Advertisement

Identification of critical stage responding to consecutive monoculture obstacle in Rehmannia glutinosa L.

  • Xiaoran Wang
  • Zhen Li
  • Lu Yang
  • Weixi Li
  • Yuhong Wang
  • Mingjie Li
  • Zhongyi ZhangEmail author
  • Xinjian ChenEmail author
Original Article
  • 31 Downloads

Abstract

Rehmannia glutinosa L. (R. glutinosa) is one of the most common traditional Chinese medicines, whose productivity and quality, however, are seriously impacted by replanting disease, also known as consecutive monoculture obstacle. Little is known about R. glutinosa’s critical responsive stage to consecutive monoculture. There were two parts to this study: first, we analyzed different gene expression profiles in root of R. glutinosa between first-year planting (FP) and second-year replanting (SP) in five development stages (stage I to V) using Illumina sequencing to interpret the stage that most dramatically responding to consecutive monoculture; second, applying tissue culture technique, the harm of consecutive monoculture in a sterile condition was simulated and the medium was added with the soil extracts from FP and SP soil. The results showed that a significant difference in gene expression appeared at stage I under consecutive monoculture. Using a calcium indicator, the fluo-3 fluorescence to detect calcium distribution in the root tip of seedlings cultured in medium, the results revealed that after being cultured for 10 days, the SP fluorescence intensity of the seedlings was significantly higher than that of FP while crown position was particularly prominent. The evidence from gene expression profiling and tissue culture reached agreement that early stage of R. glutinosa growth was the critical stage to perceive consecutive monoculture stress. The results are of great significance to study the molecular mechanism of consecutive monoculture, which is expected to await a quick and accurate evaluation of land feasibility to plant R. glutinosa.

Keywords

R. glutinosa Consecutive monoculture obstacle Digital gene expression Calcium signaling Aseptic seedling 

Abbreviations

R. glutinosa

Rehmannia glutinosa L.

FP

First-year planting

SP

Second-year planting

HPLC

High performance liquid chromatography

Stage I

From cropping R. glutinosa planted seedlings to the root length of 8 cm, June 10th

Stage II

The root length of 8–15 cm, July 1st

Stage III

The diameter column of 1–2 cm, July 29th

Stage IV

The diameter column of 2–4 cm August 26th

Stage V

Maturity at the end of September 30th

DGE

Digital gene expression profiling

KEGG

Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes

DEG

Differentially expressed genes

GO

Gene ontology

MENP

MS medium with extracts of rhizosphere soil in which R. glutinosa had never been replanted

MEPO

MS medium with extracts of rhizosphere soil in which R. glutinosa had been replanted for 1 year

MEPT

MS medium with extracts of rhizosphere soil in which R. glutinosa had been replanted for 2 years

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by grants from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (31271674), and Key Research Project of Colleges and Universities in Henan Province (17A180024).

Supplementary material

11738_2019_2847_MOESM1_ESM.tif (356 kb)
Fig. S1 The tuberous roots of R. glutinosa at five different developmental stages (I, II, III, IV and V) as sampling time (TIFF 356 kb)
11738_2019_2847_MOESM2_ESM.xlsx (11 kb)
Table S1 Primer sequences used to assay ten differentially expressed genes by qRT-PCR verification in FP and SP (XLSX 10 kb)
11738_2019_2847_MOESM3_ESM.xlsx (10 kb)
Table S2 Primer sequences for ten differentially expressed genes screened by DGE, which were enriched in at least one of 124 KEGG pathways, used to compare transcript abundance in aseptic seedlings cultured for 10 days in MENP (never replanted) and MEPO (replanted for one year) by qRT-PCR (XLSX 10 kb)
11738_2019_2847_MOESM4_ESM.tif (796 kb)
Fig. S2 The induction process of R. glutinosa aseptic seedlings. The aseptic pieces of root with bud eyes were cultured in 1/2 MS around 14 days. When regenerants reached 3-4 cm in length, they could be transferred to basic MS medium to continue nurturing (TIFF 795 kb)
11738_2019_2847_MOESM5_ESM.xlsx (10 kb)
Table S3 Summary of DGE tags of R. glutinosa in FP and SP at all five stages (XLSX 10 kb)
11738_2019_2847_MOESM6_ESM.tif (1.7 mb)
Fig. S3 Validation of the DGE results. Ten differentially expressed genes (five up-regulated and five down-regulated) between FP and SP were randomly selected to detect transcript abundance by qRT-PCR. Eight of the ten genes provided consistent trends, indicated that DGE results were credible (TIFF 1782 kb)
11738_2019_2847_MOESM7_ESM.xlsx (1.7 mb)
Table S4 The differentially expressed genes (DEGs) between FP and SP at stage I, of which transcript abundance was quantified in RPKM method, and annotation against KEGG, GO and Nr databases (XLSX 1691 kb)
11738_2019_2847_MOESM8_ESM.xlsx (98 kb)
Table S5 The details of GO ‘biological_process’ of differentially expressed genes in SP compared to FP at stage I (XLSX 98 kb)
11738_2019_2847_MOESM9_ESM.xlsx (24 kb)
Table S6 The details of GO ‘celluar_component’ enriched by differentially expressed genes in SP compared to FP at stage I (XLSX 24 kb)
11738_2019_2847_MOESM10_ESM.xlsx (47 kb)
Table S7 The details of GO ‘molecular_function’ enriched by differentially expressed genes in SP compared to FP at stage I (XLSX 46 kb)
11738_2019_2847_MOESM11_ESM.xlsx (18 kb)
Table S8 The details of KEGG pathways enriched by differentially expressed genes in SP compared to FP at stage I (XLSX 18 kb)
11738_2019_2847_MOESM12_ESM.tif (2.3 mb)
Fig. S4 The aseptic seedlings were cultured in MENP (never replanted), MEPO (replanted for one year), and MEPT (replanted for two years) for 30 days (TIFF 2333 kb)
11738_2019_2847_MOESM13_ESM.xlsx (13 kb)
Table S9 Fresh weight and root length of seedlings cultured in MENP (never replanted) and MEPO (replanted for one year) after 10, 15 and 25 days. Three biological replications were performed in measurement of each biomass (XLSX 12 kb)
11738_2019_2847_MOESM14_ESM.tif (334 kb)
Fig. S5 The phenotype of mature tuberous roots of R. glutinosa planted in FP and SP. Instead of elongation process, swelling of R. glutinosa roots has a dramatic inhibition under consecutive monoculture (TIFF 333 kb)

References

  1. An M, Pratley JE, Haig T (2000) Phytotoxicity of vulpia residues: IV. Dynamics of allelochemicals during decomposition of vulpia residues and their corresponding phytotoxicity. J Chem Ecol 26:2603–2617.  https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005692724885 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Audic S, Claverie JM (1997) The significance of digital gene expression profiles. Genome Res 7:986–995.  https://doi.org/10.1101/gr.7.10.986 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Bacskai BJ, Xia MQ, Strickland DK, Rebeck GW, Hyman BT (2000) The endocytic receptor protein LRP also mediates neuronal calcium signaling via N-methyl-d-aspartate receptors. Proc Natl Acad Sci 97:11551–11556.  https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.200238297 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Barbero F, Guglielmotto M, Capuzzo A, Maffei ME (2016) Extracellular self-DNA (esDNA), but not heterologous plant or insect DNA (etDNA), induces plasma membrane depolarization and calcium signaling in lima bean (Phaseolus lunatus) and maize (Zea mays). Int J Mol Sci 17:1.  https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms17101659 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Batistič O, Kudla J (2012) Analysis of calcium signaling pathways in plants. Biochim Biophys Acta Gen Subj 1820:1283–1293.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbagen.2011.10.012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bouhaouel I, Gfeller A, Fauconnier ML, Rezgui S, Amara HS, Jardin PD (2015) Allelopathic and autotoxicity effects of barley (Hordeum vulgare L. ssp. vulgare) root exudates. Biocontrol 60:425–436.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10526-014-9634-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bu RF, Xie JM, Yu JH, Liao WB, Xiao XM, Lv J, Wang CL, Ye J, Calderón-Urrea A (2016) Autotoxicity in cucumber (Cucumis sativus L.) seedlings is alleviated by silicon through an increase in the activity of antioxidant enzymes and by mitigating lipid peroxidation. J Plant Biol 59:247–259.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12374-016-0526-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cartenì F, Bonanomi G, Giannino F, Incerti G, Vincenot CE, Chiusano ML, Mazzoleni S (2016) Self-DNA inhibitory effects: underlying mechanisms and ecological implications. Plant Signal Behav 11:e1158381.  https://doi.org/10.1080/15592324.2016 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. Cholewa E, Peterson CA (2004) Evidence for symplastic involvement in the radial movement of calcium in onion roots. Plant Physiol 134:1793–1802.  https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.103.035287 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. Cholewa E, Bown AW, Cholewinski AJ, Shelp BJ, Snedden WA (1997) Cold-shock-stimulated γ-aminobutyric acid synthesis is mediated by an increase in cytosolic Ca2+, not by an increase in cytosolic H+. Can J Bot 75:375–382.  https://doi.org/10.1139/b97-040 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dias AS, Lidon FC, Ramalho JC (2009) I. Heat stress in Triticum: kinetics of Ca and Mg accumulation. Braz J Plant Physiol 21:123–134.  https://doi.org/10.1590/S1677-04202009000200005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Du JF, Yin WJ, Zhang ZY, Hou J, Huang J, Li J (2009) Autotoxicity and phenolic acids content in soils with different planting interval years of Rehmannia glutinosa. Chin J Ecol 28:445–450Google Scholar
  13. Ehrenfeld JG, Ravit B, Elgersma K (2005) Feedback in the plant-soil system. Annu Rev Environ Resour 30:75–115.  https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.energy.30.050504.144212 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Evans NH, McAinsh MR, Hetherington AM (2001) Calcium oscillations in higher plants. Curr Opin Plant Biol 4:415–420.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1369-5266(00)00194-1 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Galon Y, Finkler A, Fromm H (2010) Calcium-regulated transcription in plants. Mol Plant 3:653–669.  https://doi.org/10.1093/mp/ssq019 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Guo GY, Li MJ, Wang PF, Wang FQ, He HQ, Li J, Zheng HY, Chen XJ, Zhang ZY (2013) Abnormal change of calcium signal system on consecutive monoculture problem of Rehmannia glutinosa. China J Chin Materia Med 38:1471–1478Google Scholar
  17. Han LM, Wang SQ, Ju HY, Yan X, Yan F, Yang ZM (2000) Identification and allelopathy on the decomposition products from soybean stubs. Acta Ecol Sin 20:771–778Google Scholar
  18. Hashimoto K, Kudla J (2011) Calcium decoding mechanisms in plants. Biochimie 93:2054–2059.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biochi.2011.05.019 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. He CN, Gao WW, Yang JX, Bi W, Zhang XS, Zhao YJ (2009) Identification of autotoxic compounds from fibrous roots of Panax quinquefolium L. Plant Soil 318:63–72.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-008-9817-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hegazy AK, Mansour KS, Abdel-Hady NF (1990) Allelopathic and autotoxic effects of Anastatica hierochuntica L. J Chem Ecol 16:2183–2193.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01026929 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Hegde RS, Miller DA (1992) Concentration dependency and stage of crop growth in alfalfa autotoxicity. Agron J 84:940–946.  https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj1992.00021962008400060006x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Huang XX, Bie ZL, Huang Y (2010) Identification of autotoxins in rhizosphere soils under the continuous cropping of cowpea. Allelopathy J 25:383–392Google Scholar
  23. Irani NG, Russinova E (2009) Receptor endocytosis and signaling in plants. Curr Opin Plant Biol 12:653–659.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pbi.2009.09.011 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Kitazawa H, Asao T, Ban T, Pramanik MHR, Hosoki T (2005) Autotoxicity of root exudates from strawberry in hydroponic culture. J Hortic Sci Biotechnol 80:677–680.  https://doi.org/10.1080/14620316.2005.11511997 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Krasensky J, Jonak C (2012) Drought, salt, and temperature stress-induced metabolic rearrangements and regulatory networks. J Exp Bot 63:1593–1608.  https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/err460 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. Li ZF, Yang YQ, Xie DF, Zhu LF, Zhang ZG, Lin WX (2012) Identification of autotoxic compounds in fibrous roots of Rehmannia (Rehmannia glutinosa Libosch.). PLOS One 7:e28806.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0028806 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. Li MJ, Yang YH, Li XY, Gu L, Wang FJ, Feng FJ, Tian YH, Wang FQ, Wang XR, Lin WX, Chen XJ, Zhang ZY (2015) Analysis of integrated multiple ‘omics’ datasets reveals the mechanisms of initiation and determination in the formation of tuberous roots in Rehmannia glutinosa. J Exp Bot 66:5837–5851.  https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erv288 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Li GJ, Kronzucker HJ, Shi WM (2016a) Root developmental adaptation to Fe toxicity: mechanisms and management. Plant Signal Behav 11:e1117722.  https://doi.org/10.1080/15592324.2015.1117722 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Li ZF, He CL, Wang Y, Li MJ, Dai YJ, Wang T, Lin WX (2016b) Enhancement of trichothecene mycotoxins of Fusarium oxysporum by ferulic acid aggravates oxidative damage in Rehmannia glutinosa Libosch. Sci Rep 6:33962.  https://doi.org/10.1038/srep33962 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. Liu TJ, Cheng ZH, Meng HW, Ahmad I, Zhao HL (2014) Growth, yield and quality of spring tomato and physicochemical properties of medium in a tomato/garlic intercropping system under plastic tunnel organic medium cultivation. Sci Hortic 170:159–168.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2014.02.039 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Mazzoleni S, Bonanomi G, Incerti G, Chiusano ML, Termolino P, Mingo A, Senatore M, Giannino F, Cartenì F, Rietkerk M, Lanzotti V (2015) Inhibitory and toxic effects of extracellular self-DNA in litter: a mechanism for negative plant-soil feedbacks? New Phytol 205:1195–1210.  https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.13121 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Platta HW, Stenmark H (2011) Endocytosis and signaling. Curr Opin Cell Biol 23:393–403.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceb.2011.03.008 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Purvis JE, Lahav G (2013) Encoding and decoding cellular information through signaling dynamics. Cell 152:945–956.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2013.02.005 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  34. Ren X, Yan ZQ, He XF, Li XZ, Qin B (2017) Allelochemicals from rhizosphere soils of Glycyrrhiza uralensis Fisch: discovery of the autotoxic compounds of a traditional herbal medicine. Ind Crops Prod 97:302–307.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2016.12.035 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sigismund S, Confalonieri S, Ciliberto A, Polo S, Scita G, Fiore PPD (2012) Endocytosis and signaling: cell logistics shape the eukaryotic cell plan. Physiol Rev 92:273–366.  https://doi.org/10.1152/physrev.00005.2011 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  36. Singh HP, Batish DR, Kohli RK (1999) Autotoxicity: concept, organisms, and ecological significance. Crit Rev Plant Sci 18:757–772.  https://doi.org/10.1080/07352689991309478 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Wu LK, Wang HB, Zhang ZX, Lin R, Zhang ZY, Lin WX (2011) Comparative metaproteomic analysis on consecutively Rehmannia glutinosa—monocultured rhizosphere soil. PLoS One 6:e20611.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0020611 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  38. Wu B, Long QL, Gao Y, Wang Z, Shao TW, Liu YN, Li Y, Ding WL (2015a) Comprehensive characterization of a time-course transcriptional response induced by autotoxins in Panax ginseng using RNA-Seq. BMC Genom 16:1010.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s12864-015-2151-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Wu LK, Wang JY, Huang WM, Wu HM, Chen J, Yang YQ, Zhang ZY, Lin WX (2015b) Plant-microbe rhizosphere interactions mediated by Rehmannia glutinosa root exudates under consecutive monoculture. Sci Rep 5:15871.  https://doi.org/10.1038/srep15871 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  40. Wu LK, Wu HM, Chen J, Wang JY, Lin WX (2016) Microbial community structure and its temporal changes in Rehmannia glutinosa rhizospheric soils monocultured for different years. Eur J Soil Biol 72:1–5.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejsobi.2015.12.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Yang YH, Chen XJ, Chen JY, Xu HX, Li J, Zhang ZY (2011) Differential miRNA expression in Rehmannia glutinosa plants subjected to continuous cropping. BMC Plant Biol 11:53.  https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2229-11-53 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  42. Yang YH, Zhang ZY, Fan HM, Zhao YD, Li MJ, Li J, Chen JY, Lin WX, Chen XJ (2013) Construction and analysis of different expression cDNA libraries in Rehmannia glutinosa plants subjected to continuous cropping. Acta Physiol Plant 35:645–655.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11738-012-1105-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Yang M, Zhang XD, Xu YG, Mei XY, Jiang BB, Liao JJ, Yin ZB, Zheng JF, Zhao Z, Fan LM, He XH, Zhu YY, Zhu SS (2015a) Autotoxic ginsenosides in the rhizosphere contribute to the replant failure of Panax notoginseng. PLoS One 10:e0118555.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0118555 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  44. Yang YH, Li MJ, Li XY, Chen XJ, Lin WX, Zhang ZY (2015b) Transcriptome-wide identification of the genes responding to replanting disease in Rehmannia glutinosa L. roots. Mol Biol Rep 42:881–892.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11033-014-3825-y CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Yin WJ, Du JF, Li J, Zhang ZY (2009) Effects of continuous cropping obstacle on growth of Rehmannia glutinosa. China J Chin Materia Med 34:18–21 (in Chinese) Google Scholar
  46. Yu JQ, Sun Y, Zhang Y, Ding J, Xia XJ, Xiao CL, Shi K, Zhou YH (2009) Selective trans-Cinnamic acid uptake impairs [Ca2+]cyt homeostasis and growth in Cucumis sativus L. J Chem Ecol 35:1471–1477.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10886-009-9726-1 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Zhang RX, Li MX, Jia ZP (2008) Rehmannia glutinosa: review of botany, chemistry and pharmacology. J Ethnopharmacol 117:199–214.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jep.2008.02.018 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Zhang B, Li XZ, Wang FQ, Li MJ, Zhang JY, Gu L, Zhang LJ, Tu WQ, Zhang ZY (2016) Assaying the potential autotoxins and microbial community associated with Rehmannia glutinosa replant problems based on its ‘autotoxic circle’. Plant Soil 407:307–322.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-016-2885-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Franciszek Górski Institute of Plant Physiology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Kraków 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.College of Life SciencesHenan Agricultural UniversityZhengzhouChina
  2. 2.College of Crop SciencesFujian Agriculture and Forestry UniversityFuzhouChina

Personalised recommendations