PreprintCited by 3Plant Stress Responses and TolerancePlant Molecular Biology ResearchPlant-Microbe Interactions and Immunity

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

AP2/ERF transcription factors enriched in the drought-response transcriptome of the Thar desert tree Prosopis cineraria show higher copy number and greater DNA-binding affinity than orthologs in drought-sensitive species

Open access
Dhiman, Vedikaa, Marik, Debankona, Amrita, Shekhawat, Rajveer Singh, Swain, Asish Kumar, Dey, Arpan, Yadav, Pankaj, Pal, Arumay, Dey, Sucharita, Sadhukhan, Ayan·2024·Journal of Plant Growth Regulation

Preprint — published as 10.1007/s00344-024-11532-3

Abstract

We sequenced the drought-response transcriptome of the keystone tree species Prosopis cineraria from the Indian Thar desert to understand the key factors in its drought tolerance mechanism. We identified a network of genes activated in P. cineraria involved in osmotic stress response, phytohormone, calcium, and phosphorelay signal transduction. Of these, up-regulation of 54 APETALA2/Ethylene-Responsive Factor (AP2/ERF) transcription factor genes, validated by real-time PCR, suggests their key role in the drought tolerance of P. cineraria. We conducted a genome-wide study of the AP2/ERF superfamily in P. cineraria , classifying its 232 proteins into 15 clades and analyzing their protein structures, gene structure, and promoter organization. The P. cineraria genome contains more copies of AP2/ERF genes than drought-sensitive plants. Further, we identified sequence polymorphisms in AP2/ERF genes between Arabian and Indian cultivars of P. cineraria . We modeled the DNA-protein complex structures of AP2/ERFs from drought-tolerant and sensitive species using AlphaFold to compare their DNA binding ability. Though the DNA binding domain (DBD) is relatively conserved across species, the unstructured region of these proteins possesses different charge distributions, which might contribute differently to their DNA search and binding. Using all-atom molecular dynamics simulations, we teased out a higher number of specific DBD-DNA hydrogen bonds in P. cineraria, leading to a stronger DNA-binding affinity compared to drought-sensitive Arabidopsis thaliana . These results directly support copy number expansion of AP2/ERF transcription factors and the evolution of their structures for more efficient DNA search and binding as drought adaptation mechanisms in P. cineraria .

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 · 10.1101/2024.06.17.599320

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 129

  1. 10.3390/ijms21030772 · DOI
  2. 10.1038/s41586-024-07487-w · DOI · Paper page
  3. 10.1105/tpc.006130 · DOI
  4. 10.1111/pbi.12520 · DOI
  5. 10.1093/emboj/17.18.5484 · DOI
  6. 10.1080/23818107.2021.1981437 · DOI
  7. 10.3390/ijms160715811 · DOI
  8. 10.1146/annurev.physchem.51.1.129 · DOI
  9. 10.1038/s41588-019-0405-z · DOI
  10. 10.1016/j.jmb.2022.167660 · DOI
  11. 10.1016/j.pmpp.2020.101527 · DOI
  12. 10.1007/s12033-014-9828-z · DOI
  13. 10.1016/j.molp.2020.06.009 · DOI
  14. 10.1007/s13353-021-00675-8 · DOI
  15. 10.12688/f1000research.8987.2 · DOI
  16. 10.1104/pp.16.00025 · DOI
  17. 10.1105/tpc.006494 · DOI
  18. 10.1007/BF00027338 · DOI
  19. 10.3389/fgene.2021.750761 · DOI
  20. 10.1093/nar/gks405 · DOI
  21. 10.1093/bioinformatics/bts635 · DOI · Paper page
  22. 10.1186/s12870-015-0700-5 · DOI
  23. 10.1038/srep37379 · DOI
  24. 10.1073/pnas.2009554117 · DOI
  25. 10.1105/tpc.12.3.393 · DOI
  26. 10.1073/pnas.252637799 · DOI · Paper page
  27. 10.1016/j.jplph.2023.153923 · DOI
  28. 2015, The MM/PBSA and MM/GBSA methods to estimate ligand-binding affinities, Expert Opin Drug Dis, 10, 449, 10.1517/17460441.2015.1032936 · DOI
  29. 10.1093/aob/mch150 · DOI
  30. 10.1038/nbt.1883 · DOI
  31. 10.17221/108/2022-cjgpb · DOI
  32. 10.1371/journal.pone.0161322 · DOI
  33. 10.1016/j.indcrop.2023.116820 · DOI
  34. 10.3390/Int · DOI
  35. 10.1146/annurev-physiol-012110-142203 · DOI
  36. 10.1074/jbc.273.41.26857 · DOI
  37. 10.1016/j.ymeth.2023.03.002 · DOI
  38. 10.1080/07391102.2021.1894980 · DOI
  39. 10.3389/fpls.2018.00970 · DOI
  40. 10.3390/Int · DOI
  41. 10.1016/j.colsurfb.2005.07.017 · DOI
  42. 10.1007/s11103-013-0054-z · DOI
  43. 10.3389/fgene.2019.01326 · DOI
  44. 10.1186/1471-2164-9-118 · DOI · Paper page
  45. 10.1046/j.1365-313x.2001.01096.x · DOI
  46. 10.1002/pro.4362 · DOI
  47. 10.1371/journal.pone.0221422 · DOI
  48. 10.3389/fgene.2016.00207 · DOI
  49. 10.1104/pp.18.01185 · DOI
  50. 10.1093/nar/gkad347 · DOI · Paper page
  51. 10.1016/0022-2836(82)90515-0 · DOI
  52. 10.1038/srep18878 · DOI
  53. 10.1093/jxb/err016 · DOI
  54. 10.1093/jxb/err210 · DOI
  55. 10.1093/nar/30.1.325 · DOI
  56. 10.1093/nar/gkab301 · DOI
  57. 10.3390/plants12173166 · DOI
  58. 10.1104/pp.106.080580 · DOI
  59. 10.3390/IntJBiolMacromol19113637 · DOI
  60. 10.1016/j.pld.2016.03.002 · DOI
  61. 10.1186/s12864-021-07799-5 · DOI
  62. 10.1186/s12870-019-1923-7 · DOI
  63. 10.1105/tpc.10.8.1391 · DOI · Paper page
  64. 10.1016/j.cj.2023.05.002 · DOI
  65. 10.1186/s12864-023-09585-x · DOI
  66. 10.1186/gb-2014-15-1-r1 · DOI
  67. 10.1016/j.devcel.2010.10.023 · DOI
  68. 10.1006/jmbi.1994.1334 · DOI
  69. 10.1021/ct300418h · DOI
  70. 10.1186/1471-2229-12-1 · DOI
  71. 10.1016/j.gene.2023.147215 · DOI
  72. 10.3389/fpls.2021.737490 · DOI
  73. 10.1104/pp.105.073783 · DOI
  74. 10.1016/j.gene.2020.144514 · DOI
  75. 10.1016/j.phytochem.2023.113715 · DOI
  76. 10.1002/prot.20033 · DOI · Paper page
  77. 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007867 · DOI
  78. 10.3389/fmolb.2022.978310 · DOI
  79. 10.1186/s12870-018-1289-2 · DOI
  80. 10.1104/pp.105.066324 · DOI
  81. 10.1038/s41598-023-49245-4 · DOI
  82. 10.3390/Int · DOI
  83. 10.1016/S0065-3233(03)66002-X · DOI
  84. 10.1023/B:PLAN.0000040903.66496.a4 · DOI
  85. 10.3389/fpls.2019.01765 · DOI
  86. 10.1007/s12355-023-01337-1 · DOI
  87. 10.1007/s00468-020-02073-9 · DOI
  88. 10.1007/s00425-014-2111-5 · DOI
  89. 10.3389/fpls.2017.01553 · DOI
  90. 10.1006/bbrc.2001.6299 · DOI · Paper page
  91. 10.1105/tpc.105.035881 · DOI
  92. 10.7717/peerj.6810 · DOI
  93. 10.1093/treephys/tpy153 · DOI
  94. 10.1111/pce.14629 · DOI
  95. 10.1101/gr.1239303 · DOI · Paper page
  96. 10.1186/s42397-021-00102-7 · DOI
  97. 10.1038/msb.2011.75 · DOI
  98. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btv351 · DOI · Paper page
  99. 10.1007/bf00303516 · DOI
  100. 10.1021/ja00172a038 · DOI
  101. 10.1016/j.compbiolchem.2009.07.007 · DOI
  102. 10.3390/ijms23158503 · DOI
  103. 10.1186/s12870-023-04180-4 · DOI
  104. 10.3389/fpls.2014.00771 · DOI
  105. 10.1093/bib/bbs017 · DOI · Paper page
  106. 10.1073/pnas.1806460115 · DOI
  107. 10.3389/fpls.2022.851731 · DOI
  108. 10.1093/nar/gkad045 · DOI
  109. 10.3390/Int · DOI
  110. 10.1007/978-0-387-98141-3 · DOI · Paper page
  111. 10.1105/tpc.109.073072 · DOI
  112. 10.1093/jxb/eraa452 · DOI
  113. 10.1186/s12870-020-02795-5 · DOI
  114. 10.3390/Int · DOI
  115. 10.1007/978-0-387-79144-9_2 · DOI
  116. 10.1016/s0378-1119(96)00578-1 · DOI
  117. 10.1073/pnas.1212547109 · DOI
  118. 10.1016/j.jbc.2021.100945 · DOI
  119. 10.1186/s12870-022-03521-z · DOI
  120. 10.1186/s43897-023-00054-3 · DOI
  121. 10.1186/s12864-022-08345-7 · DOI
  122. 10.1007/s11103-008-9357-x · DOI
  123. 10.1007/s11103-008-9357-x · DOI
  124. 10.1007/s11103-008-9357-x · DOI
  125. 10.3389/fpls.2022.885694 · DOI
  126. 10.1111/ppl.14272 · DOI
  127. 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2023.127582 · DOI
  128. 10.1016/j.bbrc.2008.04.087 · DOI
  129. 10.1007/s00122-013-2177-7 · DOI

Metadata

Authors
Dhiman, V., Marik, D., Amrita, Shekhawat, R. S., Swain, A. K., Dey, A., Yadav, P., Pal, A., Dey, S., & Sadhukhan, A.
Affiliations
  • Indian Institute of Technology Jodhpur (IN)
  • Vellore Institute of Technology University (IN)
Corresponding author
  • Yadav, Pankaj
  • Pal, Arumay
  • Dey, Sucharita
  • Sadhukhan, Ayan
Venue
Journal of Plant Growth Regulation
Publisher
openRxiv
Published
2024-06-19
Volume
44
Issue
5
Pages
2139-2163
ISSN
0721-7595 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4403747296
Cited by
3
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2
FWCI
0.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Plant Growth Regulation (publishedVersion)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • Indian Institute of Technology Jodhpur (I/SEED/SUD/20230166, I/SEED/ASK/20220015)
  • Ministry of Education, India
  • Principal Scientific Adviser to the Government of India (JCKIF/Thar/Proj-01/2022)
  • Science and Engineering Research Board (SRG/2022/000169)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Plant Stress Responses and Tolerance
  • 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
Keywords
Prosopis cineraria, AP2/ERF transcription factors, drought tolerance, gene copy number expansion, DNA binding affinity, DNA-binding domain, promoter polymorphism, cultivar differences, osmolyte biosynthesis, antioxidant biosynthesis, phytohormone production, signal transduction, desert trees, Thar Desert, protein-DNA complex structure, molecular dynamics simulation, AlphaFold

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