Next Article in Journal
Noble Gas—Silicon Cations: Theoretical Insights into the Nature of the Bond
Previous Article in Journal
Characteristics of Gaseous/Liquid Hydrocarbon Adsorption Based on Numerical Simulation and Experimental Testing
Previous Article in Special Issue
Synthesis of Polycyclic Ether-Benzopyrans and In Vitro Inhibitory Activity against Leishmania tarentolae
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Molecules
Volume 27
Issue 14
10.3390/molecules27144591
molecules-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Identifying Terpenoid Biosynthesis Genes in Euphorbia maculata via Full-Length cDNA Sequencing

by
Mi Jin Jeon
1,†,
Neha Samir Roy
2,†,
Beom-Soon Choi
3,
Ji Yeon Oh
1,
Yong-In Kim
4,
Hye Yoon Park
5,
Taeyoung Um
2,
Nam-Soo Kim
3,*,
Soonok Kim
1,* and
Ik-Young Choi
2,3,6,*
1
Microorganism Resources Division, National Institute of Biological Resources, Incheon 22689, Korea
2
Agriculture and Life Sciences Research Institute, Kangwon National University, Chuncheon 24341, Korea
3
BIT Institute, NBIT Co., Ltd., Chuncheon 24341, Korea
4
On Biological Resource Research Institute, Chuncheon 24239, Korea
5
Biological Resources Assessment Division, National Institute of Biological Resources, Incheon 22689, Korea
6
Department of Agriculture and Life Industry, Kangwon National University, Chuncheon 24341, Korea
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
†
These authors contributed equally to this work.
Molecules 2022, 27(14), 4591; https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules27144591
Submission received: 9 June 2022 / Revised: 18 July 2022 / Accepted: 18 July 2022 / Published: 19 July 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Organic Synthesis in Natural Products and Bioactive Compounds)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The annual herb Euphorbia maculata L. produces anti-inflammatory and biologically active substances such as triterpenoids, tannins, and polyphenols, and it is used in traditional Chinese medicine. Of these bioactive compounds, terpenoids, also called isoprenoids, are major secondary metabolites in E. maculata. Full-length cDNA sequencing was carried out to characterize the transcripts of terpenoid biosynthesis reference genes and determine the copy numbers of their isoforms using PacBio SMRT sequencing technology. The Illumina short-read sequencing platform was also employed to identify differentially expressed genes (DEGs) in the secondary metabolite pathways from leaves, roots, and stems. PacBio generated 62 million polymerase reads, resulting in 81,433 high-quality reads. From these high-quality reads, we reconstructed a genome of 20,722 genes, in which 20,246 genes (97.8%) did not have paralogs. About 33% of the identified genes had two or more isoforms. DEG analysis revealed that the expression level differed among gene paralogs in the leaf, stem, and root. Whole sets of paralogs and isoforms were identified in the mevalonic acid (MVA), methylerythritol phosphate (MEP), and terpenoid biosynthesis pathways in the E. maculata L. The nucleotide information will be useful for identifying orthologous genes in other terpenoid-producing medicinal plants.

1. Introduction

Euphorbia (Euphorbiaceae) is a genus of flowering plants with about 2000 species that is subdivided into many subgenera and sections [1,2]. Distributed worldwide from desert to temperate zones, Euphorbia species range from tiny annuals to large and long-lived trees (https://www.finegardening.com/genus/euphorbia; accessed on 1 December 2021). Many Euphorbia species are used in traditional Chinese, Japanese, and Korean medicine [3]. Shi et al. (2008) surveyed biomolecules in Euphorbia and identified 535 molecules among the terpenoids, steroids, phenolic compounds, and flavonoids [2]. Their biological activities include cytotoxicity, effects on cell division, DNA damage, tumor promotion, and antimicrobial activity [3,4]. E. maculata L., commonly called spotted spurge, is an annual herb native to North America but grows worldwide. Although the sap from E. maculata may cause skin irritation and rash in some people, extracts have been used to treat diarrhea, hemolysis, and hematuria [4]. There are numerous reports on the bioactive phytochemicals in E. maculata, such as polyphenols, tannins, flavonol glycosides, and triterpenoids [4,5,6,7].
Also known as isoprenoids, terpenoids are a large class of plant secondary metabolites with more than 50,000 naturally occurring members [8]. Terpenoids are organic compounds derived from a 5-carbon isoprene (C5) called isopentyl diphosphate (IPP). Terpenoids are synthesized by the head-to-tail addition of IPP (C5) units, resulting in hemiterpenoids (C5H8), monoterpenoids (C10H16), diterpenoids (C20H32), and triterpenoids (C30H48) [9]. There are two IPP biosynthesis pathways: the cytosolic mevalonic acid (MVA) pathway, resulting in IPP; and the plastidial methylerythritol phosphate (MEP) pathway, resulting in dimethylallyl diphosphate (DMAPP), an IPP isomer [10]. The cytosolic MVA pathway begins with 2-Acetyl-CoA, which is converted to IPP by stepwise enzyme-mediated reactions [11]; the plastidial MEP pathway starts with the condensation of pyruvate and glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate by 1-deoxy-D-xylulose-5-phosphate (DOXP) synthase. Then, DOXP is converted to DMAPP by stepwise enzymatic reactions [12]. The IPP and DMAPP isomers are interconverted by isopentyl pyrophosphate isomerase (IDI) [13]. While triterpenoids and sesquiterpenoids are synthesized via the MVA pathway, monoterpenoids, diterpenoids, and tetraterpenoids are synthesized via the MEP pathway [14].
Numerous reports document the terpenoids in Euphorbia species. Tsopmo and Kamnaing (2011) isolated 18 terpenoid molecules from whole plant parts of E. sapinii by simple acetone extraction and deciphered their molecular structures [15]. Terpenoids were extracted from E. pedroi, and an isolated tetracyclic triterpenoid was demonstrated to be a multidrug resistance reverser [16]. Many Euphorbia species produce a milky latex that is irritating to humans and animals. The triterpene alcohols derived from the milky latex of E. azorica have potential as chemopreventive and chemotherapeutic agents in cancer treatment [17]. Sun et al. (2018) isolated 17 triterpenoid derivatives including two lanostane-type triterpenoids from E. maculata [4]. The isolated triterpenes exhibited potent anti-inflammatory activities, and the authors proposed these triterpenes as candidate cancer chemopreventive agents. Terpenoids have pharmacological benefits, including antitumor, anti-inflammatory, antibacterial, antioxidation, and immunoregulation activities, and can be used in the prevention of cardiovascular diseases [18].
A transcriptome is the complete set of transcripts at a defined spatial and temporal stage of an organism’s life cycle, and it provides comprehensive information on gene expression and regulation [19,20]. Next-generation sequencing (NGS) technologies, such as Illumina paired-end transcriptome analysis [21,22] and single-molecule real-time sequencing (PacBio SMRT) technology, have been used to isolate numerous key genes in metabolite biosynthesis pathways [23,24]. The PacBio SMRT system is especially useful for plants lacking reference genome sequence data because it reads full-length transcripts [25,26,27]. Plant metabolites are often biosynthesized in specific tissues; thus, tissue-specific transcriptomes can be compared to identify key genes involved in various complex metabolite biosynthesis pathways in plants [28,29].
In this study, we characterized the terpenoid biosynthesis genes in E. maculata. We sequenced the leaf, root, and stem transcriptomes using Illumina short-read sequencing and PacBio SMRT techniques. The former technique allowed us to identify differentially expressed genes (DEGs) in the metabolite biosynthesis pathways, and the latter allowed us to obtain the complete sequences and isoform copy number information of transcripts involved in terpenoid biosynthesis.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Sample Preparation

Tissue samples (leaves, stem, and roots) of Euphorbia maculata were obtained from the experimental garden of Hallym University, Korea. The E. maculata accessions were originally collected in Kangwon Province of Korea. The collected tissues were immediately frozen with liquid nitrogen and stored at −80 °C until use.

2.2. Illumina RNA-Seq Library Construction and Sequencing

Total RNA was purified from leaves, stem, and roots using the RiboPure Kit (Applied Biosynthesis, Foster City, CA, USA). DNase1 (Sigma, St. Louis, MO, USA) was used for residual DNA digestion, and the total RNA was quantified using a NanoDrop 2000 spectrophotometer (Thermo Scientific, Wilmington, DE, USA). Paired-end sequencing was performed with a Nova Seq platform (Illumina, San Diego, CA, USA) at the professional sequencing provider Theragen Bio Co., Ltd. (Seongnam, South Korea). The quality of the constructed libraries was checked by a LabChip GX system (PerkinElmer, Waltham, MA, USA).

2.3. Full-Length cDNA Sequencing

Total RNAs from the three tissues (leaf, root, and stem) were pooled, and RNA quality was checked (Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, CA, USA). The cDNA size selection was performed with a BluePippin system (Sage Science, Beverly, MA, USA) to build two cDNA libraries of ≤4 and ≥4 kb. Iso-Seq library preparation and sequencing were carried out using the PacBio full-length cDNA library and sequencing kit according to the manufacturer’s protocol (Pacific Biosciences Inc., San Diego, CA, USA) at the sequencing service provider Theragen Bio Co., Ltd. (Seongnam, South Korea).

2.4. De Novo Assembly and Iso-Seq Data Analysis Using a Bioinformatics Pipeline

PacBio raw sequencing reads were processed via the standard Iso-Seq protocol in SMRTlink 4.0 software. Polymerase reads shorter than 50 bp were removed, and the subread BAM files were set to error-corrected circular consensus sequences (CCSs) using the following parameters: full passes ≥0 and predicted consensus accuracy >0.75. Full-length (5′- and 3′-adapters and the poly-A tail) and non-full-length reads (CCSs with all 5′- and 3′-reads) were clustered into consensus sequences using the Iterative Clustering for Error Correction (ICE) algorithm (https://www.pacb.com/products-and-services/analytical-software; accessed on 1 April 2022). These reads were further combined with non-full-length transcripts and polished in clusters by Quiver [30].

2.5. Full-Length Unique Transcript Model Reconstruction

Error-corrected, high-quality (HQ) and low-quality (LQ), full-length, polished consensus transcripts were combined to remove redundancy using the CD-HITv4.6 package with the parameters –c 0.99 –G 0 –aL 0.00 –aS 0.99 –AS 30 –M 0 –d 0 –p 1 [31]. The non-redundant transcripts were processed with the Coding GENome reconstruction Tool (Cogent v7.0.0, https://github.com/Magdoll/Cogent; accessed on 1 April 2022). Cogent creates the k-mer profile of non-redundant transcripts, computes pairwise distance, and clusters the transcripts into families based on their k-mer similarity. Each transcript family was further reconstructed into one or several unique transcript models (referred to as UniTransModels) using a De Bruijn graph method.

2.6. Isoform and Paralog Identification

Error-corrected, non-redundant transcripts (transcripts before Cogent reconstruction) were mapped to UniTransModels using Minimap2 v2.6 (Li 2018). Splicing junctions for transcripts mapped to the same UniTransModels were examined, and transcripts with the same splicing junctions were collapsed using Cupcake ToFU v13.0.0 [25]. Collapsed transcripts with different splicing junctions were identified as transcription isoforms of UniTransModels. Paralogs were analyzed by the BLASTclust program with the unigene sequences (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/Web/Newsltr/Spring04/blastlab.html; accessed on 1 April 2022) with a score coverage threshold of 1.75 and a length coverage threshold of 0.9.

2.7. Functional Annotation

Functional annotations were obtained by mapping sequences into several databases. Non-redundant protein sequences (Nr) and non-redundant nucleotide sequences (Nt) were compared against the NCBI database by BLAST v2.10.1 with an E-value cut-off of 1 × 10−5. Gene Ontology (GO) analyses were carried out by BLAST2GO v5.2.5 (bioinformatics software) with an E-value cut-off of 1 × 10−5. Figure 1 shows the genomics and bioinformatics pipeline used in this study.

2.8. Differential Gene Expression Analysis

Illumina reads were aligned using Bowtie 2 v2.4.2 [32]. The read count values were directly obtained and converted to fragments per kilobase of transcript per million mapped reads (FPKM) values using RSEM (v1.1.12) [33]. Then, the DEGs between different tissue samples (leaf vs. stem, leaf vs. root, and stem vs. root) were detected with the standardization trimmed mean of M values (TMM) normalization method using edge R [34]. The significant DEGs were screened at false discovery rates (FDRs) < 0.05 and fold change of 2 as a cut-off.

3. Results

3.1. E. maculata Transcriptome Analysis Using PacBio Iso-Seq

We clustered raw sequencing reads from the full-length cDNA libraries into consensus transcripts using the TOFU pipeline (GitHub version) supported by PacBio (Table 1). We obtained approximately 62 million polymerase reads with an average length of 56,777 bp in the ≤4 kb library and 51,584 bp in the ≥4 kb library. We obtained 467,479 CCSs with an average length of 2471 bp and a CCS read score of 0.989 in the ≤4 kb library and 465,085 CCSs with an average length of 4040 bp and a read score of 0.983 in the ≥4 kb library. Using the standard Iso-Seq protocol for transcript clustering, we obtained 47,860 high-quality (HQ) isoforms and 405 low-quality (LQ) isoforms in the ≤4 kb library and 33,573 HQ and 993 LQ isoforms in the ≥4 kb library (Table 1). Then, we processed 81,433 HQ transcripts with the COding GENome reconstruction Tool (Cogent v7.0.0, https://github.com/Magdoll/Cogent; accessed on 1 April 2022) to develop a fake genome of 20,722 reads (containing 18,481 reconstructed contigs and 2241 unassigned sequences). The fake genome was then used as a reference to map the HQ transcripts, which produced 20,172 isoforms (Figure 1, Table 2). The transcript length showed a normal distribution with the greatest number of transcripts in the 2000–2999-bp range (Figure 2).

3.2. Isoforms and Paralogs

Of the 20,172 unigenes, 13,492 (66.9%) had no isoform (singleton), while the remaining 6680 unigenes had 2–25 isoforms, and 19.6% of the unigenes produced two isoforms (Table 2). Most unigenes (20,246 unigenes, 97.8%) did not have paralogs (Table 3). The remaining 475 unigenes had 2–20 paralogs. Figure 3 shows the isoforms and paralogs of the DOXP synthase gene and the tRNA ligase gene.

3.3. Functional Annotation

Of the 20,172 unigenes, 19,190 (95.1%) and 19,407 (96.2%) matched with the non-redundant nucleotide sequence (Nt) and non-redundant protein sequence (Nr) databases, respectively, in NCBI. Of the unigenes matched to the Nr database, the highest match was with Hevea brasiliensis (6046; 29.9%), followed by Jatropha curcas (4477; 22.1%), Ricinus communis (4048; 20%), and Manihot esculenta (3452; 17.6%).
In the functional classification, we assigned Gene Ontology (GO) terms to each of the UniTransModels via the BLAST2GO program based on the annotation of the Nr database. Overall, 16,652 (82.55%) unigenes were classified into three major categories: ‘biological process’, ‘molecular function’, and ‘cellular component’ (Figure 4). Genes in the biological process category primarily fell into seven major subgroups with over 10,000 transcripts: cellular process (GO: 00099871), metabolic process (GO: 0008152), response to stimulus (GO: 0050896), biological regulation (GO: 0065007), regulation of biological process (GO: 0050789), developmental process (GO: 0032502), and multi-multicellular organism process (GO: 0044706). In the molecular function category, two subgroups, binding (GO: 0005488) and catalytic activity (GO: 0003824), were predominant. Genes fell mainly into two subgroups in the cellular component category: cellular anatomical entity (GO: 0110165) and protein-containing complex (GO: 0032991).

3.4. Gene Expression Analysis across Different Tissues

We analyzed the DEGs in leaf, root, and stem tissues by mapping the Illumina sequencing reads to the Pac-Bio unigene reference sequences (Table 4). The percent mapped paired-end reads to unigene reference sequences was 70.9, 60, and 64.8 in the leaf, root, and stem, respectively. The number of expressed genes was 17,735, 17,260, and 18,008 in the leaf, root, and stem, respectively. Of the 20,172 unigenes, 16,477 (81.7%) were expressed constitutively among the three organs. There were 295 organ-specific genes in the root, 300 in the leaf, and 395 in the stem (Figure 5). The number of DEGs with more than a two-fold difference in expression was distinct among the three organs. We identified more upregulated genes in the root than in the shoot or stem (Table 4). Figure 6 shows the GO analysis of the organ-specific genes. In the biological process category, the proportion of genes involved in metabolic processes was higher in the aboveground organs (leaf and stem) than in the root. However, the distribution of genes in the molecular function and cellular process categories was similar among the three organs.

3.5. Terpenoid Biosynthesis Pathway Genes

We identified all genes in the MVA, MEP, and terpenoid biosynthesis pathways (Table 5; Figure 7). The nucleotide sequences of paralogous genes and isoforms in these pathways are listed in Supplementary Table S1. In the MVA pathway, six genes encode the enzymes involved in IPP biosynthesis, with one (AAC thiolase and MVA kinase) to five (HMG-CoA reductase) paralogs per gene and one to three isoforms of each paralog. The first reaction in the MEP pathway is the condensation of pyruvate with glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate to form DOXP by DOXP synthase. The DOXP synthase gene had two paralogs and one and three isoforms of each paralog. There are five genes involved in the conversion of DOXP to 1-hydroxyl-2-methyl-2(E)-butenyl-4-diphosphate (HMBPP), which had one (CDP-ME synthase) to five (HMG-CoA reductase) paralogs and one to three isoforms of each paralog. HMBPP is reduced to dimethylallyl diphosphate or IPP by IPP/DMAPP synthase, which has two paralogous genes with only one isoform each. IPP and DMAPP are isomers that are interconverted by IDI. IDI has two paralogous genes with one and three isoforms. IPP undergoes head-to-tail dimerization to form geranyl diphosphate (GPP) by GPP synthase, which has two paralogous genes with a single isoform each. GPP is converted to monoterpenes by monoterpene synthase, which has two paralogous genes with a single isoform each. GPP is also converted to farnesyl diphosphate (FPP) by farnesyl synthase, which is encoded by a single-copy gene with two isoforms. FPP is processed into sesquiterpenoids or squalene by sesquiterpene synthase or squalene synthase, respectively. Squalene is further processed to triterpenoid by triterpene synthase, which is encoded by three paralogous genes with a single isoform each. Geranylgeranyl diphosphate (GGPP) is converted into diterpenes by diterpene synthase, which is annotated as ent-kaurene synthase. Ent-kaurene synthase is encoded by a single-copy gene with one isoform.
In a single gene, different paralogs had different numbers of isoforms as exemplified by the DOXP gene in Figure 3. DOXP.para1 had three isoforms with different termination sites, and DOXP.para3 had two isoforms with different starting and termination sites, as well as different exons. The expression of the paralogs differed among the tissues (Figure 7). For instance, of the five paralogs of the gene encoding HMG-CoA reductase in IPP biosynthesis, PB.10074 had the highest expression in the leaf and the lowest expression in the root, but PB.10076 had the opposite expression pattern. Supplementary Table S1 shows the sequence information of all the genes involved in the terpenoid synthesis in E. maculata.

4. Discussion

NGS technologies have revolutionized many areas of genetics. Transcriptomics captures a snapshot of the total transcripts in a cell at a specific time and is used to quantify gene expression profiles during development [19,35]. High-throughput short RNA-Seq analysis was used to identify the genes involved in the biosynthesis of phytochemicals in medicinal plants [25,27,36]. Here, we used transcriptome profiling to analyze the genes involved in terpenoid biosynthesis in the medicinal plant E. maculata L., which is used in folk medicine in oriental countries [4]. Terpenoids are major secondary metabolites in E. maculata that have pharmacological benefits including anti-inflammation, antioxidant, antitumor, hepatoprotection, and anti-HIV protease activity [4,5,7,37].
The E. maculata genome has not been sequenced; therefore, we obtained transcriptome sequences from PacBio SMRT full-length cDNA sequencing. We obtained 20,172 full-length unigenes, which is similar to that obtained in Berberis koreana (23,246) by PacBio SMRT sequencing [27]. Although full-length unigenes may not accurately represent the number of genes in a species, the number of genes in E. maculata may be low compared to other plant species. Gene numbers in plants range from 20,000 to 124,000. The small genome of Arabidopsis thaliana encodes 26,000 genes [38]. We previously reported an Illumina NovaSeq-derived transcriptome of Euphorbia jolkini having 123,215 assembled transcripts [27]. In our functional annotation of E. maculata genes, 19,190 (92.6%) and 19,407 (93.65%) matched with the Nt and Nr databases in NCBI, respectively, indicating that the function of most of the transcripts is known and only about 7% of the transcripts have not been annotated. The top three species BLAST-matching with E. maculata transcripts were the Pará rubber tree (Hevea brasiliensis), castor bean (Ricinus communis), and cassava (Manihot esculenta), all in Euphorbiaceae. These plants produce a milky latex containing terpenes [18,39,40]. The high match to these species may be because they have well-characterized transcriptome data due to their economic importance, as reported in the Pará rubber tree [41,42], castor bean [43], and cassava [44,45]. GO allows the comparison and functional classification of genes and their products across species (http://www.geneontology.org/; accessed on 1 April 2022) and covers three domains: cellular components, molecular functions, and biological processes. In our E. maculata transcriptomes, the distribution of genes in the different functional categories was similar to that of other medicinal plants [26,27,46].
PacBio SMRT sequencing is a third-generation sequencing system that allows the identification of isoforms [20,47]. Paralogs are homologous genes in a species that arise from the duplication of a single ancestral gene [48]. We identified isoforms and paralogs in our PacBio SMRT sequencing data. In humans, approximately 70% of protein-coding genes have at least one paralog [49]. Arabidopsis has at least 21,843 paralogs, which account for approximately 84% of its protein-coding genes [50]. However, 97.8% of the E. maculata unigenes were single copy, which is unexpectedly high because most eukaryotes underwent several whole-genome duplication events that resulted in the duplication of ancestral genes. Thus, it will be interesting to determine the number of paralogs in other Euphorbia species to verify our findings. Currently, only one Euphorbia transcriptome has been reported, but it was generated by Illumina NovaSeq, which does not permit the analysis of paralogs of full-length transcripts [26]. Transcript isoforms are derived from alternative splicing of the introns and the differential initiation or termination of translation from primary transcripts, which allows a single gene to code for multiple forms of a protein [51]. Proteome plasticity from alternative splicing plays a major role in adaptation to environmental stresses [52]. In plants, alternative splicing occurs in about 24% of transcripts in wheat (Triticum aestivum) to 60% in Arabidopsis in intron-containing genes [44]. In the E. maculata transcriptome, about 35.8% of the unigenes had isoforms; two examples are shown in Figure 3. Different paralogs had different isoform patterns. Furthermore, the expression patterns of paralogs differed among root, stem, and leaf tissues. Thus, paralogs and their isoforms might help plants adapt to stresses, as demonstrated in cassava under cold stress [44].
Terpenoids are the major bioactive compounds in E. maculata. We isolated the genes, as well as their isoforms and paralogs, involved in the MVA, MEP, and terpenoid biosynthesis pathways in E. maculata. The MVA pathway begins with Acetoacetyl-CoA synthase (AAC thiolase), which catalyzes the condensation of two 2-Acetyl-CoA (AAC) molecules. AAC is subsequently transformed into five intermediate molecules to form IPP, which involves five enzymes: HMG-CoA synthase, HMG-CoA reductase, MVA kinase, MVAP kinase, and MVAPP decarboxylase (Figure 7) [11]. In E. maculata, the genes encoding these enzymes were present as single-copy up to five-copy genes, with one to three isoforms per gene (Table 4). HMG-CoA reductase is a key regulatory enzyme in the MVA pathway in plants [53] and catalyzes the conversion of HMG-CoA to MVA, which is a rate-limiting step in the MVA pathway [10,13]. The HMG-CoA reductase gene is highly conserved among organisms, and we identified 1929 HMG-CoA reductase mRNAs among all biological kingdoms from viruses to bacteria to eukaryotes in the NCBI database (data not shown). The gene encoding HMG-CoA reductase had five copies in E. maculata, and each paralog was expressed differently in stem, leaf, and root tissue. Developmental and organ-specific expression of the HMG-CoA reductase gene was also reported in plants [53]. The HMG-CoA reductase gene was expressed higher in stems than in roots and leaves in lavender (Lavandula pubescens), which also produces terpenoids [54]. In E. maculata, one of the HMG-CoA reductase-paralogous genes was highly expressed in stems. The various paralogs expressed differently among the three organs, which may be highly coordinated for plant development.
The MEP pathway, also known as the non-mevalonate (non-MVA) pathway [13], occurs in plastids; thus, animals do not have this pathway, which has spurred interest as a potential strategy to develop anti-bacterial or herbicide products [55,56]. We identified all enzyme-encoding genes of the MEP pathway in E. maculata. Except for the gene encoding CDP-ME kinase, all other enzyme-encoding genes had two to four copies and several isoforms. IPP derived from the MVA pathway and DMAPP derived from the MEP pathway are structurally unrelated isomers that are interconverted by IDI. Because IPP is derived directly from the MVA pathway, IDI is not essential for plant survival; thus, IDI may play a role in modulating the IPP/DMAPP ratio in the cell [13].
IPP is a C5 molecule that undergoes enzyme-mediated sequential head-to-tail condensation to become GPP (C10), FPP (C15), and GGPP (C20) [12]. There were two, one, and two copies of GPP synthase, FPP synthase, and GGPP synthase in E. maculata, respectively. GPP is converted to monoterpenes by monoterpene synthase, which was encoded by two paralogous genes, and both copies had very high expression in the three organs in our analysis. Monoterpenoids have not been reported in E. maculata, but several monoterpenoid compounds were reported in other Euphorbia species [57,58]. FPP is converted to sesquiterpenes (C15) by sesquiterpene synthase or squalene (C30) by squalene synthase. We found one copy of the sesquiterpene synthase gene in E. maculata. A sesquiterpene synthase gene was isolated from Euphorbia fischeriana, which produced several sesquiterpenoids, including cedrol and eupho-acorenols [59,60]. Oxygenated sesquiterpenes and sesquiterpene hydrocarbons were identified in different Euphorbia species, and their bioactivities were also reported [3]. Squalene (C30) is a precursor of steroids [61]. Squalene is biosynthesized by combining two molecules of FPP by squalene synthase. A squalene synthase gene was isolated from Euphorbia pekinensis [62] and Euphorbia tirucalli [63]. We found two copies of squalene synthase in E. maculata, and both copies were actively expressed in the three organs. Squalene is converted to triterpenoids (C30) by triterpenoid synthase, also called oxidosqualene cyclase [64]. A triterpene synthase gene was isolated from the bark of Euphorbia lathyris, in which triterpenoids are abundant [63]. The terpene synthase gene was highly expressed in the latex of E. lathyris. We identified three copies of the triterpene synthase gene in E. maculata, and their expression was high in leaves and stems compared to roots. Sun et al. (2018) reported two new triterpenes from dried whole E. maculata plants, which had anti-inflammatory properties [4]. Triterpenes have been isolated from diverse Euphorbia species [63,64,65]. Diterpenoids (C20) are derived from GGPP by diterpene synthase. Diterpenoids are abundant in Euphorbia species [60]. We found one copy of the diterpene synthase gene in E. maculata. Plants produce thousands of diterpenoids, and diterpene synthases have numerous functions in diverse plants [66].

5. Conclusions

E. maculata L. is a medicinal herb that produces bioactive compounds including terpenoids. We conducted transcriptome sequencing via PacBio SMRT and Illumina RNA-Seq to identify the genes involved in terpenoid biosynthesis in E. maculata. Because the E. maculata genome sequence is not available, we used de novo assembly and obtained 20,722 unique full-length transcripts. PacBio SMRT sequencing allowed us to identify paralogous genes and isoforms. GO and DEG analyses revealed that paralogs of each gene expressed differently in stem, leaf, and root tissues. Using this approach, we identified the genes involved in the terpenoid biosynthesis pathway in E. maculata. Our sequence information will be useful for isolating orthologs in other terpenoid-producing medicinal plants.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/molecules27144591/s1, Table S1: The DNA sequence information of all the genes involved in the terpenoid synthesis in E. maculata.

Author Contributions

I.-Y.C. and S.K. conceived and designed the project and edited the manuscript. M.J.J., N.S.R., N.-S.K. and B.-S.C. contributed to the data analysis and drafted the manuscript. J.Y.O., Y.-I.K., H.Y.P. and T.U. prepared the sample materials and analyzed the data. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work was supported by the National Institute of Biological Resources (Grant Numbers: NIBR202021101, NIBR202222101).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The raw data of the current research are linked in the http://nbitglobal.com/emaculata (accessed on 12 April 2022).

Conflicts of Interest

All authors have read the manuscript and have no conflict of interest.

Sample Availability

Samples of the compounds are available from the authors.

References

  1. The Plant List. Available online: http://www.theplantlist.org/1.1/browse/A/Compositae/Inula/ (accessed on 12 April 2022).
  2. Shi, Q.; Su, X.; Kiyota, H. Chemical and pharmacological research of the plants in genus Euphorbia. Chem. Rev. 2008, 108, 4295–4327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Salehi, B.; Iriti, M.; Vitalini, S.; Antolak, H.; Pawlikowska, E.; Kregel, D.; Sharifi-Rad, J.; Pyeleye, S.; Ademiluyi, A.; Czpek, K. Euphorbia-derived natural products with potential for use in health maintenance. BioMol. 2019, 9, 337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  4. Sun, Y.; Gao, L.; Tang, M.; Feng, B.; Pei, Y.; Yasukawa, K. Triterpenoids from Euphorbia maculata and their anti-inflammatory effects. Molecules 2018, 23, 2112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  5. Agata, I.; Hatano, T.; Nakaya, Y.; Sugaya, T.; Nishibe, S.; Yoshida, T. Tannins and related polyphenols of Euphorbiaceous plants. 8. Emaculin A and Eusupinin A, and accompanying polyphenols from Euphorbia maculata L. and E. supine Rafin. Chem. Pharm. Bull. 1991, 39, 881–883. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  6. Akamura, Y.; Kawada, K.; Hatano, T.; Agata, I.; Sugaya, T.; Nishibe, S.; Okuda, T.; Yoshida, T. Four new hydrolysable tannins and an acylated flavonol glycoside from Euphorbia maculata. Can. J. Chem. 1997, 75, 727–733. [Google Scholar]
  7. Matsunaga, S.; Tanaka, R.; Akagi, M. Triterpinoids from Euphorbia maculata. Phytochemistry 1988, 27, 535–537. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Sun, L.; Li, S.; Wang, F.; Xin, F. Research progresses in the synthetic biology of terpenoids. Biotechnol. Bull. 2017, 33, 64–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Ludwiczuk, A.; Skalika-Woziak, K.; Georgiev, M. Terpenoids Pharmacogsy; Badal, S., Delgoda, R., Eds.; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2017; pp. 233–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Dubey, V.; Bhalla, R.; Luthra, R. An overview of the non-mevalonate pathway for terpenoid biosyntheis in plants. J. Biosci. 2003, 28, 637–646. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Bochar, D.; Friesen, J.; Stauffacher, C.; Rodwell, V. Biosynthesis of mevalonic acid from acetyl—CoA. In Comprehensive Natural Product Chemistry; Cane, D.E., Ed.; Pergamon: Oxford, UK, 1999; pp. 15–44. [Google Scholar]
  12. Eisenreich, W.; Bacher, A.; Arigoni, D.; Rodhdich, F. Biosynthesis of isoprenoids via the non-mevalonate pathway. Cell. Mol. Life Sci. 2004, 61, 1401–1426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Chang, W.; Song, H.; Liu, H.; Liu, P. Current development in isoprenoid precursor biosynthesis and regulation. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 2013, 17, 571–579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  14. Sawai, S.; Saito, K. Triterpenoid biosynthesis and engineering in plants. Front. Plant. Sci. 2011, 2, 25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  15. Tsopmo, A.; Kamnaing, P. Terpenoids constituents of Euphobia sapinii. Phytochem. Letters 2011, 4, 218–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Ferreira, R.; Kincses, A.; Gajdacs, M.; Spengler, G.; Dos Santos, D.; Molnar, J.; Ferreira, M. Terpenoids from Euphorbia pedroi as multidrug-resistance reversers. J. Nat. Prod. 2018, 81, 2032–2040. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Lima, E.; Medeiros, J. Terpenoid compounds in the latex of Euphorbia azorica from Azores. BioMed. J. Sci. Tech. Res. 2020, 26, 19680–19682. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Yang, Y.; Luo, X.; Wei, W.; Fan, Z.; Huang, T.; Pan, X. Analaysis of leaf morphology, secondary metabolites nd proteins related to the resisytance to Tetranychus cinnabarinus in Cassaba (Manihot esculenta Crantz). Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 14197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Wang, Z.; Gerstein, M.; Snyder, M. RNA-Seq: A revolutionary tool for transcriptomics. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2009, 10, 57–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Wang, B.; Kumar, V.; Olson, A.; Ware, D. Reviving the transcriptome studies: An insght of single-molecule transcriptome sequencing. Front. Genet. 2019, 10, 384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  21. Ban, Y.; Roy, N.; Yang, H.; Choi, H.; Kim, J.; Babu, P.; Ha, K.; Ham, J.; Park, K.; Choi, I. Comparative transcriptome analysis reveals higher expression of stress and defense responsive genes in dwarf soybeans obtained from the crossing of G. max and G. soja. Genes Genom. 2019, 41, 1315–1327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Mitu, S.; Cummins, S.; Reddell, P.; Ogbourne, S. Transcriptome analysis of the medicinally significant plant Fontainea picrosperma (Euphorbiaceae) reveals conserved biosynthetic pathways. Fitoterapia 2020, 146, 104680. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Tilgner, H.; Jahanbani, F.; Blauwkamp, T.; Moshrefi, A.; Jaeger, E.; Chen, F.; Harel, I.; Bustamante, C.; Rasmussen, M.; Snyder, M. Comprehensive transcriptome analysis using synthetic long-read sequencing reveals molecular co-association of distant splicing events. Nat. Biotechnol. 2015, 33, 736–742. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Zimin, A.; Puiu, D.; Luo, M.C.; Zhu, T.; Koren, S.; Marcais, G.; Yorke, J.; Dvorak, J.; Salzberg, S. Hybrid assembly of the large and highly repetitive genome of Aegilops tauschii, a progenitor of bread wheat, with the MaSuRCA mega-reads algorithm. Genome Res. 2017, 27, 787–792. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  25. Kim, J.; Roy, N.; Lee, I.; Choi, A.; Choi, B.; Yu, Y.; Park, N.; Park, K.; Kim, S.; Yang, H.; et al. Genome-wide transcriptome profiling of the medicinal plant Zanthoxylum planispinum using a single-molecule direct RNA sequencing approach. Genomics 2019, 111, 973–979. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Roy, N.; Lee, I.; Kim, J.; Ramekar, R.; Park, K.; Park, N.; Yeo, J.; Choi, I.; Kim, S. De novo assembly and characterization of transcriptome in the medicinal plant Euphorbia jolkini. Genes Genom. 2020, 42, 1011–1021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Roy, N.; Choi, I.; Um, T.; Jeon, M.; Kim, B.; Kim, Y.; Yu, J.; Kim, S.; Kim, N. Gene Expression and Isoform Identification of PacBio Full-Length cDNA Sequences for Berberine Biosynthesis in Berberis koreana. Plants 2021, 10, 1314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Qiao, W.; Li, C.; Mosongo, I.; Liang, Q.; Liu, M.; Wang, X. Comparative Transcriptome Analysis Identifies Putative Genes Involved in Steroid Biosynthesis in Euphorbia tirucalli. Genes 2018, 9, 38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  29. Zhao, X.; Wang, M.; Chai, J.; Li, Q.; Zhou, Y.; Li, Y.; Cai, X. De novo assembly and characterization of the transcriptome and development of microsatellite markers in a Chinese endemic Euphorbia kansui. Biotechnol. Biotechnol. Equipm. 2020, 34, 562–574. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Chin, C.; Alexander, H.; Marks, P.; Klammer, A.; Drake, J.; Heiner, C.; Clum, A.; Copeland, A.; Huddleston, J.; Eichler, E.; et al. Nonhybrid, finished microbial genome assemblies from long-read SMRT sequencing data. Nat. Methods 2013, 10, 563–569. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Fu, L.; Niu, B.; Zhu, Z.; Wu, S.; Li, W. CD-HIT: Accelerated for clustering the next-generation sequencing data. Bioinformatics 2012, 28, 3150–3152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Langmead, B.; Salzberg, S. Fast gapped-read alignment with Bowtie 2. Nat. Methods 2012, 9, 357–359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  33. Li, B.; Dewey, C. RSEM: Accurate transcript quantification from RNA-Seq data with or without a reference genome. BMC Bioinform. 2011, 12, 323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  34. Robinson, M.; McCarthy, D.; Smyth, G. edgeR: A Bioconductor package for differential expression analysis of digital gene expression data. Bioinformatics 2010, 26, 139–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  35. McGettigan, P. Transcriptomics in the RNA-seq era. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 2013, 17, 4–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Jo, I.; Lee, J.; Hong, C.; Lee, D.; Bae, W.; Park, S.; Ahn, Y.; Kim, Y.; Kim, J.; Lee, J.; et al. Isoform sequencing provides a more comprehensive view of the Panax ginng transcriptome. Gene 2017, 8, 228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  37. Xia, Q.; Zhang, H.; Sun, X.; Zhao, H.; Wu, L.; Zhu, D.; Yang, G.; Shao, Y.; Zhang, X.; Mao, X.; et al. A comprehensive review of the structure elucidation and biological activity of triterpenoids from Ganoderma spp. Molecules 2014, 19, 17478–17535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. AGI 2020. Analysis of the genome sequence of the flowering plant Arabidopsis thaliana. Nature 2020, 408, 796–815. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  39. Abdelgardir, H.; Van Staden, J. Ethnobotany, ethnopharmacology and toxicity of Jatropha curcas L. (Euphorbiaceae): A review. South African J. Bot. 2013, 88, 204–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  40. Gracz-Bernaciak, J.; Mazur, O.; Nawrot, R. Functional studies of plant latex as a rich source of bioactive compounds: Focus on proeins and alkaloids. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2021, 22, 12427. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Montoro, P.; Wu, S.; Favreau, B.; Herlinawati, E.; Labrune, C.; Martin-Magniette, M.-L.; Pointet, S.; Rio, M.; Leclercq, J.; Ismawanto, S.; et al. Transcriptome analysis in Hevea brasiliensis latex revealed changes in hormone signalling pathways during ethephon stimulation and consequent Tapping Panel Dryness. Sci. Rep. 2018, 8, 8483. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Bakar, M.; Kamerker, U.; Rahman, S.; Sakaff, M.; Othgman, A. Transcriptome dataset from bark and latex tissues of three Havea brasilensis clones. Data Brief 2020, 32, 106188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Liu, X.; Li, R.; Lu, W.; Zhou, Z.; Jiang, X.; Zhao, H.; Yang, B.; Lu, S. Transcriptome analysis identifies key genes involed in the regulation of epidermal lupeol biosynthesis in Ricinus communis. Indus. Crops Product. 2021, 160, 113100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Li, S.; Yu, X.; Cheng, Z.; Zeng, C.; Li, W.; Zhang, L.; Peng, M. Large-scale analysis of the cassava transcriptome freveals the impact of cold stress on alternative splicing. J. Exp. Bot. 2020, 71, 422–434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Kamsen, R.; Kalapanulak, S.; Chiewchanaset, P.; Saithong, T. Transcriptome integrated metabolic modeling of carbon assimilation underlying storage root development in cassava. Sci. Rep. 2021, 11, 8758. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Kwon, E.; Basnet, P.; Roy, N.; Kim, J.; Heo, K.; Park, K.; Um, T.; Kim, N.; Choi, I. Identification of resurrection genes from the transcription of dehydrated and rehydrated Selaginella tamaricina. Plant Signal. Behav. 2021, 16, 1973703. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Sahlin, K.; Tomaszkiewicz, M.; Makova, K.; Meddev, P. Desiphering highly similar multigene family transcripts from Iso-Seq data with IsoCon. Nat. Commun. 2018, 9, 4601. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  48. Koonin, E. Orthologs, paralogs, and evolutionary genomics. Ann. Rev. Genet. 2005, 39, 309–338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  49. Ibn-Salem, J.; Muro, E.; Andrade-Navarro, M. Co-regultion of paralog genes in the three-dimensional chromatin architecture. Nucleic Acids Res. 2017, 45, 81–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  50. Lambrosino, L.; Bostan, H.; di Salle, P.; Sangiovanni, M.; Vigilante, A.; Chiusano, M. pATsi:paralogs and singlton genes from Arabidopsis thaliana. Evol. Bioinform. 2016, 12, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  51. Pan, Q.; Shai, O.; Lee, L.; Frey, B.; Blencowe, B. Deep surveying of alternative splicing compexity in the human transcriptome by high-throughput sequencing. Nat. Genet. 2008, 40, 1413–1415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Filchkin, S.; Priest, H.; Megraw, M.; Mockler, T. Alternative splcing in plants: Direct traffic at the crossroad of adatation and environmental stresses. Genome Res. 2015, 20, 45–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Rodwell, V.; Beach, M.; Bischoff, K.; Bochar, D.; Darnay, B.; Friesen, J.; Gill, J.; Hedl, M.; Jordan-Starck, T.; Kennely, P.; et al. 3-Hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-CoA reductase. Methods Enzymol. 2000, 324, 259–280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Park, C.; Yeo, H.; Park, Y.; Kim, Y.; Park, C.; Kim, J.; Park, S. Integrated analysis of transcriptome and metabolome and evaluation of antioxidant activities in Lavendula pubescence. Antioxidants 2021, 10, 1027. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Hale, I.; O’Neill, P.; Berry, N.; Odom, A.; Sharma, R. The MEP pathway and development of inhibotors as potential antiinfective agents. Med. Chem. Comm. 2012, 3, 418–433. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Obiol-Pardo, C.; Rubio-Martinez, J.; Impeial, S. The methy;erythritol phosphate (MEP) pathway for isopreniod biosynthesis as a target for the deelopemnt of new drugs against tuberculosis. Curr. Med. Chem. 2011, 18, 1325–1338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Demirkiran, O.; Topcu, G.; Hussain, J.; Ahamd, V.; Choudhary, M. Structure elucidation of two new unusal monoterpene glycoside from Euphorbia decipiens, by 1D and 2D NMR experiments. Mag. Reson. Chem. 2011, 49, 673–677. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Wang, A.; Huo, X.; Feng, L.; Sun, C.; Deng, S.; Zhang, H.; Zhang, B.; Ma, X.; Jia, J.; Wang, C. Phenolic glycosides and monterpenoids from roots of Euphobia ebracteolata and their bioectivities. Fitoterapia 2017, 121, 175–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Zhu, J.; Liu, L.; Wu, M.; Xia, G.; Lin, P.; Zi, J. Chracyerization of a sequiterpene synthase catalyzing formation of Cedrol and two diasteroisomers of Trichoacorenol from Euphobia fischeriana. J. Nat. Prod. 2021, 84, 1780–1786. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Fais, A.; Delogi, G.; Floris, S.; Era, B.; Medda, R.; Pintus, F. Euphorbia characias: Phytochemistry and biological activities. Plants 2021, 10, 1468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Bloch, K. Sterol, structure and membrane function. Critical. Rev. Biochem. 2008, 14, 47–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Zheng, Z.; Cao, X.; Li, C.; Yuan, B.; Jiang, J. Molecular cloning and expression of a squalene synthase gene from a medicinal plant, Euphorbia pekinensis Rupr. Acta Physiol. Plant. 2013, 35, 3007–3014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Uchida, H.; Yamashita, H.; Kajikawa, M.; Ohyama, K.; Nakayachi, O.; Sugiyama, R.; Yamato, K.; Muranaka, T.; Fukazawa, H.; Takemura, M.; et al. Cloning and characterization of a squalene synthase gene from a petroleum plant, Euphorbia tirucalli L. Planta 2009, 229, 1243–1252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Thimmappa, R.; Geisler, K.; Louveau, T.; O’Maille, P.; Osbourn, A. Triterpene biosynthesis in plants. Ann. Rev. Plant Biol. 2014, 65, 225–257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Forestier, E.; Romero-Segura, C.; Pateraki, I.; Centeno, E.; Compagnon, V.; Preiss, M.; Berna, A.; Boronat, A.; Bach, T.; Darnet, S.; et al. Distinct triterpene synthases in laticifer of Euphorbia lathyris. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 4840. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  66. Zerbe, P.; Bohlmann, J. Plant diterpene synthases: Exploring modularity and metabolic diversity for bioengineering. Trends Biotechnol. 2015, 33, 419–428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Molecules 27 04591 g001 550
Figure 1. Schematic representation of full-length cDNA analysis in E. maculata.
Figure 1. Schematic representation of full-length cDNA analysis in E. maculata.
Molecules 27 04591 g001
Molecules 27 04591 g002 550
Figure 2. Length distribution of the transcripts after de novo assembly.
Figure 2. Length distribution of the transcripts after de novo assembly.
Molecules 27 04591 g002
Molecules 27 04591 g003 550
Figure 3. Paralogs and isoforms. (A): DOXP had three paralogs: DOXP.para1, DOXP.para2, and DOXP.para3. DOXP.para1 had three isoforms with different translation termination sites. DOXP.para3 had two isoforms due to alternative splicing and differences in translation initiation and termination sites. (B): PB84.1 is a tRNA ligase gene. It had no paralogs, but 10 isoforms, which differed by alternative splicing and different translation initiation and termination sites.
Figure 3. Paralogs and isoforms. (A): DOXP had three paralogs: DOXP.para1, DOXP.para2, and DOXP.para3. DOXP.para1 had three isoforms with different translation termination sites. DOXP.para3 had two isoforms due to alternative splicing and differences in translation initiation and termination sites. (B): PB84.1 is a tRNA ligase gene. It had no paralogs, but 10 isoforms, which differed by alternative splicing and different translation initiation and termination sites.
Molecules 27 04591 g003
Molecules 27 04591 g004 550
Figure 4. GO analysis of the E. maculata transcripts.
Figure 4. GO analysis of the E. maculata transcripts.
Molecules 27 04591 g004
Molecules 27 04591 g005 550
Figure 5. Venn diagram showing the number of unigenes expressed in three different organs.
Figure 5. Venn diagram showing the number of unigenes expressed in three different organs.
Molecules 27 04591 g005
Molecules 27 04591 g006 550
Figure 6. GO analysis of the organ-specific-expressing unigenes.
Figure 6. GO analysis of the organ-specific-expressing unigenes.
Molecules 27 04591 g006
Molecules 27 04591 g007 550
Figure 7. Biochemical pathways of (a) the MVA and MEP pathways and (b) terpenoid biosynthesis. The numbers in parenthesis are the genes in the E. maculata transcriptomes. The numbers in the heat maps are the FPKM-normalized values.
Figure 7. Biochemical pathways of (a) the MVA and MEP pathways and (b) terpenoid biosynthesis. The numbers in parenthesis are the genes in the E. maculata transcriptomes. The numbers in the heat maps are the FPKM-normalized values.
Molecules 27 04591 g007
Table
Table 1. PacBio summary of RNA-seq data from two RNA libraries of E. maculata.
Table 1. PacBio summary of RNA-seq data from two RNA libraries of E. maculata.
Analysis MetricUnder 4 kbOver 4 kb
Polymerase reads
Total Polymerase Read length (bp)31,143,923,14231,036,246,900
Total Polymerase Reads548,527601,659
Average Polymerase Read Length (bp)56,77751,584
Subreads
Total Subreads18,525,8148,597,836
N5025043893
Average Subread Length (bp)16303739
Circular consensus sequence (CCS) reads
Total CCS reads467,479465,085
Total CCS read length (bp)1,155,280,0611,879,756,017
Average CCS read length (bp)24714040
Transcript clustering
Number of polished high-quality isoforms47,86033,573
Number of polished low-quality isoforms405993
Table
Table 2. IsoSeq results and statistics of isoforms in the transcriptomes of E. maculata.
Table 2. IsoSeq results and statistics of isoforms in the transcriptomes of E. maculata.
Iso Seq ResultNumber of ReadsLength (bp)
High-quality consensus Seq.76,631216,086,311
Reconstructed Coding Contig19,90260,494,776
Unassigned Seq334410,608,597
Fake Genome20,72271,103,373
Minimum read length 100
Maximum read length 13,544
Average read length 3059
Number of IsoformsNumber of TranscriptsPercentage (%)
113,49266.9
2394619.6
312696.3
46303.1
53811.9
61850.9
71160.6
8–251530.8
Total20,172100
Table
Table 3. Distribution of number of paralogs in the transcriptome of E. maculata.
Table 3. Distribution of number of paralogs in the transcriptome of E. maculata.
Number of ParalogsNumber of Transcripts
120,246
284
314
418
5–2027
Table
Table 4. Mapping information of the Illumina sequence reads and the results of differentially expressed genes.
Table 4. Mapping information of the Illumina sequence reads and the results of differentially expressed genes.
Mapping InformationLeafRootStem
No. of total reads25,971,88829,095,59426,009,774
No. of mapped Paired-end reads 18,411,50617,458,81616,843,542
% Mapped Paired-end reads 70.96064.8
No. of expressed genes
0298736422714
>017,73517,26018,008
Differential Expression Leaf vs. RootRoot vs. StemLeaf vs. Stem
Up447104987
Down1660177266
Table
Table 5. Enzymes involved in the biosynthesis of terpenoids, isopentyl diphosphate, and dimethylallyl diphosphate.
Table 5. Enzymes involved in the biosynthesis of terpenoids, isopentyl diphosphate, and dimethylallyl diphosphate.
EnzymesAbbreviationPathwayNo of ParalogsRange of Isoform
Acetate-Mevalonate
Acetoacetyl CoA thiolaseAAC thiolase 11
3-Hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl synthaseHMG-CoA Synthase 31
3-Hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl reductaseHMG-CoA Reductase 51–3
Mevalonate kinaseMVA kinase 11
Mevalonate phosphate kinaseMVAP kinase 21–2
Mevalonate diphosphate decarboxylaseMVAPP carboxylase 21–2
Non-Mevalonate
1-deoxy-D-xylulose-5-phophate synthaseDOXP synthase 21–3
1-deoxy-D-xylulose-5-phophate reductoisomeraseDOXP reductoisomerase31–3
Cytidine diphosphate 2-C-methyl-D-erythritol synthaseCDP-ME synthase 21
Cytidine diphosphate 2-C-methyl-D-erythritol kinaseCDP-ME kinase 11
2C-methyl-D-erythritol synthaseMECP synthase 41
1-hydroxy-2-methyl-2-D-butenyl-4-diphosphate synthaseHMBPP synthase 22
IPP/MDAPP synthaseIspH 21
Terpenoid synthesis
Isopentenyl-diphosphate delta-isomeraseIDI 21–2
Geranyl diphosphate synthaseGPP synthase 21
Farnesyl diphosphate synthaseFPP synthase 12
Geranyl geranyl diphosphate synthaseGGPP synthase 21
Monoterpene synthaseMonoterpene synthase21
Sesquiterpene synthaseSesquiterpene synthase11
Diterpene synthaseEnt-Kaurene synthase 11
Squalene synthaseSqualene synthase 21
Triterpene synthaseTriterpene synthase 31
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Jeon, M.J.; Roy, N.S.; Choi, B.-S.; Oh, J.Y.; Kim, Y.-I.; Park, H.Y.; Um, T.; Kim, N.-S.; Kim, S.; Choi, I.-Y. Identifying Terpenoid Biosynthesis Genes in Euphorbia maculata via Full-Length cDNA Sequencing. Molecules 2022, 27, 4591. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules27144591

AMA Style

Jeon MJ, Roy NS, Choi B-S, Oh JY, Kim Y-I, Park HY, Um T, Kim N-S, Kim S, Choi I-Y. Identifying Terpenoid Biosynthesis Genes in Euphorbia maculata via Full-Length cDNA Sequencing. Molecules. 2022; 27(14):4591. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules27144591

Chicago/Turabian Style

Jeon, Mi Jin, Neha Samir Roy, Beom-Soon Choi, Ji Yeon Oh, Yong-In Kim, Hye Yoon Park, Taeyoung Um, Nam-Soo Kim, Soonok Kim, and Ik-Young Choi. 2022. "Identifying Terpenoid Biosynthesis Genes in Euphorbia maculata via Full-Length cDNA Sequencing" Molecules 27, no. 14: 4591. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules27144591

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop