Multi-omics approach highlights differences between RLP classes in Arabidopsis thaliana

Abstract Background The Leucine rich-repeat (LRR) receptor-like protein (RLP) family is a complex gene family with 57 members in Arabidopsis thaliana. Some members of the RLP family are known to be involved in basal developmental processes, whereas others are involved in defence responses. However,...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: C. E. Steidele, R. Stam
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2021-07-01
Series:BMC Genomics
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1186/s12864-021-07855-0
id doaj-8fed67f34ec34e0dab50ea04dfe6f507
record_format Article
spelling doaj-8fed67f34ec34e0dab50ea04dfe6f5072021-07-25T11:29:40ZengBMCBMC Genomics1471-21642021-07-0122111410.1186/s12864-021-07855-0Multi-omics approach highlights differences between RLP classes in Arabidopsis thalianaC. E. Steidele0R. Stam1Chair of Phytopathology, TUM School of Life Sciences Weihenstephan, Technical University of MunichChair of Phytopathology, TUM School of Life Sciences Weihenstephan, Technical University of MunichAbstract Background The Leucine rich-repeat (LRR) receptor-like protein (RLP) family is a complex gene family with 57 members in Arabidopsis thaliana. Some members of the RLP family are known to be involved in basal developmental processes, whereas others are involved in defence responses. However, functional data is currently only available for a small subset of RLPs, leaving the remaining ones classified as RLPs of unknown function. Results Using publicly available datasets, we annotated RLPs of unknown function as either likely defence-related or likely fulfilling a more basal function in plants. Then, using these categories, we can identify important characteristics that differ between the RLP subclasses. We found that the two classes differ in abundance on both transcriptome and proteome level, physical clustering in the genome and putative interaction partners. However, the classes do not differ in the genetic di versity of their individual members in accessible pan-genome data. Conclusions Our work has several implications for work related to functional studies on RLPs as well as for the understanding of RLP gene family evolution. Using our annotations, we can make suggestions on which RLPs can be identified as potential immune receptors using genetics tools and thereby complement disease studies. The lack of differences in nucleotide diversity between the two RLP subclasses further suggests that non-synonymous diversity of gene sequences alone cannot distinguish defence from developmental genes. By contrast, differences in transcript and protein abundance or clustering at genomic loci might also allow for functional annotations and characterisation in other plant species.https://doi.org/10.1186/s12864-021-07855-0
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author C. E. Steidele
R. Stam
spellingShingle C. E. Steidele
R. Stam
Multi-omics approach highlights differences between RLP classes in Arabidopsis thaliana
BMC Genomics
author_facet C. E. Steidele
R. Stam
author_sort C. E. Steidele
title Multi-omics approach highlights differences between RLP classes in Arabidopsis thaliana
title_short Multi-omics approach highlights differences between RLP classes in Arabidopsis thaliana
title_full Multi-omics approach highlights differences between RLP classes in Arabidopsis thaliana
title_fullStr Multi-omics approach highlights differences between RLP classes in Arabidopsis thaliana
title_full_unstemmed Multi-omics approach highlights differences between RLP classes in Arabidopsis thaliana
title_sort multi-omics approach highlights differences between rlp classes in arabidopsis thaliana
publisher BMC
series BMC Genomics
issn 1471-2164
publishDate 2021-07-01
description Abstract Background The Leucine rich-repeat (LRR) receptor-like protein (RLP) family is a complex gene family with 57 members in Arabidopsis thaliana. Some members of the RLP family are known to be involved in basal developmental processes, whereas others are involved in defence responses. However, functional data is currently only available for a small subset of RLPs, leaving the remaining ones classified as RLPs of unknown function. Results Using publicly available datasets, we annotated RLPs of unknown function as either likely defence-related or likely fulfilling a more basal function in plants. Then, using these categories, we can identify important characteristics that differ between the RLP subclasses. We found that the two classes differ in abundance on both transcriptome and proteome level, physical clustering in the genome and putative interaction partners. However, the classes do not differ in the genetic di versity of their individual members in accessible pan-genome data. Conclusions Our work has several implications for work related to functional studies on RLPs as well as for the understanding of RLP gene family evolution. Using our annotations, we can make suggestions on which RLPs can be identified as potential immune receptors using genetics tools and thereby complement disease studies. The lack of differences in nucleotide diversity between the two RLP subclasses further suggests that non-synonymous diversity of gene sequences alone cannot distinguish defence from developmental genes. By contrast, differences in transcript and protein abundance or clustering at genomic loci might also allow for functional annotations and characterisation in other plant species.
url https://doi.org/10.1186/s12864-021-07855-0
work_keys_str_mv AT cesteidele multiomicsapproachhighlightsdifferencesbetweenrlpclassesinarabidopsisthaliana
AT rstam multiomicsapproachhighlightsdifferencesbetweenrlpclassesinarabidopsisthaliana
_version_ 1721283103635275776