material 1). The isolated transposons covered 13,649,233 out of 3,027,963,057 nt, corresponding to 0.45% of the reference genome of sunflower. Two CACTA sequences, retrieved on linkage groups 7 and 15 of the reference genome, showed 99.83% and 98.74% identity compared with Tetu1, respectively (Supplementary Material 2). These sequences likely represent two copies of Tetu1 in the sunflower’s reference genome.

2.2. Classification of CACTA Transposons Based on their TR Sequences and Abundance Estimation

As the majority of the identified CACTA transposons have no coding domains and vary considerably in size, the classification of the elements was based on the TR sequences according to Wicker et al. [19]. A multi-sequence alignment was performed with the terminal 300 bp of all the collected elements and, after improving the alignment area by removing sequences too divergent, a maximum likelihood phylogenetic analysis allowed for the classification of 347 TR sequences into three main distinct clades (Figure 2). The high variability of the sequences analyzed could allow the identification of several small clades; for clarity, we limited the subsequent analyses to the three clades resulting from basal significant separation. The NEWICK file, related to maximum likelihood analysis, can be found in Supplementary Material 3. An additional phylogenetic tree was constructed using iqTree (http://www.iqtree.org/) in order to double-check the classification of CACTAs; the result (Supplementary Material 4) is consistent with our classification.
This classification was tested by a second approach based on the similarity of TR sequences among the three different families, and displayed by an all vs. all dot-plot analysis. In Figure 3, the comparison of TRs from model members of the same family (e.g., A1 vs. A2) display a characteristic pattern called transposon signature, whereas TRs of elements belonging to different families show no signature. This is especially the case for members of the A family, which show a distinctive TR pattern.
In Table 1, the number of CACTA transposons, grouped by family, is reported. The major family, designated as A, contained 141 CACTA sequences, including the two identified copies of Tetu1 (the only two complete elements of the A family), none of which had apparent coding capacity. Two additional families, families B and C, resulted in 84 and 122 elements, respectively. We also report, for each family, a sequence conservation value, defined as the minimum percentage of identity resulting from the corresponding multi-sequence alignment.
To gain insight into the repetitiveness of CACTA TEs within the sunflower genome, we evaluated the abundance of each family by mapping Illumina reads with two different strategies and counting the per base average coverage and copy numbers of each element.
The first mapping method was performed using stringent mapping parameters, and then, the mapping was repeated with relaxed parameters to avoid target read loss. In Table S1, a comparison between the two mapping methods is reported. For the second approach, 95,526 reads out of 68,949,014 were mapped onto the 707 putative CACTA elements. Overall, the three families showed a comparable level of per base average coverage (Table 2). Due to their low conservation level, the majority of CACTAs identified remained unclassified and constituted the group showing the highest per base average coverage and the average number of copies.

2.3. Proximity of CACTA Transposons to Genes and Functional Analysis

To evaluate the potential impact of CACTA insertions on gene function, we analyzed the association between sequences belonging to the three families identified and the protein-encoding genes in the sunflower genome. On average, the majority of analyzed CACTAs lay close to genes, located between 1 and 50,000 bp upstream or downstream from the nearest gene (Figure 4). About 10% of the CACTAs of each identified family lay within a gene sequence.
To gain biological insight into the phenotypic traits of sunflower that could be affected by the presence of CACTA elements in the proximity of genes, we performed a functional analysis of genes close to CACTAs. Gene ontology (GO) distribution per gene showed that the most frequent terms are metabolic process (GO:0008152) and cellular process (GO:0009987) in the biological process class, whereas catalytic activity (GO:0003824) and binding (GO:0005488) were retrieved for molecular function, and for cellular component, cell (GO:0005623) and cell part (GO:0044464) are the most distributed terms (Figure 5).
Finally, concerning enrichment analysis, Fisher’s exact test was performed on the GO terms of genes in close proximity to each CACTA family compared with the GO distribution of the other known genes of sunflower. Only CACTA family A showed four enriched terms: dihydrolipollysine-residue acetyltransferase activity (GO:0004742), dihydrolipoamide S-acyltransferase activity (GO:0030523), S-acyltransferase activity (GO:0016417), dihydrolipollysine-residue (2-methylpropanoyl) transferase activity (GO:0043754). The GO terms percentage of enrichment analysis are shown in Figure 6. Similarly, GO enrichment analysis was performed for genes upstream/downstream and for genes with CACTA regions residing within. Overall, we detected six and four GO terms enriched in genes upstream and with CACTAs residing within, respectively. Concerning enrichment analysis of genes downstream to CACTA elements, no significant results were found (Table S2).

2.4. Expression Analysis of CACTA Transposons and Genes Closest to CACTA Transposons in the Sunflower Genome

The expression of CACTA TEs in the leaves of sunflower was obtained by mapping Illumina cDNA reads onto a collection of 39 TPase-encoding sequences belonging to TEs of CACTA families B and C. Our analyses showed that the expression of CACTA TEs is extremely low, with only 10 TPase sequences showing a slight signal of activation, except for one element (CACTA 224) of family C (Table 3).
Finally, the expression of sunflower genes residing in proximity to CACTA elements was analyzed. Linear regression revealed a weak but significant (coefficient: 0.09, p-value < 0.01) effect of the distance from these elements on the expression of sunflower genes, i.e., genes close or colocalized with CACTA elements had lower expression than genes farther to CACTA elements (Figure 7).

3. Discussion

The previous decades have been marked by an exponential increase in genomic data, which have facilitated, among many other studies, the identification and characterization of repeated sequences. However, CACTA elements have remained poorly characterized for a long time. Despite being the most abundant DNA transposons (accounting for 10% of some grass genomes [19,27,28,29]), the identification and characterization of these TEs is difficult due to their low sequence conservation, which is mostly limited to the TR regions, and also because the majority of CACTA TEs are deletion derivatives not encoding a TPase [19].
Exploiting the genomic resources that are now available for sunflower, we performed a genome-wide analysis of CACTA elements in the sunflower genome to gain insight into the abundance, gene proximity, and related expression patterns of this superfamily, which previous studies have shown impact phenotypic variation. For example, in the Asteraceae, the members of CYCLOIDEA (CYC) 2 clade of TCP transcription factors are essential to control flower symmetry and are also crucial for the inflorescence (capitulum) architecture [22,30]. The ligulate-like inflorescence showed by the Chrysanthemoides (Chry) mutant of sunflower is the consequence of a small CACTA (1034 bp) inserted 558 bp before the initiation codon of the HaCYC2c gene [23,31]. This CACTA alters the transcriptional activity of HaCYC2c, in which the expression extends into the inflorescence, suggesting that the insertion of the TE is an essential step to generate the Chry phenotype. In contrast, when the basal region of the bHLH TCP motif of the HaCYC2c gene is interrupted by the insertion of the incomplete CACTA transposon Tetu1, the ray flowers are transformed from zygomorphic to actinomorphic, assuming a resemblance to the disk flowers [20,21,32]. In this mutant, (turf) the ray flowers also recover their hermaphroditic features, developing both male and female reproductive organs.
Based on our knowledge of the Tetu1 sequence and exploiting the complete CACTA elements characterized by Badouin et al. [24], we identified 707 new putative CACTA sequences corresponding to 0.45% of the sunflower genome. Usually, CACTA elements are not considered to explain the large genome sizes found in plants. However, CACTA families can be highly abundant; for instance, Tpo1 in Lolium perenne and Caspar in Triticeae have contributed to the expansion of the genome size of their host [19,33,34].
Concerning the CACTA elements, we were able to subdivide 347 sequences into three families based on the TR sequence conservation (Figure 2). The majority of the identified TEs were found to be non-autonomous, lacking the coding portion. For instance, family A consists of a group of non-autonomous elements sharing a sufficient level of similarity to be considered a clade. Evidence proved that some non-autonomous elements can be cross activated by autonomous partners belonging to different families [19]. This seems to be the case of Tetu1, which, despite being a non-autonomous element and also being similar to two elements of the A family, appears to be mobile due to the action of other TPases [32]. We isolated 39 TPase-encoding sequences from our database of sunflower CACTA elements, 10 of which show a weak signal of activation, and only one was found to be expressed more.
On average, the majority of the analyzed CACTAs found to be in close proximity to sunflower genes are located between 1 and 50,000 bp from the closest gene. TEs may sometimes be associated with regulatory elements of genes, thus, possibly influencing gene expression [23,31,35,36,37]. There is a notable case of a TE inserted 65 kb upstream of the teosinte branched1 (tb1) gene of maize, which acts as an enhancer of gene expression [38]. However, a relevant fraction of elements of the identified CACTA families is found within a gene coding sequence. Functional analysis showed that most distributed GO terms of genes in close proximity to CACTA elements belong to broad biological classes (i.e., metabolic process, cellular processes, and cell part), so the insertion of CACTA may have resulted in the modification of major biological processes during the evolution of sunflower, or subsequently to an activation that might have changed the expression pattern of genes that have important biological functions. As shown by enrichment analysis, a significant part of the genes in proximity to CACTA elements are involved in acyltransferase activity (Figure 6). CACTA elements were shown to modify the expression of acyltransferases encoding transcripts, such as chalcone-synthase (chs) of A. majus [35]. In the unstable nivea locus of this species, an autonomous CACTA element Tam1 was found inserted 17 bp upstream of the chs TATA box, a gene encoding for a key enzyme of the flavonoid/isoflavonoid biosynthesis pathway. The characteristic variegated phenotype of the snapdragon flowers originates from the somatic excision of Tam1.
Finally, the expression analysis of genes in close proximity to CACTAs revealed that most expressed genes lay in the range of 50,000 bp up or downstream of the sequence, whereas genes with a lower rate of expression hold CACTA within the sequence (Figure 7). Therefore, this analysis might suggest that the insertion of a CACTA within a gene could lead to the inactivation of host gene expression.

4. Material and Methods

4.1. Sequence Collection

Putative CACTA elements were isolated from the HanXRQr1.0 version of the sunflower genome sequence [24], deposited at the NCBI site (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/) (WGS project number PRJNA396063). Putative CACTA sequences were isolated by using full-length elements retrieved by Badouin et al. [24] along with the sequence of Tetu1 [20,21] as a query for a BLASTN search (-E-value 1e-10). This approach was found to be adequate for this type of particularly heterogeneous sequence. Collected elements were subsequently filtered for the presence of TR sequences distinguishing elements with complete ends, in which both TIRs present an intact CACTA motif, and truncated elements. The collection of putative CACTA elements was then used to mask the reference genome using RepeatMasker v4.0.3 [39] to obtain a more precise localization and coverage estimation. Masking results were analyzed using the Bedtools v2.27.0 [40] merge function and were then manually adjusted.

4.2. Abundance Estimation and DNA Mapping Procedure

For each CACTA sequence, the genomic abundance was first assessed by mapping DNA reads of the sunflower genome, downloaded from NCBI (SRR5004633), according to the strategy already used for repetitive sequences in Mascagni et al. [41,42]. Illumina HiSeq 2000 reads were preprocessed to remove Illumina adapters, then quality-trimmed using the default settings, and the lengths of reads were defined at 90 nt. The mapping procedure was tested using two different pipelines: it was first performed using CLC Genomics Workbench 9.5.3 (CLC-BIO, Aarhus, Denmark), with stringent parameters (length fraction = 0.9, similarity fraction = 0.9, mismatch penalty = 1, and gap penalty = 1). Afterward, BWA MEM version 0.7.13-r1126 [43] was used without enforcing a mapping quality cutoff (MAPQ ≥ 0). Then, Bedtools v. 2.27.0 was used to compute the average per-base coverage.
To compare the genomic redundancy of CACTA elements, seven single-copy genes previously published and wet validated [26,44] were used. The seven selected genes encode a dehydrin (FR670619.1), a heat shock protein (LOC110868885), a ζ-carotene desaturase (FR671183.1), a drought-responsive-element-binding protein (LOC110872740), a NAC-domain transcription regulator (FR671350.1), an auxin-binding protein (FR671175.1), and an ABA-responsive C5 protein (FR671167.1). The mapping was performed by using the same Illumina sequence read set as before. The analysis allowed us to estimate the CACTA copy numbers as the ratio between the per-base coverage of the CACTA elements and the coverage of single-copy regions.

4.3. Evolutionary Analysis using the Maximum Likelihood Method

A multiple sequence alignment of the terminal repeats (300 bp) of the identified putative CACTA sequences was performed using MAFFT version 7 [45]. To increase the number of gap-free sites, the MaxAlign 1.1 Server [46] was used, removing any sequences with too many gaps in the post-process stage of alignments, improving the alignment area. The evolutionary history of CACTAs was inferred by using the maximum likelihood method based on the Tamura–Nei model [47]. The bootstrap consensus tree was inferred from 500 replicates [48]. Analyses were conducted by using MEGA X [49]. Two TRs were selected for each family and used to perform a dot-plot analysis with DOTTER [50] for each pairwise combination. Sequence conservation was computed performing a multi-sequence alignment for each family with ClustalX [51] and considering the minimum percentage of identity value.

4.4. Analysis of Proximity of CACTA Elements to Genes

To estimate the distance and the sequence of the closest gene to each CACTA element, the coordinates of the CACTA elements were compared to those of the known genes of sunflower [24] by using Bedtools. Then, the corresponding gene sequences were retrieved from the HanXRQ genome annotation database (https://www.heliagene.org/HanXRQ-SUNRISE/). Gene ontology (GO) terms for each gene were extracted from the available b2g annotation file provided by the Heliagene website (https://www.heliagene.org/). Subsequently, GOs were grouped into three principal classes (molecular function, cellular component, and biological processes) and analyzed with Fisher’s exact test using Blast2GO [52]. Enrichment analysis was performed between GO terms of genes proximal to CACTAs and the whole set of sunflower genes; GOs were considered significantly enriched for an FDR-corrected p-value < 0.05. The effect of CACTA proximity on gene expression was tested with a linear regression.

4.5. TPase Domain Identification and CACTA Transposon Expression Analysis

Isolated CACTAs were screened for the occurrence of the TPase domain within their sequence, by using the domain-based annotation of transposable elements tool (DANTE, [4]). DANTE accomplishes domain searching by comparing the LASTAL alignment tool results against a database of Viridiplantae protein domains derived from TEs.
The expression of TPase domains and that of genes in close proximity to CACTAs were analyzed using Illumina cDNA paired-end libraries publicly available at the NCBI SRA (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sra/, accession number SRP092742) [24]. Such libraries were obtained from the leaves of sunflower plants grown under hydroponic conditions, as described by Badouin et al. [24].
High-quality paired-end reads of 45 nucleotide lengths were mapped onto isolated nucleotide sequences of the protein domain by using CLC Genomics Workbench (version 9.5.3, CLC-BIO, Aarhus, Denmark). The parameters used for the TPase domain were: similarity fraction = 0.9, length fraction = 0.9, mismatch penalty = 1, and gap open penalty = 1. The parameters used for gene mapping were the same, except for mismatch and gap penalties (mismatch penalty = 2 and gap open penalty = 3). The raw number of mapped reads for each TPase and gene sequences was normalized by calculating the number of mapped reads per million reads that were used for mapping (MRxM).

5. Conclusions

Although, in recent years, the role of repeated elements has been largely reconsidered, CACTA elements have remained poorly studied. Our study represents the first genome-wide analysis of such elements for sunflower, a model species for studying genome evolution, known for its huge repetitive component. A number of elements were fully characterized, identifying three clades of sunflower-specific CACTAs that include complete and incomplete elements among which we found two copies of Tetu1.
The majority of CACTA elements were found to be in close proximity to the nearest sunflower gene, whereas another relevant fraction is located within gene-encoding sequences with an impact on the expression of those genes.
Finally, we found that some CACTA elements are sporadically transcribed at a low rate in sunflower leaves, except for one element expressed at a high level. These elements are potential candidates for further studies to ascertain the occurrence of new insertions of CACTA elements in the sunflower genome that could be used for a transposon-tagging system similar to those based on En/Spm and Ac/Ds elements.

Supplementary Materials

The following are available online at https://www.mdpi.com/1422-0067/21/6/2021/s1.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, C.P., L.N., A.C., and F.M.; data curation, M.V., C.P., AV, G.U., T.G., and F.M.; investigation, M.V., C.P., AV, G.U., T.G., and F.M; methodology, M.V., AV, G.U., and F.M.; writing—original draft, M.V. and F.M.; writing—review and editing, M.V., C.P., A.V., G.U., T.G, L.N., A.C. and F.M. All authors have read and agree to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was supported by the Department of Agriculture, Food, and Environment of the University of Pisa, Italy, Project “Plantomics”.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Abbreviations

ChryChrysanthemoides
CYCCYCLOIDEA gene
GOGene ontology
LTRLong terminal repeats
REsRetrotransposons
TCPTEOSINTE BRANCHED1/CYCLOIDEA/PROLIFERATING NUCLEAR ANTIGEN CELL FACTOR
TEsTransposable elements
Tetu1Transposable element of turf1
TIRsTerminal inverted repeats
TRsSub-terminal repeats
TPaseTransposase domain
TSDTarget-site duplication motif
turfTubular ray flower

References

  1. Wicker, T.; Sabot, F.; Hua-Van, A.; Bennetzen, J.L.; Capy, P.; Chalhoub, B.; Flavell, A.; Leroy, P.; Morgante, M.; Panaud, O.; et al. A unified classification system for eukaryotic transposable elements. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2007, 8, 973–982. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Schnable, P.S.; Ware, D.; Fulton, R.S.; Stein, J.C.; Wei, F.; Pasternak, S.; Liang, C.; Zhang, J.; Fulton, L.; Graves, T.A.; et al. The B73 maize genome: Complexity, diversity, and dynamics. Science 2009, 326, 1112–1115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  3. Tenaillon, M.I.; Hollister, J.D.; Gaut, B.S. A triptych of the evolution of plant transposable elements. Trends Plant Sci. 2010, 15, 471–478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Neumann, P.; Novák, P.; Hoštáková, N.; Macas, J. Systematic survey of plant LTR-retrotransposons elucidates phylogenetic relationships of their polyprotein domains and provides a reference for element classification. Mob. DNA 2019, 10, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Slotkin, R.K.; Martienssen, R. Transposable elements and the epigenetic regulation of the genome. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2007, 8, 272–285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Butelli, E.; Licciardello, C.; Zhang, Y.; Liu, J.; Mackay, S.; Bailey, P.; Reforgiato-Recupero, G.; Martin, C. Retrotransposons control fruit-specific, cold-dependent accumulation of anthocyanins in blood oranges. Plant Cell 2012, 24, 1242–1255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  7. Falchi, R.; Vendramin, E.; Zanon, L.; Scalabrin, S.; Verde, I.; Vizzotto, G.; Morgante, M. Three distinct mutational mechanisms acting on a single gene underpin the origin of yellow flesh in peach. Plant J. 2013, 76, 175–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  8. Lisch, D. How important are transposons for plant evolution? Nat. Rev. Genet. 2013, 14, 49–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Catoni, M.; Jonesman, T.; Cerruti, E.; Paszkowski, J. Mobilization of Pack-CACTA transposons in Arabidopsis suggests the mechanism of gene shuffling. Nucleic Acids Res. 2019, 47, 1311–1320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  10. Ueki, N.; Nishii, I. Idaten is a new cold-inducible transposon of Volvox carteri that can be used for tagging developmentally important genes. Genetics 2008, 180, 1343–1353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  11. Pereira, A.; Cuypers, H.; Gierl, A.; Schwarz-Sommer, Z.; Saedler, H. Molecular analysis of the En/Spm transposable element system of Zea mays. EMBO J. 1986, 5, 835–841. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Snowden, K.C.; Napoli, C.A. Psl: a novel Spm-like transposable element from Petunia hybrida. Plant J. 1998, 14, 43–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Chopra, S.; Brendel, V.; Zhang, J.; Axtell, J.D.; Peterson, T. Molecular characterization of a mutable pigmentation phenotype and isolation of the first active transposable element from Sorghum bicolor. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1999, 96, 15330–15335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  14. Miura, A.; Yonebayashi, S.; Watanabe, K.; Toyama, T.; Shimada, H.; Kakutani, T. Mobilization of transposons by a mutation abolishing full DNA methylation in Arabidopsis. Nature 2001, 411, 212–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Novick, P.A.; Smith, J.D.; Floumanhaft, M.; Ray, D.A.; Boissinot, S. The evolution and diversity of DNA transposons in the genome of the lizard Anolis carolinensis. Genome Biol. Evol. 2011, 3, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  16. Fedoroff, N.V. Molecular genetics and epigenetics of CACTA elements. Methods Mol. Biol. 2013, 1057, 177–192. [Google Scholar]
  17. Peterson, P.A. A mutable pale green locus in maize. Genetics 1953, 38, 682–683. [Google Scholar]
  18. McClintock, B. Mutations in maize and chromosomal aberrations in Neurospora. Carnegie Inst. Wash. Year Book 1954, 53, 254–260. [Google Scholar]
  19. Wicker, T.; Guyot, R.; Yahiaoui, N.; Keller, B. CACTA transposons in Triticeae. A diverse family of high-copy repetitive elements. Plant Physiol. 2003, 132, 52–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  20. Fambrini, M.; Salvini, M.; Pugliesi, C. A transposon-mediate inactivation of a CYCLOIDEA-like gene originates polysymmetric and androgynous ray flowers in Helianthus annuus. Genetica 2011, 139, 1521–1529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Fambrini, M.; Basile, A.; Salvini, M.; Pugliesi, C. Excisions of a defective transposable CACTA element (Tetu1) generate new alleles of a CYCLOIDEA-like gene of Helianthus annuus. Gene 2014, 549, 198–207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Fambrini, M.; Pugliesi, C. CYCLOIDEA 2 clade genes: key players in the control of floral symmetry, inflorescence architecture, and reproductive organ development. Plant Mol. Biol. Rep. 2017, 35, 20–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Chapman, M.A.; Tang, S.; Draeger, D.; Nambeesan, S.; Shaffer, H.; Barb, J.G.; Knapp, S.J.; Burke, J.M. Genetic analysis of floral symmetry in Van Gogh’s sunflowers reveals independent recruitment of CYCLOIDEA genes in the Asteraceae. PLoS Genet. 2012, 8, e1002628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Badouin, H.; Gouzy, J.; Grassa, C.J.; Murat, F.; Staton, S.E.; Cottret, L.; Lelandais-Brière, C.; Owens, G.L.; Carrère, S.; Mayjonade, B.; et al. The sunflower genome provides insights into oil metabolism, flowering and Asterid evolution. Nature 2017, 546, 148–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Mascagni, F.; Barghini, E.; Giordani, T.; Rieseberg, L.H.; Cavallini, A.; Natali, L. Repetitive DNA and plant domestication: variation in copy number and proximity to genes of LTR-retrotransposons among wild and cultivated sunflower (Helianthus annuus) genotypes. Genome Biol. Evol. 2015, 7, 3368–3382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  26. Natali, L.; Cossu, R.M.; Barghini, E.; Giordani, T.; Buti, M.; Mascagni, F.; Morgante, M.; Gill, N.; Kane, N.C.; Rieseberg, L.; et al. The repetitive component of the sunflower genome as revealed by different procedures for assembling next generation sequencing reads. BMC Genomics 2013, 14, 686. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  27. Kwon, S.-J.; Hong, S.-W.; Son, J.-H.; Lee, J.K.; Cha, Y.-S.; Eun, M.-Y.; Kim, N.-S. CACTA and MITE transposon distributions on a genetic map of rice using F15 RILs derived from Milyang 23 and Gihobyeo hybrids. Mol. Cells 2006, 21, 360–366. [Google Scholar]
  28. Sabot, F.; Simon, D.; Bernard, M. Plant transposable elements, with an emphasis on grass species. Euphytica 2004, 139, 227–247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Sergeeva, E.M.; Salina, E.A.; Adonina, I.G.; Chalhoub, B. Evolutionary analysis of the CACTA DNA-transposon Caspar across wheat species using sequence comparison and in situ hybridization. Mol. Genet. Genomics 2010, 284, 11–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Chapman, M.A.; Leebens-Mack, J.H.; Burke, J.M. Positive selection and expression divergence following gene duplication in the sunflower CYCLOIDEA gene family. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2008, 25, 1260–1273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  31. Fambrini, M.; Salvini, M.; Basile, A.; Pugliesi, C. Transposon-dependent induction of Vincent van Gogh’s sunflowers: Exceptions revealed. genesis 2014, 52, 315–327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Fambrini, M.; Pugliesi, C. Mobilization of the Tetu1 transposable element of Helianthus annuus: evidence for excision in different developmental stages. Biol. Plantarum 2017, 61, 55–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Bennetzen, J.L. Transposable element contributions to plant gene and genome evolution. Plant Mol. Biol. 2000, 42, 251–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Langdon, T.; Jenkins, G.; Hasterok, R.; Jones, R.N.; King, I.P. A high-copy-number CACTA family transposon in temperate grasses and cereals. Genetics 2003, 163, 1097–1108. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  35. Bonas, U.; Sommer, H.; Harrison, B.J.; Saedler, H. The transposable element Tam1 of Antirrhinum majus is 17 kb long. Mol. Gen. Genet. 1984, 194, 138–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Roccaro, M.; Li, Y.; Sommer, H.; Saedler, H. ROSINA (RSI) is part of a CACTA transposable element, TamRSI, and links flower development to transposon activity. Mol. Genet. Genomics 2007, 278, 243–254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  37. Sabot, F.; Guyot, R.; Wicker, T.; Chantret, N.; Laubin, B.; Chalhoub, B.; Leroy, P.; Sourdille, P.; Bernard, M. Updating of transposable element annotations from large wheat genomic sequences reveals diverse activities and gene associations. Mol. Genet. Genomics 2005, 274, 119–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Studer, A.; Zhao, Q.; Ross-Ibarra, J.; Doebly, J. Identification of a functional transposon insertion in the maize domestication gene tb1. Nat. Genet. 2011, 43, 1160–1164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  39. Smit, A.F.A.; Hubley, R.; Green, P. RepeatMasker Open-4.0. 2013–2015. Available online: http://repeatmasker.org/ (accessed on 1 December 2019).
  40. Quinlan, A.R.; Hall, I.M. BEDTools: a flexible suite of utilities for comparing genomic features. Bioinformatics 2010, 26, 841–842. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  41. Mascagni, F.; Cavallini, A.; Giordani, T.; Natali, L. Different histories of two highly variable LTR retrotransposons in sunflower species. Gene 2017, 634, 5–14. [Google Scholar]
  42. Mascagni, F.; Vangelisti, A.; Giordani, T.; Cavallini, A.; Natali, L. Specific LTR-retrotransposons show copy number variations between wild and cultivated sunflowers. Genes 2018, 9, 433. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  43. Li, H. Aligning sequence reads, clone sequences and assembly contigs with BWA-MEM. arXiv 2013, arXiv:1303.3997. [Google Scholar]
  44. Giordani, T.; Buti, M.; Natali, L.; Pugliesi, C.; Cattonaro, F.; Morgante, M.; Cavallini, A. An analysis of sequence variability in eight genes putatively involved in drought response in sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.). Theor. Appl. Genet. 2011, 122, 1039–1049. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Katoh, K.; Rozewicki, J.; Yamada, K.D. MAFFT online service: multiple sequence alignment, interactive sequence choice and visualization. Brief. Bioinform. 2019, 20, 1160–1166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  46. Gouveia-Oliveira, R.; Sackett, P.W.; Pedersen, A.G. MaxAlign: maximizing usable data in an alignment. BMC Bioinformatics 2007, 8, 312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  47. Tamura, K.; Nei, M. Estimation of the number of nucleotide substitutions in the control region of mitochondrial DNA in humans and chimpanzees. Mol. Biol. Evol. 1993, 10, 512–526. [Google Scholar]
  48. Felsenstein, J. Confidence limits on phylogenies: An approach using the bootstrap. Evolution 1985, 39, 783–791. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Kumar, S.; Stecher, G.; Li, M.; Knyaz, C.; Tamura, K. MEGA X: Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis across computing platforms. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2018, 35, 1547–1549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Sonnhammer, E.L.L.; Durbin, R. A dot-matrix program with dynamic threshold control suited for genomic DNA and protein sequence analysis. Gene 1995, 167, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  51. Larkin, M.A.; Blackshields, G.; Brown, N.P.; Chenna, R.; McGettigan, P.A.; McWilliam, H.; Valentin, F.; Wallace, I.M.; Wilm, A.; Lopez, R.; et al. Clustal W and Clustal X version 2.0. Bioinformatics 2007, 23, 2947–2948. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  52. Conesa, A.; Götz, S.; García-Gómez, J.M.; Terol, J.; Talón, M.; Robles, M. Blast2GO: a universal tool for annotation, visualization and analysis in functional genomics research. Bioinformatics 2005, 21, 3674–3676. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
Ijms 21 02021 g001 550
Figure 1. The phenotypic effect of the insertion of the CACTA-like transposable element (TE) in the TEOSINTE BRANCHED1/CYCLOIDEA/PROLIFERATING NUCLEAR ANTIGEN CELL FACTOR (TCP) 1 and 2 motif of a CYCLOIDEA gene (HaCYC2c) controlling flower symmetry in sunflower [20]. (A) Inflorescence of normal sunflower with zygomorphic ray flowers. (B) Inflorescence of the tubular ray flower (turf) mutant. (C) Schematic representation of the coding region (CDS) of the HaCYC2c gene in the turf mutant. The HaCYC2c conserved domains, TCP and R, are boxed in blue and brown, respectively. The CACTA-like transposable element of turf1 (Tetu1) is inserted into the basic motif of the TCP domain (427 bp after the start codon). The insertion originates a perfect three bp (ATA, in red) target site duplication (TSD). The structure of both 5′ (360 bp) and 3′ (400 bp) regions, recognized by terminal inverted repeats (TIRs) and sub-terminal repeats (TRs) of Tetu1, are depicted. The red arrows indicate the TIRs; the colored triangles indicate the TR regions of 9–11 bp units that are repeated in direct and inverted orientations. Each triangle color distinguishes an identical sequence in direct or inverted orientations. The TR sequences were identified by dot-plot analyses [19,20].
Figure 1. The phenotypic effect of the insertion of the CACTA-like transposable element (TE) in the TEOSINTE BRANCHED1/CYCLOIDEA/PROLIFERATING NUCLEAR ANTIGEN CELL FACTOR (TCP) 1 and 2 motif of a CYCLOIDEA gene (HaCYC2c) controlling flower symmetry in sunflower [20]. (A) Inflorescence of normal sunflower with zygomorphic ray flowers. (B) Inflorescence of the tubular ray flower (turf) mutant. (C) Schematic representation of the coding region (CDS) of the HaCYC2c gene in the turf mutant. The HaCYC2c conserved domains, TCP and R, are boxed in blue and brown, respectively. The CACTA-like transposable element of turf1 (Tetu1) is inserted into the basic motif of the TCP domain (427 bp after the start codon). The insertion originates a perfect three bp (ATA, in red) target site duplication (TSD). The structure of both 5′ (360 bp) and 3′ (400 bp) regions, recognized by terminal inverted repeats (TIRs) and sub-terminal repeats (TRs) of Tetu1, are depicted. The red arrows indicate the TIRs; the colored triangles indicate the TR regions of 9–11 bp units that are repeated in direct and inverted orientations. Each triangle color distinguishes an identical sequence in direct or inverted orientations. The TR sequences were identified by dot-plot analyses [19,20].
Ijms 21 02021 g001
Ijms 21 02021 g002 550
Figure 2. Phylogenetic tree of CACTA elements based on the TR sequences (347 sequences clustered). Bootstrap values higher than 0.9 are shown for basal nodes.
Figure 2. Phylogenetic tree of CACTA elements based on the TR sequences (347 sequences clustered). Bootstrap values higher than 0.9 are shown for basal nodes.
Ijms 21 02021 g002
Ijms 21 02021 g003 550
Figure 3. Matrix reporting the dot-plots for each pairwise combination of the 6 TR sequences (2 sequences from A, B, and C family, respectively).
Figure 3. Matrix reporting the dot-plots for each pairwise combination of the 6 TR sequences (2 sequences from A, B, and C family, respectively).
Ijms 21 02021 g003
Ijms 21 02021 g004 550
Figure 4. Bar plots reporting the proximity of CACTA TEs to the closest sunflower gene. Results are reported for families A, B, and C. Proximity to the closest gene is expressed in kilo base pairs (kbp).
Figure 4. Bar plots reporting the proximity of CACTA TEs to the closest sunflower gene. Results are reported for families A, B, and C. Proximity to the closest gene is expressed in kilo base pairs (kbp).
Ijms 21 02021 g004
Ijms 21 02021 g005 550
Figure 5. Gene ontology (GO) distribution for genes in close proximity to elements of different CACTA families. GO terms were subdivided into three major ontology classes: cellular component, molecular function, and biological process.
Figure 5. Gene ontology (GO) distribution for genes in close proximity to elements of different CACTA families. GO terms were subdivided into three major ontology classes: cellular component, molecular function, and biological process.
Ijms 21 02021 g005
Ijms 21 02021 g006 550
Figure 6. Enriched gene ontology (GO) terms distribution. GO terms of genes in close proximity to elements of CACTA family A (red bars) compared to GO terms of the whole gene set of sunflower (blue bars).
Figure 6. Enriched gene ontology (GO) terms distribution. GO terms of genes in close proximity to elements of CACTA family A (red bars) compared to GO terms of the whole gene set of sunflower (blue bars).
Ijms 21 02021 g006
Ijms 21 02021 g007 550
Figure 7. Expression (in mapped reads per million) of sunflower genes according to the distance from CACTA elements.
Figure 7. Expression (in mapped reads per million) of sunflower genes according to the distance from CACTA elements.
Ijms 21 02021 g007
Table
Table 1. Description of the three CACTA families identified in the sunflower genome.
Table 1. Description of the three CACTA families identified in the sunflower genome.
FAMILYNO. OF ELEMENTSCOMPLETE ELEMENTSTRUNCATED ELEMENTSTPASE DOMAINSEQUENCE CONSERVATION
A1412139-64
B8413712752
C122191031245
TOTAL3473431339
Table
Table 2. Mapping results of the sunflower nuclear genomic reads onto the total collection of putative CACTA elements.
Table 2. Mapping results of the sunflower nuclear genomic reads onto the total collection of putative CACTA elements.
FAMILYFAMILY PER BASE AVERAGE COVERAGEAVERAGE NUMBER OF COPIES
A2.501.29
B2.661.38
C2.721.41
UNKNOWN7.123.68
Table
Table 3. Expressed transposase (TPase) domains of CACTA elements. The expression is reported in mapped reads per million, and for each element, the family is reported.
Table 3. Expressed transposase (TPase) domains of CACTA elements. The expression is reported in mapped reads per million, and for each element, the family is reported.
FAMILYCACTA ELEMENT NAMEMAPPED READS PER MILLION
BCACTA 6410.0127
BCACTA 5060.0141
BCACTA 3140.0150
BCACTA 2030.0168
BCACTA 2920.0282
BCACTA 6100.0430
CCACTA 4920.008
CCACTA 5850.008
CCACTA 2420.023
CCACTA 2240.949

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Ventimiglia, M.; Pugliesi, C.; Vangelisti, A.; Usai, G.; Giordani, T.; Natali, L.; Cavallini, A.; Mascagni, F. On the Trail of Tetu1: Genome-Wide Discovery of CACTA Transposable Elements in Sunflower Genome. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2020, 21, 2021. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms21062021

AMA Style

Ventimiglia M, Pugliesi C, Vangelisti A, Usai G, Giordani T, Natali L, Cavallini A, Mascagni F. On the Trail of Tetu1: Genome-Wide Discovery of CACTA Transposable Elements in Sunflower Genome. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2020; 21(6):2021. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms21062021

Chicago/Turabian Style

Ventimiglia, Maria, Claudio Pugliesi, Alberto Vangelisti, Gabriele Usai, Tommaso Giordani, Lucia Natali, Andrea Cavallini, and Flavia Mascagni. 2020. "On the Trail of Tetu1: Genome-Wide Discovery of CACTA Transposable Elements in Sunflower Genome" International Journal of Molecular Sciences 21, no. 6: 2021. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms21062021

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop