![]() | ![]() |
Formats:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Copyright © 2007 Deluc et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. Transcriptomic and metabolite analyses of Cabernet Sauvignon grape berry development 1Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, University of Nevada, Reno, Nevada 89557-0014, USA 2Department of Animal Biotechnology, University of Nevada, Reno, NV 89557-0014, USA 3Boston University School of Medicine, Department of Genetics and Genomics, Boston University, E632, Boston, MA 02118, USA Corresponding author.Laurent G Deluc: delucl/at/unr.edu; Jérôme Grimplet: jerome.grimplet/at/sdstate.edu; Matthew D Wheatley: wheatle8/at/unr.nevada.edu; Richard L Tillett: tillett/at/unr.nevada.edu; David R Quilici: quilici/at/unr.edu; Craig Osborne: Vandal98/at/aol.com; David A Schooley: schooley/at/unr.edu; Karen A Schlauch: schlauch/at/unr.edu; John C Cushman: jcushman/at/unr.edu; Grant R Cramer: cramer/at/unr.edu Received May 14, 2007; Accepted November 22, 2007. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. This article has been cited by other articles in PMC.Abstract Background Grape berry development is a dynamic process that involves a complex series of molecular genetic and biochemical changes divided into three major phases. During initial berry growth (Phase I), berry size increases along a sigmoidal growth curve due to cell division and subsequent cell expansion, and organic acids (mainly malate and tartrate), tannins, and hydroxycinnamates accumulate to peak levels. The second major phase (Phase II) is defined as a lag phase in which cell expansion ceases and sugars begin to accumulate. Véraison (the onset of ripening) marks the beginning of the third major phase (Phase III) in which berries undergo a second period of sigmoidal growth due to additional mesocarp cell expansion, accumulation of anthocyanin pigments for berry color, accumulation of volatile compounds for aroma, softening, peak accumulation of sugars (mainly glucose and fructose), and a decline in organic acid accumulation. In order to understand the transcriptional network responsible for controlling berry development, mRNA expression profiling was conducted on berries of V. vinifera Cabernet Sauvignon using the Affymetrix GeneChip® Vitis oligonucleotide microarray ver. 1.0 spanning seven stages of berry development from small pea size berries (E-L stages 31 to 33 as defined by the modified E-L system), through véraison (E-L stages 34 and 35), to mature berries (E-L stages 36 and 38). Selected metabolites were profiled in parallel with mRNA expression profiling to understand the effect of transcriptional regulatory processes on specific metabolite production that ultimately influence the organoleptic properties of wine. Results Over the course of berry development whole fruit tissues were found to express an average of 74.5% of probes represented on the Vitis microarray, which has 14,470 Unigenes. Approximately 60% of the expressed transcripts were differentially expressed between at least two out of the seven stages of berry development (28% of transcripts, 4,151 Unigenes, had pronounced (≥2 fold) differences in mRNA expression) illustrating the dynamic nature of the developmental process. The subset of 4,151 Unigenes was split into twenty well-correlated expression profiles. Expression profile patterns included those with declining or increasing mRNA expression over the course of berry development as well as transient peak or trough patterns across various developmental stages as defined by the modified E-L system. These detailed surveys revealed the expression patterns for genes that play key functional roles in phytohormone biosynthesis and response, calcium sequestration, transport and signaling, cell wall metabolism mediating expansion, ripening, and softening, flavonoid metabolism and transport, organic and amino acid metabolism, hexose sugar and triose phosphate metabolism and transport, starch metabolism, photosynthesis, circadian cycles and pathogen resistance. In particular, mRNA expression patterns of transcription factors, abscisic acid (ABA) biosynthesis, and calcium signaling genes identified candidate factors likely to participate in the progression of key developmental events such as véraison and potential candidate genes associated with such processes as auxin partitioning within berry cells, aroma compound production, and pathway regulation and sequestration of flavonoid compounds. Finally, analysis of sugar metabolism gene expression patterns indicated the existence of an alternative pathway for glucose and triose phosphate production that is invoked from véraison to mature berries. Conclusion These results reveal the first high-resolution picture of the transcriptome dynamics that occur during seven stages of grape berry development. This work also establishes an extensive catalog of gene expression patterns for future investigations aimed at the dissection of the transcriptional regulatory hierarchies that govern berry development in a widely grown cultivar of wine grape. More importantly, this analysis identified a set of previously unknown genes potentially involved in critical steps associated with fruit development that can now be subjected to functional testing. Background Grapes have been cultivated and fermented into wine for more than 7,000 years. Worldwide, grapes are one of the most widely cultivated fruit crops, encompassing 7.4 million hectares of arable land in 2006 [1] and with 68.9 million metric tons produced in 2006, ranks second among bananas, oranges, and apples with 69.7, 63.8 and 62.1 million metric tons respectively, produced during this same period. However, because the majority of the grapes that are harvested are fermented into wine, the economic impact for this commodity is far greater than the value of the grapes. For example, wine sales from California alone in 2006 was at an all-time high and growing with approximately $18 billion dollar in sales [2]. According to 2005 statistics, the California wine industry has a $52 and $125 billion economic impact on the state and U.S. economies, respectively [3]. In addition to their economic importance, consumption of grapes and wine has numerous nutritional and health benefits for humans [4,5]. For example, there are more than 200 polyphenolic compounds in red wines that are thought to act as antioxidants. In particular, one antioxidant compound, trans-resveratrol, has been shown to play a role in the prevention of heart disease (atherosclerosis) [6] and cancer [7]. Resveratrol slows the aging process in animals [8], acts as a signaling molecule in the brain [9], and down-regulates the expression of genes that are involved in cell cycle and cell proliferation in human prostate cells [10]. Therefore, for a variety of reasons, there is great interest in manipulating grape berry development and quality for both economic and health reasons. In contrast to the well studied climacteric fruits such as tomato and apple, very little is known about the development and ripening processes of non-climacteric fruits such as grape or strawberry [11,12]. In 1992, Coombe, one of the leaders in the field, described our knowledge of grape berry development and the regulation of ripening as "embryonic [13]." Grape berries, like other berry fruits, undergo a complex series of physical and biochemical changes during development, which can be divided into three major phases [13] with more detailed descriptive designations, known as the modified E-L system, being used to define more precise growth stages over the entire grapevine lifecycle [14]. During the initial stage of berry growth (Phase I) cell division is rapid and all cells are established in the developing fruit in the first two weeks after flowering followed by a subsequent sigmoidal increase in berry size over approximately 60 days due to cell expansion. Two important organic acids, tartrate and malate, are synthesized and reach maximal concentrations by the end of Phase I. Biosynthesis of tannins and hydroxycinnamates, which are major precursors for phenolic volatiles, also occurs, primarily during Phase I. Tannins are located primarily in the skin and seeds of the berry, and are perceived as astringent compounds important for color stability and the body of red wine. Phase II is characterized as a lag phase during which there is no increase in berry size. Biosynthetic processes are not well characterized for this stage, but it is known that sugar accumulation begins during this phase just prior to véraison (the onset of ripening) [13]. Véraison marks the start of Phase III of berry growth, which is characterized by the initiation of color development (anthocyanin accumulation in red grapes) and berry softening. Berry growth is sigmoidal during Phase III, as the berries double in size. At the onset of this stage, sugars (largely glucose and fructose) continue to accumulate, and organic acid concentrations decline. The acid:sugar balance at harvest is critical for high quality wines, as it affects important sensory attributes [15]. A large number of the flavor compounds and volatile aromas are synthesized at the end of Stage III. Many of these aromas are derived from terpenoids. However, the availability of seed tannins declines through oxidative processes during Phase III, causing the tannins to bind to the seed coat, reducing the astringent components within the berry. Skin tannins begin to interact and bind with anthocyanins and each other, increasing tannin polymer size and complexity. Two major objectives of modern viticultural practices include the ability to produce a uniformly ripe crop and to harvest at optimal grape maturity. Large variations in ripening among berries within a cluster and within a vineyard make it difficult to determine when a crop is at its best possible ripeness. The start of véraison is recognized to be a critical determinant for berry harvest dates, yet little is known about what initiates this important stage. A more detailed understanding of the complex changes in gene expression that orchestrate berry developmental processes is needed. Several mRNA expression-profiling studies have been completed for Vitis berries. Differential screening of cDNA libraries from (Vitis vinifera cv. Shiraz) and northern blot analysis revealed that large differences in gene expression occur during berry ripening and led to the isolation of a large number of grape ripening-induced protein (GRIP) genes [16]. Monitoring of gene expression profiles in flowers and across six time points during grape (Vitis vinifera cv. Shiraz) berry skin development to 13 weeks post-flowering resolved four sets of genes with distinctive and similar expression patterns using spotted cDNA microarrays containing 4,608 elements [17]. mRNA expression was also studied across nine stages of wildtype cv. Shiraz berry development (green "pea" to overripe) [18] and in a fleshless berry mutant cv. Ugni Blanc using oligonucleotide microarrays containing 3,200 elements [19]. Differences in transcript expression profiles in the skin of ripening fruit (12 to 13 weeks after flowering) of seven different cultivars were also examined using a 9,200 feature cDNA microarray [20]. In this study, we conducted mRNA expression profiling on one of the widely grown varieties of V. vinifera (cv Cabernet Sauvignon) using the Vitis Affymetrix GeneChip® oligonucleotide microarray ver. 1.0, which contains 14,470 Unigenes, over seven temporal stages (green "pea" to ripe) of berry development. We also correlated specific transcript profiles with specific metabolite profiles to gain deeper insights into discrete aspects of grape berry developmental dynamics. Results and discussion Grape berry development Vitis vinifera cv. Cabernet Sauvignon grapes were harvested on a weekly basis over the course of berry development from the Shenandoah Vineyard, Plymouth, California during the summer of 2004. Samples corresponding to stages 31 to 38 of the modified E-L system [14] were measured for berry diameter, °Brix (an approximate measure of the mass ratio of dissolved solids, mostly sucrose, to water in fruit juices) and titratable acidity (Figure (Figure1).1
Microarray analysis The mRNA expression profiles of seven time points spanning E-L stages 31 to 38 as indicated in Figure Figure11 From the Vitis 16,602 probesets represented on the array [Additional File 1C], an overall mean call rate of 74.5% per array (range 73.5% to 76.2%) was obtained. Data from the 12,596 probe sets that were found to be present in at least two out of the three biological triplicates were retained for further analyses. After performing an ANOVA and a multiple testing correction (Benjamini and Hochberg) [22], we found that 10,068 probesets (60.6%) were differentially expressed (p ≤ 0.05) between two or more E-L stages of berry development [Additional File 2: Table 1]. Because one Unigene can be related to several probesets, the number of Unigenes decreased to 9,143 Unigenes [Additional File 2: Table 2]. These probesets will be hereby referred to as those passing the ANOVA filter. From this set of genes, we extracted a subset of 4,510 probesets that displayed a two-fold or greater change in steady-state transcript abundance over the course of development (i.e., across any two of the seven developmental stages) [Additional File 2: Table 3] representing 4,151 Unigenes (28.3%) in the DFCI Grape Gene Index database VvGI5 [23]. We refer to this subset of genes as the two-fold ratio (TFR) set [Additional File 2: Table 4]. Principal component analysis (PCA), was used to simplify and define associations between different developmental stages within the global transcriptomic data (Additional File 3). Two principal components explaining 97.4% of the overall variance of transcription profiles (86.8% and 7.6% for axes 1 and 2, respectively) allowed us to clearly differentiate E-L stages 31 and 35 from the other developmental stages analyzed (Additional File 3). It was not possible to clearly separate E-L stages 32 to 34 or 36 to 38 indicating that the transcription patterns occurring at these stages were similar to one another. However, stage 35, which corresponds to early post-véraison, could be distinguished suggesting that transcription patterns at this point in berry ripening are unique to this critical stage in berry development. Further analysis using a third axis explaining 2.7% of the overall variance, confirmed the previous results and slightly improved the resolution among stages 31, 35, and 36 to 38. Clustering of significant genes We used the Pavlidis Template Matching (PTM) algorithm [24], to divide the 4,151 TFR Unigenes into twenty gene groups or clusters. Specifically, twenty gene profiles of interest were selected [Additional File 4] to reflect major transcriptional patterns of development across E-L stages 31 to 38 (Figure (Figure2).2
Functional categorization of Unigenes across different stages of development Functional categories were assigned to Unigenes with two-fold or greater changes in steady-state transcript abundance over the course of the seven developmental stages using the Munich Information Center for Protein Sequences (MIPS, ver. 2.0) catalog with annotations of the top Arabidopsis BLAST hits [25]. Because we detected some errors in the functional annotation for some Unigenes, functional categorization of each Unigene were verified manually and corrected if necessary. Corrections were only performed for the 4,151 Unigenes that displayed a two-fold or greater change in expression [See Additional File 2: Table 4]. Functional annotations could be assigned to approximately 64% of transcripts (Figure (Figure3A).3A
The opposite trend of increasing transcript abundance from Phase I to Phase III was observed for functional groups that included transcription (11), protein synthesis (12), protein fate (14), protein with binding function (16), and to a lesser extent with interaction with cellular environment (34). These trends served to further indicate the complexity of the transcriptional, translational, and interaction-based regulatory processes necessary for berry development. Exemplar Unigenes associated with important molecular events of berry development In order to identify genes with potentially important roles in specific stages of berry development, transcripts with a dynamic pattern were identified from within the first 20 PTM algorithm-defined profile groups. The transcript profiles were examined in further detail (Figure (Figure44
Polyamines (PAs) are a class of compounds that have plant growth regulator activity. Their roles in cell division [26] and fruit set [27] have been widely investigated. Free, conjugated and wall-bound forms of polyamines accumulate mostly at anthesis before decreasing at fruit set in grapes [28]. Two transcripts were detected that belong to profile 4, which are strongly down-regulated at E-L stage 32 (1618814_at, 1616399_s_at; AY174164, TC68466). Both are related to ornithine decarboxylase and arginine decarboxylase, which are involved in polyamine metabolism [29]. These two genes located at the start of the PA pathway might play a role in providing precursors that would be used during Phase I of berry development. In higher plants, the catabolism of asparagine (Asn) occurs by two routes. The first pathway involves the hydrolysis of Asn, releasing ammonia and aspartate by asparaginase activity. L-asparaginase is one of the enzymes for Asn utilization by plants that plays an important role in the nitrogen metabolism of developing plant tissues [30]. One Unigene encoding L-asparaginase (1611257_a_at; TC51832) displayed a specific peak during E-L stages 32 (Figure (Figure4A).4A In grape berries, fruit softening occurs during Phase III and is largely affected by cell-wall loosening [32] and turgor [33]. Xyloglucans account for about 10% of the cell wall composition in berries [32]. In fruit, xyloglucan depolymerization is associated with fruit softening [34]. Xyloglucan endotransglycosylases, which hydrolyze and transglycosylate xyloglucans, were encoded by multiple isogenes, the majority of which were expressed highly during Phase I in berry development (E-L stage 31), but then declined (data not shown; see Table 1). One Unigene (1618848_at; TC52577), however, which is a xyloglucan endotransglucosylase/hydrolase, displayed a 185-fold increase in expression during Phase II, peaking at E-L stage 33 (Figure (Figure4A).4A
Expansins play important roles in cell wall loosening via non-enzymatic mechanisms and are involved in cell expansion [36]. Most expansin genes displayed steadily increasing or decreasing patterns during berry development (see Table 1). Others showed peak expression around E-L stage 34 (α-expansin, 1608074_at, TC62965; α-expansin, 1608191_at, TC64448; Figure Figure4B).4B Terpenes, which are precursors for important aroma compounds [38], accumulate at véraison [39,40]. One Unigene encoding a limonene cyclase (1613161_at; TC69794; Figure Figure4B),4B Phytohormone biosynthesis and responses A number of plant growth regulators including abscisic acid (ABA), auxin (indole-3-acetic acid [IAA], brassinosteroids (BR), ethylene, and gibberellic acid (GA) have been implicated in the control of berry development and ripening. Therefore, steady-state transcript accumulation patterns of Unigenes with functions related to hormone biosynthesis and response were tracked over the course of berry development (Figure (Figure5,5
Abscisic acid ABA amounts in berries decrease after anthesis, but then increase significantly at véraison [45]. External applications of ABA to ripening fruit can accelerate berry development (see [13] and references therein). The transcript abundance of 9-cis-epoxycarotenoid dioxygenase (NCED), which encodes the rate limiting step in ABA biosynthesis, increased during the lag phase and peaked at stage 35 around the start of véraison (Figure (Figure5A).5A Ethylene Traditionally, wine grape has been considered a non-climacteric fruit, however, there are studies that indicate that ethylene plays an important role in berry development and ripening [13] and is required for increased berry diameter and ripening processes, such as anthocyanin biosynthetic gene expression and accumulation [46,47]. In addition, ethylene appears to be involved in controlling the expression of an alcohol dehydrogenase gene from grape [48]. Furthermore, some inhibitors of ethylene biosynthesis can delay berry ripening [49]. Ethylene-related transcripts displayed some very unique and intriguing patterns of expression (Figure (Figure5B)5B According to the Arabidopsis model of ethylene signaling, reduced expression of transcripts and activity of receptors increases the sensitivity to ethylene, whereas increased receptor expression and activity decreases sensitivity [50]. In tomato, the expression of most genes encoding ethylene receptors increases during fruit development. In parallel, high levels of ethylene are expressed to counterbalance the negative effect of increased receptor expression on the ethylene signaling pathway [51]. In grape berry, the slight decreases observed in ethylene receptor transcript expression occurring between E-L stages 31 and 32 and the peak of ethylene accumulation during this same period, indicate a higher sensitivity to ethylene during the early stages of berry development. This would be expected to lead to a greater activation of the ethylene signaling pathway prior to véraison. As in grape berry, strawberry is able to produce significant levels of ethylene during fruit development, but not to the same extent as climacteric fruits. Recently, three ethylene receptors have been identified in strawberry [52]. Two of them (FaEtr1 and FaErs1) display the same pattern of expression during fruit development as those observed for ERS1 ethylene receptor during grape berry development. In addition, the highest rates of ethylene production in strawberry were detected in very young green fruits. Following this, the hormone decreases continuously until the White stage of fruits. Following this stage, ethylene showed a slight but steady increase for the remainder of development. When considered together, the similarities of expression of ethylene receptors during fruit development for both grapes and strawberries coupled with the concomitant ethylene production during the early steps of fruit development indicate a conserved mechanism for ethylene perception between these fruits prior to ripening. Brassinosteroids Brassinosteroids (BR) have recently been implicated in playing an important role in berry development [53]. Castasterone concentrations are low during the early stages of berry development and then increase at véraison [53]. Brassinosteroids have been shown to increase cell size [54] indicating that berry enlargement may be affected by castasterone levels. BRH1 RING finger protein (1617572_at, TC66046) transcript abundance, which is known to be down-regulated by exogenous application of BR, decreased during E-L stages 31 to 35, but increased in fully mature berries (Figure (Figure5C).5C Gibberellins Very little is known about the role of gibberellin (GA) in grape berry development except a possible role in cell enlargement. Biologically active concentrations of GA are high in flowers and in fruits just after anthesis, but then drop to lower levels over the course of berry development [53,55]. There is a second peak of active GA at the start of the lag phase and it is 77 times higher in the seed compared to the berry mesocarp [56]. The transcript abundance of two putative GA receptors, GIDL1 and GIDL2 (1618181_at, TC67464; 1620071_at, TC56624, respectively), increased during berry development (Figure (Figure5D).5D Auxins The mechanisms by which the phytohormone indole-3-acetic acid (IAA) regulates berry development are complex and not fully understood. Increased auxin production produced through the action of an ovule-specific auxin-synthesizing transgene enhanced fecundity in grapes [57]. Earlier reports indicated that auxin concentrations were high during early Phase I and declined following véraison [55] consistent with the role of this phytohormone in promoting cell division and expansion during Phase I. Treatment of grape berries with synthetic auxin-like compound, benzothiazole-2-oxyacetic acid (BTOA) delayed ripening [45]. A more recent study showed that auxin concentrations remain relatively constant over the course of berry development [53]. Our data indicate that there are numerous transcript responses to auxin (Figure (Figure5E).5E Methyl jasmonate and cytokinins Methyl jasmonate (MeJA) is known to promote the synthesis and accumulation of terpenes and resveratrol in berry cell cultures [59,60], however, its effects in vivo are not well understood. The transcript abundance of 12-oxophytodienoate reductase (12-OPR) (1607601_at, TC61395), which is involved in jasmonate biosynthesis [61], and a constitutive pathogen-response 5 protein (1614324_at, CF213899), both decreased with berry development (Figure (Figure5F).5F New candidates genes associated with calcium signaling, flavonoid transport and flavor Calcium has many essential roles in plant growth and development [63], however, the role of calcium signaling in grape berry development is largely unexplored. Recently, an ABA-responsive calcium-dependent protein kinase (CDPK) was described that was specifically expressed in the seed and flesh of berries with increased transcript abundance over berry development and ripening [64]. In the current study, a large number of genes with functions related to calcium sequestration, transport and signaling were found to display developmentally regulated expression patterns (Figure (Figure6A;6A
Calcium homeostasis within the cytosol is tightly controlled by membrane spanning Ca2+-ATPases and H+/Ca2+ exchangers, which typically maintain low concentrations of Ca2+ in the cytosol and restore this concentration following signaling-related transient changes in calcium levels. Transcripts encoding plasma membrane Ca2+-ATPase genes (1614028_at, TC62785; 1622073_at, CF404214), which are closely related to ACA8 and ACA13, respectively, in Arabidopsis thaliana, showed increased transcript abundance during E-L stages 33 and 34 and in later developmental stages. Interestingly, ABA markedly and rapidly stimulates the expression of the ACA8 gene in cell cultures of Arabidopsis thaliana [65]. A tonoplast Ca2+/H+ exchanger (1617237_s_at, TC66680), which is a close homolog of CAX3 from A. thaliana and plays a key role in cytosolic Ca2+ homeostasis [66], showed a transient increase in transcript abundance at E-L stages 34, indicating a possible role for calcium signaling around véraison. ABA accumulates until two weeks after the beginning of véraison before decreasing later in berry development [67]. Thus, it is likely that ABA is directly or indirectly involved in the control of Ca2+ signaling and homeostasis events, particularly around véraison. The increased expression of several Unigenes encoding calmodulin or calcium interacting protein kinases (see Table 3) supports this hypothesis [68]. One Unigene encoding a calmodulin-related suppressor of gene silencing (1618587_at, TC64370) displayed a pronounced pattern with two peaks of expression at E-L stage 32 and at E-L stage 35 corresponding to two transitions of berry development (Phases I to II and Phases II to III). This Unigene displayed a 10-fold change in its transcript abundance across berry development and may be involved in the suppression of posttranscriptional gene silencing (PTGS) by interacting with a proteinase known to suppress PTGS in plants [69]. This correlation indicates a possible role for calcium in regulating the activity of the PTGS mechanisms. To date, only one paper reported the possibility of the involvement of PTGS in the regulation of gene expression during plant development [70]. Further investigations are necessary to evaluate the real impact of this Unigene in the triggering of véraison. Phenolic compounds, derived from flavonoids (anthocyanins, tannins and flavonols), are the major wine constituents responsible for organoleptic properties such as color and astringency. Twenty-one Unigenes encoding biosynthetic enzymes of the general phenylpropanoid and flavonoid pathways were found to exhibit differential mRNA expression patterns across berry development (Table 4). The vast majority of these genes are expressed predominantly in the skin [71].
The mechanisms by which anthocyanins accumulate in the vacuole of grape berry skin cells during Phase III are not fully understood. These compounds must be transported from the site of synthesis in the cytosol to their final destination, the vacuole. Several models have been proposed for sequestering anthocyanins in the vacuole in Arabidopsis thaliana. One model [72] indicates the action of a glutathione-S-transferase (GST) in facilitating the transfer of anthocyanins into the vacuole. Another model indicates that a transporter of the multidrug-resistance-associated protein family could facilitate the transport of an anthocyanin-GST complex into the vacuole [73]. Here, the Unigene transcript encoding a GST (1619917_s_at, TC69505; Figure Figure6B)6B Specific members of the MYB transcription factor family play critical roles in the regulation of flavonoid metabolism during grape berry development [76]. We detected four transcripts encoding MYB transcription factors that have been previously characterized in grape berry (see Table 4) [77-80]. VvMYBPA1 (1611091_s_at, TC54724) regulates the proanthocyanidin (condensed tannins) pathway in the grape berry [77]. In the Shiraz cultivar, VvMYBPA1 peak expression appears to occur during E-L stages 34 and 35 in the skin and seeds, whereas, in Cabernet Sauvignon this gene is expressed at an earlier developmental stage (E-L stages 32) (Figure (Figure6B).6B In grape berries, volatile aroma compounds, such as terpenes, benzenoids, and phenylpropanoids, accumulate in exocarp and mesocarp tissues following the initiation of berry ripening [38,82]. Three transcripts (Figure (Figure6C)6C Organic acid and proline metabolism The acid:sugar balance at harvest is an important factor of wine quality as it affects important sensory attributes [15]. Two major organic acids that contribute to titratable acidity, tartrate and malate, are the most abundant organic acids in grapes and reach maximal concentrations around the end of Phase I (E-L stage 32; see Table 5). Tartrate concentrations were found to peak at E-L stage 32 and then declined steadily until harvest, E-L stage 38 (Figure (Figure7A).7A
Like tartrate, malate concentrations peaked around E-L stage 32, but then declined more rapidly than tartrate during berry ripening (Figure (Figure7B).7B Mature berries contain unusually high concentrations of free proline; proline being the most abundant amino acid in Cabernet Sauvignon [88,89]. Proline concentrations increased significantly at véraison and remained high until berries were fully ripe (Figure (Figure7C).7C Sugar metabolism Sugar accumulation in grape berries has been well studied because sugar content is a key factor in producing wine. In contrast to organic acids, hexose sugars (i.e., Glc and Fru) begin to accumulate substantially in the lag phase (Phase II) and continue thereafter. In grapevines, carbohydrates produced during photosynthesis are exported from the leaf as sucrose and transported in the phloem to the berry cluster [90,91]. Prior to véraison, most sugars imported into the berries are metabolized with little if any storage of these compounds. Following véraison, however, sugars accumulate in the vacuole to high levels in the form of glucose and fructose following the enzymatic cleavage of sucrose (mainly in the apoplast, but also in the cytoplasm and vacuole). Monosaccharide transporters direct the transport of these sugars through different organelles [92]. In the berries in this study, fructose was more abundant than glucose; in contrast sucrose concentrations remained relatively low and constant throughout berry development (Figure (Figure8A).8A
Sucrose-6-phosphate phosphohydrolase (SPP) (1608257_at, TC68135), which catalyzes the last step in sucrose synthesis, showed a slight increase in transcript abundance after E-L stage 32 and then remained relatively constant throughout the remainder of berry development (Figure (Figure8B).8B In most sink cells, sucrose is either cleaved by invertase into glucose and fructose or degraded by sucrose synthase into uridine-5'-diphosphate (UDP) glucose and fructose for subsequent metabolism and biosynthesis [96,97]. Cell wall invertases appear to play the main role in the cleavage of sucrose during Phase III of berry development [95]. However, the increase in sucrose synthase during Phase III of berry development indicates that this isogene may participate in the catabolism of sucrose to fructose and glucose. Alternatively, this sucrose synthase isogene may play a critical role in cellulose synthesis associated with Phase III cell expansion similar to its role in cotton fiber elongation [98]. Two cellulose synthase isogenes (1607069_at, TC53461; 1611149_at, TC56091) displayed increased transcript abundance during Phase II and III, consistent with this hypothesis (see Table 1). Additional developmentally regulated transcripts related to carbohydrate metabolism and transport are summarized in Table 6.
Hexose and triose phosphate transport The transcript abundances of numerous hexose and triosephosphate transporters varied considerably over the course of berry development (Figure (Figure8C)8C A putative plastidic glucose transporter (1608991_at, TC60060) showed increased transcript abundance up to E-L stage 34 and then remained constant throughout berry ripening (Figure (Figure8C).8C Finally, a sorbitol transporter (Figure (Figure9)9
Starch metabolism Starch metabolism in developing and ripening grape berries is poorly understood. Starch synthase I catalyzes the elongation of glucans by the addition of glucose residues from ADP-glucose through the formation of α-1,4 linkages and is a major determinant for the synthesis of transient starch reserves in plants [105]. Our data indicate that starch metabolism is significant in berries. Starch concentrations declined significantly during Phase III of berry development; E-L stage 35, 36 and 38 were equal to 774 ± 57, 715 ± 54 and 554 ± 28 μg of glucose per g fresh weight of berry, respectively (mean ± SE). Furthermore, the transcript abundance of numerous transcripts involved in starch metabolism changed during berry development. One plastidial soluble starch synthase Unigene (1615571_at, TC53551) displayed increasing transcript abundance, while a second Unigene (1613601_at, TC67353) displayed decreasing transcript abundance during berry development (Figure (Figure8D).8D Figure Figure99 Photosynthesis and carbon assimilation During berry development transcripts encoding proteins associated with photosynthesis-related functions are strongly expressed during the flowering stage and the so-called "herbaceous phase" or Phase I of berry development with expression declining during the later stages of berry maturation [17,18]. In our data, around 100 Unigenes with photosynthesis-related functions were identified with most displaying a steady or transient decline in the transcript abundance across berry development (Additional file 5, Table 7). Similarly, transcripts encoding enzymes with roles in carbon assimilation also exhibited a declining pattern of expression. For instance, Unigenes encoding Calvin cycle enzymes such as glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (1615814_at, TC56030; 1622715_s-at, TC51781), phosphoribulokinase (1614716_at, TC58640), transketolase (1618061_a_at, TC52548) as well as ribulose biphosphate carboxylase/oxygenase small subunit (1612848_x_at, TC64044) were highly expressed and then declined during Phase III of berry development consistent with previous reports [18].
Circadian cycles Circadian clocks are signaling networks that enhance an organism's growth, survival, and competitive advantage in rhythmic day/night environments [108]. The plant circadian clock modulates a wide range of physiological and biochemical events, such as stomatal and organ movements, photosynthesis and induction of flowering. A model of circadian rhythm based upon activities of several enzymes has been created involving transcription factors such as CIRCADIAN CLOCK-ASSOCIATED 1 (CCA1) or pseudo-response regulators such as PRR7 [108]. Transcripts for Unigene (1616834_at, TC54726) encoding CCA1 were repressed during the early stages of berry development, but increased in abundance at E-L stage 36. In contrast, one Unigene (1608006_at, TC51808) related to the two-component response regulator APRR7 had a transient peak of expression in the early stages of berry development. This result is consistent with the position and function of these proteins in the circadian clock. Indeed, APRR7 represses CCA1 activity in Arabidopsis thaliana. In grape, these correlations in the transcript abundance indicate the operation of the circadian clock machinery throughout berry development. In addition, those genes are thought to enhance starch mobilization, consistent with previous observations made during Phase III of berry development [109]. Pathogen and disease resistance related proteins Pathogen-related (PR) proteins are the most abundant class of proteins present in wine and can negatively affect the clarity and stability of wine [110]. During berry development, PR genes are expressed highly throughout various stages of berry growth. Around 30 Unigenes encoding different classes of PR genes were identified with a two-fold ratio or greater expression change (Additional file 5, Table 8). Interestingly, four Unigenes encoding PR1 protein were highly expressed during early berry development, but then declined for the remainder of berry development. PR1 protein is regarded as one of the main down-stream responses of the salicylic acid signaling that plays an important role in Systemic Acquired Resistance. Salycylic acid is thought to accumulate just before véraison, which correlates well with the PR1 mRNA and protein expression [111]. The two main PR proteins that have a significant role in the defense against invading fungal pathogens are β-1,3-glucanase (PR2) and chitinase (PR3) [112]. Five Unigenes encoding β-1,3-glucanase were transiently expressed at different periods of berry development. Unigenes encoding various chitinases were also identified that displayed similar mRNA expression patterns. Some chitinase genes exhibit strong homologies with a chitinase previously observed in grape berry [111]. Another PR protein, which may play a role in grape berry defense, is thaumatin protein (PR5) [113]. Eight Unigenes encoding PR5 proteins were identified and their respective expression patterns span all stages of berry development. Taken together, the expression patterns revealed that these defense-related gene products and enzymes are expressed across all stages of berry development. Such a Systemic Acquired Resistance strategy probably minimizes pathogen invasion as previously suggested [114].
Quantitative real-time RT-PCR To validate expression profiles obtained using the Affymetrix GeneChip® Vitis genome array, quantitative real-time RT-PCR was performed on 11 genes using gene-specific primers [Additional file 5, Table 3]. Transcript abundance patterns were calculated along the entire course of berry development. Linear regression ([microarray value] = a[RT-PCR value]+b) analysis showed an overall correlation coefficient of 0.94 indicating a good correlation between transcript abundance assessed by real-time RT-PCR and the expression profiles obtained with the GeneChip® genome arrays (Figure (Figure1010
Conclusion Our large-scale transcriptomic analysis demonstrated that nearly a third (28%) of genes expressed in berries exhibited at least two-fold or greater change in steady-state transcript abundance over the course of seven stages of grape berry development. Approximately two-thirds (64%) of these Unigenes could be assigned a functional annotation with the remaining one-third having obscure or unknown functions. Twenty distinct patterns of expression were resolved in order to illustrate the complex transcriptional regulatory hierarchies that exist to orchestrate the dynamic metabolic, transport, and control processes occurring in developing berries. We provided evidence that phytohormone biosynthesis and responses, particularly for ABA, ethylene, brassinosteroids, and auxins, as well as calcium homeostasis, transport, and signaling processes play critical roles in this developmental process. We also demonstrate that the expression and regulation of genes involved in cell wall biosynthesis and expansion, as well as genes involved in the biosynthesis, transport, and regulation of the phenylpropanoid and flavonoid pathways undergo dynamic changes throughout the course of berry development. Our analysis has revealed candidate genes that may participate in the production of different classes of aroma producing compounds. We have also demonstrated coordinate regulation of transcripts and the accumulation of key metabolites including tartrate, malate, and proline during berry development. A close examination of the behavior of gene expression patterns of genes involved in sugar and starch metabolism indicate that plastidial starch reserves are mobilized to fuel the production of hexose sugars during the ripening and maturation phase (Phase III) of berry development. Finally, our findings provide the first functional genomic information for hundreds of genes with obscure functions that can be exploited for hypothesis testing by traditional functional assays to improve our understanding of the complex developmental processes present in grape berries and to ultimately utilize this information to improve quality traits of wine grapes. Methods Plant Materials Six twenty-year-old Cabernet Sauvignon (Vitis vinifera L.) vines grown on St. George rootstock were used during 2004 for this study. The vines were located at the Shenandoah Vineyard in Plymouth, CA, on a hillside row located in the middle of the vineyard. All plants were equipped with a drip irrigation system and watered daily to keep their water status high. Mid-day stem water potentials were measured weekly with a pressure chamber on two mature leaves per plant for a total of 6 vines [115]. For each measurement, a single leaf per plant was tightly zipped in a plastic bag to eliminate transpiration and covered with aluminum foil to deflect light and heat. After two hours of equilibration time, the petiole was cleanly cut and carefully threaded through a rubber gasket in the lid of a pressure chamber (3005 Plant Water Status Console, Soilmoisture Equipment Corp., Santa Barbara, CA, USA). The foil was removed before sealing the bagged leaf in the chamber. The balancing pressure required to visibly push stem xylem sap to the cut surface was recorded. Two grape clusters were sampled weekly from each plant (n = 6), one from the south (sunny) and one from the north (shady) side of the plant. The clusters were pooled together for each plant in order to avoid light and temperature effects. Berry development was characterized by monitoring berry diameter, total soluble solids and titratable acidity. The berry diameter was measured with a micrometer for fifteen randomly selected berries per each of two clusters and an average berry size was computed per vine (n = 6). Total soluble solids (°Brix) were assayed (two technical replicates) with a refractometer (BRIX30, USA) from juice crushed from harvested berries from two clusters per vine (n = 6) to estimate total sugar content. Titratable acidity (g/L) of the grape juice was measured by titration to an endpoint of pH 8.4 with a strong base. The same number of repetitions as in °Brix measurements was used. RNA extraction and microarray hybridization Total RNA was extracted from berries finely ground in liquid nitrogen using Qiagen RNeasy Plant MidiKit columns (Qiagen Inc., CA) as previously described [116]. The total RNA was further purified using a Qiagen RNeasy Plant Mini Kit (Qiagen, Valencia, CA) according to the manufacturers' instructions. RNA integrity was confirmed by electrophoresis on 1.5% agarose gels containing formaldehyde and quality was confirmed by analysis on an Agilent 2100 Bioanalyzer using RNA LabChip® assays according to the manufacturer's instructions. mRNAs were converted to cDNAs using oligo dT primer containing a T7 RNA polymerase promoter sequence and reverse transcriptase. Biotinylated complementary RNAs (cRNAs) were synthesized in vitro using T7 RNA polymerase in the presence of biotin-labeled UTP/CTP, purified, fragmented and hybridized in the GeneChip® Vitis vinifera Genome Array cartridge (Affymetrix®, Santa Clara, CA). The hybridized arrays were washed and stained with streptavidin phycoerythrin and biotinylated anti-streptavidin antibody using an Affymetrix Fluidics Station 400. Microarrays were scanned using a Hewlett-Packard GeneArray® Scanner and image data was collected and processed on a GeneChip® workstation using Affymetrix® GCOS software. Microarray data processing Three biological replicates per experiment were processed to evaluate intra-specific variability. Expression data were processed by RMA (Robust Multi-Array Average) [117] using the R package affy [118]. Specifically, the RMA model of probe-specific background correction was first applied to the PM (perfect match) probes. These corrected probe values were normalized via quantile normalization and a median polish method was applied to compute one expression measure from all probe values. Data quality was verified by digestion curves describing trends in RNA degradation between the 5' end and the 3' end in each probe set. Differentially expressed genes throughout berry development were determined by ANOVA on the RMA expression values [118]. A multiple testing correction [22] was applied to the p-values of the F-statistics to adjust the false discovery rate. Genes with adjusted p-values < 0.05 were extracted for further analysis. Genes having a two-fold ratio (TFR) or greater between at least two time points along berry development were selected for further analyses. The RMA expression data (experiment Vv5) have been deposited in PLEXdb [119]. Microarray data analysis Clustering of co-regulated genes was performed using the MultiExperimentViewer software part of the TM4 software package (MEV3.1) developed by TIGR [120]. TFR Unigenes were clustered via the Pavlidis Template Matching (PTM) algorithm [24]. The twenty template profiles were selected (by us) as representatives of biological processes occurring during berry development (Additional File 4). The Pearson correlation coefficient between each Unigene and each template profile was used to determine cluster membership: correlation measures greater than 0.75 corresponded to a good match. If genes were well correlated with more than one template profile, the gene was assigned to the cluster with which it had greatest correlation. The p-values associated to the hypothesis test of each correlation coefficient (null hypothesis is that the correlation is zero) were calculated and a multiple testing correction (Benjamini and Hochberg) was applied. Only genes with adjusted p-values ≤ 0.05 and correlations greater than 0.75 were placed into clusters Unigene Annotation and Functional Analysis Unigene annotation was updated by nucleotide sequence query of the probe consensus sequence against the UniProt/TrEMBL, NCBI-nr and TAIR protein databases using BLASTX (e-value < 1e-05). Functional categories were assigned automatically by amino acid homology to Arabidopsis thaliana proteins categorized according to the Munich Information Center for Protein Sequences (MIPS) Funcat 2 classification scheme [25]. Bibliographic searches were performed to assign functions to Unigenes exhibiting no homology with Arabidopsis thaliana proteins. Some annotation presented here will be subject to error due to the relatively correlative nature of these associations. It is expected that the annotated data presented here will be used for future hypothesis-driven research that can establish stronger functional analyses and annotations. Attribution of the 20 clusters to the key developmental phases (I, II or III) (See Figure Figure6)6 Real Time PCR experiments RNA was extracted and its integrity verified by standard procedures. cDNA was synthesized using an iScript cDNA Synthesis Kit (Bio-Rad Laboratories, Hercules, CA) according to the manufacturer's instructions with a uniform 1 μg RNA per reaction volume reverse-transcribed. Primers for genes (Additional File 5: Table 3) assayed by real-time PCR were selected using Primer3 software [122]. Quantitative real-time PCR reactions were prepared using an iTaq SYBR Green Supermix with ROX (Bio-Rad) and performed using the ABI PRISM® 7000 Sequence Detection System (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, CA). Expression was determined for triplicate biological replicates by use of serial dilution cDNA standard curves per gene. In order to assess the performance of the array in a biological context, we examined the transcript abundance of some candidate genes from Cabernet Sauvignon exhibiting changing expression patterns across the 7 time points of berry development. Real-time RT-PCR was performed with the ABI PRISM® 7000 Sequence Detection System (Applied Biosystems, Forster City, CA) under annealing conditions of 50°C for 1 minute and analyzed with ABI PRISM® 7000 SDS software. Analysis of relative gene expression was performed using the Metabolite extraction and derivatization Polar metabolites were extracted and derivatized with a water/chloroform protocol according to previously established procedures [125]. Freeze-dried berry tissue (6 mg) was placed in a standard screw-cap-threaded, glass vial. The tube was then returned to the -80°C freezer until use. Frozen tubes were wrapped in parafilm and freeze-dried overnight. All tissue samples were kept frozen throughout the lyophilization procedure. Upon lyophilization, tubes were capped and returned to the freezer until extraction. The vials were allowed to cool back to room temperature before being handled. The extraction vials were not washed with a methanol/hexane rinse, but all caps and septa were. The vial was incubated in HPLC grade chloroform for 1 hour at 50°C in an oven. A volume of Millipore water was added (m/V) containing 25 mg/L of ribitol as an internal standard and the sample was re-incubated for an additional hour at 50°C. Finally, vials were allowed to cool to room temperature and then spun down at 2,900 × g for 30 minutes. One mL of the polar phase was dried down in a vacuum concentrator. Polar samples were derivatized by adding 120 μL of 15 mg mL-1 of methoxyamine HCl in pyridine, incubated at 50°C for 30 minutes and sonicated until all crystals disappeared. After that, 120 μL of MSTFA + 1% TMCS were added, incubated at 50°C for 30 minutes and immediately submitted for analysis with a Thermo Finnigan Polaris Q230 GC-MS (Thermo Electron Corporation, San Jose, CA, USA). The inlet and transfer lines were held at 240°C and 320°C, respectively. Separation was achieved with a temperature program of 80°C for 3 min, then ramped at 5°C min-1 to 315°C and held for 17 min, using a 60 m DB-5MS column (J&W Scientific, 0.25 mm ID, 0.25 μm film thickness) and a constant flow of 1.0 ml min-1. Derivatized samples (120 μL) were transferred to a 200 μL silanized vial insert and run at an injection split of 200:1 to bring the large peaks to a concentration within the range of the detector. Identity of all organic acids, sugars and amino acids were verified by comparison with standards purchased from Sigma-Aldrich (St. Louis, MO, USA). Metabolite data processing Metabolites were identified from the chromatograms using two different software packages: AMDIS (2.64, United States Department of Defense, USA) and Xcalibur (1.3; Thermo Electron Corporation). The software matched the mass spectrum in each peak against three different metabolite libraries: NIST ver. 2.0 library [126], T_MSRI_ID library of the Golm Metabolome Database [127] and our own custom-created UNR library (V1) made from more than 50 standards bought from Sigma-Aldrich. Quantification of the area of the chromatogram peaks was determined using Xcalibur and normalized as a ratio of the area of the peak of the ribitol internal standard. Starch determination Starch assays were performed according to Dubois et al. [128]; 100 mg of berry powder from E-L stages (35 to 38) were finely ground and incubated in 5 mL of methanol (80/20; v/v) at 80°C for 40 min. This step eliminates soluble sugars. The methanol extract was removed and the pellet was washed twice with distilled water. The remaining pellet was incubated overnight in 1.2 mL of acetate buffer (40 mM sodium acetate, 60 mM acetic acid) and 0.2 mL of enzymes solution (3 units of amyloglucosidase and 0.25 units of α-amylase); 0.5 mL of the supernatant was mixed with 0.5 mL of water and 1 mL of phenol (5/95; v/v). Thereafter, 5 mL of concentrated sulfuric acid was added and the solution was left to cool for 15 min. Glucose was measured by its absorbance at 483 nm and expressed in terms of μg of glucose per g fresh weight of berry sample. Calibration of the concentration of glucose was performed by determining the absorbance of several concentrations of glucose standards at 483 nm (0, 20, 40, 80, 120, 160, 200 μg ml-1). Authors' contributions LGD conceived the experimental design, set up mRNA extraction, performed microarray experiments, RT-PCR, GC-MS, and starch analyses, prepared figures and tables and wrote the initial manuscript draft. JG performed database analysis. MDW and GRC acquired physiological data. RLT performed the identification of housekeeping genes. DRQ supervised the GC-MS analysis. CO performed microarray analyses. DAS contributed to metabolic profiling studies and edited the manuscript. KAS performed all statistical data analysis and edited the manuscript. JCC and GRC contributed equally to the preparation and finalization of the manuscript and conceived the study. All authors have read and approved the final version of the manuscript. Additional file 1 Quality control of Vitis GeneChip® genome arrays. The data provided represent the quality controls and commercial specifications of the 21 arrays used in this study. Slide 1. A) Box plot of raw PM (perfect match) probe intensities before and after RMA normalization. Each color indicates a set of three biological replicates. B) RNA degradation plot for all 21 arrays. All lines have similar shapes and similar variation between highest and lowest points. C) Commercial specifications of the Affymetrix Vitis GeneChip® version 1.0. Click here for file(420K, ppt) Additional file 2 Extensive list of transcripts differentially expressed along berry development. The data provided represent the lists of transcripts that fulfilled the ANOVA filter. Table 1: List of probe sets that passed the ANOVA filter. Table 2: List of Unigenes that passed the ANOVA filter. Table 3: List of probe sets that passed the two-fold ratio (TFR) or greater filter for transcript abundance changes between two stages over berry development. Table 4: List of Unigenes according to Profile number that passed the two-fold ratio (TFR) or greater filter for transcript abundance changes between two stages over berry development. Click here for file(7.3M, xls) Additional file 3 Principal component analysis of transcriptomic behavior during grape berry development. Hybridization data from each biological replicate were projected as two graphs according to the A) first and second and B) second and third principal components arranged in descending order of variance. These first three principal components allowed clear distinction of the seven developmental stages with spots representing data from each biological replicate: E-L stage 31 (light green), 32 (dark green), 33 (brown), 34 (burgundy), 35 (yellow), 36 (light purple), and 38 (orange). Analysis was performed using GeneANOVA software [118]. Click here for file(599K, ppt) Additional file 4 Template profiles used for PTM analysis. The data provided represent the schematic trends of transcript profiles across berry development used for defining the template profiles. Phases are indicated as I, II, or III. Numbers indicated E-L stages 31 to 38. Pink shading indicates véraison (E-L stages 34 to 35). Click here for file(135K, ppt) Additional file 5 Supplemental data related to the functional analyses of the Unigenes and to real-time RT-PCR. The data provided represent supplemental data related to Figures Figures33 Click here for file(115K, doc) Acknowledgements This work was supported by grants from the National Science Foundation (NSF) Plant Genome program (DBI-0217653) to G.R.C., J.C.C., and D.A.S. and the Bioinformatics program (DBI-0136561) to K.A.S. The Nevada Genomics and Proteomics Centers are supported by grants from the NIH Biomedical Research Infrastructure Network (NIH-NCRR, P20 RR16464) and NIH IDeA Network of Biomedical Research Excellence (INBRE, RR-03-008). This research was supported, in part, by the Nevada Agricultural Experiment Station, publication # 03077039. The authors are indebted to Rebecca Albion and Kitty Spreeman for their invaluable technical support. The authors would like to especially thank Leon Sobon of Sobon Estate and Shenandoah Vineyards, Amador County, California for allowing us to collect the berry samples used in this study. References
|
PubMed related articles
Your browsing activity is empty. Activity recording is turned off. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Annu Rev Nutr. 2000; 20():561-93.
[Annu Rev Nutr. 2000]J Nutr. 2001 May; 131(5):1401-4.
[J Nutr. 2001]Cardiovasc Drug Rev. 2004 Fall; 22(3):169-88.
[Cardiovasc Drug Rev. 2004]Drugs Exp Clin Res. 2003; 29(5-6):257-61.
[Drugs Exp Clin Res. 2003]Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2006 Jun; 5(6):493-506.
[Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2006]Plant Cell. 2004; 16 Suppl():S170-80.
[Plant Cell. 2004]Plant Physiol. 2000 Mar; 122(3):803-12.
[Plant Physiol. 2000]Funct Integr Genomics. 2005 Jan; 5(1):40-58.
[Funct Integr Genomics. 2005]Planta. 2005 Nov; 222(5):832-47.
[Planta. 2005]Plant Mol Biol. 2007 Feb; 63(3):307-23.
[Plant Mol Biol. 2007]Biostatistics. 2003 Apr; 4(2):249-64.
[Biostatistics. 2003]Genome Biol. 2001; 2(10):RESEARCH0042.
[Genome Biol. 2001]Nucleic Acids Res. 2004 Jan 1; 32(Database issue):D373-6.
[Nucleic Acids Res. 2004]Plant Physiol. 1977 Oct; 60(4):570-574.
[Plant Physiol. 1977]Plant Physiol. 1989 Jan; 89(1):104-110.
[Plant Physiol. 1989]J Exp Bot. 2002 Apr; 53(370):979-87.
[J Exp Bot. 2002]Plant Physiol. 1998 Nov; 118(3):783-92.
[Plant Physiol. 1998]Plant Cell Environ. 2006 May; 29(5):993-1001.
[Plant Cell Environ. 2006]Plant Mol Biol. 2001 Sep; 47(1-2):311-40.
[Plant Mol Biol. 2001]Plant J. 2006 Jul; 47(2):282-95.
[Plant J. 2006]Genome Biol. 2005; 6(12):242.
[Genome Biol. 2005]Plant Physiol Biochem. 2006 May-Jun; 44(5-6):301-7.
[Plant Physiol Biochem. 2006]Science. 2006 Feb 10; 311(5762):804-5.
[Science. 2006]Phytochemistry. 2004 Oct; 65(19):2649-59.
[Phytochemistry. 2004]Phytochemistry. 2004 May; 65(9):1223-9.
[Phytochemistry. 2004]Trends Plant Sci. 2002 Aug; 7(8):366-73.
[Trends Plant Sci. 2002]J Agric Food Chem. 2005 Mar 9; 53(5):1633-6.
[J Agric Food Chem. 2005]Plant Physiol. 1997 Nov; 115(3):1155-1161.
[Plant Physiol. 1997]J Exp Bot. 2004 Oct; 55(406):2235-40.
[J Exp Bot. 2004]Plant Physiol. 1970 May; 45(5):620-623.
[Plant Physiol. 1970]Ann Bot. 2005 May; 95(6):901-15.
[Ann Bot. 2005]Physiol Plant. 2002 Jul; 115(3):336-341.
[Physiol Plant. 2002]J Exp Bot. 2005 Aug; 56(418):2037-46.
[J Exp Bot. 2005]Plant Physiol. 2006 Jan; 140(1):150-8.
[Plant Physiol. 2006]Science. 2006 Dec 1; 314(5804):1410-1.
[Science. 2006]Plant Physiol. 2006 Jan; 140(1):150-8.
[Plant Physiol. 2006]Plant Physiol. 2007 Apr; 143(4):1689-94.
[Plant Physiol. 2007]Plant Physiol. 1997 Nov; 115(3):1155-1161.
[Plant Physiol. 1997]Plant Physiol. 2006 Jan; 140(1):150-8.
[Plant Physiol. 2006]Science. 1995 Jun 23; 268(5218):1745-8.
[Science. 1995]J Agric Food Chem. 2005 Apr 6; 53(7):2652-7.
[J Agric Food Chem. 2005]New Phytol. 2005 Jun; 166(3):895-905.
[New Phytol. 2005]Planta. 2000 May; 210(6):979-84.
[Planta. 2000]Plant Biol (Stuttg). 2006 May; 8(3):371-81.
[Plant Biol (Stuttg). 2006]Plant Cell. 2005 Aug; 17(8):2142-55.
[Plant Cell. 2005]Plant Physiol. 2006 Feb; 140(2):558-79.
[Plant Physiol. 2006]Plant Biol (Stuttg). 2006 Sep; 8(5):572-8.
[Plant Biol (Stuttg). 2006]Plant Physiol. 2005 Aug; 138(4):2048-60.
[Plant Physiol. 2005]Plant Physiol. 1973 Apr; 51(4):629-634.
[Plant Physiol. 1973]Trends Plant Sci. 2005 Aug; 10(8):383-9.
[Trends Plant Sci. 2005]Science. 2000 Oct 6; 290(5489):142-4.
[Science. 2000]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2000 Oct 10; 97(21):11650-4.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2000]BMC Genomics. 2007 Jun 21; 8():187.
[BMC Genomics. 2007]Plant J. 2004 Jan; 37(1):104-14.
[Plant J. 2004]Plant Cell. 2004 Jul; 16(7):1812-26.
[Plant Cell. 2004]Plant Cell. 1998 Jul; 10(7):1135-49.
[Plant Cell. 1998]BMC Genomics. 2007 Jun 21; 8():187.
[BMC Genomics. 2007]Plant Cell. 2001 Apr; 13(4):853-71.
[Plant Cell. 2001]Plant J. 2007 Mar; 49(5):772-85.
[Plant J. 2007]Plant Physiol. 2007 Mar; 143(3):1347-61.
[Plant Physiol. 2007]Science. 2004 May 14; 304(5673):982.
[Science. 2004]Cell. 1992 Mar 6; 68(5):955-64.
[Cell. 1992]BMC Genomics. 2007 Jun 21; 8():187.
[BMC Genomics. 2007]Science. 2006 Feb 10; 311(5762):804-5.
[Science. 2006]Phytochemistry. 2002 Jul; 60(5):451-9.
[Phytochemistry. 2002]Plant Physiol. 2004 May; 135(1):95-102.
[Plant Physiol. 2004]Arch Biochem Biophys. 1999 Jul 1; 367(1):9-16.
[Arch Biochem Biophys. 1999]Science. 2006 Feb 10; 311(5762):808-11.
[Science. 2006]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006 Apr 4; 103(14):5608-13.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006]BMC Genomics. 2007 Jun 21; 8():187.
[BMC Genomics. 2007]Plant Physiol. 1999 Jul; 120(3):923.
[Plant Physiol. 1999]Plant Physiol. 1958 Jan; 33(1):33-7.
[Plant Physiol. 1958]Plant Physiol. 2006 Aug; 141(4):1563-77.
[Plant Physiol. 2006]J Exp Bot. 2002 Jan; 53(366):61-71.
[J Exp Bot. 2002]Plant Physiol. 1996 May; 111(1):275-83.
[Plant Physiol. 1996]Plant Physiol. 2006 Sep; 142(1):220-32.
[Plant Physiol. 2006]Annu Rev Plant Physiol Plant Mol Biol. 1996 Jun; 47():509-540.
[Annu Rev Plant Physiol Plant Mol Biol. 1996]Plant Physiol. 2006 Sep; 142(1):220-32.
[Plant Physiol. 2006]J Exp Bot. 2005 May; 56(415):1409-18.
[J Exp Bot. 2005]Planta. 2005 Nov; 222(5):832-47.
[Planta. 2005]Plant Cell. 2005 Jan; 17(1):204-18.
[Plant Cell. 2005]Plant Physiol. 2003 Apr; 131(4):1566-75.
[Plant Physiol. 2003]Plant J. 2005 Aug; 43(3):398-412.
[Plant J. 2005]Planta. 2003 May; 217(1):11-20.
[Planta. 2003]Protoplasma. 2001; 218(3-4):225-35.
[Protoplasma. 2001]Funct Integr Genomics. 2005 Jan; 5(1):40-58.
[Funct Integr Genomics. 2005]Planta. 2005 Nov; 222(5):832-47.
[Planta. 2005]Plant Cell Environ. 2007 Mar; 30(3):333-49.
[Plant Cell Environ. 2007]Plant Physiol. 2005 Aug; 138(4):2280-91.
[Plant Physiol. 2005]Plant Physiol. 1997 Jul; 114(3):771-8.
[Plant Physiol. 1997]Plant J. 1995 Jul; 8(1):97-109.
[Plant J. 1995]Plant Physiol. 1997 Jul; 114(3):759-69.
[Plant Physiol. 1997]Plant Physiol. 1997 Nov; 115(3):1039-48.
[Plant Physiol. 1997]Bioinformatics. 2004 Feb 12; 20(3):307-15.
[Bioinformatics. 2004]Bioinformatics. 2002 Mar; 18(3):490-1.
[Bioinformatics. 2002]Nucleic Acids Res. 2005 Jan 1; 33(Database issue):D614-8.
[Nucleic Acids Res. 2005]Biotechniques. 2003 Feb; 34(2):374-8.
[Biotechniques. 2003]Genome Biol. 2001; 2(10):RESEARCH0042.
[Genome Biol. 2001]Nucleic Acids Res. 2004 Jan 1; 32(Database issue):D373-6.
[Nucleic Acids Res. 2004]Methods Mol Biol. 2000; 132():365-86.
[Methods Mol Biol. 2000]Biotechniques. 2005 Feb; 38(2):287-93.
[Biotechniques. 2005]Genome Biol. 2002 Jun 18; 3(7):RESEARCH0034.
[Genome Biol. 2002]J Exp Bot. 2005 Jan; 56(410):323-36.
[J Exp Bot. 2005]Bioinformatics. 2005 Apr 15; 21(8):1635-8.
[Bioinformatics. 2005]Bioinformatics. 2002 Mar; 18(3):490-1.
[Bioinformatics. 2002]