covid
Buscar en
Brazilian Journal of Microbiology
Toda la web
Inicio Brazilian Journal of Microbiology Genome-wide gene expression patterns in dikaryon of the basidiomycete fungus Ple...
Journal Information
Vol. 48. Issue 2.
Pages 380-390 (April - June 2017)
Share
Share
Download PDF
More article options
Visits
2272
Vol. 48. Issue 2.
Pages 380-390 (April - June 2017)
Genetics and Molecular Microbiology
Open Access
Genome-wide gene expression patterns in dikaryon of the basidiomycete fungus Pleurotus ostreatus
Visits
2272
Tianxiang Liu, Huiru Li, Yatong Ding, Yuancheng Qi, Yuqian Gao, Andong Song, Jinwen Shen, Liyou Qiu
Corresponding author
qliyou@henau.edu.cn

Corresponding author.
Henan Agricultural University, College of Life Sciences, Key Laboratory of Enzyme Engineering of Agricultural Microbiology, Zhengzhou, China
This item has received

Under a Creative Commons license
Article information
Abstract
Full Text
Bibliography
Download PDF
Statistics
Figures (7)
Show moreShow less
Tables (7)
Table 1. Throughput and quality of RNA-Seq of the dikaryon and its constituent monokaryons of Pleurotus ostreatus.
Table 2. Summary of gene expression in the dikaryon and its constituent monokaryons of Pleurotus ostreatus.
Table 3. Function annotation of differentially expressed genes in dikaryon DK13×3 compared to its parental monokaryon MK13.
Table 4. Functional annotation of differentially expressed genes in dikaryon DK13×3 compared to its parental MK3 monokaryon.
Table 5. Laccase gene expression profile in Pleurotus ostreatus dikaryon DK13×3 and its parental monokaryons MK13 and MK3.
Table 6. Sequence alignment of the poure gene CDS between the two monokaryons of Pleurotus ostreatus.
Table 7. Sequence alignment of the poure gene CDS, mRNA and predicted AAs between the three strains of P. ostreatus.
Show moreShow less
Abstract

Dikarya is a subkingdom of fungi that includes Ascomycota and Basidiomycota. The gene expression patterns of dikaryon are poorly understood. In this study, we bred a dikaryon DK13×3 by mating monokaryons MK13 and MK3, which were from the basidiospores of Pleurotus ostreatus TD300. Using RNA-Seq, we obtained the transcriptomes of the three strains. We found that the total transcript numbers in the transcriptomes of the three strains were all more than ten thousand, and the expression profile in DK13×3 was more similar to MK13 than MK3. However, the genes involved in macromolecule utilization, cellular material synthesis, stress-resistance and signal transduction were much more up-regulated in the dikaryon than its constituent monokaryons. All possible modes of differential gene expression, when compared to constituent monokaryons, including the presence/absence variation, and additivity/nonadditivity gene expression in the dikaryon may contribute to heterosis. By sequencing the urease gene poure sequences and mRNA sequences, we identified the monoallelic expression of the poure gene in the dikaryon, and its transcript was from the parental monokaryon MK13. Furthermore, we discovered RNA editing in the poure gene mRNA of the three strains. These results suggest that the gene expression patterns in dikaryons should be similar to that of diploids during vegetative growth.

Keywords:
Differential gene expression
Monoallelic expression
Monokaryon
RNA editing
RNA-Seq
Full Text
Introduction

Dikaryon is a unique organism in which each compartment of a hypha contains two haploid nuclei, each derived from a different parent. It consists of a subkingdom of fungi Dikarya, including Ascomycota and Basidiomycota. A dikaryon strain is formed by mating two compatible monokaryon strains, resulting in plasmogamy but not karyogamy in the fused compartment. When new hyphae grow, the two nuclei synchronously divide, and each new compartment keeps two nuclei1; karyogamy only occurs before the initiation of sexual reproduction. This sexual reproduction mode was distinctly different from that in diploids. The interaction between the genetic materials of the two nuclei in dikaryons has not been well characterized. Are the modes of gene action in dikaryons the same as that in diploids during vegetative growth?

The major types of gene expression patterns found in diploids during vegetative growth are mitotic crossover or mitotic recombination,2,3 DNA methylation and gene silencing by RNAi,4 monoallelic expression (sex chromosome inactivation, imprinted gene expression, or autosomal random monoallelic expression),5 RNA-editing,6 and differential allele expression in hybrids and parents that contributes to heterosis,7 etc. Mitotic recombination (also named parasexuality in fungi), DNA methylation and gene silencing by RNAi were also found in dikaryons,8–10 while monoallelic expression and RNA-editing have not been identified in the dikaryon. Although not strictly true for all reported species, in terms of the growth rate, enzyme activity and pathogenicity, diploids have a significant advantage over their parental haploids, which is similar to what is exhibited when dikaryons are compared to their parental monokaryons. It was proposed that the heterosis in diploids resulted from the allele gene differential expression in hybrids and their parents, such as presence/absence variation and additive/non-additive (high- and low-parent dominance, underdominance, and overdominance) gene expression.11–14 The mechanism of heterosis in dikaryons remains obscure.

An effective approach for exploring the allele gene differential expression in dikaryons is the comparison of soluble protein profiles or isoenzyme patterns between a dikaryon and its constituent monokaryons. The soluble protein profile of Schizophyllum commune dikaryon was dramatically different from that of its parental monokaryons, and there are many new bands in the dikaryon15; further studies showed that 14 out of 15 isoenzyme patterns changed between the dikaryon and two monokaryons.16 Similar results were also reported in other basidiomycetes, such as Coprinus congregatus17 and Coprinopsis cinerea.18 Those studies indicated that alleles had different expression patterns in dikaryons and monokaryons. However, subsequent studies found no such difference in higher basidiomycetes and suggested that those reported differences were probably caused by growth conditions and the electrophoresis procedure.19,20 Since then, many other observations have confirmed such findings. For example, comparing S. commune monokaryons and the dikaryon, protein two-dimensional gel electrophoresis showed only 6.6% and 7.7% differences,21 and the sequence complexities and coding properties of polysomal RNA and total RNA had no detectable difference.22,23 Nevertheless, using gene expression profiling, the relative differences in the transcription quantity of the 12 laccase genes in the Pleurotus ostreatus dikaryon and its two parental monokaryons showed that the dikaryotic superiority in laccase activity was due to non-additive transcriptional increases in two genes.24 Genome-wide gene expression pattern analysis of dikaryons and their parental monokaryons has not been reported.

Oyster mushroom P. ostreatus (Jacq. Fr) Kumm. is a white rot basidiomycete that is an important edible and medical mushroom,25–27 and it has been studied as a model organism for basidiomycete genetics and genomic studies.24 In this study, we compared the genome-wide transcriptional profiles among the dikaryon and its two constituent monokaryons of P. ostreatus by Solexa-based RNA-Seq with a focus on the transcriptomic profiling difference analysis between the dikaryon and monokaryons, investigation of the mechanisms of the advantages of sexual reproduction, monoallelic expression, and RNA-editing in dikarya.

Materials and methodsStrains and culture conditions

Monokaryons MK13 and MK3 were from the basidiospores of P. ostreatus TD300, which is a commercial cultivation strain in China and was obtained from Zhengzhou Composite Experiment station, China Edible Fungi Research System (Zhengzhou, China). The mycelial growth rate of MK3 was faster than MK13 on potato dextrose agar (PDA) plates (Fig. 1). Dikaryon DK13×3 was from MK13 and MK3 through A1B1 and A2B2 mating, as identified using mating tests.28 DK13×3 grew faster than its constituent monokaryons in PDA and formed normal fruiting bodies with a biological efficiency that was similar to TD300 in cottonseed hull medium (Fig. 2). The three strains were cultured in potato dextrose broth (150mL in a 500-mL flask) at 25°C under 150rpm shaking; mycelia were harvested in the late exponential phase (10 and 25 days of culturing for dikaryon and monokaryons, respectively) for DNA or total RNA extraction.

Fig. 1.

Mycelial growth of the monokaryons and reconstituted dikaryon of Pleurotus ostreatus on PDA plates. MK13, monokaryon; MK3, monokaryon; DK13×3, dikaryon; TD300, dikaryon and the two monokaryons’ parent; MGR, mycelial growth rate. Data are given as the means and SE of four replicates. Data with the same lower case letter do not significantly differ from other data at p<0.05.

(0.16MB).
Fig. 2.

Fruiting body morphology and biological efficiency of TD300 and DK13×3 in cottonseed hull medium. Biological efficiency indicates the percentage of the fresh weight of harvested 1st and 2nd flush mushrooms over the dry weight of inoculated substrates.

(0.12MB).
RNA extraction, cDNA library construction and RNA-Seq

Mycelia were isolated from culture broth by centrifugation at 5000×g for 10min; 100g of fresh mycelia was homogenized in liquid nitrogen; and total RNA was extracted using an RNA pure total RNA fast isolation kit (Bioteke, Beijing, China). The total RNA was used for RT-PCR or enrichment of mRNA (poly(A)+RNA) with a Dynabeads mRNA Purification Kit (Invitrogen, Grand Island, NY), and mRNA was then broken into short fragments. Using these short fragments as templates, first- and second-strand cDNA were synthesized. Sequencing adapters, which also served as sample markers, were ligated to short fragments after purification with a QiaQuick PCR Extraction Kit (Qiagen, Hilden, Germany). Fragments that were 200–700bp were then separated by agarose gel electrophoresis and selected for PCR amplification as sequencing templates. The three strain libraries were sequenced using Illumina HiSeq™ 2000 by the Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) (Shenzhen, China).

Sequencing reads filtering

Raw reads contained low-quality, adaptor-polluted and high contents of unknown base (N) reads, and these noise reads should be removed before downstream analyses. We used internal software to filter reads. After filtering, the remaining reads were called “Clean Reads” and stored in the FASTQ format.

De novo assembly and sequencing assessment

Contigs were assembled from clean reads using a de novo assembler Trinity29; then, non-redundant unigene sets for all three strains were constructed using the EST assembly program TGICL.30 An all-unigene set was produced from the three contig datasets by further sequence overlap splicing and non-redundancies.

Genome mapping and gene expression analysis

Clean reads were mapped to the reference genome sequence of Pleurotus ostreatus PC15 (http://genome.jgi-psf.org/PleosPC15_2/PleosPC15_2.home.html) using Bowtie231; then, the gene expression level was calculated using RSEM.32

Differential unigene expression analysis

The unigene expression levels were calculated using the Reads per kb per Million reads (RPKM) method.33 Under the null hypothesis of equal expression between two samples, the following test gives the p-values for identifying differentially expressed genes (DEGs) between two samples.34

N1 is the total number of clean tags in MK3 or MK13; N2 is the number in DK13×3; x is the number of the clean tags of the target gene in MK3 or MK13, and y is the number in DK13×3. p0.001 and |log2Ratio|1 were used as the threshold to filter DEGs.

The DEGs expressed in all three strains were used to estimate the mid-parent expression value (MPV). The MPV was calculated by averaging the expression level of the parental monokaryons, assuming an (MK3:MK13) ratio of RNA abundance in the nucleus of Dikaryon DK13×3 of 1:1, as described elsewhere.35

Cloning and sequencing of the urease gene

To validate the gene expression profiles obtained by RNA-seq, urease gene poure of the monokaryons and dikaryon was cloned, amplified, and sequenced. Cloning was performed by colony direct PCR36 using primers POU1 (GCATTTTGATTGGCAGGGT) and POU2 (AGTGATTACGGCAGGGCG) at PCR conditions of 94°C for 30s, 51°C for 40s, and 72°C for 3min, which were repeated 31 times. mRNAs were amplified using RT-PCR with primers POU3 (TTACCGAGGGAAGAAGCGAA) and POU4 (GGTGGTGACAGAAACGGGAGTA), and PCR conditions were set at 94°C for 30s, 52°C for 40s, and 72°C for 2min, which was repeated 31 times. The PCR products of DNA and mRNA were purified and were then cloned into the pGEM-T Vector (Promega, Madison, WI, USA). The vectors were transformed into E. coli DH5α, and five transformants were randomly selected and sequenced by the Beijing Genome Institute (BGI) (Shenzhen, China).

ResultsQuality assessment of RNA-seq datasets and mapping of the reference genome

Table 1 lists the statistics of the reads. The RNA-seq reads were of high quality; almost all mRNA fragments were sequenced, and 97% of the reads had a Phred quality score greater than 20. We mapped clean reads to the reference genome sequence of Pleurotus ostreatus PC15 (http://genome.jgi-psf.org/PleosPC15_2/PleosPC15_2.home.html) using HISAT.37 On average, 60.44% of reads are mapped, and the uniformity of the mapping result for each sample suggests that the samples are comparable. The GenBank accession number for the RNA-seq datasets of the three strains is BioProject Accession: PRJNA326297.

Table 1.

Throughput and quality of RNA-Seq of the dikaryon and its constituent monokaryons of Pleurotus ostreatus.

Strain  Total raw reads (Mb)  Total clean reads (Mb)  Total clean bases (Gb)  Clean reads Q20 (%)  Clean reads ratio (%)  Total mapping ratio (%)  Uniquely mapping ratioa (%) 
MK13  20.27  20.27  1.82  97.19  100.00  64.72  59.17 
MK3  20.81  20.81  1.87  97.10  100.00  57.28  52.56 
DK13×20.50  20.50  1.84  97.24  100.00  59.33  54.59 
a

Unique mapping: reads that map to only one location of the reference, called unique mapping.

Gene expression analysis

After genome mapping, we used StringTie38 to reconstruct transcripts, and with genome annotation information, we can identify novel transcripts in our samples using cuffcompare, a tool of cufflinks.39 In total, we identified 4261 novel transcripts. Then, we merged novel coding transcripts with the reference transcript to obtain a complete reference, mapped clean reads using Bowtie2,40 and calculated the gene expression level for each sample with RSEM.41 Thereupon, the total mapping ratios of the clean reads in the transcriptomes of the three strains were increased. Total transcript numbers were all more than ten thousand (Table 2).

Table 2.

Summary of gene expression in the dikaryon and its constituent monokaryons of Pleurotus ostreatus.

Strain  Total mapping ratio (%)  Uniquely mapping ratio (%)  Total gene number  Known gene number  Novel gene number  Total transcript number  Known transcript number  Novel transcript number 
MK13  66.91  41.60  9559  9467  92  11,134  7667  3467 
MK3  66.94  42.81  9380  9293  87  10,883  7497  3386 
DK13×65.45  42.40  9659  9565  94  11,319  7827  3492 

We then calculated the read coverage and read distribution on each detected transcript. The Pearson correlation between the transcriptomes of the three strains was obtained. The Pearson correlations of the dikaryon DK13×3 to its constituent monokaryons, MK13 and MK3, were 0.8523 and 0.8100, respectively, while the Pearson correlation between the two monokaryons was 0.8124, indicating that the expression profile in DK13×3 was more similar to MK13 than MK3 (Fig. 3).

Fig. 3.

Heatmap of Pearson correlations between the dikaryon and its constituent monokaryons of Pleurotus ostreatus.

(0.05MB).
Gene expression difference between the three strains

The total RPKMs of the unigenes in MK13, MK3 and DK13×3 were 559494, 550716, and 586583. The total RPKMs of the unigenes in DK13×3 were 4.8% and 6.5% higher than those in MK13 and MK3 (p<0.05) (Fig. 4). Among the unigenes between DK13×3 and MK13 or MK3, the common unigenes of the three strains were 27.6%, the common unigenes for DK13×3 and MK13 were 10.8%, and the common unigenes for DK13×3 and MK3 were 11.3%. The special unigenes in DK13×3, MK13 and MK3 were 13.5%, 17.6%, and 15.5%, respectively. Up to 38% of unigenes in DK13×3 were derived from its parental monokaryons (Fig. 5), indicating that the gene expression pattern of present/absent variation occurred among the three strains, and more than one-third of the DEGs in the dikaryon were monoallelic expression genes.

Fig. 4.

Comparison of the unigene expression levels between MK3 or MK13 and DK13×3. Up-regulated genes, down-regulated genes, and NOT DEGs were determined using a threshold of p0.001 and |log2Ratio|1. A, MK3 vs DK13×3; B, MK13 vs DK13×3; NOT DEGs, Unigenes were not obviously changed upon MK3 or MK13 to DK13×3.

(0.21MB).
Fig. 5.

Distribution diagram of DEGs between MK3 or MK13 and DK13×3. DEGs were screened by a threshold of p0.001 and |log2Ratio|1.

(0.15MB).

Using p0.001 and |log2Ratio|1 as the standard to screen the differentially expressed genes (DEGs) between DK13×3 and MK13 or MK3, compared to MK13, the number of genes whose expression levels were up-regulated in DK13×3 was 11323; 7953 were up-regulated more than 3-fold, and 114 were up-regulated more than 15-fold. Additionally, 8421 genes were down-regulated; 2573 were down-regulated more than 3-fold, while none were down-regulated more than 15-fold (Fig. 6A). Compared to MK3, the number of genes whose expression was up-regulated in DK13×3 was 11578; 7787 were up-regulated more than 3-fold, and 116 were up-regulated more than 15-fold. Furthermore, 7425 genes were down-regulated; 2176 were down-regulated more than 3-fold, and 1 was down-regulated more than 15-fold (Fig. 6B). The results suggest that the number of up-regulated genes in the dikaryon was much higher than that of down-regulated genes, especially compared to the constituent monokaryons.

Fig. 6.

Differentially expressed genes in dikaryon DK13×3 compared to parental monokaryons MK13 (A) or MK3 (B). RPKM, reads per kb per million reads.

(0.11MB).

The genes in the dikaryon that were 15-fold up- or down-regulated compared with the monokaryons were examined with an NCBI online BLASTP homology analyzer. Additionally, 28 and 21 up-regulated genes were found to have related functions to annotated genes; no such genes were found for down-regulated genes. The up-regulated genes were primarily involved in macromolecule utilization, cellular material synthesis, stress resistance and signal transduction, etc. (Tables 3 and 4). These findings have provided evidence for the growth advantage that the dikaryon has over the constituent monokaryons.

Table 3.

Function annotation of differentially expressed genes in dikaryon DK13×3 compared to its parental monokaryon MK13.

Gene ID  Log2 ratio  Up/down  Homologous protein  NCBI ID  E-value 
Unigene24705  18.9046  Up  Mitochondrion protein  XP_567165.1  3E−37 
Unigene8016  18.2889  Up  Tetraspanin Tsp2 family  XP_001885708.1  1E−14 
Unigene17666  17.5877  Up  Alcohol dehydrogenase superfamily protein  XP_001833941.1  6E−59 
Unigene24669  17.4953  Up  NADH kinase  XP_001830329.2  1E−152 
Unigene6939  17.286  Up  Glucosamine 6-phosphate N-acetyltransferase  XP_001834733.1  6E−63 
Unigene3965  17.2631  Up  Cystathionine beta-synthase (beta-thionase)  XP_754772.1  3E−24 
Unigene4053  17.126  Up  Calcium:hydrogen antiporter  XP_002911846.1  4E−71 
Unigene12949  16.6756  Up  Large surface exposed glycoprotein PsrP  CBW35224.1  6E−28 
Unigene22941  16.5483  Up  Histone-like type 2  XP_001831684.1  3E−36 
Unigene24800  16.5407  Up  MCMA  XP_001835736.2  1E−111 
Unigene12396  16.2922  Up  OmpA family protein  YP_001236439.1  2E−10 
Unigene24789  16.252  Up  123R  NP_149586.1  3E−09 
Unigene12755  16.18  Up  Membrane fraction protein  XP_001837650.1  1E−122 
Unigene24727  16.1761  Up  Endopeptidase  XP_001837196.1  1E−179 
Unigene24787  16.0545  Up  KLTH0E05940p  XP_002553740.1  5E−06 
Unigene22994  15.9919  Up  Calcium/calmodulin-dependent protein kinase  BAF75875.1  1E−168 
Unigene24636  15.7398  Up  Proteasome subunit alpha type 4  XP_001830819.2  1E−131 
Unigene24738  15.7175  Up  Type VI secretion system Vgr family protein  YP_001812335.1  3E−14 
Unigene17540  15.5547  Up  Alpha/beta hydrolase fold protein  YP_002430731.1  6E−24 
Unigene2861  15.5003  Up  Mucin-like protein 1  XP_001835597.2  3E−08 
Unigene9632  15.4441  Up  Ribosomal protein P2  XP_001831572.2  2E−41 
Unigene17732  15.3692  Up  NADH-ubiquinone oxidoreductase 21kDa subunit  XP_001835740.1  2E−63 
Unigene18012  15.3683  Up  Endo-1,3(4)-beta-glucanase  XP_001828985.1  1E−144 
Unigene12721  15.2793  Up  NADH-ubiquinone oxidoreductase 51kDa subunit  XP_001840875.1 
Unigene24653  15.189  Up  Ubiquitin-conjugating enzyme 16  EFP75491.1  7E−47 
Unigene1749  15.1234  Up  Carboxy-cis,cis-muconate cyclase  XP_002850491.1  6E−10 
Unigene21455  15.1112  Up  Mitochondrial ribosomal small subunit  XP_001840218.2  1E−60 
Unigene23368  15.064  Up  Glycoside hydrolase family 16 protein  XP_001875740.1  1E−129 
Table 4.

Functional annotation of differentially expressed genes in dikaryon DK13×3 compared to its parental MK3 monokaryon.

Gene ID  Log2 ratio  Up/down  Homologous protein  NCBI ID  E-value 
Unigene22495  17.9421  Up  Glycoside hydrolase family 30 protein  XP_001883860.1  7E−13 
Unigene33702  17.4268  Up  YOP1  XP_001828571.1  8E−71 
Unigene20364  16.6204  Up  Cystathionine beta-synthase (beta-thionase)  XP_754772.1  2E−24 
Unigene33752  16.5541  Up  Aspartate amino-transferase  XP_001874806.1  1E−72 
Unigene17552  16.5366  Up  Aldo-keto reductase  XP_001838896.2  2E−87 
Unigene7733  16.4478  Up  Oligopeptide transporter  XP_001883373.1 
Unigene12919  16.1909  Up  Symbiosis-related protein  ADD66798.1  6E−10 
Unigene33888  16.1005  Up  40S ribosomal protein S12  XP_002475522.1  4E−71 
Unigene33770  15.9518  Up  RNA-binding region RNP-1  YP_001022993.1  8E−10 
Unigene8068  15.9284  Up  YALI0C17391p  XP_501942.2  4E−07 
Unigene15993  15.6892  Up  Nucleoside-diphosphate-sugar epimerase family protein  XP_748586.1  3E−13 
Unigene14963  15.6826  Up  Receptor expression-enhancing protein 4  XP_001837879.2  1E−103 
Unigene29875  15.6645  Up  TKL/TKL-ccin protein kinase  XP_001838297.2  3E−20 
Unigene14774  15.6242  Up  Short-chain dehydrogenase/reductase SDR  XP_001828376.2  1E−108 
Unigene15814  15.5711  Up  Glycoside hydrolase family 16 protein  XP_003028746.1  4E−91 
Unigene5851  15.3849  Up  Chitinase  BAA36223.1  9E−08 
Unigene14448  15.2642  Up  Guanine nucleotide-binding protein alpha-4 subunit  XP_001884704.1  6E−21 
Unigene3750  15.2109  Up  Tetraspanin Tsp2 family  XP_001881334.1  4E−11 
Unigene16536  15.1569  Up  Mitochondrial protein  XP_001828236.1  4E−92 
Unigene17706  15.1209  Up  Aldo-keto reductase  XP_001835654.1  1E−125 
Unigene22890  15.0774  Up  Carboxyesterase  XP_002473270.1  3E−50 

Among the common DEGs of the three strains, when the DK13×3 levels were compared to MPV additive model values, approximately 63.0% (878/2027) of transcripts were identified to be engaged in non-additive gene expression (threshold of greater than two-fold higher/lower). A small plurality of genes, 36.8%, had lower expression levels in DK13×3 than expected, while 26.2% were higher and potentially upregulated (Fig. 7).

Fig. 7.

Scatter plots showing the expression levels of the differentially expressed genes in dikaryon DK13×3 vs. mid-parent expression value model estimates. RPKM, reads per kb per million reads and MPV, mid-parent expression values.

(0.1MB).

For example, we obtained the transcription profiling from the RNA-seq of the 17 laccase genes in the three strains. The gene action modes of the 17 laccase genes could be divided into the following three patterns: genes expressed in both parental monokaryons but not in the dikaryon; genes expressed in one parental monokaryon and dikaryon but not in another parental monokaryon; and genes expressed in parental monokaryons and the dikaryon. However, the total RPKMs of these laccase genes in DK13×3 did not present significant differences compared to the parental monokaryons (Table 5).

Table 5.

Laccase gene expression profile in Pleurotus ostreatus dikaryon DK13×3 and its parental monokaryons MK13 and MK3.

Unigene ID  Nr-annotation  RPKMGene differential expression patternsa 
    MK3  MK13  DK13× 
16937  phenol oxidase  1.74  0.32  0.00  Group 1
36987  laccase 3  0.18  0.19  0.00 
17686  diphenol oxidase  0.00  7.97  7.18  Group 2
17819  phenol oxidase  0.00  3.46  1.92 
32024  phenol oxidase  0.00  1.67  0.42 
33168  laccase  0.00  2.60  0.48 
24223  laccase  3.24  0.00  0.79 
9579  phenol oxidase  3.72  0.00  3.04 
10675  laccase  3.64  2.14  3.23  Group 3
13269  laccase  3.93  2.17  3.44 
17104  phenol oxidase  0.79  2.71  2.19 
21195  laccase 2  1.72  1.96  1.78 
21872  laccase 4  1.78  1.32  0.84 
25117  laccase 3  2.27  0.42  0.85 
31192  poxa3b  0.97  1.08  1.19 
33608  phenol oxidase  0.59  2.13  0.61 
3517  phenol oxidase 1  1.33  1.09  0.28 
Total    25.9  31.23  28.24   
a

Group 1, genes expressed in both parental monokaryons but not in the dikaryon; Group 2, genes expressed in one parental monokaryon and the dikaryon but not in another parental monokaryon; Group 3, genes expressed in parental monokaryons and the dikaryon.

poure monoallelic expression in the dikaryon

The poure gene of the two monokaryons and mRNA of the two monokaryons and karyon were cloned and sequenced by PCR and RT-PCR. The poure gene sequences of MK13 (GenBank access number: KF312589.1) were 97% and 97% identical to those of P. ostreatus PC15 v2.0, PC9 v1.0, (http://genome.jgi-psf.org/PleosPC15_2/PleosPC15_2.home.html;http://genome.jgi-psf.org/PleosPC9_1/PleosPC9_1.home.html); those for MK3 (GenBank access number: KF312590.1) were 96% and 95% identical. The different bases between the poure gene CDS of MK13 and MK3 were 93 (Table 6). The poure mRNA sequences of MK13, MK3 and DK13×3 were all 100% identical to the RNA-seq results. However, the mRNA sequences and gene CDS of poure differed by 4 bases in MK13 and 12 in MK3. In MK13, the differences were two Ts to Cs and two Gs to As. In MK3, the differences were one C changing to G, four Cs to Ts, four As to Gs, and three Gs to As (Table 7). This revealed that P. ostreatus simultaneously occurred in numerous RNA editing types. Furthermore, the poure mRNA sequences of DK13×3 were more identical to that of MK13 than MK3, with only two different bases and one predicted amino acid to MK13, while there were 89 different bases compared to MK3. As with MK13, the mRNA sequence and gene CDS of Poure in DK13×3 involved 4 bases, one T to C, one C to T, and two Gs to As (Tables 6 and 7). Urease catalyzed the hydrolysis of urea into carbon dioxide and ammonia. Urease was the first enzyme to be crystallized from jack beans, and it was the first protein whose enzymatic properties were demonstrated by Sumner in 1926.42 Ureases have been found in numerous bacteria, fungi, algae, plants and some invertebrates, and they have been found to help microorganisms and plants use endogenous and exogenous urea as a nitrogen source. The ammonia produced is subsequently utilized to synthesize proteins.43 Ureases of bacteria, fungi and higher plants are highly conserved.44 In higher plants and fungi, the enzyme is encoded by a single gene.45,46 Thus, our results showed that the poure transcript of DK13×3 was from the MK13 poure gene and that RNA editing also occurred (Table 6).

Table 6.

Sequence alignment of the poure gene CDS between the two monokaryons of Pleurotus ostreatus.

CDSa  The position of mismatched bases from the 5′ end of the Poure CDS
  10  30  81  160  177  189  222  264  285  306  325  331  363  365  376  523 
MK13 
MK3 
  540  558  567  576  586  600  639  642  654  691  741  763  779  795  879  903 
MK13 
MK3 
  924  966  975  978  1005  1061  1074  1083  1170  1200  1209  1236  1290  1311  1326  1335 
MK13 
MK3 
  1383  1521  1523  1527  1536  1587  1605  1628  1641  1680  1689  1707  1709  1713  1764  1767 
MK13 
MK3 
  1769  1782  1788  1808  1848  1857  1876  1917  1992  2061  2067  2070  2076  2079  2158  2208 
MK13 
MK3 
  2224  2229  2268  2317  2325  2364  2409  2450  2451  2469  2475  2478  2480       
MK13       
MK3       
a

The accession numbers in GeneBank of the poure gene CDS of Pleurotus ostreatus MK13 and MK3 are KF312589.1 and KF312590.1.

Table 7.

Sequence alignment of the poure gene CDS, mRNA and predicted AAs between the three strains of P. ostreatus.

Strain    The position of mismatched bases from the 5′ end of the poure CDS in MK13 or MK3 and contact mismatched AA residues
    529  1005  1301  1383  2158               
MK13CDS               
AA  Phe        Glu               
MK13mRNA               
AA  Leu        Lys               
DK13×3mRNA               
AA  Phe        Lys               
    16  365  523  570  691  779  924  1061  1628  1876  2224  2450 
MK3CDS 
AA    Ala        Glu    Glu    Val  Leu  Gly 
MK3mRNA 
AA    Phe        Gly    Gly    Ile  Phe  Asp 
Discussion

Our results showed that the global gene expression profile of dikaryon was distinct from its constituent monokaryons, and there was an expression difference in nearly two-thirds of the genes. This change was also confirmed by RT-PCR cloning and sequencing of the poure mRNA of the three strains. These results are not in agreement with previous reports,22,23 which is probably due to the different gene expression profiling approaches. The high throughput RNA-seq was certainly more thorough and comprehensive than traditional DNA hybridization.47

Based on the gene transcriptional quantity, heterosis in diploids was considered to result from differential gene expression, including the following five gene expression patterns: (i) genes expressed in both parents but not in hybrids, (ii) genes expressed in one parent and hybrid but not in another parent, (iii) genes expressed in one parent but not in another parent or hybrid, (iv) genes expressed only in a hybrid but not in both parents, and (v) genes expressed in both parents and the hybrid. The first four patterns are the presence/absence variations (PAV)48; the fifth could be divided into additive and non-additive gene expression patterns for which hybrids showed a transcript level equal to or deviating from the mid-parent value (average of the two parents).49–51 In this study, the mycelial growth rate of P. ostreatus dikaryon DK13×3 was significantly higher than that of the two parental monokaryons, indicating the advantage of sexual reproduction or heterosis in the dikaryon. The total gene expression quantity in the dikaryon was 4.8% and 6.5% higher than its constituent monokaryons, and all possible modes of differential gene expression that were present in the dikaryon when compared to its constituent monokaryons, including presence/absence variation and additive/non-additive gene expression, may be contributing to heterosis. This was confirmed in previous studies.24

Monoallelic expression genes have been found in a number of organisms, including humans, rodents, corn, and yeast.52 They are on the X chromosome in female placental mammals or on autosomes,5 and the selection of the expressed allele may depend on the parental origin or be random.53 However, this phenomenon has not been reported in the dikaryon. Those DEGs in the dikaryon can be divided into four groups. The main group was simultaneously expressed in both of the monokaryons. The other two smaller groups were expressed in only one of two monokaryons. The fourth group was expressed in the dikaryon alone. DEGs in the dikaryon only expressing MK3 or MK13 might be regarded as monoallelic expression genes, as evidenced by RT-PCR cloning and sequencing results. For example, the poure transcript in the dikaryon was from the MK13 nucleus gene but not MK3. More than 10% of the monoallelic expression genes in the dikaryon were from each parental monokaryon. However, we could not determine whether they demonstrated autosomal random monoallelic expression, sex chromosome inactivation, or imprinted gene expression. In fungi, the chromosome containing mating genes may be deemed as the sex chromosome. In mice and humans, more than 10% of the genes have autosomal random monoallelic expression.54,55 The isozyme bands that are only present in the S. commune dikaryon were demonstrated to depend on the expression of mating genes A and B.16 Accordingly, the relationship between the fourth group and the mating genes merits further study.

RNA-editing by base deamination has been reported in plant mitochondria and plastids (C-to-U editing)56 and mammals (A-to-I editing)57; U-to-C and guanosine (G)-to-A changes, which are probably by trans-amination, are also reported in mammals.58,59 No similar cases have been found in higher fungi. In this study, our results showed that numerous types of RNA editing existed in the poure mRNA in P. ostreatus, including C-T, A-G, and C-G base substitution.

Taken together, our results suggest that the gene expression patterns in dikaryons should be similar to diploid. Finally, we strongly propose that the fungal dikaryon is a perfect experimental model for studying sex evolution and monoallelic expression due to its unique biology. The two parental monokaryons can independently live with asexual reproduction. It was proposed that the monokaryons were the temporary stage of dikaryons and had less combative ability than dikaryons,60 but several species models have demonstrated that monokaryons have a similar or more combative phenotype compared to dikaryons.61,62 Therefore, it was suggested that monokaryons with greater adaptive genetic potential may improve the combative ability to dikaryons.63 In dikaryons, the two monokaryon nuclei do not fuse to karyogamy, and the two chromosomal sets only occasionally recombine during vegetative growth63; therefore, it is easy to determine the origins of alleles in a dikaryon. Although there is no paternal and maternal distinction in the mating of two compatible monokaryons, as with other sexual reproduction, the mitochondrion in almost all dikaryons is from only one monokaryon.64 The example donor can be regarded as the female parent.

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Acknowledgments

This work was funded by a grant from the Natural Science Foundation of Henan Province (112300410115) and the program for Innovative Research Team (in Science and Technology) in University of Henan Province (15IRTSTHN014).

References
[1]
J.E. Stajich, M.L. Berbee, M. Blackwell, et al.
The fungi.
Curr Biol, 19 (2009), pp. R840-R845
[2]
C. Stern.
Somatic crossing over and segregation in Drosophila melanogaster.
Genetics, 21 (1936), pp. 625-730
[3]
M.C. LaFave, S.L. Andersen, E.P. Stoffregen, et al.
Sources and structures of mitotic crossovers that arise when BLM helicase is absent in Drosophila.
Genetics, 196 (2014), pp. 107-118
[4]
C. Fellmann, S.W. Lowe.
Stable RNA interference rules for silencing.
Nat Cell Biol, 16 (2014), pp. 10-18
[5]
A. Chess.
Mechanisms and consequences of widespread random monoallelic expression.
Nat Rev Genet, 13 (2012), pp. 421-428
[6]
V.V. Stepanova, M.S. Gelfand.
RNA editing: classical cases and outlook of new technologies.
Mol Biol, 48 (2014), pp. 11-15
[7]
Z.J. Chen.
Genomic and epigenetic insights into the molecular bases of heterosis.
Nat Rev Genet, 14 (2013), pp. 471-482
[8]
L.Y. Qiu, C. Yu, Y.C. Qi, et al.
Recent advances on fungal epigenetics.
Chin J Cell Biol, 31 (2009), pp. 212-216
[9]
F.E. Nicolás, S. Torres-Martínez, R.M. Ruiz-Vázquez.
Loss and retention of RNA interference in fungi and parasites.
PLoS Pathog, 9 (2013), pp. e1003089
[10]
U. Goodenough, J. Heitman.
Origins of eukaryotic sexual reproduction.
Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol, 6 (2014), pp. a016154
[11]
G. Gibson, R. Riley-Berger, L. Harshman, et al.
Extensive sex-specific nonadditivity of gene expression in Drosophila melanogaster.
Genetics, 167 (2004), pp. 1791-1799
[12]
G.M. He, X.P. Zhu, A.A. Elling, et al.
Global epigenetic and transcriptional trends among two rice subspecies and their reciprocal hybrids.
Plant Cell, 22 (2010), pp. 17-33
[13]
R.C. Meyer, H. Witucka-Wall, M. Becher, et al.
Heterosis manifestation during early Arabidopsis seedling development is characterized by intermediate gene expression and enhanced metabolic activity in the hybrids.
[14]
A. Paschold, Y. Jia, C. Marcon, et al.
Complementation contributes to transcriptome complexity in maize (Zea mays L.) hybrids relative to their inbred parents.
Genome Res, 22 (2012), pp. 2445-2454
[15]
C.-S. Wang, J.R. Raper.
Protein specificity and sexual morphogenesis in Schizophyllum commune.
J Bact, 99 (1969), pp. 291-297
[16]
C.-S. Wang, J.R. Raper.
Isozyme patterns and sexual morphogenesis in Schizophyllum.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 66 (1970), pp. 882-889
[17]
I.K. Ross, E.M. Martin, M. Thoman.
Changes in isozyme patterns between monokaryons and dikaryons of a bipolar Coprinus.
J Bact, 114 (1973), pp. 1083-1089
[18]
D. Moore, R.I. Jirjis.
Electrophoretic studies of carpophore development in the basidiomycete Coprinus cinereus.
New Phytol, 87 (1981), pp. 101-113
[19]
R.C. Ullrich.
Isozyme patterns and cellular differentiation in Schizophyllum.
Mol Gen Genet, 156 (1977), pp. 157-161
[20]
D.C. Evers, I.K. Ross.
Isozyme patterns and morphogenesis in higher basidiomycetes.
Exp Mycol, 7 (1983), pp. 9-16
[21]
O.M. de Vries, J.H. Hoge, J.G. Wessels.
Regulation of the pattern of protein synthesis in Schizophyllum commune by the incompatibility genes.
Dev Biol, 74 (1980), pp. 22-36
[22]
B. Zantinge, H. Dons, J.G. Wessels.
Comparison of poly(A)-containing RNAs in different cell types of the lower eukaryote Schizophyllum commune.
Eur J Biochem, 101 (1979), pp. 251-260
[23]
B. Zantinge, J.H. Hoge, J.G. Wessels.
Frequency and diversity of RNA sequences in different cell types of the fungus Schizophyllum commune.
Eur J Biochem, 113 (1981), pp. 381-389
[24]
R. Castanera, A. Omarini, F. Santoyo, et al.
Non-additive transcriptional profiles underlie dikaryotic superiority in Pleurotus ostreatus laccase activity.
[25]
L. Wang, Y. Li, D. Liu, et al.
Immobilization of mycelial pellets from liquid spawn of oyster mushroom based on carrier adsorption.
Horttechnology, 21 (2011), pp. 82-86
[26]
X. Dong, K. Zhang, Y. Gao, et al.
Expression of hygromycin B resistance in oyster culinary-medicinal mushroom, Pleurotus ostreatus (Jacq.:Fr.)P. Kumm. (higher Basidiomycetes) using three gene expression systems.
Int J Med Mushrooms, 14 (2012), pp. 21-26
[27]
R. Chai, C. Qiu, D. Liu, et al.
β-Glucan synthase gene overexpression and β-glucans overproduction in Pleurotus ostreatus using promoter swapping.
[28]
A.S. Kotasthane.
A simple technique for isolation of Xanthomonas oryzae pv oryzae.
J Mycol Plant Pathol, 33 (2003), pp. 277-278
[29]
M.G. Grabherr, B.J. Haas, M. Yassour, et al.
Full-length transcriptome assembly from RNA-Seq data without a reference genome.
Nat Biotechnol, 29 (2011), pp. 644-652
[30]
G. Pertea, X. Huang, F. Liang, et al.
TIGR Gene Indices clustering tools (TGICL): a software system for fast clustering of large EST datasets.
Bioinformatics, 19 (2003), pp. 651-652
[31]
B. Langmead, S.L. Salzberg.
Fast gapped-read alignment with Bowtie 2.
Nat Methods, 9 (2012), pp. 357-359
[32]
B. Li, C.N. Dewey.
RSEM: accurate transcript quantification from RNA-Seq data with or without a reference genome.
BMC Bioinform, 12 (2011), pp. 323
[33]
A. Mortazavi, B.A. Williams, K. McCue, et al.
Mapping and quantifying mammalian transcriptomes by RNA-Seq.
Nat Methods, 5 (2008), pp. 621-628
[34]
S. Audic, J.M. Claverie.
The significance of digital gene expression profiles.
Genome Res, 7 (1997), pp. 986-995
[35]
M. Pumphrey, J. Bai, D. Laudencia-Chingcuanco, et al.
Nonadditive expression of homoeologous genes is established upon polyploidization in hexaploid wheat.
Genetics, 181 (2009), pp. 1147-1157
[36]
K. Izumitsu, K. Hatoh, T. Sumita, et al.
Rapid and simple preparation of mushroom DNA directly from colonies and fruiting bodies for PCR.
Mycoscience, 53 (2012), pp. 396-401
[37]
D. Kim, B. Langmead, S.L. Salzberg.
HISAT: a fast spliced aligner with low memory requirements.
Nat Methods, 12 (2015), pp. 357-360
[38]
M.J. de Hoon, S. Imoto, J. Nolan, S. Miyano.
Open source clustering software.
Bioinformatics, 20 (2004), pp. 1453-1454
[39]
A.J. Saldanha.
Java Treeview—extensible visualization of microarray data.
Bioinformatics, 20 (2004), pp. 3246-3248
[40]
M. Pertea, G.M. Pertea, C.M. Antonescu, et al.
StringTie enables improved reconstruction of a transcriptome from RNA-seq reads.
Nat Biotechnol, 33 (2015), pp. 290-295
[41]
C. Trapnell, A. Roberts, L. Goff, et al.
Differential gene and transcript expression analysis of RNA-seq experiments with TopHat and Cufflinks.
Nat Protoc, 7 (2012), pp. 562-578
[42]
P.A. Karplus, M.A. Pearson, R.P. Hausinger.
70 years of crystalline urease: what have we learned?.
Acc Chem Res, 30 (1997), pp. 330-337
[43]
H.L. Mobley, R.P. Hausinger.
Microbial ureases: significance, regulation, and molecular characterization.
Microbiol Rev, 53 (1989), pp. 85-108
[44]
H.L.T. Mobley, M.D. Island, R.P. Hausinger.
Molecular biology of microbial ureases.
Microbiol Rev, 59 (1995), pp. 451-480
[45]
K. Takashima, T. Suga, G. Mamiya.
The structure of jack bean urease. The complete amino acid sequence, limited proteolysis and reactive cysteine residues.
Eur J Biochem, 175 (1988), pp. 151-165
[46]
M.J. Wagemaker, D.C. Eastwood, C. van der Drift, et al.
Expression of the urease gene of Agaricus bisporus: a tool for studying fruit body formation and post-harvest development.
Appl Microbiol Biotechnol, 71 (2006), pp. 486-492
[47]
R. Higuchi, G. Dollinger, P.S. Walsh, R. Griffith.
Simultaneous amplification and detection of specific DNA sequences.
Biotechnology (N Y), 10 (1992), pp. 413-417
[48]
N.M. Springer, K. Ying, Y. Fu, et al.
Maize inbreds exhibit high levels of copy number variation (CNV) and presence/absence variation (PAV) in genome content.
PLoS Genet, 5 (2009), pp. e1000734
[49]
M. Guo, M.A. Rupe, X.F. Yang, et al.
Genome-wide transcript analysis of maize hybrids: allelic additive gene expression and yield heterosis.
Theor Appl Genet, 113 (2006), pp. 831-845
[50]
R.A. Swanson-Wagner, Y. Jia, R. DeCook, et al.
All possible modes of gene action are observed in a global comparison of gene expression in a maize F1 hybrid and its inbred parents.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 103 (2006), pp. 6805-6810
[51]
F. Hochholdinger, N. Hoecker.
Towards the molecular basis of heterosis.
Trends Plant Sci, 12 (2007), pp. 427-432
[52]
R.B. Brem, G. Yvert, R. Clinton, et al.
Genetic dissection of transcriptional regulation in budding yeast.
Science, 296 (2002), pp. 752-755
[53]
A. Chess.
Random and non-random monoallelic expression.
Neuropsychopharmacology, 38 (2013), pp. 55-61
[54]
A. Gimelbrant, J.N. Hutchinson, B.R. Thompson, A. Chess.
Widespread monoallelic expression on human autosomes.
Science, 318 (2007), pp. 1136-1140
[55]
L.M. Zwemer, A. Zak, B.R. Thompson, et al.
Autosomal monoallelic expression in the mouse.
Genome Biol, 13 (2012), pp. R10
[56]
M.W. Gray, P.S. Covello.
RNA editing in plant mitochondria and chloroplasts.
FASEB J, 7 (1993), pp. 64-71
[57]
P. Danecek, C. Nellåker, R.E. McIntyre, et al.
High levels of RNA-editing site conservation amongst 15 laboratory mouse strains.
Genome Biol, 13 (2012), pp. 26
[58]
J. Villegas, I. Muller, J. Arredondo, et al.
A putative RNA editing from U to C in a mouse mitochondrial transcript.
Nucleic Acids Res, 30 (2002), pp. 1895-1901
[59]
K. Klimek-Tomczak, M. Mikula, A. Dzwonek, et al.
Editing of hnRNP K protein mRNA in colorectal adenocarcinoma and surrounding mucosa.
Br J Cancer, 94 (2006), pp. 586-592
[60]
M. Gardes, K.K. Wong, J.A. Fortin.
Interactions between monokaryotic and dikaryotic isolates of Laccaria bicolor on roots of Pinus banksiana.
Symbiosis, 8 (1990), pp. 233-250
[61]
M.E. Crockatt, G.I. Pierce, R.A. Camden, et al.
Homokaryons are more combative than heterokaryons of Hericium coralloides.
Fungal Ecol, 1 (2008), pp. 40-48
[62]
J. Hiscox, C. Hibbert, H.J. Rogers, L. Boddy.
Monokaryons and dikaryons of Trametes versicolor have similar combative, enzyme and decay ability.
Fungal Ecol, 3 (2010), pp. 347-356
[63]
T.A. Clark, J.B. Anderson.
Dikaryons of the basidiomycetes fungus Schizophyllum commune: evolution in long-term culture.
Genetics, 167 (2004), pp. 1663-1675
[64]
T. Matsumoto, Y. Fukumasa-Nakai.
Mitochondrial DNA inheritance in sexual crosses of Pleurotus ostreatus.
Curr Genet, 30 (1996), pp. 549-552
Copyright © 2016. Sociedade Brasileira de Microbiologia
Article options