Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Jul 28;15(7):e0236376.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0236376. eCollection 2020.

Transfer of endogenous small RNAs between branches of scions and rootstocks in grafted sweet cherry trees

Affiliations
Free PMC article

Transfer of endogenous small RNAs between branches of scions and rootstocks in grafted sweet cherry trees

Dongyan Zhao et al. PLoS One. .
Free PMC article

Abstract

Grafting is a well-established agricultural practice in cherry production for clonal propagation, altered plant vigor and architecture, increased tolerance to biotic and abiotic stresses, precocity, and higher yield. Mobile molecules, such as water, hormones, nutrients, DNAs, RNAs, and proteins play essential roles in rootstock-scion interactions. Small RNAs (sRNAs) are 19 to 30-nucleotides (nt) RNA molecules that are a group of mobile signals in plants. Rootstock-to-scion transfer of transgene-derived small interfering RNAs enabled virus resistance in nontransgenic sweet cherry scion. To determine whether there was long-distance scion-to-rootstock transfer of endogenous sRNAs, we compared sRNAs profiles in bud tissues of an ungrafted 'Gisela 6' rootstock, two sweet cherry 'Emperor Francis' scions as well as their 'Gisela 6' rootstocks. Over two million sRNAs were detected in each sweet cherry scion, where 21-nt sRNA (56.1% and 55.8%) being the most abundant, followed by 24-nt sRNAs (13.1% and 12.5%). Furthermore, we identified over three thousand sRNAs that were potentially transferred from the sweet cherry scions to their corresponding rootstocks. In contrast to the sRNAs in scions, among the transferred sRNAs in rootstocks, the most abundant were 24-nt sRNAs (46.3% and 34.8%) followed by 21-nt sRNAs (14.6% and 19.3%). In other words, 21-nt sRNAs had the least transferred proportion out of the total sRNAs in sources (scions) while 24-nt had the largest proportion. The transferred sRNAs were from 574 cherry transcripts, of which 350 had a match from the Arabidopsis thaliana standard protein set. The finding that "DNA or RNA binding activity" was enriched in the transcripts producing transferred sRNAs indicated that they may affect the biological processes of the rootstocks at different regulatory levels. Overall, the profiles of the transported sRNAs and their annotations revealed in this study facilitate a better understanding of the role of the long-distance transported sRNAs in sweet cherry rootstock-scion interactions as well as in branch-to-branch interactions in a tree.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1
Experimental design and sample collection (A) and small RNA profiles in sweet cherry scions (B).
Fig 2
Fig 2
Summary of sRNAs (A) and gene networks of overrepresented sRNAs in bud tissues of sweet cherry scion 15 (Scion15) ‘Emperor Francis’ grafted on a ‘Gisela 6’ rootstock (RS15). The ontology file of GO_FULL in BiNGO and A. thaliana annotation were used as the references to identify overexpressed GO terms (P < 0.05). Bubble color indicates the P-value. Overrepresented sRNAs in “Biological process” (B) and “Molecular function” (C). No overrepresented GO terms are present in “Cellular component”.
Fig 3
Fig 3. A diagram showing the pipeline of determining scion-to-rootstock transferred sRNAs.
Fig 4
Fig 4. Profiles of putative sRNAs transferred from sweet cherry scions to rootstocks.
RS15_specific and RS19_specific are sRNAs found in the grafted rootstocks, RS15 and RS19, but absent in the ungrafted.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Martínez-Ballesta M. C., Alcaraz-López C., Muries B., Mota-Cadenas C., and Carvajal M. (2010). Physiological aspects of rootstock-scion interactions. Sci. Hortic. (Amsterdam). 127, 112–118. 10.1016/j.scienta.2010.08.002 - DOI
    1. Mudge K., Janick J., Scofield S., and Goldschmidt E. E. (2009). A History of Grafting. Hortic. Rev. (Am. Soc. Hortic. Sci). 35, 437–493. 10.1002/9780470593776.ch9 - DOI
    1. Goldschmidt E. E. (2014). Plant grafting: New mechanisms, evolutionary implications. Front. Plant Sci. 5, 1–9. 10.3389/fpls.2014.00727 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Allevato E., Mauro R.P., Stazi S.R., Marabottini R., Leonardi C., Ierna A., et al. (2019). Arsenic Accumulation in Grafted Melon Plants: Role of Rootstock in Modulating Root-To-Shoot Translocation and Physiological Response. Agronomy-Basel 9(12). ARTN 828 10.3390/agronomy9120828.
    1. Dandekar A. M., Jacobson A., Ibáñez A. M., Gouran H., Dolan D. L., Agüero C. B., et al. (2019). Trans-graft protection against pierce’s disease mediated by transgenic grapevine rootstocks. Front. Plant Sci. 10.3389/fpls.2019.00084 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

Substances

Grants and funding

This research was supported by AgBioResearch of Michigan State University. There was no additional external funding received for this study.