Genomic signatures of different adaptations to environmental stimuli between wild and cultivated Vitis vinifera L

Abstract

The application of population genetic methods in combination with gene mapping strategies can help to identify genes and mutations selected during the evolution from wild plants to crops and to explore the considerable genetic variation still maintained in natural populations. We genotyped a grapevine germplasm collection of 44 wild (Vitis vinifera subsp. sylvestris) and 48 cultivated (V. vinifera subsp. sativa) accessions at 54 K single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) to perform a whole-genome comparison of the main population genetic statistics. The analysis of Wright Fixation Index (F_ST) along the whole genome allowed us to identify several putative “signatures of selection” spanning over two thousand SNPs significantly differentiated between sativa and sylvestris. Many of these genomic regions included genes involved in the adaptation to environmental changes. An overall reduction of nucleotide diversity was observed across the whole genome within sylvestris, supporting a small effective population size of the wild grapevine. Tajima’s D resulted positive in both wild and cultivated subgroups, which may indicate an ongoing balancing selection. Association mapping for six domestication-related traits was performed in combination with population genetics, providing further evidence of different perception and response to environmental stresses between sativa and sylvestris.

References

[1] This, P., Lacombe, T. & Thomas, M. R. Historical origins and genetic diversity of wine grapes. Trends Genet. 22, 511-519 (2006).

[2] Drori, E. et al. Collection and characterization of grapevine genetic resources (Vitis vinifera) in the Holy Land, towards the renewal of ancient winemaking practices. Sci. Rep. 7, 44463 (2017).

[3] Emanuelli, F. et al. Genetic diversity and population structure assessed by SSR and SNP markers in a large germplasm collection of grape. BMC Plant Biol. 13, 39 (2013).

[4] Myles, S. et al. Genetic structure and domestication history of the grape. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108, 3530-3535 (2011).

[5] De Lorenzis, G., Chipashvili, R., Failla, O. & Maghradze, D. Study of genetic variability in Vitis vinifera L. germplasm by high-throughput Vitis18kSNP array: the case of Georgian genetic resources. BMC Plant Biol. 15, 154 (2015).

[6] Marrano, A. et al. SNP-discovery by RAD-sequencing in a germplasm collection of wild and cultivated grapevines (V. vinifera L.). PLoS ONE 12, 1-19 (2017).

[7] Arroyo-García, R. A. & Revilla, E. in The Mediterranean Genetic Code-Grapevine and Olive (ed Sladonja, B.) 51-72. London: Headquarters IntechOpen Limited, (2013).

[8] Di Vecchi-Staraz, M. et al. Low level of pollen-mediated gene flow from cultivated to wild grapevine: Consequences for the evolution of the endangered subspecies Vitis vinifera L. subsp. silvestris. J. Hered. 100, 66-75 (2009).

[9] Doulati Baneh, H., Hassani, A. & Abdollahi, R. Growth and physiological responses of some wild grapevine (Vitis vinifera L. ssp. sylvestris) genotypes to salinity. Bulg. J. Agric. Sci. 21, 530-535 (2015).

[10] Cambrollé, J., García, J. L., Figueroa, M. E. & Cantos, M. Physiological responses to soil lime in wild grapevine (Vitis vinifera ssp. sylvestris). Environ. Exp. Bot. 105, 25-31 (2014).

[11] Duan, D. et al. Genetic diversity of stilbene metabolism in Vitis sylvestris. J. Exp. Bot. 66, 3243-3257 (2015).

[12] Nielsen, R. et al. Genomic scans for selective sweeps using SNP data Genomic scans for selective sweeps using SNP data. Genome Res. 15, 1566-1575 (2005).

[13] Lin, T. et al. Genomic analyses provide insights into the history of tomato breeding. Nat. Genet. 46, 1220-1226 (2014).

[14] Hufford, M. B. et al. The genomic signature of crop-wild introgression in maize. PLoS Genet. 9, e1003477 (2013).

[15] Huang, X. et al. A map of rice genome variation reveals the origin of cultivated rice. Nature 490, 497-501 (2012).

[16] Bonhomme, M. et al. Genomic signature of selective sweeps illuminates adaptation of Medicago truncatula to root-associated microorganisms. Mol. Biol. Evol. 32, 2097-2110 (2015).

[17] Nicolas, S. D. et al. Genetic diversity, linkage disequilibrium and power of a large grapevine (Vitis vinifera L) diversity panel newly designed for association studies. BMC Plant Biol. 16, 74 (2016).

[18] Chitwood, D. H. et al. A modern ampelography: a genetic basis for leaf shape and venation patterning in grape. Plant Physiol. 164, 259-272 (2014).

[19] Myles, S. et al. Rapid genomic characterization of the genus Vitis. PLoS ONE 5, e8219 (2010).

[20] Migicovsky, Z. et al. Patterns of genomic and phenomic diversity in wine and table grapes. Hortic. Res. 4, 17035 (2017).

[21] LePaslier, M.-C. et al. The GRAPERESEQ 18K Vitis genotyping chip. In IX International Symposium on Grapevine Physiology & Biotechnology 18. La Serena (CHL) (2013).

[22] Money, D. et al. LinkImpute: Fast and Accurate Genotype Imputation for Non-Model Organisms. G3 5, 2383-2390 (2015).

[23] Chang, C. C. et al. Second-generation PLINK: rising to the challenge of larger and richer datasets. Gigascience 4, 7 (2015).

[24] Raj, A., Stephens, M. & Pritchard, J. K. FastSTRUCTURE: variational inference of population structure in large SNP data sets. Genetics 197, 573-589 (2014).

[25] Jakobsson, M. & Rosenberg, N. A. CLUMPP: A cluster matching and permutation program for dealing with label switching and multimodality in analysis of population structure. Bioinformatics 23, 1801-1806 (2007).

[26] Rosenberg, N. A. DISTRUCT: A program for the graphical display of population structure. Mol. Ecol. Notes 4, 137-138 (2004).

[27] Jombart, T. Adegenet: A R package for the multivariate analysis of genetic markers. Bioinformatics 24, 1403-1405 (2008).

[28] Barrett, J. C., Fry, B., Maller, J. & Daly, M. J. Haploview: analysis and visualization of LD and haplotype maps. Bioinformatics 21, 263-265 (2005).

[29] Danecek, P. et al. The variant call format and VCFtools. Bioinformatics 27, 2156-2158 (2011).

[30] Tajima, F. Statistical method for testing the neutral mutation hypothesis by DNA polymorphism. Genetics 123, 585-595 (1989).

[31] Vitulo, N. et al. A deep survey of alternative splicing in grape reveals changes in the splicing machinery related to tissue, stress condition and genotype. BMC Plant Biol. 14, 99 (2014).

[32] Alexa, A., Rahnenführer, J. & Lengauer, T. Improved scoring of functional groups from gene expression data by decorrelating GO graph structure. Bioinformatics 22, 1600-1607 (2006).

[33] Bradbury, P. J. et al. TASSEL: Software for association mapping of complex traits in diverse samples. Bioinformatics 23, 2633-2635 (2007).

[34] Turner, S. D. qqman: an R package for visualizing GWAS results using Q-Q and manhattan plots. bioRxiv 1-2 (2014).

[35] Deschamps, S., Llaca, V. & May, G. D. Genotyping-by-sequencing in plants. Biology (Basel) 1, 460-483 (2012).

[36] Regner, F., Stadlbauer, A., Eisenheld, C. & Kaserer, H. Genetic relationships among Pinots and related cultivars. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 51, 7-14 (2000).

[37] Adam-Blondon, A., Martinez-Zapater, J. M. & Kole, C. Genetics, Genomics and Breeding of Grapes St. Helier, Jersey, British Channel Islands: Science Publishers (2011).

[38] Lijavetzky, D., Cabezas, J. A., Ibáñez, A., Rodríguez, V. & Martínez-Zapater, J. M. High throughput SNP discovery and genotyping in grapevine (Vitis vinifera L.) by combining a re-sequencing approach and SNPlex technology. BMC Genom. 8, 424 (2007).

[39] Velasco, R. et al. A high quality draft consensus sequence of the genome of a heterozygous grapevine variety. PLoS ONE 2, e1326 (2007).

[40] Koch, E., Ristroph, M. & Kirkpatrick, M. Long range linkage disequilibrium across the human genome. PLoS ONE 8, e80754 (2013).

[41] Costantini, L., Battilana, J., Lamaj, F., Fanizza, G. & Grando, M. S. Berry and phenology-related traits in grapevine (Vitis vinifera L.): from quantitative trait loci to underlying genes. BMC Plant Biol. 8, 38 (2008).

[42] Doligez, A. et al. New stable QTLs for berry weight do not colocalize with QTLs for seed traits in cultivated grapevine (Vitis vinifera L.). BMC Plant. Biol. 13, 217 (2013).

[43] De Andrés, M. T. et al. Genetic diversity of wild grapevine populations in Spain and their genetic relationships with cultivated grapevines. Mol. Ecol. 21, 800-816 (2012).

[44] Zinelabidine, L. H., Haddioui, A., Bravo, G., Arroyo-García, R. & Zapater, J. M. M. Genetic origins of cultivated and wild grapevines from Morocco. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 61, 83-90 (2010).

[45] Vitti, J. J., Grossman, S. R. & Sabeti, P. C. Detecting natural selection in genomic data. Annu. Rev. Genet. 47, 97-120 (2013).

[46] Tajima, F. Evolutionary relationship of DNA sequences in finite populations. Genetics 105, 437-460 (1983).

[47] Riahi, L. et al. Single nucleotide polymorphism and haplotype diversity of the gene NAC4 in grapevine. Ind. Crops Prod. 43, 718-724 (2013).

[48] Charlesworth, D. Balancing selection and its effects on sequences in nearby genome regions. PLoS Genet. 2, 379-384 (2006).

[49] Delph, L. F. & Kelly, J. K. On the importance of balancing selection in plants Lynda. New Phytol. 100, 130-134 (2013).

[50] Devis, D., Firth, S. M., Liang, Z. & Byrne, M. E. Dosage sensitivity of RPL9 and concerted evolution of ribosomal protein genes in plants. Front. Plant Sci. 6, 1-12 (2015).

[51] Bodor, P., Ladányi, M., Grzeskowiak, L., Grando, M. S. & Bisztray, G. D. Ampelometric evaluation of wild grape (Vitis vinifera L. ssp. sylvestris (C.C. Gmel.) Hegi) accessions in the germplasm collection of FEM-IASMA, Italy. Vitis J. Grapevine Res. 54, 213-215 (2015).

[52] Agudelo-Romero, P. et al. Search for transcriptional and metabolic markers of grape pre-ripening and ripening and insights into specific aroma development in three Portuguese cultivars. PLoS ONE 8, e60422 (2013).

[53] Fortes, A. M., Teixeira, R. T. & Agudelo-Romero, P. Complex interplay of hormonal signals during grape berry ripening. Molecules 20, 9326-9343 (2015).

[54] Skopelitis, D. S. et al. Abiotic stress generates ROS that signal expression of anionic glutamate dehydrogenases to form glutamate for proline synthesis in tobacco and grapevine. Plant Cell 18, 2767-2781 (2006).

[55] Zhou, Y., Massonnet, M., Sanjak, J. S., Cantu, D. & Gaut, B. S. Evolutionary genomics of grape (Vitis vinifera ssp. vinifera) domestication. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1709257114 (2017).

[56] Raffaele, S. et al. A MYB transcription factor regulates very-long-chain fatty acid biosynthesis for activation of the hypersensitive cell death response in Arabidopsis. Plant Cell 20, 752-767 (2008).

[57] Nakano, T., Nishiuchi, T., Suzuki, K., Fujimura, T. & Shinshi, H. Studies on transcriptional regulation of endogenous genes by ERF2 transcription factor in tobacco cells. Plant Cell Physiol. 47, 554-558 (2006).

[58] Mizoi, J., Shinozaki, K. & Yamaguchi-Shinozaki, K. AP2/ERF family transcription factors in plant abiotic stress responses. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1819, 86-96 (2012).

[59] Chervin, C. et al. Ethylene seems required for the berry development and ripening in grape, a non-climacteric fruit. Plant Sci. 167, 1301-1305 (2004).

[60] Kaps, M. L. & Cahoon, Ga Growth and fruiting of container-grown Seyval blanc grapevines modified by changes in crop level, leaf number and position, and light exposure. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 43, 191-199 (1992).

[61] Chakrabarti, M. et al. A cytochrome P450 regulates a domestication trait in cultivated tomato. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, 17125-17130 (2013).

[62] Fechter, I. et al. Candidate genes within a 143 kb region of the flower sex locus in Vitis. Mol. Genet. Genom. 287, 247-259 (2012).

[63] Costantini, L. et al. New candidate genes for the fine regulation of the colour of grapes. J. Exp. Bot. 66, 4427-4440 (2015).

[64] Coombe, B. G. & McCarthy, M. G. Dynamics of grape berry growth and physiology of ripening. Aust. J. Grape Wine Res. 6, 131-135 (2000).

[65] Deluc, L. G. et al. Transcriptomic and metabolite analyses of Cabernet Sauvignon grape berry development. BMC Genome 8, 429 (2007).

[66] Symons, G. M. et al. Grapes on steroids. brassinosteroids are involved in grape berry ripening. Plant. Physiol. 140, 150-158 (2006).

[67] Leforestier, D. et al. Genomic basis of the differences between cider and dessert apple varieties. Evol. Appl. 8, 650-661 (2015).

[68] Hu, B. et al. Variation in NRT1.1B contributes to nitrate-use divergence between rice subspecies. Nat. Genet. 47, 834-838 (2015).

[69] Ji, H. et al. The salt overly sensitive (SOS) pathway: Established and emerging roles. Mol. Plant 6, 275-286 (2013).

[70] Licausi, F. et al. HRE1 and HRE2, two hypoxia-inducible ethylene response factors, affect anaerobic responses in Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant. J. 62, 302-315 (2010).

[71] Afoufa-Bastien, D. et al. The Vitis vinifera sugar transporter gene family: phylogenetic overview and macroarray expression profiling. Bmc. Plant. Biol. 10, 245 (2010).