Chinese Bulletin of Botany ›› 2019, Vol. 54 ›› Issue (4): 474-485.doi: 10.11983/CBB18200

• EXPERIMENTAL COMMUNICATIONS • Previous Articles     Next Articles

Evolution and Expression of NCED Family Genes in Vitis vinifera

Wang Xiaolong,Liu Fengzhi,Shi Xiangbin,Wang Xiaodi,Ji Xiaohao,Wang Zhiqiang,Wang Baoliang,Zheng Xiaocui,Wang Haibo()   

  1. Key Laboratory of Mineral Nutrition and Fertilizers Efficient Utilization of Deciduous Fruit Tree, Liaoning Province, Key Laboratory of Germplasm Resources Utilization of Horticultural Crops, Ministry of Agriculture, Fruit Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Xingcheng 125100, China
  • Received:2018-09-19 Accepted:2019-01-15 Online:2020-01-08 Published:2019-07-01
  • Contact: Wang Haibo


9-cis-epoxycarotenoid dioxygenase (NCED), a key rate-limiting enzyme in ABA biosynthesis in plants, is involved in plant drought, exogenous abscisic acid (ABA) and high salt response, and can reduce the damage of environmental stress on plants. With genome-wide identification and analysis of the grape NCED gene family, we aimed to understand the species evolution relationship and study the expression patterns of various genes in different tissues and under drought, ABA and high salt (NaCl) stress treatment, to lay the foundation for further study of the biological functions of NCED genes. A total of 12 NCED genes were found in the grape genome. The amino acid residues encoded by the genes are distributed between 510 aa (VvNCED2) and 625 aa (VvNCED10). The maximum molecular weight of the VvNCED protein was 70.53 kDa (VvNCED10) and the minimum was 57.85 kDa (VvNCED2). After differentiation from the ancestral gene, the grape NCED genes had five replication events with two loss events. The NCED1/2, NCED3/4, NCED6/7 and NCED9/10 gene pairs are thought to be produced by segmental duplication. The replication time of segmental duplication ranged from 3.08 to 120.0 million years ago, which is later than the differentiation of monocotyledons. As compared with the control, VvNCED1 was significantly upregulated by 72.1% after 48 h of ABA treatment, whereas VvNCED2 was significantly downregulated by 84.0%. The expression of VvNCED6 was higher in only roots under drought treatment for 14, 21 and 28 days than in the control: 2.49, 1.05 and 1.09 times of control values, respectively. The expression of VvNCED7 was only 1.07 times higher than the control value in roots under drought treatment for 14 days. After 72 h of ABA treatment, the expression of VvNCED3 was significantly downregulated by 59.5% as compared with the control, whereas VvNCED4 was significantly upregulated by 169.9% as compared with the control. The significant peaks in expression of VvNCED3/VvNCED4 after NaCl treatment were 24 and 48 h, respectively, up by 219.2% and 114.4%. The differential conserved-domain expression patterns with different stress treatments are the basis for the functional differentiation of NCED proteins. The functional differentiation of NCED during evolution may be conducive to the occurrence of replication events.

Key words: NCED gene family, grapevine, abiotic stress, gene expression

Table 1

The primer sequences used for quantitative RT-PCR"

Gene name Forward primer (5'-3') Reverse primer (5'-3')

Table 2

NCED genes identified in grapevine and their detailed information"

Gene name Accession No. Chromosome location
(start, end)
Length of amino acids (aa) Molecular
weight (kDa)
Theoretical pI GRAVY
VvNCED1 VIT_213s0064g00840.1 Chr.13 (22672994, 22681910) 546 61.63 6.13 -0.271
VvNCED2 VIT_213s0064g00810.1 Chr.13 (22587965, 22596719) 510 57.85 6.23 -0.250
VvNCED3 VIT_202s0087g00910.1 Chr.2 (18560696, 18562591) 599 65.90 6.88 -0.236
VvNCED4 VIT_202s0087g00930.1 Chr.2 (18588853, 18590786) 589 65.61 6.63 -0.187
VvNCED5 VIT_216s0039g01370.1 Chr.16 (789473, 791221) 558 62.09 5.57 -0.197
VvNCED6 VIT_219s0093g00550.1 Chr.19 (17645348, 17647649) 609 67.13 6.38 -0.317
VvNCED7 VIT_210s0003g03750.1 Chr.10 (6374432, 6376728) 605 67.34 6.36 -0.365
VvNCED8 VIT_205s0051g00670.1 Chr.5 (11589343, 11591102) 575 63.14 8.24 -0.202
VvNCED9 VIT_204s0008g03510.1 Chr.4 (2883265, 2886523) 567 63.72 5.73 -0.335
VvNCED10 VIT_204s0008g03480.1 Chr.4 (2873553, 2878309) 625 70.53 6.43 -0.305
VvNCED11 VIT_204s0008g03380.1 Chr.4 (2784465, 2788790) 563 62.34 7.27 -0.339
VvNCED12 VIT_215s0021g02190.1 Chr.15 (13131078, 13135539) 610 68.46 7.31 -0.313

Figure 1

Joint phylogenetic tree (A) and amplification model (B) of NCED gene from grape, Arabidopsis and rice The red five-pointed stars in the figure represent the most recent common ancestral differentiation node before species differentiation. The numbers in the red and blue circles represent the number of duplication and loss events that occur after the species differentiated nodes, respectively. The numbers in the green solid box represent the number of NCED genes."

Figure 2

Phylogenetic relationship (A) and gene structure (B) of grape NCED genes"

Figure 3

Schematic structure of conserved motifs identified in grapevine NCED proteins The grey bars represent the full length of NCED proteins, and the numbers in the other colored boxes are random numbers for the conserved domains located at NCED protein. The same number represents the same conserved domain."

Figure 4

Expression pattern of NCED genes at different developmental stages and in some specialized tissues of grapevine The 54 tissue names and gene names are located above and to the right of the heat map, respectively. The scale bar above the heat map indicates the geng expression level from 0.0 to 3.49."

Figure 5

Expression pattern of grapevine NCED genes under drought treatments The drought treatments (DL1-DL5 indicate drought treatment for 0, 7, 14, 21 and 28 days of leaf tissue, respectively; DR1-DR5 indicate drought treatment for 0, 7, 14, 21 and 28 days of root tissue, respectively) and gene names are located above and to the right of the heat map, respectively. The scale bar above the heat map indicates the gene expression level from 0.0 to 77.06. Solid dots of the same color represent duplicated gene pairs."

Figure 6

Expression pattern of grapevine NCED genes under ABA treatments Different lowercase letters above the histogram indicate significant differences among the different time points of the treatment (P<0.05)."

Figure 7

Expression pattern of grapevine NCED genes under NaCl treatments Different lowercase letters above the histogram indicate significant differences among the different time points of the treatment (P<0.05)."

[1] 白戈, 杨大海, 姚恒, 谢贺 ( 2017). 烟草NtNCED基因的鉴定分析. 分子植物育种 15, 3907-3912.
[2] 徐学中, 汪婷, 万旺, 李思慧, 朱国辉 ( 2018). 水稻ABA生物合成基因OsNCED3响应干旱胁迫. 作物学报 44, 24-31.
[3] Adams KL, Cronn R, Percifield R, Wendel JF ( 2003). Genes duplicated by polyploidy show unequal contributions to the transcriptome and organ-specific reciprocal silencing. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 100, 4649-4654.
[4] Ahrazem O, Rubio-Moraga A, Trapero A, Gómez-Gómez L ( 2012). Developmental and stress regulation of gene expression for a 9-cis-epoxycarotenoid dioxygenase, Cst NCED, isolated from Crocus sativus stigmas. J Exp Bot 63, 681-694.
[5] Chaw SM, Chang CC, Chen HL, Li WH ( 2004). Dating the monocot-dicot divergence and the origin of core eudicots using whole chloroplast genomes. J Mol Evol 58, 424-441.
[6] Cohen-Gihon I, Sharan R, Nussinov R ( 2011). Processes of fungal proteome evolution and gain of function: gene duplication and domain rearrangement. Phys Biol 8, 035009.
[7] Fasoli M, Dal Santo S, Zenoni S, Tornielli GB, Farina L, Zamboni A, Porceddu A, Venturini L, Bicego M, Murino V, Ferrarini A, Delledonne M, Pezzotti M ( 2012). The grapevine expression atlas reveals a deep transcriptome shift driving the entire plant into a maturation program. Plant Cell 24, 3489-3505.
[8] Gaut BS, Morton BR, McCaig BC, Clegg MT ( 1996). Substitution rate comparisons between grasses and palms: synonymous rate differences at the nuclear gene Adh parallel rate differences at the plastid gene rbcL. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 93, 10274-10279.
[9] Gu ZL, Nicolae D, Lu HHS, Li WH ( 2002). Rapid divergence in expression between duplicate genes inferred from microarray data. Trends Genet 18, 609-613.
[10] Gu ZL, Rifkin SA, White KP, Li WH ( 2004). Duplicate genes increase gene expression diversity within and between species. Nat Genet 36, 577-579.
[11] Guo CL, Guo RR, Xu XZ, Gao M, Li XQ, Song JY, Zheng Y, Wang XP ( 2014). Evolution and expression analysis of the grape (Vitis vinifera L.) WRKY gene family. J Exp Bot 65, 1513-1528.
[12] Jaillon O, Aury JM, Noel B, Policriti A, Clepet C, Casagrande A, Choisne N, Aubourg S, Vitulo N, Jubin C, Vezzi A, Legeai F, Hugueney P, Dasilva C, Horner D, Mica E, Jublot D, Poulain J, Bruyère C, Billault A, Segurens B, Gouyvenoux M, Ugarte E, Cattonaro F, Anthouard V, Vico V, Del Fabbro C, Alaux M, Di Gaspero G, Dumas V, Felice N, Paillard S, Juman I, Moroldo M, Scalabrin S, Canaguier A, Le Clainche I, Malacrida G, Durand E, Pesole G, Laucou V, Chatelet P, Merdinoglu D, Delledonne M, Pezzotti M, Lecharny A, Scarpelli C, Artiguenave F, Pè ME, Valle G, Morgante M, Caboche M, Adam-Blondon AF, Weissenbach J, Quétier F, Wincker P ( 2007). The grapevine genome sequence suggests ancestral hexaploidization in major angiosperm phyla. Nature 449, 463-467.
[13] Malacarne G, Perazzolli M, Cestaro A, Sterck L, Fontana P, Van de Peer Y, Viola R, Velasco R, Salamini F ( 2012). Deconstruction of the (Paleo) polyploid grapevine genome based on the analysis of transposition events involving NBS resistance genes. PLoS One 7, e29762.
[14] McAdam SAM, Brodribb TJ ( 2015). The evolution of mechanisms driving the stomatal response to vapor pressure deficit. Plant Physiol 167, 833-843.
[15] McAdam SAM, Brodribb TJ, Banks JA, Hedrich R, Atallah NM, Cai C, Geringer MA, Lind C, Nichols DS, Stachowski K, Geiger D, Sussmilch FC ( 2016). Abscisic acid controlled sex before transpiration in vascular plants. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 113, 12862-12867.
[16] Raghavendra AS, Gonugunta VK, Christmann A, Grill E ( 2010). ABA perception and signaling. Trends Plant Sci 15, 395-401.
[17] Roychoudhury A, Paul S, Basu S ( 2013). Cross-talk between abscisic acid-dependent and abscisic acid-independent pathways during abiotic stress. Plant Cell Rep 32, 985-1006.
[18] Saeed AI, Bhagabati NK, Braisted JC, Liang W, Sharov V, Howe EA, Li JW, Thiagarajan M, White JA, Quackenbush J ( 2006). TM4 microarray software suite. Methods Enzymol 411, 134-193.
[19] Sussmilch FC, Brodribb TJ, McAdam SAM ( 2017). What are the evolutionary origins of stomatal responses to abscisic acid in land plants? J Integr Plant Biol 59, 240-260.
[20] Tan BC, Joseph LM, Deng WT, Liu LJ, Li QB, Cline K, McCarty DR ( 2010). Molecular characterization of the Arabidopsis 9-cis epoxycarotenoid dioxygenase gene family. Plant J 35, 44-56.
[21] Wang RY, Yang Y, Wang HG, Chen L, Wang L, Lu P, Liu MX, Qiao ZJ ( 2018). Cloning of gene PmNCED1 and its response to PEG stress in common millet. J Nuclear Agric Sci 32, 244-256.
[22] Yang SH, Zhang XH, Yue JX, Tian DC, Chen JQ ( 2008). Recent duplications dominate NBS-encoding gene expan- sion in two woody species. Mol Genet Genom 280, 187-198.
[23] Ye X, Kang BG, Osburn LD, Li Y, Cheng ZM ( 2009). Identification of the flavin-dependent monooxygenase- encoding YUCCA gene family in Populus trichocarpa and their expression in vegetative tissues and in response to hormone and environmental stresses. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult 97, 271-283.
[24] Zhang JZ ( 2003). Evolution by gene duplication: an update. Trends Ecol Evol 18, 292-298.
[1] Lei -Yang. Advances in AP2/ERF transcription factors regulating plant abiotic stress response [J]. Chinese Bulletin of Botany, 2020, 55(4): 0-0.
[2] Wang Menglong,Peng Xiaoqun,Chen Zhufeng,Tang Xiaoyan. Research Advances on Lectin Receptor-like Kinases in Plants [J]. Chinese Bulletin of Botany, 2020, 55(1): 96-105.
[3] Zhang Xun, Yu Juanjuan, Wang Sizhu, Li Ying, Dai Shaojun. Research Advances in DREPP Gene Family in Plants [J]. Chinese Bulletin of Botany, 2019, 54(5): 582-595.
[4] Fan Yegeng, Qiu Lihang, Huang Xing, Zhou Huiwen, Gan Chongkun, Li Yangrui, Yang Rongzhong, Wu Jianming, Chen Rongfa. Expression Analysis of Key Genes in Gibberellin Biosynthesis and Related Phytohormonal Dynamics During Sugarcane Internode Elongation [J]. Chinese Bulletin of Botany, 2019, 54(4): 486-496.
[5] Hua Wenping,Chen Chen,Zhi Yuan,Liu Li,Wang Zhezhi,Li Cuiqin. Effect of SmGGPPS2 Expression on Tanshinones Biosynthesis in Salvia miltiorrhiza [J]. Chinese Bulletin of Botany, 2019, 54(2): 217-226.
[6] Liu Ming, Liu Xia, Sun Ran, Li Yuling, Du Kejiu. Polychlorinated Biphenyls Promotes Differentiation on Adventitious Roots of Populous tomentosa [J]. Chinese Bulletin of Botany, 2018, 53(6): 764-772.
[7] Du Kangxi, Shen Wenhui, Dong Aiwu. Advances in Epigenetic Regulation of Abiotic Stress Response in Plants [J]. Chinese Bulletin of Botany, 2018, 53(5): 581-593.
[8] Sun Wanmei, Wang Xiaozhu, Han Erqin, Han Li, Sun Liping, Peng Zaihui, Wang Bangjun. Advances in the Functions of Immunophilins in Plants [J]. Chinese Bulletin of Botany, 2017, 52(6): 808-819.
[9] Lulong Sun, Wei Song, Yuanpeng Du, Heng Zhai. Application of Photochemical Reflectance Index in Comparing Frost Resistance of Grapevine Cultivars [J]. Chinese Bulletin of Botany, 2017, 52(5): 543-549.
[10] Bang-Liang DENG, Qian LIU, Xi-Shuai LIU, Li-Ya ZHENG, Liang-Bo JIANG, Xiao-Min GUO, Yuan-Qiu LIU, Ling ZHANG. Effects of enhanced UV-B radiation and nitrogen deposition on the growth of invasive plant Triadica sebifera [J]. Chin J Plan Ecolo, 2017, 41(4): 471-479.
[11] Lingling Zhang, Dan Wu, Zijie Zhao, Liqun Zhao. Research Progress in Nitric Oxide Signaling Molecule in Plants [J]. Chinese Bulletin of Botany, 2017, 52(3): 337-345.
[12] Jinfei Zhang, Xia Li, Yinfeng Xie. The Function of Sucrose Nonfermenting-1 Related Protein Kinases in Stress Signaling [J]. Chinese Bulletin of Botany, 2017, 52(3): 346-357.
[13] Wang Ling, Guo Changkui, Ren Ding, Ma Hong. Molecular Evolution and Expression Analysis of the OsMIP1 Response to Abiotic Stress [J]. Chinese Bulletin of Botany, 2017, 52(1): 43-53.
[14] Li Jiao, Shufang Fu, Yali Zhang, Jiang Lu. U-box E3 Ubiquitin Ligases Regulate Stress Tolerance and Growth of Plants [J]. Chinese Bulletin of Botany, 2016, 51(5): 724-735.
[15] Ying Bao*, Jiaxiao Du, Xiang Jing, Si Xu. Sequence Divergence and Expression Specificity of the Starch Synthase Gene Family in Oryza officinalis Leaf [J]. Chinese Bulletin of Botany, 2015, 50(6): 683-690.
Full text



[1] TANG Zhong-Hua YU Jing-Hua YANG Feng-Jian ZU Yuan-Gang. Metabolic Biology of Plant Alkaloids[J]. Chinese Bulletin of Botany, 2003, 20(06): 696 -702 .
[2] Chunlin Long;Meilan Li . Status and Conservation Strategies of Community Plant Genetic Resources—A Case Study in Manlun, a Dai Village in Xishuangbanna[J]. Chinese Bulletin of Botany, 2006, 23(2): 177 -185 .
[3] KONG Hai-Yan JIA Gui-Xia WEN Yue-Ge. The Role of Calcium in Flower Development[J]. Chinese Bulletin of Botany, 2003, 20(02): 168 -177 .
[4] CHEN Jian-San and ZHAO Shi-Xu. A Study Cell Embryology of Rice 84-15[J]. Chinese Bulletin of Botany, 1999, 16(03): 284 -287 .
[5] Yanqing Zhou, Wanshen Wang, Xiangnan Wang, Hongying Duan. Recent Progress in DNA Molecular Markers and Gene Functions of Rehmannia glutinosa[J]. Chinese Bulletin of Botany, 2015, 50(5): 665 -672 .
[6] Han Yeliang. A Discussion on the Northern Boundary of the Subtropical Evergreen Broad-leaf Forest Zone in Anhui Province (Abstract)[J]. Chin J Plan Ecolo, 1981, 5(1): 54 -57 .
[7] Li Yi-de, Zeng Qing-bo, Wu Zhong-min, Du Zhi-hu, Zhou Guang-yi, Chen Bu-feng, Zhang Zhen-cai, Chen Huan-qiang. Study on Biomass of Tropical Mountain Rain Forest in Jianfengling, Hainan Province[J]. Chin J Plan Ecolo, 1992, 16(4): 293 -300 .
[8] XIA Jiang-Bao, ZHANG Guang-Can, SUN Jing-Kuan, LIU Xia. Threshold effects of photosynthetic and physiological parameters in Prunus sibirica to soil moisture and light intensity[J]. Chin J Plan Ecolo, 2011, 35(3): 322 -329 .
[9] Deng Lianhe, Zhou Xincheng. Suggestion to Protect the Community Composed of Rare Tree Species of Houhe Forest Area in Wufeng County, Hubei Province[J]. Chin J Plan Ecolo, 1982, 6(1): 84 .
[10] JIANG Xiao-Jie, HU Yan-Ling, HAN Jian-Qiu, and ZHOU Yu-Mei. Effects of warming on carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus stoichiometry in tundra soil and leaves of typical plants[J]. Chin J Plan Ecolo, 2014, 38(9): 941 -948 .