Korean Journal of Agricultural Science (농업과학연구)

Institute of Agricultural Science, CNU (충남대학교 농업과학연구소)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Perspectives on the genomics research of important crops in the tribe Andropogoneae: Focusing on the Saccharum complex

  • Choi, Sang Chul (Department of Crop Science, Chungnam National University) ;
  • Chung, Yong Suk (Department of Crop Science, Chungnam National University) ;
  • Kim, Changsoo (Department of Crop Science, Chungnam National University)
  • Received : 2016.02.23
  • Accepted : 2016.03.15
  • Published : 2016.03.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Climate changes are shifting the perception of C4 photosynthetic crops due to their superior adaptability to harsh conditions. The tribe Andropogoneae includes some economically important grasses, such as Zea mays, Sorghum bicolor, Miscanthus spp., and Saccharum spp., representing C4 photosynthetic grasses. Although the Andropogoneae grasses diverged fairly recently, their genomic structures are remarkably different from each other. As previously reported, the family Poaceae shares the pan-cereal duplication event occurring ca. 65 MYA. Since this event, Sorghum bicolor has never experienced any additional duplication event. However, some lineage-specific duplication events were reported in Z. mays and Saccharum spp., and, more recently, it was revealed that a shared allotetraploidization event occurred before the divergence between Miscanthus and Saccharum (but after the divergence from S. bicolor), which provided important clues to those two species having large genome sizes with complicated ploidy numbers. The complex genomic structures of sugarcane and Miscanthus (defined as the Saccharum complex along with some other taxa) have had a limiting effect on the use of their molecular information in breeding programs. For the last decade, genomics-associated technologies have become an important tool for molecular crop breeding (genomics-assisted breeding, GAB), but it has not been directly applied to sugarcane and Miscanthus due to their complicated genome structures. As genomics research advances, molecular breeding of those crops can take advantage of technical improvements at a reasonable cost through comparative genomic approaches. Active genomic research of non-model species using closely related model species will facilitate the improvement of those crops in the future.

Keywords

References

  1. Abrouk M, Murat F, Pont C, Messing J, Jackson S, Faraut T, Tannier E, Plomion C, Cooke R, Feuillet C et al. 2010. Palaeogenomics of plants: synteny-based modelling of extinct ancestors.
  2. Arabidopsis Genome Initiative. 2000. Analysis of the genome sequence of the flowering plant Arabidopsis thaliana. Nature 408:796-815. https://doi.org/10.1038/35048692
  3. Bremer G. 1961. Problems in breeding and cytology of sugarcane. Euphytica 10:59-78. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00037206
  4. D'Hont A, Ison D, Alix K, Roux C, Glaszmann J-C. 1998. Determination of basic choromosome numbers in the genus Saccharum by physical mapping of ribosomal RNA genes. Genome 41:221-225. https://doi.org/10.1139/gen-41-2-221
  5. Daniels J, Roach BT. 1987. Taxonomy and Evolution. in Sugarcane Improvement Through Breeding (ed. DJ Heinz), pp. 7-84. Elsevier Press, Amsterdam.
  6. Daniels J, Smith P, Panton N, Williams CA. 1975. The origin of the genus Saccharum. Sugarcane Breed Newsl 36:24-39.
  7. de Setta N, Monteiro-Vitorello CB, Metcalfe CJ, Cruz GM, Del Bem LE, Vicentini R, Nogueira FT, Campos RA, Nunes SL, Turrini PC et al. 2014. Building the sugarcane genome for biotechnology and identifying evolutionary trends. BMC Genomics 15:540. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2164-15-540
  8. Edwards GE, Franceschi VR, Voznesenskaya EV. 2004. Single-cell C(4) photosynthesis versus the dual-cell (Kranz) paradigm. Annual Rreview of Plant Biology 55:173-196. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.arplant.55.031903.141725
  9. Goff SA, Ricke D, Lan TH, Presting G, Wang R, Dunn M, Glazebrook J, Sessions A, Oeller P, Varma H et al. 2002. A Draft Sequence of the Rice Genome (Oryza sativa L. ssp. japonica). Science 296:92-100. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1068275
  10. Grass Phylogeny Working Group. 2001. Phylogeny and subfamilial classification of the grasses (Poaceae). Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 88:373-457. https://doi.org/10.2307/3298585
  11. Grivet L, Arruda P. 2001. Sugarcane genomics: depicting the complex genome of an important tropical crop. Curr Opin Plant Biol 5:122-127.
  12. Grivet L, Glaszmann J, D'Hont A. 2006. Molecular evidence of sugarcane evolution and domestication. in Darwin's harvest: New approaches to the origins, evolution and conservation of crops (ed. TJ Motley), pp. 49-66. Columbia University Press, New York.
  13. Ha S, Moore PH, Heinz DJ, Kato S, Ohmido N, Fukui K. 1999. Quantitative chromosome map of the polyploid Saccharum spontaneum by multicolor fluorescence in situ hybridization and imaging methods. Plant Mol Biol 39:1165-1173. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006133804170
  14. Irvine JE. 1999. Saccharum species as horticultural classes. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 98:186-194. https://doi.org/10.1007/s001220051057
  15. Kellogg EA. 2000. The grasses: a case study of macroevolution. Annual review of ecology and systematics 31:217-238. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.31.1.217
  16. Kellogg. 2013. Phylogenetic Relationships of Saccharinae and Sorghinae. in Genomics of the Saccharinae (ed. AH Paterson), pp. 3-21. Springer, Springer New York.
  17. Kim C, Lee TH, Compton RO, Robertson JS, Pierce GJ, Paterson AH. 2013. A genome-wide BAC end-sequence survey of sugarcane elucidates genome composition, and identifies BACs covering much of the euchromatin. Plant Molecular Biology 81:139-147. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11103-012-9987-x
  18. Kim C, Lee TH, Guo H, Chung SJ, Paterson AH, Kim DS, Lee GJ. 2014a. Sequencing of transcriptomes from two Miscanthus species reveals functional specificity in rhizomes, and clarifies evolutionary relationships. BMC Plant Biology 14:134. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2229-14-134
  19. Kim C, Tang H, Paterson AH. 2009. Duplication and divergence of grass genomes: Integrating the Cloridoids. Tropical Plant Biol 2:51-62. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12042-009-9028-3
  20. Kim C, Wang X, Lee TH, Jakob K, Lee GJ, Paterson AH. 2014b. Comparative Analysis of Miscanthus and Saccharum Reveals a Shared Whole-Genome Duplication but Different Evolutionary Fates. The Plant cell 26:2420-2429. https://doi.org/10.1105/tpc.114.125583
  21. Kim C, Zhang D, Auckland SA, Rainville LK, Jakob K, Kronmiller B, Sacks EJ, Deuter M, Paterson AH. 2012. SSR-based genetic maps of Miscanthus sinensis and M. sacchariflorus, and their comparison to sorghum. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 124:1325-1338. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00122-012-1790-1
  22. Luo MC, Deal KR, Akhunov ED, Akhunova AR, Anderson OD, Anderson JA, Blake N, Clegg MT, Coleman-Derr D, Conley EJ et al. 2009. Genome comparisons reveal a dominant mechanism of chromosome number reduction in grasses and accelerated genome evolution in Triticeae. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 106:15780-15785. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0908195106
  23. Ma X-F, Jensen E, Alexandrov N, Troukhan M, Zhang L, Thomas-Jones S, Farrar K, Clifton-Brown J, Donnison I, Swaller T et al. 2012. High resolution genetic mapping by genome sequencing reveals genome duplication and tetraploid genetic structure of the diploid Miscanthus sinensis. PLoS One 7:e33821. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0033821
  24. Ming R, Liu S-C, Lin Y-R, da Silva J, Wilson W, Braga D, Van Deynze A, Wenslaff TF, Wu KK, Moore PH et al. 1998. Detailed alignment of Saccharum and Sorghum chromosomes: comparative organization of closely related diploid and polyploidy genomes. Genetics 150:1663-1682.
  25. Paterson AH, Bowers JE, Bruggmann R, Dubchak I, Grimwood J, Gundlach H, Haberer G, Hellsten U, Mitros T, Poliakov A et al. 2009. The Sorghum bicolor genome and the diversification of grasses. Nature 457:551-556. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature07723
  26. Paterson AH, Bowers JE, Chapman BA. 2004. Ancient polyploidization predating divergence of the cereals, and its consequences for comparative genomics. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 101:9903-9908. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0307901101
  27. Pinto H, Sharwood RE, Tissue DT, Ghannoum O. 2014. Photosynthesis of C3, C3-C4, and C4 grasses at glacial CO2. Journal of Experimental Botany 65:3669-3681. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/eru155
  28. Pritchard JK, Stephens M, Donnelly P. 2000. Inference of population structure using multilocus genotype data. Genetics 155:945-959.
  29. Rayburn AL, Crawford J, Rayburn CM, Juvik JA. 2009. Genome size of Three Miscanthus species. Plant Molecular Biology Reporter 27:184-188. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11105-008-0070-3
  30. Sacks EJ, Juvik JA, Lin Q, Stewart R, Yamada T. 2013. The gene pool of Miscanthus species and its improvement. in Genomics of the Saccharinae (ed. AH Paterson), pp. 73-101. Springer, New York.
  31. Schnable PS Ware D Fulton RS Stein JC Wei F Pasternak S Liang C Zhang J Fulton L Graves TA et al. 2009. The B73 maize genome: complexity, diversity, and dynamics. Science 326:1112-1115. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1178534
  32. Simon BK. 2007. Grass phylogeny and classification: Conflict of morphology and molecules. A Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Botany 23:259-266.
  33. Souza GM, Berges H, Bocs S, Casu R, D'Hont A, Ferreira JE, Henry R, Ming R, Potier B, Sluys M-A et al. 2011. The Sugarcane Genome Challenge: Strategies for Sequencing a Highly Complex Genome. Tropical Plant Biology 4:145-156. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12042-011-9079-0
  34. Swaminathan K, Chae WB, Mitros T, Varala K, Xie L, Barling A, Glowacha K, Hall M, Jezowski S, Ming R et al. 2012. A framework genetic map for Miscanthus sinensis from RNAseq-based markers shows recent tetraploidy. BMC Genomics 13:142. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2164-13-142
  35. Swigonova Z, Lai J, Ma J, Ramarkrishna W, Llaca V, Bennetzen JL, Messing J. 2004. Close split of sorghum and maize genome progenitors. Genome Research 14:1916-1923. https://doi.org/10.1101/gr.2332504
  36. Taylor SH, Ripley BS, Martin T, De-Wet LA, Woodward FI, Osborne CP. 2014. Physiological advantages of C4 grasses in the field: a comparative experiment demonstrating the importance of drought. Global Change Biology 20:1992-2003. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.12498
  37. Tomkins JP, Yu Y, Miller-Smith H, Frisch DA, Woo SS, Wing RA. 1999. A bacterial artificial chromosome library for sugarcane. Theor Appl Genet 99:419-424. https://doi.org/10.1007/s001220051252
  38. Varshney RK, Graner A, Sorrells ME. 2005. Genomics-assisted breeding for crop improvement. Trends in plant science 10:621-630. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tplants.2005.10.004
  39. Wei F, Coe E, Nelson W, Bharti A, Engler F, Butler E, Kim H, Goicoechea JL, Chen M, Lee S et al. 2007. Physical and genetic structure of the maize genome reflects its complex evolutionary history. PLOS Genetics 3:e123. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.0030123
  40. Yu J, Hu S, Wang J, Wong GK, Li S, Liu B, Deng Y, Dai L, Zhou Y, Zhang X et al. 2002. A draft sequence of the rice genome (Oryza sativa L. ssp. indica). Science 296:79-92. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1068037

Cited by

  1. Unveiling the transcriptomic complexity of Miscanthus sinensis using a combination of PacBio long read- and Illumina short read sequencing platforms vol.22, pp.1, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1186/s12864-021-07971-x