Abstract
Plants have evolved various defense mechanisms including morphological adaptations, cellular pathways, specific signalling molecules and inherent immunity to endure various abiotic stresses during different growth stages. Most of the defense mechanisms are controlled by stress-responsive genes by transcribing and translating specific genes. However, certain modifications of DNA and chromatin along with small RNA-based mechanisms have also been reported to regulate the expression of stress-responsive genes and constitute another line of defense for plants in their struggle against stresses. More recently, studies have suggested that these modifications are heritable to the future generations as well, thereby indicating their possible role in the evolutionary mechanisms related to abiotic stresses.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
Abiotic stresses in crop plants constitute one of the serious threats to food security causing reduction in crop productivity leading to economic losses. The regions that faced abiotic stress (heat stress) year after year were most affected, as farmers have reduced total area under cultivation. Abiotic stresses lead to a series of complex changes at molecular, biochemical and physiological levels that culminate into morphological changes affecting crop yield and productivity (Asada 2006). However, plants have evolved an array of defense mechanisms to adapt to different stresses by quick and coordinated changes at transcriptional and post-transcriptional levels (Boyko and Kovalchuk 2008). The stress tolerance mechanisms have been reported to inherit over generations, though the inheritance mechanism may differ among plant species based upon intensity and duration of stress and the genetic composition of the plant species (Chen et al. 2010).
Alterations in DNA sequence as a result of mutations leads to trait variation that plant breeders often use to estimate heritability and improve trait performance among the plant populations. In addition to DNA sequence variations, findings have also suggested that plant response to stresses can be attributed to the changes in chromatin states (Gehring and Henikoff 2007). The chromatin structures can be modified rapidly and reversibly by the insertion of methyl groups (Chinnusamy and Zhu 2009). Such modifications that alter expression of genes without disturbing its nucleotide sequence are referred to as epigenetic changes (Madlung and Comai 2004).
The concept of epigenetics has its roots in the ancient theory of epigenesis proposed by Aristotle to condemn the theory of perforation. However, the modern concept of epigenetics was developed in twentieth century by Waddington (1942) in the proposed model of “Epigenetics Landscape” (Tsaftaris et al. 2007). In the present context “epigenetics refers to both heritable changes in gene activity and expression (in the progeny of cells or of individuals) and also stable, long-term alterations in the transcriptional potential of a cell that are not necessarily heritable” (NIH “Roadmap Epigenomics Project 2013”). These changes are either mitotically stable or may be meiotically heritable for several future generations despite the fact that they do not cause any change in the core DNA sequences of an organism (Bird 2007; Bonasio et al. 2010). In the recent years, both genetic and biochemical studies have enhanced our knowledge of various epigenetic processes that involved DNA methylation, histone modification and RNA-mediated gene silencing. These processes are correlated with each other as DNA methylation is required for chromatin modifications and vice versa, while RNAi-based mechanisms regulate both the processes (Fig. 1) (Hidetoshi et al. 2012).
Epigenetic mechanisms play an essential role in gene expression regulation in response to environmental stresses in plants (Boyko and Kovalchuk 2008; Pontvianne et al. 2010). Abiotic stresses like temperature, day length, UV, water, salt, and oxidative stresses in plants cause modifications in the (de)methylation pattern at coding region of some stress-responsive genes and regulate their expression (Beck et al. 2004; Pecinka et al. 2009; Boyko et al. 2010b; Zemach et al. 2013; Fang et al. 2014; Xie and Yu 2015). Though these modifications can be specific to tissue, species, organelle or age of an organism (Bhutani et al. 2011); the mechanisms involved need to be studied thoroughly to produce plants for future that are engineered with the ability to have minimal effect of a stress. In this review, efforts have been made to discuss the recent advances and mechanisms related to epigenetics that are involved in abiotic stress and their generational heritability.
Master regulators of epigenetics at molecular level
Modifications at the genomic (DNA methylation) and chromatin (histone modifications) levels have so far been the focus of research into the mechanism of epigenetics that regulate expression of a gene. Of late, the RNA-directed DNA methylation (RdDM) has also been shown to be involved in the methylation of homologous loci in a genome. Together, all three mechanisms have been involved in the regulation of gene expression.
DNA methylation
Enzyme catalyzed transfer of a methyl moiety from S-adenosyl methionine to 5th position of the cytosine residue of DNA (converting it to 5-methylcytosine often referred as 5mC) brings about a conserved and sometimes heritable modification that results into an epigenetic event also termed as DNA methylation. The 5mC promotes transcriptional repression by preventing the activators from binding to their target sites. The transcriptional regulation of genes serves as an adaptation towards different stresses. The degree of gene regulation depends upon the intensity and duration of stress (Urano et al. 2010). These classes of plant adaption towards different stresses that occurs by modifying the DNA methylation blueprint can be termed as DNA Methylation Mediated Adaptations (DAMMS). DAMMS depends upon the degree of 5mC in plants which ranges from 4 to 37 percent depending upon the species (Steward et al. 2000). The total 5mC content of a plant genome correlates with the repetitive content of a genome (Bender 2004). The majority of methylated residues in plants are found in repetitive sequences harbouring heterochromatin regions, but few genes have also been reported to undergo methylation in euchromatin region (Saze et al. 2012).
DNA methylation in plants can be grouped into two types: symmetrical (CG or CNG) and non-symmetrical {CNN (N = A, C or T)}. The symmetrical (CG and CNG) methylation pattern are easily-copied after DNA replication while non-symmetrical (CNN) methylation has to be established de novo after each cycle of DNA replication (Karlsson et al. 2011). In Arabidopsis, dense CG methylation clusters scattered throughout the genome have been reported (Cokus et al. 2008).
DNA methylation is catalysed by a family of conserved DNA methylases (MTases) that are categorised into two groups depending upon the establishment of DNA methylation pattern: (1) maintenance MTases, which are able to maintain and transmit stable 5mC patterns through consecutive generations, and (2) de novo MTases, that can transfer methyl groups to unmethylated cytosines, include Methyltransferase 1 (MET1), Chromomethylase 3 (CMT3) and domains rearranged methylase (DRM) (Sahu et al. 2013). MET1, an homologue of the mouse Dnmt1 (DNA methyltransferases 1) most likely function as maintenance methyltransferases, but may also play a role in de novo methylation. The Arabidopsis MET1 gene, a member of a small multigene family, preferably methylates cytosines in CpG sequences (Zemach et al. 2010). The CMT3 methylates CpNpG sequences particularly in centromeric repeats and transposons (Henikoff and Comai 1998). These methyltransferases transmit the symmetric methylation (CpG and CpNpG) imprints on the parental DNA (Bond and Baulcombe 2014). DRM, a homologue of Dnmt1 in plants includes three types of DNA methyltransferases; DRM1, DRM2 and DRM3. DRMs catalyse de novo methylation of cytosine at asymmetrical CpNpNp sites (Cao and Jacobsen 2002; Takuno and Gaut 2012). Both DRM2 and DRM3 have been reported to controls RNA-directed DNA methylation via a pathway that regulates plant-specific RNA Polymerase V in Arabidopsis (Grativol et al. 2012; Xuehua et al. 2014).
Demethylation of cytosines is equally important as it brings modified sites back to their native state and therefore affecting gene expression. The removal of methyl group from cytosines is mediated by either passive or active mechanism. Incorporation of unmodified cytosines, which may be due to the loss of activity of maintenance DNA methylases, i.e., MET1 and CMT3, during DNA replication, refers to as passive mechanism (Zhu 2009). As a result of the enzyme inactivity, there is a progressive loss of DNA methylation in the subsequent generations (Ibarra et al. 2012). Active DNA demethylation involves a base excision repair pathway undertaken by various DNA methylases which possess either only glycosylase activity (monofunctional DNA glycosylase) or both glycosylase and lyase activity (bifunctional DNA glycosylase). The 5mC is removed as a free base and a single base gap left behind is filled by a non-methylated cytosine by DNA polymerase and ligase (Agius et al. 2006; Bhutani et al. 2011). The target sequences for demethylation are identified by demethylases either by sliding on the DNA molecule or as a result of interaction with the repressor of silencing (ROS) 1 complex (Ponferrada-Marin et al. 2012). Four DNA demethylases have been reported in Arabidopsis and these include Repressor of Silencing 1 (ROS1), DEMETER (DME), DEMETER-LIKE (DML2) and DML3 (Gong et al. 2002; Ortega-Galisteo et al. 2008). These DNA demethylases also prevent the formation of stable hypermethylated epi-alleles in plant genomes and thus maintain equilibrium between methylated and unmethylated DNA (Penterman et al. 2007).
Histone modifications
Post-translational modifications of histones (acetylation, ubiquitination, biotinylation, methylation, sumoylation and phosphorylation) are key regulator of DNA-associated processes. The histone protein is an octamer with two copies each of histone 2A (H2A), histone 2B (H2B), histone 3 (H3) and histone 4 (H4). The amino acid residues on H3 and H4 are more prone to modifications due to the protruding end of N-terminal tail that is easily accessible to modifying enzymes. The histone tail modification is a key control point in determining chromatin structure and gene regulations (Eichten et al. 2014). While phosphorylation, acetylation and ubiquitination of histone tails are associated with gene up-regulation, the processes of de-acetylation and biotinylation are associated with gene down-regulation (Chen et al. 2010). Histone methylation is one of the most important covalent modifications, as it has been reported to affect both up- and down-regulation of gene expression (Law and Jacobsen 2010). Gene expression can be affected by site, degree and number of methyl groups that are being added to the lysine and arginine residue (Ding et al. 2012). In Arabidopsis, methylation of histone H3 at K4 and K36 is associated with actively transcribed genes, whereas H3 methylation at K9 and K27 is predominant at constitutively condensed chromatin and developmentally inactive global genes (Nakayama et al. 2001; Li et al. 2012). In case of acetylation, Lys-36 in histone H3 (H3K36ac) is newly discovered to be involved in various chromatin modification in plants (Mahrez et al. 2016).
Extensive enzymatic machinery is involved in histone modifications including histone methyltransferase (HMT), histone de-methylase (HDM), histone acetyltransferase (HAT), and histone de-acetylase (HDAC) as key enzymes (Marmorstein and Trievel 2009; Grativol et al. 2012). Histone methyltransferase (HMT) catalyze the transfer of up to three methyl groups to lysine and arginine residues on histones H3 and H4. Depending upon the domain they enclose in their structure, HMT can be classified as- lysine-specific conserved SET-domain protein family and arginine-specific protein family (Wood 2004; Sawan and Herceg 2010). The lysine-specific conserved SET proteins originally identified in Drosophila and are referred to as suppressor of variegation (Su-var3-9) (Tschiersch et al. 1994), Enhancer of zeste (Ez) (Jones and Gelbart 1993) and Trithorax (Trx) (Stassen et al. 1995)—hence the name SET. These domains catalysed the histone lysine methylation (except in H3K79), and have vital effect on the formation of heterochromatin and transcriptional regulation of genes depending upon mono-, di- or tri-methylation of distinct lysine residues (Qian and Zhou 2006). So far, a total of 41 SET-domain proteins encoded by 29 active genes have been reported in Arabidopsis (Pontvianne et al. 2010). The identification of putative nuclear localization signals in many SET-domain proteins and crystal structures of the ternary complexes of SET-domain proteins bound to AdoHcy and histone H3 peptides have elucidated beyond doubt their role in chromatin remodelling and epigenetic control over chromatin function (Xiao et al. 2003).
Arginine-specific protein family consists of two different types of methyltransferases; the first type produces mono- and di-methylarginine (asymmetric), while the second type produces mono- and symmetric di-methylarginine. Arginine-specific protein family is also involved in many animal diseases as well (Scaramuzzino et al. 2015). HMT also causes the methylation of both heterochromatin and euchromatin, although heterochromatin is more methylated as compared to active euchromatin. Methylation of H3K9, H3K27, H3K79 and H4K20 that occurs in the heterochromatin region causes the gene silencing while methylation of H3K4 at euchromatin region causes the gene expression (Tsaftaris et al. 2007; Jacob et al. 2014). The silencing and expression of different genes occur in response to different stresses, thus constitutes an important strategy in plants to survive.
Histone demethylases (HDM) remove methyl group from histones and alter transcriptional regulation of a gene by maintaining a control on the methylation level of histones. Shi et al. (2004) reported four histone demethylases in Arabidopsis on the basis of conserved domain of human LSD1 (lysine-specific demethylase1). Two classes of HDM were reported to reverse the methylation pattern of lysine. The LSD1 class (lysine-specific demethylase 1) of HDM act on mono- and di-methylated lysines and the LSD2 (Jumonji C) domain de-methylates mono-, di- and tri-methylated lysine by hydroxylation (Metzger et al. 2005; Tsukada et al. 2006). These classes of demethylases are also reported to control the gene expression in the plants under stress (Shen et al. 2014). Histone acetyltransferases (HAT) acetylate conserved lysine on histone proteins by transferring an acetyl group. HAT enzymes are involved in transcriptional activation, generating binding sites for specific protein and in acetylating nuclear receptors proteins to facilitate gene expression in various plant development process (Yuan and Marmorstein 2013; Fang et al. 2014). Histone de-acetylase (HDAC) remove acetyl groups from lysine residue of histone and act in synchronization with histone acetyltransferases to regulate active and reversible histone acetylation which modifies chromatin structure and function thus, controlling multiple cellular processes (Hollender and Liu 2008; Ma et al. 2013).
RNA-directed DNA methylation
Double stranded RNA (ds-RNA) molecules induced sequence-specific methylation to cause de novo methylation, called as RNA-directed DNA methylation (RdDM). In plants, dsRNA structures are generated as intermediates of viral replication intermediates, products of the endogenous RNA-directed RNA polymerase or through transcribed inverted repeats (Law and Jacobsen 2010). RdDM is inter-related with the RNA interference (RNAi) suggesting that small RNAs have a role in eliciting and guiding cytosine methylation (Wassenegger et al. 1994; Meister and Tuschl 2004). Small RNAs are a class of RNAs that do not code for proteins and their function depends on their structure. In plants, small RNAs are classified into- micro RNA (miRNA) and small interfering RNA (siRNA) based on their origin, structure and pathways they regulate. MicroRNAs are small (21–24 nucleotides long) non-coding RNA structures, encoded by eukaryotic nuclear DNA in plants and functions in RNA silencing and post-transcriptional regulation of gene expression (Lee et al. 1993; Maxwell et al. 2012).
Small interfering RNAs are 20–25 nucleotide (nt) long ds-stranded RNA structures that also regulates gene expression at the transcriptional (RNA silencing) and post-transcriptional levels. Plants have distinct classes of endogenous siRNAs, such as: trans-acting siRNAs, natural antisense siRNAs, and heterochromatic-siRNAs (Xu et al. 2013). The siRNAs are responsible for mediating gene silencing through RdDM and histone methylation (Mosher et al. 2008). The RdDM mechanism initiated with the production of single stranded RNAs (ssRNAs) requires as CLASSY1 (CLSY1), a potential chromatin remodelling protein, and DNA-directed RNA Polymerases IV; the ssRNAs are generated from transposons or repeats containing regions (Havecker et al. 2010) by DdR Pol IV a with the help of SHH1 (Sawadee Homeodomain Homolog1) (Law et al. 2013) and DTF1 (DNA-binding Transcriptional Factor1) (Zhang et al. 2013). These ssRNAs are later converted into double stranded RNA (dsRNA) by RDR2 (Fig. 2).
The dsRNAs processed by DICER-LIKE3 (DCL3) and HUA-ENCHANCER1 (HEN1) after methylation of 3ʹ terminal ends with the help of methyltransferase, are loaded onto the effector protein called Argonaut4 (AGO4). A complex of AGO4 (containing guide RNA strand) and Nuclear RNA Polymerase E1 (NRPE1) subunit of Pol V target guide strand RNA to base pair with gene transcript to be silenced (Law and Jacobsen 2010). The siRNA and associated proteins recruits DNA methyltransferase to catalyze de novo CpNpN-type asymmetric DNA methylation in the promoter regions of PolV transcript (Bologna 2014). These RdDM pathways are biologically important since they control adaptation responses in different stress (biotic and abiotic), maintain genome stability and regulate development (Xie and Yu 2015). However, recent studies also confirmed that RdDM is not always related with the accumulation of corresponding siRNAs (Dalakouras et al. 2015). In the absence of RdDM, asymmetric methylation is lost, while CHG methylation is efficiently maintained by the Maintenance Methyltransferase1 (MET1) and Chromomethyltransferase3 (CMT3), respectively (Dalakouras and Wassenegger 2013).
Though being different, the mode of action exhibited by both miRNA and siRNAs in inhibiting the translation of DNA sequence suggested some kind of relatedness in their biogenesis and mechanism (Carthew and Sontheimer 2009). Both small RNAs—miRNAs and siRNAs play an important role in plant development and the adaptation responses to various biotic and abiotic stresses. Moreover, the gene regulation that are control by these small RNAs could be inherited, thus have gained much consideration as epigenetic processes that are involved in plant stress responses (Bologna 2014).
Epigenetic mechanisms and abiotic stress
The plants have evolved highly regulated yet interdependent mechanisms to adapt and survive under changing environments. The discovery of functional small RNAs (smRNAs), and their role in chromatin remodelling and RNA-directed DNA methylation (RdDM) have allowed for a better understanding of the regulatory networks triggered in response to abiotic stresses in plants (Hirayama and Shinozaki 2010).
DNA methylation pattern during abiotic stresses
In response to the abiotic stresses, DNA methylation regulates the gene expression by hindering/suppressing transcription. Changes in DNA methylation contribute significantly to the plants’ ability to respond to stresses (Boyko and Kovalchuk 2008). The level of DNA methylation increases (hypermethylation) or decreases (demethylation) in response to a stress. However, the changes in methylation patterns depend on the type of stress response (Bonasio et al. 2010). Mangrove and rice plants grown under high salinity conditions show hypermethylation when compared to plants grown under normal soil conditions (Lira-Medeiros et al. 2010; Karan et al. 2012). Rice genotypes grown under drought condition were predominantly hypermethylated while drought tolerant genotypes were hypomethylated (Gayacharan 2013). In case of tobacco under biotic stress (infection with tobacco mosaic virus (TMV), the hypomethylation results in specific expression of 31 genes, which are related to stress response (Wada et al. 2004). The methylation of CG, CNG and CNN mediated by CMT3 and DRM2 also play differential role in stress conditions. In rice, CG methylation is a feature of genic regions, while non-CG methylation (CHG and CHH) is mostly found in transposable elements (Zemach et al. 2010). As such, tobacco plants when exposed to salt and cold stress in presence of aluminium and paraquat reported CG demethylation in the coding region of NtGPDL (glycerophosphodiesterase-like protein) gene (Choi and Sano 2007). Recently, a new study also supports that modification in various checkpoints of DNA also confers tolerance to Aluminium toxicity (Eekhout et al. 2017). Water deficit condition led to CG hypermethylation in pea genome (Labra et al. 2002) while it induced CHG hypermethylation of satellite DNA in halophyte leading to the shifting of the carbon assimilation mechanism form C3 to CAM (crassulacean acid metabolism) (Dyachenko et al. 2006). In certain cases, the hypermethylation got reversed after removal of stress. Kovarik et al. (1997) showed that tobacco cell-suspension cultures under osmotic and salt stress show CHG hypermethylation. However, the hypermethylation was reversed when the cell culture were re-inoculated onto non-stress media. This is contradictory in case of maize where the demethylation pattern did not get reversed when the chilling condition was removed (Steward et al. 2002). The incidence of methylation and demethylation at the genic or non-genic regions also produce a wide variety of affects on the produced transcript. Methylation of promoter and 3′ region of the gene including flanking sequence may inhibit gene expression (Zilberman et al. 2007). The methylation in promoter region is associated with down-regulation of genes; the methylation of genic region exhibits a parabolic relationship with transcription. The methylation is most likely to occur in the genes that are least expressed and the most expressed genes are least likely to be methylated (Zemach et al. 2010).
Transposable elements exhibit different methylation patterns that are involved in the process of providing different adaptations to plants (Cantu et al. 2010). A retrotransposon-like sequence (ZmMI1) showed demethylation patterns under cold stress in maize roots (Steward et al. 2000). Severe cold stress led to decrease in methylation status and increased the excision rate of a specific transposon, Tam3 in Antirrhinum majus (Hashida et al. 2006). In earlier studies, stress mediated induction of transposons was reported for Tos17 (rice) (Hirochika et al. 1996), Tnt1 (tobacco) (Beguiristain et al. 2001) and BARE-1 (barley) (Kalendar et al. 2000). The recent studies have also confirmed that some retrotransposons (ONSEN, an LTR-copia type retrotransposon in Arabidopsis thaliana) employ demethylation strategies for their activation under heat stress (Cavrak et al. 2014). Thus, apart from methylation and demethylation pattern which genes followed during stress (Deleris et al. 2016), the role of transposable elements is also imperative in providing defense mechanism.
Histone modifications associated with abiotic stress
Histone modifications play a decisive role in both plant development and their responses to stress. Among different modifications, de-acetylation and biotinylation cause repression of genes while acetylation, phosphorylation, and ubiquitination activate transcription of genes (Chen et al. 2010). There are several cases on dynamic alterations of histone tail modifications in response to abiotic stresses in plants. Tobacco plant cells when exposed to salinity, cold and abscisic acid (ABA) resulted in the phosphorylation, phospho-acetylation and acetylation of H3 Ser10, H3 Ser10 and H4 lys14, respectively (Sokol et al. 2007). This histone modification causes the up-regulation of stress specific genes. In Arabidopsis, an increase in acetylation of H3K4 and H3K9 on the coding regions of dehydration responsive genes (Rd29A, RD29B, RD20 and RAP2.4) resulting their activation (Kim et al. 2009). Exposure to UV-B also caused an increase in the acetylation of H3K9/K14 on the promoter of ELIP1 in Arabidopsis and wheat (Cloix and Jenkins 2008). Chen et al. (2010) also showed that gene expression induced by ABA and salt stress is associated with the induction of gene activation marks, such as H3K9/K14ac and H3K4me3, and the reduction of gene repression marks, such as H3K9me2, at ABA and abiotic stress-responsive genes. Arabidopsis plants when exposed to different levels of salt stress showed hypermethylation in the progeny of stressed plants (Boyko et al. 2010b).
Non-coding RNA and abiotic stresses in plants
Apart from the several alterations in histone and DNA due to abiotic stresses, there is plethora of gene regulation instances dependent on small RNA population. These gene regulations serve as an adaptation of plants to various stress mechanisms. Two classes of non-coding RNA; miRNA and siRNA are reported to be often actively involved in the epigenetic modifications when plants are exposed to stress conditions (Chinnusamy and Zhu 2009).
Abiotic stresses induce the accumulation of various novel antisense transcripts, a source of siRNAs and thus implying their role under stress (Zeller et al. 2009). Hc-siRNAs (heterochromatic-siRNAs), siR441 and siR446 were found to be downregulated under abiotic stresses but show an increase in the creation of their precursors, entailing that the processing of siRNA precursors is inhibited that seems to be a mechanism of regulation due to stress responses (Yan et al. 2011). Besides, these siRNA classes, nat-siRNAs (Natural antisense short interfering RNA (nat-siRNA) and ta-siRNAs (Trans-acting siRNA) were also shown to be directly involved in stress response. Under salt stress in Arabidopsis, the nat-siRNAs are generated from double strand of overlapping antisense transcription of the gene P5CDH (DELTA-1-PYRROLINE-5-CARBOXYLATE DEHYDROGENASE) that leads to the accumulation of proline (Borsani et al. 2005). The proline is considered as an important metabolite involved in tolerance to salt stress. The ta-siRNAs are involved in the regulation of plant growth under stressful environment (Schwab et al. 2009). Moreover, as siRNA are involved in RdDM they are able to control one-third methylation of genomic loci (Lister et al. 2008). SlAGO4, an important orthologue of AGO4 (core factor of RdDM) also plays an important role under salt and drought stress in tomato (Huang et al. 2016). iTRAQ analysis in tobacco also confirmed that RdDM has key role in plant defense mechanism against geminivirus infection (Zhong et al. 2017).
Many researchers also reported the involvement of miRNAs and their role in plant responses to different stresses such as salinity, heat, cold and pathogens. The small RNA analysis of Arabidopsis seedlings revealed 26 new miRNAs, either upregulated or downregulated by abiotic stresses (Sunkar and Zhu 2004). The miR319 was found to be downregulated under cold stress in rice (Lv et al. 2010), while several families of miRNAs were upregulated under cold stress conditions in Brachypodium, (Zhang et al. 2009). The over expression of miR396 in rice and Arabidopsis plants enhanced tolerance to alkali and salt stress (Gao et al. 2010). These deviations in miRNA concentration correspond to an important regulation of miRNA targets that response to stress tolerance in these plants. A summary of recent research reports indicating the role of different epigenetic mechanisms including DNA methylation, histone modification and RNA-directed DNA methylation involved in various abiotic stresses is given in Table 1.
Heritability of epigenetic mechanisms
Exposure of plants to stress causes formation of epi-alleles that constitutes either transient or stable epigenetic stress memory (Molinier et al. 2006). The transient memory can be reversed upon release of stress, but the stable memory- after the stress has ceased, is maintained during remaining cycles of plant development or inherited to future plant generations contributing to adaptation and evolution of plant (Fig. 3). Moreover, transfer of epigenetic patterns through cell cycles requires rapid reestablishment of epi-alleles after twofold dilution due to replication (Jiang and Berger 2017). Unlike animals, plants establish their germ-line late during development; therefore they could sense stresses during their life and memorize them perhaps by epigenetic mechanisms in cell lineages that later form the germ-line and pass them into their progeny (Lang-Mladek et al. 2010).
The stability of stress memories and the degree and duration of stress that leads to the formation of heritable epi-alleles is still a matter of debate. Rice plants grown under water submergence conditions resulted in an increase in enrichment level of H3K4me3 and decrease in enrichment level of H3K4me2 in the coding region of submergence inducible genes. These alterations in histone were transient and resort to basal levels during re-aeration (Tsuji et al. 2006). Arabidopsis when exposed to cold stress, showed a decrease in enrichment level of H3K27me3 mark. This decrease was maintained for up to 3 days after returning to optimum temperature (Kwon et al. 2009). These alterations at the histone levels could not be able to inherit to next generations as they seem to form transient epi-alleles that diminish their affect after the stress was removed. Similarly, earlier reports also confirmed that exposure of Arabidopsis plants to temperature stress resulted in the release of transcriptional gene silencing at several heterochromatin regions and this destabilized status was also verified at the genome-wide level by transcriptomic analyses (Pecinka et al. 2010). This transcriptional activation was transient and silencing was re-established a few days after removing the stress. Pecinka et al. (2010) also determined that the transient release of silencing and its restoration was related to temporary changes in nucleosome density. Recently, transcriptional repressive mark H3K27me3 was shown to be restored in daughter plant cells through DNA replication-coupled modification of histone variant H3.1 (Jiang and Berger 2017).
Therefore, most of the stress-induced epigenetic modifications are transient and restore to initial levels when the stress is removed, however, some of the modifications might be stable and inherited across mitotic or even meiotic cell divisions.
However, those epigenetic changes that occur swiftly and irreversibly with a prospective to sustain the “acquired stress memory” through several generations via cell divisions could be a potential mechanism for elucidating the flexibility of plant response to environment conditions. There are several reports on epigenetic mediated stress memory that helps in imparting instantaneous response towards stress which later led to the long-term adaption. Blodner et al. 2007 reports that exposure of plants to cold stress during flowering and seed development resulted in improved photosynthetic yield recovery in their progeny in response to chilling conditions. Further, Arabidopsis plants grown in heat stress conditions for two generations (parent and F1) showed an increased seed production efficiency to high temperature in the non-stressed F3 generation, even though the F2 generation was raised in a normal temperature (Whittle et al. 2009). Verhoeven et al. (2010) also observed that variation in DNA methylation level at several loci in a population of dandelion, upon exposure to abiotic stresses, were transmitted to the offspring of these plants.
Arabidopsis exposed to UV-C stimulated the inheritance of stress tolerance even to the untreated progeny via increased homologous frequency and global genome methylation (Boyko et al. 2010a). Rice genotypes under salt and alkaline stress treatments showed the persistence of altered DNA methylation levels in the selfed progenies (Fang et al. 2014). However, the molecular mechanism that underlies the formation of stress memory and provokes the adaptive responses over one unexposed generation has still to be figured out.
Future outlook
Epigenetics mechanism constitutes another line of defense against environmental stresses. Although a plethora of genes seems to be involved in various mechanisms of stresses that induced DNA methylation, histone alterations and RNA-directed DNA methylation; it is still a matter of suspense that how much degree of stress may be epigenetic in nature as their mitotic and meiotic heritability behaviour is still unclear. Research have paid a way to the better understanding of transmission of epigenetic stress memory but there is still a long way to go in deepen our understanding of how these stress memory regulates gene expression and controls plant development and stress tolerance in future progenies. Epigenetics can constitute another genetic engineering tools to be applied in crop stress tolerance breeding.
References
Abid G, Mingeot D, Muhovski Y, Mergeai G, Aouida M, Abdelkarim S, Jebara M (2017) Analysis of DNA methylation patterns associated with drought stress response in faba bean (Vicia faba L.) using methylation-sensitive amplification polymorphism (MSAP). Environ Exp Bot 142:34–44
Agius F, Kapoor A, Zhu JK (2006) Role of the Arabidopsis DNA glycosylases/lyase ROS1 in active DNA demethylation. Proc Natl Acad Sci 103:11796–11801
Arıkan B, Özden S, Turgut-Kara N (2018) DNA methylation related gene expression and morphophysiological response to abiotic stresses in Arabidopsis thaliana. Environ Exp Bot 149:17–26
Asada K (2006) Production and scavenging of reactive oxygen species in chloroplasts and their functions. Plant Physiol 141:391–396
Beck EH, Heim R, Hansen J (2004) Plant resistance to cold stress: mechanisms and environmental signals triggering frost hardening and dehardening. J Biosci 29(4):449–459
Beguiristain T, Grandbastien MA, Puigdomenech P, Casacuberta M (2001) Three Tnt1 subfamilies show different stress-associated pattern of expression in tobacco. Consequences for retrotransposon control and evolution in plants. Plant Physiol 127:212–221
Bender J (2004) DNA methylation and epigenetics. Annu Rev Plant Biol 55:41–68
Bhutani N, Burns DM, Blau HM (2011) DNA demethylation dynamics. Cell 146:866–872
Bird A (2007) Perceptions of epigenetics. Nature 447(7143):396–398
Blodner C, Goebel C, Feussner I, Gatz C, Polle A (2007) Warm and cold parental reproductive environments affect seed properties, fitness, and cold responsiveness in Arabidopsis thaliana progenies. Plant Cell Environ 30:165–175
Bologna NG (2014) The diversity, biogenesis, and activities of endogenous silencing small RNAs in Arabidopsis. Annu Rev Plant Biol 65:473–503
Bonasio R, Tu S, Reinberg D (2010) Molecular signals of epigenetic states. Science 330:612–616
Bond DM, Baulcombe DC (2014) Small RNAs and heritable epigenetic variation in plants. Trends Cell Biol 24(2):100–107
Borsani O, Zhu J, Verslues PE, Sunkar R, Zhu JK (2005) Endogenous siRNAs derived from a pair of natural cis-antisense transcripts regulate salt tolerance in Arabidopsis. Cell 123:1279–1291
Boyko A, Kovalchuk I (2008) Epigenetic control of plant stress response. Environ Mol Mutagen 49:61–72
Boyko A, Blevins T, Yao Y, Golubov A, Bilichak A, Ilnytskyy Y, Hollander J, Meins FJ, Kovalchuk I (2010a) Transgenerational adaptation of Arabidopsis to stress requires DNA methylation and the function of Dicer-like proteins. PLoS One 5(3):9514
Boyko A, Golubov A, Bilichak A, Kovalchuk I (2010b) Chlorine ions but not sodium ions alter genome stability of Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant Cell Physiol 51(6):1066–1078
Cantu D, Vanzetti LS, Sumner A, Dubcovsky M, Matvienko M, Distelfeld A, Michelmore RW, Dubcovsky J (2010) Small RNAs, DNA methylation and transposable elements in wheat. BMC Genomics 11(1):408
Cao X, Jacobsen SE (2002) Locus-specific control of asymmetric and CpNpG methylation by the DRM and CMT3 methyltransferase genes. Proc Natl Acad Sci 99(4):16491–16498
Carthew RW, Sontheimer EJ (2009) Origins and mechanisms of miRNAs and siRNAs. Cell 136:642–655
Cavrak VV, Lettner N, Jamge S, Kosarewicz A, Bayer LM et al (2014) How a retrotransposon exploits the plant’s heat stress response for its activation. PLoS Genet 10(1):1004115
Chen LT, Luo M, Wang YY, Wu K (2010) Involvement of Arabidopsis histone deacetylase HDA6 in ABA and salt stress response. J Exp Bot 61:3345–3353
Chinnusamy V, Zhu JK (2009) Epigenetic regulation of stress responses in plants. Curr Opin Plant Biol 12:133–139
Choi CS, Sano H (2007) Abiotic-stress induces demethylation and transcriptional activation of a gene encoding a glycerophosphodiesterase-like protein in tobacco plants. Mol Genet Genomics 277(5):589–600
Cloix C, Jenkins GI (2008) Interaction of the Arabidopsis UV-B-specific signaling component UVR8 with chromatin. Mol Plant 1:118–128
Cokus SJ, Feng S, Zhang X, Chen Z, Merriman B, Haudenschild CD, Pradhan S, Nelson SF, Pellegrini M, Jacobsen SE (2008) Shotgun bisulphite sequencing of the Arabidopsis genome reveals DNA methylation patterning. Nature 452:215–219
Dalakouras A, Wassenegger M (2013) Revisting RNA-directed DNA methylation. RNA Biol 10(3):453–455
Dalakouras A, Dadami E, Bassler A, Zwiebel M, Krczal G, Wassenegger M (2015) Replicating Potato spindle tuber viroid mediates de novo methylation of an intronic viroid sequence but no cleavage of the corresponding pre-mRNA. RNA Biol 12(3):268–275
Deleris A, Halter T, Navarro L (2016) DNA methylation and demethylation in plant immunity. Annu Rev Phytopathol 54:579–603
Ding B, Bellizzi Mdel R, Ning Y, Meyers BC, Wang GL (2012) HDT701, a histone H4 deacetylase, negatively regulates plant innate immunity by modulating histone H4 acetylation of defense related genes in rice. Plant Cell 24:3783–3794
Dyachenko OV, Zakharchenko NS, Shevchuk TV, Bohnert HJ, Buryanov YI (2006) Effect of hypermethylation of CCWGG sequences in DNA of Mesembryanthemum crystallinum plants on their adaptation to salt stress. Biochem 71(4):461–465
Eekhout T, Larsen P, DeVeylder L (2017) Modification of DNA checkpoints to confer aluminum tolerance. Trends Plant Sci 22(2):102–105
Eichten SR, Schmitz RJ, Springer NM (2014) Epigenetics: beyond chromatin modifications and complex genetic regulation. Plant Physiol 165(3):933–947
Fang H, Liu X, Thorn G, Duan J, Tian L (2014) Expression analysis of histone acetyltransferases in rice under drought stress. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 443:400–405
Fu Y, Ma H, Chen S, Gu T, Gong J (2017) Control of proline accumulation under drought via a novel pathway comprising the histone methylase CAU1 and the transcription factor ANAC055. J Exp Bot 69(3):579–588
Gao P, Bai X, Yang L, Lv D, Li Y, Cai H et al (2010) Over-expression of osa-MIR396c decreases salt and alkali stress tolerance. Planta 231:991–1001
Gayacharan Joel AJ (2013) Epigenetic responses to drought stress in rice (Oryza sativa L.). Physiol Mol Biol Plants 19:379–387
Gehring M, Henikoff S (2007) DNA methylation dynamics in plant genomes. Biochim Biophys Acta 1769:276–286
Gong Z, Morales-Ruiz T, Ariza RR, Roldan-Arjona T, David L, Jian-Kang Z (2002) ROS1, a repressor of transcriptional gene silencing in Arabidopsis, encodes a DNA glycosylase/lyase. Cell 111(6):803–814
Grativol C, Hemerly AS, Ferreira PCG (2012) Genetic and epigenetic regulation of stress responses in natural plant populations. Biochem Biophys Acta 1819:176–185
Hashida SN, Uchiyama T, Martin C, Kishima Y, Sano Y, Mikami T (2006) The temperature-dependent change in methylation of the Antirrhinum transposon Tam3 is controlled by the activity of its transposase. Plant Cell 18:104–118
Havecker ER, Wallbridge LM, Hardcastle TJ, Bush MS, Kelly KA, Dunn RM, Schwach F, Doonan JH, Baulcombe DC (2010) The Arabidopsis RNA-directed DNA methylation argonautes functionally diverge based on their expression and interaction with target loci. Plant Cell 22:321–334
Henikoff S, Comai L (1998) A DNA methyltransferase homolog with a chromodomain exists in multiple polymorphic forms in Arabidopsis. Genetics 149:307–318
Hidetoshi S, Kazuo T, Tatsuo K, Taisuke N (2012) DNA methylation in plants: relationship to small RNAs and histone modifications, and functions in transposon inactivation. Plant Cell Physiol 53(5):766–784
Hirayama T, Shinozaki K (2010) Research on plant abiotic stress responses in the post-genome era: past, present and future. Plant J 61:1041–1052
Hirochika H, Sugimoto K, Otsuki Y, Tsugawa H, Kanda M (1996) Retrotransposons of rice involved in mutations induced by tissue culture. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 93:7783–7788
Hollender C, Liu Z (2008) Histone deacetylase genes in Arabidopsis development. J Integr Plant Biol 50(7):875–885
Huang W, Xian Z, Hu G, Li Z (2016) SlAGO4A, a core factor of RNA-directed DNA methylation (RdDM) pathway, plays an important role under salt and drought stress in tomato. Mol Breed 36(3):28
Ibarra CA, Feng X, Schoft VK, Hsieh TF, Uzawa R, Rodrigues JA et al (2012) Active DNA demethylation in plant companion cells reinforces transposon methylation in gametes. Science 337(6100):1360–1364
Jacob Y, Bergamin E et al (2014) Selective methylation of histone H3 variant H3.1 Regulates heterochromatin replication. Science 343:1249–1253
Jiang D, Berger F (2017) DNA replication-coupled histone modification maintains Polycomb gene silencing in plants. Science 357(6356):1146–1149
Jones RS, Gelbart WM (1993) The Drosophila polycomb-group gene enhancer of zeste contains a region with sequence similarity to trithorax. Mol Cell Biol 13:6357–6366
Kalendar R, Tanskanen J, Immonen S, Nevo E, Schulman AH (2000) Genome evolution of wild barley (Hordeum spontaneum) by BARE-1 retrotransposon dynamics in response to sharp microclimatic divergence. Proc Nat Acad Sci 97(12):6603–6607
Karan R, DeLeon T, Biradar H, Subudhi PK (2012) Salt stress induced variation in DNA methylation pattern and its influence on gene expression in contrasting rice genotypes. PLoS One 7(6):e40203
Karlsson M, Weber W, Fussenegger M (2011) De novo design and construction of an inducible gene expression system in mammalian cells. Methods Enzymol 497:239–253
Kim J, To T, Ishida J, Morosawa T, Kawashima M, Matsui A et al (2009) Alterations of lysine modifications on the histone H3 N-tail under drought stress conditions in Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant Cell Physiol 50:1856–1864
Kovarik A, Koukalova B, Bezdek M, Opatrny Z (1997) Hypermethylation of tobacco heterochromatic loci in response to osmotic stress. Theor Appl Genet 95:301–306
Kumar S, Beena AS, Awana M, Singh A (2017) Physiological, biochemical, epigenetic and molecular analyses of wheat (Triticum aestivum) genotypes with contrasting salt tolerance. Front Plant Sci 8:1151
Kwon CS, Lee D, Choi G, Chung WI (2009) Histone occupancy-dependent and -independent removal of H3K27 trimethylation at cold-responsive genes in Arabidopsis. Plant J 60:112–121
Labra M, Ghiani A, Citterio S, Sgorbati S, Sala F, Vannini C, Ruffini- Castiglione M, Bracale M (2002) Analysis of cytosine methylation pattern in response to water deficit in pea root tips. Plant Biol 4:694–699
Lang-Mladek C, Popova O, Kiok K, Berlinger M, Rakic B, Aufsatz W, Jonak C, Hauser MT, Luschnig C (2010) Transgenerational inheritance and resetting of stress-induced loss of epigenetic gene silencing in Arabidopsis. Mol Plant 3:594–602
Law JA, Jacobsen SE (2010) Establishing, maintaining and modifying DNA methylation patterns in plants and animals. Nat Rev Genet 11(3):204–220
Law JA, Du J, Hale CJ, Feng S, Krajewski K, Palanca AM, Strahl BD, Patel DJ, Jacobsen SE (2013) Polymerase IV occupancy at RNA-directed DNA methylation sites requires SHH1. Nature 498:385–389
Lee RC, Feinbaum RL, Ambros V, Feinbaum A (1993) The C. elegans heterochronic gene lin-4 encodes small RNAs with antisense complementarity to lin-14. Cell 75(5):843–854
Li KK, Luo C, Wang D, Jiang H, Zheng YG (2012) Chemical and biochemical approaches in the study of histone methylation and demethylation. Med Res Rev 32(4):815–867
Liang D, Zhang Z, Wu H, Huang C, Shuai P, Ye CY, Yin W (2014) Single-base-resolution methylomes of Populus trichocarpa reveal the association between DNA methylation and drought stress. BMC Genet 15(1):S9
Lira-Medeiros CF, Parisod C, Fernandes RA, Mata CS, Cardoso MA, Ferreira PCG (2010) Epigenetic variation in mangrove plants occurring in contrasting natural environment. PLoS One 5(4):e10326
Lister R, Malley RC, Tonti-Filippini J, Gregory BD, Berry CC, Millar AH, Ecker JR (2008) Highly integrated single-base resolution maps of the epigenome in Arabidopsis. Cell 133(3):523–536
Lv D, Bai X, Li Y, Ding X, Ge Y, Cai H et al (2010) Profiling of cold-stress-responsive miRNAs in rice by microarrays. Gene 459:39–47
Ma X, Lv S, Zhang C, Yang C (2013) Histone deacetylases and their functions in plants. Plant Cell Rep 32(4):465–478
Madlung A, Comai L (2004) The effect of stress on genome regulation and structure. Ann Botany 94:481–495
Mahrez W, Arellano MST, Moreno-Romero J, Nakamura M, Shu, Nanni P et al (2016) H3K36ac is an evolutionary conserved plant histone modification that marks active genes. Plant Physiol 170(3):1566–1577
Marmorstein R, Trievel RC (2009) Histone modifying enzymes: structures, mechanisms, and specificities. Biochim Biophys Acta 1789(1):58–68
Maxwell EK, Ryan JF, Schnitzler CE, Browne WE, Baxevanis AD (2012) MicroRNAs and essential components of the microRNA processing machinery are not encoded in the genome of the ctenophore Mnemiopsis leidyi. BMC Genomics 13(1):714–723
Meister G, Tuschl T (2004) Mechanisms of gene silencing by double-stranded RNA. Nature 431:343–349
Metzger E, Wissmann M, Yin N, Müller JM et al (2005) LSD1 demethylates repressive histone marks to promote androgen-receptor-dependent transcription. Nature 437:436–439
Molinier J, Ries G, Zipfel C, Hohn B (2006) Transgeneration memory of stress in plants. Nature 442(7106):1046–1049
Mosher RA, Schwach F, Studholme D, Baulcombe DC (2008) PolIVb influences RNA-directed DNA methylation independently of its role in siRNA biogenesis. PNAS 105:3145–3150
Nakayama J, Rice JC, Strahl BD, Allis CD, Grewal SI (2001) Role of histone H3 lysine 9 methylation in epigenetic control of heterochromatin assembly. Science 292(5514):110–113
Ortega-Galisteo AP, Morales-Ruiz T, Ariza RR (2008) Arabidopsis DEMETER-LIKE proteins DML2 and DML3 are required for appropriate distribution of DNA methylation marks. Plant Mol Biol 67(6):671–681
Pecinka A, Rosa M, Schikora A, Berlinger M, Hirt H, Luschnig C, Mittelsten Scheid O (2009) Transgenerational stress memory is not a general response in Arabidopsis. PLoS One 4(4):e5202
Pecinka A, Dinh HQ, Baubec T, Rosa M, Lettner N, Mittelsten Scheid O (2010) Epigenetic regulation of repetitive elements is attenuated by prolonged heat stress in Arabidopsis. Plant Cell 22:3118–3129
Penterman J, Uzawa R, Fischer RL (2007) Genetic interactions between DNA demethylation and methylation in Arabidopsis. Plant Physiol 145(4):1549–1557
Ponferrada-Marin MI, Roldan-Arjona T, Ariza RR (2012) Demethylation initiated by ROS1 glycosylase involves random sliding along DNA. Nucl Acids Res 40:11554–11562
Pontvianne F, Blevins T, Pikaard PS (2010) Arabidopsis histone lysine methyltransferases. Adv Bot Res 53:1–22
Qian C, Zhou M (2006) SET domain protein lysine methyltransferases: structure, specificity and catalysis. CMLS 63:2755–2763
Raju SKK, Shao MR, Wamboldt Y, Mackenzie S (2018) Epigenomic plasticity of Arabidopsis msh1 mutants under prolonged cold stress. bioRxiv 263780
Sahu PP, Pandey G, Sharma N, Puranik S, Muthamilarasan M, Prasad M (2013) Epigenetic mechanisms of plant stress responses and adaptation. Plant Cell Rep 32:1151–1159
Sako K, Kim JM, Matsui A, Nakamura K, Tanaka M, Kobayashi M, Yoshida M (2015) Ky-2, a histone deacetylase inhibitor, enhances high-salinity stress tolerance in Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant Cell Physiol 57(4):776–783
Sawan C, Herceg Z (2010) Histone modifications and cancer. Adv Genet 70:57–85
Saze H, Tsugane K, Kanno T, Nishimura T (2012) DNA methylation in plants: relationship to small RNAs and histone modifications and functions in transposon inactivation. Plant Cell Physiol 53(5):766–784
Scaramuzzino C, Casci I, Parodi S et al (2015) Protein arginine methyltransferase 6 enhances polyglutamine-expanded androgen receptor function and toxicity in spinal and bulbar muscular atrophy. Neuron 85:88–100
Schwab R, Maizel A, Ruiz-Ferrer V, Garcia D, Bayer M, Crespi M et al (2009) Endogenous TasiRNAs mediate non-cell autonomous effects on gene regulation in Arabidopsis thaliana. PLoS One 4:5980
Shen L, Song CX, He C, Zhang Y (2014) Mechanism and function of oxidative reversal of DNA and RNA methylation. Annu Rev Biochem 83:585–614
Shi Y, Lan F, Matson C, Mulligan P, Whetstine JR, Cole PA, Casero RA, Shi Y (2004) Histone demethylation mediated by the nuclear amine oxidase homolog LSD1. Cell 119:941–953
Shi D, Zhuang K, Xia Y, Zhu C, Chen C, Hu Z, Shen Z (2017) Hydrilla verticillata employs two different ways to affect DNA methylation under excess copper stress. Aquat Toxicol 193:97–104
Sokol A, Kwiatkowska A, Jerzmanowski A, Prymakowska-Bosak M (2007) Up-regulation of stress-inducible genes in tobacco and Arabidopsis cells in response to abiotic stresses and ABA treatment correlates with dynamic changes in histone H3 and H4 modifications. Planta 227:245–254
Stassen MJ, Bailey D, Nelson S, Chinwalla V, Harte PJ (1995) The Drosophila trithorax proteins contain a novel variant of the nuclear receptor type DNA binding domain and an ancient conserved motif found in other chromosomal proteins. Mech Dev 52:209–223
Steward N, Kusano T, Sano H (2000) Expression of ZmMET1, a gene encoding a DNA methyltransferase from maize, is associated not only with DNA replication in actively proliferating cells, but also with altered DNA methylation status in cold-stressed quiescent cells. Nuc Acids Res 28:3250–3259
Steward N, Ito M, Yamaguchi Y, Koizumi N, Sano H (2002) Periodic DNA methylation in maize nucleosomes and demethylation by environmental stress. J Biol Chem 277(40):37741–37746
Sunkar R, Zhu JK (2004) Novel and stress-regulated microRNAs and other small RNAs from Arabidopsis. Plant Cell 16(8):2001–2019
Surdonja K, Eggert K, Hajirezaei MR, Harshavardhan VT, Seiler C, von Wirén N, Kuhlmann M (2017) Increase of DNA Methylation at the HvCKX2. 1 promoter by terminal drought stress in Barley. Epigenomes 1(2):9
Takuno S, Gaut BS (2012) Body-methylated genes in Arabidopsis thaliana are functionally important and evolve slowly. Mol Biol Evol 29(1):219–227
Tsaftaris AS, Polidoros AN, Kapazoglou A, Tani E, Kovacevic NM (2007) Epigenetics and plant breeding. Plant Breed Rev 30:49–178
Tschiersch B, Hofmann A, Krauss V, Dorn R, Korge G, Reuter G (1994) The protein encoded by the Drosophila position-effect variegation suppressor gene Su(var)3-9 combines domains of antagonistic regulators of homeotic gene complexes. EMBO J 13:3822–3831
Tsuji H, Saika H, Tsutsumi N, Hirai A, Nakazono M (2006) Dynamic and reversible changes in histone H3-Lys4 methylation and H3 acetylation occurring at submergence-inducible genes in rice. Plant Cell Physiol 47:995–1003
Tsukada Y, Fang J, Erdjument-Bromage H, Warren ME, Borchers CH, Tempst P, Zhang Y (2006) Histone demethylation by a family of JmjC domain-containing proteins. Nature 439:811–816
Urano K, Kurihara Y, Seki M, Shinozaki K (2010) ‘Omics’ analyses of regulatory networks in plant abiotic stress responses. Curr Opin Plant Biol 13:132–138
Verhoeven KJF, Jansen JJ, van Dijk PJ, Biere A (2010) Stress-induced DNA methylation changes and their heritability in asexual dandelions. New Phytol 185:1108–1118
Wada Y, Miyamoto K, Kusano T, Sano H (2004) Association between up-regulation of stress-responsive genes and hypomethylation of genomic DNA in tobacco plants. Mol Genet Genome 271:658–666
Waddington CH (1942) Canalization of development and the inheritance of acquired characters. Nature 150(3811):563–565
Wang X, Xin C, Cai J, Zhou Q, Dai T, Cao W, Jiang D (2016) Heat priming induces trans-generational tolerance to high temperature stress in wheat. Front Plant Sci 7:501
Wassenegger M, Heimes S, Riedel L, Sänger H (1994) RNA-directed de novo methylation of genomic sequences in plants. Cell 76(3):567–576
Whittle CA, Otto SP, Johnston MO, Krochko JE (2009) Adaptive epigenetic memory of ancestral temperature regime in Arabidopsis thaliana. Botany-Botanique 87:650–657
Wood A (2004) Posttranslational modifications of histones by methylation. Adv Protein Chem 67:201–222
Xiao B, Jing C, Wilson JR, Walker PA et al (2003) Structure and catalytic mechanism of the human histone methyltransferase SET7/9. Nature 421(6923):652–656
Xie M, Yu B (2015) siRNA-directed DNA methylation in plants. Curr Genom 16(1):23–31
Xu C, Tian J, Mo B (2013) siRNA-mediated DNA methylation and H3K9 dimethylation in plants. Protein Cell 4(9):656–663
Xuehua Z et al (2014) Domains rearranged methyltransferase3 controls DNA methylation and regulates RNA polymerase V transcript abundance in Arabidopsis. PNAS 112(3):911–916
Yan Y, Zhang Y, Yang K, Sun Z, Fu Y, Chen X et al (2011) Small RNAs from MITE derived stem-loop precursors regulate abscisic acid signaling and abiotic stress responses in rice. Plant J 65:820–828
Yolcu S, Ozdemir F, Güler A, Bor M (2016) Histone acetylation influences the transcriptional activation of POX in Beta vulgaris L. and Beta maritima L. under salt stress. Plant Physiol Biochem 100:37–46
Yuan H, Marmorstein R (2013) Histone acetyltransferases: rising ancient counterparts to protein kinases. Biopolymer 99(2):98–111
Zeller G, Henz SR, Widmer CK, Sachsenberg T, Ratsch G, Weigel D, Laubinger S (2009) Stress-induced changes in the Arabidopsis thaliana transcriptome analyzed using whole-genome tiling arrays. Plant J 58:1068–1082
Zemach A, McDaniel IE, Silva P, Zilberman D (2010) Genome-wide evolutionary analysis of eukaryotic DNA methylation. Science 4:328–338
Zemach A et al (2013) The Arabidopsis nucleosome remodeler DDM1 allows DNA methyltransferases to access H1-containing heterochromatin. Cell 153:193–205
Zhang J, Xu Y, Huan Q, Chong K (2009) Deep sequencing of Brachypodium small RNAs at the global genome level identifies micro RNAs involved in cold stress response. BMC Genomics 10:449
Zhang H, Ma ZY, Zeng L, Tanaka K et al (2013) DTF1 is a core component of RNA-directed DNA methylation and may assist in the recruitment of Pol IV. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 110:8290–8295
Zheng Y, Ding Y, Sun X, Xie S, Wang D, Liu X, Zhou DX (2016) Histone deacetylase HDA9 negatively regulates salt and drought stress responsiveness in Arabidopsis. J Exp Bot 67(6):1703–1713
Zhong X, Wang ZQ, Xiao R, Wang Y, Xie Y, Zhou X (2017) iTRAQ analysis of the tobacco leaf proteome reveals that RNA-directed DNA methylation (RdDM) has important roles in defense against geminivirus-betasatellite infection. J Proteomics 152:88–101
Zhu JK (2009) Active DNA methylation mediated by DNA glycosylases. Annu Rev Genet 43:143–166
Zhu N, Cheng S, Liu X, Du H, Dai M, Zhou DX, Zhao Y (2015) The R2R3-type MYB gene OsMYB91 has a function in coordinating plant growth and salt stress tolerance in rice. Plant Sci 236:146–156
Zilberman D, Gehring M, Tran RK, Ballinger T, Henikoff S (2007) Genome-wide analysis of Arabidopsis thaliana DNA methylation uncovers interdependence between methylation and transcription. Natl Genet 39:61–69
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Sudan, J., Raina, M. & Singh, R. Plant epigenetic mechanisms: role in abiotic stress and their generational heritability. 3 Biotech 8, 172 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13205-018-1202-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13205-018-1202-6