Abstract

BackgroundPlant hybrid proline-rich proteins (HyPRPs) are putative cell wall proteins consisting, usually, of a repetitive proline-rich (PR) N-terminal domain and a conserved eight-cysteine motif (8 CM) C-terminal domain. Understanding the evolutionary dynamics of HyPRPs might provide not only insight into their so far elusive function, but also a model for other large protein families in plants.ResultsWe have performed a phylogenetic analysis of HyPRPs from seven plant species, including representatives of gymnosperms and both monocot and dicot angiosperms. Every species studied possesses a large family of 14–52 HyPRPs. Angiosperm HyPRPs exhibit signs of recent major diversification involving, at least in Arabidopsis and rice, several independent tandem gene multiplications. A distinct subfamily of relatively well-conserved C-type HyPRPs, often with long hydrophobic PR domains, has been identified. In most of gymnosperm (pine) HyPRPs, diversity appears within the C-type group while angiosperms have only a few of well-conserved C-type representatives. Atypical (glycine-rich or extremely short) N-terminal domains apparently evolved independently in multiple lineages of the HyPRP family, possibly via inversion or loss of sequences encoding proline-rich domains. Expression profiles of potato and Arabidopsis HyPRP genes exhibit instances of both overlapping and complementary organ distribution. The diversified non-C-type HyPRP genes from recently amplified chromosomal clusters in Arabidopsis often share their specialized expression profiles. C-type genes have broader expression patterns in both species (potato and Arabidopsis), although orthologous genes exhibit some differences.ConclusionHyPRPs represent a dynamically evolving protein family apparently unique to seed plants. We suggest that ancestral HyPRPs with long proline-rich domains produced the current diversity through ongoing gene duplications accompanied by shortening, modification or loss of the proline-rich domains. Most of the diversity in gymnosperms and angiosperms originates from different branches of the HyPRP family. Rapid sequence diversification is consistent with only limited requirements for structure conservation and, together with high variability of gene expression patterns, limits the interpretation of any functional study focused on a single HyPRP gene or a couple of HYPRP genes in single plant species.

Highlights

  • Plant hybrid proline-rich proteins (HyPRPs) are putative cell wall proteins consisting, usually, of a repetitive proline-rich (PR) N-terminal domain and a conserved eightcysteine motif (8 CM) C-terminal domain

  • Inventory and expression patterns of potato Hybrid proline-rich proteins (HyPRPs) genes We initially found sequences of fourteen potato cDNAs encoding HyPRPs in the public SOL Genomics Network (SGN) database

  • Hybrid proline-rich proteins (HyPRPs) could be viewed as a prototype of a dynamically evolving plant protein family constrained by rather limited structural requirements without specific demands for e.g. enzyme activity

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Plant hybrid proline-rich proteins (HyPRPs) are putative cell wall proteins consisting, usually, of a repetitive proline-rich (PR) N-terminal domain and a conserved eightcysteine motif (8 CM) C-terminal domain. Hybrid proline-rich proteins (HyPRPs) represent a typical example of a protein family characterized by well-defined sequence features but little functional knowledge besides a loosely defined role in the development or function of the plant cell wall. Understanding molecular mechanisms of plant cell wall evolution, ontogeny, and function, is of more than purely theoretical interest. Based on the prolinerich domain and a secretory signal, HyPRPs belong to the group of secreted structural cell wall proline-rich proteins [1]. The repetitive character and high proline content of N-terminal domains resemble other proline-rich proteins, though the repeated amino acid motifs vary [2]. It apparently serves only as a scaffold carrying specific functional elements in various subgroups of the 8 CM family [2]

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call