BMC Genomics (May 2023)

Low impact of polyploidization on the transcriptome of synthetic allohexaploid wheat

  • Meriem Banouh,
  • David Armisen,
  • Annaig Bouguennec,
  • Cécile Huneau,
  • Mamadou Dia Sow,
  • Caroline Pont,
  • Jérôme Salse,
  • Peter Civáň

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12864-023-09324-2
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 24, no. 1
pp. 1 – 18

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Background Bread wheat is a recent allohexaploid (genomic constitution AABBDD) that emerged through a hybridization between tetraploid Triticum turgidum (AABB) and diploid Aegilops tauschii (DD) less than 10,000 years ago. The hexaploidization can be re-created artificially, producing synthetic wheat that has been used to study immediate genomic responses to polyploidization. The scale of the consequences of polyploidization, and their mechanism of establishment, remain uncertain. Results Here we sampled several synthetic wheats from alternative parental genotypes and reciprocal crosses, and examined transcriptomes from two different tissues and successive generations. We did not detect any massive reprogramming in gene expression, with only around 1% of expressed genes showing significant differences compared to their lower-ploidy parents. Most of this differential expression is located on the D subgenome, without consistency in the direction of the expression change. Homoeolog expression bias in synthetic wheat is similar to the pattern observed in the parents. Both differential expression and homoeolog bias are tissue-specific. While up to three families of transposable elements became upregulated in wheat synthetics, their position and distance are not significantly associated with expression changes in proximal genes. Discussion While only a few genes change their expression pattern after polyploidization, they can be involved in agronomically important pathways. Alternative parental combinations can lead to opposite changes on the same subset of D-located genes, which is relevant for harnessing new diversity in wheat breeding. Tissue specificity of the polyploidization-triggered expression changes indicates the remodelling of transcriptomes in synthetic wheat is plastic and likely caused by regulome interactions rather than permanent changes. We discuss the pitfalls of transcriptomic comparisons across ploidy levels that can inflate the de-regulation signal. Conclusions Transcriptomic response to polyploidization in synthetic AABBDD wheat is modest and much lower than some previous estimates. Homoeolog expression bias in wheat allohexaploids is mostly attributed to parental legacy, with polyploidy having a mild balancing effect.

Keywords