Fruits are novel structures resulting from transformations in the
late ontogeny of the carpels that evolved in the flowering plants (Doyle, 2013). Fruits are generally formed from the ovary wall but accessory
fruits (e.g., apple and strawberry) may contain other parts of the flower
including the receptacle, bracts, sepals, and/or petals (Esau, 1967; Weberling, 1989). For purposes of comparison we will discuss fruits that develop
from the carpel wall only. Fruit development generally begins after
fertilization when the carpel wall (pericarp) transitions from an ovule
containing, often photosynthetic vessel, to a seed containing dispersal unit.
The fruit wall will differentiate into endocarp (1-few layers closest to
developing seeds, often inner to the vascular bundle), mesocarp (multiple
middle layers, including the vascular bundles and outer tissues), and exocarp
(for the most part restricted to the outermost layer, and only occasionally
including hypodermal tissues) (Richard, 1819; Sachs, 1874; Bordzilowski, 1888; Farmer, 1889; Roth, 1977; Pabón-Mora and Litt, 2011). Fruits are classified by their number of carpels, whether
multiple carpels are free or fused, texture (dry or fleshy), how the pericarp
layers differentiate and whether and how the fruits open to disperse the seeds
contained inside (Roth, 1977).
There is a vast amount of fruit morphological diversity and fruit
terminology that corresponds to this diversity (reviewed in Esau, 1967; Weberling, 1989; Figure Figure1).1). For example, fruits made of a single carpel
include follicles or pods (e.g., Medicago truncatula; Figure Figure1D)1D) and sometimes drupes (e.g., Ascarina
rubricaulis; Figure Figure1K).1K). Follicles and pods
both have thick walled exocarp and thin walled parenchyma cells in the
mesocarp. However, follicles also have thin walled parenchyma cells in the
endocarp while many pods have a heavily sclerified endocarp with 2 distinct
layers with microfibrils oriented in different directions (Roth, 1977). When follicles mature the parenchyma and schlerenchyma cell
layers dry at different rates causing the fruit to open at the carpel margins
(adaxial suture) while pods open at the carpel margin and the median bundle of
the carpel due to additional tensions in the endocarp (Roth, 1977; Fourquin et al., 2013). Fruits that are multicarpellate but not fused can include
follicles that are free on a receptacle (e.g., Aquilegia coerulea; Figure Figure1H).1H). Fruits that are
multi-carpellate and fused include berries (e.g., Solanum lycopersicum,
Carica papaya, and Vitis vinifera; Figures 1B,C,E), capsules (e.g., Arabidopsis thaliana,
Eschscholzia californica, Papaver somniferum; Figures 1A,F,G), caryopses (grains of Oryza sativa and Zea
mays; Figures 1I,J), and drupes (e.g., peach). These
multicarpellate fruits differ by the differentiation of the pericarp and their
dehiscence mechanisms. Berries and drupes tend to be indehiscent and the
pericarp of berries is often fleshy and composed mainly of parenchyma tissue
(Richard, 1819; Roth, 1977). The endocarp and mesocarp of drupes is also fleshy, however,
the endocarp is composed of highly sclerified tissue termed the stone
(Richard, 1819; Sachs, 1874). Caryopses are also indehiscent and have a thin wall of pericarp
fused to a single seed (Roth, 1977). Capsules can have few to many cells in the pericarp and the
different layers of the pericarp can be composed of parenchyma tissue in most
layers and sclerenchyma tissue in the mesocarp and/or endocarp. Capsules can
dehisce at various locations including at the carpel margins (septicidal), at
the median bundles (loculicidal) or through small openings (poricidal)
(Roth, 1977). The extreme fruit morphologies found across angiosperms, even
in closely related taxa suggest that fruits are an adaptive trait, thus,
homoplasious seed dispersal forms and transformations from berries to capsules
or drupes and vice versa are common in many plant families (Pabón-Mora and
Litt, 2011).
The molecular basis that underlies fruit
diversity is not well-understood. However, the fruit molecular genetic network
in Arabidopsis thaliana (Arabidopsis), necessary to specify
the different components of the fruit including the sclerified (lignified)
tissues necessary for the controlled opening (dehiscence) of the fruit are
well-characterized (Reviewed in Ferrándiz, 2002; Roeder and Yanofsky, 2006; Seymour et al., 2013). Arabidopsis fruits develop from two fused carpels and are
specialized capsules called siliques, which open along a well-defined
dehiscence zone (Hall et al., 2002: Avino et al., 2012). The siliques are composed of two valves separated by a unique
tissue termed the replum present only in the Brassicaceae. The valves develop
from the carpel wall and are composed of an endocarp, mesocarp and exocarp. The
replum and valves are joined together by the valve margin. The valve margin is
composed of a separation layer closest to the replum and liginified tissue
closer to the valve. The endocarp of the valves becomes lignified late in
development and plays a role, along with the lignified layer and separation
layer of the valve margin, in fruit dehiscence (Ferrándiz, 2002).
Developmental genetic studies in Arabidopsis thaliana have
uncovered the genetic network that patterns the Arabidopsis fruit. FRUITFULL
(FUL) is necessary for proper valve development and represses SHATTERPROOF 1/2
(SHP 1/2) (Gu et al., 1998; Ferrándiz et al., 2000a). SHP1/2 are necessary for valve margin development (Liljegren et
al., 2000). REPLUMLESS (RPL) is necessary for replum development and
represses SHP1/2 (Roeder et al., 2003). The repression of SHP1/2 by FUL and RPL keeps valve margin
identity to a small strip of cells. SHP1/2 activate INDEHISCENT (IND) and
ALCATRAZ (ALC), which are both necessary for the differentiation of the
dehiscence zone between the valves and replum (Girin et al., 2011; Groszmann et al., 2011). IND is important for lignification of cells in the dehiscence
zone while IND and ALC are necessary for proper differentiation of the
separation layer (Rajani and Sundaresan, 2001; Liljegren et al., 2004: Arnaud et al., 2010). SPATULA (SPT) also plays a minor role, redundantly with its
paralog ALC in the specification of the fruit dehiscence zone (Alvarez and
Smyth, 1999; Heisler et al., 2001; Girin et al., 2010, 2011; Groszmann et al., 2011).
FUL, SHP1/2, RPL, IND, SPT, and ALC all belong to large
transcription factor families. FUL and SHP1/2 belong to the MADS-box family (Gu
et al., 1998; Liljegren et al., 2000), IND, SPT, and ALC belong to the bHLH family and RPL belongs to
the homeodomain family (Heisler et al., 2001; Rajani and Sundaresan, 2001; Roeder et al., 2003; Liljegren et al., 2004). Some of these transcription factors are known to be the result
of Brassicaceae specific duplications, others seem to be the result of
duplications coinciding with the origin of the core eudicots (Jiao et
al., 2011). For instance SHP1 and SHP2 are AGAMOUS paralogs
and Brassicaceae-specific duplicates belonging to the C-class gene lineage
(Kramer et al., 2004). FUL is a member of the AP1/FUL gene lineage
unique to angiosperms (Purugganan et al., 1995). FUL belongs to the euFULI clade, that together with euFULII and
euAP1 are core-eudicot specific paralogous clades. Nevertheless,
pre-duplication proteins are similar to euFUL proteins, hence they have been
named FUL-like proteins and are present in all other angiosperms (Litt and
Irish, 2003). Likewise, ALC and SPT and IND are
the result of several duplications in different groups of the bHLH family of
transcription factors, but the exact duplication points have not yet been
identified (Reymond et al., 2012; Kay et al., 2013). Hence, it is unclear whether this gene regulatory network can
be extrapolated to fruits outside of the Brassicaceae. Functional evidence
from Anthirrhinum (Plantaginaceae) (Müller et al., 2001), Solanum(Solanaceae) (Bemer et al., 2012; Fujisawa et al., 2014), and Vaccinium (Ericaceae) (Jaakola et
al., 2010) in the core eudicots, as well as Papaver and Eschscholzia (Papaveraceae,
basal eudicots) (Pabón-Mora et al., 2012, 2013b) suggest that at least FUL orthologs have a
conserved role in regulating proper fruit development even in fruits with
diverse morphologies. euFUL and FUL-like genes
control proper pericarp cell division and elongation, endocarp identity, and
promote proper distribution of bundles and lignified patches after
fertilization. However, functional orthologs of SHP, IND, ALC, SPT,
or RPL have been less studied and it is unclear whether they
are conserved in core and non-core eudicots. The limited functional data gathered
suggests that at least in other core eudicots SHP orthologs
play roles in capsule dehiscence (Fourquin and Ferrandiz, 2012) and berry ripening (Vrebalov et al., 2009). Likewise, SPT orthologs have been identified
as potential key players during pit formation in drupes, likely regulating
proper endocarp margin development (Tani et al., 2011). RPL orthologs have not been characterized in
core eudicots, but an RPL homolog in rice is a domestication
gene involved in the non-shattering phenotype, suggesting that the same genes
are important to shape seed dispersal structures in widely divergent species
(Arnaud et al., 2011; Meyer and Purugganan, 2013). At this point, more expression and functional data are urgently
needed to test whether the network is functionally conserved across
angiosperms, nevertheless, all these transcription factors are candidate
regulators of proper fruit wall growth, endocarp and dehiscence zone identity,
and carpel margin identity and fusion (Kourmpetli and Drea, 2014). In the meantime, another approach to study the putative
conservation of the network is to identify how these specific gene families
have evolved in flowering plants as duplication and diversification of
transcription factors are thought to be important for morphological evolution.
Although, based on gene analyses no functions can be explicitly identified, the
presence and copy number of these genes will provide testable hypothesis for
future studies in different angiosperm groups. Thus, to better understand the
diversity of fruits and the changes in the fruit core genetic regulatory
network we analyzed the evolution of these transcription factor families from
across the angiosperms. We utilized data in publicly available databases and
performed phylogenetic analyses. We found different patterns of duplication
across the different transcription factor families and discuss the results in
the context of the evolution of a developmental network across flowering
plants.
No comments:
Post a Comment