2.1. Plant materials and treatment
S. pohuashanensis was provided by the forest germplasm resources nursery of the National Forest Genetic Resources Platform (NFGR), Beijing University of Agriculture. Beijing, China, and one-year-old grafted clones of three genotypes from Mount Tai (Shandong, China), Mount Lao (Shandong, China), and Pingquan (Hebei, China) were used in the experiment. Jian Zheng undertook the formal identification of the plant material used in this study. Voucher specimens of this material have not yet been deposited in a publicly available herbarium.
Treatment samples were obtained from the same grafted S. pohuashanensis as the previously sequenced transcriptome [17]. The high-temperature treatment group (HT) and a control group (CK) were pretreated for 3 days in an artificial climate chamber (BIC-400; Bosun, Shanghai, China) under 16 h/25°C day, 8 h/18°C night, 70% relative humidity and a light intensity of 180 μmol·m-2·s-1. After pretreatment, the HT group was subjected to high-temperature stress at 43 ℃ for 8 h under light conditions (other conditions unchanged). In contrast, the conditions of the CK group remained unchanged. At the end of treatment, all leaves of the HT and CK were collected, frozen in liquid nitrogen, and stored at -80 ℃ for protein extraction. In addition, the leaves of HT and CK groups used for transmission electron microscopy were selected and high-temperature treatment was performed at 0, 2, 4, 6 and 8 h, and recovery for 24 h.
2.2. Protein preparation
After 43 ℃ 8h treatment, six leaves samples from HT and CK groups were extracted by phenol extraction, and an appropriate amount of the sample was grounded thoroughly in liquid nitrogen. Thereafter, pre-cooled BPP buffer (Sinopharm, Shanghai, China) was added to three volumes as plant homogenate, and the samples were vortexed at 4 ℃ for 10 min. An equal volume of Tris-saturated phenol (pH≥7.8) (T0250, Solarbio, Shanghai, China) was added, followed by vortexing at 4 ℃ for 10 min and then centrifuged for 20 min (12,000×g, 4 ℃). Added 5 volumes of pre-cooled ammonium acetate (Sigma, Santa Clara, CA, USA) methanol (Sinopharm, Shanghai, China) solution and precipitate the protein overnight at -20 °C; the next day, centrifuged at 4 °C for 20 min at 12000×g and discard the supernatant; added 90 % pre-cooled acetone to the precipitate and mixed well, centrifuged and discarded the supernatant, repeat twice; dissolved the precipitate in Halt Protease Inhibitor Cocktail (ThermoFisher Scientific, Wilmington, DE, USA); ultrasound on ice for 2 min; centrifuged at 4 °C for 12000× g 20 min and remove the protein supernatant. Standard samples were prepared according to the instructions provided with the Pierce BCA Protein Assay Kit (23225, Thermo Fisher Scientific, Wilmington, DE, USA) and the absorbance of each sample was measured at 562 nm using a Multiskan MK3 ELISA (Thermo, Waltham, MA, USA). The protein concentration of the samples was calculated from the standard curve and the volume of sample used.
2.3. Protein digestion and labeling
TEAB (Sigma, Santa Clara, CA, USA) was added to a final concentration of 100 mM, followed by Bond-Breaker TCEP Solution (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Wilmington, DE, USA) to a final concentration of 10 mM at 37 ℃ for 60 min and added iodoacetamide (≥99 %, chromatographically pure crystalline, Sigma, Santa Clara, CA, USA) to a final concentration of 40 mM at 25 ℃ for 40 min, protected from light. Thereafter it was centrifuge at 10,000×g for 20 min and then the precipitate was removed. The sample was dissolved in 150 µL of 100 mM TEAB, and trypsin (Promega, Madison, WI, USA) was added at an enzyme: protein ratio of = 1:50 and digested overnight at 37 ℃. After trypsin digestion, the peptides were dried using vacuum pump. The enzymatically dried peptides were dissolved in 0.1 % TFA (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Wilmington, DE, USA). The peptides were desalted by HLB (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Wilmington, DE, USA), and each sample was divided into two portions and dried using a vacuum concentrator. The peptides were quantified using a Pierce quantitative colorimetric peptide assay (23275, Thermo Fisher Scientific, Wilmington, DE, USA).
2.4. Liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry
The peptides were quantified by mass spectrometry using mass spectrometry loading buffer at an equivalent concentration of 0.5 μg/μL. Liquid-phase tandem mass spectrometry was performed using EASY-nLC 1200 (ThermoFisher Scientific, Wilmington, DE, USA) with Q-Exactive (ThermoFisher Scientific, Wilmington, DE, USA). A 75 μm × 25 cm C18 column reversed-phase column (ThermoFisher Scientific, Wilmington, DE, USA) was selected and using high-performance liquid chromatography system (Thermo Xcalibur, Version 3.0, https://www.thermofisher.com/order/catalog/product/OPTON-30487?SID=srch-srp-OPTON-30487 ). Separation was performed using buffer A solution of 0.1 % formic acid water and buffer B solution of 0.08 % formic acid acetonitrile solution (80 % acetonitrile). The chromatographic column was balanced with 95 % A. Samples were loaded by an automatic sampler first to a mass spectrometry C18 trap column and then separated using an analytical C18 column with a flow rate of 300 nL/min. The relevant liquid phase gradient was performed as follows: 0 min, A: B = 100:0 (v/v); 1 min, A:B = 95:5 (v/v); 63 min, A:B = 77:23 (v/v); 77 min, A:B = 71:29 (v/v); 86 min, A:B = 62:38 (v/v); 88 min, A:B = 52:48 (v/v); 89 min, A:B = 0:100 (v/v); 95 min, A:B = 0:100 (v/v); 96 min, A:B = 100:0 (v/v); and 120 min, stop. Each sample was separated by capillary high-performance liquid chromatography and then analyzed using Q-Exactive Mass Spectrometers.
2.5. Label-free protein identification and quantification
Mass spectrometry raw data were analyzed qualitatively and quantitatively using Proteome Discoverer (Version 2.2) and Xcalibur Qual Browser Version 3.0. The database used in this study was UniGene_ORF.fa.transdecoder.pep. The data were derived from transcriptome sequencing data [17]. The database search parameters were as follows: fixed iodoacetamide of Cys alkylation, fixed modifications of oxidation (M), acetyl (Protein N-term), modifications of carbamidomethyl (C), fixed trypsin of enzyme name (Full), trypsin fragment with up to 2 missed cleavages, peptide tolerance was set at 10 ppm, and peptide false discovery rate analysis ≤ 0.01. Identification of the peptides BLAST Nr database ( https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/blast/db/FASTA/ ) to obtain annotation information. DAPs were screened using a threshold of fold change (FC). FC ≥ 1.2 was considered up-abundant, FC ≤ 0.83 was considered down-abundant, and 0.83<FC<1.2 was considered to have no significant change in expression and visualization of DAPs using TBtools. The mass spectrometry proteomics data have been deposited to the ProteomeXchange Consortium (http://proteomecentral.proteomexchange.org ) via the iProX partner repository with the dataset identifier PXD027218 [36].
2.6. Bioinformatic analysis of proteins
Functional annotations of GO (Gene Ontology, http://www.geneontology.org ) describe three aspects of molecular function, cellular component and biological process. AgriGO (Version 2.0; http://systemsbiology.cau.edu.cn/agriGOv2/index.php ) was used to identify GO terms that were significantly enriched by DAPs after high-temperature stress. KEGG is a key public database associated with pathways (http://www.kegg.jp/kegg/pathway. html )[37]. GO and KEGG functional annotation analysis were performed for the differentially identified proteins. In addition, the main biological functions of DAPs and the major biochemical metabolic and transduction pathways involved was determined using GO and pathway functional significance enrichment analysis.
2.7. Proteomic and transcriptomic correlation analysis
The mRNA and protein encoded by the same gene were linked when the protein encoded by this gene was identified in the DAPs in this study and the gene was a DEG in the previous transcriptome [17]. The proteins and associated genes were counted in terms of both quantifiable and significantly different components. Once the association information for the gene and protein was obtained, the association results were annotated for GO function. At GO level_2, the profiles of differential transcripts and differential protein functional annotations were compared. KEGG pathway annotation was performed on the association results to compare the KEGG pathways involved in the differential transcripts and differential proteins. Quantitative association analysis of transcriptomics and proteomics-linked genes based on the annotation of DEGs and DAPs to determine their expression at the transcriptional and translational levels.
2.8. Quantitative RT-PCR determination
qRT-PCR was performed using a Bio-Rad CFX96 real-time PCR detection system. Fifteen primers specific for DAP corresponding to DEGs were designed using Primer Premier Version 6.24 (Supplementary Table S1). qRT-PCR was performed using SYBR Green Premix Pro Taq HS qPCR Kit (AG11701, Accurate Biology, Hunan, China) according to the manufacturer's instructions. SpActinQ was used as an internal reference gene. Differences in quantitative results were evaluated using 2-ΔΔCt method[38]. Three technical replicates of qRT-PCR were performed for each gene.
2.9. Transmission electron microscope observation
The washed leaves were placed on wax dishes; avoiding the veins, they were cut into long strips of 1-1.5 mm width and 2-3 mm length. The cut leaves were immersed in 2.5 % glutaraldehyde fixative (111-30-8, SPI, USA) at 4 ℃ for more than 8 h. Thereafter the samples were fixed overnight at 4℃ under light-proof conditions using 1% osmium fixative (Ted Pella Inc., CA, USA). The dehydrated samples were embedded in Epon812 (4.70 g Epon812, 2.56 g MNA, 2.62 g DDSA, 0.12 gDMP-30) embedding agent and the material was placed in a 45 ℃ thermostat for 12 h before being transferred to a 60 ℃ thermostat for 24 h to complete polymerization. Samples were sectioned using an EM UC7 frozen ultrathin sectioning machine (Leica, Wetzlar, Germany) and an Ultra 45° diamond sectioning knife (Daitome, Switzerland). Sections that produced a yellowish color were selected for slicing interference, and slices were retrieved using a 150 mesh Formvar Film copper mesh. The copper mesh was stained with 2 % uranyl acetate saturated with ethanol for 8 min, followed by 2.6 % lead citrate solution protected from carbon dioxide for 8 min, and vacuumed for 30 min on a 7700 transmission electron microscope (Hitachi, Tokyo, Japan). CCD conversion was performed to obtain electronic images.
2.10. Statistical analysis
The t-test in R Version 3.5.0 was used to calculate the p-value for significant differences between samples.
The g plot in the R package was used to cluster the significant DAPs using the distance calculation algorithm: Spearman between samples, Pearson between genes, and h cluster (complete algorithm).
GO functional and KEGG pathway significance enrichment analysis of DAPs was performed using a hypergeometric distribution and the test was Fisher's exact test.