CRISPR/Cas9-targeted mutagenesis of SlCMT4 causes changes in plant architecture and reproductive organs in tomato

Abstract

DNA methylation participates widely in the regulation of gene expression in plants. To date, the regulation and function of DNA methylation is still unknown in tomato plants. Here, we generated SlCMT4 mutants using the CRISPR-Cas9 gene editing system. We observed severe developmental defects in CRISPR-Cas9-mediated SlCMT4 mutants, including small and thick leaves, increased lateral buds, defective stamens and pistils, small fruit size with reduced setting rate, and defective seed development. The alterations at hormonal levels (IAA, tZR, strigol) were consistent with the multibranching phenotype in SlCMT4 mutant plants. CRISPR-Cas9-mediated knockout of SlCMT4 induced the expression of two pollen-specific genes (PMEI and PRALF) that suppressed the development of pollen wall and pollen tube elongation, which is responsible for irregular and defective pollen. The small-sized fruit phenotype is probably associated with upregulated expression of the IMA gene and reduced seeds in the mutant lines. Furthermore, we performed whole-genome bisulfite sequencing (WGBS) of fruits and found that SlCMT4 knockout reduced genome-wide cytosine methylation. A reduction of methylation was also observed in a 2-kp region of the IMA and LOXB promoters in the SlCMT4-mutant fruits, indicating that the hypermethylation status of the CHH context is critical for the inhibition of IMA and LOXB promoter activity. Our results show that SlCMT4 is required for normal development of tomato vegetative and reproductive organs. This study illuminates the function of SlCMT4 and sheds light on the molecular regulatory mechanism of tomato plant architecture and fruit development and ripening.

References

[1] He X, Chen T, Zhu J . Regulation and function of DNA methylation in plants and animals. Cell Res. 2011; 21: 442-65.

[2] Law JA, Jacobsen SE . Establishing, maintaining and modifying DNA methylation patterns in plants and animals. Nat Rev Genet. 2010; 11: 204-20.

[3] Zhu JK . Active DNA demethylation mediated by DNA glycosylases. Annu Rev Genet. 2009; 43: 143-66.

[4] Pavlopoulou A, Kossida S . Plant cytosine-5 DNA methyltransferases: structure, function, and molecular evolution. Genomics. 2007; 90: 530-41.

[5] Finnegan EJ, Peacock WJ, Dennis ES . Reduced DNA methylation in Arabidopsis thaliana results in abnormal plant development. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1996; 93: 8449-54.

[6] Ronemus MJ, Galbiati M, Ticknor C et al. Demethylation-induced developmental pleiotropy in Arabidopsis . Science. 1996; 273: 654-7.

[7] Saze H, Mittelsten Scheid O, Paszkowski J . Maintenance of CpG methylation is essential for epigenetic inheritance during plant gametogenesis. Nat Genet. 2003; 34: 65-9.

[8] Xiao W, Custard KD, Brown RC et al. DNA methylation is critical for Arabidopsis embryogenesis and seed viability. Plant Cell. 2006; 18: 805-14.

[9] Mathieu O, Reinders J, Caikovski M et al. Transgenerational stability of the Arabidopsis epigenome is coordinated by CG methylation. Cell. 2007; 130: 851-62.

[10] Yamauchi T, Johzuka-Hisatomi Y, Fukada-Tanaka S et al. Homologous recombination-mediated knock-in targeting of the MET1a gene for a maintenance DNA methyltransferase reproducibly reveals dosage-dependent spatiotemporal gene expression in rice. Plant J. 2009; 60: 386-96.

[11] Nakano Y, Steward N, Sekine M et al. A tobacco NtMET1 cDNA encoding a DNA methyltransferase: molecular characterization and abnormal phenotypes of transgenic tobacco plants. Plant Cell Physiol. 2000; 41: 448-57.

[12] Yang Y, Tang K, Datsenka TU et al. Critical function of DNA methyltransferase 1 in tomato development and regulation of the DNA methylome and transcriptome. J Integr Plant Biol. 2019; 61: 1224-42.

[13] Moritoh S, Eun CH, Ono A et al. Targeted disruption of an orthologue of DOMAINS REARRANGED METHYLASE 2, OsDRM2, impairs the growth of rice plants by abnormal DNA methylation. Plant J. 2012; 71: 85-98.

[14] Garcia-Aguilar M, Michaud C, Leblanc O et al. Inactivation of a DNA methylation pathway in maize reproductive organs results in apomixis-like phenotypes. Plant Cell. 2010; 22: 3249-67.

[15] Qu L, Wu C, Zhang F et al. Rice putative methyltransferase gene OsTSD2 is required for root development involving pectin modification. J Exp Bot. 2016; 67: 5349-62.

[16] Bartee L, Malagnac F, Bender J . Arabidopsis cmt3 chromomethylase mutations block non-CG methylation and silencing of an endogenous gene . Genes Dev. 2001; 15: 1753-8.

[17] Cao X, Jacobsen SE . Role of the Arabidopsis DRM methyltransferases in de novo DNA methylation and gene silencing. Curr Biol. 2002; 12: 1138-44.

[18] Chen W, Kong J, Qin C et al. Requirement of CHROMOMETHYLASE3 for somatic inheritance of the spontaneous tomato epimutation colourless non-ripening. Sci Rep. 2015; 5: 9192.

[19] Fieldes MA, Schaeffer SM, Krech MJ et al. DNA hypomethylation in 5-azacytidine-induced early-flowering lines of flax. Theor Appl Genet. 2005; 111: 136-49.

[20] Guo X, Xie Q, Li B et al. Molecular characterization and transcription analysis of DNA methyltransferase genes in tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) . Genet Mol Biol. 2020; 43: e20180295.

[21] Young MD, Wakefield MJ, Smyth GK et al. Gene ontology analysis for RNA-seq: accounting for selection bias. Genome Biol. 2010; 11: R14.

[22] Catoni M, Tsang JM, Greco AP et al. DMRcaller: a versatile R/bioconductor package for detection and visualization of differentially methylated regions in CpG and non-CpG contexts. Nucleic Acids Res. 2018; 46: e114.

[23] Vongs A, Kakutani T, Martienssen RA et al. Arabidopsis thaliana DNA methylation mutants . Science. 1993; 260: 1926-8.

[24] Kakutani T, Jeddeloh JA, Flowers SK et al. Developmental abnormalities and epimutations associated with DNA hypomethylation mutations. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1996; 93: 12406-11.

[25] Kim WB, Lim CJ, Jang HA et al. SlPMEI, a pollen-specific gene in tomato . Can J Plant Sci. 2014; 94: 73-83.

[26] Covey PA, Subbaiah CC, Parsons RL et al. A pollen-specific RALF from tomato that regulates pollen tube elongation. Plant Physiol. 2010; 153: 703-15.

[27] Sicard A, Petit J, Mouras A et al. Meristem activity during flower and ovule development in tomato is controlled by the mini zinc finger gene INHIBITOR OF MERISTEM ACTIVITY . Plant J. 2008; 55: 415-27.

[28] Zhong S, Zhang J, Chen Y . Single-base resolution methylomes of tomato fruit development reveal epigenome modifications associated with ripening. Nat Biotechnol. 2013; 31: 154-9.

[29] Manning K, Tor M, Poole M et al. A naturally occurring epigenetic mutation in a gene encoding an SBP-box transcription factor inhibits tomato fruit ripening. Nat Genet. 2006; 38: 948-52.

[30] Giovannoni JJ . Fruit ripening mutants yield insights into ripening control. Curr Opin Plant Biol. 2007; 10: 283-9.

[31] Orfila C, Huisman MM, Willats WG et al. Altered cell wall disassembly during ripening of Cnr tomato fruit: implications for cell adhesion and fruit softening. Planta. 2002; 215: 440-7.

[32] Phan TD, Bo W, West G et al. Silencing of the major salt-dependent isoform of pectinesterase in tomato alters fruit softening. Plant Physiol. 2007; 144: 1960-7.

[33] Giovannoni J, Nguyen C, Ampofo B et al. The epigenome and transcriptional dynamics of fruit ripening. Annu Rev Plant Biol. 2017; 68: 61-84.

[34] Beaudoin N, Rothstein SJ . Developmental regulation of two tomato lipoxygenase promoters in transgenic tobacco and tomato. Plant Mol Biol. 1997; 33: 835-46.

[35] Ferrie BJ, Beaudoin N, Burkhart W et al. The cloning of two tomato lipoxygenase genes and their differential expression during fruit ripening. Plant Physiol. 1994; 106: 109-18.

[36] Alexander L, Grierson D . Ethylene biosynthesis and action in tomato: a model for climacteric fruit ripening. J Exp Bot. 2002; 53: 2039-55.

[37] Barry CS, Blume B, Bouzayen M et al. Differential expression of the 1-aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylate oxidase gene family of tomato. Plant J. 1996; 9: 525-35.

[38] Martín-Trillo M, Grandío EG, Serra F et al. Role of tomato branched 1-like genes in the control of shoot branching. Plant J. 2011; 67: 701-14.

[39] Guo X, Chen G, Naeem M et al. The MADS-box gene SlMBP11 regulates plant architecture and affects reproductive development in tomato plants. Plant Sci. 2017; 258: 90-101.

[40] Exposito-Rodriguez M, Borges AA, Borges-Perez A et al. Selection of internal control genes for quantitative real-time RT-PCR studies during tomato development process. BMC Plant Biol. 2008; 8: 131.

[41] Livak KJ, Schmittgen TD . Analysis of relative gene expression data using realtime quantitative PCR and the 2^−△△C T method. Methods. 2001; 25: 402-8.

[42] Kojima M, Kamada-Nobusada T, Komatsu H et al. Highly sensitive and high-throughput analysis of plant hormones using MS-probe modification and liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry: an application for hormone profiling in Oryza sativa . Plant Cell Physiol. 2009; 50: 1201-14.

[43] Pan X, Welti R, Wang X . Quantitative analysis of major plant hormones in crude plant extracts by high-performance liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry. Nat Protoc. 2010; 5: 986-92.

[44] Cock P, Fields C, Goto N et al. The sanger FASTQ file format for sequences with quality scores, and the Solexa/Illumina FASTQ variants. Nucleic Acids Res. 2010; 38: 1767-71.

[45] Krueger F, Andrews SR . Bismark: a flexible aligner and methylation caller for Bisulfite-Seq applications. Bioinformatics. 2011; 27: 1571-2.

[46] Lister R, Pelizzola M, Dowen R et al. Human DNA methylomes at base resolution show widespread epigenomic differences. Nature. 2009; 462: 315-22.

[47] Quinlan AR, Hall IM . BEDTools: a flexible suite of utilities for comparing genomic features. Bioinformatics. 2010; 26: 841-2.