Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-18T10:28:42.483Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Temporal and spatial auxin responsive networks in maize primary roots

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 October 2022

Maxwell R. McReynolds
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Pathology and Microbiology, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa 50011, USA
Linkan Dash
Affiliation:
Department of Genetics, Development and Cell Biology, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa 50011, USA
Christian Montes
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Pathology and Microbiology, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa 50011, USA
Melissa A. Draves
Affiliation:
Department of Genetics, Development and Cell Biology, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa 50011, USA
Michelle G. Lang
Affiliation:
Department of Genetics, Development and Cell Biology, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa 50011, USA Corteva Agriscience, Johnston, Iowa 50131, USA
Justin W. Walley*
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Pathology and Microbiology, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa 50011, USA
Dior R. Kelley*
Affiliation:
Department of Genetics, Development and Cell Biology, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa 50011, USA
*
Authors for correspondence: D. R. Kelley and J. W. Walley, E-mail: dkelley@iastate.edu; jwalley@iastate.edu
Authors for correspondence: D. R. Kelley and J. W. Walley, E-mail: dkelley@iastate.edu; jwalley@iastate.edu

Abstract

Auxin is a key regulator of root morphogenesis across angiosperms. To better understand auxin-regulated networks underlying maize root development, we have characterized auxin-responsive transcription across two time points (30 and 120 min) and four regions of the primary root: the meristematic zone, elongation zone, cortex and stele. Hundreds of auxin-regulated genes involved in diverse biological processes were quantified in these different root regions. In general, most auxin-regulated genes are region unique and are predominantly observed in differentiated tissues compared with the root meristem. Auxin gene regulatory networks were reconstructed with these data to identify key transcription factors that may underlie auxin responses in maize roots. Additionally, Auxin-Response Factor subnetworks were generated to identify target genes that exhibit tissue or temporal specificity in response to auxin. These networks describe novel molecular connections underlying maize root development and provide a foundation for functional genomic studies in a key crop.

Type
Original Research Article
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press in association with The John Innes Centre

1. Introduction

Auxin is a central regulator of root development, playing critical roles in processes such as meristem maintenance and lateral root formation (reviewed in Atkinson et al., Reference Atkinson, Rasmussen, Traini, Voss, Sturrock, Mooney, Wells and Bennett2014). Root architecture varies among angiosperms and can be influenced by both nutrient and hormone signaling (Hochholdinger et al., Reference Hochholdinger, Yu and Marcon2018; Liu & von Wirén, Reference Liu and von Wirén2022). The current models for auxin perception and signaling encompass decades of studies (Powers & Strader, Reference Powers and Strader2020). Nuclear auxin perception occurs via a co-receptor complex composed of evolutionarily conserved F-box TRANSPORT INHIBITOR RESPONSE1/AUXIN SIGNALING F-BOX (TIR1/AFB) and AUXIN/INDOLE ACETIC ACID (Aux/IAA) proteins (Calderón Villalobos et al., Reference Calderón Villalobos, Lee, De Oliveira, Ivetac, Brandt, Armitage, Sheard, Tan, Parry, Mao, Zheng, Napier, Kepinski and Estelle2012; Dharmasiri et al., Reference Dharmasiri, Dharmasiri and Estelle2005; Kepinski & Leyser, Reference Kepinski and Leyser2004). Because TIR1/AFB proteins encode E3 ubiquitin ligase enzymes, this interaction leads to ubiquitination and degradation of Aux/IAA proteins (Kelley, Reference Kelley2018). Additionally, Aux/IAA proteins (29 family members in Arabidopsis and 31 in maize) are transcriptional repressors that actively repress AUXIN RESPONSE FACTOR (ARF) transcription factors in cooperation with the TOPLESS co-repressor family of proteins (Gallavotti et al., Reference Gallavotti, Long, Stanfield, Yang, Jackson, Vollbrecht and Schmidt2010; Szemenyei et al., Reference Szemenyei, Hannon and Long2008). Thus, in the absence of Aux/IAA proteins ARF transcription factors are able to transcriptionally regulate gene expression very rapidly. The ARF protein family (23 members in Arabidopsis and 31–36 members in maize) has been recently divided into three classes based on their structure and ability to either activate or repress gene expression (termed “activators” or “repressors”) (Galli et al., Reference Galli, Khakhar, Lu, Chen, Sen, Joshi, Nemhauser, Schmitz and Gallavotti2018; Mutte et al., Reference Mutte, Kato, Rothfels, Melkonian, Wong and Weijers2018).

Auxin-responsive gene expression in primary roots has been studied in Arabidopsis (Bargmann et al., Reference Bargmann, Vanneste, Krouk, Nawy, Efroni, Shani, Choe, Friml, Bergmann, Estelle and Birnbaum2013; Lewis et al., Reference Lewis, Olex, Lundy, Turkett, Fetrow and Muday2013; Nemhauser et al., Reference Nemhauser, Hong and Chory2006; Pu et al., Reference Pu, Walley, Shen, Lang, Briggs, Estelle and Kelley2019) and maize (Galli et al., Reference Galli, Khakhar, Lu, Chen, Sen, Joshi, Nemhauser, Schmitz and Gallavotti2018; Ravazzolo et al., Reference Ravazzolo, Boutet-Mercey, Perreau, Forestan, Varotto, Ruperti and Quaggiotti2021; Wang et al., Reference Wang, Sun, Wang, Yang, Xu, Yang, Xu and Li2021; Xing et al., Reference Xing, Pudake, Guo, Xing, Hu, Zhang, Sun and Ni2011). While maize root systems differ considerably in their anatomy and architecture from Arabidopsis roots (Hochholdinger et al., Reference Hochholdinger, Yu and Marcon2018; Hochholdinger & Zimmermann, Reference Hochholdinger and Zimmermann2008), there are a couple maize root mutants that have been linked to auxin either directly or indirectly, highlighting the central role that auxin plays in root development. For example, rootless undetectable meristem 1 (rum1) encodes an Aux/IAA protein that is required for embryonic and postembryonic root formation (von Behrens et al., Reference von Behrens, Komatsu, Zhang, Berendzen, Niu, Sakai, Taramino and Hochholdinger2011). In addition, the rootless concerning crown and seminal roots (rtcs) mutant encodes a LATERAL ORGAN BOUNDARY (LOB) transcription factor which is linked to auxin-regulated gene expression (Taramino et al., Reference Taramino, Sauer, Stauffer, Multani, Niu, Sakai and Hochholdinger2007; Xu et al., Reference Xu, Tai, Saleem, Ludwig, Majer, Berendzen, Nagel, Wojciechowski, Meeley, Taramino and Hochholdinger2015).

Given that root system development differs between maize and Arabidopsis (Hochholdinger, Reference Hochholdinger, Bennetzen and Hake2009; Hochholdinger & Zimmermann, Reference Hochholdinger and Zimmermann2008) and that auxin responses are known to be influenced by cellular context (Bargmann et al., Reference Bargmann, Vanneste, Krouk, Nawy, Efroni, Shani, Choe, Friml, Bergmann, Estelle and Birnbaum2013; Brunoud et al., Reference Calderón Villalobos, Lee, De Oliveira, Ivetac, Brandt, Armitage, Sheard, Tan, Parry, Mao, Zheng, Napier, Kepinski and Estelle2012; Novák et al., Reference Novák, Hényková, Sairanen, Kowalczyk, Pospíšil and Ljung2012; Truskina et al., Reference Truskina, Han, Chrysanthou, Galvan-Ampudia, Lainé, Brunoud, Macé, Bellows, Legrand, Bågman, Smit, Smetana, Stigliani, Porco, Bennett, Mähönen, Parcy, Farcot, Roudier and Vernoux2021), an increased resolution of auxin-mediated transcription in maize would be beneficial. The primary maize root is divided into three key developmental regions: the meristematic zone, the elongation zone and the maturation zone with specialized functions (Hochholdinger, Reference Hochholdinger, Bennetzen and Hake2009; Hochholdinger et al., Reference Hochholdinger, Yu and Marcon2018). The meristematic zone includes the distal tip of the primary root and is composed stem cells and the lateral root cap (Hochholdinger, Reference Hochholdinger, Bennetzen and Hake2009). While the lateral root cap provides protection and gravity perception (Matsuyama et al., Reference Matsuyama, Satoh, Yamada and Hashimoto1999), the meristem functions to sustain root organogenesis via a balance of self-renewal and differentiation (Jiang et al., Reference Jiang, Zhu, Diao, Huang and Feldman2010). The elongation zone is composed of differentiating root cells that are required for gravitropism and sensitive to exogenous auxin treatment (Ishikawa & Evans, Reference Ishikawa and Evans1993). Terminally differentiated cells, such as root hairs and tracheids, are found within the maturation zone and thus represent a high degree of complexity due to their myriad of functions (Hochholdinger, Reference Hochholdinger, Bennetzen and Hake2009). A high-resolution map of gene expression across these regions of the root has revealed extensive tissue specificity and plasticity (Marcon et al., Reference Marcon, Malik, Walley, Shen, Paschold, Smith, Piepho, Briggs and Hochholdinger2015).

An outstanding question in the field is how auxin-responsive gene expression is incorporated into maize root development. In this study, we profiled auxin-responsive gene expression with spatial and temporal resolution to further our understanding of how auxin influences transcriptional responses in maize roots. Specifically, we performed transcriptome analysis of the meristematic zone, elongation zone, cortex, and stele of 5-day-old primary maize roots following 30 and 120 min of exogenous indole-3-acetic acid treatment. This analysis demonstrates that auxin-responsive gene expression in roots exhibits both tissue and temporal specificity.

Biological networks can describe molecular connections underlying cellular processes and provide insight towards complex phenomena (Haque et al., Reference Haque, Ahmad, Clark, Williams and Sozzani2019; Marshall-Colón & Kliebenstein, Reference Marshall-Colón and Kliebenstein2019; Walley et al., Reference Walley, Sartor, Shen, Schmitz, Wu, Urich, Nery, Smith, Schnable, Ecker, Briggs, Krouk, Lingeman, Colon, Coruzzi, Shasha, Gardner, Faith, Bar-Joseph and Stitt2016). With respect to auxin signaling, several aspects of auxin action are well-suited to network analyses. For instance, the direct influence of auxin on transcription can be modeled through the reconstruction of gene regulatory networks (GRNs) that can be used to infer the structure of gene expression programs that underpin development. Using the auxin transcriptome data generated herein we generated novel auxin-dependent predictive GRNs that underlie maize root morphogenesis. These data expand our understanding of shared and unique properties of maize ARF transcription factors, identify key auxin marker genes in maize roots, and quantify auxin-regulated transcription across the developing maize root to inform further research on crop root development.

2. Methods

2.1. Plant material

Zea mays inbred B73 kernels were surface sterilized in 5% bleach for 15 min and rinsed three times with sterile deionized water. For every 10 kernels, three pieces of seed germination paper (Anchor Paper Company, 10 × 15 L 38# regular weight seed germination paper) were soaked in a solution of freshly prepared Captan fungicide (2.5 g/L). Ten kernels were placed ~5 cm from the top of the paper in the middle sheet, covered with the top sheet, and rolled into a cylinder lengthwise using the rolled towel method (Hochholdinger, Reference Hochholdinger, Bennetzen and Hake2009). Twelve paper rolls were placed in a 4 L Nalgene beaker containing 400 mL of 0.5X Linsmaier and Skoog (LS) (2.4 g/L) pH buffered basal salts (Caisson Labs). The rolled towels were placed in a Percival growth chamber set to 22ºC, long day (16 hr light, 8 hr dark) white light at 160 μmol·m−2s−1 light intensity. After 2 days the rolls were opened and the seeds were scored for germination. Any ungerminated kernels were removed and this was designated day one. After 2 days of growth the liquid media was poured off and replaced with fresh 400 mL of 0.5X LS. Five days after germination (5 DAG) the seedlings were removed from the towels prior to mock or auxin treatments followed by dissection.

2.2. Auxin treatments

10 mM Indole-3-acetic acid (IAA) stocks were prepared in 95% ethanol and stored at −20°C. Immediately before performing the auxin treatments, one liter of 10 μM IAA was prepared by diluting the 10 mM stock 1:1,000 into 0.5X LS media, resulting in a final concentration of 0.095% ethanol. As a corresponding “mock” control, one liter of 0.095% ethanol was prepared by diluting 95% ethanol 1:1,000. Seedlings were placed in 0.5X LS supplemented with 10 μM IAA (“auxin” treatment) or 0.095% ethanol (“mock” control) and incubated at room temperature for 30 and 120 min. For each biological replicate, 30–80 primary roots (approximately 2–4 cm in length) were hand dissected into meristematic zone, elongation zone, cortical parenchyma and epidermis (referred to as “cortex” hereafter), and stele according to previous methods (Marcon et al., Reference Marcon, Malik, Walley, Shen, Paschold, Smith, Piepho, Briggs and Hochholdinger2015; Saleem et al., Reference Saleem, Lamkemeyer, Schutzenmeister, Madlung, Sakai, Piepho, Nordheim and Hochholdinger2010; Walley et al., Reference Walley, Sartor, Shen, Schmitz, Wu, Urich, Nery, Smith, Schnable, Ecker, Briggs, Krouk, Lingeman, Colon, Coruzzi, Shasha, Gardner, Faith, Bar-Joseph and Stitt2016) to yield at least 100 mg of tissue per sample and replicate. Total tissue weights per tissue replicate varied from 100–600 mg. In total, three biological replicates were collected for each tissue and time point for the transcriptome analysis. Tissues were immediately flash frozen in liquid nitrogen and stored at −80°C until all replicates were harvested.

2.3. RNA extraction and transcriptome sequencing

Root tissues (100–500 mg per sample) were ground to fine powder in liquid nitrogen using a pre-chilled mortar and pestle. RNA was extracted from ~100 mg of tissue using Trizol (Invitrogen) and further purified using Qiagen RNeasy kit with on column DNase treatment (Reference Walley, Kelley, Nestorova, Hirschberg and DeheshWalley et al., 2010). Isolated RNA concentration and quality were checked using a Nanodrop, Qubit, and Bioanalyzer. Total RNA was used to generate QuantSeq 3’mRNA libraries using a Lexogen 3 mRNA-Seq FWD kit and 48 unique indices (Moll et al., Reference Moll, Ante, Seitz and Reda2014). Libraries were run on an Illumina HiSeq 3,000 to generate 100 bp single-end (SE) reads.

2.4. RNA-seq analysis

FASTQ sequence files were deposited at the NCBI Sequence Read Archive (BioProject accession number PRJNA791716). Files were checked via FASTQC to obtain sequence quality information. The FASTQ files were then run through the following bioinformatic pipeline as suggested by Lexogen. First, adapters and low-quality tails were removed using bbduk from the BBTools suite (sourceforge.net/projects/bbmap/). Alignment to the B73 v4 genome (Jiao et al., Reference Jiao, Peluso, Shi, Liang, Stitzer, Wang, Campbell, Stein, Wei, Chin, Guill, Regulski, Kumari, Olson, Gent, Schneider, Wolfgruber, May, Springer and Ware2017) was performed using STAR (Dobin et al., Reference Dobin, Davis, Schlesinger, Drenkow, Zaleski, Jha, Batut, Chaisson and Gingeras2013) and indexing was executed using SAMTools (Li et al., Reference Li, Handsaker, Wysoker, Fennell, Ruan, Homer, Marth, Abecasis and Durbin2009). HTSeq (Anders et al., Reference Anders, Pyl and Huber2015) was used to generate count files which were then analyzed via PoissonSeq (Li et al., Reference Li, Witten, Johnstone and Tibshirani2012). Differentially expressed (DE) genes were identified between mock and time-matched treated samples in each tissue using a false discovery rate (FDR; adjusted p-value) of q < 0.1.

2.5. Gene regulatory network analysis

Transcription factor-centered GRNs were generated using Spatiotemporal Clustering and Inference of Omics Networks (SC-ION) version 2.1 (Clark et al., Reference Clark, Nolan, Wang, Song, Montes, Valentine, Guo, Sozzani, Yin and Walley2021). For clustering and network reconstruction within SC-ION, a trimmed mean of M values (TMM)-normalized counts matrix of all detected transcripts across all samples from the RNA-seq analysis was selected as the input file for both the target matrix and regulator matrix. To specify network candidate targets, a list of gene IDs corresponding to PoissonSeq-derived significant DE genes (q < 0.1) from comparisons between tissue types or in IAA versus mock treatments was used as the target list. Similarly, to classify candidate regulators, IDs of significant DE genes from the comparisons between tissue types or in IAA versus mock treatments, which were annotated as TFs according to Grassius (Yilmaz et al., Reference Yilmaz, Nishiyama, Fuentes, Souza, Janies, Gray and Grotewold2009) were used as the regulator list. Non-temporal clustering via Independent Component Analysis (ICA) (Nascimento et al., Reference Nascimento, Silva, Sáfadi, Nascimento, Ferreira, Barroso, Ferreira Azevedo, Guimarães and Serão2017) was selected and SC-ION was supplied a matrix consisting of TMM-normalized counts of transcripts averaged across biological replicate for each tissue type at 30 min. GRNs for each ICA cluster were then inferred using SC-ION’s implementation of the random forest algorithm, GENIE3 (Huynh-Thu et al., Reference Huynh-Thu, Irrthum, Wehenkel and Geurts2010). The SC-ION output table consisting of predicted regulator-target interactions as well as a numeric “weight” value for each pair indicating the confidence of their connection was imported into Cytoscape (Shannon et al., Reference Shannon, Markiel, Ozier, Baliga, Wang, Ramage, Amin, Schwikowski and Ideker2003) for GRN visualization. For the spatiotemporal GRN, the nodes (genes) were colored in Cytoscape according to their temporal IAA responsiveness (i.e., up or down at 30 or 120 min) and grouped by tissue cluster enrichment. To visualize the ARF transcription factor subnetworks, ARF-specific regulators and their first-neighbor targets were extracted from the SC-ION output table and imported into Cytoscape. The grouping of ARFs by clade membership and coloring of ARF nodes and their first neighbor targets was done within Cytoscape.

2.6. Gene ontology enrichment and UpSet analyses

Gene ontology (GO) enrichment analysis was performed using the Zea mays B73 inbred reference genome in PANTHER. A Fisher’s exact test type and an FDR correction using the Benjamini–Hochberg method with a cutoff of 0.05 was used to identify significantly enriched GO terms. Significant GO biological process terms were plotted on the y-axis against their genotype/treatments on the x-axis using multidimensional dot plots (Bonnot et al., Reference Bonnot, Gillard and Nagel2019). UpSet plots were generated using the UpsetR package in RStudio and ordered by frequency (Conway et al., Reference Conway, Lex and Gehlenborg2017). The “nintersects” argument was used to output the 20 (Figure 2 and Supplemental Figure S2) and 50 (Supplemental Figure S3) most populated intersections. Additional code was written to extract gene identifiers among shared lists of differentially expressed genes within an UpSet plot; data processing scripts are available from a GitHub repository: https://github.com/mmcreyno92/AuxinRootAtlas.

2.7. Hierarchical clustering and visualization by heatmaps

Hierarchical clustering of transcript abundance was independently performed in each tissue on genes that were DE in response to auxin and plotted as heatmaps using the Morpheus software from the Broad Institute (https://software.broadinstitute.org/morpheus/). The heatmaps show the row normalized transcript level. Row normalization was done by converting to Z-scores using the “subtracted by row mean and divided by row standard deviation” adjustment.

Fig. 1. Identification of auxin-responsive genes across four key regions of the primary maize root. (a) Picture of maize primary dissected root regions profiled in this study. Five-day-old primary maize roots were dissected into the four regions indicated. The distal 2 mm of the root tip corresponds to the meristematic zone (MZ). The elongation zone (EZ) is the proximal zone adjacent to the MZ root tip up to where the root hairs emerge. The differentiation zone, starting with the root hair zone, was mechanically separated into cortex (C) and stele (S) by snapping the root from the kernel and pulling the stele out from the cortex. Scale bar = 1 cm. (b) Differentially expressed genes within each root region at 30 min (t30) and 120 min (t120) were identified by comparing 10 □M indole-3-acetic acid (auxin) treated samples to mock-treated samples at q < 0.1. The x-axes represent the number of DE genes. (c) Heatmaps ordered by hierarchical clustering of the genes that are DE in response to auxin within each tissue profiled. Hierarchical clustering was independently carried out within each tissue.

Fig. 2. A comparison of differentially expressed genes in maize roots across four regions at two different time points in response to auxin. (a) UpSet plot of differentially expressed transcripts at 30 min (t30). (b) UpSet plot of auxin-responsive DE transcripts at 120 min (t120). Concordant and discordant comparisons are indicated in green and vermillion, respectively. Only the top 20 most populated intersections are visualized. Abbreviations: auxin, indole-3-acetic acid treatment compared with mock treatment; C, cortex; EZ, elongation zone; MZ, meristematic zone; S, stele, auxin.

3. Results and discussion

3.1. Auxin responsive transcriptome profiles in primary maize roots across space and time

Maize root growth and development have been linked to auxin using hormone application essays (Pilet & Saugy, Reference Pilet and Saugy1985) and genetic studies (von Behrens et al., Reference von Behrens, Komatsu, Zhang, Berendzen, Niu, Sakai, Taramino and Hochholdinger2011; Zhang et al., Reference Zhang, Behrens, Zimmermann, Ludwig, Hey and Hochholdinger2015; Reference Zhang, Marcon, Tai, von Behrens, Ludwig, Hey, Berendzen and Hochholdinger2016). In Arabidopsis, the transcriptional responses of root cells to auxin have been characterized (Bargmann et al., Reference Bargmann, Vanneste, Krouk, Nawy, Efroni, Shani, Choe, Friml, Bergmann, Estelle and Birnbaum2013) and provide foundational knowledge of how auxin impacts gene expression in a context-dependent manner. In maize, auxin-responsive gene expression has been characterized on whole seedlings (Galli et al., Reference Galli, Khakhar, Lu, Chen, Sen, Joshi, Nemhauser, Schmitz and Gallavotti2018), but auxin-driven gene expression patterns within the root are not well understood. The overall goal of this study was to characterize the auxin-responsive transcriptome within maize primary roots across four key cellular regions: the meristematic zone, elongation zone, and the cortex and stele within the differentiation zone (Marcon et al., Reference Marcon, Malik, Walley, Shen, Paschold, Smith, Piepho, Briggs and Hochholdinger2015; Paschold et al., Reference Paschold, Larson, Marcon, Schnable, Yeh, Lanz, Nettleton, Piepho, Schnable and Hochholdinger2014; Walley et al., Reference Walley, Sartor, Shen, Schmitz, Wu, Urich, Nery, Smith, Schnable, Ecker, Briggs, Krouk, Lingeman, Colon, Coruzzi, Shasha, Gardner, Faith, Bar-Joseph and Stitt2016) to determine how auxin can impact gene expression in roots (Figure 1a). Five-day-old B73 maize primary roots were treated with 10 μM IAA (“auxin”) or 0.095% ethanol (“mock” solvent control) for 30 and 120 min and then dissected into four regions (Figure 1a). This concentration of auxin was selected based on previous work that demonstrated auxin-dependent degradation of an Aux/IAA-based fluorescence reporter (DII-VENUS) occurred rapidly following 10 μM IAA treatments (Mir et al., Reference Mir, Aranda, Biaocchi, Luo, Sylvester and Rasmussen2017) and can lead to primary root inhibition (Supplemental Figure S1). These treatments were performed for 30 and 120 min in order to capture the temporal nature of auxin signaling, given that transcriptional response and Aux/IAA turnover occur rapidly within these timeframes of hormone exposure (Bargmann et al., Reference Bargmann, Vanneste, Krouk, Nawy, Efroni, Shani, Choe, Friml, Bergmann, Estelle and Birnbaum2013; Mir et al., Reference Mir, Aranda, Biaocchi, Luo, Sylvester and Rasmussen2017; Zhang et al., Reference Zhang, Marcon, Tai, von Behrens, Ludwig, Hey, Berendzen and Hochholdinger2016). Transcriptome profiling was performed on these tissues using the 3’ QuantSeq method with three biological replicates for each tissue/treatment/time. From this analysis, we identified 32,832 distinct transcripts in total across all tissues. Within the meristematic zone, relatively few auxin-responsive genes were observed (Figure 1b Supplemental Table S1). In contrast, hundreds of genes were induced or repressed following auxin treatment within the elongation zone, cortex, and stele. This result suggests that meristematic zone cells may be less sensitive to exogenous auxin effects, as endogenous levels of IAA are already high in this region of the root (Mir et al., Reference Mir, Aranda, Biaocchi, Luo, Sylvester and Rasmussen2017; Pilet & Saugy, Reference Pilet and Saugy1985). In addition, many of the observed auxin-regulated genes include AUXIN INDOLE-3-ACETIC ACID INDUCIBLE (Aux/IAA), GRETCHEN HAGEN (GH), SMALL AUXIN UPREGULATED (SAUR), and LATERAL BOUNDARY DOMAIN (LBD) family members, which is consistent with previous studies on auxin-mediated gene expression from Arabidopsis roots (Bargmann et al., Reference Bargmann, Vanneste, Krouk, Nawy, Efroni, Shani, Choe, Friml, Bergmann, Estelle and Birnbaum2013; Lewis et al., Reference Lewis, Olex, Lundy, Turkett, Fetrow and Muday2013). In Arabidopsis roots, early up-regulated clusters of co-expressed genes are enriched with these same auxin-response annotations (Lewis et al., Reference Lewis, Olex, Lundy, Turkett, Fetrow and Muday2013), which is consistent with the temporal effects observed here.

Within the cortex and stele more auxin-regulated genes are observed at 30 min compared with 120 min. In contrast, within the elongation zone, we observed more up-regulated genes at 120 min compared with 30 min. These patterns may reflect the altered chromatin state or transcription factor properties associated with cellular state as cortex and stele cells are further differentiated compared with elongation zone cells. A previous time course of auxin-responsive gene expression in Arabidopsis roots identified few transcriptional changes at 30 min and a marked bimodal distribution at 120 min (2 hr) (Lewis et al., Reference Lewis, Olex, Lundy, Turkett, Fetrow and Muday2013), which is consistent with this study.

3.2. Auxin-regulated gene expression in maize primary roots is region specific

Auxin-mediated gene expression is context dependent. To examine shared and uniquely regulated transcripts across the four sampled root regions we generated UpSet plots comparing auxin-responsive transcripts within each time point (Figure 2 and Supplemental Figure S2) as well as DE between tissues (Supplemental Figure S3). Given that there are numerous possible comparisons with four regions and two categories of DE (up or down) we selected the top 20 comparisons for visualization. At both 30 and 120 min after auxin treatment, relative to mock treatment, the majority of the observed DE genes are region specific. At 30 min after treatment auxin up- and down-regulated genes across regions include both concordant and discordant properties. For example, there are 22 genes that are up-regulated in the cortex at 30 min after auxin treatment that are down-regulated in the stele (Figure 2a). Thus, these transcripts are considered to be discordant because they display opposite expression patterns between neighboring tissues. In contrast, at 120 min after treatment, the observed DE genes in common between tissues are only concordant. For example, all shared transcripts between tissues at this timepoint display the same direction of expression across tissues. This result suggests that early auxin-mediated transcriptional changes may include both repression and activation at the same genes in a tissue-specific manner, while later effects (i.e., 120 min) of auxin may uniformly influence suites of genes irrespective of cellular context.

These comparisons provide the opportunity to identify robust auxin-responsive transcripts which are up-regulated irrespective of tissue or time point. For example, there are four transcripts that are auxin induced in the meristematic zone, elongation zone, cortex, and stele at 30 min and 13 such transcripts at 120 min. These transcripts include AUX/IAA-transcription factor 22 (IAA22/Zm00001d013707), Aux/IAA24 (Zm00001d018414), DIOXYGENASE FOR AUXIN OXIDATION 1 (DAO1/Zm00001d003311) and AUXIN AMIDO SYNTHETASE2 (AAS2/Zm00001d006753). Notably, these are all encoded by genes with annotated functions as auxin transcriptional repressors and enzymes that conjugate or degrade IAA. Thus, these upregulated genes may reflect pathway feedback. From this analysis, a set of auxin-responsive marker genes have now been identified which can facilitate future studies on auxin signaling in maize roots.

3.3. Distinct biological processes are enriched among auxin-regulated genes across root regions

To determine if particular biological processes are auxin-regulated in root regions we performed a GO enrichment analysis. Many of the observed enriched GO terms are congruent with a previous study that examined the transcriptome profile of these root zones in the absence of treatment (Paschold et al., Reference Paschold, Larson, Marcon, Schnable, Yeh, Lanz, Nettleton, Piepho, Schnable and Hochholdinger2014), but we also identified a number of novel GO terms associated with hormone signaling, cell cycle, and gene regulation (Figure 3, Supplemental Figure S4, Supplemental Table S2). In general, auxin-induced genes are associated with transcription, auxin-activated signaling pathway, and gibberellin metabolism. In contrast, auxin repressed genes are associated with cell cycle, cell division, and chromatin silencing. Specifically, several Cyclins that promote cell cycle progression are repressed in the stele following a 30 min auxin treatment (Figure 3 and Supplemental Table S2), which is in line with a previous study linking low levels of auxin signaling with cell cycle progression (Mir et al., Reference Mir, Aranda, Biaocchi, Luo, Sylvester and Rasmussen2017).

Fig. 3. Auxin-responsive genes between root regions are enriched in several gene ontology (GO) terms related to biological processes. Significant GO terms of interest in auxin down-regulated genes (“down”) and auxin up-regulated genes (“up”) are indicated on the y-axis. Only tissues with enriched GO terms are shown. False discovery rate (FDR) is color-coded from blue (0.00) to red (0.05). Size of the dot indicates the number of enriched genes within each GO term. Abbreviations: C, cortex; EZ, elongation zone; MZ, meristematic zone; S, stele, t30 = 30 min, t120 = 120 min.

Fig. 4. A spatiotemporal auxin-responsive gene regulatory network in maize primary roots. The nodes (genes) are arranged in numbered circles to represent groupings of nodes (genes) that clustered together and were enriched within the same tissues. Colored nodes represent genes that are differentially expressed following auxin treatment. The temporal response to auxin is indicated by node color: blue, auxin responsive at 30 min; vermillion, auxin responsive at 120 min; and green, auxin responsive at both time points sampled. Each circular node represents a distinct cluster based on tissue: 1 = C + S, 2 = C, 3 = MZ, 4 = S, 5 = EZ, 6 = EZ + S, 7 = MZ + S, 8 = MZ + EZ, 9 = EZ + C, 10 = MZ + C, 11 = EZ + C + S, 12 = MZ + C + S, 13 = MZ + EZ + S, 14 = MZ + EZ + C (Abbreviations: C, cortex; EZ, elongation zone; MZ, meristematic zone; S, stele).

Fig. 5. Auxin-Response Factor (ARF) transcription factor gene regulatory subnetworks associated with primary maize roots. (a) ARF expression across tissues at t30 and t120 auxin treatments. (b) ARF GRN networks arranged by clade classification: Clade A, Clade B, Clade C, or ETTIN-Like. The central enlarged pink nodes within each network represent the ARF of interest labeled above the network and the connected small nodes represent that ARFs target genes. Target genes are colored according to the directionality of their transcript expression in response to auxin: grey, no significant transcript change; vermillion, decreased transcript level; blue, increased transcript level.

In addition, we examined GO term enrichment between root regions to uncover tissue-specific processes that may underlie root structure (Supplemental Figure S4). In general, most GO terms appear to be tissue specific and many of the observed enriched GO terms are congruent with the previous study (Paschold et al., Reference Paschold, Larson, Marcon, Schnable, Yeh, Lanz, Nettleton, Piepho, Schnable and Hochholdinger2014). A couple of enriched GO terms stand out among the many observed. First, transcripts involved in protein phosphorylation are more abundant in the stele compared with the meristem or the neighboring cortex. Another GO term observed across several tissue comparisons is ‘microtubule-based movement’, which is to be expected for cells undergoing cell elongation and/or differentiation. Secondary cell wall biogenesis is more prevalent in elongation zone expressed genes compared with meristem zone transcripts, which fits with our current understanding of cell wall composition across the primary root whereby secondary cell walls can be laid down in the elongation zone (Kozlova et al., Reference Kozlova, Nazipova, Gorshkov, Petrova and Gorshkova2020; Somssich et al., Reference Somssich, Khan and Persson2016). A comparison of the tissue-specific observed enriched GO terms across maize root tissues to the Bargmann et al. (Reference Bargmann, Vanneste, Krouk, Nawy, Efroni, Shani, Choe, Friml, Bergmann, Estelle and Birnbaum2013) auxin cell-type specific study identified some shared terms, related to auxin signaling and cell wall. Specifically, we observed cell wall organization and auxin-activated signaling pathway terms enriched in auxin up-regulated genes in the stele compared with other tissues (Supplemental Figure S4) which is consistent with stele-associated terms observed in Arabidopsis (Bargmann et al., Reference Bargmann, Vanneste, Krouk, Nawy, Efroni, Shani, Choe, Friml, Bergmann, Estelle and Birnbaum2013). Altogether these results support the notion that root tissues exhibit unique cellular processes that may be linked to function.

3.4. Identification of spatially distinct auxin gene regulatory networks within primary roots

To infer regulatory relationships between auxin-responsive root transcription factors and their targets we generated a GRN. To reconstruct the predictive GRN we implemented our network inference pipeline, SC-ION, which is an extension of RTP-STAR and has been shown previously to successfully identify novel TF roles in response to hormone treatment (Clark et al., Reference Clark, Buckner, Fisher, Nelson, Nguyen, Simmons, de Luis Balaguer, Butler-Smith, Sheldon, Bergmann, Williams and Sozzani2019; Reference Clark, Nolan, Wang, Song, Montes, Valentine, Guo, Sozzani, Yin and Walley2021; Van den Broeck et al., Reference Brunoud, Wells, Oliva, Larrieu, Mirabet, Burrow, Beeckman, Kepinski, Traas, Bennett and Vernoux2021) (See Section 2for details). The resulting GRN consisted of 15,856 nodes (genes) with a total of 86,461 directed edges (Figure 4 and Supplemental Table S3). A circular layout visualization of the complete GRN illustrates the presence of several distinct groups (circles) based on their underlying tissue enrichment, either within a singular root region (meristematic zone, elongation zone, cortex, or stele) or between multiple combinatorial root zones based on SC-ION generated ICA clustering assignments (Supplemental Table S3).

The nodes contained within our GRN fell into one of 14 tissue enrichment groups with content sizes ranging from 2,862 nodes enriched in the cortex + stele (group 1) down to 98 nodes in the meristematic zone + elongation zone + cortex (group 14). The tissue enrichment groupings also featured varying numbers of auxin-responsive genes and a high degree of interconnectedness as evidenced by the number of edges linking nodes within a grouping. The GRN contained a total of 1,372 unique DE transcription factors thus we investigated the predicted regulatory relationships of these transcription factors and their targets that are known to be involved in auxin signaling and maize root architecture (Figure 4 and Supplemental Table S3). Root development-associated transcription factors represented in the data include LBD-transcription factor family members and multiple members of the maize SHI/STY (SRS) family (Gomariz-Fernández et al., Reference Gomariz-Fernández, Sánchez-Gerschon, Fourquin and Ferrándiz2017), such as the known transcriptional activator lateral root primordia 1 (Zm00001d011843) that is required for maize root morphogenesis (Zhang et al., Reference Zhang, Behrens, Zimmermann, Ludwig, Hey and Hochholdinger2015). In addition, a known auxin-induced transcription factor that is required for maize root development, RTCS1 (Zm00001d027679) (Tai et al., Reference Tai, Opitz, Lithio, Lu, Nettleton and Hochholdinger2016; Taramino et al., Reference Taramino, Sauer, Stauffer, Multani, Niu, Sakai and Hochholdinger2007; Xu et al., Reference Xu, Tai, Saleem, Ludwig, Majer, Berendzen, Nagel, Wojciechowski, Meeley, Taramino and Hochholdinger2015), was predicted in the GRN to regulate 57 target genes including the auxin-responsive gene AUX/IAA32 (Zm00001d018973) (Supplemental Table S3). A previous study identified putative targets of RTCS1 (also called RTCS) from embryonic transcriptional data that included cell cycle and auxin pathway genes (Tai et al., Reference Tai, Opitz, Lithio, Lu, Nettleton and Hochholdinger2016). Our results provide a novel putative set of root-expressed RTCS1 targets that can support further research on this key TF.

ARF transcription factors represent a critical regulatory component of the auxin response, thus we set out to inspect their target gene relationships within the GRN at a deeper level. First, we identified all of the annotated ARFs present in the GRN and observed that 27 of the 33 expressed maize ARF family members were present in the GRN (according to the ARF nomenclature from Galli et al. (Reference Galli, Liu, Moss, Malcomber, Li, Gaines, Federici, Roshkovan, Meeley, Nemhauser and Gallavotti2015). For these 27 ARFs and their first node neighbor targets, we generated subnetworks that were visualized in perfuse force-directed layout in Cytoscape (Figure 5 and Supplemental Table S4). These 27 ARFs are predicted to regulate 2,067 unique target genes at either 30 or 120 min. Notably, representative ARFs from each of the four distinct evolutionary ARF clades (Galli et al., Reference Galli, Khakhar, Lu, Chen, Sen, Joshi, Nemhauser, Schmitz and Gallavotti2018) were found to be present in the GRN, including 12 clade A ARFs, 6 clade B ARFs, 4 clade C ARFs, and 5 ETTIN-like ARFs (visualized as pink nodes in Figure 5). In general, most ARFs had target nodes that were DE in response to auxin (coded blue and orange in Figure 5) and exhibit unique target genes. In three instances there are several ARFs that have shared target genes, including ARF18 and ARF7; ARF8, ARF23 and ARF25; and ARF24 and ARF36. Notably, the ARFs with shared targets span phylogenetic clades, suggesting that the properties of ARFs cannot be predicted based on sequence evolution alone. In addition, we examined the ARF target genes and found that they include auxin-related genes belonging to the ARF (5), Aux/IAA (8), SAUR (3), and GRETCHEN HAGEN (GH3) (1) families. Such targets are well-known types of auxin-responsive genes (Bargmann et al., Reference Bargmann, Vanneste, Krouk, Nawy, Efroni, Shani, Choe, Friml, Bergmann, Estelle and Birnbaum2013; Galli et al., Reference Galli, Khakhar, Lu, Chen, Sen, Joshi, Nemhauser, Schmitz and Gallavotti2018; Lewis et al., Reference Lewis, Olex, Lundy, Turkett, Fetrow and Muday2013; Mutte et al., Reference Mutte, Kato, Rothfels, Melkonian, Wong and Weijers2018; Nemhauser et al., Reference Nemhauser, Hong and Chory2006) and indicate that ARF proteins are engaged in feedback loops.

In this work, we utilized a combinatorial approach of transcriptome analysis and gene network inference to identify temporally auxin-responsive genes across root tissue types. By elucidating the complex inner workings of auxin-mediated gene expression during primary maize root development we can begin to answer questions surrounding root architecture in this key crop. A molecular understanding of the dynamics of root growth can aid in informing strategies to create next-generation crops with more efficient water and nutrient uptake capabilities.

Acknowledgement

We wish to thank Diana Burkart for her guidance with Lexogen QuantSeq data analysis and Natalie Clark for her assistance with SC-ION.

Financial support

This work was supported by USDA NIFA AFRI Predoctoral Fellowship to MRM (Award No. 2021-67034-35188), USDA NIFA AFRI grant to DRK and JWW (Award No. 2020-67013-30914), start-up funds to DRK from Iowa State University (ISU), funding from the ISU Plant Science Institute to JWW, and Hatch Act and State of Iowa funds to DRK (Project No. IOW03649) and JWW (Project No. IOW04108).

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Authorship contributions

Conceptualization: D.R.K.; Data curation: M.R.M., L.D.; Formal analysis: M.R.M., L.D.; Funding acquisition: J.W.W., D.R.K.; Investigation: M.R.M., L.D.; Project administration: J.W.W.; Resources: M.A.D., M.G.L.; Software: C.M.; Supervision: J.W.W., D.R.K.; Visualization: D.R.K.; Writing—original draft: J.W.W., D.R.K.; Writing—review and editing: M.R.M., L.D.

Data availability statement

Raw sequencing data (FASTQ files) are deposited at the NCBI Sequence Read Archive (BioProject accession number PRJNA791716). Code to extract gene identifiers among shared lists of differentially expressed genes within an UpSet plot is available from a GitHub repository: https://github.com/mmcreyno92/AuxinRootAtlas. TF-centred GRNs were inferred using SC-ION version 2.1 (https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5237310; Clark et al., Reference Clark, Nolan, Wang, Song, Montes, Valentine, Guo, Sozzani, Yin and Walley2021).

Supplementary Materials

To view supplementary material for this article, please visit http://doi.org/10.1017/qpb.2022.17.

Footnotes

M.R.M. and L.D. contributed equally to this work.

References

Anders, S., Pyl, P. T., & Huber, W. (2015). HTSeq—A python framework to work with high-throughput sequencing data. Bioinformatics, 31, 166169. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btu638 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Atkinson, J. A., Rasmussen, A., Traini, R., Voss, U., Sturrock, C., Mooney, S. J., Wells, D. M., & Bennett, M. J. (2014). Branching out in roots: Uncovering form, function, and regulation. Plant Physiology, 166, 538550. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.114.245423 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bargmann, B. O. R., Vanneste, S., Krouk, G., Nawy, T., Efroni, I., Shani, E., Choe, G., Friml, J., Bergmann, D. C., Estelle, M., & Birnbaum, K. D. (2013). A map of cell type-specific auxin responses. Molecular Systems Biology, 9, 688. https://doi.org/10.1038/msb.2013.40 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bonnot, T., Gillard, M., & Nagel, D. (2019). A simple protocol for informative visualization of enriched gene ontology terms. Bio-Protocol, 9, 3429. https://doi.org/10.21769/BioProtoc.3429 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brunoud, G., Wells, D. M., Oliva, M., Larrieu, A., Mirabet, V., Burrow, A. H., Beeckman, T., Kepinski, S., Traas, J., Bennett, M. J., & Vernoux, T. (2012). A novel sensor to map auxin response and distribution at high spatio-temporal resolution. Nature, 482, 103106. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature10791 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Calderón Villalobos, L. I. A., Lee, S., De Oliveira, C., Ivetac, A., Brandt, W., Armitage, L., Sheard, L. B., Tan, X., Parry, G., Mao, H., Zheng, N., Napier, R., Kepinski, S., & Estelle, M. (2012). A combinatorial TIR1/AFB–Aux/IAA co-receptor system for differential sensing of auxin. Nature Chemical Biology, 8, 477485. https://doi.org/10.1038/nchembio.926 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Clark, N. M., Buckner, E., Fisher, A. P., Nelson, E. C., Nguyen, T. T., Simmons, A. R., de Luis Balaguer, M. A., Butler-Smith, T., Sheldon, P. J., Bergmann, D. C., Williams, C. M., & Sozzani, R. (2019). Stem-cell-ubiquitous genes spatiotemporally coordinate division through regulation of stem-cell-specific gene networks. Nature Communications, 10, 5574. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-13132-2 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Clark, N. M., Nolan, T. M., Wang, P., Song, G., Montes, C., Valentine, C. T., Guo, H., Sozzani, R., Yin, Y., & Walley, J. W. (2021). Integrated omics networks reveal the temporal signaling events of brassinosteroid response in Arabidopsis. Nature Communications, 12, 5858. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-26165-3 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Conway, J. R., Lex, A., & Gehlenborg, N. (2017). UpSetR: An R package for the visualization of intersecting sets and their properties. Bioinformatics, 33, 29382940. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btx364 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dharmasiri, N., Dharmasiri, S., & Estelle, M. (2005). The F-box protein TIR1 is an auxin receptor. Nature, 435, 441445. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature03543 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dobin, A., Davis, C. A., Schlesinger, F., Drenkow, J., Zaleski, C., Jha, S., Batut, P., Chaisson, M., & Gingeras, T. R. (2013). STAR: Ultrafast universal RNA-seq aligner. Bioinformatics, 29, 1521. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/bts635 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gallavotti, A., Long, J. A., Stanfield, S., Yang, X., Jackson, D., Vollbrecht, E., & Schmidt, R. J. (2010). The control of axillary meristem fate in the maize ramosa pathway. Development (Cambridge, England), 137, 28492856. https://doi.org/10.1242/dev.051748 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Galli, M., Khakhar, A., Lu, Z., Chen, Z., Sen, S., Joshi, T., Nemhauser, J. L., Schmitz, R. J., & Gallavotti, A. (2018). The DNA binding landscape of the maize AUXIN RESPONSE FACTOR family. Nature Communications, 9, 4526. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-06977-6 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Galli, M., Liu, Q., Moss, B. L., Malcomber, S., Li, W., Gaines, C., Federici, S., Roshkovan, J., Meeley, R., Nemhauser, J. L., & Gallavotti, A. (2015). Auxin signaling modules regulate maize inflorescence architecture. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 112, 1337213377. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1516473112 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gomariz-Fernández, A., Sánchez-Gerschon, V., Fourquin, C., & Ferrándiz, C. (2017). The role of SHI/STY/SRS genes in organ growth and carpel development is conserved in the distant eudicot species Arabidopsis thaliana and Nicotiana benthamiana. Frontiers in Plant Science, 8, 814. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2017.00814 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Haque, S., Ahmad, J. S., Clark, N. M., Williams, C. M., & Sozzani, R. (2019). Computational prediction of gene regulatory networks in plant growth and development. Current Opinion in Plant Biology, 47, 96105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pbi.2018.10.005 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hochholdinger, F. (2009). The maize root system: Morphology, anatomy, and genetics. In Bennetzen, J. L. & Hake, S. C. (Eds.), Handbook of maize: Its biology (pp. 145160). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-79418-1_8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hochholdinger, F., Yu, P., & Marcon, C. (2018). Genetic control of root system development in maize. Trends in Plant Science, 23, 7988. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tplants.2017.10.004 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hochholdinger, F., & Zimmermann, R. (2008). Conserved and diverse mechanisms in root development. Current Opinion in Plant Biology, 11, 7074. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pbi.2007.10.002 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Huynh-Thu, V. A., Irrthum, A., Wehenkel, L., & Geurts, P. (2010). Inferring regulatory networks from expression data using tree-based methods. PLoS One, 5, 10. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0012776 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ishikawa, H., & Evans, M. L. (1993). The role of the distal elongation zone in the response of maize roots to auxin and gravity. Plant Physiology, 102, 12031210. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.102.4.1203 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jiang, K., Zhu, T., Diao, Z., Huang, H., & Feldman, L. J. (2010). The maize root stem cell niche: A partnership between two sister cell populations. Planta, 231, 411424. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00425-009-1059-3 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jiao, Y., Peluso, P., Shi, J., Liang, T., Stitzer, M. C., Wang, B., Campbell, M. S., Stein, J. C., Wei, X., Chin, C.-S., Guill, K., Regulski, M., Kumari, S., Olson, A., Gent, J., Schneider, K. L., Wolfgruber, T. K., May, M. R., Springer, N. M., … Ware, D. (2017). Improved maize reference genome with single-molecule technologies. Nature, 546, 524527. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature22971 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kelley, D. R. (2018). E3 ubiquitin ligases: Key regulators of hormone signaling in plants. Molecular and Cellular Proteomics, 17, 10471054. https://doi.org/10.1074/mcp.MR117.000476 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kepinski, S., & Leyser, O. (2004). Auxin-induced SCFTIR1-Aux/IAA interaction involves stable modification of the SCFTIR1 complex. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 101, 1238112386. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0402868101 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kozlova, L. V., Nazipova, A. R., Gorshkov, O. V., Petrova, A. A., & Gorshkova, T. A. (2020). Elongating maize root: Zone-specific combinations of polysaccharides from type I and type II primary cell walls. Scientific Reports, 10, 10956. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-67782-0 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lewis, D. R., Olex, A. L., Lundy, S. R., Turkett, W. H., Fetrow, J. S., & Muday, G. K. (2013). A kinetic analysis of the auxin transcriptome reveals Cell Wall remodeling proteins that modulate lateral root development in Arabidopsis . The Plant Cell, 25, 33293346. https://doi.org/10.1105/tpc.113.114868 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Li, H., Handsaker, B., Wysoker, A., Fennell, T., Ruan, J., Homer, N., Marth, G., Abecasis, G., Durbin, R., & 1000 Genome Project Data Processing Subgroup. (2009). The sequence alignment/map format and SAMtools. Bio informatics, 25, 20782079. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btp352 Google ScholarPubMed
Li, J., Witten, D. M., Johnstone, I. M., & Tibshirani, R. (2012). Normalization, testing, and false discovery rate estimation for RNA-sequencing data. Biostatistics, 13, 523538. https://doi.org/10.1093/biostatistics/kxr031 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Liu, Y., & von Wirén, N. (2022). Integration of nutrient and water availabilities via auxin into the root developmental program. Current Opinion in Plant Biology, 65, 102117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pbi.2021.102117 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marcon, C., Malik, W. A., Walley, J. W., Shen, Z., Paschold, A., Smith, L. G., Piepho, H.-P., Briggs, S. P., & Hochholdinger, F. (2015). A high-resolution tissue-specific proteome and phosphoproteome atlas of maize primary roots reveals functional gradients along the root axes. Plant Physiology, 168, 233246. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.15.00138 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marshall-Colón, A., & Kliebenstein, D. J. (2019). Plant networks as traits and hypotheses: Moving beyond description. Trends in Plant Science, 24, 840852. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tplants.2019.06.003 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Matsuyama, T., Satoh, H., Yamada, Y., & Hashimoto, T. (1999). A maize glycine-rich protein is synthesized in the lateral root cap and accumulates in the Mucilage1. Plant Physiology, 120, 665674. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.120.3.665 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mir, R., Aranda, L. Z., Biaocchi, T., Luo, A., Sylvester, A. W., & Rasmussen, C. G. (2017). A DII domain-based auxin reporter uncovers low auxin signaling during telophase and early G1. Plant Physiology, 173, 863871. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.16.01454 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moll, P., Ante, M., Seitz, A., & Reda, T. (2014). QuantSeq 3’ mRNA sequencing for RNA quantification. Nature Methods, 11, 952. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.f.376 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mutte, S. K., Kato, H., Rothfels, C., Melkonian, M., Wong, G. K.-S., & Weijers, D. (2018). Origin and evolution of the nuclear auxin response system. ELife, 7, e33399. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.33399 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nascimento, M., Silva, F. F. E., Sáfadi, T., Nascimento, A. C. C., Ferreira, T. E. M., Barroso, L. M. A., Ferreira Azevedo, C., Guimarães, S. E. F., & Serão, N. V. L. (2017). Independent component analysis (ICA) based-clustering of temporal RNA-seq data. PLoS One, 12, e0181195. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0181195 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nemhauser, J. L., Hong, F., & Chory, J. (2006). Different plant hormones regulate similar processes through largely nonoverlapping transcriptional responses. Cell, 126, 467475. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2006.05.050 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Novák, O., Hényková, E., Sairanen, I., Kowalczyk, M., Pospíšil, T., & Ljung, K. (2012). Tissue-specific profiling of the Arabidopsis thaliana auxin metabolome: Auxin metabolite profiling in Arabidopsis. The Plant Journal, 72, 523536. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-313X.2012.05085.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paschold, A., Larson, N. B., Marcon, C., Schnable, J. C., Yeh, C.-T., Lanz, C., Nettleton, D., Piepho, H.-P., Schnable, P. S., & Hochholdinger, F. (2014). Nonsyntenic genes drive highly dynamic complementation of gene expression in maize hybrids. The Plant Cell, 26, 39393948. https://doi.org/10.1105/tpc.114.130948 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pilet, P.-E., & Saugy, M. (1985). Effect of applied and endogenous indol-3-yl-acetic acid on maize root growth. Planta, 164, 254258.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Powers, S. K., & Strader, L. C. (2020). Regulation of auxin transcriptional responses. Developmental Dynamics, 249, 483495. https://doi.org/10.1002/dvdy.139 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pu, Y., Walley, J. W., Shen, Z., Lang, M. G., Briggs, S. P., Estelle, M., & Kelley, D. R. (2019). Quantitative early auxin root proteomics identifies GAUT10, a Galacturonosyltransferase, as a novel regulator of root meristem maintenance. Molecular & Cellular Proteomics, 18, 11571170. https://doi.org/10.1074/mcp.RA119.001378 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ravazzolo, L., Boutet-Mercey, S., Perreau, F., Forestan, C., Varotto, S., Ruperti, B., & Quaggiotti, S. (2021). Strigolactones and auxin cooperate to regulate maize root development and response to nitrate. Plant and Cell Physiology, 62, 610623. https://doi.org/10.1093/pcp/pcab014 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Saleem, M., Lamkemeyer, T., Schutzenmeister, A., Madlung, J., Sakai, H., Piepho, H.-P., Nordheim, A., & Hochholdinger, F. (2010). Specification of cortical parenchyma and stele of maize primary roots by asymmetric levels of auxin, cytokinin, and cytokinin-regulated proteins. Plant Physiology, 152, 418. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.109.150425 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shannon, P., Markiel, A., Ozier, O., Baliga, N. S., Wang, J. T., Ramage, D., Amin, N., Schwikowski, B., & Ideker, T. (2003). Cytoscape: A software environment for integrated models of biomolecular interaction networks. Genome Research, 13, 24982504.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Somssich, M., Khan, G. A., & Persson, S. (2016). Cell Wall heterogeneity in root development of Arabidopsis. Frontiers in Plant Science, 7, 1242. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2016.01242 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Szemenyei, H., Hannon, M., & Long, J. A. (2008). TOPLESS mediates auxin-dependent transcriptional repression during Arabidopsis embryogenesis. Science, 319, 13841386. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1151461 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tai, H., Opitz, N., Lithio, A., Lu, X., Nettleton, D., & Hochholdinger, F. (2016). Non-syntenic genes drive RTCS-dependent regulation of the embryo transcriptome during formation of seminal root primordia in maize (Zea mays L.). Journal of Experimental Botany, 68, 403414. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erw422 Google Scholar
Taramino, G., Sauer, M., Stauffer, J. L., Multani, D., Niu, X., Sakai, H., & Hochholdinger, F. (2007). The maize (Zea mays L.) RTCS gene encodes a LOB domain protein that is a key regulator of embryonic seminal and post-embryonic shoot-borne root initiation: Map-based cloning of the maize RTCS gene. The Plant Journal, 50, 649659. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-313X.2007.03075.x CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Taramino, G., Sauer, M., Stauffer, J. L., Multani, D., Niu, X., Sakai, H., & Hochholdinger, F. (2007). The maize (Zea mays L.) RTCS gene encodes a LOB domain protein that is a key regulator of embryonic seminal and post-embryonic shoot-borne root initiation. The Plant Journal, 50, 649659. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-313X.2007.03075.x CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Truskina, J., Han, J., Chrysanthou, E., Galvan-Ampudia, C. S., Lainé, S., Brunoud, G., Macé, J., Bellows, S., Legrand, J., Bågman, A.-M., Smit, M. E., Smetana, O., Stigliani, A., Porco, S., Bennett, M. J., Mähönen, A. P., Parcy, F., Farcot, E., Roudier, F., … Vernoux, T. (2021). A network of transcriptional repressors modulates auxin responses. Nature, 589, 116119. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2940-2 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van den Broeck, L., Spurney, R. J., Fisher, A. P., Schwartz, M., Clark, N. M., Nguyen, T. T., Madison, I., Gobble, M., Long, T., & Sozzani, R. (2021). A hybrid model connecting regulatory interactions with stem cell divisions in the root. Quantitative Plant Biology, 2, E2. https://doi.org/10.1017/qpb.2021.1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
von Behrens, I., Komatsu, M., Zhang, Y., Berendzen, K. W., Niu, X., Sakai, H., Taramino, G., & Hochholdinger, F. (2011). Rootless with undetectable meristem 1 encodes a monocot-specific AUX/IAA protein that controls embryonic seminal and post-embryonic lateral root initiation in maize: AUX/IAA regulation of maize root development. The Plant Journal, 66, 341353. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-313X.2011.04495.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walley, J. W., Kelley, D. R., Nestorova, G., Hirschberg, D. L., & Dehesh, K. (2010). Arabidopsis deadenylases AtCAF1a and AtCAF1b play overlapping and distinct roles in mediating environmental stress responses. Plant Physiology, 152, 866875. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.109.149005 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Walley, J. W., Sartor, R. C., Shen, Z., Schmitz, R. J., Wu, K. J., Urich, M. A., Nery, J. R., Smith, L. G., Schnable, J. C., Ecker, J. R., Briggs, S. P., Krouk, G., Lingeman, J., Colon, A. M., Coruzzi, G., Shasha, D., Gardner, T. S., Faith, J. J., Bar-Joseph, Z., … Stitt, M. (2016). Integration of omic networks in a developmental atlas of maize. Science, 353, 814818. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aag1125 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, Y., Sun, H., Wang, H., Yang, X., Xu, Y., Yang, Z., Xu, C., & Li, P. (2021). Integrating transcriptome, co-expression and QTL-seq analysis reveals that primary root growth in maize is regulated via flavonoid biosynthesis and auxin signal transduction. Journal of Experimental Botany, 72, 47734795. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erab177 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Xing, H., Pudake, R. N., Guo, G., Xing, G., Hu, Z., Zhang, Y., Sun, Q., & Ni, Z. (2011). Genome-wide identification and expression profiling of auxin response factor (ARF) gene family in maize. BMC Genomics, 12, 178. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2164-12-178 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Xu, C., Tai, H., Saleem, M., Ludwig, Y., Majer, C., Berendzen, K. W., Nagel, K. A., Wojciechowski, T., Meeley, R. B., Taramino, G., & Hochholdinger, F. (2015). Cooperative action of the paralogous maize lateral organ boundaries (LOB) domain proteins RTCS and RTCL in shoot-borne root formation. New Phytologist, 207, 11231133. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.13420 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yilmaz, A., Nishiyama, M. Y., Fuentes, B. G., Souza, G. M., Janies, D., Gray, J., & Grotewold, E. (2009). GRASSIUS: A platform for comparative regulatory genomics across the grasses. Plant Physiology, 149, 171180. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.108.128579 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zhang, Y., Behrens, I. v., Zimmermann, R., Ludwig, Y., Hey, S., & Hochholdinger, F. (2015). LATERAL ROOT PRIMORDIA 1 of maize acts as a transcriptional activator in auxin signalling downstream of the Aux/IAA gene rootless with undetectable meristem 1. Journal of Experimental Botany, 66, 38553863. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erv187 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zhang, Y., Marcon, C., Tai, H., von Behrens, I., Ludwig, Y., Hey, S., Berendzen, K. W., & Hochholdinger, F. (2016). Conserved and unique features of the homeologous maize Aux/IAA proteins ROOTLESS WITH UNDETECTABLE MERISTEM 1 and RUM1-like 1. Journal of Experimental Botany, 67, 11371147. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erv519 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Identification of auxin-responsive genes across four key regions of the primary maize root. (a) Picture of maize primary dissected root regions profiled in this study. Five-day-old primary maize roots were dissected into the four regions indicated. The distal 2 mm of the root tip corresponds to the meristematic zone (MZ). The elongation zone (EZ) is the proximal zone adjacent to the MZ root tip up to where the root hairs emerge. The differentiation zone, starting with the root hair zone, was mechanically separated into cortex (C) and stele (S) by snapping the root from the kernel and pulling the stele out from the cortex. Scale bar = 1 cm. (b) Differentially expressed genes within each root region at 30 min (t30) and 120 min (t120) were identified by comparing 10 □M indole-3-acetic acid (auxin) treated samples to mock-treated samples at q < 0.1. The x-axes represent the number of DE genes. (c) Heatmaps ordered by hierarchical clustering of the genes that are DE in response to auxin within each tissue profiled. Hierarchical clustering was independently carried out within each tissue.

Figure 1

Fig. 2. A comparison of differentially expressed genes in maize roots across four regions at two different time points in response to auxin. (a) UpSet plot of differentially expressed transcripts at 30 min (t30). (b) UpSet plot of auxin-responsive DE transcripts at 120 min (t120). Concordant and discordant comparisons are indicated in green and vermillion, respectively. Only the top 20 most populated intersections are visualized. Abbreviations: auxin, indole-3-acetic acid treatment compared with mock treatment; C, cortex; EZ, elongation zone; MZ, meristematic zone; S, stele, auxin.

Figure 2

Fig. 3. Auxin-responsive genes between root regions are enriched in several gene ontology (GO) terms related to biological processes. Significant GO terms of interest in auxin down-regulated genes (“down”) and auxin up-regulated genes (“up”) are indicated on the y-axis. Only tissues with enriched GO terms are shown. False discovery rate (FDR) is color-coded from blue (0.00) to red (0.05). Size of the dot indicates the number of enriched genes within each GO term. Abbreviations: C, cortex; EZ, elongation zone; MZ, meristematic zone; S, stele, t30 = 30 min, t120 = 120 min.

Figure 3

Fig. 4. A spatiotemporal auxin-responsive gene regulatory network in maize primary roots. The nodes (genes) are arranged in numbered circles to represent groupings of nodes (genes) that clustered together and were enriched within the same tissues. Colored nodes represent genes that are differentially expressed following auxin treatment. The temporal response to auxin is indicated by node color: blue, auxin responsive at 30 min; vermillion, auxin responsive at 120 min; and green, auxin responsive at both time points sampled. Each circular node represents a distinct cluster based on tissue: 1 = C + S, 2 = C, 3 = MZ, 4 = S, 5 = EZ, 6 = EZ + S, 7 = MZ + S, 8 = MZ + EZ, 9 = EZ + C, 10 = MZ + C, 11 = EZ + C + S, 12 = MZ + C + S, 13 = MZ + EZ + S, 14 = MZ + EZ + C (Abbreviations: C, cortex; EZ, elongation zone; MZ, meristematic zone; S, stele).

Figure 4

Fig. 5. Auxin-Response Factor (ARF) transcription factor gene regulatory subnetworks associated with primary maize roots. (a) ARF expression across tissues at t30 and t120 auxin treatments. (b) ARF GRN networks arranged by clade classification: Clade A, Clade B, Clade C, or ETTIN-Like. The central enlarged pink nodes within each network represent the ARF of interest labeled above the network and the connected small nodes represent that ARFs target genes. Target genes are colored according to the directionality of their transcript expression in response to auxin: grey, no significant transcript change; vermillion, decreased transcript level; blue, increased transcript level.

Supplementary material: File

McReynolds et al. supplementary material

McReynolds et al. supplementary material

Download McReynolds et al. supplementary material(File)
File 26.4 MB

Author comment: Temporal and spatial auxin responsive networks in maize primary roots — R0/PR1

Comments

January 28, 2022

Dear Editors,

We wish to submit a manuscript entitled “Temporal and spatial auxin responsive networks in maize primary roots” for consideration by Quantitative Plant Biology as an original research article. We confirm that this work is original and has not been published elsewhere, nor is it currently under consideration for publication elsewhere. We have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

Auxin is a classical phytohormone that is well known to regulate gene expression in planta. An outstanding question in the field is how auxin responsive gene networks are shaped in key crops such as Zea mays (corn). In this manuscript, we have characterized auxin-mediated transcriptome profiles across four regions of maize primary roots at two time points (30 and 120 minutes) using 3’ end mRNA sequencing. These transcriptomic data is a high-quality resource that will be useful for researchers working at molecular scales across laboratory and field sources. We identified differentially expressed genes across temporal and spatial scales that are up- and down-regulated by auxin based on these data. Auxin regulated genes within maize root regions are enriched in biological processes such as cell cycle control and hormone signaling. Furthermore, using these data we have reconstructed auxin responsive gene regulatory networks (GRNs). We believe that this manuscript is appropriate for publication by Quantitative Plant Biology because it fits well with the journal scope to support large dataset resources and incorporate correlative data to generate robust predictions.

If you feel that the manuscript is appropriate for your journal, we suggest the following reviewers based on their expertise in these areas:

Matthew Brooks (USDA ARS; mb5886@illinois.edu)

Andrea Eveland (Donald Danforth Plant Science Center; aeveland@danforthcenter.org)

Bastiaan Bargmann (Virginia Tech; bastiaan@vt.edu)

Gloria Muday (Wake Forest muday@wfu.edu)

Please address all correspondence concerning this manuscript to jwalley@iastate.edu or dkelley@iastate.edu (co-corresponding authors). Thank you for your consideration of this manuscript.

Sincerely,

Dior R. Kelley & Justin W. Walley

Iowa State University

Review: Temporal and spatial auxin responsive networks in maize primary roots — R0/PR2

Conflict of interest statement

Reviewer declares none.

Comments

Comments to Author: QPB-21-0035 Review

The manuscript by McReynolds et al. titled “Temporal and spatial auxin responsive networks in maize primary roots” describes a study on the transcriptomic responses to auxin treatment in separate regions of the maize seedling root and at two timepoints after treatment. Results indicate that different regions of the root respond with significant differences in which genes are differentially expressed as well as the number of genes that are regulated. The authors go on to perform gene regulatory network analysis and look specifically at Auxin Response Factor subnetwoks. The generated data could be of value for further functional genomic studies of the auxin response in maize.

I believe this work is suitable for publication in Quantitative Plant Biology but the manuscript will require some revision before it is ready for publication. The main concern is a need for more discussion of the results in comparison to previous studies of the auxin response in maize seedlings, a better visualization of the differential gene expression, and further discussion of the network analysis results. Additionally, there is room for improvement in the way the manuscript is written in certain sections. These issues are listed in more detail below.

Major points:

1. The authors present data on the response in distinct regions of the root, but how does that compare to the genes that can be seen to be differentially expressed when looking at the intact root, or entire seedling (Galli et al., 2018)? Does this increased spatial resolution allow for the detection of regulated genes that could not be seen on the organ or seedling level?

2. It would be beneficial to see a heatmap representation of differential gene expression (tissues and treatments in columns, hierarchically clustered genes in rows) for both timepoints rather than just the visualization of the number of responding genes that is included now.

3. Although gene regulatory network analysis is performed, how it is done could be explained better and what conclusions could be drawn from these results could be discussed in more detail.

Minor points:

1. Line 67: please add “the” before TOPLESS

2. Line 91 and 97: unless this is a reference to how others have called these procedures, there is no need to name these procedures “rolled towel” or “cigar roll”

3. Line 98: instead of 0.5X, please state the amount used in g/l

4. Line 103 and elsewhere throughout the manuscript: please only introduce an abbreviation if it is going to be used again later on, and only do so once (e.g. DAG, MZ, EZ etc.)

5. Line 105: 10 uM is the final concentration and the stock is dissolved in 95% ethanol, please state this clearly in the text

6. Line 118: “Trizol/RNeasy hybrid” is not mentioned in Walley et al., 2010 and no QIAGEN kit is used here, please explain the procedure used here directly

7. Line 121-122 and 125-6: please remove the facility references, which facility was involved is inconsequential

8. Line 129: please state what kind of raw sequence files were deposited

9. Line 131: please reference the suggested mapping pipeline (BlueBee website?)

10. Line 142: please use passive rather than first-person writing for consistency

11. Line 154: please provide the additional code

12. Line 158: please explain which false discovery rate correction was used

13. Line 172: please clarify, 32,832 distinct transcripts?

14. Line 176-178: please provide some references that could back up this speculation, or explain why this would lead to less of a transcriptional response

15. Line 198: please use 120 min instead of 2 hours for consistency

16. Line 235: please use construct instead of reconstruct

17. Line 243: please remove etc.

18. Line 255: please remove other

19. Line 263 and Fig 5: does this mean DE at either of the two timepoints?

20. Line 269 and 270: please remove compared to one another and with one another

21. Line 447: is this a micrograph or just a picture? please include a scale bar in the figure

22. Line 459 and other legends: please be consistent in color indications (green, blue, bluish green…)

23. Line 460: auxin is not a used abbreviation, please indicate the concentration of IAA used

24. please review punctuation throughout the text

Review: Temporal and spatial auxin responsive networks in maize primary roots — R0/PR3

Conflict of interest statement

Reviewer declares none.

Comments

Comments to Author: This article examines the transcriptional responses to elevated auxin in four regions of maize roots. The generated data is examined for changes in transcript abundance across these tissues and gene regulatory networks are predicted by network modeling. The resulting tissue specific auxin response dataset and resulting gene regulatory networks (GRNs) will provide valuable information for those studying auxin response networks in maize. Some additions to this article will make the data even more informative for those seeking to understand maize growth and development and the GRNs that control the auxin responses and developmental changes. These suggestions are summarized in the following paragraphs.

The authors clearly state (in the last sentence of the introduction) that their goal is to generate novel auxin driven predictive GRNs that underly maize root morphogenesis, but inclusion of data/images to show or explain how the treatment with exogenous IAA alters maize root development would help connect transcriptional changes to development. Since there are very different transcriptional responses in different tissues, it would be helpful to overlay these responses on developmental responses in the root regions sampled in this analysis. The authors suggest tissues with fewer transcriptional responses may exhibit few developmental responses to this treatment (lines 181-183) and could support this idea by showing the developmental response to auxin at a couple of times after treatment under their growth conditions (time of RNA Seq sampling and later points where growth or development show larger responses).

Examining transcriptional responses over time adds valuable insight into the temporal nature of transcriptional responses. The authors make this point noting the greater number of DE transcripts at 120 min of treatment in the meristem and elongation zone, but the smaller numbers in the cortex and stele. Yet, whether these are the same transcripts increasing (or decreasing) with similar kinetics or different transcripts is not clear. It would be helpful for the authors to show a heat map to reveal for each transcript whether they are changing at multiple time points and with consistent direction. Inclusion of two additional Upset plots focused on all the up regulated transcripts and a second growth with all the down regulated transcripts would quantitatively show this relationship. The current separation of data into two time points but with up and down in the same plot is not as informative (but would be a great supplemental figure) as it does show that the majority of transcripts that increase (or decrease) seem to have that pattern in one or more tissue, but only in very few cases are there opposite directional changes in different tissues. This is mentioned in lines 193-194 as discordant response (rather than the predominant concordant response), but the application of those terms to these responses were not fully explained.

The GRNs generated in this paper, the methods used to generate them, and the input data used to build them, will be of particular interest to readers of this journal. Although the S- ION method was previously published, it needs a more detailed explanation for readers of this paper. The methods indicate the SC-ION version used and what was input, but it does not explain the basis of the independent component analysis or the network inference algorithms that were used. The methods also indicate that there are genes indicated as “regulators” (DE TFs only) and it is not clear how TFs were predicted, and which TFs were found in this data. It would be valuable to include that list of DE TFs and clarify which are ARFs and what other TFs are present, perhaps as an added table or heat map.

The authors could do more to connect their results to what is know about transcriptional response to auxin in Arabidopsis and maize. I would encourage the authors to add to the discussion comparing their findings to those in Arabidopsis and other systems both in terms of transcriptional and developmental responses, to point out similarities and differences. In particular, the Galli paper is cited that reports transcriptional responses to IAA in maize seedlings and how much overlap with the transcripts in that dataset would be very informative.

Additional details that could be clarified:

1. I have two suggestions to clarify the introduction. The first paragraph begins with auxin’s central role in root development, explaining that generally, but adding details of the responses in maize roots could help inform the interpretation of their tissue transcriptional responses if the developmental responses in these zones were introduced here. The second half of this paragraph introduces maize root developmental mutants with defects in genes encoding auxin signaling proteins. This text if found before the function of those proteins are explained in the second paragraph. Perhaps these mutant descriptions could be integrated with the text beginning in lines 72 on the Galli et al paper that discussed auxin transcriptional responses in maize seedlings to occur after the signaling pathway is introduced.

2. The methods are generally clear but would benefit from the addition of information on the gene regulatory network analysis and how DE genes were identified. Was DE defined relative to the untreated time matched control? Information on why the dose of 10 µM IAA was used should be reported here or elsewhere in the paper. This is rather a high dose compared to what is used in Arabidopsis auxin transcriptional response networks but may reflect differences in responses in these two species.

3. The authors make an important point in lines 206 and following that the four up regulated transcripts in the meristem may participate in pathway feedback, which might be clarified by noting that these genes encode auxin transcriptional repressor proteins (AUX/IAA) and enzymes that degrade or conjugate auxin, rather than the more general “auxin response and auxin metabolism” description in line 207.

4. The authors point out that GO reveals that auxin repressed genes are associated the cell cycle and cell division. This is surprising as in Arabidopsis auxin induced genes have this annotation as they are turned on to drive lateral root initiation. It would helpful if the authors explained whether these cell cycle genes turn on or off cycling and/or whether this because of tissue sampled having reduced cell division. Similarly in line 228, the reference to cell wall being changed could be expanded (and a citation added).

5. In the results section the role of TF RTCS1 as driving 57 target genes is highlighted. It would be helpful if the authors explained how the model makes that prediction in this results section and what is known about this TF. The next paragraph discusses the ARFs and it would be helpful to have a visual showing which of the ARFs change and with what kinetics. Also, it is not clear the relationship between the numbering of these ARFs to the auxin ARFs and so clarifying that would help connect this to Arabidopsis networks and well characterized ARFs.

Recommendation: Temporal and spatial auxin responsive networks in maize primary roots — R0/PR4

Comments

Comments to Author: Dear Dr. Kelley and Dr. Walley,

as you can see, the reviewers found you paper interesting, however, they raised several points mainly related to data presentation and writing. Please, consider these points.

I am looking forward to see the revised version of your m/s.

best wishes,

Ari Pekka Mähönen

Decision: Temporal and spatial auxin responsive networks in maize primary roots — R0/PR5

Comments

No accompanying comment.

Author comment: Temporal and spatial auxin responsive networks in maize primary roots — R1/PR6

Comments

May 16, 2022

Dear Editors,

We wish to resubmit our manuscript entitled “Temporal and spatial auxin responsive networks in maize primary roots” for consideration by Quantitative Plant Biology as an original research article. We have worked to address all of the comments raised by the two reviewers.

Please address all correspondence concerning this manuscript to jwalley@iastate.edu or dkelley@iastate.edu (co-corresponding authors). Thank you for your consideration of this manuscript.

Thank you for your consideration,

Dior R. Kelley & Justin W. Walley

Iowa State University

Review: Temporal and spatial auxin responsive networks in maize primary roots — R1/PR7

Comments

Comments to Author: The authors have adequately addressed my concerns. I will be happy to see this published.

Review: Temporal and spatial auxin responsive networks in maize primary roots — R1/PR8

Conflict of interest statement

Dr. Kelly and I both serve on the North American Arabidopsis Steering Committee.

Comments

Comments to Author: This article examines the transcriptional responses to elevated auxin in four regions of maize roots. The generated data is examined for changes in transcript abundance across these tissues and gene regulatory networks are predicted by network modeling. The resulting tissue specific auxin response dataset and resulting gene regulatory networks (GRNs) will provide valuable information for those studying auxin response networks in maize, but also for those working in other species as the patterns of auxin-induced change may be similar or different between species. The authors added information to address comments in the last review and the article is improved. There are several key points that are still not clear, particularly how the modeling approach reveals gene regulatory networks, that are critical for readers of this quantitatively focused journal. Additionally, some aspects of the added data need to be further clarified. The major questions/suggestions are listed first and more detailed minor comments are listed after that.

1. Examining transcriptional responses over time adds valuable insight into the temporal nature of transcriptional responses. The authors make this point noting the greater number of DE transcripts at 120 min of treatment in the meristem and elongation zone, but the smaller numbers in the cortex and stele. Yet, whether these are the same transcripts increasing (or decreasing) with similar kinetics or different transcripts was not clear in the first submission. As requested in the last review, the authors added a heat map to reveal for each transcript whether they are changing at multiple time points and with consistent direction. The absence of explanation of this data in the text or legend limits clarity of this figure.

a. Is each row the same transcript in all four tissue types? More detail in the figure legend is needed.

b. This seems to be relative transcript abundance normalized to time matched controls, but whether this is done in each tissue type or for each tissue type is not stated. All the legend says about this comparison is that it is hierarchical clustering, but not what each row is and how the data was normalized for this plot.

c. The reason I ask the question in b is that the mock treatments are close to zero in the MZ, but there are many transcripts that are more than 2-fold different in the t30 mock in the other tissues, especially the cortex and stele, which is surprising if the authors are normalizing to the transcripts abundance in the mock treatment in that tissue.

d. Have the authors verified that these colors are visible to color blind individuals? I am not sure the red/green differences will be distinguished. A red is high, white is zero, and blue is low scale is readily visible to these individuals.

e. The text states the control was 95% ethanol for this experiment. The methods implies that the stock of IAA was in 95% ethanol which suggests it was diluted for the actual treatment, but how much is not clear. Was there a dilution of the ethanol in the mock treatment? Could the authors please clarify the final % of ethanol in both the mock and IAA treatments in the methods and results.

2. Upset plots are a great way to highlight this data. The current separation of data into two time points but with up and down in the same plot is not as informative as comparing the up regulated at both time points and the down regulated transcripts at two time points. The addition of this data should be moved from the supplement into the primary text and the current figure should be supplemental. By definition there is no transcript that can be both up and down in the same tissue at the same time (which is why the plot has connections separated by another row). The majority of the overlaps in the Figure 2 Upset plot should still be present in a comparison of transcripts that go up at two time points, as there are few opposite directional changes in different tissues. The authors nicely point this out beginning on lines 254, but an Upset plot comparing positive (or negative) changes could help support their explanation. There appear to be some errors in the new Upset plots in supplemental figure 2, as the numbers of transcripts in each group do not add up to the reported totals, so this needs to be corrected. For example, in the meristematic zone there are 6 up regulated at time 0 (from Figure 1) and there are none on that Upset plot. In the elongation zone at 30 minutes, when I add up the number of up regulated transcripts in the upset plot I get 58 transcripts, but figure 1 says that there are 93.

3. The GRNs generated in this paper, the methods used to generate them, and the input data used to build them, will be of particular interest to readers of this journal. The methods section described the S- ION method now has a more detailed explanation for readers of this paper. Yet, it is still not possible to tell what criteria lead to the predictions that specific TFs turn on other genes and a big picture explanation in the results is needed. Is it a delay in kinetics of targets relative to transcription factors? Is it parallel changes in a TF and targets? It would be really helpful to the readers of this journal, which is focused on quantitative results, if the reader could understand the features in the data recognized by the modeling algorithm. Several sentences explaining how this works need to be added to the results.

4. The authors could still do more to connect their results to what is known about transcriptional response to auxin in Arabidopsis and maize. I would encourage the authors to add to the discussion comparing their findings to those in Arabidopsis and other systems both in terms of transcriptional and developmental responses, to point out similarities and differences. For example in the Lewis et al Arabidopsis IAA time course dataset, there were transcripts that were changed over a broad range of times with enriched annotations and in the Bargmann et al paper there were cell type specific patterns of enriched annotation. Do they see similar responses in cell type or temporal responses between these two species at the level of interesting individual genes or GO annotations?

Additional details that are clearer or need to be clarified:

1. The organization of introduction is substantially improved and sets up the paper well.

2. The methods are generally clear but would benefit from the addition of information on the gene regulatory network analysis and how DE genes were identified. The methods now specify that DE genes were determined relative to time matched controls, but whether this is for each tissue sample is not stated. If so, then it is puzzling that the values on the heat map in Figure 1 are not all zero in the controls.

3. The labeling of the figures could be easier to follow if rather than saying t30 up, they labeled them 30 min up (the t makes it harder to quickly identify the number).

4. The labeling and samples could be clearer in Figure 3. It would be more intuitive if they grouped the up samples at both time points next to each other and then had stacked labels With IAA Up at the top level and then labels below them saying 30 or 120. (Such a labeling system would make reading all the figures more intuitive). Also, it is not clear why the EZ and MZ samples at 120 minutes are not on this chart.

5. Figure 4. The green and blue colors are hard to differentiate, so using two colors that are more different from each other would be helpful. Also, this relates to the questions about modeling above, but I cannot tell what criteria is used to group these genes into these 14 groupings.

6. Figure 5: I appreciate the addition of a heat map showing the changes in ARFs, but the same questions asked above for the Figure 1 heat map regarding how genes were normalized need to be clarified for this figure since the mock treatments are not at 0. Also, the text needs to clarify what criteria is used to identify nodes that are targets of ARFs. I am excited about this data, but the criteria used to group ARFs and targets needs greater clarity.

7. Line 207, 237 (and other locations), they talk about context dependent gene expression. Would it be more accurate to say tissue or cell type specific, since context could be time or other factors that are not spatial?

8. Line 214 is where the text indicates that the control was 95% ethanol, rather than a dilution of this concentrated stock to lower ethanol.

9. Line 241 refers to selection of 20 top comparisons (which I think is Figure 2A), but are they really only showing 20 genes?

10. The authors added the supplemental Upset plots, but don’t actually discuss them. As suggested above those need to be primary and discussed more fully (after checking the numbers).

11. Line 310 refers to 1372 unique TFs. Are these all DE? Or are they just present in the RNA seq? More information on the criteria for this identification would be helpful.

12. It was distracting that the line spacing differs between sections and on some pages there is a gradient of spacing from the top to the bottom of the page.

Recommendation: Temporal and spatial auxin responsive networks in maize primary roots — R1/PR9

Comments

Comments to Author: Dear Dior and Justin,

thank you for sending the revised version. As you can see, one of the reviewers still has a few points. Please, consider the relevant points, and revise the text accordingly, or explain in the Author's Response letter, if some of these requests were not justified for this m/s.

best wishes,

Ari Pekka

Decision: Temporal and spatial auxin responsive networks in maize primary roots — R1/PR10

Comments

No accompanying comment.

Author comment: Temporal and spatial auxin responsive networks in maize primary roots — R2/PR11

Comments

August 22, 2022

Dear Editors,

We wish to resubmit our second revision of the manuscript entitled “Temporal and spatial auxin responsive networks in maize primary roots” for consideration by Quantitative Plant Biology as an original research article. We have worked to fully address all of the additional comments raised by reviewer #2.

Please address all correspondence concerning this manuscript to jwalley@iastate.edu or dkelley@iastate.edu (co-corresponding authors). Thank you for the opportunity to revise our work and we look forward to a timely decision.

Thank you for your consideration,

Dior R. Kelley & Justin W. Walley

Iowa State University

Recommendation: Temporal and spatial auxin responsive networks in maize primary roots — R2/PR12

Comments

Comments to Author: Dear Dr. Walley and Dr. Kelley,

I have now read your response to Reviewer 2, and based on that I am happy to accept your manuscript for publication in Quantitative Plant Biology.

best wishes,

Ari Pekka Mähönen

Decision: Temporal and spatial auxin responsive networks in maize primary roots — R2/PR13

Comments

No accompanying comment.