Transpositional reactivation of the Dart transposon family in rice lines derived from introgressive hybridization with Zizania latifolia.
BACKGROUND
It is widely recognized that interspecific hybridization may induce "genome shock", and lead to genetic and epigenetic instabilities in the resultant hybrids and/or backcrossed introgressants. A prominent component involved in the genome shock is reactivation of cryptic transposable elements (TEs) in the hybrid genome, which is often associated with alteration in the elements' epigenetic modifications like cytosine DNA methylation. We have previously reported that introgressants derived from hybridization between Oryza sativa (rice) and Zizania latifolia manifested substantial methylation re-patterning and rampant mobilization of two TEs, a copia retrotransposon Tos17 and a MITE mPing. It was not known however whether other types of TEs had also been transpositionally reactivated in these introgressants, their relevance to alteration in cytosine methylation, and their impact on expression of adjacent cellular genes.


RESULTS
We document in this study that the Dart TE family was transpositionally reactivated followed by stabilization in all three studied introgressants (RZ1, RZ2 and RZ35) derived from introgressive hybridization between rice (cv. Matsumae) and Z. latifolia, while the TEs remained quiescent in the recipient rice genome. Transposon-display (TD) and sequencing verified the element's mobility and mapped the excisions and re-insertions to the rice chromosomes. Methylation-sensitive Southern blotting showed that the Dart TEs were heavily methylated along their entire length, and moderate alteration in cytosine methylation patterns occurred in the introgressants relative to their rice parental line. Real-time qRT-PCR quantification on the relative transcript abundance of six single-copy genes flanking the newly excised or inserted Dart-related TE copies indicated that whereas marked difference in the expression of all four genes in both tissues (leaf and root) were detected between the introgressants and their rice parental line under both normal and various stress conditions, the difference showed little association with the presence or absence of the newly mobilized Dart-related TEs.


CONCLUSIONS
Introgressive hybridization has induced transpositional reactivation of the otherwise immobile Dart-related TEs in the parental rice line (cv. Matsumae), which was accompanied with a moderate alteration in the element's cytosine methylation. Significant difference in expression of the Dart-adjacent genes occurred between the introgressants and their rice parental line under both normal and various abiotic stress conditions, but the alteration in gene expression was not coupled with the TEs.
Wang
Ningning
N
Key Laboratory of Molecular Epigenetics of MOE and Institute of Genetics & Cytology, Northeast Normal University, Changchun 130024, China.
Wang
Hongyan
H
Wang
Hui
H
Zhang
Di
D
Wu
Ying
Y
Ou
Xiufang
X
Liu
Shuang
S
Dong
Zhenying
Z
Liu
Bao
B
D015139:Blotting, Southern; D003596:Cytosine / Q000378:metabolism; D019175:DNA Methylation; D004251:DNA Transposable Elements; D006824:Hybridization, Genetic; D012275:Oryza / Q000235:genetics* / Q000378:metabolism; D006109:Poaceae / Q000235:genetics* / Q000378:metabolism
D004251:DNA Transposable Elements; D003596:Cytosine
Mol Plant Microbe Interact. 2004 Oct;17(10):1146-52
15497407
Mol Biol Evol. 2005 Apr;22(4):976-90
15647520
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2003 Jun 29;358(1434):1149-55
12831481
Plant Cell. 2001 Aug;13(8):1735-47
11487689
Mol Ecol. 2009 Mar;18(5):877-89
19175502
Cell. 2006 Sep 22;126(6):1189-201
16949657
Plant Mol Biol. 2008 Jul;67(5):511-8
18409027
Cell. 2007 Apr 6;129(1):37-44
17418784
Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol. 1959;24:305-11
13833941
Science. 1984 Nov 16;226(4676):792-801
15739260
BMC Plant Biol. 2009 May 29;9:63
19476655
Science. 2003 Aug 29;301(5637):1211-6
12907807
Annu Rev Plant Biol. 2009;60:43-66
19007329
J Soc Biol. 2004;198(4):425-32
15969350
Nature. 1998 May 7;393(6680):68-72
9590690
Curr Biol. 2006 Oct 24;16(20):R872-3
17055967
Nature. 2009 Sep 17;461(7262):423-6
19734880
Curr Biol. 2003 Mar 4;13(5):421-6
12620192
J Plant Physiol. 2009 Sep 15;166(14):1537-43
19410335
Mol Ecol. 2005 Apr;14(4):1163-75
15773943
Genetics. 2006 Jan;172(1):507-17
16172500
Plant Mol Biol. 2004 Mar;54(4):571-82
15316290
Plant Cell. 2001 Aug;13(8):1749-59
11487690
Curr Opin Plant Biol. 2005 Apr;8(2):135-41
15752992
Methods Mol Biol. 2004;260:145-73
15020808
Plant Physiol. 2002 Jun;129(2):733-46
12068115
New Phytol. 2009 Aug;183(3):702-717
19594693
Annu Rev Plant Biol. 2009;60:561-88
19575590
Annu Rev Plant Biol. 2007;58:377-406
17280525
Curr Opin Genet Dev. 1995 Dec;5(6):814-21
8745082
J Biol Chem. 2001 Apr 27;276(17):14271-8
11278495
Mol Genet Genomics. 2005 Apr;273(2):150-7
15803319
Biotech Histochem. 1992 Mar;67(2):59-67
1599973
J Virol. 1999 Feb;73(2):1010-22
9882302
Nature. 2009 Oct 22;461(7267):1130-4
19847266
Mob DNA. 2010 Jan 25;1(1):4
20226073
Plant J. 2006 Jan;45(1):46-57
16367953
Mol Biol Evol. 2003 Jul;20(7):1070-6
12777520
Genetics. 2005 Aug;170(4):1945-56
15937131
BMC Biol. 2009 Jul 14;7:40
19594956
Genomics. 2009 Mar;93(3):274-81
19071208
Nature. 1998 May 7;393(6680):22-3
9590685
Genetics. 2007 Dec;177(4):1975-85
18073417
Proc Biol Sci. 1990 Oct 22;242(1303):57-60
1980741
Nat Genet. 2003 Jan;33(1):102-6
12483211
Genome. 2000 Oct;43(5):874-80
11081978
Heredity (Edinb). 2010 Apr;104(4):341-50
20068588
Heredity (Edinb). 2009 Jan;102(1):45-50
18545265
Plant Cell. 2007 Nov;19(11):3403-17
18024568
Plant Methods. 2007 Jun 08;3:7
17559651