Abstract
It has been increasingly important for breeding programs to be aimed at crops that are capable of coping with a changing climate, especially with regards to higher frequency and intensity of drought events. Grass stomatal complex has been proposed as an important factor that may enable grasses to adapt to water stress and variable climate conditions. There are many studies focusing on the stomatal morphology and development in the eudicot model plant Arabidopsis and monocot model plant Brachypodium. However, the comprehensive understanding of the distinction of stomatal structure and development between monocots and eudicots, especially between grasses and eudicots, are still less known at evolutionary and comparative genetic levels. Therefore, we employed the newly released version of the One Thousand Plant Transcriptome (OneKP) database and existing databases of green plant genome assemblies to explore the evolution of gene families that contributed to the formation of the unique structure and development of grass stomata. This review emphasizes the differential stomatal morphology, developmental mechanisms, and guard cell signaling in monocots and eudicots. We provide a summary of useful molecular evidences for the high water use efficiency of grass stomata that may offer new horizons for future success in breeding climate resilient crops.
Introduction
Global food demand and consumption is at historically high levels and the current level of crops may not be sustainable if their production is not able to keep up with the population growth and adapt to the changing climate (). Therefore, future molecular and conventional crop breeding approaches are suggested to aim at new cultivars that can maximize yield under a capricious climate (; ). One of the positive climate adaptation strategies for agriculture is irrigation, which allows crops to buffer against climate variability (Lobell et al., 2009). However, over-irrigation depletes groundwater and diminishes surface water supplies (Zhu et al., 2019). Therefore, water use efficiency (WUE), the ratio of carbon gains to water use, directed by photosynthesis and gas exchange level, becomes one of the most important challenging targets for crop improvement (Leakey et al., 2019).
Drought is one of the most detrimental abiotic stresses, threatening sustainable food production (Lesk et al., 2016). Water deficit in plants is caused by insufficient soil water availability and high vapor pressure deficit, resulting in a change in plant water status and restricting plant development and productivity (Tardieu et al., 2018). As drought tolerance is a complex trait, breeding for drought tolerance by targeting single genes has not resulted in significant success so far (Tester and Langridge, 2010; Tardieu et al., 2018). Therefore, it is vital to combine quantitative trait loci (QTL) identification, gene pyramiding, genome editing, and other molecular breeding technologies to study fundamental phenotypic traits (e.g., deep root, efficient metabolism for desiccation tolerance) in order to improve WUE and drought tolerance of crops.
Stomatal opening facilitates CO2 uptake and water loss in plants. However, the increased transpiration rate will induce stomatal closure to stabilize transpiration (Mott and Parkhurst, 1991; ). This feedback loop is an important short-term physiological mechanism triggered by plants under water stress (Martínez-Vilalta and Garcia-Forner, 2017). Therefore, understanding the mechanisms of stomatal movement is crucial in regulating plant performance under the forthcoming predicted increasing frequency and intensity of droughts across the globe (). Furthermore, stomatal movement becomes an obvious target for breeding crops with high WUE and drought tolerance (Lawson and Blatt, 2014; McAusland et al., 2016).
Numerous studies have shown that stomatal structure affects plants’ response to the environmental cues (; ; ). Species of the grass (Poaceae) family have distinctive dumbbell-shaped guard cells (GCs) and specialized subsidiarry cells (SCs), forming an efficient stomatal complex (; ). For example, light can induce faster stomatal opening in grass species such as barley (Hordeum vulgare) and sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum) than those in eudicots like broad bean (Vicia faba) and soybean (Glycine max) (; Kaiser and Kappen, 1997). Moreover, wheat (Triticum aestivum) has significantly faster stomatal opening than Tradescantia virginiana, Nephrolepis exaltata, and Huperzia prolifera (). In the 1970s, it was proposed that the potassium shuttling between guard cells and subsidiary cells may be the key mechanism for rapid stomatal opening in grasses (Raschke and Fellows, 1971). Later, researchers found the effect of blue-light stimulus on rapid opening of grass stomata (; Karlsson and Assmann, 1990; ; ), which explained the mechanical advantage and osmotic shuttling of grass stomata. These characteristics allow for a faster grass stomata response than any other stomatal types. Thus, it was proposed that water and resource utilization have been optimized in grass-specific stomatal complexes during evolution (). In recent years, there have been huge advancements in the genome sequencing and funcational analysis of genes for stomatal regulation, epidermal patterning, and stomatal development (Raschke and Fellows, 1971; ; Nadeau and Sack, 2002; ; Shpak et al., 2005; ; ; ; Pillitteri and Torii, 2012; ; Kollist et al., 2014; Raven, 2014; ; Rudall et al., 2017; ). However, the molecular evolution of key gene families for stomatal development and the distinction between eudicot and monocot stomatal structure across a comprehensive set of plant species, representing the major lineages of angiosperms, have not been fully investigated.
This review highlights the unique morphological structure and developmental process of grass stomata and summarizes the contribution of Arabidopsis homologous genes in a large number of eudicot and monocots, including grasses. We found that some gene families involved in the lineage-specific stomatal file specification or polarization have certain levels of distinction between monocots and eudicots. We hypothesized that relevant gene families [e.g., SPCH, MUTE, FAMA (SMFs), Breaking of Asymmetry in the Stomatal Lineage (BASLs), and PANGLOSS (PANs)] determine stomatal structure and development, which may further influence stomatal movement and potentially regulate WUE in plants (; Li et al., 2017; Lawson and Vialet-Chabrand, 2018). For more comprehensive reviews of stomatal development and function, the readers are directed to the following excellent articles (Qu et al., 2017; ; ; Lawson and Vialet-Chabrand, 2018; Tardieu et al., 2018; Leakey et al., 2019).
Classification of Plant Stomatal Morphology
Based on the existence and position of lateral subsidiary cells (LSCs) and shape of GCs, stomata can be divided into seven major morphological classes: anomocytic (no obvious SCs), actinocytic complexes (a circle of radiating SCs), paracytic (LSCs), graminoid (dumbbell-shaped GCs with LSCs), tetracytic (LSCs and polar SCs), diacytic (perpendicular SCs), and cyclocytic (four or more similarly sized SCs) (; ; Nunes et al., 2019). Mature monocot stomatal complex is classified into anomocytic, paracytic, and tetracytic (Rudall et al., 2017) and graminoid is a special type of paracytic (Figure 1A). A majority of the studies on stomatal function are conducted on ‘kidney-shaped’ GCs in most eudicots (Nadeau and Sack, 2002; ; Macalister et al., 2007; Lampard et al., 2008; ; Pires and Dolan, 2010; Zhang et al., 2015; ) and some are on the ‘dumbbell-shaped’ stomatal complex in grasses (; Raissig et al., 2016, 2017; ; ; ; ; ). The stomatal complex of grass species may have facilitated their evolutionary success (; ), resulting in better adaptation under water deficient environments with significant biomass production (Lawson and Vialet-Chabrand, 2018). Dumbbell-shaped GCs are a characteristic structure of Poaceae (Stebbins and Shah, 1960), which provides these species with faster responses to environmental changes (; ; ) and a closer morphological and physiological connection between GCs and SCs than other monocots and eudicots (; Tomlinson, 1974; Rudall et al., 2013; Rudall et al., 2017).
FIGURE 1
Stomatal Development Process and Regulatory Models
Stomatal development and epidermal patterning have been extensively studied mainly in Arabidopsis, Brachypodium, maize, and moss (Nadeau and Sack, 2002; ; ; Raissig et al., 2017; ). Indeed, monocots and eudicots have huge differences in stomatal development and epidermal patterning. In eudicots, protodermal cell produces meristemoid mother cell (MMC), which asymmetrically divides into stomatal lineage ground cell (SLGC) and meristemoid (M). Meristemoids subsequently differentiate into guard mother cells (GMCs) through asymmetrical division, and division of GMCs produces Young Guard Cells (YGCs). After cell expansion and pore formation, YGCs develop into Mature GCs (MGCs). Moreover, SLGC is another initial point as it can reversely generate another stomatal lineage precursor (M + SLGC) or form a pavement cell (Peterson et al., 2010; Pillitteri and Torii, 2012; Vatén and Bergmann, 2012; , ). Most eudicots, including Arabidopsis, have random GC orientation and epidermal patterning (Zhao and Sack, 1999). However, the formation of grasses’ LSCs is still not fully understood due to the complex structure and underlying molecular mechanisms. It was suggested that GMCs induce MGC formation via symmetric divisions and subsidiary mother cell (SMC) via asymmetric divisions in grasses, resulting in divergent stomatal morphology (Raissig et al., 2016, 2017; ). On the contrary, polar subsidiary cells of tetracytic stomata are strictly mesogene cells because they initiated from stomatal cell files (Rudall et al., 2017; Nunes et al., 2019). It is also worth noting that not all the stomatal developmental patterns are well-ordered and axially polarized among monocots. For example, stomatal orientation is transverse in some Stemona and Lapageria species, but is random in some Araceae and Dioscorea species (; Rudall et al., 2017).
The extrinsic and intrinsic signals regulate the stomatal development and epidermal patterning in plants and most of the studies employed the model plant Arabidopsis (Peterson et al., 2010; Pillitteri and Torii, 2012; ). The heterodimers of basic Helix-Loop-Helix (bHLH) transcription factors specify stomatal precursor cell states (Weintraub et al., 1991). In different developmental stages, two universal components, SCRM/ICE1 and SCRM2, bind with different members of bHLH subgroup Ia SPEECHLESS (SPCH), MUTE, and FAMA, which were recently renamed as SMFs (SPCH, MUTE, FAMA) (Qu et al., 2017). The interactions of ICE1/SCRM2 and SPEECHLESS (SPCH), MUTE, and FAMA promote MMC, GMC and MGC stages respectively (Ohashi-Ito and Bergmann, 2006; Macalister et al., 2007; Pillitteri et al., 2007; Kanaoka et al., 2008). The leucine-rich repeat receptor (LRR) kinase complex that includes receptor-like protein Too Many Mouths (TMM), ERECTA family (ER), and Somatic Embryogenesis Receptor Kinase (SERK) are the primary receptors that transduce extrinsic signals (Shimada et al., 2000; Nadeau and Sack, 2002; Lukowitz et al., 2004; Shpak et al., 2005; Meng et al., 2015). LRR family transduces the developmental signal from EPFs. TMM is a signal modulator that establishes ligand-receptor pairs EPF2-ERECTA and EPF1-ERL1 to specify stomatal developmental initiation and spacing division (Lee et al., 2012). The Mitogen-Activated Protein Kinase (MAPK) cascade, including the MAPKKK/Embryo Defective71 (YODA), MPKK4/5, and MAPK MPK3/6, are also involved in this process to inhibit stomatal development and epidermal patterning (Lampard et al., 2008, 2009; ; Lee et al., 2015). In Arabidopsis, the polarity protein BASL serves as the scaffold for the MAPK kinase cascade, which determines asymmetric cell division (; Zhang et al., 2015; Qu et al., 2017). In addition, proteins of BREVIS RADIX (AtBRX)-like family and Polar Localization during Asymmetric Division and Redistribution (POLAR) family have been confirmed to play key roles in stomatal development and epidermal patterning (Nunes et al., 2019).
Although bHLH, SMF, and SCRM/SCRM2 may share a close phylogenetic relationship in land plants (Liu et al., 2009; Ran et al., 2013; ), the diversification of stomatal patterning among different plant species suggests there may be lineage-specific stomatal developmental regulation during evolution (Qu et al., 2017). Based on functionally confirmed genes relevant to stomatal development in Arabidopsis, many studies on their orthologs in grasses have been conducted. Evidence has shown that in three bHLH paralogs, the function of FAMA is conserved across monocots and dicots, however, divergence existed in MUTE and SPCH (Liu et al., 2009). It may be due to the fact that two asymmetric divisions are needed for the formation of grass stomatal complexes. The paralogs of bHLH that regulate these divisions may have some functional diversity compared to Arabidopsis (Raissig et al., 2016; ). For instance, it was reported that two functional SPCH paralogs are partially redundant and BdICE1/BdSCRM2 control stomatal development in different temporal or spatial process in Brachypodium distachyon (Raissig et al., 2016). These important regulators may be likely to produce special epidermal patterning and stomatal morphology. Moreover, BdMUTE in specific SCs is related to its mobility across cells and the presence of SCs allows B. distachyon stomata greater responsiveness and better resilience to the environment (Raissig et al., 2017). Therefore, manipulating SC property in grasses may be an effective approach in enhancing photosynthetic performance and WUE for the breeding of climate resilient crops.
In grasses, HvEPF1, OsEPF1, and TaEPF1 of the major cereal crops have been functionally characterized. These EPFs inhibited GMC formation and arrest GMC development before SMC generation, causing substantial reduction of stomatal density in plants for better WUE without impacting grain yield in barley, rice, and wheat (; ; ). It is interesting that gene duplication of EPFs/EFPL9s occurs in H. vulgare, T. aestivum, B. distachyon, and Oryza sativa and may be related to the bHLH functional diversity and parallel evolution of EPF signaling peptides for unequal stomatal complexes formation (). Furthermore, some novel proteins for stomatal development have shown distinctive differences with their Arabidopsis orthologs. A series of studies suggests that SHORTROOT (SHRs) and SCARECROW (SCRs) are involved in the stomatal file specification and GMC formation in rice and maize (Kamiya et al., 2003; Slewinski et al., 2014; Schuler et al., 2018; Wu et al., 2019). Moreover, unlike BASL or POLAR in Arabidopsis, in maize, ZmSCAR/ZmWAVE regulatory complex, which contains Abl-interactor (Abi), Nck-associated protein (Nap), p53-inducible mRNA 121 (PIR121), and haematopoietic stem progenitor cell 300 (HSPC300) (), is an initial marker of polarity, which polarize two other LRR receptors: PANGLOSS1 (PAN1) and PANGLOSS 2 (PAN2) (; ; ). Both proteins promote polarization of the lateral neighboring protodermal cells, leading to their asymmetric division to form SMCs; their function may highlight the unique regulation of stomatal patterning in grasses. These studies provide promising perspectives to modify these genes for breeding programs toward drought tolerant crops.
Stomatal Evolutionary Analysis Using OneKP
The large bulk of experimental evidences and some unsolved questions led to the potential evolutionary bioinformatics solutions for better understanding of the stomatal distinction between eudicots to monocots and for possible answers that would link high WUE and speedy grass stomata. New gene functions are generally considered to have arisen from gene duplications (). The expansions or contractions of gene family contribute to the dynamic evolution of metabolism, physiological regulation and signaling networks (). Since functional diversified paralogs of bHLHs (Liu et al., 2009; Raissig et al., 2016) or EPFs/EPFL9 () were found in grasses, it is necessary to figure out the relation between the stomata-associated gene duplications and different stomatal structures, especially the grass stomata. Combined comparative genetic analysis of known gene families involved in stomatal development and epidermal patterning, the distribution of these gene families may reveal the difference between basal angiosperm stomata, eudicot stomata, and the unique nature of grass stomata (Figure 1).
The release of one thousand plant transcriptomes (OneKP) provides the possibility to explore the evolution, duplication, and expansions of major gene families in large numbers of evolutionarily significant plant species (Leebens-Mack et al., 2019), in which they sequenced the vegetative transcriptomes of 1,124 species. Although it is difficult to include samples from every growing stage or from different environments, there were 80–90% universal genes conserved in the project across the Viridiplantae. Furthermore, gene family sizes in these transcriptomes have a significant correlation (r = 0.95) with those limited numbers of fully sequenced genomes (Leebens-Mack et al., 2019). In addition, cdhit (v.4.5.7) and HMMER (v.3.1b2) were used to estimate gene-family size across OneKP dataset. Sequence files for each gene family can be downloaded in OneKP Orthogroups Extractor with a valid gene identifier from one of 31 released genomes1, which facilitates the analysis of gene duplication across a wide range of species.
The distribution of gene families related to stomatal development may reveal the unique function of grass stomata with the analysis of gene families of 411 monocots and eudicots. Among these species, graminoid stomata has been distinguished from other eudicots or monocots on the basis of previous classification (; ; Rudall et al., 2017; Nunes et al., 2019). Most of the 108 monocotyledonous species have paracytic or tetracytic stomata, but some species in Alismatales, Dioscoreales, Liliales, and Asparagales have anomocytic stomatal type (Supplementary Table S1). The number of each gene family member of these species has been counted and the gene duplication of species were subjected for Xgboost analysis (Figure 1B). We found that SMFs, SHRs, PANs, SCRMs, SCRs, TMMs, POLARs, and SCAR/WAVE are the important gene families (Figure 1B), which take part in the stomatal file specification and SMC formation and polarization essential for lineage specific stomatal developmental regulation.
In order to show distributions of gene family directly, a phylogenetic tree was constructed for 411 OneKP species. The tree has presented all the numbers of each gene family in the representative Orders of angiosperms (Figure 2). Based on the phylogeny, there is an evolutionary transition from species of Chloranthales and Magnoliids as the basal angiosperms with kidney-shaped GCs (Pillitteri and Torii, 2012) to more complex stomata in monocots and eudicots. The most obvious gene family is BASLs, due to its absence in most eudicots and all monocots, indicating that there may be a unique polarity control of grasses (Vatén and Bergmann, 2012). Moreover, the absence not only occurs in transcriptomes, but also in sequenced and assembled plant genomes2. Although both BASL and POLAR drive stomatal file division, they function in two different cell fates: a meristemoid to a stoma and a SLGC to a pavement cell (Zhang et al., 2015; ). The sequential distinction of BASL and POLAR may explain the absence of BASL but presence of POLAR in monocots. Furthermore, the gene duplication analysis shows significant differences in major taxon (Figure 3). EPFs/EPFLs/EPFL9 are not found in some monocot clades, such as Dioscoreale and Pandanales, but are present in grasses. It appears that BASLs only exist in eudicots and there is at least one BASL homologue in most eudicot clades, except for Caryophyllales.
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 3
We then used OneKP to compare gene duplications of these gene families between grasses and other angiosperms. For exploring the evolutionary relationship of these gene families, Maximum Likelihood trees (Supplementary Figures S1–S10) have been constructed via PROTGAMMAWAGF model in RAxML (v8.2.12) (Stamatakis, 2014). Gene family distributions and taxon information for all species are summarized in Supplementary Table S2. In summary, we found some key gene families related to stomatal development have certain levels of different distribution in grasses in contrast to eudicots, especially regarding the function in cell division polarity and initial cell distribution. Their existence and duplication may provide grasses some functions to acquire unique stomatal morphology. However, the main limitation in this study is that the number of species only represents a tiny fraction of the total number of more than 300,000 angiosperms. Therefore, further investigation is required when there are sufficient numbers of high quality genome assemblies (i.e., 1,000) across the major orders and families of angiosperms.
Stomatal Opening and Closure in Grass
In addition to stomatal morphological structure and development, many genetic and environmental factors are involved in stomatal response (Lawson and Vialet-Chabrand, 2018). Light (Shimazaki et al., 2007; ), CO2 (; Kolbe et al., 2018), GC membrane transport (; ; Sade et al., 2010; Perrone et al., 2012; Lawson and Blatt, 2014), abscisic acid (ABA), reactive oxygen species (ROS), nitric oxide (NO), Ca2+, and pH signaling (Yang et al., 2005; ; ; ; Wang et al., 2018), and mesophyll photosynthesis (McAusland et al., 2016; Lawson and Vialet-Chabrand, 2018) all determine the speed and magnitude of stomatal movement. Moreover, many environmental stimuli regulate stomatal opening and closure via coordinated cell signaling and membrane transport activities (Kollist et al., 2014).
Stomatal opening is tightly regulated by light (Shimazaki et al., 2007). For instance, when GCs are illuminated with blue light, photoreceptors phytochromes (PHOTs) are triggered (Kinoshita et al., 2001; ) to directly phosphorylate another protein kinase Blue Light Signaling1 (BLUS1), which indirectly conveys the signal to type 1 Protein Phosphatase (PP1) (Takemiya et al., 2013; Takemiya and Shimazaki, 2016). Furthermore, a Raf-like protein kinase, Blue light–dependent H+-ATPase Phosphorylation (BHP), bound to BLUS1 forms a signaling complex with PHOTs to phosphorylate plasma membrane H+-ATPase (), driving H+ pumping and causing the hyperpolarization of the plasma membrane, activation of inward rectifying K+ channels, and water uptake for stomatal opening (Shimazaki et al., 2007; Marten et al., 2010; ). Blue light is one of the most influential stimuli triggering osmotic potential change and stomatal opening in grass and eudicots (; ; ). Interestingly, the PHOTs locate in different sites for light perception and phototropic bending in grass coleoptiles, but the response position is more independent in dicots (Yamamoto et al., 2014). Therefore, more research work should be conducted to investigate the different underlying mechanims between the grasses and eudicots in the key gene families (e.g., proton pumps, photoreceptors, protein kinases and phosphatases) that govern the light-induced stomatal opening.
The drought hormone ABA is one of the major signals that trigger stomatal closure (; Kollist et al., 2014). In Arabidopsis, ATP-binding cassette (ABC) transporters (AtABCG25, AtABCG40) regulate transmembrane ABA flux (Kuromori et al., 2010). Then the ABA receptors, Pyrabactin Resistance 1 (PYR)/PYR1-Like (PYL)/Regulatory Component Of Aba Receptor (RCAR) perceive ABA (Melcher et al., 2009; ; Umezawa et al., 2010) and bind to protein phosphatases type 2Cs (PP2Cs) (Ma et al., 2009; Park et al., 2009) to activate the SNF1-Related Kinase 2s (SnRK2s) (). The most important member of SnRK2s is Open Stomata 1 (OST1/SnRK2.6), which directly interacts and stimulates the S-type as well as the R-type anion channels (; ). The activation of anion channels results in the extrusion of anions and causes the depolarization that triggers the opening of outwardly rectifying K+ channel for K+ efflux from GCs for stomatal closure (Weiner et al., 2010; Munemasa et al., 2015; Murata et al., 2015). Current evidence shows that ABA controls grass stomatal movement in a similar mechanism with some differences in the ABA concentrations and specific gene expression in GCs for eudicots and SCs for grasses and sustrates for the ion channels (Matsuda et al., 2016; Wei et al., 2014; Mega et al., 2019; Wu et al., 2019). It was found that the reciprocal responses and concentration gradient of ABA in GCs and SCs is likely to trigger fast stomatal opening and closing in grasses (Nunes et al., 2019). In Arabidopsis, a typical eudicot, AtSLAC1 anion channel is active in chloride-based media (), but its homologs AtSLAH2 and AtSLAH3 require exogenous nitrate for channel opening in oocyte and GC systems (; Maierhofer et al., 2014). However, OsSLAC1 was confirmed as a nitrate-selective channel in rice (Sun et al., 2016) and ZmSLAC1 and HvSLAC1 also have similar selectivity for nitrate over chloride (Qi et al., 2018; Schäfer et al., 2018). However, it is still unclear whether key genes such as SLACs in grass stomata are the key determinant for the fast stomatal closure without functional completmentation in knockout mutants of eudicots.
CO2 mediated stomatal closure has also been well-investigated (Kolbe et al., 2018). In the short-term, elevated concentration of CO2 (eCO2) inhibits stomatal opening and leads to stomatal closure. CO2 enters GCs through aquaporins (PIPs), then interacts with the carbonic anhydrase (CAs) (; Lake et al., 2002). The interaction accelerates bicarbonate (HCO3–) formation to activate anion channels for stomatal closure (Negi et al., 2008; Tian et al., 2015). In the long-term, exposure to elevated CO2 stimulates the activity of secreted extracellular protease (CRSP), which evokes EPF2 and causes the reduction of stomatal density, thus further reducing stomatal conductance (; ). However, CAs showed evidence of different effects on stomatal characteristics in Arabidopsis and grasses (; Kolbe et al., 2018). It is still unclear whether key genes such as CAs controlling stomatal CO2 sensing and signaling in grass stomata are different from those in eudicots and whether they are the key determinant for the fast stomatal opening and closure in grasses.
Breeding Crops With Highly Water Use Efficient Stomata
Drought tolerant crops have the capacity to mitigate the damaging impacts of water deficit and allow plants to recover after rehydration (Morgan, 1984; Juenger, 2013). Both stomatal and non-stomatal controlling mechanisms are needed to cope with variable soil water status, which has been confirmed in a broad range of eudicot crops (Li et al., 2012; Wen et al., 2012; Tardieu et al., 2018; ).
The big dilemma for breeding crops with WUE is that under water stress, plants generally reduce their stomatal conductance (gs), which also reduces net photosynthetic rate (A), biomass, and yields (Tardieu et al., 2018). How can we improve WUE of crops and maintain yield under water deficiency? Recently, one study showed that without stomatal response to water stress, yield decreased by 76% in soybeans (). In tomatoes, green light induced significant decreases in gs, and increased WUE and maintained a relatively high photosynthetic capability under short-term drought stress (). Overexpression of aquaporin in tomatoes (Sade et al., 2010) and grapevines (Perrone et al., 2012) increased WUE under both optimal and water stress conditions. For stomatal development, it was shown that bHLHs are required for the development of soybean stomata, revealing the relationship between the accumulation sequence of GmSMFs and the initial growth stage of mature GCs (). Despite the success in breeding drought tolerant crops, most horticultural crops and cash crops are eudicots that do not have stomata similar to those in the crops of the grass family. It may be useful for the engineering of complex grass stomatal structure into the eudicot crop species for better WUE, drought tolerance, and eventually higher yield and quality of agricultural produces in future climatic conditions.
Conclusion and Future Perspectives
With the increasing water deficiency and steadily growing population, breeding crops with better water and resource use efficiency is one of the top priorities in agriculture. Here, we summarized that grasses may have outstanding advantages for WUE due to their unique stomatal structure. We compared relevant gene families to find the differences between grass stomata and other monocotyledonous and dicotyledonous stomata. We found that gene duplication or absence of some gene families may contribute to the unique structure in grass stomata as most of their functions are for stomatal file specification and SMC formation and polarization (Figures 1–3). We reviewed the differential stomatal morphology, developmental mechanism, and GC signaling in monocots and eudicots. We also compared key factors and underlying mechanisms affecting stomatal opening and closure for WUE in grasses and eudicots. Therefore, manipulation of genes responsible for stomatal structure and development in crops of the grass family could be an effective approach to enhance photosynthetic performance and WUE for the breeding of climate resilient crops. It might also open opportunities for future genome editing and modification of these genes to change the stomatal complex of eudicots, accounting for the majority of food crops, to achieve a better WUE for sustainable food production. Understanding the prominent adaptability of grass stomata under drought stress is likely to provide breeding guidance for other crops.
Statements
Author contributions
Z-HC conceived and designed the research. YW conducted the literature search and bioinformatics and evolutionary analysis. YW and Z-HC wrote the manuscript.
Funding
This work was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (31620103912 and 31571578) and Chinese and Dabeinong Funds for Discipline Development and Talent Training in Zhejiang University. Z-HC was funded by the Australian Research Council (DE1401011143), and Horticulture Innovation Australia (MT13041, VG17003, and LP18000).
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Supplementary material
The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpls.2020.00333/full#supplementary-material
References
1
AbbeE. C.MetcalfC. R.ChalkL. (1951). Anatomy of the dicotyledons.Ecology32:154. 10.2307/1930984
2
AbdulrahamanA. A.EgbedoF. O.OladeleF. A. (2009). Stomatal complex types, stomatal density, and the stomatal index in some species of Dioscorea.Arch. Biol. Sci.61847–851. 10.2298/ABS0904847A
3
AssmannS. M.JeglaT. (2016). Guard cell sensory systems: recent insights on stomatal responses to light, abscisic acid, and CO2.Curr. Opin. Plant Biol.33157–167. 10.1016/j.pbi.2016.07.003
4
BablaM.CaiS.ChenG.TissueD. T.CazzonelliC. I.ChenZ. H. (2019). Molecular evolution and interaction of membrane transport and photoreception in plants.Front. Genet.10:956. 10.3389/fgene.2019.00956
5
Bailey-SerresJ.ParkerJ. E.AinsworthE. A.OldroydG. E. D.SchroederJ. I. (2019). Genetic strategies for improving crop yields.Nature575109–118. 10.1038/s41586-019-1679-0
6
BarralA. (2019). Stomata feel the pressure.Nat. Plants.5:244. 10.1038/s41477-019-0390-3
7
BerryJ. A.BeerlingD. J.FranksP. J. (2010). Stomata: key players in the earth system, past and present.Curr. Opin. Plant Biol.13232–239. 10.1016/j.pbi.2010.04.013
8
BianZ.ZhangX.WangY.LuC. (2019). Improving drought tolerance by altering the photosynthetic rate and stomatal aperture via green light in tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) seedlings under drought conditions.Environ. Exp. Bot.167:103844. 10.1016/j.envexpbot.2019.103844
9
BlattM. R. (2000). Cellular signaling and volume control in stomatal movements in plants.Annu. Rev. Cell Dev. Biol.16:221. 10.1146/annurev.cellbio.16.1.221
10
BussisD.UvonG.FisahnJ.AltmannT. (2006). Stomatal aperture can compensate altered stomatal density in Arabidopsis thaliana at growth light conditions.Funct. Plant Biol.331037–1043. 10.1071/FP06078
11
CaiS.PapanatsiouM.BlattM. R.ChenZ. H. (2017). Speedy grass stomata: emerging molecular and evolutionary features.Mol. Plant10:912. 10.1016/j.molp.2017.06.002
12
CaineR. S.YinX.SloanJ.HarrisonE. L.MohammedU.FultonT.et al (2019). Rice with reduced stomatal density conserves water and has improved drought tolerance under future climate conditions.New Phytol.221371–384. 10.1111/nph.15344
13
CartwrightH. N.HumphriesJ. A.SmithL. G. (2009). PAN1: A receptor-like protein that promotes polarization of an asymmetric cell division in maize.Science323649–651. 10.1126/science.1161686
14
ChaterC. C. C.CaineR. S.FlemingA. J.GrayJ. E. (2017). Origins and evolution of stomatal development.Plant Physiol.174624–638. 10.1104/pp.17.00183
15
ChenZ. H.ChenG.DaiF.WangY.HillsA.RuanY. L.et al (2017). Molecular evolution of grass stomata.Trends Plant Sci.22124–139. 10.1016/j.tplants.2016.09.005
16
ChenZ. H.WangY.WangJ. W.BablaM.ZhaoC.García-MataC.et al (2016). Nitrate reductase mutation alters potassium nutrition as well as nitric oxide-mediated control of guard cell ion channels in Arabidopsis.New Phytol.2091456–1469. 10.1111/nph.13714
17
ChristieJ. M. (2007). Phototropin blue-light receptors.Annu. Rev. Plant Biol.5821–45. 10.1146/annurev.arplant.58.032806.103951
18
CutlerS. R.RodriguezP. L.FinkelsteinR. R.AbramsS. R. (2010). Abscisic acid: emergence of a core signaling network.Annu. Rev. Plant Biol.61651–679. 10.1146/annurev-arplant-042809-112122
19
DanzerJ.MeilottE.BuiA. Q.LeB. H.MartinP.HashimotoM.et al (2015). Down-regulating the expression of 53 soybean transcription factor genes uncovers a role for SPEECHLESS in initiating stomatal cell lineages during embryo development.Plant Physiol.1681025–1035. 10.1104/pp.15.00432
20
Doheny-AdamsT.HuntL.FranksP. J.BeerlingD. J.GrayJ. E. (2012). Genetic manipulation of stomatal density influences stomatal size, plant growth and tolerance to restricted water supply across a growth carbon dioxide gradient.Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B367547–555. 10.1098/rstb.2011.0272
21
DongJ.CoraA. M.DominiqueC. B. (2009). BASL controls asymmetric cell division in Arabidopsis.Cell1371320–1330. 10.1016/j.cell.2009.04.018
22
DrakeP. L.FroendR. H.FranksP. J. (2013). Smaller, faster stomata: scaling of stomatal size, rate of response, and stomatal conductance.J. Exp. Bot.64495–505. 10.1093/jxb/ers347
23
DunnJ.HuntL.AfsharinafarM.MeselmaniM. A.MitchellA.HowellsR.et al (2019). Reduced stomatal density in bread wheat leads to increased water-use efficiency.J. Exp. Bot.704737–4748. 10.1093/jxb/erz248
24
EngineerC. B.GhassemianM.AndersonJ. C.PeckS. C.HuH.SchroederJ. I. (2014). Carbonic anhydrases, EPF2 and a novel protease mediate CO2 control of stomatal development.Nature513246–250. 10.1038/nature13452
25
FacetteM. R.ParkY.SutimantanapiD.LuoA.CartwrightH. N.YangB.et al (2015). The SCAR/WAVE complex polarizes PAN receptors and promotes division asymmetry in maize.Nat. Plants1:14024. 10.1038/nplants.2014.24
26
FacetteM. R.SmithL. G. (2012). Division polarity in developing stomata.Curr. Opin. Plant Biol.15585–592. 10.1016/j.pbi.2012.09.013
27
FAO, IFAD, UNICEF, WFP, and WHO. (2019). The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World 2019. Safeguarding Against Economic Slowdowns and Downturns.Rome: FAO.
28
FaralliM.MatthewsJ.LawsonT. (2019). Exploiting natural variation and genetic manipulation of stomatal conductance for crop improvement.Curr. Opin. Plant Biol.491–7. 10.1016/j.pbi.2019.01.003
29
ForceA.LynchM.PickettF. B.AmoresA.YanY.-L.PostlethwaitJ. (1999). Preservation of duplicate genes by complementary, degenerative mutations.Genetics1511531–1545. 10.1017/S0016672398003711
30
FranksP. J.FarquharG. D. (2007). The mechanical diversity of stomata and its significance in gas-exchange control.Plant Physiol.14378–87. 10.1104/pp.106.089367
31
FrynsclaessensE.Van CotthemW. (1973). A new classification of the ontogenetic types of stomata.Bot. Rev.3971–138. 10.1007/BF02860071
32
GeigerD.MaierhoferT.Al-RasheidK. A. S.ScherzerS.MummP.LieseA.et al (2011). Stomatal closure by fast abscisic acid signaling is mediated by the guard cell anion channel SLAH3 and the receptor RCAR1.Sci. Signal.4:ra32. 10.1126/scisignal.2001346
33
GeigerD.ScherzerS.MummP.StangeA.MartenI.BauerH.et al (2009). Activity of guard cell anion channel SLAC1 is controlled by drought-stress signaling kinase-phosphatase pair.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.10621425–21430. 10.1073/pnas.0912021106
34
GorthiA.VolenecJ. J.WelpL. R. (2019). Stomatal response in soybean during drought improves leaf-scale and field-scale water use efficiencies.AGR. For. Meteorol.276-277:107629. 10.1016/j.agrformet.2019.107629
35
GrantzD. A.AssmannS. M. (1991). Stomatal response to blue light: water use efficiency in sugarcane and soybean.Plant Cell Environ.14683–690. 10.1111/j.1365-3040.1991.tb01541.x
36
GrayJ. E.HolroydG. H.Van Der LeeF. M.BahramiA. R.SijmonsP. C.WoodwardF. I.et al (2000). The HIC signalling pathway links CO2 perception to stomatal development.Nature408713–716. 10.1038/35047071
37
HamelL.-P.NicoleM.-C.SritubtimS.MorencyM.-J.EllisM.EhltingJ.et al (2006). Ancient signals: comparative genomics of plant MAPK and MAPKK gene families.Trends Plant Sci.11192–198. 10.1016/j.tplants.2006.02.007
38
HanS. K.ToriiK. U. (2016). Lineage-specific stem cells, signals and asymmetries during stomatal development.Development (Cambridge, U.K.)1431259–1270. 10.1242/dev.127712
39
HanS.-K.ToriiK. U. (2019). Linking cell cycle to stomatal differentiation.Curr. Opin. Plant Biol.5166–73. 10.1016/j.pbi.2019.03.010
40
HanadaK.ZouC.Lehti-ShiuM. D.ShinozakiK.ShiuS.-H. (2008). Importance of lineage-specific expansion of plant tandem duplicates in the adaptive response to environmental stimuli.Plant Physiol.148993–1003. 10.1104/pp.108.122457
41
HanbaY. T.ShibasakaM.HayashiY.HayakawaT.KasamoK.TerashimaI.et al (2004). Overexpression of the barley aquaporin HvPIP2;1 increases internal CO2 conductance and CO2 assimilation in the leaves of transgenic rice plants.Plant Cell Physiol.45521–529. 10.1093/pcp/pch070
42
HaraK.YokooT.KajitaR.OnishiT.YahataS.PetersonK. M.et al (2009). Epidermal cell density is autoregulated via a secretory peptide, epidermal patterning factor 2 in Arabidopsis leaves.Plant Cell Physiol.501019–1031. 10.1093/pcp/pcp068
43
HauserF.WaadtR.SchroederJ. I. (2011). Evolution of abscisic acid synthesis and signaling mechanisms.Curr. Biol.21R346–R355. 10.1016/j.cub.2011.03.015
44
HayashiM.InoueS. I.UenoY.KinoshitaT. (2017). A Raf-like protein kinase BHP mediates blue light-dependent stomatal opening.Sci. Rep.7:45586. 10.1038/srep45586
45
HepworthC.CaineR. S.HarrisonE. L.SloanJ.GrayJ. E. (2018). Stomatal development: focusing on the grasses.Curr. Opin. Plant Biol.411–7. 10.1016/j.pbi.2017.07.009
46
HetheringtonA. M.WoodwardF. I. (2003). The role of stomata in sensing and driving environmental change.Nature424901–908. 10.1038/nature01843
47
HettenhausenC.BaldwinI. T.WuJ. (2012). Silencing MPK4 in Nicotiana attenuata enhances photosynthesis and seed production but compromises abscisic acid-induced stomatal closure and guard cell-mediated resistance to Pseudomonas syringae pv tomato DC3000.Plant Physiol.158759–776. 10.1104/pp.111.190074
48
HoubaertA.ZhangC.TiwariM.WangK.de Marcos SerranoA.SavatinD. V.et al (2018). POLAR-guided signalling complex assembly and localization drive asymmetric cell division.Nature563574–578. 10.1038/s41586-018-0714-x
49
HughesJ.HepworthC.DuttonC.DunnJ. A.HuntL.StephensJ.et al (2017). Reducing stomatal density in barley improves drought tolerance without impacting on yield.Plant Physiol.174776–787. 10.1104/pp.16.01844
50
IbarraN.PollittA.InsallR. H. (2005). Regulation of actin assembly by SCAR/WAVE proteins.Biochem. Soc. Trans.331243–1246. 10.1042/BST0331243
51
ImesD.MummP.BöhmJ.Al-RasheidK. A. S.MartenI.GeigerD.et al (2013). Open stomata 1 (OST1) kinase controls R-type anion channel QUAC1 in Arabidopsis guard cells.Plant J.74372–382. 10.1111/tpj.12133
52
InoueS. I.KinoshitaT.MatsumotoM.NakayamaK. I.DoiM.ShimazakiK. I. (2008). Blue light-induced autophosphorylation of phototropin is a primary step for signaling.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.1055626–5631. 10.1073/pnas.0709189105
53
JohnssonM.IssaiasS.BrogardhT.JohnssonA. (1976). Rapid, blue-light-induced transpiration response restricted to plants with grass-like stomata.Physiol. Plant36229–232. 10.1111/j.1399-3054.1976.tb04418.x
54
JuengerT. E. (2013). Natural variation and genetic constraints on drought tolerance.Curr. Opin. Plant Biol.16274–281. 10.1016/j.pbi.2013.02.001
55
KaiserH.KappenL. (1997). In situ observations of stomatal movements in different light-dark regimes: the influence of endogenous rhythmicity and long-term adjustments.J. Exp. Bot.481583–1589. 10.1093/jxb/48.8.1583
56
KamiyaN.ItohJ. I.MorikamiA.NagatoY.MatsuokaM. (2003). The SCARECROW gene’s role in asymmetric cell division in rice plants.Plant J.3645–54. 10.1046/j.1365-313X.2003.01856.x
57
KanaokaM. M.PillitteriL. J.FujiiH.YoshidaY.BogenschutzN. L.TakabayashiJ.et al (2008). Specify three cell-state transitional steps leading to arabidopsis stomatal differentiation.Plant Cell20:1775. 10.1105/tpc.108.060848
58
KarlssonP. E.AssmannS. M. (1990). Rapid and specific modulation of stomatal conductance by blue light in Ivy (Hedera helix): an approach to assess the stomatal limitation of carbon assimilation.Plant Physiol.94440–447. 10.1104/pp.94.2.440
59
KinoshitaT.DoiM.SuetsuguN.KagawaT.WadaM.ShimazakiK. I. (2001). Phot1 and Phot2 mediate blue light regulation of stomatal opening.Nature414656–660. 10.1038/414656a
60
KolbeA. R.BrutnellT. P.CousinsA. B.StuderA. J. (2018). Carbonic anhydrase mutants in zea mays have altered stomatal responses to environmental signals.Plant Physiol.177980–989. 10.1104/pp.18.00176
61
KollistH.NuhkatM.RoelfsemaM. R. (2014). Closing gaps: linking elements that control stomatal movement.New Phytol.20344–62. 10.1111/nph.12832
62
KuromoriT.MiyajiT.YabuuchiH.ShimizuH.SugimotoE.KamiyaA.et al (2010). ABC transporter AtABCG25 is involved in abscisic acid transport and responses.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.1072361–2366. 10.1073/pnas.0912516107
63
LakeJ. A.WoodwardF. I.QuickW. P. (2002). Long-distance CO2 signalling in plants.J. Exp. Bot.53183–193. 10.1093/jexbot/53.367.183
64
LampardG. R.LukowitzW.EllisB. E.BergmannD. C. (2009). Novel and expanded roles for MAPK signaling in Arabidopsis stomatal cell fate revealed by cell type-specific manipulations.Plant Cell213506–3517. 10.1105/tpc.109.070110
65
LampardG. R.MacAlisterC. A.BergmannD. C. (2008). Arabidopsis stomatal initiation is controlled by MAPK-mediated regulation of the bHLH speechless.Science3221113–1116. 10.1126/science.1162263
66
LawsonT.BlattM. R. (2014). Stomatal size, speed, and responsiveness impact on photosynthesis and water use efficiency.Plant Physiol.1641556–1570. 10.1104/pp.114.237107
67
LawsonT.Vialet-ChabrandS. (2018). Speedy stomata, photosynthesis and plant water use efficiency.New Phytol.22193–98. 10.1111/nph.15330
68
LeakeyA. D. B.FergusonJ. N.PignonC. P.WuA.JinZ.HammerG. L.et al (2019). Water use efficiency as a constraint and target for improving the resilience and productivity of C3 and C4 crops.Annu. Rev. Plant Biol.70781–808. 10.1146/annurev-arplant-042817-040305
69
LeeJ. S.HnilovaM.MaesM.LinY. C. L.PutarjunanA.HanS. K.et al (2015). Competitive binding of antagonistic peptides fine-tunes stomatal patterning.Nature522439–443. 10.1038/nature14561
70
LeeJ. S.KurohaT.HnilovaM.KhatayevichD.KanaokaM. M.McabeeJ. M.et al (2012). Direct interaction of ligand-receptor pairs specifying stomatal patterning.Gene Dev.26126–136. 10.1101/gad.179895.111
71
Leebens-MackJ. H.BarkerM. S.CarpenterE. J.DeyholosM. K.GitzendannerM. A.GrahamS. W.et al (2019). One thousand plant transcriptomes and the phylogenomics of green plants.Nature574679–685. 10.1038/s41586-019-1693-2
72
LeskC.RowhaniP.RamankuttyN. (2016). Influence of extreme weather disasters on global crop production.Nature529:84. 10.1038/nature16467
73
LetunicI.BorkP. (1988). Interactive tree of life (iTOL): an online tool for phylogenetic tree display and annotation.FEBS Lett.23278–82. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btl529
74
LiQ. M.LiuB. B.ZouZ. R. (2012). Effects of doubled CO2 concentration on physiological characteristics of cucumber seedlings under drought stresses.Acta Hortic.936103–112. 10.17660/ActaHortic.2012.936.11
75
LiY.LiH.LiY.ZhangS. (2017). Improving water-use efficiency by decreasing stomatal conductance and transpiration rate to maintain higher ear photosynthetic rate in drought-resistant wheat.Crop. J.5231–239. 10.1016/j.cj.2017.01.001
76
LiuT.Ohashi-ItoK.BergmannD. C. (2009). Orthologs of Arabidopsis thaliana stomatal bHLH genes and regulation of stomatal development in grasses.Development1362265–2276. 10.1242/dev.032938
77
LobellD.BalaG.MirinA.PhillipsT.MaxwellR.RotmanD. (2009). Regional differences in the influence of irrigation on climate.J. Clim.222248–2255. 10.1175/2008JCLI2703.1
78
LukowitzW.RoederA.ParmenterD.SomervilleC. (2004). A MAPKK kinase gene regulates extra-embryonic cell fate in Arabidopsis.Cell116109–119. 10.1016/S0092-8674(03)01067-5
79
MaY.SzostkiewiczI.KorteA.MoesD.YangY.ChristmannA.et al (2009). Regulators of PP2C phosphatase activity function as abscisic acid sensors.Science3241064–1068. 10.1126/science.1172408
80
MacalisterC. A.Ohashi-ItoK.BergmannD. C. (2007). Transcription factor control of asymmetric cell divisions that establish the stomatal lineage.Nature445537–540. 10.1038/nature05491
81
MaierhoferT.LindC.HüttlS.ScherzerS.PapenfußM.SimonJ.et al (2014). A single-pore residue renders the Arabidopsis root anion channel SLAH2 highly nitrate selective.Plant Cell262554–2567. 10.1105/tpc.114.125849
82
MartenI.DeekenR.HedrichR.RoelfsemaM. R. G. (2010). Light-induced modification of plant plasma membrane ion transport.Plant Biol.1264–79. 10.1111/j.1438-8677.2010.00384.x
83
Martínez-VilaltaJ.Garcia-FornerN. (2017). Water potential regulation, stomatal behaviour and hydraulic transport under drought: deconstructing the iso/anisohydric concept.Plant Cell Environ.40962–976. 10.1111/pce.12846
84
MatsudaS.TakanoS.SatoM.FurukawaK.NagasawaH.YoshikawaS.et al (2016). Rice stomatal closure requires guard cell plasma membrane ATP-binding cassette transporter RCN1/OsABCG5.Mol. Plant9417–427. 10.1016/j.molp.2015.12.007
85
McAuslandL.Vialet-ChabrandS.DaveyP.BakerN. R.BrendelO.LawsonT. (2016). Effects of kinetics of light-induced stomatal responses on photosynthesis and water-use efficiency.New Phytol.2111209–1220. 10.1111/nph.14000
86
MegaR.AbeF.KimJ. S.TsuboiY.TanakaK.KobayashiH.et al (2019). Tuning water-use efficiency and drought tolerance in wheat using abscisic acid receptors.Nat. Plants5153–159. 10.1038/s41477-019-0361-8
87
MelcherK.NgL. M.ZhouX. E.SoonF. F.XuY.Suino-PowellK. M.et al (2009). A gate-latch-lock mechanism for hormone signalling by abscisic acid receptors.Nature462602–608. 10.1038/nature08613
88
MengX.ChenX.MangH.LiuC.YuX.GaoX.et al (2015). Differential function of Arabidopsis SERK family receptor-like kinases in stomatal patterning.Curr. Biol.252361–2372. 10.1016/j.cub.2015.07.068
89
MorganJ. M. (1984). Osmoregulation and water stress in higher plants.Annu. Rev. Plant Biol.35299–319. 10.1146/annurev.pp.35.060184.001503
90
MottK. A.ParkhurstD. F. (1991). Stomatal responses to humidity in air and helox.Plant Cell Environ.14509–515. 10.1111/j.1365-3040.1991.tb01521.x
91
MunemasaS.HauserF.ParkJ.WaadtR.BrandtB.SchroederJ. I. (2015). Mechanisms of abscisic acid-mediated control of stomatal aperture.Curr. Opin. Plant Biol.28154–162. 10.1016/j.pbi.2015.10.010
92
MurataY.MoriI. C.MunemasaS. (2015). Diverse stomatal signaling and the signal integration mechanism.Annu. Rev. Plant Biol.66369–392. 10.1146/annurev-arplant-043014-114707
93
NadeauJ. A.SackF. D. (2002). Control of stomatal distribution on the Arabidopsis leaf surface.Science2961697–1700. 10.1126/science.1069596
94
NegiJ.MatsudaO.NagasawaT.ObaY.TakahashiH.Kawai-YamadaM.et al (2008). CO2 regulator SLAC1 and its homologues are essential for anion homeostasis in plant cells.Nature452483–486. 10.1038/nature06720
95
NunesT. D. G.ZhangD.RaissigM. T. (2019). Form, development and function of grass stomata.Plant J.101780–799. 10.1111/tpj.14552
96
Ohashi-ItoK.BergmannD. C. (2006). Arabidopsis: FAMA controls the final proliferation/differentiation switch during stomatal development.Plant Cell182493. 10.1105/tpc.106.046136
97
ParkS. Y.FungP.NishimuraN.JensenD. R.FujiiH.ZhaoY.et al (2009). Abscisic acid inhibits type 2C protein phosphatases via the PYR/PYL family of START proteins.Science3241068–1071. 10.1126/science.1173041
98
PerroneI.GambinoG.ChitarraW.VitaliM.PagliaraniC.RiccomagnoN.et al (2012). The grapevine root-specific aquaporin VvPIP2;4N controls root hydraulic conductance and leaf gas exchange under well-watered conditions but not under water stress.Plant Physiol.160965–977. 10.1104/pp.112.203455
99
PetersonK. M.RychelA. L.ToriiK. U. (2010). Out of the mouths of plants: the molecular basis of the evolution and diversity of stomatal development.Plant Cell22296–306. 10.1105/tpc.109.072777
100
PillitteriL. J.SloanD. B.BogenschutzN. L.ToriiK. U. (2007). Termination of asymmetric cell division and differentiation of stomata.Nature445501–505. 10.1038/nature05467
101
PillitteriL. J.ToriiK. U. (2012). Mechanisms of stomatal development.Annu. Rev. Plant Biol.63591–614. 10.1146/annurev-arplant-042811-105451
102
PiresN.DolanL. (2010). Origin and diversification of basic-helix-loop-helix proteins in plants.Mol. Biol. Evol.27862–874. 10.1093/molbev/msp288
103
QiG. N.YaoF. Y.RenH. M.SunS. J.TanY. Q.ZhangZ. C.et al (2018). The S-type anion channel ZmSLAC1 plays essential roles in stomatal closure by mediating nitrate efflux in maize.Plant Cell Physiol.59614–623. 10.1093/pcp/pcy015
104
QuX.PetersonK. M.ToriiK. U. (2017). Stomatal development in time: the past and the future.Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev.451–9. 10.1016/j.gde.2017.02.001
105
RaissigM. T.AbrashE.BettadapurA.VogelJ. P.BergmannD. C. (2016). Grasses use an alternatively wired bHLH transcription factor network to establish stomatal identity.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.1138326–8331. 10.1073/pnas.1606728113
106
RaissigM. T.MatosJ. L.GilM. X.KornfeldA.BettadapurA.AbrashE.et al (2017). Mobile MUTE specifies subsidiary cells to build physiologically improved grass stomata.Science3551215–1218. 10.1126/science.aal3254
107
RanJ. H.ShenT. T.LiuW. J.WangX. Q. (2013). Evolution of the bHLH genes involved in stomatal development: implications for the expansion of developmental complexity of stomata in land plants.PLoS One8:e78997. 10.1371/journal.pone.0078997
108
RaschkeK.FellowsM. P. (1971). Stomatal movement in Zea mays: shuttle of potassium and chloride between guard cells and subsidiary cells.Planta101296–316. 10.1007/BF00398116
109
RavenJ. A. (2014). Speedy small stomata?J. Exp. Bot.651415–1424. 10.1093/jxb/eru032
110
RudallP. J.ChenE. D.CullenE. (2017). Evolution and development of monocot stomata.Am. J. Bot.1041122–1141. 10.3732/ajb.1700086
111
RudallP. J.HiltonJ.BatemanR. M. (2013). Several developmental and morphogenetic factors govern the evolution of stomatal patterning in land plants.New Phytol.200598–614. 10.1111/nph.12406
112
SadeN.GebretsadikM.SeligmannR.SchwartzA.WallachR.MoshelionM. (2010). The role of tobacco Aquaporin1 in improving water use efficiency, hydraulic conductivity, and yield production under salt stress.Plant Physiol.152245–254. 10.1104/pp.109.145854
113
SchäferN.MaierhoferT.HerrmannJ.JørgensenM. E.LindC.von MeyerK.et al (2018). A tandem amino acid residue motif in guard cell SLAC1 anion channel of grasses allows for the control of stomatal aperture by nitrate.Curr. Biol.281370–1379. 10.1016/j.cub.2018.03.027
114
SchulerM. L.SedelnikovaO. V.WalkerB. J.WesthoffP.LangdaleaJ. A. (2018). SHORTROOT-mediated increase in stomatal density has no impact on photosynthetic efficiency.Plant Physiol.176757–772. 10.1104/pp.17.01005
115
ShimadaY.GulliM. P.PeterM. (2000). Nuclear sequestration of the exchange factor Cdc24 by Far1 regulates cell polarity during yeast mating.Nat. Cell Biol.2117–124. 10.1038/35000073
116
ShimazakiK. I.DoiM.AssmannS. M.KinoshitaT. (2007). Light regulation of stomatal movement.Annu. Rev. Plant Biol.58219–247. 10.1146/annurev.arplant.57.032905.105434
117
ShpakE. D.McAbeeJ. M.PillitteriL. J.ToriiK. U. (2005). Plant science: stomatal patterning and differentiation by synergistic interactions of receptor kinases.Science309290–293. 10.1126/science.1109710
118
SlewinskiT. L.AndersonA. A.PriceS.WitheeJ. R.GallagherK.TurgeonR. (2014). Short-root1 plays a role in the development of vascular tissue and Kranz anatomy in maize leaves.Mol. Plant71388–1392. 10.1093/mp/ssu036
119
StamatakisA. (2014). RAxML version 8: a tool for phylogenetic analysis and post-analysis of large phylogenies.Bioinformatics9:9. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btu033
120
StebbinsG. L.ShahS. S. (1960). Developmental studies of cell differentiation in the epidermis of monocotyledons: II. Cytological features of stomatal development in the Gramineae.Dev. Biol.2477–500. 10.1016/0012-1606(60)90050-6
121
SunS. J.QiG. N.GaoQ. F.WangH. Q.YaoF. Y.HussainJ.et al (2016). Protein kinase OsSAPK8 functions as an essential activator of S-type anion channel OsSLAC1, which is nitrate-selective in rice.Planta243489–500. 10.1007/s00425-015-2418-x
122
TakemiyaA.ShimazakiK. I. (2016). Arabidopsis phot1 and phot2 phosphorylate BLUS1 kinase with different efficiencies in stomatal opening.J. Plant Res.129167–174. 10.1007/s10265-015-0780-1
123
TakemiyaA.SugiyamaN.FujimotoH.TsutsumiT.YamauchiS.HiyamaA.et al (2013). Phosphorylation of BLUS1 kinase by phototropins is a primary step in stomatal opening.Nat. Commun.4:3094. 10.1038/ncomms3094
124
TardieuF.SimonneauT.MullerB. (2018). The physiological basis of drought tolerance in crop plants: a scenario-dependent probabilistic approach.Annu. Rev. Plant Biol.69733–759. 10.1146/annurev-arplant-042817-040218
125
TesterM.LangridgeP. (2010). Breeding technologies to increase crop production in a changing world.Science327818–822. 10.1126/science.1183700
126
TianW.HouC.RenZ.PanY.JiaJ.ZhangH.et al (2015). A molecular pathway for CO2 response in Arabidopsis guard cells.Nat. Commun.6:6057. 10.1038/ncomms7057
127
TomlinsonP. B. (1974). Development of the stomatal complex as a taxonomic character in the monocotyledons.Taxon23109–128. 10.2307/1218094
128
UmezawaT.NakashimaK.MiyakawaT.KuromoriT.TanokuraM.ShinozakiK.et al (2010). Molecular basis of the core regulatory network in ABA responses: sensing, signaling and transport.Plant Cell Physiol.511821–1839. 10.1093/pcp/pcq156
129
VaténA.BergmannD. C. (2012). Mechanisms of stomatal development: an evolutionary view.Evo. Devo.4:11. 10.1186/2041-9139-4-11
130
WangY.BlattM. R.ChenZ.-H. (2018). “Ion transport at the plant plasma membrane,” in Encyclopedia for Life Sciences, (Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd), 1–16. Available online at: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/9780470015902.a000130 7.pub3
131
WeiS.HuW.DengX.ZhangY.LiuX.ZhaoX.et al (2014). A rice calcium-dependent protein kinase OsCPK9 positively regulates drought stress tolerance and spikelet fertility.BMC Plant Biol.14:133. 10.1186/1471-2229-14-133
132
WeinerJ. J.PetersonF. C.VolkmanB. F.CutlerS. R. (2010). Structural and functional insights into core ABA signaling.Curr. Opin. Plant Biol.13495–502. 10.1016/j.pbi.2010.09.007
133
WeintraubH.DavisR.TapscottS.ThayerM.KrauseM.BenezraR.et al (1991). The myoD gene family: nodal point during specification of the muscle cell lineage.Science251761–766. 10.1126/science.1846704
134
WenQ.ZhangN.CaoR. X.ZhouX. Y.TangJ.WuN. B. (2012). Research on limiting factors of photosynthesis in Coptis chinensis leaves under short-term drought.Chin. Tradit. Herb. Drugs431407–1411.
135
WuZ.ChenL.YuQ.ZhouW.GouX.LiJ.et al (2019). Multiple transcriptional factors control stomata development in rice.New Phytol.223220–232. 10.1111/nph.15766
136
YamamotoK.SuzukiT.AiharaY.HagaK.SakaiT.NagataniA. (2014). The phototropic response is locally regulated within the topmost light-responsive region of the Arabidopsis thaliana seedling.Plant Cell Physiol.55497–506. 10.1093/pcp/pct184
137
YangW.JifengY.MonikaK.MaryseC.AngelaS.CharleneM. A.et al (2005). Molecular tailoring of farnesylation for plant drought tolerance and yield protection.Plant J.43413–424. 10.1111/j.1365-313x.2005.02463.x
138
ZhangY.WangP.ShaoW.ZhuJ. K.DongJ. (2015). The BASL polarity protein controls a MAPK signaling feedback loop in asymmetric cell division.Dev. Cell33136–149. 10.1016/j.devcel.2015.02.022
139
ZhaoC.WangY.ChanK. X.MarchantD. B.FranksP. J.RandallD.et al (2019). Evolution of chloroplast retrograde signaling facilitates green plant adaptation to land.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.1165015–5020. 10.1073/pnas.1812092116
140
ZhaoL.SackF. D. (1999). Ultrastructure of stomatal development in Arabidopsis (Brassicaceae) leaves.Am. J. Bot.86929–939. 10.2307/2656609
141
ZhuX.TroyT. J.DevineniN. (2019). Stochastically modeling the projected impacts of climate change on rainfed and irrigated US crop yields.Environ. Res. Lett.14:074021. 10.1088/1748-9326/ab25a1
Summary
Keywords
epidermal patterning, guard cell signaling, molecular breeding, stomatal development, stomatal structure
Citation
Wang Y and Chen Z-H (2020) Does Molecular and Structural Evolution Shape the Speedy Grass Stomata?. Front. Plant Sci. 11:333. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2020.00333
Received
04 December 2019
Accepted
05 March 2020
Published
21 April 2020
Volume
11 - 2020
Edited by
Carlos García-Mata, National University of Mar del Plata, Argentina
Reviewed by
Scott McAdam, Purdue University, United States; Jie Le, Key Laboratory of Plant Molecular Physiology, Institute of Botany (CAS), China
Updates
Copyright
© 2020 Wang and Chen.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Zhong-Hua Chen, z.chen@westernsydney.edu.au; z.chen@uws.edu.au
This article was submitted to Plant Traffic and Transport, a section of the journal Frontiers in Plant Science
Disclaimer
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.