|
Plant Physiol, January 2001, Vol. 125, pp. 149-151
Plant Transposable Elements. A Hard Act to Follow
Susan R.
Wessler*
Departments of Botany and Genetics, Miller Plant Sciences Building,
University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia 30602
 |
INTRODUCTION |
The discovery and genetic
characterization of plant transposable elements (TEs) led to a
revolution in our understanding of the composition and dynamic
potential of the genetic material in virtually all organisms. Most of
these breakthroughs occurred between 30 and 50 years ago. It was during
this time that TEs were discovered in maize (Zea mays) and
several aspects of their genetic behavior were characterized. Through
the study of spotted kernels and sectored flowers, McClintock and her
contemporaries discovered: (a) the existence of multiple TE families
with autonomous and nonautonomous members that are normal residents of
the genome, (b) that elements can move within and between chromosomes
where they can alter gene expression or serve as sites of chromosome breakage or rearrangement, (c) that excision is often imprecise and
reinsertion is often to a linked locus, and (d) that elements can exist
in the genome in a quiescent state that is subject to reactivation by
biotic and abiotic means collectively termed "genomic stress." This
era of discovery and its relevance to modern biology is reviewed by
Fedoroff (9). In addition, the story of how the genomic stress
hypothesis came to fruition is summarized in McClintock's Nobel
lecture (18). This view of the genome as responsive and dynamic, that
is, something more than a collection of genes, heralded the start of
the current genomics era.
The purpose of these historical notes is to review conceptual
breakthroughs that have occurred over the past quarter century. I would
venture to guess that for most of us involved in the study of plant TEs
during this time, the historical legacy has been a hard act to follow.
However, I will argue that recent studies, especially those in the last
5 years, have raised the bar on what constitutes the dynamic genome and
have placed plants once again at the forefront of transposon studies.
 |
PHASE I: THE DNA ELEMENTS CHARACTERIZING OUR GENETIC
LEGACY |
Although the historical legacy may have been a hard act to follow,
the large collections of TE-induced alleles generated during that era
provided most of the raw materials used by the first generation of
plant molecular biologists. What I have arbitrarily called phase I in
the molecular analysis of plant TEs focused on two areas: (a) the
isolation of genes and their TE-induced alleles and the subsequent
characterization of TE families, and (b) understanding the mechanisms
underlying the diversity of unstable phenotypes. Many of the first
plant genes cloned in the early 1980s were chosen because they had
TE-induced alleles. These include the sh1, adh1,
and wx genes from maize and the nivea gene from Antirhinnum majus. From their mutant alleles came the first
characterized Ds, Ac, and Tam elements
(3, 11, 21). The isolation of members of the other prominent plant TE
families including Mutator, Spm/En, and other Tam elements occurred in numerous labs around the
world including those of the Burrs, Freeling, Peterson/Saedler,
Starlinger, Walbot, and Carpenter/Coen (for review, see 17)
This first wave of plant elements was distinguished by their high
frequency of somatic and germinal instability. All were DNA or class 2 elements, a group that is characterized by short inverted terminal
repeats and transposition via a DNA intermediate. That is, the element
usually excises from one site and reinserts elsewhere. Analyses of
complex and diverse mutant phenotypes induced by insertion and excision
of class 2 elements into plant genes revealed a myriad of ways that
these elements can modify gene regulation. These included: (a) the
discovery that transposon footprints are usually left behind when
elements exicise (21), (b) that Ds and dSpm
elements function as introns (15, 23), and (c) that promoter insertions
can alter tissue-specific patterns of expression (8).
In retrospect, the most important discoveries that came out of this
period were the analyses of what McClintock called changes in phase, or
the reversible switch in element activity. The correlation between
element activity and methylation state was first documented for the
Mutator element (6) and foreshadowed similar correlations for other TEs and normal plant genes.
With these elements in one hand and a large collection of previously
isolated TE-induced alleles in the other, transposon tagging strategies
were developed (for review, see 10) that permitted the rapid isolation
of many structural and regulatory genes in both maize and
Antirrhinum majus. The importance of transposon tagging protocols for gene isolation was recognized by those working with plants that lack well-characterized endogenous systems. This recognition led to the introduction of the maize elements into a
variety of plant species, beginning with tobacco (Nicotiona tubacum; 1), and has resulted in the isolation of many
genes, the first being a floral color gene from petunia (Petunia
hybrida; 7) and the most prominent being the N
resistance gene from tobacco (24). It is unfortunate that the success
of forward genetic approaches like transposon tagging is severely
limited by the large size of most plant genomes and the requirement for
a visible mutant phenotype. To circumvent these problems, site-selected
transposon tagging protocols (also called reverse genetics) using the
Mutator element were developed (2).
PHASE 2: TEs OF HIGH COPY NUMBER
Although the characterization of class 2 elements dominated the
first 10 years of the molecular era, it soon became clear that the low
copy numbers of these elements precluded their having a significant
impact on genome size, structure, or evolution. One exception to this
generalization may be miniature inverted repeat TEs (MITEs) which
appear to be high copy number class 2 elements that, in some cases, are
preferentially associated with grass genes (4).
TE studies in the 1990s have been dominated by long terminal repeat
(LTR) retrotransposons, which are members of the class 1 or
retro-element group. LTR retrotransposons are flanked by long terminal
repeats and usually encode all of the proteins required for their
transposition. For all class 1 elements, it is the element-encoded transcript, and not the element itself, that forms the transposition intermediate. It is for this reason that they can attain much higher
copy number than class 2 elements. Transcription of most of the active
plant elements characterized to date is largely quiescent during normal
development but can be induced by biotic and/or abiotic stresses
including cell culture, wounding, and pathogen attack (12). Because the
element-encoded transcript is also the transposition intermediate, LTR
retrotransposons may have the ability to rapidly alter genome structure
in response to environmental cues (see below).
Given their large size (from 4-10 kb on average) and potential to
amplify on a massive scale, it is not surprising that LTR retrotransposons comprise the largest fraction of TE-derived genomic DNA in almost all plant genomes examined to date (for review, see 16).
An important series of recent experiments, led by the Bennetzen lab
(20), has demonstrated that differential amplification of LTR
retrotransposons largely accounts for the C-value paradox among the
agronomically important members of the grass clade. The C-value paradox
is the observed lack of correlation between increases in DNA content
and an organism's complexity. It has been documented for both animal
and plant species, but to date only appears to be "solved" for the
members of the grass tribe.
The focus on high copy number elements in plants necessitated the
development of new protocols to assay TE movement on a whole-genome basis. Unlike the low copy number class 2 elements discussed above, MITEs and retrotransposons rarely transpose and are not associated with
mutant genes. Thus their activity could not be visualized in the
traditional manner of examining spotted kernels (Fig.
1A). Instead, a modification of the
gel-based amplified fragment length polymophism technique called
transposon display was developed to simultaneously monitor the
movement of hundreds of elements (Fig. 1B; 22). Transposon display of
the stable and highly polymorphic MITE families of maize has led to
their use as a new class of molecular marker that is preferentially
associated with genic regions (5).

View larger version (107K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 1.
Assaying TE activity the old way (A) and the new
way (B). A, Maize kernels displaying patterns characteristic of TE
excision from a gene in the anthocyanin biosynthetic pathway. B,
Computer-generated image of a transposon display where blue fluorescent
bands are PCR products that are anchored in a restriction site and in a
member of the MITE family Hb2 (courtesy of Zenaida Magbanua
[University of Georgia, Athens]). Red bands are
Mr markers. Samples were resolved on an
ABI377 sequencer where the loading was staggered.
|
|
 |
THE FUTURE OF PLANT TRANSPOSONS: POISED FOR NEW
BREAKTHROUGHS |
Given that a large fraction of the DNA sequence output from plant
genome projects will be derived from TEs, there will be no shortage of
new elements to be discovered, categorized, and exploited as
potentially valuable molecular tools. However, three recent papers
exemplify for me the areas where major breakthroughs are most likely to
arise. The first, by Hirochiki and coworkers, reports the amplification
of the tobacco retrotransposon Tto1 in Arabidopsis plants
that are methylation deficient (ddm1; 13). In the near
future we should know how epigenetic mechanisms regulate TEs, whether
this control is influenced by environmental cues, how TE organization
influences global chromatin structure (and in turn gene expression),
and whether epigenetic regulation evolved to regulate TEs.
Two papers have raised the bar on our concept of the dynamic genome and
have positioned the grass clade as a focal point for future studies. In
a follow-up to their study of intergenic retrotransposons in maize,
SanMiguel et al. (19) provide evidence that a burst in retrotransposon
activity doubled the size of the maize genome within the past 3 million
years. This result demonstrated for the first time that TEs could
rapidly restructure a genome. In the second paper Kalendar et al. (14)
present a dramatic example of TE-mediated genomic restructuring within
populations of the wild barley Hordeum spontaneum growing in
distinct regions of a canyon in Israel. In this case, genome
restructuring takes the form of genome size variation due to
retrotransposon amplification (the BARE-1 element) and
intra-element deletion. Correlation between BARE-1 copy
number, genome size, and local environmental conditions suggest for the
first time a testable molecular mechanism linking habitat with TE
induction in natural populations.
Taken together these two studies suggest that the grass clade is in a
dynamic period of genomic restructuring and, for this reason, may be
the system of choice for understanding the extent of TEs
involvement in both macroevolutionary and
microevolutionary processes. Given the rapid pace of recent
discoveries, it may be reasonable to expect that in the not-too-distant
future this line of research will provide mechanisms to explain how
evolution works at the molecular level.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
E-mail sue{at}dogwood.botany.uga.edu; fax
706-542-1805.
 |
LITERATURE CITED |
-
Baker B, Schell J, Lorz H, Fedoroff N
(1986)
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
83: 4844-4848
[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Bensen RJ, Johal GS, Crane VC, Tossberg JT, Schnable PS, Meeley RB, Briggs SP
(1995)
Plant Cell
7: 75-84
[Abstract]
-
Bonas U, Sommer H, Saedler H
(1984)
EMBO J
5: 1015-1019
-
Bureau TE, Wessler SR
(1992)
Plant Cell
4: 1283-1294
[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Casa AM, Brouwer C, Nagel A, Wang L, Zhang Q, Kresovich S, Wessler SR
(2000)
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
97: 10083-10089
[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Chandler VL, Walbot V
(1986)
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
83: 1767-1771
[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Chuck G, Robbins T, Nijjar C, Ralston E, Courtney-Gutterson N, Dooner HK
(1993)
Plant Cell
5: 371-378
[Abstract]
-
Coen ES, Carpenter R, Martin C
(1986)
Cell
47: 285-296
[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
-
Fedoroff NV
(1983)
Mobile Genetic Elements. Academic Press, New York, pp 1-63
-
Fedoroff NV, Furtek DB, Nelson OE
(1984)
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
81: 3825-3829
[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Fedoroff NV, Wessler SR, Shure M
(1983)
Cell
35: 235-242
[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
-
Grandbastien M-A
(1998)
Trends Plant Sci
3: 181-189
-
Hirochika H, Okamoto H, Kakutani T
(2000)
Plant Cell
12: 357-369
[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Kalendar R, Tanskanen J, Immonen S, Nevo E, Schulman AH
(2000)
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
97: 6603-6607
[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Kim HY, Schiefelbein JW, Raboy V, Furtek D, Nelson OE
(1987)
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
84: 5863-5867
[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Kumar A, Bennetzen JL
(1999)
Annu Rev Genet
33: 479-532
[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
-
Kunze R, Saedler H, Lönnig W-E
(1997)
Adv Bot Res
27: 331-470
-
McClintock B
(1984)
Science
226: 792-801
[Free Full Text]
-
SanMiguel P, Gaut BS, Tikhonov A, Nakajima Y, Bennetzen JL
(1998)
Nat Genet
20: 43-45
[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
-
SanMiguel P, Tikhonov A, Jin Y-K, Motchoulskaia N, Zakharov D, Melake-Berhan A, Springer PS, Edwards KJ, Lee M, Avramova Z, Bennetzen JL
(1996)
Science
274: 765-768
[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Sutton WD, Gerlach WL, Schwartz D, Peacock WJ
(1984)
Science
223: 1265-1268
[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Van den Broeck D, Maes T, Sauer M, Zethof J, De Keukeleire P, D'Hauw M, Van Montagu M, Gerats T
(1998)
Plant J
13: 121-129
[Medline]
-
Wessler SR, Baran G, Varagona M
(1987)
Science
237: 916-918
[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Whitham S, Dineshkumar SP, Choi D, Hehl R, Corr C, Baker B
(1994)
Cell
78: 1101-1115
[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
© 2001 American Society of Plant Physiologists
This article has been cited by other articles:

|
 |

|
 |
 
H. Ner-Gaon, N. Leviatan, E. Rubin, and R. Fluhr
Comparative Cross-Species Alternative Splicing in Plants
Plant Physiology,
July 1, 2007;
144(3):
1632 - 1641.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
O. N. Danilevskaya, P. Hermon, S. Hantke, M. G. Muszynski, K. Kollipara, and E. V. Ananiev
Duplicated fie Genes in Maize: Expression Pattern and Imprinting Suggest Distinct Functions
PLANT CELL,
February 1, 2003;
15(2):
425 - 438.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|
|
|