Next Article in Journal
Effects of Nutrient Solution Irrigation Quantity and Downy Mildew Infection on Growth and Physiological Traits of Greenhouse Cucumber
Next Article in Special Issue
Genome-Wide Analysis of Somatic Embryogenesis-Related Transcription Factors in Cultivated Strawberry (Fragaria × ananassa) and Evolutionary Relationships among Rosaceae Species
Previous Article in Journal
Seed Phosphorus Effects on Rice Seedling Vigour in Soils Differing in Phosphorus Status
Previous Article in Special Issue
Interactions of JAZ Repressors with Anthocyanin Biosynthesis-Related Transcription Factors of Fragaria × ananassa
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Communication

Identification of microRNAs and Their Expression in Leaf Tissues of Guava (Psidium guajava L.) under Salinity Stress

by
Ashutosh Sharma
1,*,
Luis M. Ruiz-Manriquez
1,
Francisco I. Serrano-Cano
1,
Paula Roxana Reyes-Pérez
1,
Cynthia Karina Tovar Alfaro
2,
Yulissa Esmeralda Barrón Andrade
2,
Ana Karen Hernández Aros
2,
Aashish Srivastava
3,4 and
Sujay Paul
1,*
1
Tecnologico de Monterrey, School of Engineering and Sciences, Campus Queretaro, Av. Epigmenio Gonzalez, No. 500 Fracc. San Pablo, Querétaro 76130, Mexico
2
Chemical-Biological Sciences Area, Universidad del Noreste, Prol. Av. Hidalgo # 6315 Col. Nuevo Aeropuerto, Tampico 89337, Mexico
3
Section of Bioinformatics, Clinical Laboratory, Haukeland University Hospital, 5021 Bergen, Norway
4
Department of Clinical Science, University of Bergen, 5021 Bergen, Norway
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Agronomy 2020, 10(12), 1920; https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy10121920
Submission received: 10 November 2020 / Revised: 28 November 2020 / Accepted: 1 December 2020 / Published: 7 December 2020
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Functional Genomics Research of Crops)

Abstract

:
Superfruit guava (Psidium guajava L.) is one of the healthiest fruits due to its high antioxidant dietary fiber and vitamin content. However, the growth and development of this plant are severely affected by salinity stress, mostly at the seedling stage. MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are small, noncoding, endogenous, highly conserved RNA molecules that play key regulatory roles in plant development, organ morphogenesis, and stress response signaling. In this study, applying computational approaches and following high stringent filtering criteria, a total of 40 potential microRNAs belonging to 19 families were characterized from guava. The identified miRNA precursors formed stable stem-loop structures and exhibited high sequence conservation among diverse and evolutionarily distant plant species. Differential expression pattern of seven selected guava miRNAs (pgu-miR156f-5p, pgu-miR160c-5p, pgu-miR162-3p, pgu-miR164b-5p, pgu-miR166t, pgu-miR167a-5p, and pgu-miR390b-5p) were recorded under salinity stress and pgu-miR162-3p, pgu-miR164b-5p as well as pgu-miR166t were found to be the most affected ones. Using the psRNATarget tool, a total of 49 potential target transcripts of the characterized guava miRNAs were identified in this study which are mostly involved in metabolic pathways, cellular development, and stress response signaling. A biological network has also been constructed to understand the miRNA mediated gene regulation using the minimum free energy (MFE) values of the miRNA-target interaction. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report of guava miRNAs and their targets.

1. Introduction

MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are highly conserved, 20–24 nucleotides (nt) long non-coding RNA molecules that play critical roles in post-transcriptional gene regulation either by triggering transcriptional repression or via targeting mRNA degradation [1,2]. Plant microRNAs have been implicated in several biological functions, such as plant development [3], signaling [4], organ morphogenesis [5], secondary metabolite production [6], as well in the adaptation to abiotic and biotic stresses [7]. MicroRNA biogenesis in plants begins when miRNA genes are transcribed into long primary transcripts (pri-miRNAs) by the enzyme RNA polymerase II. Subsequently, the resulting pri-miRNAs are cleaved to generate stem-loop RNA precursors (pre-miRNAs) by ribonuclease III-like Dicer (DCL1) enzyme. Right away, DCL1 recognizes and cleaves further the hairpin loop of the pre-miRNAs and produces short double-stranded RNAs (dsRNAs) or duplexes, and finally, one strand of the mature miRNA duplexes associates with the RNA Induced Silencing Complex (RISC) to form a miRNA-ribonucleoprotein complex guided by Argonaute (AGO) protein to interact with the relevant mRNA targets [8,9].
The recent development of next-generation sequencing technology has led to the discovery of numerous miRNAs in several non-model plant species [8]; however, the overall procedure is expensive, time-consuming, and requires a high technical expertise. In the plant kingdom, multiple miRNAs are evolutionarily conserved, and this feature simplifies the process of characterization of novel miRNA orthologues in new plant species by identifying homologs [10,11,12]. Nonetheless, the only sequence-based in silico homology approaches to identify potential miRNAs in new plant species may yield false-positive results, and hence consideration must be given to the secondary structures as well as other parameters of the pre-miRNAs such as length, GC content, Minimum Folding Free Energy (MFE), and Minimum Folding Free Energy Index (MFEI) in order to increase the precision of the computational prediction by discriminating from other coding or non-coding RNAs [6,12,13]. However, experimental confirmation of the predicted miRNAs is strongly recommended [6,14,15].
Guava (Psidium guajava L.) is an important fruit crop belonging to the Myrtaceae family, originated from Mexico and distributed throughout Asia, Africa, Europe, and South America [16,17]. Guava is popularly known as the poor man’s apple due to its high nutritious value and low cost of cultivation. The compositional analysis showed that guava contains a variety of powerful health-promoting substances including flavonoids, phenols, tannins, saponins, triterpenes, lectins, carotenoids, essential oils, fatty acids, fibers, and vitamins [18,19]. However, salinity has been shown to be one of the major problems in guava cultivation, which impairs its growth and productivity [20]. Excess accumulation of salts in mature guava leaves has several detrimental consequences, such as quick leaf chlorosis, necrosis, and decreased photosynthetic activity [21].
Since miRNAs have been considered as crucial players in plants’ response towards salinity and other stress modulation, these molecules have been proposed as major genetic engineering targets to produce abiotic stress tolerant transgenic plants through loss-of-function or gain-of-function approaches [22,23]. Thus, profiling miRNAs in nonmodel plants is essential not only for understanding the regulation of various biological phenomena but also to explore their role in stress response signaling. To date, no scientific information about the guava miRNAs and their targets are available. Hence, using the recently published guava draft genome sequence (GenBank assembly accession GCA_002914565.1) several miRNAs and their corresponding targets have been characterized as well as their expression pattern under salinity stress were studied to gain a better understanding of the physiological role of miRNAs in guava.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Computational Prediction of Potential Guava miRNAs and Their Pre-miRNA Candidates

We performed an in silico analysis to predict and identify potential guava miRNAs using a reference set of plant miRNAs obtained from the miRbase database [24]. The reference set confined a total of 1580 known mature miRNAs from several plant species including Arabidopsis thaliana (428), Malus domestica (322), Glycine max (756), and Eugenia uniflora (74). The workflow is summarized in Figure 1. Briefly, the preceding set of known miRNAs were BLASTn against the guava genome; the sequences with exact matches were selected manually. The potential precursor sequences of approx 400 nt (200 nt upstream and 200 nt downstream to the BLAST hit region) were mined and protein-coding sequences were discarded. Stable secondary structures of the selected precursors were generated using the mFold web server [25] and the stability was evaluated by the previously demonstrated strict filtering criteria [26]: (i) the pre-miRNA must have a stem-loop structure containing the mature miRNA sequence within one arm; (ii) the potential mature miRNA should not be presented in the hairpin structures’ terminal loop, (iii) mature miRNA should have fewer than nine mismatches with the opposite miRNA* sequence [27], and (iv) the potential stem-loop candidate should have minimum negative folding free energy (MFE) or ΔG (−kcal/mol) and higher minimum folding free energy index (MFEI). The formula for calculating MFEI is as follows:
M F E I = ( M F E / l e n g t h   o f   R N A   s e q u e n c e )   × 100 % G C   c o n t e n t

2.2. Phylogenetic and Conservation Analysis of Guava miRNA and Their Pre-miRNAs

To perform the conservation analysis of the predicted guava miRNAs and their precursor candidates, we retrieve the FASTA format of the miRNA precursor sequences of several plant species such as Amborella trichopoda (atr), Arabidopsis lyrata (aly), Arabidopsis thaliana (ath), Asparagus officinalis (aff), Brachypodium distachyon (bdi), Brassica napus (bna), Carica papaya (cpa), Citrus sinensis (csi), Cucumis melo (cme), Fragaria vesca (fve), Glycine max (gma), Linum usitatissimum (lus), Malus domestica (mdm), Manihot esculenta (mes), Medicago truncatula (mtr), Nicotiana tabacum (nta), Oryza sativa (osa), Populus trichocarpa (ptc), Prunus persica (ppe), Ricinus communis (rco), Theobroma cacao (tcc) and Vitis vinífera (vvi) available at miRbase and aligned accordingly. Multiple sequence alignment and phylogenetic tree construction (based on the Tamura-Nei model with 1000 boot-strapped replicates) were carried out using MEGA X software (version 10.0.5). The conservation analysis of the identified guava pre-miRNAs of miR160c, miR390b, miR396b was performed by the WebLogo tool [28] using their orthologs. Moreover, to elucidate the conserved nature of miRNAs across species and their cross-species transferability, a syntenic map was generated using potential guava pre-miRNAs against the well-annotated apple (Malus domestica) genome (GenBank assembly accession GCF_002114115.1), phylogenetically close species of guava [29].

2.3. Target Prediction of Guava miRNAs and Their Functional Annotations

For the prediction of the potential guava miRNA targets “Plant Small RNA Target Analysis Server” (psRNATarget) [30] was employed. The target transcript search was executed against the Malus domestica database due to the non-availability of the guava protein database on the psRNATarget list. The selection parameters were designated as follows: maximum expectation value of 3, translation inhibition ranges of 9 nt to 11 nt, number of top targets of 10, the penalty for G:U pair of 0.5, and number of mismatches allowed in the seed region of 1.5. Protein information of the matched sequences was obtained using UniProt BLAST. Consequently, gene ontology (GO) analysis of the potential guava target transcripts was executed, and the biological processes, cellular components, and molecular functions associated with each GO term were inferred using QuickGO [31]. Moreover, to know the coregulation of the potential targets, a biological network was generated using the MFE values of the miRNA-target interaction and visualized by Cytoscape 3.2 [32]. Finally, KEGG analysis [33] was performed to investigate the metabolic pathways and their networks regulated by the potential guava miRNAs with the Bi-directional Best Hit (BBH) method.

2.4. Plant Materials, Stress Treatment, RNA Extraction, and miRNA Expression Analysis

Guava seeds after surface sterilization (with 70% ethanol, 2.5% Sodium hypochlorite, and water) were germinated in Petri dishes and subsequently transferred into a hydroponic system containing Hoagland nutrient solution (pH 6.5) [34] and allowed to grow under controlled environmental conditions (25 °C, 70% humidity, and artificial illumination 250 μmol m−2 s−1 with a 12 h photoperiod) for four weeks. Consequently, half of the guava seedlings were transferred to a nutrient solution containing 200 mM NaCl for salinity stress, while the rest were placed into a nutrient solution without NaCl as control. Leaves of stressed and control plants were collected at 24, 48, and 72 h. Small RNA (<200 nt) was isolated from leaf tissues using the mirVanaTM miRNA Isolation kit (Thermo Scientific, Wilmington, NC, USA) following the manufacturer’s instructions and pooled separately each for stressed and control samples. The quality and quantity of RNA samples were checked with Nanodrop One (Thermo Scientific, Wilmington, NC, USA), and 1 µg of RNA for individual samples was subsequently polyadenylated (using modified oligo dT primer) and reverse transcribed using mRQ Buffer and enzyme provided with Mir-X miRNA First-Stand Synthesis kit (Takara, Tokyo, Japan). Prior to the qRT-PCR experiment, a No-RT (-RT) control PCR was performed to monitor any genomic DNA contamination. The qRT-PCR experiment was performed by Step One Real-Time PCR System (Applied Biosystems, Carlsbad, CA, USA) and Mir-X miRNA TB Green qRT-PCR kit (Takara, Tokyo, Japan) using the entire predicted miRNA sequence as a forward primer and the adapter-specific mRQ3′ primer provided with the kit as the reverse primer. Each reaction was made in 12.5 µL volume containing 1× SYBR Advantage Premix, 1× ROX dye, 0.2 µM each of forward and reverse primers as indicated above, and 2 µL of the first-strand cDNA. Seven miRNAs (pgu-miR156f-5p, pgu-miR160c-5p, pgu-miR162-3p, pgu-miR164b-5p, pgu-miR166t, pgu-miR167a-5p, and pgu-miR390b-5p), previously reported to have key roles in both biotic and abiotic stress responses [35] were selected for the qRT-PCR experiment, and the qPCR conditions were as follows: initial denaturation at 95 °C for 10 s followed by 45 cycles of denaturation at 95 °C for 5 s and annealing at 63 °C for 20 s, and finally a dissociation curve 95 °C for 30 s, 55 °C for 20 s and 95 °C for 20 s. The relative fold change values were obtained using the comparative Ct method or Ct (2−ΔΔCT). Recently, the biological averaging method, in which individual biological replicates were replaced with pooled biological replicates, has been employed in several real-time PCR, microarray, and RNA-Seq experiments [36,37], and hence in this study, all the qPCR experiments were carried out with two pooled biological replicates and three technical replicates.

3. Results

3.1. Characterization of Guava miRNAs and Their Candidate Precursors

In this study using a high stringent filtering method, a total of 40 potential guava miRNAs belonging to 19 families were identified (Table 1). The majority of the identified guava miRNAs were 21 nt long. The precursors of guava miRNAs showed large variability in their size ranging from 72 to 215 nt with an average of 112 ± 32 nt. Guava miRNA pgu-miR159d exhibited the longest precursor length of 215 nt, while pgu-miR395-3p showed the shortest one of 72 nt. In this study, MFE values of precursors ranged from −33.1 to −95.2 kcal/mol with an average of −49.64 ± 14.39, whereas the MFEI values fluctuated between 0.70 to 1.36 with an average of 0.94 ± 0.14. The predicted secondary structures of guava miRNA precursors with higher MFEI values (top 10) are shown in Figure 2.

3.2. Conservation Analysis of Guava miRNAs and Their Potential Precursors

The recently identified guava miRNAs displayed a high degree of sequence homology (≤1 mismatch) to their respective homologs (orthologs) from several other monocots and dicot plant species (Figure 3). Moreover, high sequence conservation among the pre-miRNA orthologs was also noticed (Figure 4).
The conserved nature of the pre-miRNAs as well as mature miRNAs offers the chance to explore their evolutionary relationships (Figure 5). Phylogenetic analysis of pre-miRNAs pgu-160c-5p suggested its closeness to a group of plant species including apple, papaya, and black cottonwood pre-miRNAs (mdm-miR160c, cpa-miR160c, and ptc-miR160c), while pre-miRNA pgu-miR390b-5p is closer to both muskmelon (cme-miR390b) and flax (lus-miR390b). On the other hand, pgu-miR396-5p is closer to a group of plant species that included apple (mdm-miR396b), sweet orange (csi-miR396b), papaya (cpa-miR396b), cassava (mes-miR396b), black cottonwood (ptc-miR396b), muskmelon (cme-miR396b), and cacao (tcc-miR396b) (Figure 5). Furthermore, the comparative synteny map indicated the widespread distribution of potential guava miRNA orthologs in the apple genome demonstrating their cross-species transferability during the course of evolution (Figure 6).

3.3. Predicted Targets for Guava miRNAs and Their Functional Annotations

In this study using the psRNAtarget tool, a total of 49 potential target transcripts of guava miRNAs were identified. Important targets include squamosa promoter-binding like proteins/SPBs/SPLs, auxin response factors (ARFs), NAC domain protein, nuclear transcription factor Y, WRKY, and myb-like, laccase, thioredoxin, cytochrome f, among others. However, GO analysis of the predicted targets was conducted to obtain a deeper understanding of the miRNA function, which helps to unravel the biological mechanism, molecular function, and cellular component regulatory network of the miRNA gene (Figure 7). GO enrichment analysis highlighted different targets with molecular functions such as binding activity (protein binding, DNA binding, metal ion binding, etc.), catalytic activity, kinase activity, oxidoreductase activity, and structural activity (Figure 7A) are involved in significant biological processes such as transcription regulation, metabolic processes, transport, and oxidation-reduction (Figure 7B) in guava. The cellular components involved were found to be the nucleus, plasma membrane, cytoplasm, Golgi apparatus, ribosome, apoplast, chloroplast, and proteasome (Figure 7C). By conducting KEGG analysis, a deeper insight into the related biosynthetic and metabolic pathways was obtained (Figure 8). The KEGG analysis revealed that the potential guava miRNA targets are involved in a total of 22 different metabolic pathways in plants and animals. “Plant hormone signal transduction” was the most significantly enriched, followed by “plant-pathogen interaction” and “MAPK signaling pathway“ (Figure 8). Moreover, the coregulation of several potential target genes was observed by gene network analysis (Figure 9).

3.4. Expression Analysis of Guava miRNAs under Salinity Stress

To address whether the salinity stress influences the expression of the selected guava miRNAs (pgu-miR156f-5p, pgu-miR160c-5p, pgu-miR162-3p, pgu-miR164b-5p, pgu-miR166t, pgu-miR167a-5p, and pgu-miR390b-5p) in leaves, a qRT-PCR experiment was carried out and the results showed the differential expression of all the 7 miRNA under salinity stress. The expression levels of pgu-miR156f-5p, pgu-miR160c-5p, pgu-miR162-3p, pgu-miR164b-5p, pgu-miR166t, pgu-miR167a-5p were downregulated, while pgu-miR390b-5p was upregulated (Figure 10). Pgu-miR162-3p and pgu-miR164b-5p expressions have been shown to be most influenced by salinity stress, whereas the expressions of others have been less affected (Figure 10).

4. Discussion

The fundamental role of miRNAs in plant development and adaptation to environmental stresses has positioned them as an interesting molecule of study. Although miRNAs have been widely studied in several important crops and model plant species such as Arabidopsis, soybean, wheat, rice, and Tobacco [38,39,40,41,42], none of the systematic studies has been performed on guava so far. The recently identified guava miRNAs, as well as their precursors, displayed sequence conservation with their orthologs from different monocot and dicot plant species. This result indicates that between monocotyledonous and dicotyledonous species, miRNAs are universally conserved and may perform the same physiological role [43,44].
In this study, precursors of guava miRNAs displayed large variability in the size ranging from 72 to 215 nt as well as formed stable stem-loop secondary structures corroborating with the data reported in several other species including maize, cotton, soybean, flax, and passion fruit [12,45,46,47]. Moreover, all the precursors showed high MFEI values (0.70–1.36) with an average of 0.94 which is much higher than that of mRNAs (0.62–0.66), tRNAs (0.64), or rRNAs (0.59) [48] thus ruling out the possibilities of being other noncoding RNAs, furthermore, some experimental studies also confirmed that plant miRNAs were found to be correlated with high valued MFEI precursors [8,49]. Similarly, in our analysis, the prevalence of uracil (70%) at the first position of predicted miRNAs improved the authenticity of the findings agreeing with the reports that proved that miRNA-mediated regulation is highly dependent on the uracil present at the first position of the mature miRNA [26].
Consistent with previous studies, it was also observed that the majority of the predicted targets of guava miRNAs were transcription factors that are mostly involved in plant growth, developmental patterning, or cell differentiation. For example, transcription factors SBP/SPL have a crucial role in plant growth, vegetative phase transition, and root development and those are the main targets of miRNA family 156 [50]; while the miR160 family targets ARFs and plays a vital role in root development and auxin signaling pathways [51]. Likewise, the miR828 family has been found to target MYB-like transcripts which significantly participate in stress response signaling and plant development [52]. Moreover, transcription factors NAM and NAC which were involved in fruit ripening and shoot development are mostly targeted by the miR164 family, and the miR171 family targets the GRAS transcription factors which participate in nodule morphogenesis and floral development [53,54,55]. Therefore, the current study re-established the fact that the majority of miRNAs act on transcription factors controlling plant development and organ formations.
Numerous genomic and proteomic studies have elucidated that plants’ response to saline and other stresses comprises a broad spectrum of processes, such as protein biosynthesis, membrane trafficking, and signal transduction [56,57], and it has been well established that miRNAs and their targets influence directly on plant stress tolerance [58,59]. In this context, in Arabidopsis, maize, and cowpea an upregulation of miR156, miR159, miR160, miR162, miR168, miR169, and downregulation of their corresponding targets such as SBPs/SPLs, TCP family transcription factor, ARFs, RNaseIII CAF protein, AGO1, and CBF during salinity stress has been documented [1,60,61]. In addition, during salinity stress, three members of the miR169 family-miR169g, miR169n, and miR169o, as well as miR393, have been upregulated in rice, which precisely cleaves the NF-YA transcription factor gene transcript [62,63]. Similarly, a microarray experiment on two cotton cultivars (salt resistance SN-011 and salt-sensitive LM-6) revealed that miR156, miR169, miR535, and miR827 were substantially upregulated in LM-6, while miR167, miR397, and miR399 were downregulated [64]. Nevertheless, the current research on the crucial role of miRNAs in salt stress responses is largely based on the expression profiling in plant species with varying salt sensitivities under variable salt levels [65]. For example, recently a report demonstrated the downregulation of miR164 under salinity stress (which is consistent with our results) in safflower significantly increased NAC expression [66]. Moreover, it has been shown that miR164 is a negative regulator of lateral root development (auxin-mediated) by controlling NAC1 levels in Arabidopsis thaliana [67]. Thus, it is possible that the downregulation of miR164 in guava under salinity stress, may contribute to salt stress adaption and with root/shoot formation as previously reported in sweet potato [68,69]. In the same way, miR166 is downregulated in guava in response to salinity stress which agrees with the previous results reported in maize and chickpea [61,70], while an upregulation was evidenced in both sweet potato leaves and roots [69]. Interestingly, miR166 family members are proven to regulate auxiliary meristem initiation and leaf morphology by controlling the expression of the HD-ZIP III protein [70,71,72,73]. It has been demonstrated that the downregulation of miR166 leads to salt tolerance in safflower, suggesting the same response in guava [66]. Similarly, it has been widely reported that miR156 has a significant role during salt stress conditions in many plants [70,74,75]. In this study, one of the potential targets of guava miR156 was the squamosa promoter binding protein-likes (SPLs) which is a key regulator of plant abiotic stress tolerance [69]. Similar expression pattern with safflower and Japanese white birch, downregulation of this miRNA in guava may enhance the inhibition of translation or cleavage SPL mRNAs which participate in controlling trichome patterning on the inflorescence stems and floral organs since SPL transcription factors suppress trichome formation by activating TCL1 and TRY gene expression [66,76,77]. Furthermore, the downregulation of both miR160 and miR167 during salt stress in guava is consistent with results published for maize, B. napus, beet, and tomato but contradict with the outcome shown in green cotton, foxtail, and Chinese tamarisk [61,64,78,79,80,81,82]. Interestingly, these miRNAs have been demonstrated to target ARFs that play significant roles in the lateral and adventitious root formation but at high salt concentrations, a diminution of the root growth rate has been evidenced [17]. It has also been reported that miR162 is involved in miRNA processing by targeting the DCL1 gene [83] and corroborating with our results downregulation of miR162 has been reported in maize, cotton, and radish under salinity stress [61,84,85,86]. Moreover, in many plant species, salt responsive differential expression of miR390 was noticed that might target different gene families [86]. For example, it targets the noncoding TAS3 precursor RNA to trigger the biogenesis by cleaving ARFs transcripts leading to the regulation of lateral root growth [87]. In addition, miR390 targets different protein kinases such as AtBAM3 kinase-like receptor that regulates both floral and shoot meristem formation [88]. In this study, the downregulation of guava miR390 under salinity stress showed consistency with the previous reports in chickpea and rice while contradicted the report from Caragana intermedia under salinity stress [70,89,90]. Nonetheless, all the reports indicated that a systematic study of miRNA response to salt stress in closely related genotypes with conflicting stress sensitivities would provide deeper insights into miRNA-guided gene regulation.
It is widely documented that plants face dynamic environmental challenges during their lives that have a substantial effect on their resilience, enlargement, maturity, and yield [91,92,93]. Since miRNAs are involved in plant responses to various environmental stimuli, recent research has identified miRNAs as powerful targets for improving plant stress tolerance [94,95], and hence, some important plant miRNAs have already been engineered to achieve better abiotic stress tolerance. For example, transgenic creeping bentgrass overexpressing any of the following miRNAs osa-miR319a, osa-miR528, or osa-miR393a exhibited enhanced salt tolerance [96,97,98]. More specifically, miR393 was reported to influence abiotic stress responses through directly repressing the expression of its targets AsTIR1 and AsAFB2 (auxin receptors), which leads to the enhanced tolerance to salinity, heat, and drought stress [98]. On the contrary, a work with transgenic rice and Arabidopsis thaliana that overexpressed osa-miR393 demonstrated that these transgenic lines are more sensitive to salt as compared to wild-type plants [63]. More recently, it has been established that in soybean the overexpression and knockdown of miR172c activity resulted in substantially increased and reduced root sensitivity to salt stress, respectively [99]. Nevertheless, all these case studies confirm miRNAs as crucial players and fine tuners in plant responses to stresses. Therefore, it is important to explore the possible role of miRNAs in nonmodel plant species since we assume that a better understanding of these molecules will provide an excellent platform to comprehend numerous physiological and developmental processes in plants that can help to develop authentic stress-tolerant transgenic lines.

5. Conclusions

The post-transcriptional function of miRNAs has a great influence on the overall gene regulatory network in plants. Due to the availability of advanced software tools and sequence resources in public databases, there has been a growing interest in computer-based miRNA identification in the last few years. Nevertheless, this is the first report of guava microRNAs and their targets. In this study using homology-based analysis and strict filtering criteria, we have identified 40 potential guava microRNAs belonging to 19 families as well as 49 corresponding targets and investigated the influence of salinity stress on selected miRNAs which may contribute to further understanding the miRNAs function and regulatory mechanism in guava. Moreover, recently, artificial microRNA mediated gene silencing technology has been utilized successfully for crop improvement. Hence, we believe this study will not only provide considerable aid in miRNA research on economically important fruit crops but also help to initiate an artificial miRNA-based salinity stress tolerance study on guava.

Author Contributions

Data analysis, writing, editing A.S. (Ashutosh Sharma); Experimental procedures, data collection and analysis L.M.R.-M., F.I.S.-C., P.R.R.-P., C.K.T.A., Y.E.B.A., A.K.H.A.; Bioinformatics, and statistical analysis A.S. (Aashish Srivastava); Conceptualization, experimental design, critical writing, reviewing S.P. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Paul, S.; Kundu, A.; Pal, A. Identification and validation of conserved microRNAs along with their differential expression in roots of Vigna unguiculata grown under salt stress. Plant Cell. Tissue Organ Cult. 2011, 105, 233–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Fang, Z.; Jiang, W.; He, Y.; Ma, D.; Liu, Y.; Wang, S.; Zhang, Y.; Yin, J. Genome-wide identification, structure characterization, and expression profiling of Dof transcription factor gene family in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Agronomy 2020, 10, 294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  3. Cedillo-Jimenez, C.A.; Feregrino-Perez, A.A.; Guevara-González, R.G.; Cruz-Hernández, A. MicroRNA regulation during the tomato fruit development and ripening: A review. Sci. Hortic. 2020, 270, 109435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Yoshikawa, M.; Peragine, A.; Mee, Y.P.; Poethig, R.S. A pathway for the biogenesis of trans-acting siRNAs in Arabidopsis. Genes Dev. 2005, 19, 2164–2175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  5. Kidner, C.A.; Martienssen, R.A. The developmental role of microRNA in plants. Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 2005, 8, 38–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Sharma, A.; Bejerano, P.I.A.; Maldonado, I.C.; Capote, M.d.D.; Madariaga-Navarrete, A.; Paul, S. Genome-wide computational prediction and experimental validation of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa) micrornas. Can. J. Plant Sci. 2019, 99, 666–675. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Paul, S. Identification and characterization of microRNAs and their targets in high-altitude stress-adaptive plant maca (Lepidium meyenii Walp). 3 Biotech 2017, 7, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  8. Paul, S.; Kundu, A.; Pal, A. Identification and expression profiling of Vigna mungo microRNAs from leaf small RNA transcriptome by deep sequencing. J. Integr. Plant Biol. 2014, 56, 15–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Treiber, T.; Treiber, N.; Meister, G. Regulation of microRNA biogenesis and its crosstalk with other cellular pathways. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2019, 20, 5–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Xie, X.; Li, X.; Tian, Y.; Su, M.; Zhang, J.; Han, X.; Cui, Y.; Bian, S. Identification and characterization of microRNAs and their targets from expression sequence tags of Ribes nigrum. Can. J. Plant Sci. 2016, 96, 995–1001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Zakeel, M.C.M.; Safeena, M.I.S.; Komathy, T. In silico identification of microRNAs and their target genes in watermelon (Citrullus lanatus). Sci. Hortic. 2019, 252, 55–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Paul, S.; de la Fuente-Jiménez, J.L.; Manriquez, C.G.; Sharma, A. Identification, characterization and expression analysis of passion fruit (Passiflora edulis) microRNAs. 3 Biotech 2020, 10, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  13. Chowdhury Paul, S.; Sharma, A.; Mehta, R.; Paul, S. In silico Characterization of microRNAs and Their Target Transcripts from Cranberry (Vaccinium macrocarpon). Cytol. Genet. 2020, 54, 82–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Wang, T.; Lu, J.; Xu, Z.; Yang, W.; Wang, J.; Cheng, T.; Zhang, Q. Selection of suitable reference genes for miRNA expression normalization by qRT-PCR during flower development and different genotypes of Prunus mume. Sci. Hortic. 2014, 169, 130–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Rosas Cárdenas, F.D.F.; Suárez, Y.R.; Rangel, R.M.C.; Garcia, V.L.; Aguilera, K.L.G.; Martínez, N.M.; De Folter, S. Effect of constitutive miR164 expression on plant morphology and fruit development in Arabidopsis and tomato. Agronomy 2017, 7, 48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  16. Kamath, J.; Rahul, N.; Ashok Kumar, C.; Lakshmi, S. Psidium guajava L: A review. Int. J. Green Pharm. 2008, 2, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Gutierrez, L.; Bussell, J.D.; Pǎcurar, D.I.; Schwambach, J.; Pǎcurar, M.; Bellini, C. Phenotypic plasticity of adventitious rooting in arabidopsis is controlled by complex regulation of auxin response factor transcripts and microRNA abundance. Plant Cell 2009, 21, 3119–3132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  18. Joseph, B.; Priya, M. Review on nutritional, medicinal and pharmacological properties of guava (Psidium guajava Linn.). Int. J. Pharma Bio Sci. 2011, 2, 53–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  19. Da Silva de Souza, T.; da Silva Ferreira, M.F.; Menini, L.; de Lima Souza, J.R.C.; Parreira, L.A.; Cecon, P.R.; Ferreira, A. Essential oil of Psidium guajava: Influence of genotypes and environment. Sci. Hortic. 2017, 216, 38–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Esfandiari Ghalati, R.; Shamili, M.; Homaei, A. Effect of putrescine on biochemical and physiological characteristics of guava (Psidium guajava L.) seedlings under salt stress. Sci. Hortic. 2020, 261, 108961. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Abbasi, J.A.; Gandahi, A.W.; Saleem, M.; Bhatti, S.M.; Bughio, Z.R. Growth and Development of Guava (Psidium guajava L.) Seedlings Against Sodium Chloride Salinized Water. Pakistan J. Agric. Eng. Vet. Sci. 2019, 1072, 81–85. [Google Scholar]
  22. Li, R.; Yuan, S.; He, Y.; Fan, J.; Zhou, Y.; Qiu, T.; Lin, X.; Yao, Y.; Liu, J.; Fu, S.; et al. Genome-wide identification and expression profiling analysis of the galactinol synthase gene family in cassava (Manihot esculenta Crantz). Agronomy 2018, 8, 250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  23. Zhang, B. MicroRNA: A new target for improving plant tolerance to abiotic stress. J. Exp. Bot. 2015, 66, 1749–1761. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. miRBase. Available online: http:/www.mirbase.org/cgi-bin/browse.pl (accessed on 7 May 2020).
  25. The UNAFold Web Server. Available online: http://unafold.rna.albany.edu/?q=mfold/RNA-Folding-Form (accessed on 8 May 2020).
  26. Zhang, B.; Pan, X.; Stellwag, E.J. Identification of soybean microRNAs and their targets. Planta 2008, 229, 161–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Yang, W.; Liu, X.; Zhang, J.; Feng, J.; Li, C.; Chen, J. Prediction and validation of conservative microRNAs of Solanum tuberosum L. Mol. Biol. Rep. 2010, 37, 3081–3087. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. WebLogo. Available online: https://weblogo.berkeley.edu/logo.cgi (accessed on 22 June 2020).
  29. Darzentas, N. Circoletto: Visualizing sequence similarity with Circos. Bioinformatics 2010, 26, 2620–2621. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. psRNATarget: A Plant Small RNA Target Analysis Server. Available online: http://plantgrn.noble.org/psRNATarget/ (accessed on 24 June 2020).
  31. Gene Ontology and GO Annotations. Available online: https://www.ebi.ac.uk/QuickGO/ (accessed on 13 July 2020).
  32. Cytoscape. Available online: https://cytoscape.org/release_notes_3_2_0.html (accessed on 18 August 2020).
  33. KAAS - KEEG Automatic Annotation Server. Available online: http:/www.genome.jp.tools/kaas/ (accessed on 20 August 2020).
  34. Hoagland, D.R.; Arnon, D.I. The water-culture method for growing plants without soil. Circ. Calif. Agric. Exp. Stn. 1950, 347, 32. [Google Scholar]
  35. Khraiwesh, B.; Zhu, J.K.; Zhu, J. Role of miRNAs and siRNAs in biotic and abiotic stress responses of plants. Biochim. Biophys. Acta Gene Regul. Mech. 2012, 1819, 137–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  36. Ho, C.L.; Tan, Y.C.; Yeoh, K.A.; Ghazali, A.K.; Yee, W.Y.; Hoh, C.C. De novo transcriptome analyses of host-fungal interactions in oil palm (Elaeis guineensis Jacq.). BMC Genom. 2016, 17, 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  37. Lee, W.K.; Namasivayam, P.; Abdullah, J.O.; Ho, C.L. Transcriptome profiling of sulfate deprivation responses in two agarophytes Gracilaria changii and Gracilaria salicornia (Rhodophyta). Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 46563. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  38. Zhu, Q.H.; Spriggs, A.; Matthew, L.; Fan, L.; Kennedy, G.; Gubler, F.; Helliwell, C. A diverse set of microRNAs and microRNA-like small RNAs in developing rice grains. Genome Res. 2008, 18, 1456–1465. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  39. Chen, R.; Hu, Z.; Zhang, H. Identification of MicroRNAs in wild soybean (Glycine soja). J. Integr. Plant Biol. 2009, 51, 1071–1079. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Frazier, T.P.; Xie, F.; Freistaedter, A.; Burklew, C.E.; Zhang, B. Identification and characterization of microRNAs and their target genes in tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum). Planta 2010, 232, 1289–1308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. Ding, J.; Li, D.; Ohler, U.; Guan, J.; Zhou, S. Genome-wide search for miRNA-target interactions in Arabidopsis thaliana with an integrated approach. BMC Genom. 2012, 13, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  42. Sun, F.; Guo, G.; Du, J.; Guo, W.; Peng, H.; Ni, Z.; Sun, Q.; Yao, Y. Whole-genome discovery of miRNAs and their targets in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). BMC Plant Biol. 2014, 14, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  43. Zhang, B.; Pan, X.; Cannon, C.H.; Cobb, G.P.; Anderson, T.A. Conservation and divergence of plant microRNA genes. Plant J. 2006, 46, 243–259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Barozai, M.Y.K.; Baloch, I.A.; Din, M. Identification of MicroRNAs and their targets in Helianthus. Mol. Biol. Rep. 2012, 39, 2523–2532. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Unver, T.; Budak, H. Conserved micrornas and their targets in model grass species brachypodium distachyon. Planta 2009, 230, 659–669. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Wang, L.; Liu, H.; Li, D.; Chen, H. Identification and characterization of maize microRNAs involved in the very early stage of seed germination. BMC Genom. 2011, 12, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  47. Neutelings, G.; Fénart, S.; Lucau-Danila, A.; Hawkins, S. Identification and characterization of miRNAs and their potential targets in flax. J. Plant Physiol. 2012, 169, 1754–1766. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Zhang, B.; Pan, X.; Cobb, G.P.; Anderson, T.A. microRNAs as oncogenes and tumor suppressors. Dev. Biol. 2007, 302, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  49. Han, Y.; Zhu, B.; Luan, F.; Zhu, H.; Shao, Y.; Chen, A.; Lu, C.; Luo, Y. Conserved miRNAs and their targets identified in lettuce (Lactuca) by EST analysis. Gene 2010, 463, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  50. Schwarz, S.; Grande, A.V.; Bujdoso, N.; Saedler, H.; Huijser, P. The microRNA regulated SBP-box genes SPL9 and SPL15 control shoot maturation in Arabidopsis. Plant Mol. Biol. 2008, 67, 183–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  51. Mallory, A.C.; Bartel, D.P.; Bartel, B. MicroRNA-directed regulation of Arabidopsis Auxin Response Factor17 is essential for proper development and modulates expression of early auxin response genes. Plant Cell 2005, 17, 1360–1375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  52. Dubos, C.; Stracke, R.; Grotewold, E.; Weisshaar, B.; Martin, C.; Lepiniec, L. MYB transcription factors in Arabidopsis. Trends Plant Sci. 2010, 15, 573–581. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Morishita, T.; Kojima, Y.; Maruta, T.; Nishizawa-Yokoi, A.; Yabuta, Y.; Shigeoka, S. Arabidopsis NAC transcription factor, ANAC078, regulates flavonoid biosynthesis under high-light. Plant Cell Physiol. 2009, 50, 2210–2222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  54. Zeng, S.; Liu, Y.; Pan, L.; Hayward, A.; Wang, Y. Identification and characterization of miRNAs in ripening fruit of lycium barbarum L. Using high-throughput sequencing. Front. Plant Sci. 2015, 6, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  55. Huang, W.; Peng, S.; Xian, Z.; Lin, D.; Hu, G.; Yang, L.; Ren, M.; Li, Z. Overexpression of a tomato miR171 target gene SlGRAS24 impacts multiple agronomical traits via regulating gibberellin and auxin homeostasis. Plant Biotechnol. J. 2017, 15, 472–488. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Hasegawa, P.M.; Bressan, R.A. Plant Cellular and Molecular Responses to High Salinity. Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. Plant Mol. Biol. 2000, 51, 463–499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  57. Bej, S.; Basak, J. MicroRNAs: The Potential Biomarkers in Plant Stress Response. Am. J. Plant Sci. 2014, 5, 748–759. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  58. Li, S. The Arabidopsis thaliana TCP transcription factors: A broadening horizon beyond development. Plant Signal. Behav. 2015, 10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  59. Villanueva, M.A.; Islas-Flores, T.; Ullah, H. Signaling through WD-Repeat Proteins in Plants. Front. Plant Sci. 2016, 7, 1–2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  60. Liu, H.H.; Tian, X.; Li, Y.J.; Wu, C.A.; Zheng, C.C. Microarray-based analysis of stress-regulated microRNAs in Arabidopsis thaliana. RNA 2008, 14, 836–843. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  61. Ding, D.; Zhang, L.; Wang, H.; Liu, Z.; Zhang, Z.; Zheng, Y. Differential expression of miRNAs in response to salt stress in maize roots. Ann. Bot. 2009, 103, 29–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  62. Zhao, B.; Ge, L.; Liang, R.; Li, W.; Ruan, K.; Lin, H.; Jin, Y. Members of miR-169 family are induced by high salinity and transiently inhibit the NF-YA transcription factor. BMC Mol. Biol. 2009, 10, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  63. Gao, P.; Bai, X.; Yang, L.; Lv, D.; Pan, X.; Li, Y.; Cai, H.; Ji, W.; Chen, Q.; Zhu, Y. Osa-MIR393: A salinity- and alkaline stress-related microRNA gene. Mol. Biol. Rep. 2011, 38, 237–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  64. Yin, Z.; Li, Y.; Yu, J.; Liu, Y.; Li, C.; Han, X.; Shen, F. Difference in miRNA expression profiles between two cotton cultivars with distinct salt sensitivity. Mol. Biol. Rep. 2012, 39, 4961–4970. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  65. Covarrubias, A.A.; Reyes, J.L. Post-transcriptional gene regulation of salinity and drought responses by plant microRNAs. Plant Cell Environ. 2010, 33, 481–489. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Kouhi, F.; Sorkheh, K.; Ercisli, S. MicroRNA expression patterns unveil differential expression of conserved miRNAs and target genes against abiotic stress in safflower. PLoS ONE 2020, 15, e0228850. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  67. Guo, H.S.; Xie, Q.; Fei, J.F.; Chua, N.H. MicroRNA directs mRNA cleavage of the transcription factor NAC1 to downregulate auxin signals for Arabidopsis lateral root development. Plant Cell 2005, 17, 1376–1386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  68. Zhang, X.; Fan, B.; Yu, Z.; Nie, L.; Zhao, Y.; Yu, X.; Sun, F.; Lei, X.; Ma, Y. Functional analysis of three miRNAs in agropyron mongolicum keng under drought stress. Agronomy 2019, 9, 661. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  69. Yang, Z.; Zhu, P.; Kang, H.; Liu, L.; Cao, Q.; Sun, J.; Dong, T.; Zhu, M.; Li, Z.; Xu, T. High-throughput deep sequencing reveals the important role that microRNAs play in the salt response in sweet potato (Ipomoea batatas L.). BMC Genom. 2020, 21, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  70. Kohli, D.; Joshi, G.; Deokar, A.A.; Bhardwaj, A.R.; Agarwal, M.; Katiyar-Agarwal, S.; Srinivasan, R.; Jain, P.K. Identification and characterization of wilt and salt stress-responsive MicroRNAs in chickpea through high-throughput sequencing. PLoS ONE 2014, 9, e108851. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  71. Rhoades, M.W.; Reinhart, B.J.; Lim, L.P.; Burge, C.B.; Bartel, D.P. Prediction of plant miRNA targets. Cell 2002, 110, 513–520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  72. Du, J.; Miura, E.; Robischon, M.; Martinez, C.; Groover, A. The populus class III HD ZIP transcription factor popcorona affects cell differentiation during secondary growth of woody stems. PLoS ONE 2011, 6, e17458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  73. Ramachandran, P.; Carlsbecker, A.; Etchells, J.P.; Turner, S. Class III HD-ZIPs govern vascular cell fate: An HD view on patterning and differentiation. J. Exp. Bot. 2016, 68, 55–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  74. Cui, L.G.; Shan, J.X.; Shi, M.; Gao, J.P.; Lin, H.X. The miR156-SPL9-DFR pathway coordinates the relationship between development and abiotic stress tolerance in plants. Plant J. 2014, 80, 1108–1117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Arshad, M.; Gruber, M.Y.; Wall, K.; Hannoufa, A. An insight into microRNA156 role in salinity stress responses of alfalfa. Front. Plant Sci. 2017, 8, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  76. Yu, N.; Cai, W.J.; Wang, S.; Shan, C.M.; Wang, L.J.; Chena, X.Y. Temporal control of trichome distribution by microRNA156-targeted SPL genes in Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant Cell 2010, 22, 2322–2335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  77. Ning, K.; Chen, S.; Huang, H.; Jiang, J.; Yuan, H.; Li, H. Molecular characterization and expression analysis of the SPL gene family with BpSPL9 transgenic lines found to confer tolerance to abiotic stress in Betula platyphylla Suk. Plant Cell. Tissue Organ Cult. 2017, 130, 469–481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Bhardwaj, A.R.; Joshi, G.; Pandey, R.; Kukreja, B.; Goel, S.; Jagannath, A.; Kumar, A.; Katiyar-Agarwal, S.; Agarwal, M. A genome-wide perspective of miRNAome in response to high temperature, salinity and drought stresses in Brassica juncea (Czern) L. PLoS ONE 2014, 9, e0125644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  79. Cui, J.; Sun, Z.; Li, J.; Cheng, D.; Luo, C.; Dai, C. Characterization of miRNA160/164 and Their Targets Expression of Beet (Beta vulgaris) Seedlings under the Salt Tolerance. Plant Mol. Biol. Report. 2018, 36, 790–799. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Jodder, J.; Das, R.; Sarkar, D.; Bhattacharjee, P.; Kundu, P. Distinct transcriptional and processing regulations control miR167a level in tomato during stress. RNA Biol. 2018, 15, 130–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  81. Pegler, J.L.; Nguyen, D.Q.; Grof, C.P.L.; Eamens, A.L. Profiling of the salt stress responsive MicroRNA landscape of C4 genetic model species Setaria viridis (l.) beauv. Agronomy 2020, 10, 837. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Ye, Y.; Wang, J.; Wang, W.; Xu, L.A. ARF family identification in Tamarix chinensis reveals the salt responsive expression of TcARF6 targeted by miR167. PeerJ 2020, 2020, e8829. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  83. Xie, Z.; Kasschau, K.D.; Carrington, J.C. Negative Feedback Regulation of Dicer-Like1 in Arabidopsis by microRNA-Guided mRNA Degradation. Curr. Biol. 2003, 13, 784–789. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  84. Wang, M.; Wang, Q.; Zhang, B. Response of miRNAs and their targets to salt and drought stresses in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.). Gene 2013, 530, 26–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Zhuang, Y.; Zhou, X.H.; Liu, J. Conserved miRNAs and their response to salt stress in wild eggplant Solanum linnaeanum roots. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2014, 15, 839–849. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  86. Sun, Z.; Wang, Y.; Mou, F.; Tian, Y.; Chen, L.; Zhang, S.; Jiang, Q.; Li, X. Genome-wide small RNA analysis of soybean reveals auxin-responsive microRNAs that are differentially expressed in response to salt stress in root apex. Front. Plant Sci. 2016, 6, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  87. Morin, R.D.; Aksay, G.; Dolgosheina, E.; Ebhardt, H.A.; Magrini, V.; Mardis, E.R.; Sahinalp, S.C.; Unrau, P.J. Comparative analysis of the small RNA transcriptomes of Pinus contorta and Oryza sativa. Genome Res. 2008, 18, 571–584. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  88. Depuydt, S.; Rodriguez-Villalon, A.; Santuari, L.; Wyser-Rmili, C.; Ragni, L.; Hardtke, C.S. Suppression of Arabidopsis protophloem differentiation and root meristem growth by CLE45 requires the receptor-like kinase BAM3. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2013, 110, 7074–7079. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  89. Zhu, J.; Li, W.; Yang, W.; Qi, L.; Han, S. Identification of microRNAs in Caragana intermedia by high-throughput sequencing and expression analysis of 12 microRNAs and their targets under salt stress. Plant Cell Rep. 2013, 32, 1339–1349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  90. Lu, Y.; Feng, Z.; Liu, X.; Bian, L.; Xie, H.; Zhang, C.; Mysore, K.S.; Liang, J. MiR393 and miR390 synergistically regulate lateral root growth in rice under different conditions. BMC Plant Biol. 2018, 18, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  91. Trumbo, J.L.; Zhang, B.; Stewart, C.N. Manipulating microRNAs for improved biomass and biofuels from plant feedstocks. Plant Biotechnol. J. 2015, 13, 337–354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  92. Zafar, S.; Ashraf, M.Y.; Anwar, S.; Ali, Q.; Noman, A. Yield enhancement in wheat by soil and foliar fertilization of K and Zn under saline environment. Soil Environ. 2016, 35, 46–55. [Google Scholar]
  93. Noman, A.; Fahad, S.; Aqeel, M.; Ali, U.; Amanullah; Anwar, S.; Baloch, S.K.; Zainab, M. miRNAs: Major modulators for crop growth and development under abiotic stresses. Biotechnol. Lett. 2017, 39, 685–700. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Zhang, B.; Wang, Q. MicroRNA-based biotechnology for plant improvement. J. Cell. Physiol. 2015, 230, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Shriram, V.; Kumar, V.; Devarumath, R.M.; Khare, T.S.; Wani, S.H. Micrornas as potential targets for abiotic stress tolerance in plants. Front. Plant Sci. 2016, 7, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Zhou, M.; Li, D.; Li, Z.; Hu, Q.; Yang, C.; Zhu, L.; Luo, H. Constitutive expression of a miR319 gene alters plant development and enhances salt and drought tolerance in transgenic creeping bentgrass. Plant Physiol. 2013, 161, 1375–1391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  97. Yuan, S.; Li, Z.; Li, D.; Yuan, N.; Hu, Q.; Luo, H. Constitutive expression of rice microRNA528 alters plant development and enhances tolerance to salinity stress and nitrogen starvation in creeping bentgrass. Plant Physiol. 2015, 169, 576–593. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  98. Zhao, J.; Yuan, S.; Zhou, M.; Yuan, N.; Li, Z.; Hu, Q.; Bethea, F.G.; Liu, H.; Li, S.; Luo, H. Transgenic creeping bentgrass overexpressing Osa-miR393a exhibits altered plant development and improved multiple stress tolerance. Plant Biotechnol. J. 2019, 17, 233–251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  99. Sahito, Z.A.; Wang, L.; Sun, Z.; Yan, Q.; Zhang, X.; Jiang, Q.; Ullah, I.; Tong, Y.; Li, X. The miR172c-NNC1 module modulates root plastic development in response to salt in soybean. BMC Plant Biol. 2017, 17, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
Figure 1. Diagrammatic representation of guava miRNA search procedure (workflow).
Figure 1. Diagrammatic representation of guava miRNA search procedure (workflow).
Agronomy 10 01920 g001
Figure 2. Secondary stem-loop structures of the potential guava miRNA precursors/pre-miRNAs. Respective miRNAs are represented with red font.
Figure 2. Secondary stem-loop structures of the potential guava miRNA precursors/pre-miRNAs. Respective miRNAs are represented with red font.
Agronomy 10 01920 g002
Figure 3. Conserved and nonconserved potential guava miRNA families (dark green boxes) and their homologs in other plant organisms. Identical color shades reflect closely related species, while filled and empty boxes indicate the presence or absence of miRNA families, respectively.
Figure 3. Conserved and nonconserved potential guava miRNA families (dark green boxes) and their homologs in other plant organisms. Identical color shades reflect closely related species, while filled and empty boxes indicate the presence or absence of miRNA families, respectively.
Agronomy 10 01920 g003
Figure 4. Web logo displaying conserved nucleotide sequences of (A) pre-miRNA160c (B) pre-miRNA390b and (C) pre-miRNA396b sequences.
Figure 4. Web logo displaying conserved nucleotide sequences of (A) pre-miRNA160c (B) pre-miRNA390b and (C) pre-miRNA396b sequences.
Agronomy 10 01920 g004
Figure 5. Phylogenetic analysis of the identified guava miRNAs (marked with a red box) pgu-miR160c-5p, pgu-miR390b-5p, and pgu-miR396b-5p was performed using their potential precursor sequences.
Figure 5. Phylogenetic analysis of the identified guava miRNAs (marked with a red box) pgu-miR160c-5p, pgu-miR390b-5p, and pgu-miR396b-5p was performed using their potential precursor sequences.
Agronomy 10 01920 g005
Figure 6. Comparative synteny map of potential guava miRNAs against the well-annotated genome of phylogenetically close species apple (Malus domestica).
Figure 6. Comparative synteny map of potential guava miRNAs against the well-annotated genome of phylogenetically close species apple (Malus domestica).
Agronomy 10 01920 g006
Figure 7. Gene ontology analysis of potential targets in Guava. (A) Molecular function, (B) Biological process. (C) Cellular component.
Figure 7. Gene ontology analysis of potential targets in Guava. (A) Molecular function, (B) Biological process. (C) Cellular component.
Agronomy 10 01920 g007
Figure 8. KEGG pathways mapped using the KAAS tool among the predicted targets of the identified miRNAs in guava.
Figure 8. KEGG pathways mapped using the KAAS tool among the predicted targets of the identified miRNAs in guava.
Agronomy 10 01920 g008
Figure 9. Minimum free energy (MFE) based network interaction of potential guava miRNAs and their corresponding targets. Different guava miRNAs and their targets are marked with orange and blue circles, respectively. Targets marked with the green circle are shared by two miRNAs, while targets marked with the pink circle are shared by 3 or more miRNAs.
Figure 9. Minimum free energy (MFE) based network interaction of potential guava miRNAs and their corresponding targets. Different guava miRNAs and their targets are marked with orange and blue circles, respectively. Targets marked with the green circle are shared by two miRNAs, while targets marked with the pink circle are shared by 3 or more miRNAs.
Agronomy 10 01920 g009
Figure 10. Evaluation of relative fold change of the selected guava miRNAs under salinity stress. The delta-delta CT method was used to determine the fold change and the U6 RNA was used as a normalization control. The values were further normalized with respect to the control condition that was set to 1.
Figure 10. Evaluation of relative fold change of the selected guava miRNAs under salinity stress. The delta-delta CT method was used to determine the fold change and the U6 RNA was used as a normalization control. The values were further normalized with respect to the control condition that was set to 1.
Agronomy 10 01920 g010
Table 1. Potential miRNAs in guava.
Table 1. Potential miRNAs in guava.
Identified miRNAsLM * (nt)Query miRNAsmiRNA SequencesAccessionStrandLocationLP * (nt)MFEs (ΔG)MFEI
pgu-miR156ac21mdm-miR156acUUGACAGAAGAUAGAGAGCACMI0022999+/−5′86−471.18
pgu-miR156f-5p20ath-miR156f-5pUGACAGAAGAGAGUGAGCACMI0000183+/+5′86−50.81.1
pgu-miR159-5p21eun-miR159-5pAGCUGCUGGUCUAUGGAUCCCMI0033013+/−5′134−48.50.77
pgu-miR159d21mdm-miR159dUUUGGAUUGAAGGGAGCUCUAMI0035594+/−3′215−95.20.93
pgu-miR160a-3p21ath-miR160a-3pGCGUAUGAGGAGCCAUGCAUAMI0000190+/+3′91−49.70.97
pgu-miR160c-5p21ath-miR160c-5pUGCCUGGCUCCCUGUAUGCCAMI0000192+/+5′86−51.41.01
pgu-miR162-3p21eun-miR162-3pUCGAUAAACCUCUGCAUCCAGMI0033015+/−3′111−38.40.7
pgu-miR164b-5p21ath-miR164b-5pUGGAGAAGCAGGGCACGUGCAMI0000198+/+5′91−43.40.9
pgu-miR166-3p21eun-miR166-3pUCGGACCAGGCUUCAUUCCCCMI0033016+/−3′123−51.30.99
pgu-miR166t20gma-miR166tUCGGACCAGGCUUCAUUCCCMI0021696+/+5′111−47.70.75
pgu-miR167a-5p21ath-miR167a-5pUGAAGCUGCCAGCAUGAUCUAMI0000208+/+5′111−50.41.01
pgu-miR167c-5p22eun-miR167c-5pUGAAGCUGCCAGCGUGAUCUCAMI0033019+/−5′86−33.10.74
pgu-miR169b-5p21ath-miR169b-5pCAGCCAAGGAUGACUUGCCGGMI0000976+/+5′116−37.60.7
pgu-miR169f-5p21ath-miR169f-5pUGAGCCAAGGAUGACUUGCCGMI0000980+/+5′96−41.50.86
pgu-miR169k21mdm-miR169kUAGCCAAGGAUGACUUGCCUGMI0035667+/+5′103−45.51.08
pgu-miR169w21gma-miR169wCAAGGAUGACUUGCCGGCAUUMI0033468+/+5′106−38.20.8
pgu-miR171b21mdm-miR171bUUGAGCCGCGUCAAUAUCUCCMI0023043+/+3′116−46.10.85
pgu-miR171g21mdm-miR171gUGAUUGAGCCGUGCCAAUAUCMI0023048+/+3′88−36.71.05
pgu-miR171j21mdm-miR171jUUGAGCCGCGCCAAUAUCACUMI0023051+/+3′106−41.80.91
pgu-miR172a21ath-miR172aAGAAUCUUGAUGAUGCUGCAUMI0000215+/+3′111−48.40.99
pgu-miR172b-5p21eun-miR172b-5pGCAGCAUCAUCAAGAUUCACAMI0033022+/−5′111−48.40.99
pgu-miR172l21mdm-miR172lGGAAUCUUGAUGAUGCUGCAGMI0023067+/−3′176−65.10.97
pgu-miR319a21ath-miR319aUUGGACUGAAGGGAGCUCCCUMI0000544+/+3′201−92.40.9
pgu-miR319e20mdm-miR319eGAGCUUUCUUCAGUCCACUCMI0035621+/+5′176−85.70.88
pgu-miR390b-5p21ath-miR390b-5pAAGCUCAGGAGGGAUAGCGCCMI0001001+/+5′84−51.31.09
pgu-miR393a-5p22ath-miR393a-5pUCCAAAGGGAUCGCAUUGAUCCMI0001003+/+5′96−40.70.93
pgu-miR393c22mdm-miR393cUCCAAAGGGAUCGCAUUGAUCUMI0023081+/+5′111−44.40.91
pgu-miR393i22gma-miR393iUUCCAAAGGGAUCGCAUUGAUCMI0021710+/+5′126−56.40.97
pgu-miR395-3p21eun-miR395-3pAUGAAGUGUUUGGGGGAACUCMI0033024+/+3′72−47.51.36
pgu-miR395a21ath-miR395aCUGAAGUGUUUGGGGGAACUCMI0001007+/+3′106−37.20.89
pgu-miR396b-3p21ath-miR396b-3pGCUCAAGAAAGCUGUGGGAAAMI0001014+/+3′126−36.10.82
pgu-miR396b-5p21eun-miR396b-5pUUCCACAGCUUUCUUGAACUGMI0033026+/+5′118−52.41.01
pgu-miR396d21mdm-miR396dUUCCACAGCUUUCUUGAACUUMI0023096+/+5′96−50.60.9
pgu-miR399c21mdm-miR399cUGCCAAAGGAGAAUUGCCCUGMI0023107+/−3′96−50.41.12
pgu-miR399f21ath-miR399fUGCCAAAGGAGAUUUGCCCGGMI0001025+/+3′111−500.98
pgu-miR399g21mdm-miR399gUGCCAAAGGAGAUUUGCUCGGMI0023111+/+3′81−36.51.11
pgu-miR530-5p21eun-miR530-5pUCUGCAUUUGCACCUGCACCUMI0033032+/+5′161−73.60.89
pgu-miR535b-5p21eun-miR535b-5pUGACAACGAGAGAGAGCACGCMI0033034+/+5′81−41.61.01
pgu-miR535d21mdm-miR535dUGACGACGAGAGAGAGCACGCMI0023131+/+5′101−491.02
pgu-miR828b22mdm-miR828bUCUUGCUCAAAUGAGUAUUCCAMI0023134+/+5′99−33.80.89
* LM length of mature miRNAs, * LP length of precursors.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Sharma, A.; Ruiz-Manriquez, L.M.; Serrano-Cano, F.I.; Reyes-Pérez, P.R.; Tovar Alfaro, C.K.; Barrón Andrade, Y.E.; Hernández Aros, A.K.; Srivastava, A.; Paul, S. Identification of microRNAs and Their Expression in Leaf Tissues of Guava (Psidium guajava L.) under Salinity Stress. Agronomy 2020, 10, 1920. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy10121920

AMA Style

Sharma A, Ruiz-Manriquez LM, Serrano-Cano FI, Reyes-Pérez PR, Tovar Alfaro CK, Barrón Andrade YE, Hernández Aros AK, Srivastava A, Paul S. Identification of microRNAs and Their Expression in Leaf Tissues of Guava (Psidium guajava L.) under Salinity Stress. Agronomy. 2020; 10(12):1920. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy10121920

Chicago/Turabian Style

Sharma, Ashutosh, Luis M. Ruiz-Manriquez, Francisco I. Serrano-Cano, Paula Roxana Reyes-Pérez, Cynthia Karina Tovar Alfaro, Yulissa Esmeralda Barrón Andrade, Ana Karen Hernández Aros, Aashish Srivastava, and Sujay Paul. 2020. "Identification of microRNAs and Their Expression in Leaf Tissues of Guava (Psidium guajava L.) under Salinity Stress" Agronomy 10, no. 12: 1920. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy10121920

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop