Gene silencing as an adaptive defence against viruses

Gene silencing was perceived initially as an unpredictable and inconvenient side effect of introducing transgenes into plants. It now seems that it is the consequence of accidentally triggering the plant's adaptive defence mechanism against viruses and transposable elements. This recently discovered mechanism, although mechanistically different, has a number of parallels with the immune system of mammals.

Exploring plant genomes by RNA-induced gene silencing

The nucleotide sequences of several animal, plant and bacterial genomes are now known, but the functions of many of the proteins that they are predicted to encode remain unclear. RNA interference is a gene-silencing technology that is being used successfully to investigate gene function in several organisms - for example, Caenorhabditis elegans. We discuss here that RNA-induced gene silencing approaches are also likely to be effective for investigating plant gene function in a high-throughput, genome-wide manner.

The use of artificial MicroRNA technology to control gene expression in Arabidopsis thaliana

In plants, double-stranded RNA (dsRNA) is an effective trigger of RNA silencing, and several classes of endogenous small RNA (sRNA), processed from dsRNA substrates by DICER-like (DCL) endonucleases, are essential in controlling gene expression. One such sRNA class, the microRNAs (miRNAs) control the expression of closely related genes to regulate all aspects of plant development, including the determination of leaf shape, leaf polarity, flowering time, and floral identity. A single miRNA sRNA silencing signal is processed from a long precursor transcript of nonprotein-coding RNA, termed the primary miRNA (pri-miRNA). A region of the pri-miRNA is partially self-complementary allowing the transcript to fold back onto itself to form a stem-loop structure of imperfectly dsRNA. Artificial miRNA (amiRNA) technology uses endogenous pri-miRNAs, in which the miRNA and miRNA*(passenger strand of the miRNA duplex) sequences have been replaced with corresponding amiRNA/ amiRNA*sequences that direct highly efficient RNA silencing of the targeted gene. Here, we describe the rules for amiRNA design, as well as outline the PCR and bacterial cloning procedures involved in the construction of an amiRNA plant expression vector to control target gene expression in Arabidopsis thaliana. © 2014 Springer Science+Business Media New York.

Rapid match-searching for gene silencing assessment

Motivation: Gene silencing, also called RNA interference, requires reliable assessment of silencer impacts. A critical task is to find matches between silencer oligomers and sites in the genome, in accordance with one-to-many matching rules (G-U matching, with provision for mismatches). Fast search algorithms are required to support silencer impact assessments in procedures for designing effective silencer sequences.Results: The article presents a matching algorithm and data structures specialized for matching searches, including a kernel procedure that addresses a Boolean version of the database task called the skyline search. Besides exact matches, the algorithm is extended to allow for the location-specific mismatches applicable in plants. Computational tests show that the algorithm is significantly faster than suffix-tree alternatives. © The Author 2010. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved.

Application of gene silencing in plants

Recent studies of gene silencing in plants have revealed two RNA-mediated epigenetic processes, RNA-directed RNA degradation and RNA-directed DNA methylation. These natural processes have provided new avenues for developing high-efficiency, high-throughput technology for gene suppression in plants.

Gene silencing: Fleshing out the bones

Genetic studies are revealing the pathway for RNA-mediated gene silencing. Short RNA molecules are the key, giving sequence specificity for RNA degradation and mediating communication within and between cells; these short RNAs are common to transcriptional and post-transcriptional silencing pathways. The expression of transgenes in plants varies between independent transformants and there are many examples where the transgenic trait is not expressed, or disappears in subsequent generations, despite the presence of the transgene. This loss of a trait, but not of the transgene, has become known as gene silencing and can take two forms, transcriptional or post-transcriptional. As their names imply, transcriptional gene silencing occurs when a transgene is not transcribed, whereas in post-transcriptional gene silencing, the transgene mRNA is produced but degraded before it is translated (reviewed in [1]). Both forms of silencing seem to be the result of inherent mechanisms for protecting plants against mobile or invading DNA — for example, transposable elements or the T-DNA of Agrobacterium — or RNA viruses. Plants are not alone in their capacity for transgene silencing; both forms of silencing occur in flies and fungi, where it is known as RIP or quelling, while nematodes exhibit post-transcriptional silencing, generally referred to as RNA interference (RNAi). A clearer picture of the mechanisms and relationships of the different types of transgene silencing is beginning to emerge from a number of recent studies [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7] and [8]. Some of these studies [2], [3], [4] and [5] have enhanced our understanding of the steps within the post-transcriptional silencing pathway, and others [6], [7] and [8] have demonstrated that the two forms of silencing may be mechanistically linked.

Vectors and methods for hairpin RNA and artificial microRNA-mediated gene silencing in plants

In plant cells, DICER-LIKE4 processes perfectly double-stranded RNA (dsRNA) into short interfering (si) RNAs, and DICER-LIKE1 generates micro (mi) RNAs from primary miRNA transcripts (pri-miRNA) that form fold-back structures of imperfectly dsRNA. Both si and miRNAs direct the endogenous endonuclease, ARGONAUTE1 to cleave complementary target single-stranded RNAs and either small RNA (sRNA)-directed pathway can be harnessed to silence genes in plants. A routine way of inducing and directing RNA silencing by siRNAs is to express self-complementary single-stranded hairpin RNA (hpRNA), in which the duplexed region has the same sequence as part of the target gene's mRNA. Artificial miRNA (amiRNA)-mediated silencing uses an endogenous pri-miRNA, in which the original miRNA/miRNA* sequence has been replaced with a sequence complementary to the new target gene. In this chapter, we describe the plasmid vector systems routinely used by our research group for the generation of either hpRNA-derived siRNAs or amiRNAs.

Posttranscriptional gene silencing is not compromised in the Arabidopsis CARPEL FACTORY (DICER-LIKE1) mutant, a homolog of dicer-1 from Drosophila

Posttranscriptional silencing (PTGS) in plants, nematodes, Drosophila, and perhaps all eukaryotes operates by sequence-specific degradation or translational inhibition of the target mRNA. These processes are mediated by duplexed RNA. In Drosophila and nematodes, double-stranded (ds)RNA or self-complementary RNA is processed into fragments of approximately 21 nt by Dicer-1 [1, 2]. These small interfering RNAs (siRNAs) serve as guides to target degradation of homologous single-stranded (ss)RNA [1, 3]. In some cases, the approximately 21 nt guide fragments derived from endogenous, imperfectly self-complementary RNAs cause translational inhibition of their target mRNAs, with which they have substantial, but not perfect sequence complementarity [4-6]. These small temporal RNAs (stRNAs) belong to a class of noncoding microRNAs (miRNAs), 20-24 nt in length, that are found in flies, plants, nematodes, and mammals [4, 6-12]. In nematodes, the Dicer-1 enzyme catalyzes the production of both siRNA and stRNA [2, 13-15]. Mutation of the Arabidopsis Dicer-1 homolog, CARPEL FACTORY (CAF), blocks miRNA production [1, 4, 16-18]. Here, we report that the same caf mutant does not block either PTGS or siRNA production induced by self-complementary hairpin RNA. This suggests either that this mutation only impairs miRNA formation or, more interestingly, that plants have two distinct dicer-like enzymes, one for miRNA and another for siRNAi production.

Application of gene silencing in plants

Recent studies of gene silencing in plants have revealed two RNA-mediated epigenetic processes, RNA-directed RNA degradation and RNA-directed DNA methylation. These natural processes have provided new avenues for developing high-efficiency, high-throughput technology for gene suppression in plants.

Role of short RNAs in gene silencing

Recent research has revealed the existence of an elegant defence mechanism in plants and lower eukaryotes. The mechanism, known in plants as post-transcriptional gene silencing, works through sequence-specific degradation of RNA. It appears to be directed by double-stranded RNA, associated with the production of short 21-25 nt RNAs, and spread through the plant by a diffusible signal. The short RNAs are implicated as the guides for both a nuclease complex that degrades the mRNA and a methyltransferase complex that methylates the DNA of silenced genes. It has also been suggested that these short RNAs might be the mobile silencing signal, a suggestion that has been challenged recently.

Marker gene elimination from transgenic barley, using co-transformation with adjacent 'twin T-DNAs' on a standard Agrobacterium transformation vector

We have tested a methodology for the elimination of the selectable marker gene after Agrobacterium-mediated transformation of barley. This involves segregation of the selectable marker gene away from the gene of interest following co-transformation using a plasmid carrying two T-DNAs, which were located adjacent to each other with no intervening region. A standard binary transformation vector was modified by insertion of a small section composed of an additional left and right T-DNA border, so that the selectable marker gene and the site for insertion of the gene of interest (GOI) were each flanked by a left and right border. Using this vector three different GOIs were transformed into barley. Analysis of transgene inheritance was facilitated by a novel and rapid assay utilizing PCR amplification from macerated leaf tissue. Co-insertion was observed in two thirds of transformants, and among these approximately one quarter had transgene inserts which segregated in the next generation to yield selectable marker-free transgenic plants. Insertion of non-T-DNA plasmid sequences was observed in only one of fourteen SMF lines tested. This technique thus provides a workable system for generating transgenic barley free from selectable marker genes, thereby obviating public concerns regarding proliferation of these genes.

A single copy of a virus-derived transgene encoding hairpin RNA gives immunity to barley yellow dwarf virus

Barley yellow dwarf virus-PAV (BYDV-PAV) is the most serious and widespread virus of cereals worldwide. Natural resistance genes against this luteovirus give inadequate control, and previous attempts to introduce synthetic resistance into cereals have produced variable results. In an attempt to generate barley with protection against BYDV-PAV, plants were transformed with a transgene designed to produce hairpin (hp)RNA containing BYDV-PAV sequences. From 25 independent barley lines transformed with the BYDV-PAV hpRNA construct, nine lines showed extreme resistance to the virus and the majority of these contained a single transgene. In the progeny of two independent transgenic lines, inheritance of a single transgene consistently correlated with protection against BYDV-PAV. This protection was rated as immunity because the virus could not be detected in the challenged plants by ELISA nor recovered by aphid feeding experiments. In the field, BYDV-PAV is sometimes associated with the related luteovirus Cereal yellow dwarf virus-RPV (CYDV-RPV). When the transgenic plants were challenged with BYDV-PAV and CYDV-RPV together, the plants were susceptible to CYDV-RPV but immune to BYDV-PAV. This shows that the immunity is virus-specific and not broken down by the presence of CYDV. It suggests that CYDV-RPV does not encode a silencing-suppressor gene or that its product does not protect BYDV-PAV against the plant's RNAi-like defence mechanism. Either way, our results indicate that the BYDV-PAV immunity will be robust in the field and is potentially useful in minimizing losses in cereal production worldwide.

Virus resistance and gene silencing : killing the messenger

On occasion, virus-derived transgenes in plants can be poorly expressed and yet provide excellent virus resistance, and transgene constructs designed to supplement the expression of endogenous genes can have the effect of co-suppressing themselves and the endogenous genes. These two phenomena appear to result from the same post-transcriptional silencing mechanism, which operates by targeted-RNA degradation. Recent research into RNA-mediated virus resistance and co-suppression has provided insights into the interactions between plant viruses and their hosts, and spawned several models to explain the phenomenon.

Comparison of the coat protein, movement protein and RNA polymerase gene sequences of Australian, Chinese, and American isolates of barley yellow dwarf virus transmitted by Rhopalosiphum padi

Barley yellow dwarf luteovirus-GPV (BYDV-GPV) is a common problem in Chinese wheat crops but is unrecorded elsewhere. A defining characteristic of GPV is its capacity to be transmitted efficiently by both Schizaphis graminum and Rhopaloshiphum padi. This dual aphid species transmission contrasts with those of BYDV-RPV and BYDV-SGV, globally distributed viruses, which are efficiently transmitted only by Rhopaloshiphum padi and Schizaphis graminum respectively. The viral RNA sequences encoding the coat protein (22K) gene, the movement protein (17K) gene, the region surrounding the conserved GDD motif of the polymerase gene and the intergenic sequences between these genes were determined for GPV and an Australian isolate of BYDV-RPV (RPVa). In all three genes, the sequences of GPV and RPVa were more similar to those of an American isolate of BYDV-RPV (RPVu) than to any other luteovirus for which there is data available. RPVa and RPVu were very similar, especially their coat proteins which had 97% identity at the amino acid level. The coat protein of GPV had 76% and 78% amino acid identity with RPVa and RPVu respectively. The data suggest that RPVu and RPVa are correctly named as strains of the same serotype and that GPV is sufficiently different from either RPV strain to be considered a distinct BYDV type. The coat protein and movement protein genes of GPV are very dissimilar to SGV. The polymerase sequences of RPVu, RPVa and GPV show close affinities with those of the sobemo-like luteoviruses and little similarity with those of the carmo-like luteoviruses. The sequences of the coat proteins, movement proteins and the polymerase segments of BYDV serotypes, other than RPV and GPV, form a cluster that is separate from their counterpart sequences from dicot-infecting luteoviruses. The RPV and GPV isolates consistently fall within a dicot-infecting cluster. This suggests that RPV and GPV evolved from within this group of viruses. Since these other viruses all infect dicots it seems likely that their common ancestor infected a dicot and that RPV and GPV evolved from a virus that switched hosts from a dicot to a monocot.