Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
PreprintCited by 13Plant Molecular Biology ResearchPlant-Microbe Interactions and ImmunityChromosomal and Genetic Variations

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Differential expansion and retention patterns of LRR-RLK genes across plant evolution

Open access

Preprint — published as 10.1002/pld3.556 · Paper page

Abstract

To maximize overall fitness, plants must accurately respond to a host of growth, developmental, and environmental signals throughout their life. Many of these internal and external signals are perceived by the leucine-rich repeat receptor-like kinases, which play roles in regulating growth, development, and immunity. This largest family of receptor kinases in plants can be divided into subfamilies based on conservation of the kinase domain, which demonstrates that shared evolutionary history often indicates shared molecular function. Here we investigate the evolutionary history of this family across the evolution of 112 plant species. We identify lineage-specific expansions of the malectin-domain containing subfamily LRR subfamily I primarily in the Brassicales and bryophytes. Most other plant lineages instead show a large expansion in LRR subfamily XII, which in Arabidopsis is known to contain key receptors in pathogen perception. This striking asymmetric expansion may reveal a dichotomy in the evolutionary history and adaptation strategies employed by plants. A greater understanding of the evolutionary pressures and adaptation strategies acting on members of this receptor family offers a way to improve functional predictions for orphan receptors and simplify identification of novel stress related receptors.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1101/2023.07.26.549740

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

FIGURE 1 Expansion, duplication, and counts of LRR‐RLKs across 112 plant and algae species. (a) The LRR‐RLK subfamily members have undergone asymmetric expansion. Subfamily expansion is represented as the percentage of LRR‐RLKs belonging to each subfamily out of the total number of LRR‐RLKs in each genome. Letters represent the significance group of each subfamily, as determined by Tukey's HSD test at alpha = .05. Subfamilies with shared letters are statistically similar to one another, while subfamilies with different letters are significantly different from one another. Species with less than 10 total LRR‐RLKs were omitted. Subfamilies LRR‐I, LRR‐III, LRR‐VIII, LRR‐XI, and LRR‐XII have a higher proportion of total LRR‐RLKs compared to the other subfamilies, demonstrating increased diversification. (b) LRR‐RLKs have undergone tandem duplication. Blue bars represent tandem duplicated genes, while gray bars represent non‐tandem duplicated genes. Tandem duplicates are those in the same subclade separated on a chromosome by no more than two intervening genes.
FIGURE 1 Expansion, duplication, and counts of LRR‐RLKs across 112 plant and algae species. (a) The LRR‐RLK subfamily members have undergone asymmetric expansion. Subfamily expansion is represented as the percentage of LRR‐RLKs belonging to each subfamily out of the total number of LRR‐RLKs in each genome. Letters represent the significance group of each subfamily, as determined by Tukey's HSD test at alpha = .05. Subfamilies with shared letters are statistically similar to one another, while subfamilies with different letters are significantly different from one another. Species with less than 10 total LRR‐RLKs were omitted. Subfamilies LRR‐I, LRR‐III, LRR‐VIII, LRR‐XI, and LRR‐XII have a higher proportion of total LRR‐RLKs compared to the other subfamilies, demonstrating increased diversification. (b) LRR‐RLKs have undergone tandem duplication. Blue bars represent tandem duplicated genes, while gray bars represent non‐tandem duplicated genes. Tandem duplicates are those in the same subclade separated on a chromosome by no more than two intervening genes.CC BY-NC · PubMed Central
FIGURE 2 Comparison of LRR‐I and LRR‐XII receptor counts across different plant orders. (a) Percentage of total LRR‐RLKs found in subfamilies LRR‐I and LRR‐XII in each given order. Outliers (> Q3 + 1.5xIQR) are plotted as dots. Significance values represent an ANOVA followed by Tukey's HSD. * = p < .05, ** = p < .01, *** = p < .001, **** = p < .0001. (b) LRR‐RLK subfamilies have different ratios of expansion across evolutionary time. Colors indicate the log of the ratio of LRR‐I to LRR‐XII genes at each node. Numbers at terminal nodes represent the ratio for those species and internal nodes represent the ratio for the common ancestor at that branch. Red algae ( P. umbilicalis ) is used as the species outgroup.
FIGURE 2 Comparison of LRR‐I and LRR‐XII receptor counts across different plant orders. (a) Percentage of total LRR‐RLKs found in subfamilies LRR‐I and LRR‐XII in each given order. Outliers (> Q3 + 1.5xIQR) are plotted as dots. Significance values represent an ANOVA followed by Tukey's HSD. * = p < .05, ** = p < .01, *** = p < .001, **** = p < .0001. (b) LRR‐RLK subfamilies have different ratios of expansion across evolutionary time. Colors indicate the log of the ratio of LRR‐I to LRR‐XII genes at each node. Numbers at terminal nodes represent the ratio for those species and internal nodes represent the ratio for the common ancestor at that branch. Red algae ( P. umbilicalis ) is used as the species outgroup.CC BY-NC · PubMed Central
FIGURE 3 Maximum‐likelihood phylogeny of LRR‐I inferred from 112 species of plants and algae based on kinase domain sequences. Outer ring denotes the order in each sequence falls into. Inner ring colors denote the subclade to which each sequence belongs. Bootstrap values represent 1,000 re‐samplings. Subclades were considered as such if sequences shared at least 60% sequence similarity to one another and the subclade contained bootstrap support >90%. Phylogeny was rooted using a variety of Arabidopsis and human kinases. Arabidopsis sequences are marked with red dots, and characterized members are noted.
FIGURE 3 Maximum‐likelihood phylogeny of LRR‐I inferred from 112 species of plants and algae based on kinase domain sequences. Outer ring denotes the order in each sequence falls into. Inner ring colors denote the subclade to which each sequence belongs. Bootstrap values represent 1,000 re‐samplings. Subclades were considered as such if sequences shared at least 60% sequence similarity to one another and the subclade contained bootstrap support >90%. Phylogeny was rooted using a variety of Arabidopsis and human kinases. Arabidopsis sequences are marked with red dots, and characterized members are noted.CC BY-NC · PubMed Central
FIGURE 4 Domain architectures of LRR‐I members across 112 species. (a) General schematic of the two commonly found architectures across 112 species. MLD = malectin‐like domain, LRRs = leucine‐rich repeats, TM = transmembrane domain, GDPC = a cleavage motif, Cys‐pair = predicted disulfide bond, and SP = signal peptide. The two architectures are based on Arabidopsis FRK1 (top) and P. patens receptor Ppate_Pp3c16_23380V3.1.p (bottom). (b) Sequence logo of the WxGDCPxP motif found in the majority of LRR‐I sequences. (c) Uncommon domains found within at least five sequences. Hexagons represent those found within the transmembrane domain, and ovals represent those found within the LRR domain.
FIGURE 4 Domain architectures of LRR‐I members across 112 species. (a) General schematic of the two commonly found architectures across 112 species. MLD = malectin‐like domain, LRRs = leucine‐rich repeats, TM = transmembrane domain, GDPC = a cleavage motif, Cys‐pair = predicted disulfide bond, and SP = signal peptide. The two architectures are based on Arabidopsis FRK1 (top) and P. patens receptor Ppate_Pp3c16_23380V3.1.p (bottom). (b) Sequence logo of the WxGDCPxP motif found in the majority of LRR‐I sequences. (c) Uncommon domains found within at least five sequences. Hexagons represent those found within the transmembrane domain, and ovals represent those found within the LRR domain.CC BY-NC · PubMed Central

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 60

  1. 10.1038/s41587-019-0036-z · DOI · Paper page
  2. 10.1016/j.cub.2013.12.053 · DOI
  3. 2020, The Evolutionary History of Ephs and Ephrins: Toward Multicellular Organisms, Mol. Biol. Evol, 37, 379, 10.1093/molbev/msz222 · DOI
  4. 2023, An LRR receptor kinase controls ABC transporter substrate preferences during plant growth-defense decisions, Curr. Biol, 33, 2008, 10.1016/j.cub.2023.04.029 · DOI
  5. 10.1038/415977a · DOI · Paper page
  6. 10.1093/nar/gkv416 · DOI
  7. Buendia, L. , Girardin, A. , Wang, T. , Cottret, L. , and Lefebvre, B. (2018). LysM Receptor-Like Kinase and LysM Receptor-Like Protein Families: An Update on Phylogeny and Functional Characterization. Front. Plant Sci. 9. · DOI
  8. 10.1093/nar/gkl124 · DOI · Paper page
  9. 10.1105/tpc.19.00578 · DOI
  10. Chen, T. (2021). Identification and characterization of the LRR repeats in plant LRR-RLKs. BMC Mol. Cell Biol. 22. · DOI
  11. 10.1105/tpc.105.036574 · DOI
  12. 2018, Non-Mycorrhizal Plants: The Exceptions that Prove the Rule, Trends Plant Sci, 23, 577, 10.1016/j.tplants.2018.04.004 · DOI
  13. 10.1242/dev.00998 · DOI
  14. Dufayard, J.-F. , Bettembourg, M. , Fischer, I. , Droc, G. , Guiderdoni, E. , Périn, C. , Chantret, N. , and Diévart, A. (2017). New Insights on Leucine-Rich Repeats Receptor-Like Kinase Orthologous Relationships in Angiosperms. Front. Plant Sci. 08. · DOI
  15. 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002195 · DOI · Paper page
  16. 10.1104/pp.15.01470 · DOI
  17. 10.1093/nar/gkr944 · DOI
  18. 10.1104/pp.108.122457 · DOI
  19. 10.1111/j.1365-3040.2011.02390.x · DOI
  20. 10.4161/cam.4.2.12430 · DOI
  21. 10.1038/nmeth.4285 · DOI · Paper page
  22. 10.1093/molbev/mst010 · DOI · Paper page
  23. 10.1006/jmbi.2000.4315 · DOI · Paper page
  24. 10.1371/journal.pone.0102245 · DOI
  25. 10.1104/pp.108.134353 · DOI
  26. 2018, Rapid improvement of domestication traits in an orphan crop by genome editing, Nat. Plants 2018 410, 4, 766
  27. 10.4161/cam.4.2.10725 · DOI
  28. 10.1186/s12862-017-0891-5 · DOI
  29. 10.1093/NAR/GKAA913 · DOI · Paper page
  30. 10.1186/s13059-016-0955-7 · DOI
  31. 10.1104/pp.17.01606 · DOI
  32. 10.1093/molbev/msu300 · DOI · Paper page
  33. 10.1242/dev.119677 · DOI
  34. 10.1104/pp.16.00523 · DOI · Paper page
  35. 10.1371/journal.pone.0009490 · DOI · Paper page
  36. 10.1186/s13059-019-1727-y · DOI · Paper page
  37. 10.3732/ajb.1400119 · DOI · Paper page
  38. 10.1111/j.2041-210X.2011.00169.x · DOI · Paper page
  39. 10.1371/journal.pcbi.0020115 · DOI · Paper page
  40. 10.1101/gad.222702 · DOI
  41. 10.1038/s41588-019-0389-8 · DOI
  42. 10.1016/j.cell.2017.08.030 · DOI · Paper page
  43. 10.1186/1471-2229-12-229 · DOI
  44. 10.1093/glycob/cwq059 · DOI
  45. 10.1091/mbc.E08-04-0354 · DOI · Paper page
  46. Schoch, C.L. et al. (2020). NCBI Taxonomy: a comprehensive update on curation, resources and tools. Database 2020. · DOI · Paper page
  47. 10.1073/pnas.181141598 · DOI · Paper page
  48. Shiu, S.-H. , Karlowski, W.M. , Pan, R. , Tzeng, Y.-H. , Mayer, K.F.X. , and Li, W.-H. (2004). Comparative Analysis of the Receptor-Like Kinase Family in Arabidopsis and Rice. Plant Cell Online 16. · DOI · Paper page
  49. 10.3732/ajb.0800079 · DOI · Paper page
  50. 10.1038/cr.2014.161 · DOI
  51. 10.1016/j.plantsci.2010.06.017 · DOI
  52. 10.1111/j.1365-313X.2005.02437.x · DOI
  53. 2020, Soy and Arabidopsis receptor-like kinases respond to polysaccharide signals from Spodoptera species and mediate herbivore resistance, Commun. Biol, 3, 224, 10.1038/s42003-020-0959-4 · DOI
  54. 2019, Investigation of evolutionary and expressional relationships in the function of the leucine-rich repeat receptor-like protein kinase gene family (LRR-RLK) in the radish (Raphanus sativus L, Sci. Rep, 9, 6937, 10.1038/s41598-019-43516-9 · DOI
  55. 10.1016/j.cell.2019.07.038 · DOI
  56. 2021, Malectin/Malectin-like domain-containing proteins: A repertoire of cell surface molecules with broad functional potential, Cell Surf, 7, 100056, 10.1016/j.tcsw.2021.100056 · DOI
  57. Yeh, Y.-H. , Chang, Y.-H. , Huang, P.-Y. , Huang, J.-B. , and Zimmerli, L. (2015). Enhanced Arabidopsis pattern-triggered immunity by overexpression of cysteine-rich receptor-like kinases. Front. Plant Sci. 6. · DOI
  58. Yeh, Y.-H. , Panzeri, D. , Kadota, Y. , Huang, Y.-C. , Huang, P.-Y. , Tao, C.-N. , Roux, M. , Chien, H.-C. , Chin, T.-C. , Chu, P.-W. , Zipfel, C. , and Zimmerli, L. (2016). The Arabidopsis Malectin-Like/LRR-RLK IOS1 is Critical for BAK1-Dependent and BAK1-Independent Pattern-Triggered Immunity. Plant Cell: tpc.00313.2016. · DOI
  59. 10.1104/pp.17.01266 · DOI
  60. 10.1016/j.cell.2006.03.037 · DOI · Paper page

Metadata

Authors
Kileeg, Z., Haldar, A., Khan, H., Qamar, A., & Mott, G. A.
Affiliations
University of Toronto (CA)
Corresponding author
Mott, G. Adam
Venue
Plant Direct
Publisher
openRxiv
Published
2023-07-26
Volume
7
Issue
12
Pages
e556-e556
ISSN
2475-4455 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4390110941
Cited by
13
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 2
FWCI
2.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc
Locations
  • Plant Direct (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Plant Molecular Biology Research
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Plant-Microbe Interactions and Immunity
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Chromosomal and Genetic Variations
Keywords
leucine-rich repeat receptor-like kinases, gene family expansion, plant evolution, Brassicales, bryophytes, pathogen perception, orphan receptors, plant immunity

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.