Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-68ccn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-11T15:27:45.595Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Germination and proteome analyses reveal intraspecific variation in seed dormancy regulation in common waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Ramon G. Leon ,
Diane C. Bassham  and
Micheal D. K. Owen
Diane C. Bassham
Affiliation:
Department of Genetics, Development and Cell Biology and Plant Sciences Institute, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011
Micheal D. K. Owen
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Common waterhemp is an obligate outcrosser that has high genetic variability. However, under selection pressure, this weed shows population differentiation for adaptive traits. Intraspecific variation for herbicide resistance has been studied, but no studies have been conducted to determine the existence of variation for other adaptive traits that could influence weed management. The objective of this study was to examine the existence of different seed dormancy regulatory mechanisms in common waterhemp. Seed dormancy regulation, in response to different temperature and moisture regimes, was studied through germination experiments and proteome analysis using two common waterhemp biotypes (Ames and Everly) collected from agricultural fields in Iowa, and one biotype (Ohio) collected from a pristine area in Ohio. Without stratification, germination percentage among the different biotypes was 9, 29 and 88% for Ames, Everly, and Ohio respectively. The germination rate of seeds from Ames was dramatically increased after incubation at either 4 or 25 C under wet conditions, whereas germination of seeds from Everly was only increased at 25 C under wet conditions. The Ohio biotype showed no change in germination response to any of the incubation treatments. Germination studies indicated that the rate of seed dormancy alleviation differed between biotypes. Seed protein profiles obtained from the three biotypes differed in protein abundance, number, and type. A putative small heat-shock protein (sHSP) of 17.6 kDa and isoelectric point (pI) 6.1 increased whereas a putative glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (G3PDH) of 30.9 kDa and pI 6.4 decreased in abundance in the Ames biotype as seed dormancy was reduced in response to incubation at 4 C and wet conditions. These two proteins did not change in the Everly and Ohio biotypes, suggesting that these proteins changed their abundance in response to seed dormancy alleviation. The results of this study suggest that differences in seed dormancy levels between the biotypes were due to different physiological regulatory mechanisms.

Keywords

Common waterhemp, Amaranthus tuberculatus (Moq.) J.D. SauerDormancygerminationstratificationtemperature fluctuationbiotype
Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 54 , Issue 2 , April 2006 , pp. 305 - 315
Copyright
Copyright © Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

Allen, P. S. and Meyer, S. E. 2002. Ecology and ecological genetics of seed dormancy in downy brome. Weed Sci 50:241–247.Google Scholar
Altschul, S. F., Madden, T. L., Schäffer, A. A., Zhang, J., Zhang, Z., Miller, W., and Lipman, D. J. 1997. Gapped BLAST and PSI-BLAST: a new generation of protein database search programs. Nucleic Acids Res 25:3389–3402.Google Scholar
Anderson, D. D., Higly, L. G., Martin, A. R., and Roeth, F. W. 1996. Competition between triazine-resistance and -susceptible common waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis). Weed Sci 44:853–859.Google Scholar
Baskin, C. C. and Baskin, J. M. 1998. Seeds: Ecology, Biogeography, and Evolution of Dormancy and Germination. San Diego: Academic. 666 p.Google Scholar
Batlla, D. and Benech-Arnold, R. L. 2003. A quantitative analysis of dormancy loss dynamics in Polygonum aviculare L. seeds: development of a thermal time model based on changes in seed population thermal parameters. Seed Sci. Res 13:55–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Batlla, D., Verges, V., and Benech-Arnold, R. L. 2003. A quantitative analysis of seed responses to cycle-doses of fluctuating temperatures in relation to dormancy: development of a thermal time model for Polygonum aviculare L. seeds. Seed Sci. Res 13:197–207.Google Scholar
Benech-Arnold, R. L., Ghersa, C. M., Sanchez, R. A., and Insausti, P. 1990a. Temperature effects on dormancy release and germination rate in Sorghum halepense (L.) Pers. seeds: a quantitative analysis. Weed Res 30:81–89.Google Scholar
Benech-Arnold, R. L., Ghersa, C. M., Sanchez, R. A., and Insausti, P. 1990b. A mathematical model to predict Sorghum halepense seedling emergence in relation to soil temperature. Weed Res 30:91–99.Google Scholar
Bewley, J. D. 1997. Seed germination and dormancy. Plant Cell 9:1055–1066.Google Scholar
Bewley, J. D. and Black, M. 1994. Seeds: Physiology of Development and Germination. 2nd ed. New York: Plenum Press. 445 p.Google Scholar
Christal, A., Davies, D. H. K., and Van Gardingen, P. R. 1998. The germination ecology of Chenopodium album populations. Aspects of Applied Biology 51:127–134.Google Scholar
Cranston, H. J., Johnson, R. R., Chaverra, M. E., and Dyer, W. E. 1999. Isolation and characterization of a cDNA encoding a SAR-like monomeric GTP-binding protein in Avena fatua L. Plant Sci 145:75–81.Google Scholar
Debeaujon, I. and Koornneef, M. 2000. Gibberellin requirement for Arabidopsis seed germination is determined both by testa characteristics and embryonic abscisic acid. Plant Physiol 122:415–424.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Debeaujon, I., Leon-Kloosterziel, K. M., and Koornneef, M. 2000. Influence of the testa on seed dormancy, germination, and longevity in Arabidopsis. Plant Physiol 122:403–413.Google Scholar
Finnie, C., Melchior, S., Roepstorff, P., and Svensson, B. 2002. Proteome analysis of grain filling and seed maturation in barley. Plant Physiol 129:1308–1319.Google Scholar
Forcella, F. 1993. Seedling emergence model for velvetleaf. Agron. J 85:929–933.Google Scholar
Gallardo, K., Job, C., Groot, S. P. C., Puype, M., Demol, H., Vandekerckhove, J., and Job, D. 2001. Proteomics analysis of Arabidopsis seed germination and priming. Plant Physiol 126:835–848.Google Scholar
Gallardo, K., Job, C., Groot, S. P. C., Puype, M., Demol, H., Vandekerckhove, J., and Job, D. 2002. Proteomics of Arabidopsis seed germination. A comparative study of wild-type and gibberellin-deficient seeds. Plant Physiol 129:823–837.Google Scholar
Ghersa, C. M., Martinez-Ghersa, M. A., Brewer, T. G., and Roush, M. L. 1994. Selection pressures for diclofop-methyl resistance and germination time of Italian ryegrass. Agron. J 86:823–828.Google Scholar
Grundy, A. C., Peters, N. C. B., Rassmussen, I. A., Hartmann, K. M., Sattin, M., Andersson, L., Mead, A., Murdoch, A. J., and Forcella, F. 2003. Emergence of Chenopodium album and Stellaria media of different origins under different climatic conditions. Weed Res 43:163–176.Google Scholar
Hartl, D. L. and Clark, A. G. 1997. Principles of population genetics. 3rd ed. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates. 542 p.Google Scholar
Hartzler, R. G., Buhler, D. D., and Stoltenberg, D. E. 1999. Emergence characteristics of four annual weed species. Weed Sci 47:578–584.Google Scholar
Hartzler, R. G., Harrison, K., Sprague, C., and Wax, L. M. 2002. Emergence characteristics of giant ragweed populations of Ohio, Illinois and Iowa. North Central Weed Science Society Proceedings 57:51.Google Scholar
Hinz, J. R. R. and Owen, M. D. K. 1997. Acetolactate synthase resistance in a common waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis) population. Weed Technol 11:13–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horak, M. J. and Peterson, D. E. 1995. Biotypes of palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) and common waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis) are resistant to imazethapyr and thifensulfuron. Weed Technol 9:192–195.Google Scholar
Jensen, P., Stummann, B., Hansen, N., Karlebjerg, K., and Henningsen, K. 1996. Characterization of a gene for a Mg-chelatase subunit from Synechocystis PCC6803. Plant Mol. Biol 30:1076.Google Scholar
Kawakami, N., Kawabata, C., and Noda, K. 1992. Differential changes in levels of mRNAs during maturation of wheat seeds that are susceptible and resistant to preharvest-sprouting. Plant Cell Physiol 33:511–517.Google Scholar
Knack, G., Liu, Z., and Kloppstech, K. 1992. Low molecular mass heat-shock proteins of a light-resistant photoautotrophic cell culture. Eur. J. Cell Biol 59:166–175.Google Scholar
Lacerda, D. R., Filho, J. P. L., Goulart, M. F., Ribeiro, R. A., and Lovato, M. B. 2004. Seed-dormancy variation in natural populations of two tropical leguminous tree species: Senna multijuga (Caesalpinoideae) and Plathymenia reticulate (Mimosoideae). Seed Sci. Res 14:127–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewelleyn, R. S. and Powles, S. B. 2001. High levels of herbicide resistance in rigid ryegrass (Lolium rigidum) in the wheat belt of western Australia. Weed Technol 15:242–248.Google Scholar
Low, D., Brandle, K., Nover, L., and Forreiter, C. 2000. Cytosolic heat-shock proteins Hsp17.7 class I and Hsp17.3 class II of tomato act as molecular chaperones in vivo. Planta 211:575–582.Google Scholar
Marshall, B., Dunlop, G., Ramsay, G., and Squire, G. R. 2000. Temperature-dependent germination traits in oilseed rape associated with 5′-anchored simple sequence repeat PCR polymorphisms. J. Exp. Bot 51:2075–2084.Google Scholar
Martin, W. and Cerff, R. 1986. Prokaryotic features of a nucleus-encoded enzyme. cDNA sequences for chloroplast and cytosolic glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenases from mustard (Sinapis alba). Eur. J. Biochem 159:323–331.Google Scholar
Martinez, P., Martin, W., and Cerff, R. 1989. Structure, evolution, and anaerobic regulation of a nuclear gene encoding cytosolic glyceraldehydes-3-phosphate dehydrogenase from maize. J. Mol. Biol 208:551–565.Google Scholar
McElwain, E. F. and Spiker, S. 1989. A wheat cDNA clone which is homologous to the 17 kDa heat-shock protein gene family of soybean. Nucleic Acids Res 17:1764.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morrel, P. L., Lundy, K. E., and Clegg, M. T. 2003. Distinct geographic patterns of genetic diversity are maintained in wild barley (Hordeum vulgare ssp. spontaneum) despite migration. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 100:10812–10817.Google Scholar
Mortimer, A. M. 1997. Phenological adaptation in weeds-an evolutionary response to the use of herbicides? Pestic. Sci 51:299–304.Google Scholar
Niu, X., Wang, H., Bressan, R. A., and Hasegawa, P. M. 1994. Molecular cloning and expression of a glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase gene in a desert halophyte, Atriplex nummularia L. Plant Physiol 104:1105–1106.Google Scholar
Owen, M. D. K. 2001. Importance of weed population shifts and herbicide resistance in the Midwest USA corn belt. British Crop Protection Council. Proceedings of BCPC Conference, Weeds 2001 1:407–410.Google Scholar
Patzoldt, W. L., Tranel, P. G., and Hager, A. G. 2002. Variable herbicide responses among Illinois waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis and A. tuberculatus) populations. Crop Prot 21:707–712.Google Scholar
Pratt, D. B. and Clark, L. D. 2001. Amaranthus rudis and A. tuberculatus— one species or two? J. Torrey Bot. Soc 128:282–296.Google Scholar
Rajjou, L., Gallardo, K., Debeaujon, I., Vandekerckhove, J., Job, C., and Job, D. 2004. The effect of α-amanitin on the Arabidopsis seed proteome highlights the distinct roles of stored and neosynthesized mRNAs during germination. Plant Physiol 134:1598–1613.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ren, C. and Kermode, A. R. 2000. An increase in pectin methyl esterase activity accompanies dormancy breakage and germination of yellow cedar seeds. Plant Physiol 124:231–242.Google Scholar
Sawma, J. T. and Mohler, C. L. 2002. Evaluating seed viability by an unimbibed seed crush test in comparison with the tetrazolium test. Weed Technol 16:781–786.Google Scholar
Shih, M. C., Heinrich, P., and Goodman, H. M. 1991. Cloning and chromosomal mapping of nuclear encoding genes and cytosolic glaceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase form Arabidopsis thaliana . Gene 104:133–138.Google Scholar
Shoup, D. E., Al-Khatib, K., and Peterson, D. E. 2003. Common waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis) resistance to protoporphyrinogen oxidase-inhibiting herbicides. Weed Sci 51:145–150.Google Scholar
Silvertown, J. W. and Charlesworth, D. 2001. Introduction to Plant Population Biology. 4th ed. Ames, IA: Blackwell. 347 p.Google Scholar
Slocombe, S. P., Beaudoin, F., Donaghy, P. G., Hardie, D. G., Dickinson, J. R., and Halford, N. G. 2004. SNF1-related protein kinase (snRK1) phosphorylates class I heat shock protein. Plant Physiol. Biochem 42:111–116.Google Scholar
Tranel, P. J., Jiang, W., Patzoldt, W. L., and Wright, T. R. 2004. Intraspecific variability of the acetolactate synthase gene. Weed Sci 52:236–241.Google Scholar
Tranel, P. J., Wasson, J. J., Jeschke, M. R., and Rayburn, J. L. 2002. Transmission of herbicide resistance from a monoecious to a dioecious weedy Amaranthus species. Theor. Appl. Genet 105:674–679.Google Scholar
Trucco, F., Jeschke, M. R., Rayburn, A. L., and Tranel, P. J. 2005a. Amaranthus hybridus can be pollinated frequently by A. tuberculatus under field conditions. Heredity 94:64–70.Google Scholar
Trucco, F., Jeschke, M. R., Rayburn, A. L., and Tranel, P. J. 2005b. Promiscuity in weedy amaranths: high frequency of female tall waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus) × smooth pigweed (A. hybridus) hybridization under field conditions. Weed Sci 53:46–54.Google Scholar
Vila-Aiub, M. M., Neve, P., Steadman, K. J., and Powles, S. B. 2005. Ecological fitness of a multiple herbicide-resistant Lolium rigidum population: dynamics of seed germination and seedling emergence of resistant and susceptible phenotypes. J. Appl. Ecol 42:288–298.Google Scholar
Volkov, R. A., Panchuk, I. I., and Schoffl, F. 2005. Small heat shock proteins are differentially regulated during pollen development and following heat stress in tobacco. Plant Mol. Biol 57:487–502.Google Scholar
Wehmeyer, N., Hernandez, L. D., Finkelstein, R. R., and Vierling, E. 1996. Synthesis of small heat-shock proteins is part of the developmental program of late seed maturation. Plant Physiol 112:747–757.Google Scholar
Wehmeyer, N. and Vierling, E. 2000. The expression of small heat shock proteins in seeds responds to discrete developmental signals and suggests a general protective role in desiccation tolerance. Plant Physiol 122:1099–1108.Google Scholar