ECS1 and ECS2 suppress polyspermy and the formation of haploid plants by promoting double fertilization

  1. Yanbo Mao
  2. Thomas Nakel
  3. Isil Erbasol Serbes
  4. Saurabh Joshi
  5. Dawit G Tekleyohans
  6. Thomas Baum
  7. Rita Groß-Hardt

  • Curated by eLife

    eLife logo

    eLife assessment:

    This important study convincingly shows that the endopeptidases ECS1 and ECS2 repress the formation of polyspermy-derived triparental offspring and haploid induction by promoting double fertilization. While the underlying mechanisms remain to be further elucidated, the data presented in this study represent a valuable foundation for understanding the regulation of offspring genome size. This study will be of particular interest to the large community of scientists who are interested in plant reproduction and breeding.

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

The current pace of crop plant optimization is insufficient to meet future demands and there is an urgent need for novel breeding strategies. It was previously shown that plants tolerate the generation of triparental polyspermy-derived plants and that polyspermy can bypass hybridization barriers. Polyspermy thus has the potential to harness previously incompatible climate-adapted wild varieties for plant breeding. However, factors that influence polyspermy frequencies were not previously known. The endopeptidases ECS1 and ECS2 have been reported to prevent the attraction of supernumerary pollen tubes by cleaving the pollen tube attractant LURE1. Here, we show that these genes have an earlier function that is manifested by incomplete double fertilization in plants defective for both genes. In addition to supernumerary pollen tube attraction, ecs1 ecs2 mutants exhibit a delay in synergid disintegration, are susceptible to heterofertilization, and segregate haploid plants that lack a paternal genome contribution. Our results thus uncover ECS1 and ECS2 as the first female factors triggering the induction of maternal haploids. Capitalizing on a high-throughput polyspermy assay, we in addition show that the double mutant exhibits an increase in polyspermy frequencies. As both haploid induction and polyspermy are valuable breeding aims, our results open new avenues for accelerated generation of climate-adapted cultivars.

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.7554/elife.85832 on eLife
  2. eLife

    Author Response

    Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

    Precise regulation of gamete fusion ensures that offspring will have the same ploidy as the parents. However, breaking this regulation can be useful for plant breeding. Haploid induction followed by chemical-induced genome doubling can be used to fix desirable genotypes, while triparental hybrids where two sperm cells with two different genotypes fertilize an egg cell can be advantageous for bypassing hybridization barriers to create interspecies hybrids with increased fitness. This manuscript follows up on a previous study from the same research group that used a clever high throughput polyspermy detection assay (HIPOD) to show that wild-type Arabidopsis naturally forms triparental hybrids at very low frequencies (less than 0.05% of progeny) and that these triparental hybrids can bypass dosage barriers in the endosperm (Nakel, et al., 2017). Mao and co-authors hypothesized that mutants that conferred polytubey, the attraction of multiple pollen tubes by mutant female gametophytes, would also increase the rate of triparental hybrids. They used a double mutant in the endopeptidase genes ECS1 and ECS2 which had previously been reported to induce supernumerary pollen tube attraction to test this hypothesis with their two-component HIPOD system in which one pollen donor constitutively expresses the mGAL4-VP16 transcription factor while the second pollen donor carries an herbicide resistance gene regulated by the GAL4-responsive UAS promoter. Triparental hybrids are detected as herbicide-resistant progeny from wild-type Arabidopsis flowers that have been pollinated by the two paternal genotypes. The authors convincingly show that the ecs1 ecs2-1 double mutant more than doubled the frequency of triparental, triploid hybrids in HIPOD crosses. They next tested the hypothesis that this increase in triparental hybrids was due to a gametophytic effect by using an ecs1-/- ecs2-1/ECS2 maternal parent in the HIPOD assay and testing whether the ecs2-1 mutant allele was preferentially inherited in triparental hybrids. The mutant allele was inherited at a much higher rate than expected, confirming their hypothesis.

    The triparental hybrid results with the ecs1 ecs2 mutant were not that surprising since the presence of extra sperm cells gives more opportunities for triparental hybrids to form, especially if gamete fusion is misregulated. However, an unexpected result came when the authors used aniline blue staining to analyze the ecs1 ecs2 polytubey phenotype. They confirmed that the double mutant had increased levels of polytubey compared to wild-type ovules, but they also noticed that 13% of seeds were not developing normally. This phenotype was confirmed with a second ecs2 allele and was complemented with both ECS1 and ECS2 transgenes under their native promoters. Microscopic analysis revealed normal gametophyte morphology before fertilization, but 8% of pollinated ovules failed to develop an embryo and 7% failed to develop endosperm, suggesting single fertilization events. In a logical set of experiments, they followed up on this result by crossing ecs1 ecs2 with pollen carrying a fluorescent reporter that would be expressed in developing embryos and endosperm. In this experiment, they were again surprised. Some of the wild-type-looking seeds lacked a paternal contribution (i.e. no fluorescent signal from the paternal reporter construct) in the embryo. This prompted them to look more closely at the progeny, upon which they detected small plants that were haploid. They confirmed the haploid nature by chromosome spreads. Finally, they used interaccession crosses between ecs1 ecs2 (Col-0) and Landsberg to verify that haploid progeny only carried maternal alleles of markers on all five chromosomes, indicating that the ecs1 ecs2 genotype can induce maternal haploids.

    This interesting study highlights the importance of following up on unexpected results. The conclusions are well-supported by the data and quite exciting. Paternal haploid inducers have been discovered in several species, but this is one of only two examples of maternal haploid induction. While the percentage of maternal haploids is very low, this phenomenon could be useful for plant breeding.

    Weaknesses

    The data in the manuscript is intriguing, but the question of how the same mutant combination promotes the formation of both triploid and haploid progeny remains unanswered and is not thoroughly discussed, nor is any model suggested for how the ECS1/2 peptidases could play a role in regulating gamete fusion and/or repressing parthenogenesis. A second unanswered question is whether the maternal haploids are a result of failed plasmogamy or karyogamy between the egg and sperm leading to parthenogenesis or a result of paternal genome elimination after plasmogamy. In figure 3B, the authors attempted to test whether plasmogamy occurs between the male and female gametes in ecs1 ecs2 ovules by crosses with pollen that expresses a mitochondrial marker under control of the pRPS5a promoter which is active in sperm cells as well as embryos and endosperm of fertilized ovules. This experiment allowed them to detect sperm cells that had not fused with the egg and central cell at 2 days after pollination. They also counted the percentage of seeds that expressed the mitochondrial marker in both embryo and endosperm at 2 DAP and found that ecs1 ecs2 mutants had a 20% reduction of visible mitochondria in embryo sacs compared to wildtype. They conclude that the result indicates a potential plasmogamy defect. However, the dependability of this marker is questionable since only ~55% of wild-type seeds had detectable signal in the embryo and endosperm. The authors imply that this experiment could be used to test plasmogamy, but it is not clear how any conclusions related to the abnormal seed phenotype could be drawn from examining the rate of signal in both the embryo and endosperm. Since the mitochondrial marker was not expressed from a sperm-specific promoter, the fluorescent signal at 2DAP is likely due to new gene expression from pRPS5a in the fertilized embryo and endosperm, not an indication of the presence of sperm-derived mitochondria. Perhaps an earlier timepoint could be used as well as a spermspecific promoter instead of pRPS5a to answer the question of whether plasmogamy is happening in the ecs1 ecs2 ovules.

    Thanks for the suggestion. We here provide two additional new data sets to provide evidence that ecs1 ecs2 mutant plants indeed exhibit single fertilization that lead to fertilization recovery.

    We determined the fertilization failure by checking the decondensation HTR10-RFP labelled sperm nuclei 8-10 HAP (Figure 3B) and the frequency of heterofertilization through dual pollination experiment (Figure 3C-E) (see above).

    Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

    The manuscript reports the triploid and haploid productions using an ecs1ecs2 mutant as the maternal donor, in addition to the evaluation of the sexual process observed in the mutant. The indicated data show exquisite quality. To improve the content, I recommend carefully reconsidering the descriptions because some of the insights would cause a stir in the controversy regarding ECS1&2 functions in plant reproduction.

    Strengths

    Triploid production by a combination of ecs1ecs2 mutant and HIPOD system has potential as a future plant breeding tool. Moreover, it's intriguing that both triploid and haploid productions were achieved using the same mutant as a maternal donor. I think authors can claim the value of their results more by adding descriptions about the usefulness of the aneuploid plants in plant breeding history.

    The evidence of the persistent synergid nucleus (Figure 3A) is critical insight reported by this study. As Maruyama et al. (2013) reported by live cell imaging, synergid-endosperm fusion had occurred at the two endosperm nuclei stage. It would be valuable to claim the observed fact by citing Maruyama's previous observation.

    Weakness

    As the authors suggested, the higher triploid frequency observed in ecs1ecs2 than WT was likely caused by the increased polyspermy. However, it also could be that reduction of normal seed number in ecs1ecs2 (whichever is due to failure of fertilization or embryo development arrest) accounts for the increased frequency of the triploid compared to WT.

    The results in Figure 3C-E suggested the single fertilization for both egg and central cells at similar frequencies. This is an exciting result, but it is still possible that the fertilized egg or central cell degenerated after fertilization resulting in the disappearance of paternally inherited fluorescence. Evaluation of fertilization patterns at 7-10HAP in ecs1ecs2 mutant may provide more confident insight, although unfused sperm cell was evaluated at 1DAP (Figure 3-figure supplement 1B). The fertilization states can be distinguished depending on the HTR10RFP sperm nuclei morphology and their positions, as reported by Takahashi et al (2018).

    Thank you for your suggestion. We added the requested experiment see Figure 3B in the revised manuscript. In addition, we conducted a dual pollination experiment, that provides evidence for the activation of the fertilization recovery machinery (Figure 3C-E) (see above).

    Several recent studies have reported exciting insights on ECS1&2 functions; however, various results from different laboratories have raised controversy. Though, the commonly found feature is the repression of polytubey. For readers, it would be helpful to organize the explanation about which insights are concordant or different.

    Thank you for your suggestion. We now indicate using terms like in line with or in contrast to, where our data confirms /or contradicts with previous data.

    In addition, a drawing that explains the time course in the process from pollination to seed development (up to 6DAP) based on WT would help to understand which point is evaluated in each data.

    Thank you for your suggestion. We added a model figure (Figure 4E) at the end of the manuscript that brings the concepts together and facilitates the understandings.

    Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

    In this manuscript, Mao et al. reported that the two proteases ECS1 and ECS2 participate in both polyspermy block and gamete fusion in Arabidopsis thaliana. The authors could observe polytubey phenotype which has been reported previously and obtain both triparental plants and haploids in ecs1 ecs2 mutants. Therefore, they proposed that the triparental plants resulted from the polytubey block defect, whereas the haploids were caused by the gamete fusion defect. Together with two other previous reports, I think it is very interesting to see these two proteases participating in so many different but connected processes. Although they did not provide the molecular mechanism of how ECS participated in polyspermy block and gamete fusion, their findings provide more options for and thus promote plant breeding. The work may have a wide application in the future and will be of broad interest to cell biologists working on gamete fusion and plant breeders.

    We thank the reviewer for their positive comments.

    Although most of the conclusions in this paper are well supported by the data, it could be improved with a minor revision including providing clearer data analysis and descriptions, images with higher resolution, and more discussions.

  3. eLife

    eLife assessment:

    This important study convincingly shows that the endopeptidases ECS1 and ECS2 repress the formation of polyspermy-derived triparental offspring and haploid induction by promoting double fertilization. While the underlying mechanisms remain to be further elucidated, the data presented in this study represent a valuable foundation for understanding the regulation of offspring genome size. This study will be of particular interest to the large community of scientists who are interested in plant reproduction and breeding.

  4. eLife

    Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

    Precise regulation of gamete fusion ensures that offspring will have the same ploidy as the parents. However, breaking this regulation can be useful for plant breeding. Haploid induction followed by chemical-induced genome doubling can be used to fix desirable genotypes, while triparental hybrids where two sperm cells with two different genotypes fertilize an egg cell can be advantageous for bypassing hybridization barriers to create interspecies hybrids with increased fitness. This manuscript follows up on a previous study from the same research group that used a clever high throughput polyspermy detection assay (HIPOD) to show that wild-type Arabidopsis naturally forms triparental hybrids at very low frequencies (less than 0.05% of progeny) and that these triparental hybrids can bypass dosage barriers in the endosperm (Nakel, et al., 2017). Mao and co-authors hypothesized that mutants that conferred polytubey, the attraction of multiple pollen tubes by mutant female gametophytes, would also increase the rate of triparental hybrids. They used a double mutant in the endopeptidase genes ECS1 and ECS2 which had previously been reported to induce supernumerary pollen tube attraction to test this hypothesis with their two-component HIPOD system in which one pollen donor constitutively expresses the mGAL4-VP16 transcription factor while the second pollen donor carries an herbicide resistance gene regulated by the GAL4-responsive UAS promoter. Triparental hybrids are detected as herbicide-resistant progeny from wild-type Arabidopsis flowers that have been pollinated by the two paternal genotypes. The authors convincingly show that the ecs1 ecs2-1 double mutant more than doubled the frequency of triparental, triploid hybrids in HIPOD crosses. They next tested the hypothesis that this increase in triparental hybrids was due to a gametophytic effect by using an ecs1-/- ecs2-1/ECS2 maternal parent in the HIPOD assay and testing whether the ecs2-1 mutant allele was preferentially inherited in triparental hybrids. The mutant allele was inherited at a much higher rate than expected, confirming their hypothesis.

    The triparental hybrid results with the ecs1 ecs2 mutant were not that surprising since the presence of extra sperm cells gives more opportunities for triparental hybrids to form, especially if gamete fusion is misregulated. However, an unexpected result came when the authors used aniline blue staining to analyze the ecs1 ecs2 polytubey phenotype. They confirmed that the double mutant had increased levels of polytubey compared to wild-type ovules, but they also noticed that 13% of seeds were not developing normally. This phenotype was confirmed with a second ecs2 allele and was complemented with both ECS1 and ECS2 transgenes under their native promoters. Microscopic analysis revealed normal gametophyte morphology before fertilization, but 8% of pollinated ovules failed to develop an embryo and 7% failed to develop endosperm, suggesting single fertilization events. In a logical set of experiments, they followed up on this result by crossing ecs1 ecs2 with pollen carrying a fluorescent reporter that would be expressed in developing embryos and endosperm. In this experiment, they were again surprised. Some of the wild-type-looking seeds lacked a paternal contribution (i.e. no fluorescent signal from the paternal reporter construct) in the embryo. This prompted them to look more closely at the progeny, upon which they detected small plants that were haploid. They confirmed the haploid nature by chromosome spreads. Finally, they used interaccession crosses between ecs1 ecs2 (Col-0) and Landsberg to verify that haploid progeny only carried maternal alleles of markers on all five chromosomes, indicating that the ecs1 ecs2 genotype can induce maternal haploids.

    This interesting study highlights the importance of following up on unexpected results. The conclusions are well-supported by the data and quite exciting. Paternal haploid inducers have been discovered in several species, but this is one of only two examples of maternal haploid induction. While the percentage of maternal haploids is very low, this phenomenon could be useful for plant breeding.

    Weaknesses
    The data in the manuscript is intriguing, but the question of how the same mutant combination promotes the formation of both triploid and haploid progeny remains unanswered and is not thoroughly discussed, nor is any model suggested for how the ECS1/2 peptidases could play a role in regulating gamete fusion and/or repressing parthenogenesis. A second unanswered question is whether the maternal haploids are a result of failed plasmogamy or karyogamy between the egg and sperm leading to parthenogenesis or a result of paternal genome elimination after plasmogamy. In figure 3B, the authors attempted to test whether plasmogamy occurs between the male and female gametes in ecs1 ecs2 ovules by crosses with pollen that expresses a mitochondrial marker under control of the pRPS5a promoter which is active in sperm cells as well as embryos and endosperm of fertilized ovules. This experiment allowed them to detect sperm cells that had not fused with the egg and central cell at 2 days after pollination. They also counted the percentage of seeds that expressed the mitochondrial marker in both embryo and endosperm at 2 DAP and found that ecs1 ecs2 mutants had a 20% reduction of visible mitochondria in embryo sacs compared to wildtype. They conclude that the result indicates a potential plasmogamy defect. However, the dependability of this marker is questionable since only ~55% of wild-type seeds had detectable signal in the embryo and endosperm. The authors imply that this experiment could be used to test plasmogamy, but it is not clear how any conclusions related to the abnormal seed phenotype could be drawn from examining the rate of signal in both the embryo and endosperm. Since the mitochondrial marker was not expressed from a sperm-specific promoter, the fluorescent signal at 2DAP is likely due to new gene expression from pRPS5a in the fertilized embryo and endosperm, not an indication of the presence of sperm-derived mitochondria. Perhaps an earlier timepoint could be used as well as a sperm-specific promoter instead of pRPS5a to answer the question of whether plasmogamy is happening in the ecs1 ecs2 ovules.

  5. eLife

    Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

    The manuscript reports the triploid and haploid productions using an ecs1ecs2 mutant as the maternal donor, in addition to the evaluation of the sexual process observed in the mutant. The indicated data show exquisite quality. To improve the content, I recommend carefully reconsidering the descriptions because some of the insights would cause a stir in the controversy regarding EC1&2 functions in plant reproduction.

    Strengths
    Triploid production by a combination of ecs1ecs2 mutant and HIPOD system has potential as a future plant breeding tool. Moreover, it's intriguing that both triploid and haploid productions were achieved using the same mutant as a maternal donor. I think authors can claim the value of their results more by adding descriptions about the usefulness of the aneuploid plants in plant breeding history.

    The evidence of the persistent synergid nucleus (Figure 3A) is critical insight reported by this study. As Maruyama et al. (2013) reported by live cell imaging, synergid-endosperm fusion had occurred at the two endosperm nuclei stage. It would be valuable to claim the observed fact by citing Maruyama's previous observation.

    Weakness
    As the authors suggested, the higher triploid frequency observed in ecs1ecs2 than WT was likely caused by the increased polyspermy. However, it also could be that reduction of normal seed number in ecs1ecs2 (whichever is due to failure of fertilization or embryo development arrest) accounts for the increased frequency of the triploid compared to WT.

    The results in Figure 3C-E suggested the single fertilization for both egg and central cells at similar frequencies. This is an exciting result, but it is still possible that the fertilized egg or central cell degenerated after fertilization resulting in the disappearance of paternally inherited fluorescence. Evaluation of fertilization patterns at 7-10HAP in ecs1ecs2 mutant may provide more confident insight, although unfused sperm cell was evaluated at 1DAP (Figure 3-figure supplement 1B). The fertilization states can be distinguished depending on the HTR10RFP sperm nuclei morphology and their positions, as reported by Takahashi et al (2018).

    Several recent studies have reported exciting insights on ECS1&2 functions; however, various results from different laboratories have raised controversy. Though, the commonly found feature is the repression of polytubey. For readers, it would be helpful to organize the explanation about which insights are concordant or different. In addition, a drawing that explains the time course in the process from pollination to seed development (up to 6DAP) based on WT would help to understand which point is evaluated in each data.

  6. eLife

    Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

    In this manuscript, Mao et al. reported that the two proteases ECS1 and ECS2 participate in both polyspermy block and gamete fusion in Arabidopsis thaliana. The authors could observe polytubey phenotype which has been reported previously and obtain both triparental plants and haploids in ecs1 ecs2 mutants. Therefore they proposed that the triparental plants resulted from the polytubey block defect, whereas the haploids were caused by the gamete fusion defect. Together with two other previous reports, I think it is very interesting to see these two proteases participating in so many different but connected processes. Although they did not provide the molecular mechanism of how ECS participated in polyspermy block and gamete fusion, their findings provide more options for and thus promote plant breeding. The work may have a wide application in the future and will be of broad interest to cell biologists working on gamete fusion and plant breeders. Although most of the conclusions in this paper are well supported by the data, it could be improved with a minor revision including providing clearer data analysis and descriptions, images with higher resolution, and more discussions.

  7. Version published to 10.1101/2022.01.20.476184v1 on bioRxiv