Figure 1.
Regulation of fertilization by mating-type genes in P. anserina.
Mating-type protein names are enclosed in colored circles: magenta, MATα-HMG protein; cyan, MATA-HMG proteins. Grey squares represent target genes present in mat+ and mat− strains. The standard nomenclature is indicated below the P. anserina-specific gene names. MFM and MFP encode the pheromone precursors [13]. Arrows with heads and blunt ends indicate target-gene activation and repression, respectively. Data were compiled from [13], [28].
Figure 2.
Time-course RT-qPCR analysis of mating-type gene transcript levels during vegetative growth and fruiting-body development.
A: Relative quantification of mat− mating-type gene transcription using the Relative Expression Software Tool (REST) [69]. RNA was extracted from mat− colonies harvested during vegetative growth (24 h, 48 h, 72 h, 96 h and 120 h) and from mat− colonies grown for 48 h after fertilization with mat+ microconidia (crossing 48 h). The reference time for FMR1 fold-change determination was 24 h. The reference time for SMR1 and SMR2 fold-change determination was 120 h. Quantification cycle (Cq) values used for relative quantification are in Table S1. B: Relative quantification of mat+ mating-type gene transcription with REST [69]. RNA was extracted from mat+ colonies harvested during vegetative growth (24 h, 48 h, 72 h, 96 h and 120 h) and from mat+ colonies grown for 48 h after fertilization with mat− microconidia (crossing 48 h). The reference time for FPR1 fold-change determination was 24 h. Cq values used for relative quantification are shown in Table S1. C: Time course development of colonies. Upper row of Petri dishes: mat+ strain. Bottom row of Petri dishes: mat− strain.
Table 1.
Main features of genes specifically transcribed in mat+ (FC≥2) or mat− (FC≤−2) strains.
Figure 3.
Partitioning of mat+ vs mat− differentially transcribed genes.
A: Partitioning of differentially transcribed genes into classes controlled by mating-type genes or mating-type linked SNPs. Genes with FC≥2 or FC≤−2 (P<0.005) in mat+ vs fpr1−, mat− vs fmr1− and fpr1− vs fmr1− comparisons are considered as being controlled by FPR1, FMR1 and mating-type linked SNPs, respectively. 0: no regulation; +:induction or repression; s: similar control in mat+ and mat− strains. B: Partitioning of the mating-type target genes into groups with identical transcriptional patterns. Genes with FC≥2 in mat+ vs fpr1− and mat− vs fmr1− comparisons were considered as activated (A) by FPR1 and FMR1, respectively. Genes with FC≤−2 in mat+ vs fpr1− and mat− vs fmr1− comparisons were considered as repressed (R) by FPR1 and FMR1, respectively.
Table 2.
Main features of genes up- or down-regulated to a similar level in mat+ and mat− strains.
Figure 4.
Number of differentially transcribed genes in wild-type and mutant strain comparisons.
Cut-off values: FC≤−2 or FC≥2 and P<0.005.
Table 3.
Distribution of the 157 genes differentially transcribed in mat+ vs mat− in FunCat main functional categories.
Table 4.
Genes selected for deletion and phenotype of mutant strains.
Table 5.
Cross-species searches of mating-type target genes.
Figure 5.
Cell-type regulation and target-gene numbers in S. cerevisiae, S. pombe and P. anserina.
Mating-type protein names are enclosed in colored circles: magenta, MATα-HMG proteins; cyan, MATA-HMG proteins; green: homeodomain protein. Grey circles indicate different types of target genes and enclosed figures indicate their number. Mating-type genes are specific to each cell type, whereas target genes are present in both cell types. Arrows with heads and blunt ends indicate target gene activation and repression, respectively, except for a cells from S. cerevisae, which have specific regulation. Stipple arrows indicate hypothetical regulation. S. cerevisiae and S. pombe data were from compiled from [1], [2].