|
|
||||||||
|
Plant Physiology 136:2579-2586 (2004) © 2004 American Society of Plant Biologists Stress-Induced Cell Reprogramming. A Role for Global Genome Regulation?Biocenter Klein Flottbek (AMP II), Institute of Botany, University of Hamburg, 22609 Hamburg, Germany
Stress adaptation in crops is an important and timely topic in basic and applied biology. Interest in the issue is ambiguous. On the one hand, it is fascinating to understand interaction between plants and environment. On the other hand and in view of the needs of human life, we want to create crop plants that are able to confront successfully unfavorable natural conditions. The main goal in plant breeding is to obtain plants that combine high yields and reliable yield stability over years and locations. Simultaneously, plant products must have a high quality in terms of nutritional value, if used as food or feed, and/or of other characteristics of commercial interests. However, in addition to biotic stress factors, disturbances of extreme or even mild abiotic stress are supposed to account for a high amount of unachieved potential in plant production all over the world. Diverse forms of abiotic stress may occur, including drought, heat, cold and freezing, salinity, nutrient deficiency, toxic concentration of heavy metals, oxidative stress as well as oxygen shortage, and mechanical stress. Although it is known that diverse environmental stress factors never act alone, experimental study of plant responses on abiotic stress is normally restricted to plant reactions on isolated stress factors. However, it has to be considered that stress always occurs as a complex of various interacting environmental factors that contribute in varying degrees to the overall stress. Consequently, plants always respond to a unique complex of growth conditions. Stress inducers from the abiotic as well as biotic world have some common signal and response pathways in plants and thereby have the potential to modulate the effect of each other through cross-talking. Further, plants, as sessile organisms, have to get along with the dynamics of transiently changing environmental conditions, and this has to be achieved at the various stages of plant development (see Amzallag, 2001 Virtual experimentation is currently thought to offer the best potential for future research on stress adaptation because the complexity of plant reactions and stress factors may be taken into account simultaneously. Therefore, a global, multidisciplinary initiative to establish systems biology in plant sciences is very promising. Systems biology aims to collect and manage the huge amount of data available at any level of plant life to enable modeling of an artificial plant organism, the in silico plant. Confronting the artificial plant by computer simulation with real-life obstacles, such as abiotic stress through nutrient depletion or water deficit, will help to improve our understanding of how plants work and how to improve the capacity of plants in terms of increased "fitness for stress." Combining computational skill and interest in natural sciences to the benefit of humanity, environment, and remunerative intersectorial applications covers the most fascinating areas for younger researchers in biology and has the potential to attract students to a scientific career. Therefore, the field of systems plant biology will especially promote the potential of young scientists and promises to advance science a significant step forward. However, crucial to the success of this challenging idea of in silico experimental studies on stress adaptation will be the quality and completeness of the data used. Modeling the potential of plants requires a maximum of input of regulatory networks working in plants to cover the high adaptability of plants to environmental conditions and the plasticity of plant reactions. Therefore, it is of outstanding importance to understand all levels of regulatory mechanisms. This includes sequence analysis of genes and non-gene DNA, and studies of transcriptomes and posttranscriptional regulation, of proteomes and posttranslational regulation, as well as of metabolomes. Besides, profound knowledge on the functioning of regulatory genes, like transcription factors, seems to be critical to understanding general and specific expression control mechanisms in plant responses. But of equal importance for future progress will be our understanding of the details of chromatin and nuclear organization. In medicinal research and research on plant development, global mechanisms to organize genome structure and nuclear territories are discussed as superimposed instruments for the regulation of concerted gene activities. Nevertheless, in plant research on stress adaptation, the significance of this kind of global regulation of expression is still more or less ignored. This article will first illustrate how plants can adapt in a complex and coordinated manner to transient changes of abiotic environmental conditions and why cellular reprogramming is considered as a key process in stress adaptation. As an example, recent knowledge on both physiological and molecular adaptive reactions by plants to phosphorus (P) deficiency will be pointed out. Then, the factors involved in global genome regulation will be presented, and their possible contribution for adaptive reprogramming in target cells will be brought to attention.
Adaptation to Abiotic Stress Requires Coordinated Actions at the Whole-Plant Level and Cell Redifferentiation in Target Tissues: P Deficiency as an Illustration Nutrient deficiency may seriously interfere with normal plant growth and development. Nutrient efficiency is therefore thought to be an important goal in plant breeding. This might refer to macronutrients, such as nitrogen and P, and/or microelements, such as iron or zinc. Phosphorus is especially critical in terms of crop productivity. Access to this nutrient may be hampered by soil characteristics and water availability. Bioavailable anionic phosphate may be excluded from soil solutions and, thus, from mobility in the soil by the strong tendency of P to form insoluble inorganic compounds or to convert to organic forms.
Low concentrations of available P in the rhizosphere can be sensed by plants as a cue for the induction of adaptation to this stress. Surprisingly, the sensing of low available P concentrations in the rhizosphere seems to occur mainly in the shoot (Föhse and Jungk, 1983
The amount of P taken up into the root system is about proportional to the percentage of root hairs (Jungk, 2001 Another kind of significant cell redifferentiation response to P deficiency is typically observed in the rhizodermis near the root apex next to the zone of differentiation, where root hair initiation takes place. Here, so-called transfer cells are formed. These cells rarely occur under ordinary conditions and demonstrate two outstanding characteristics: strong enlargement of the cell surface due to ingrowths of secondary cell wall material extending into the cell lumina and a high increase in the number of mitochondria pointing to a high turnover of energy and carbon. Although the specific function of transfer cells in the rhizodermis remains to be further elucidated, in general they are thought to strengthen the flux of solutes at the boundaries of symplast and apoplast. Along with these environmentally induced changes in cell differentiation during adaptation, the rhizosphere of P-depleted plants is found to be enriched by plant excretion products, including protons and organic acids such as citrate and malate. Excreted acidic phosphatases as well as ribonucleases are also reported to occur due to P deficiency. These compounds are appropriate to initiate the conversion of immobile P in the soil to bioavailable forms by chemical and biochemical reactions or promotion of the proliferation of associating microorganisms and fungi, including also mycorrhizae. Taken together, adaptive phenotypic expression as response on P deficiency is primarily directed to avoid or minimize forthcoming stress by increasing P uptake. This is achieved by different strategies: (1) through the enlargement of the surface of the root system to reach a wider area of the environment; (2) by intensifying excretion of plant compounds to influence the bioavailability of the nutrient actively; and (3) by enhancing the potential of the uptake system. To realize these adaptive reactions to low amounts of bioavailable P, interaction of organs and targeting of tissues and cells for differential regulation is required.
Highly efficient methods are available now to study complex alterations at the level of transcripts, proteins, and metabolism, completing our current knowledge due to genomics. A wealth of data has been recorded recently for changes caused by various abiotic stress inducers and is ready to be analyzed by bioinformatics. All these data show that numerous genes and pre- as well as posttranscriptional and/or -translational factors and processes are involved to achieve appropriate plant responses to environmental circumstances, including mechanisms for stress avoidance as well as tolerance. Related to P depletion, for example, Wu et al. (2003) Alteration of complex expression patterns needs to be coordinated at the cell level. During recent years, a driving force to gain new insights in basic knowledge on how plants function at cellular levels has been the powerful search for transgenes that might enable efficient molecular breeding on abiotic stress tolerance. Three levels in cell biology have been mainly envisaged as tools for analyses and manipulation: (1) the level of target proteins, which are involved directly in metabolism or structure; (2) the level of regulatory proteins, namely the transcription factors and their target sequences to affect gene activity; and, evidently, (3) the level of signal transduction, including e.g. calcium and activated oxygens as signals, as well as signal cascades like the mitogen-activated protein kinase system. However, regulation of gene expression also requires superimposed organizational structures to realize coordinated transient access to the binding sites of regulating factors.
What Is Meant by Global Genome Regulation? In eukaryotes, accessibility of DNA sequences to the transcription machinery is crucially determined by the degree of packaging of the DNA into condensed and open chromatin domains. Additionally, recent studies have been undertaken to unravel the role of nonrandomly positioning of genes in the nucleus for gene expression during the interphase of the cell cycle. Global genome regulation refers to the structural and compositional organization of chromatin in the nucleus that defines coordinated accessibility to the DNA. The importance of factors involved in global genome regulation is currently highly acknowledged as critical for genetic as well as epigenetic programming in plant development. Environmentally induced reprogramming of cells during adaptation points to developmental plasticity as a typical characteristic of plants. This suggests a significant role of global genome regulation also in adaptive plant cell biology.
Linear DNA is packaged into a condensed higher-order structure, the chromatin. Organization to a first-order condensation is achieved by wrapping the DNA around a globular octamer of histone proteins in a 1.8 turn according to 146 bp. The octamer consists of two tetramers of the histones H2A, H2B, H3, and H4. The DNA/protein complexes are called nucleosomes. Nucleosomes are linked to each other by a linear DNA stretch of 20 to 200 bp, giving the impression of beads on a string in electron microscopy. This 10-nm-diameter fiber is referred to as decondensed or open chromatin, which is ready to get directly into contact with regulatory factors, e.g. of the transcription or replication machinery. A higher degree of condensation will render access to the DNA more difficult or even impossible, leading finally to the silencing of underlying sequences.
To further condense the 10-nm-diameter fiber to a solenoid structure, histone H1 links coils consisting of 6 nucleosomes to the famous 30-nm-diameter fiber. These chromatin structures are typically addressed to the fraction of euchromatic domains, whereas heterochromatic domains demonstrate highly compact structures that are generally inaccessible to DNA-binding factors and transcriptionally silent. Heterochromatic regions are thought to have an important impact on the realization of cell programs during development and differentiation and, hence, are of high interest related to future research on plant stress responses. Large heterochromatic domains are found at the centromeric and telomeric regions of the chromosomes and contribute to proper chromatid cohesion and chromosome segregation. However, additional smaller heterochromatic domains are distributed throughout the chromosomes. Current studies reveal that many factors and processes are involved in the assembly of heterochromatin, including, most importantly, the targeting of initiation sites by help of repetitive sequences or silencers as well as the posttranslational modifications of histones (see Grewal and Moazed, 2003
A flux from a decondensed to a more condensed state and vice versa is crucial for all kinds of cellular differentiation. This flexibility in chromatin structure is termed chromatin remodeling and may be defined as "any event that alters the nuclease sensitivity of a region of chromatin" (Aalfs and Kingston, 2000
Especially important events in chromatin remodeling are histone modifications by enzymatic acetylation or deacetylation of Lys residues that modulate DNA/histone interactions and correlate with activation or deactivation of transcription. Evidence for a link to stress-induced effects is coming from medicinal research. Gilmour et al. (2003)
Methylation at sites of previously deacetylated Lys-9 of H3 is obviously linked to methylation of cytosines in the DNA. In most of the cases observed, DNA methylation was found to correlate to the inhibition of transcription. Whereas methylation of the protein-coding region is often associated with posttranscriptional gene silencing, silencing of genes due to a blockage of transcription (transcriptional gene silencing) is usually related to methylated sites in the promoter region (Okamoto and Hirochika, 2001
Chromatin remodeling might also be affected by ATPases that alter conformation and positioning of the nucleosome. Recently, such complexes have also been described for plants (see Wagner, 2003
In plant genomes, up to 85% of the nuclear DNA may consist of mobile elements (Kumar and Bennetzen, 1999
During interphase of the cell cycle, the chromosomes are polarized due to opposite positions of centromeres and telomeres in the nucleus mainly occupying a distinct area, called territory (Fig. 1B, left). Chromosome territories basically correspond to reproducible positions within the nucleus, as can be inferred by chromosome painting. This technique refers to the visualization of entire chromosomes by fluorescence in situ hybridization. However, current insights in studies on human and mouse genome organization reveal that many genomic regions may also be found outside these territories uncovered by chromosomal painting. These regions have been characterized preferentially as gene rich and/or actively transcribing (Mahy et al., 2002
Attachment sequences and their binding sites are thought to have a special role in differential expression. Potential candidate sites for tethering chromatin are the nuclear envelope, the nuclear matrix, which consists of a lamina and the ribonuclear protein network, nuclear pore complexes, nucleoli, and insulator bodies (Nickerson, 2001
Double-stranded noncoding RNAs are currently known to be involved in epigenetic silencing of genes in eukaryotes. Such regulatory dsRNAs are processed in ribonucleoprotein complexes to the tiny interfering RNAs (RNAi), small interfering RNA, and microRNA of about 21 to 25 nucleotides that target mRNA sequences for subsequent cleavage according to posttranscriptional gene silencing or also translational repression in case of microRNAs. Current results also points to their biological significance in targeting DNA methylation as well as heterochromatin formation (see Volpe et al., 2002
Adaptation of sessile plants to varying and complex abiotic conditions requires plasticity in development and reprogramming of target cells. Global genome regulation mechanisms have recently been recognized as important factors of epigenetic programming. Updating current knowledge of the mechanisms involved in global genome regulation with special consideration of environmentally induced responses intends to help advance future interdisciplinary research on plant stress adaptation. Traditional breeding on environmental stress tolerance succeeded by ingenious selection procedures at the population as well as single-plant level in various environmental backgrounds (years and locations), and by calculating genetic as well as environmental components. These methods automatically considered the complexity of plant organisms (selection at the whole-plant level), as well as the complexity of stress phenomena (testing above years and locations), and have been very successful, although limited by nature. If modern breeding on abiotic tolerance wants to exceed natural limits, a better understanding of the complex interaction between plant and environment is urgently required and has to include research on the adaptive and coordinating capacities of global genome regulation. Successful transgene strategies to improve abiotic stress have been rare so far, although obviously straightforward. The presence of a transgene sequence in the plant genome cannot be expected to account solely for success or failure in molecular breeding on abiotic stress tolerance. Nevertheless, investigation of all factors involved in global genome regulation of both successful and failing transgenic plants could certainly improve our understanding of complex molecular mechanisms. In this sense, creation of transgenic plants could prove, once again, its worth in leading basic research a significant step forward. Additionally, transgene RNAi knockout plants will help to understand causal links between global genome regulation and stress adaptation. Future progress in systems biology and virtual experiments will no doubt help us to understand how plants work to overcome abiotic stress. However, since models always carry the danger of multiplying underlying minor errors according to the rules of chaos, it will be wise to remember limitations and the potential for misleading. An interdisciplinary glimpse at globally applied computer simulations and their limitations in reliably predicting future perspectives in economy, though based on very well-studied data of the economy markets, may serve as a powerful warning.
Updates are not intended to be comprehensive reviews, and the author apologizes to the colleagues whose work could not be cited because of the restricted number of references. The author thanks Horst Lörz for comments on the manuscript and is further grateful to Kyra and Jonathan Wallace as well as Peter Felker for language editing. Received March 11, 2004; returned for revision June 14, 2004; accepted June 18, 2004.
www.plantphysiol.org/cgi/doi/10.1104/pp.104.042531. * E-mail arnholdt-schmitt{at}gmx.de; fax 49407019286.
Aalfs JD, Kingston RE (2000) What does "chromatin remodeling" mean? Trends Biochem Sci 25: 548555[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Amzallag GN (2001) Maturation of integrated functions during development. I. Modifications of the regulatory network during transition periods in Sorghum bicolor. Plant Cell Environ 24: 337345[CrossRef] Arnholdt-Schmitt B (1995) Physiological aspects of genome variability in tissue culture. II. Growth phase-dependent quantitative variability of repetitive BstN I fragments of primary cultures of Daucus carota L. Theor Appl Genet 91: 816823 Arnholdt-Schmitt B, Herterich S, Neumann K-H (1995) Physiological aspects of genome variability in tissue culture. I. Growth phase-dependent differential DNA methylation of the carrot genome (Daucus carota L.) during primary culture. Theor Appl Genet 91: 809815
Beguiristain T, Grandbastien M-A, Puigdomènech P, Casacuberta JM (2001) Three Tnt1 subfamilies show different stress-associated patterns of expression in tobacco. Consequences for retrotransposon control and evolution in plants. Plant Physiol 127: 212221
Burleigh SH, Harrison MJ (1999) The down-regulation of MT4-like genes by phosphate fertilization occurs systemically and involves phosphate translocation to the shoots. Plant Physiol 119: 241248
Chua YL, Watson LA, Gray JC (2003) The transcriptional enhancer of the pea plastocyanin gene associates with the nuclear matrix and regulates gene expression through histone acetylation. Plant Cell 15: 14681479 Dolan L (2001) The role of ethylene in root hair growth in Arabidopsis. J Plant Nutr Soil Sci 164: 141145[CrossRef] Föhse D, Jungk A (1983) Influence of phosphate and nitrate supply on root hair formation of rape, spinach and tomato plants. Plant Soil 74: 359368[CrossRef]
Fojtová M, Fulnecková J, Fajkus J, Kovarik A (2002) Recovery of tobacco cells from cadmium stress is accompanied by DNA repair and increased telomerase activity. J Exp Bot 53: 21512158
Fransz P, deJong JH, Lysak M, Castiglione MR, Schubert I (2002) Interphase chromosomes in Arabidopsis are organized as well defined chromocenters from which euchromatin loops emanate. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 99: 1458414589
Fujiwara S, Matsuda N, Sato T, Sonobe S, Maeshima M (2002) Molecular properties of a matrix attachment region-binding protein located in the nucleoli of tobacco cells. Plant Cell Physiol 43: 15581567
Gaudin V, Libault M, Pouteau S, Juul T, Zhao G, Lefebre D, Grandjean O (2001) Mutations in LIKE HETEROCHROMATIN PROTEIN 1 affect flowering time and plant architecture in Arabidopsis. Development 128: 48474858 Gendall AR, Levy YY, Wilson A, Dean C (2001) The VERNALIZATION 2 gene mediates the epigenetic regulation of vernalization in Arabidopsis. Cell 107: 525535[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Gilmour PS, Rahman I, Donaldson K, MacNee W (2003) Histone acetylation regulates epithelial IL-8 release mediated by oxidative stress from environmental particles. Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol 284: L533L540 Grandbastien M-A (1998) Activation of plant retrotransposons under stress conditions. Trends Plant Sci 3: 181187
Grewal SIS, Moazed D (2003) Heterochromatin and epigenetic control of gene expression. Science 301: 798802 Houben A, Demidov D, Gernand D, Meister A, Leach CR, Schubert I (2003) Methylation of histone H3 in euchromatin of plant chromosomes depends on basic nuclear DNA content. Plant J 33: 967973[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Illi B, Nanni S, Scopece A, Farsetti A, Biglioli P, Capogrossi MC, Gaetano C (2003) Shear stress-mediated chromatin remodeling provides molecular basis for flow-dependent regulation of gene expression. Circ Res 93: 155161 Jeddeloh JA, Stokes TL, Richards EJ (1999) Maintenance of genomic methylation requires a SWI2/SNF2-like protein. Nat Genet 22: 9497[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Jungk A (2001) Root hair and the acquisition of plant nutrients from soil. J Plant Nutr Soil Sci 164: 121129[CrossRef] Kumar A, Bennetzen JL (1999) Plant retrotransposons. Annu Rev Genet 33: 479532[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Labrador M, Corces VG (2002) Setting the boundaries of chromatin domains and nuclear organisation. Cell 111: 151154[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Lerner HR, editor (1999) Plant Responses to Environmental Stresses. From Phytohormones to Genome Reorganisation. Marcel Dekker, New York
López-Bucio J, Hernández-Abreu E, Sánchez-Calderón L, Nieto-Jacobo MF, Simpson J, Herrera-Estrella J (2002) Phosphate availability alters architecture and causes changes in hormone sensitivity in the Arabidopsis root system. Plant Physiol 129: 244256 Mahy NL, Perry PE, Bickmore WA (2002) Gene density and transcription influence the localization of chromatin outside of chromosome territories detectable by FISH. J Cell Biochem 159: 753763 Marshall WF (2002) Order and disorder in the nucleus. Curr Biol 12: 185192 Mhiri C, Morel JB, Vernhettes S, Casacuberta JM, Lucas H, Grandbastien MA (1997) The promoter of the tobacco Tnt1 retrotransposon is induced by wounding and by abiotic stress. Plant Mol Biol 33: 257266[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Michael G (2001) The control of root hair formation: suggested mechanisms. J Plant Nutr Soil Sci 164: 111119[CrossRef]
Mizuno K, Hasemi T, Ubukata T, Yamada T, Lehmann E, Kohli J, Watanabe Y, Iino Y, Yamamoto M, Fox M E, et al (2001) Counteracting regulation of chromatin remodeling at a fission yeast cAMP responsive element-related recombination hotspot by stress-activated protein kinase, cAMP-dependent kinase and meiosis regulators. Genetics 159: 14671478 Mochizuki K, Fine NA, Fujisawa T, Gorovsky MA (2002) Analysis of a piwi-related gene implicates small RNAs in genome rearrangement in Tetrahymena. Cell 110: 689699[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Nickerson JA (2001) Experimental observations of a nuclear matrix. J Cell Sci 114: 463474[Abstract] Okamoto H, Hirochika H (2001) Silencing of transposable elements in plants. Trends Plant Sci 6: 527534[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Rabinowicz PD, Schutz K, Dedhia N, Yordan C, Parnell LD, Stein L, McCombie R, Martienssen RA (1999) Differential methylation of genes and retrotransposons facilitates shotgun sequencing of the maize genome. Nat Genet 23: 305308[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, et al (1996) Nested retrotransposons in the intergenic regions of the maize genome. Science 274: 765768 Schaefer C, Schaffer S, Arnholdt-Schmitt B (2000) Differential RAPD fingerprints in carrot tissues. Acta Hortic 530: 437445 Schaffer S, Arnholdt-Schmitt B (2001) Characterization of genome variation in tissue cultures by RAPD fingerprintinga methodical comment. Plant Biosyst 135: 115120 Schmidt W (2001) From faith to fate: ethylene signaling in morphogenic responses to P and Fe deficiency. J Plant Nutr Soil Sci 164: 147154[CrossRef] Shatters RG, Schweder ME, West SH, Abdelghany A, Smith RL (1995) Environmentally induced polymorphisms detected by RAPD analysis of soybean seed DNA. Seed Sci Res 5: 109116 Takeda S, Sugimoto K, Otsuki H, Hirochika H (1999) A 13 bp cis-regulatory element in the LTR promoter of the tobacco retrotransposon Tto1 is involved in responsiveness to tissue culture, wounding, methyl jasmonate and fungal elicitors. Plant J 18: 383393[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Taverna SD, Coyne RS, Allis CD (2002) Methylation of histone H3 at lysine 9 targets programmed DNA elimination in Tetrahymena. Cell 110: 701711[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Volpe TA, Kidner C, Hall IM, Teng G, Grewal SIS, Martienssen RA (2002) Regulation of heterochromatic silencing and histone H3 lysine-9 methylation by RNAi. Science 297: 18331837 Wagner D (2003) Chromatin regulation of plant development. Curr Opin Plant Biol 6: 2028[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Williamson LC, Ribrioux SPCP, Fitter AH, Ottoline Leyser HM (2001) Phosphate availability regulates root system architecture in Arabidopsis. Plant Physiol 126: 875882
Wu P, Ma L, Hou X, Wang M, Wu Y, Liu F, Deng XW (2003) Phosphate starvation triggers distinct alterations of genome expression in Arabidopsis roots and leaves. Plant Physiol 132: 12601271 This article has been cited by other articles:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| ASPB Publications | PLANT PHYSIOLOGY® | THE PLANT CELL | |
|---|---|---|---|