4.6 Article

RNA-Seq Profiling of a Defective Seed Coat Mutation in Glycine max Reveals Differential Expression of Proline-Rich and Other Cell Wall Protein Transcripts

Journal

PLOS ONE
Volume 9, Issue 5, Pages -

Publisher

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0096342

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. United Soybean Board
  2. United States Department of Agriculture (USDA)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The plant cell wall performs a number of essential functions including providing shape to many different cell types and serving as a defense against potential pathogens. The net pattern mutation creates breaks in the seed coat of soybean (Glycine max) because of ruptured cell walls. Using RNA-Seq, we examined the seed coat transcriptome from three stages of immature seed development in two pairs of isolines with normal or defective seed coat phenotypes due to the net pattern. The genome-wide comparative study of the transcript profiles of these isolines revealed 364 differentially expressed genes in common between the two varieties that were further divided into different broad functional categories. Genes related to cell wall processes accounted for 19% of the differentially expressed genes in the middle developmental stage of 100200 mg seed weight. Within this class, the cell wall proline-rich and glycine-rich protein genes were highly differentially expressed in both genetic backgrounds. Other genes that showed significant expression changes in each of the isoline pairs at the 100-200 mg seed weight stage were xylem serine proteinase, fasciclin-related genes, auxin and stress response related genes, TRANSPARENT TESTA 1 (TT1) and other transcription factors. The mutant appears to shift the timing of either the increase or decrease in the levels of some of the transcripts. The analysis of these data sets reveals the physiological changes that the seed coat undergoes during the formation of the breaks in the cell wall.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available