Developing the nuts, bolts, theoretical frameworks and community infrastructures to support global plant systems biology research

IF 2.6 Q1 AGRONOMY in silico Plants Pub Date : 2019-01-01 DOI:10.1093/INSILICOPLANTS/DIZ002
Xinguang Zhu
{"title":"Developing the nuts, bolts, theoretical frameworks and community infrastructures to support global plant systems biology research","authors":"Xinguang Zhu","doi":"10.1093/INSILICOPLANTS/DIZ002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The rate of progress in biological science today can be compared with that of physical science at the beginning of the 20th century. With so many new discoveries emerging on a daily basis, are these discoveries simply the application or manifestation of basic scientific principles such as the central dogma of molecular biology, the fundamental theorems of genetics, or the basic genetic principles of epigenetics, or will they have a larger impact? Are there grand challenges to be found in biological science research beyond the current stage of fact observation and the elucidation of the underlying mechanistic basis of individual cases using the basic principles discovered long ago? The answer is ‘yes’. In the field of plant science, though there is ever-increased resolution of the mechanistic details of the plant growth and development, we are far from being able to predict the growth and development of plants of particular genotypes under different environments, let alone predict changes in plant growth and development for an altered genotype and under a changed environment. This is one major reason why we label biology as an ‘experimental’ science, which is essentially another way of saying that models for whole plants are far from being mechanistic, sufficiently robust and satisfactorily predictive. Is there any hope of developing such models given the complexity of biological systems? There are good reasons to be optimistic. Pioneering researchers have developed many models that enable the accurate quantitative prediction of biological performances, such as the prediction of photosynthetic CO2 uptake rates under either steadystate (Farquhar et al. 1980) or dynamic conditions (Zhu et al. 2013). Models simulating many other physiological plant processes have also been developed (see reviews in Zhu et al. 2015; Chang and Zhu 2017). It is foreseeable that, as modules for individual processes become available, robust and complete models for plant growth and development will be within reach. This will not be a simple task. Even for the model organism Arabidopsis thaliana, there are about 30 000 genes, whose action and interaction among them and with their micro-environments, underlie growth and develop. Creating highly robust models to predict the behaviour of such a complex system with detailed descriptions of the mechanisms of all underlying genetic, biochemical, biophysical, and associated physical and chemical processes represent a huge challenge ahead. If such models are developed, they can be used to support plant science research, such as to study the mechanistic basis of natural variations of plant structure and function, to study the responses, acclimation, adaption and evolutionary trajectories of plants under environmental changes, in addition to the currently widely appreciated roles of plant models in guiding crop engineering, breeding or cultivation (Zhu et al. 2015; Marshall-Colon et al. 2017; Xiao et al. 2017). There are a few research areas critical to tackling this grand challenge. First, identification of new biological entities or new regulatory mechanisms that control different aspects of plant growth, development and plant–environment interactions, will continue to be the area that produces great discoveries in plant science. Here I emphasize that, in addition to the standard qualitative characterization of individual genes and their products, such as the structure and regulation of mRNA and proteins, their dynamic or kinetic properties, such as their rates of synthesis, degradation and Michaelis–Menten constants should be another major focus of future research. These quantitative data are required for the development of rate equations describing the dynamic changes of these biological entities. Second, development of accurate rate","PeriodicalId":36138,"journal":{"name":"in silico Plants","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/INSILICOPLANTS/DIZ002","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"in silico Plants","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/INSILICOPLANTS/DIZ002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRONOMY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The rate of progress in biological science today can be compared with that of physical science at the beginning of the 20th century. With so many new discoveries emerging on a daily basis, are these discoveries simply the application or manifestation of basic scientific principles such as the central dogma of molecular biology, the fundamental theorems of genetics, or the basic genetic principles of epigenetics, or will they have a larger impact? Are there grand challenges to be found in biological science research beyond the current stage of fact observation and the elucidation of the underlying mechanistic basis of individual cases using the basic principles discovered long ago? The answer is ‘yes’. In the field of plant science, though there is ever-increased resolution of the mechanistic details of the plant growth and development, we are far from being able to predict the growth and development of plants of particular genotypes under different environments, let alone predict changes in plant growth and development for an altered genotype and under a changed environment. This is one major reason why we label biology as an ‘experimental’ science, which is essentially another way of saying that models for whole plants are far from being mechanistic, sufficiently robust and satisfactorily predictive. Is there any hope of developing such models given the complexity of biological systems? There are good reasons to be optimistic. Pioneering researchers have developed many models that enable the accurate quantitative prediction of biological performances, such as the prediction of photosynthetic CO2 uptake rates under either steadystate (Farquhar et al. 1980) or dynamic conditions (Zhu et al. 2013). Models simulating many other physiological plant processes have also been developed (see reviews in Zhu et al. 2015; Chang and Zhu 2017). It is foreseeable that, as modules for individual processes become available, robust and complete models for plant growth and development will be within reach. This will not be a simple task. Even for the model organism Arabidopsis thaliana, there are about 30 000 genes, whose action and interaction among them and with their micro-environments, underlie growth and develop. Creating highly robust models to predict the behaviour of such a complex system with detailed descriptions of the mechanisms of all underlying genetic, biochemical, biophysical, and associated physical and chemical processes represent a huge challenge ahead. If such models are developed, they can be used to support plant science research, such as to study the mechanistic basis of natural variations of plant structure and function, to study the responses, acclimation, adaption and evolutionary trajectories of plants under environmental changes, in addition to the currently widely appreciated roles of plant models in guiding crop engineering, breeding or cultivation (Zhu et al. 2015; Marshall-Colon et al. 2017; Xiao et al. 2017). There are a few research areas critical to tackling this grand challenge. First, identification of new biological entities or new regulatory mechanisms that control different aspects of plant growth, development and plant–environment interactions, will continue to be the area that produces great discoveries in plant science. Here I emphasize that, in addition to the standard qualitative characterization of individual genes and their products, such as the structure and regulation of mRNA and proteins, their dynamic or kinetic properties, such as their rates of synthesis, degradation and Michaelis–Menten constants should be another major focus of future research. These quantitative data are required for the development of rate equations describing the dynamic changes of these biological entities. Second, development of accurate rate
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
发展螺母,螺栓,理论框架和社区基础设施,以支持全球植物系统生物学研究
今天生物科学的发展速度可以与20世纪初的物理科学相比。每天都有如此多的新发现出现,这些发现仅仅是基本科学原理的应用或表现,比如分子生物学的中心法则、遗传学的基本定理或表观遗传学的基本遗传原理,还是它们会产生更大的影响?在生物科学研究中,超越目前阶段的事实观察和使用很久以前发现的基本原理来阐明个体病例的潜在机制基础,是否会发现巨大的挑战?答案是肯定的。在植物科学领域,虽然对植物生长发育的机理细节的分辨率不断提高,但我们还远远不能预测特定基因型植物在不同环境下的生长发育,更不能预测基因型改变和环境变化下植物生长发育的变化。这就是为什么我们把生物学称为“实验”科学的一个主要原因,这实际上是另一种说法,即整个植物的模型远非机械的、足够健壮的和令人满意的预测。考虑到生物系统的复杂性,开发这样的模型有希望吗?我们有充分的理由保持乐观。开创性的研究人员开发了许多模型,能够准确定量预测生物性能,例如预测稳态(Farquhar et al. 1980)或动态条件下的光合CO2吸收率(Zhu et al. 2013)。模拟许多其他植物生理过程的模型也被开发出来(见Zhu et al. 2015;Chang and Zhu 2017)。可以预见,随着单个过程的模块变得可用,用于植物生长和发育的健壮和完整的模型将触手可及。这不是一项简单的任务。即使是模式生物拟南芥(Arabidopsis thaliana),也有大约3万个基因,它们之间以及与微环境的作用和相互作用是生长和发育的基础。创建高度稳健的模型来预测这样一个复杂系统的行为,并详细描述所有潜在的遗传、生化、生物物理和相关的物理和化学过程的机制,这是一个巨大的挑战。如果这些模型被开发出来,它们可以用于支持植物科学研究,例如研究植物结构和功能自然变化的机制基础,研究植物在环境变化下的响应、驯化、适应和进化轨迹,以及目前广泛认可的植物模型在指导作物工程、育种或栽培方面的作用(Zhu et al. 2015;Marshall-Colon et al. 2017;Xiao et al. 2017)。有几个研究领域对解决这一重大挑战至关重要。首先,确定控制植物生长、发育和植物与环境相互作用的不同方面的新的生物实体或新的调节机制,将继续成为植物科学中产生重大发现的领域。在这里,我强调,除了单个基因及其产物的标准定性表征,如mRNA和蛋白质的结构和调控,它们的动态或动力学性质,如它们的合成速率、降解速率和Michaelis-Menten常数,应该是未来研究的另一个主要重点。这些定量数据是建立描述这些生物实体动态变化的速率方程所必需的。二是发展准率
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
in silico Plants
in silico Plants Agricultural and Biological Sciences-Agronomy and Crop Science
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
9.70%
发文量
21
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊最新文献
Changes in the leaf area-seed yield relationship in soybean driven by genetic, management and environments: Implications for High-Throughput Phenotyping A Multi-Tissue Genome-Scale Model of Populus trichocarpa Elucidates Overexpression Targets for Improving Drought Tolerance Modelling the architecture of hazelnut (Corylus avellana) Tonda di Giffoni over two successive years An evaluation of Goudriaan's summary model for light interception in strip canopies, using functional-structural plant models Playing a crop simulation model using symbols and sounds: the ‘mandala’
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1