A comparative study of the evolution and codon usage bias in WOX gene family of three Camellia sinensis cultivars

doi:10.12302/j.issn.1000-2006.202108049

JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY ›› 2022, Vol. 46 ›› Issue (2): 71-80.doi: 10.12302/j.issn.1000-2006.202108049

Previous Articles Next Articles

A comparative study of the evolution and codon usage bias in WOX gene family of three Camellia sinensis cultivars

WANG Zhanjun¹^,²(), WU Ziqi¹(), WANG Zhaoxia¹, OU Zulan¹, LI Jie¹, CAI Qianwen¹, XU Zhongdong¹, ZHANG Zhaoliang²^,^*()

1. College of Life Science, Hefei Normal University, Hefei 230601, China
2. State Key Laboratory of Camellia sinensis Plant Biology and Utilization, Anhui Agricultural University, Hefei 230036, China

Received:2021-08-29 Accepted:2021-11-29 Online:2022-03-30 Published:2022-04-08
Contact: ZHANG Zhaoliang E-mail:wangzhanjunhxj@163.com;1293014657@qq.com;zhlzhang@ahau.edu.cn

Abstract

Abstract:

【Objective】The WOX gene family plays an important molecular regulatory role in model plant tissue culture. Phylogeny studies and research on the codon usage bias in the WOX gene family in non-model plants are helpful for exploring genetic evolution and gene expression characteristics, which serve as a guideline for establishing a transgenic system.【Method】In this study, bioinformatics were used to identify the WOX genes among all coding sequences of three Camellia sinensis cultivars. The evolutionary patterns were analyzed using ClustalX 2.1 and MEGA X software. The codon usage index of the coding sequence of the WOX gene was analyzed, and the codon usage pattern and the source of codon variation were explored using Perl language, Codon W1.4.2, and SPSS 23.0. The main factors affecting codon usage bias were analyzed based on the results of ENc-GC_3s, a PR2-plot analysis, and a neutral analysis.【Result】A total of 42 WOX members were identified in this study, of which 11 were CSA, 18 were CSS and 13 were DASZ. The phylogenetic analysis revealed that the evolution of WOX genes of the three Camellia sinensis cultivars is highly conserved. The codon bias analysis revealed that the codons of WOX genes preferred to use A/T and end with A/T in the three Camellia sinensis cultivars; the codon usage patterns of WOX genes in CSA and DASZ are similar, indicating that they are closely related. When CSA and CSS are used as transgenic receptors, individual codons in WOX genes of three Camellia sinensis cultivars need to be optimized. Nicotiana tabacum is the best heterologous expression receptor for WOX genes of three Camellia sinensis cultivars. ENc-GC_3s mapping the PR2 analysis, and the neutrality analysis indicate that the natural selection is the main reason for the codon usage bias of WOX genes in the three Camellia sinensis cultivars.【Conclusion】This study showed that WOX genes of three Camellia sinensis cultivars are evolutionarily conserved, codons prefer to use A/T and end with A/T, and the codon usage bias is mainly due to the natural selection. The results reveal the optimization information of codons when transforming tea plants, and tobacco is the best heterologous expression receptor.

Key words: Camellia sinensis, WOX gene family, evolutionary analysis, codon usage bias, transgene expression

CLC Number:

Q786
S794.4

WANG Zhanjun, WU Ziqi, WANG Zhaoxia, OU Zulan, LI Jie, CAI Qianwen, XU Zhongdong, ZHANG Zhaoliang. A comparative study of the evolution and codon usage bias in WOX gene family of three Camellia sinensis cultivars[J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2022, 46(2): 71-80.

Figures/Tables 6

Table 1

The information of WOX gene families in three Camellia sinensis cultivars"

基因名称 gene name	基因ID gene ID	氨基酸数量 amino acid quantity	等电点 isoelectric point	分子质量/ku molecular weight	不稳定系数 instability coefficient	脂溶性指数 aliphatic index	亲水性 hydrophilicity	亚细胞定位 subcellular localization
CsaWUS	CSA016122.1	292	5.91	32 238.09	78.16	43.42	-1.001	细胞核
CsaWOX1a	CSA009146.1	326	8.45	37 982.71	64.95	60.18	-0.913	细胞核
CsaWOX1b	CSA021658.1	125	9.26	14 771.54	72.38	66.96	-1.003	细胞核
CsaWOX1c	CSA017712.1	197	9.94	22 734.74	64.44	60.00	-1.076	细胞核
CsaWOX3	CSA034617.1	195	8.77	22 724.70	63.00	52.00	-0.835	细胞核
CsaWOX4	CSA021808.1	231	9.30	26 338.67	58.94	61.21	-0.905	细胞核
CsaWOX5	CSA035970.1	289	9.01	32 485.00	55.84	77.27	-0.522	细胞核
CsaWOX8a	CSA024131.1	285	5.54	32 067.08	56.18	68.07	-0.698	细胞核
CsaWOX8b	CSA032010.1	296	6.06	33 503.17	58.29	53.34	-0.963	细胞核
CsaWOX9	CSA016734.1	287	9.10	31 373.27	52.17	55.71	-0.574	细胞核
CsaWOX11	CSA027532.1	275	5.63	29 686.28	67.31	72.62	-0.286	细胞核
CssWUS	TEA008786.1	297	6.00	32 659.55	79.08	44.34	-0.986	细胞核
CssWOX1a	TEA025042.1	271	7.71	31 693.58	66.28	61.22	-0.913	细胞核
CssWOX1b	TEA006406.1	361	6.47	40 838.38	57.69	60.30	-0.804	细胞核
CssWOX2a	TEA014651.1	220	5.41	23 858.01	51.73	57.68	-0.771	细胞核
CssWOX2b	TEA032867.1	256	6.22	27 928.90	59.25	59.06	-0.702	细胞核
CssWOX3a	TEA018015.1	172	9.27	19 461.41	69.67	63.49	-0.553	细胞核
CssWOX3b	TEA012714.1	195	8.77	22 724.70	63.00	52.00	-0.835	细胞核
CssWOX4a	TEA029435.1	214	8.96	24 865.11	48.74	59.25	-1.007	细胞核
CssWOX4b	TEA022717.1	231	9.30	26 334.68	58.61	61.21	-0.910	细胞核
CssWOX4c	TEA007699.1	316	8.96	36 018.54	60.02	59.91	-0.736	细胞核
CssWOX8a	TEA027235.1	288	5.53	32 224.21	56.12	67.36	-0.695	细胞核
CssWOX8b	TEA017348.1	288	6.06	32 745.31	57.53	53.47	-0.984	细胞核
CssWOX9a	TEA033789.1	279	8.85	31 274.79	61.41	55.91	-0.834	细胞核
CssWOX9b	TEA029851.1	459	8.93	49 770.50	74.52	56.91	-0.550	细胞核
CssWOX11	TEA027449.1	212	5.09	22 791.41	79.30	67.12	-0.395	细胞核
CssWOX13a	TEA021703.1	410	6.84	46 513.77	50.56	76.49	-0.594	细胞核
CssWOX13b	TEA020072.1	706	7.84	81 150.51	49.65	80.88	-0.630	细胞核
CssWOX13c	TEA007801.1	287	7.72	32 557.99	58.76	74.36	-0.630	细胞核
DaszWOX1a	GWHPABKB016733	326	8.45	38 010.72	65.95	60.18	-0.915	细胞核
DaszWOX1b	GWHPABKB013155	916	6.51	102 942.02	48.18	76.12	-0.433	细胞核
DaszWOX2a	GWHPABKB014366	118	9.72	13 333.89	62.71	54.58	-0.840	细胞核
DaszWOX2b	GWHPABKB001060	254	6.53	27 823.75	59.93	59.53	-0.731	细胞核
DaszWOX4a	GWHPABKB015660	226	9.10	26 222.65	52.45	60.00	-0.977	细胞核
DaszWOX4b	GWHPABKB020125	234	9.30	26 676.05	57.99	61.67	-0.909	细胞核
DaszWOX5	GWHPABKB000744	157	9.62	17 769.22	53.75	75.03	-0.569	细胞核
DaszWOX8a	GWHPABKB020522	286	5.54	32 080.10	57.59	67.83	-0.698	细胞核
DaszWOX8b	GWHPABKB001976	287	6.07	32 259.75	61.39	53.66	-0.959	细胞核
DaszWOX9	GWHPABKB030319	354	8.63	38 729.50	49.81	59.18	-0.459	细胞核
DaszWOX11	GWHPABKB008034	197	5.25	21 261.58	82.03	63.35	-0.488	细胞核
DaszWOX13a	GWHPABKB017606	252	7.05	28 500.77	59.30	61.11	-0.928	细胞核
DaszWOX13b	GWHPABKB010750	183	9.10	20 592.04	61.42	56.50	-0.949	细胞核

Table 1

Fig.1

Table 2

Table 3

URSCU and fRFSC of codons of WOX gene families in three Camellia sinensis cultivars"

氨基酸 amino acid	密码子 codon	U_RSCU			f_RFSC			氨基酸 amino acid	密码子 codon	U_RSCU			f_RFSC
氨基酸 amino acid	密码子 codon	CSA	CSS	DASZ	CSA	CSS	DASZ	氨基酸 amino acid	密码子 codon	CSA	CSS	DASZ	CSA	CSS	DASZ
Phe	TTT	1.09	0.98	1.09	54.26	49.21	54.35	Ala	GCA	1.47	1.35	1.15	36.84	33.86	28.78
	TTC	0.91	1.02	0.91	45.74	50.79	45.65		GCG	0.18	0.29	0.43	4.51	7.17	10.73
Leu	TTA	0.78	0.70	0.84	13.07	11.60	13.95	Tyr	TAT	1.10	1.03	1.20	54.93	51.75	59.77
	TTG	1.53	1.59	1.60	25.57	26.52	26.75		TAC	0.90	0.97	0.80	45.07	48.25	40.23
	CTT	1.43	1.39	1.42	23.86	23.20	23.64		TAA	1.36	1.50	1.15	45.46	50.00	38.46
	CTC	1.16	1.23	1.21	19.32	20.44	20.16	TER	TAG	0.55	0.33	0.00	18.18	11.11	0.00
	CTA	0.48	0.55	0.47	7.95	9.12	7.75		TGA	1.09	1.17	1.85	36.36	38.89	61.54
	CTG	0.61	0.55	0.47	10.23	9.12	7.75	His	CAT	0.99	0.77	1.04	49.44	38.73	52.07
	ATT	1.18	1.22	1.37	39.39	40.66	45.61		CAC	1.01	1.23	0.96	50.56	61.27	47.93
Ile	ATC	0.93	0.98	0.98	31.06	32.60	32.75	Gln	CAA	1.15	1.20	1.21	57.50	60.12	60.32
	ATA	0.89	0.80	0.65	29.55	26.74	21.64		CAG	0.85	0.80	0.79	42.50	39.88	39.68
Met	ATG	1.00	1.00	1.00	100.00	100.00	100.00	Asn	AAT	1.10	1.06	1.18	55.13	52.94	59.19
Val	GTT	1.64	1.24	1.53	40.94	30.98	38.26		AAC	0.90	0.94	0.82	44.87	47.06	40.81
	GTC	0.54	0.74	0.51	13.39	18.43	12.76	Lys	AAA	0.78	0.71	0.67	38.96	35.42	33.50
	GTA	0.57	0.45	0.51	14.17	11.37	12.76		AAG	1.22	1.29	1.33	61.04	64.58	66.50
	GTG	1.26	1.57	1.45	31.50	39.22	36.22	Asp	GAT	0.98	1.11	1.21	49.02	55.61	60.54
Ser	TCT	1.40	1.45	1.59	23.31	24.09	26.59		GAC	1.02	0.89	0.79	50.98	44.39	39.46
	TCC	0.77	1.01	0.76	12.90	16.85	12.60	Glu	GAA	1.14	1.13	1.03	56.78	56.43	51.70
	TCA	1.33	1.11	1.38	22.22	18.48	23.01		GAG	0.86	0.87	0.97	43.22	43.57	48.30
	TCG	0.41	0.46	0.43	6.81	7.61	7.12	Cys	TGT	0.89	1.03	1.08	44.68	51.65	54.17
	AGT	1.18	1.03	1.04	19.71	17.21	17.26		TGC	1.11	0.97	0.92	55.32	48.35	45.83
	AGC	0.90	0.95	0.81	15.05	15.76	13.42	Trp	TGG	1.00	1.00	1.00	100.00	100.00	100.00
Pro	CCT	1.05	1.26	1.33	26.35	31.40	33.18	Arg	CGT	0.78	0.83	0.89	13.02	13.85	14.85
	CCC	0.77	0.69	0.73	19.16	17.36	18.18		CGC	0.85	0.85	0.71	14.20	14.19	11.79
	CCA	1.75	1.62	1.47	43.71	40.50	36.82		CGA	0.43	0.45	0.52	7.10	7.43	8.73
	CCG	0.43	0.43	0.47	10.78	10.74	11.82		CGG	0.43	0.41	0.71	7.10	6.76	11.79
Thr	ACT	1.47	1.47	1.66	36.69	36.87	41.49		AGA	1.74	1.78	1.60	28.99	29.73	26.64
	ACC	0.90	1.02	0.94	22.49	25.42	23.58		AGG	1.78	1.68	1.57	29.59	28.04	26.20
	ACA	1.30	1.21	1.05	32.54	30.17	26.20	Gly	GGT	1.14	1.17	1.26	28.43	29.14	31.52
	ACG	0.33	0.30	0.35	8.28	7.54	8.73		GGC	0.93	0.99	1.00	23.35	24.86	24.90
Ala	GCT	1.47	1.48	1.64	36.85	37.06	40.98		GGA	1.18	1.13	0.95	29.44	28.29	23.74
	GCC	0.87	0.88	0.78	21.80	21.91	19.51		GGG	0.75	0.71	0.79	18.78	17.71	19.84

Table 3

Table 4

A comparison of codon usage frequency between WOX gene families in three C. sinensis cultivars and six plants"

氨基酸 amino acid	密码子 codon	CsaWOX						CssWOX						DaszWOX
氨基酸 amino acid	密码子 codon	CSA	CSS	A	N	P	O	CSA	CSS	A	N	P	O	CSA	CSS	A	N	P	O
Phe	TTT	0.95	1.03	0.83	0.72	0.70	1.39	0.87	0.93	0.79	0.68	0.66	1.31	0.96	1.03	0.90	0.79	0.76	1.51
	TTC	1.06	0.97	0.74	0.85	0.87	0.68	1.18	1.08	0.86	0.98	1.01	0.79	1.06	0.97	0.80	0.92	0.95	0.74
Leu	TTA	1.06	1.07	0.64	0.61	0.55	1.34	0.94	0.95	0.60	0.57	0.51	1.26	1.14	1.14	0.75	0.71	0.64	1.55
	TTG	0.96	0.98	0.77	0.72	0.63	1.09	1.00	1.02	0.84	0.79	0.68	1.19	1.00	1.03	0.87	0.81	0.71	1.23
	CTT	1.04	1.22	0.62	0.62	0.52	0.98	1.01	1.18	0.64	0.64	0.53	1.01	1.03	1.20	0.67	0.67	0.55	1.06
	CTC	1.28	1.22	0.75	0.98	0.86	0.47	1.35	1.29	0.84	1.10	0.96	0.52	1.33	1.27	0.85	1.11	0.97	0.53
	CTA	0.77	0.75	0.50	0.53	0.41	0.65	0.88	0.86	0.61	0.64	0.50	0.78	0.75	0.73	0.53	0.56	0.43	0.68
	CTG	0.81	0.83	0.65	0.63	0.44	0.31	0.72	0.74	0.61	0.59	0.41	0.29	0.61	0.63	0.54	0.52	0.36	0.25
	ATT	0.83	0.92	0.86	0.67	0.63	1.30	0.85	0.95	0.94	0.73	0.69	1.43	0.96	1.07	0.95	0.74	0.70	1.44
Ile	ATC	1.12	0.96	0.79	1.05	0.96	0.75	1.17	1.01	0.88	1.17	1.07	0.84	1.18	1.01	0.80	1.06	0.97	0.76
	ATA	1.21	1.18	1.10	0.99	0.93	1.58	1.09	1.07	1.06	0.95	0.89	1.51	0.88	0.87	0.77	0.69	0.65	1.11
Met	ATG	1.00	1.00	1.32	1.30	1.38	1.36	1.00	1.00	1.09	1.07	1.14	1.13	1.00	1.00	1.11	1.08	1.15	1.14
Val	GTT	1.07	1.19	0.68	0.69	0.76	1.19	0.81	0.90	0.53	0.54	0.60	0.93	1.00	1.11	0.73	0.74	0.81	1.27
	GTC	0.76	0.70	0.47	0.55	0.54	0.30	1.05	0.96	0.67	0.77	0.76	0.43	0.73	0.66	0.51	0.59	0.58	0.33
	GTA	0.92	0.87	0.65	0.56	0.63	0.94	0.74	0.70	0.53	0.46	0.52	0.78	0.83	0.78	0.66	0.58	0.64	0.97
	GTG	1.09	1.05	0.82	0.85	0.84	0.59	1.36	1.31	1.05	1.09	1.08	0.75	1.26	1.21	1.07	1.12	1.10	0.77
Ser	TCT	0.94	1.10	0.92	1.16	1.13	1.82	0.97	1.13	0.96	1.21	1.18	1.91	1.07	1.25	1.01	1.28	1.24	2.01
	TCC	0.93	0.85	1.14	1.26	1.49	0.79	1.22	1.10	1.52	1.66	1.97	1.04	0.91	0.83	1.08	1.19	1.41	0.74
	TCA	0.99	0.98	1.21	1.25	1.12	1.78	0.82	0.82	1.02	1.06	0.94	1.50	1.03	1.02	1.21	1.25	1.12	1.78
	TCG	0.78	0.72	0.73	1.28	1.35	0.55	0.87	0.80	0.82	1.45	1.53	0.62	0.82	0.75	0.74	1.29	1.37	0.56
	AGT	1.17	1.23	1.40	1.47	1.30	2.22	1.02	1.08	1.24	1.30	1.15	1.97	1.02	1.08	1.18	1.25	1.10	1.88
	AGC	1.14	0.98	1.32	1.50	1.32	0.93	1.19	1.02	1.40	1.59	1.40	0.99	1.01	0.87	1.14	1.29	1.14	0.81
Pro	CCT	0.76	0.91	0.84	0.84	0.98	1.15	0.91	1.09	1.11	1.11	1.30	1.53	0.96	1.15	1.03	1.03	1.20	1.41
	CCC	1.13	0.97	2.15	1.73	2.19	0.94	1.02	0.88	2.17	1.74	2.21	0.95	1.07	0.92	1.98	1.59	2.02	0.87
	CCA	1.21	1.19	1.61	1.31	1.56	1.83	1.12	1.10	1.67	1.35	1.61	1.89	1.02	1.00	1.32	1.08	1.28	1.50
	CCG	0.87	0.74	0.75	1.28	1.60	0.36	0.87	0.74	0.83	1.42	1.78	0.40	0.95	0.81	0.79	1.37	1.71	0.38
Thr	ACT	1.07	1.26	1.26	1.09	1.53	2.08	1.07	1.27	1.38	1.19	1.67	2.27	1.20	1.42	1.43	1.23	1.73	2.36
	ACC	1.00	0.93	1.31	1.39	1.63	0.91	1.13	1.06	1.61	1.71	2.00	1.11	1.04	0.98	1.38	1.46	1.71	0.95
	ACA	0.99	0.93	1.25	1.13	1.28	1.69	0.92	0.86	1.26	1.13	1.29	1.70	0.80	0.75	1.00	0.91	1.03	1.36
	ACG	0.82	0.70	0.65	1.11	1.13	0.44	0.75	0.64	0.64	1.09	1.12	0.43	0.87	0.74	0.68	1.17	1.20	0.46
Ala	GCT	0.96	1.10	0.62	0.56	0.79	0.89	0.97	1.10	0.60	0.54	0.77	0.87	1.07	1.22	0.78	0.71	1.00	1.13
	GCC	1.11	1.01	1.00	0.83	1.05	0.34	1.12	1.02	0.97	0.80	1.02	0.33	0.99	0.91	1.02	0.84	1.07	0.34
	GCA	1.13	1.09	1.00	0.76	0.87	1.01	1.04	1.00	0.89	0.67	0.77	0.90	0.88	0.85	0.89	0.67	0.77	0.90
	GCG	0.48	0.41	0.24	0.37	0.58	0.08	0.76	0.64	0.36	0.57	0.89	0.12	1.13	0.96	0.64	1.00	1.56	0.22
Tyr	TAT	0.94	0.95	0.95	0.78	0.85	1.39	0.88	0.90	0.92	0.76	0.83	1.35	1.02	1.04	0.94	0.77	0.84	1.37
	TAC	1.09	1.06	0.83	0.84	1.20	0.75	1.16	1.14	0.92	0.93	1.33	0.83	0.97	0.95	0.67	0.68	0.97	0.61
	TAA	1.68	1.84	1.98	1.62	4.45	2.54	1.85	2.02	1.82	1.49	4.11	2.35	1.42	1.55	1.46	1.20	3.29	1.88
TER	TAG	0.82	0.86	1.42	1.42	1.78	0.89	0.50	0.53	0.73	0.73	0.91	0.46	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00
	TGA	0.72	0.67	1.19	1.42	2.03	1.19	0.77	0.72	1.06	1.28	1.82	1.06	1.21	1.14	1.75	2.10	3.01	1.75
His	CAT	0.80	0.83	1.14	1.17	0.99	1.39	0.63	0.65	0.89	0.91	0.77	1.08	0.84	0.88	1.20	1.24	1.04	1.47
	CAC	1.33	1.24	1.84	1.84	1.93	1.16	1.61	1.50	2.22	2.22	2.33	1.40	1.26	1.18	1.75	1.75	1.84	1.11
Gln	CAA	1.00	0.94	2.11	1.98	1.96	3.03	1.04	0.98	1.93	1.81	1.79	2.77	1.05	0.99	2.02	1.89	1.87	2.90
	CAG	1.00	1.10	1.99	2.02	1.72	1.45	0.94	1.03	1.63	1.65	1.41	1.19	0.94	1.02	1.70	1.72	1.46	1.24
Asn	AAT	0.90	0.95	1.37	1.09	1.11	2.03	0.86	0.91	1.33	1.06	1.07	1.96	0.97	1.02	1.56	1.24	1.25	2.30
Asn	AAC	1.16	1.07	1.19	1.39	1.60	1.35	1.22	1.12	1.26	1.47	1.68	1.42	1.06	0.97	1.14	1.34	1.53	1.29
Lys	AAA	0.82	0.77	0.69	0.66	0.63	1.33	0.74	0.70	0.67	0.63	0.60	1.29	0.70	0.66	0.56	0.53	0.51	1.08
	AAG	1.17	1.24	1.02	1.00	1.03	1.04	1.24	1.31	1.15	1.12	1.16	1.16	1.27	1.35	1.05	1.03	1.06	1.07
Asp	GAT	0.72	0.75	0.49	0.48	0.43	0.70	0.82	0.85	0.62	0.61	0.54	0.89	0.89	0.92	0.64	0.63	0.56	0.93
	GAC	1.60	1.48	1.08	1.10	1.29	0.66	1.40	1.29	1.05	1.07	1.26	0.64	1.24	1.15	0.89	0.90	1.07	0.54
氨基酸 amino acid	密码子 codon	CsaWOX						CssWOX						DaszWOX
氨基酸 amino acid	密码子 codon	CSA	CSS	A	N	P	O	CSA	CSS	A	N	P	O	CSA	CSS	A	N	P	O
Glu	GAA	1.08	1.00	1.17	1.12	0.99	1.86	1.07	1.00	1.14	1.09	0.97	1.82	0.98	0.91	1.05	1.00	0.89	1.67
	GAG	0.91	1.00	0.95	1.04	0.94	0.79	0.92	1.00	0.94	1.03	0.93	0.78	1.02	1.11	1.05	1.14	1.04	0.87
Cys	TGT	0.81	0.87	0.71	0.76	0.67	1.21	0.93	1.00	0.82	0.88	0.77	1.38	0.98	1.05	0.98	1.05	0.92	1.65
	TGC	1.24	1.14	1.29	1.29	1.04	0.75	1.08	1.00	1.12	1.12	0.90	0.65	1.03	0.95	1.21	1.21	0.97	0.70
Trp	TGG	1.00	1.00	1.31	1.34	1.18	1.19	1.00	1.00	1.27	1.30	1.14	1.15	1.00	1.00	1.26	1.29	1.14	1.14
Arg	CGT	1.12	1.55	0.87	1.04	1.06	1.09	1.19	1.65	0.83	1.00	1.01	1.04	1.27	1.77	0.99	1.19	1.21	1.24
	CGC	1.66	1.97	2.25	2.19	1.90	0.53	1.66	1.97	2.02	1.97	1.70	0.48	1.38	1.64	1.87	1.82	1.58	0.44
	CGA	0.56	0.53	0.68	0.81	0.78	0.67	0.59	0.55	0.64	0.76	0.73	0.63	0.69	0.65	0.83	0.99	0.96	0.82
	CGG	0.68	0.69	0.87	1.15	0.75	0.32	0.65	0.66	0.74	0.99	0.64	0.27	1.13	1.14	1.45	1.92	1.25	0.53
	AGA	0.94	0.81	0.92	1.09	0.89	1.66	0.97	0.83	0.85	1.00	0.82	1.53	0.87	0.75	0.84	1.00	0.82	1.53
	AGG	1.14	1.18	1.62	1.46	1.40	1.11	1.08	1.12	1.38	1.24	1.19	0.95	1.01	1.05	1.43	1.29	1.24	0.99
Gly	GGT	0.96	1.14	0.90	0.89	1.11	1.35	0.99	1.17	0.84	0.83	1.03	1.26	1.07	1.26	0.96	0.96	1.18	1.44
	GGC	1.31	1.20	1.78	1.46	1.61	0.56	1.39	1.28	1.73	1.42	1.56	0.54	1.39	1.28	1.83	1.50	1.65	0.57
	GGA	0.95	0.86	0.85	0.89	0.91	1.30	0.92	0.82	0.75	0.78	0.80	1.14	0.77	0.69	0.66	0.69	0.71	1.01
	GGG	0.87	0.88	1.29	1.25	1.15	0.77	0.82	0.83	1.11	1.08	0.98	0.66	0.92	0.93	1.31	1.28	1.17	0.78

Table 4

Fig.2

References 37

[1]	XIA E H, ZHANG H B, SHENG J, et al. The tea tree genome provides insights into tea flavor and independent evolution of caffeine biosynthesis[J]. Mol Plant, 2017, 10(6):866-877. DOI: 10.1016/j.molp.2017.04.002. doi: 10.1016/j.molp.2017.04.002
[2]	WEI C L, YANG H, WANG S B, et al. Draft genome sequence of Camellia sinensis var.sinensis provides insights into the evolution of the tea genome and tea quality[J]. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 2018, 115(18):E4151-E4158. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1719622115. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1719622115
[3]	ZHANG W Y, ZHANG Y J, QIU H J, et al. Genome assembly of wild tea tree DASZ reveals pedigree and selection history of tea varieties[J]. Nat Commun, 2020, 11(1):3719. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-020-17498-6. doi: 10.1038/s41467-020-17498-6
[4]	SINGH K, PAUL A, KUMAR S, et al. Cloning and differential expression of QM like protein homologue from tea[Camellia sinensis (L.) O.Kuntze][J]. Mol Biol Rep, 2009, 36(5):921-927. DOI: 10.1007/s11033-008-9264-x. doi: 10.1007/s11033-008-9264-x
[5]	CAO Y P, HAN Y H, MENG D D, et al. Genome-wide analysis suggests the relaxed purifying selection affect the evolution of WOX genes in Pyrus bretschneideri,Prunus persica,Prunus mume,and Fragaria vesca[J]. Front Genet, 2017, 8:78. DOI: 10.3389/fgene.2017.00078. doi: 10.3389/fgene.2017.00078
[6]	WU X L, CHORY J, WEIGEL D. Combinations of WOX activities regulate tissue proliferation during Arabidopsis embryonic development[J]. Dev Biol, 2007, 309(2):306-316. DOI: 10.1016/j.ydbio.2007.07.019. doi: 10.1016/j.ydbio.2007.07.019
[7]	GALLOIS J L, NORA F R, MIZUKAMI Y, et al. WUSCHEL induces shoot stem cell activity and developmental plasticity in the root meristem[J]. Genes Dev, 2004, 18(4):375-380. DOI: 10.1101/gad.291204. doi: 10.1101/gad.291204
[8]	GORDON S P, HEISLER M G, REDDY G V, et al. Pattern formation during de novo assembly of the Arabidopsis shoot meristem[J]. Development, 2007, 134(19):3539-3548. DOI: 10.1242/dev.010298. doi: 10.1242/dev.010298
[9]	WANG P J, GUO Y C, CHEN X J, et al. Genome-wide identification of WOX genes and their expression patterns under different hormone and abiotic stress treatments in tea plant (Camellia sinensis)[J]. Trees, 2019, 33(4):1129-1142. DOI: 10.1007/s00468-019-01847-0. doi: 10.1007/s00468-019-01847-0
[10]	LIU H M, HE R, ZHANG H Y, et al. Analysis of synonymous codon usage in Zea mays[J]. Mol Biol Rep, 2010, 37(2):677-684. DOI: 10.1007/s11033-009-9521-7. doi: 10.1007/s11033-009-9521-7
[11]	PERLAK F J, DEATON R W, ARMSTRONG T A, et al. Insect resistant cotton plants[J]. Biotechnology (N Y), 1990, 8(10):939-943. DOI: 10.1038/nbt1090-939. doi: 10.1038/nbt1090-939
[12]	张乐, 金龙国, 罗玲, 等. 大豆基因组和转录组的核基因密码子使用偏好性分析[J]. 作物学报, 2011, 37(6):965-974.
	ZHANG L, JIN L G, LUO L, et al. Analysis of nuclear gene codon bias on soybean genome and transcriptome[J]. Acta Agron Sin, 2011, 37(6):965-974. DOI: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2011.00965. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2011.00965
[13]	时慧, 王玉, 杨路成, 等. 茶树抗寒调控转录因子ICE1密码子偏性分析[J]. 园艺学报, 2012, 39(7):1341-1352.
	SHI H, WANG Y, YANG L C, et al. Analysis of codon bias of the cold regulated transcription factor ICE1 in tea plant[J]. Acta Hortic Sin, 2012, 39(7):1341-1352. DOI: 10.16420/j.issn.0513-353x.2012.07.002. doi: 10.16420/j.issn.0513-353x.2012.07.002
[14]	郭秀丽, 王玉, 杨路成, 等. 茶树CBF1基因密码子使用特性分析[J]. 遗传, 2012, 34(12):1614-1623.
	GUO X L, WANG Y, YANG L C, et al. Analysis of codon use features of CBF gene in Camellia sinensis[J]. Hereditas, 2012, 34(12):1614-1623. DOI: 10.3724/SP.J.1005.2012.01614. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1005.2012.01614
[15]	PAN L L, WANG Y, HU J H, et al. Analysis of codon use features of stearoyl-acyl carrier protein desaturase gene in Camellia sinensis[J]. J Theor Biol, 2013, 334:80-86. DOI: 10.1016/j.jtbi.2013.06.006. doi: 10.1016/j.jtbi.2013.06.006
[16]	ALTSCHUL S F, MADDEN T L, SCHÄFFER A A, et al. Gapped BLAST and PSI-BLAST:a new generation of protein database search programs[J]. Nucleic Acids Res, 1997, 25(17):3389-3402. DOI: 10.1093/nar/25.17.3389. doi: 10.1093/nar/25.17.3389
[17]	TANG F, CHEN N Z, ZHAO M L, et al. Identification and functional divergence analysis of WOX gene family in paper mulberry[J]. Int J Mol Sci, 2017, 18(8):1782. DOI: 10.3390/ijms18081782. doi: 10.3390/ijms18081782
[18]	ARTIMO P, JONNALAGEDDA M, ARNOLD K, et al. ExPASy:SIB bioinformatics resource portal[J]. Nucleic Acids Res, 2012,40(Web Server issue):597-603. DOI: 10.1093/nar/gks400. doi: 10.1093/nar/gks400
[19]	CHOU K C, SHEN H B. Cell-PLoc 2.0:an improved package of web-servers for predicting subcellular localization of proteins in various organisms[J]. Nat Sci, 2010, 2(10):1090-1103. DOI: 10.4236/ns.2010.210136. doi: 10.4236/ns.2010.210136
[20]	SHIELDS D C, SHARP P M. Synonymous codon usage in Bacillus subtilis reflects both translational selection and mutational biases[J]. Nucleic Acids Res, 1987, 15(19):8023-8040. DOI: 10.1093/nar/15.19.8023. doi: 10.1093/nar/15.19.8023
[21]	ZHOU M, TONG C F, SHI J S. Analysis of codon usage between different poplar species[J]. J Genet Genomics, 2007, 34(6):555-561. DOI: 10.1016/S1673-8527(07)60061-7. doi: 10.1016/S1673-8527(07)60061-7
[22]	Romero H, Zavala A, Musto H, Bernardi G. The influence of translational selection on codon usage in fishes from the family Cyprinidae[J]. Gene, 2003, 317:141-147. DOI: 10.1016/S0378-1119(03)00701-7. doi: 10.1016/S0378-1119(03)00701-7
[23]	ZHOU M, TONG C F, SHI J S. A preliminary analysis of synonymous codon usage in poplar species[J]. Journal of Plant Physiology & Molecular Biology, 2007, 33(4):285-293. DOI: 10.2471/BLT.13.118778. doi: 10.2471/BLT.13.118778
[24]	MAJEED A, KAUR H, BHARDWAJ P. Selection constraints determine preference for A/U-ending codons in Taxus contorta[J]. Genome, 2020, 63(4):215-224. DOI: 10.1139/gen-2019-0165. doi: 10.1139/gen-2019-0165
[25]	SUEOKA N. Translation-coupled violation of parity rule 2 in human genes is not the cause of heterogeneity of the DNA G+C content of third codon position[J]. Gene, 1999, 238(1):53-58. DOI: 10.1016/s0378-1119(99)00320-0. doi: 10.1016/s0378-1119(99)00320-0
[26]	FENNOY S L, BAILEY-SERRES J. Synonymous codon usage in Zea mays L.nuclear genes is varied by levels of C and G-ending codons[J]. Nucleic Acids Res, 1993, 21(23):5294-5300. DOI: 10.1093/nar/21.23.5294. doi: 10.1093/nar/21.23.5294
[27]	CHANG Y Y, SONG X B, ZHANG Q X, et al. Genome-wide identification of WOX gene family and expression analysis during rejuvenational rhizogenesis in walnut (Juglans regia L.)[J]. Forests, 2019, 11(1):16. DOI: 10.3390/f11010016. doi: 10.3390/f11010016
[28]	VAN DER GRAAFF E, LAUX T, RENSING S A. The WUS homeobox-containing (WOX) protein family[J]. Genome Biol, 2009, 10(12):248. DOI: 10.1186/gb-2009-10-12-248. doi: 10.1186/gb-2009-10-12-248
[29]	NARDMANN J, WERR W. The shoot stem cell niche in angiosperms:expression patterns of WUS orthologues in rice and maize imply major modifications in the course of mono-and dicot evolution[J]. Mol Biol Evol, 2006, 23(12):2492-2504. DOI: 10.1093/molbev/msl125. doi: 10.1093/molbev/msl125
[30]	LIU B B, WANG L, ZHANG J, et al. WUSCHEL-related homeobox genes in Populus tomentosa:diversified expression patterns and a functional similarity in adventitious root formation[J]. BMC Genomics, 2014, 15:296. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2164-15-296. doi: 10.1186/1471-2164-15-296
[31]	李晓旭, 刘成, 李伟, 等. 番茄WOX转录因子家族的鉴定及其进化、表达分析[J]. 遗传, 2016, 38(5):444-460.
	LI X X, LIU C, LI W, et al. Genome-wide identification,phylogenetic analysis and expression profiling of the WOX family genes in Solanum lycopersicum[J]. Hereditas, 2016, 38(5):444-460. DOI: 10.16288/j.yczz.15-499. doi: 10.16288/j.yczz.15-499
[32]	王占军, 李豹, 姜行舟, 等. 两种茶树全基因组数据的密码子偏好性比较分析[J]. 中国细胞生物学学报, 2018, 40(12):2028-2039.
	WANG Z J, LI B, JIANG X Z, et al. Comparative analysis of the codon preference patterns in two species of Camellia sinensis based on genome data[J]. Chin J Cell Biol, 2018, 40(12):2028-2039.
[33]	WANG Z J, WANG G Y, CAI Q W, et al. Genomewide comparative analysis of codon usage bias in three sequenced Jatropha curcas[J]. J Genet, 2021, 100(1):1-13. DOI: 10.1007/s12041-021-01271-9. doi: 10.1007/s12041-021-01271-9
[34]	LI N, SUN M H, JIANG Z S, et al. Genome-wide analysis of the synonymous codon usage patterns in apple[J]. J Integr Agric, 2016, 15(5):983. DOI: 10.1016/S2095-3119(16)61333-3. doi: 10.1016/S2095-3119(16)61333-3
[35]	SONG H, LIU J, CHEN T, et al. Synonymous codon usage pattern in model legume Medicago truncatula[J]. J Integr Agric, 2018, 17(9):2074-2081. DOI: 10.1016/S2095-3119(18)61961-6. doi: 10.1016/S2095-3119(18)61961-6
[36]	ADITAMA R, TANJUNG Z A, SUDANIA W M, et al. Analysis of codon usage bias reveals optimal codons in Elaeis guineensis[J]. Biodiversitas, 2020, 21(11):5311-5337. DOI: 10.13057/biodiv/d211138. doi: 10.13057/biodiv/d211138
[37]	李晓旭, 郭存, 蒲文宣, 等. 普通烟草WOX转录因子家族的全基因组鉴定及分析[J]. 中国烟草学报, 2021, 27(1):90-100.
	LI X X, GUO C, PU W X, et al. Genome-wide identification and systemic analysis of WOX family genes in tobacco[J]. Acta Tabacaria Sin, 2021, 27(1):90-100. DOI: 10.16472/j.chinatobacco.2020.t0039. doi: 10.16472/j.chinatobacco.2020.t0039

Metrics

Comments

www.nldxb.njfu.edu.cn

Edited ＆ Published by Editorial Department of Nanjing Forestry University(Natural Sciences Edition)
Address： No.159 Longpan Road,Nanjing 210037 Jiangsu,P.R.China
E-mail ：xuebao@njfu.edu.cn , xuebao@njfu.com.cn
Telephone +86-25-85428247,85427076
Distributed by China International Book Trading Corporation P.O. Box 399, Beijing ,P.R. China

碱基组成 base composition	CSA	CSS	DASZ
GC₁	46.369	46.228	47.543
GC₂	45.577	44.789	45.697
GC₃	46.050	47.303	45.087
平均average	45.999	46.107	46.109

A comparative study of the evolution and codon usage bias in WOX gene family of three Camellia sinensis cultivars

RichHTML

PDF

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 6

References 37

Related Articles 15

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments

Author

Reader

Reviewer

[1]	QUE Feng, LIU Qingnan, ZHA Ruofei, WEI Qiang. Identification and analysis of senescence related WRKYs in sheath of Bambusa multiplex [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2023, 47(6): 113-123.
[2]	QUE Feng, ZHA Ruofei, WEI Qiang. Advances in research of cellulose synthase genes in plants [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2022, 46(6): 207-214.
[3]	HE Qingqing, LIU Chuanqiang, LI Jianjian, WANG Jingjing, YAO Xiang, ZHOU Shenghao, CHEN Ying, WANG Haoran. Cloning of EoNLA gene in Eremochloa ophiuroides and the transgenic Arabidopsis phenotypic characterization under various phosphorus levels [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2022, 46(3): 134-142.
[4]	HE Xudong, ZHENG Jiwei, JIAO Zhongyi, DOU Quanqin, HUANG Libin. Genetic diversity and structure analyses of Quercus shumardii populations based on SLAF-seq technology [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2022, 46(2): 81-87.
[5]	YAN Zhixiang, YANG Haiyan, FAN Sufan, WU Wenlong, LYU Lianfei, LI Weilin. Analysis of the expression of sucrose phosphate synthase genes during the development of blackberry fruit [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2022, 46(1): 179-186.
[6]	ZHANG Qun, JI Xiaoyu, HE Zihang, WANG Zhibo, TIAN Zengzhi, WANG Chao. Cloning and salt tolerance analysis of BpGRAS1 gene in Betula platyphylla [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2021, 45(5): 38-46.
[7]	TIAN Xueyao, ZHOU Jie, WANG Baosong, HE Kaiyue, HE Xudong. Cloning and expression pattern analysis of NAC genes in Salix [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2020, 44(1): 119-124.
[8]	LI Dapei,WANG Yi ,ZHANG Shangkun ,ZHAO Xiang^1,2,ZHAO Huanyuan ,LIU Yumei^1,2,YANG Guiyan^{1,2 }. Drought resistance analysis of a V-ATPase c subunit(JrVHAc4)gene from Juglans regia* [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2019, 62(02): 79-85.
[9]	ZHOU Jie, HUANG Jing,XING Wei, WANG Baosong, HE Xudong, JIAO Zhongyi. Cloning and functional characterization of SlSIP from shrub Salix [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2019, 62(01): 39-44.
[10]	YANG Jie, SUN Lu, WANG Siyao, LI Ying, ZHAI Rui, LIN Xiangyu, ZHAN Yaguang, YIN Jing. Tissue specificity and hormone induced expression of three cytochrome P450 genes from Betula platyphylla Suk [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2018, 61(06): 27-34.
[11]	CAO Fan, PENG Fangren, LIANG Youwang, TAN Pengpeng, WANG Kechun, LYU Xin. Identification and function prediction of proteins during the adventitious rooting of pecan hardwood cuttings [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2016, 59(02): 53-58.
[12]	ZHOU Shan, ZHAN Yaguang, DONG Heng, LIU Jingjing, ZENG Fansuo. Bioinformation and expression pattern analysis of FmGT8 gene family in Fraxinus mandshurica [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2016, 59(02): 27-32.
[13]	NING Kun, SONG Xin, LI Huiyu. Cloning and expression analysis of ThGF14 gene in Tamarix hispida [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2016, 59(02): 33-40.
[14]	LI Leilei, SUN Fengkun, DONG Heng, ZHAN Yaguang, YAND Dan, ZENG Fansuo. The expression patterns of BpGT14 gene in Betula platypylla Suk. and the response to biotic stress [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2016, 59(02): 41-47.
[15]	LI Xun, GU Huaxiang, WANG Fei. Cloning, expression and characterization of a linoleic acid isomerase from Propionibacterium acnes [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2014, 57(06): 105-109.