Understanding plant stress memory under extreme temperatures such as cold and heat could contribute to plant development. Plants employ different types of stress memories, such as somatic, intergenerational and transgenerational, regulated by epigenetic changes such as DNA and histone modifications and microRNAs (miRNA), playing a key role in gene regulation from early development to maturity. In most cases, cold and heat stresses result in short-term epigenetic modifications that can return to baseline modification levels after stress cessation. Nevertheless, some of the modifications may be stable and passed on as stress memory, potentially allowing them to be inherited across generations, whereas some of the modifications are reactivated during sexual reproduction or embryogenesis. Several stress-related genes are involved in stress memory inheritance by turning on and off transcription profiles and epigenetic changes. Vernalization is the best example of somatic stress memory. Changes in the chromatin structure of the Flowering Locus C (FLC) gene, a MADS-box transcription factor (TF), maintain cold stress memory during mitosis. FLC expression suppresses flowering at high levels during winter; and during vernalization, B3 TFs, cold memory cis-acting element and polycomb repressive complex 1 and 2 (PRC1 and 2) silence FLC activation. In contrast, the repression of SQUAMOSA promoter-binding protein-like (SPL) TF and the activation of Heat Shock TF (HSFA2) are required for heat stress memory. However, it is still unclear how stress memory is inherited by offspring, and the integrated view of the regulatory mechanisms of stress memory and mitotic and meiotic heritable changes in plants is still scarce. Thus, in this review, we focus on the epigenetic regulation of stress memory and discuss the application of new technologies in developing epigenetic modifications to improve stress memory.

Long terminal repeat retrotransposons (LTR retrotransposons) are the most abundant group of mobile genetic elements in eukaryotic genomes and are essential in organizing genomic architecture and phenotypic variations. The diverse families of retrotransposons are related to retroviruses. As retrotransposable elements are dispersed and ubiquitous, their “copy-out and paste-in” life cycle of replicative transposition leads to new genome insertions without the excision of the original element. The overall structure of retrotransposons and the domains responsible for the various phases of their replication is highly conserved in all eukaryotes. The two major superfamilies of LTR retrotransposons, Ty1/Copia and Ty3/Gypsy, are distinguished and dispersed across the chromosomes of higher plants. Members of these superfamilies can increase in copy number and are often activated by various biotic and abiotic stresses due to retrotransposition bursts. LTR retrotransposons are important drivers of species diversity and exhibit great variety in structure, size, and mechanisms of transposition, making them important putative actors in genome evolution. Additionally, LTR retrotransposons influence the gene expression patterns of adjacent genes by modulating potential small interfering RNA (siRNA) and RNA-directed DNA methylation (RdDM) pathways. Furthermore, comparative and evolutionary analysis of the most important crop genome sequences and advanced technologies have elucidated the epigenetics and structural and functional modifications driven by LTR retrotransposon during speciation. However, mechanistic insights into LTR retrotransposons remain obscure in plant development due to a lack of advancement in high throughput technologies. In this review, we focus on the key role of LTR retrotransposons response in plants during heat stress, the role of centromeric LTR retrotransposons, and the role of LTR retrotransposon markers in genome expression and evolution.

No abstract

Key message We briefly discuss that the similarity of LTR retrotransposons to retroviruses is a great opportunity for the development of a genetic engineering tool that exploits intragenic elements in the plant genome for plant genetic improvement. Abstract Long terminal repeat (LTR) retrotransposons are very similar to retroviruses but do not have the property of being infectious. While spreading between its host cells, a retrovirus inserts a DNA copy of its genome into the cells. The ability of retroviruses to cause infection with genome integration allows genes to be delivered to cells and tissues. Retrovirus vectors are, however, only specific to animals and insects, and, thus, are not relevant to plant genetic engineering. However, the similarity of LTR retrotransposons to retroviruses is an opportunity to explore the former as a tool for genetic engineering. Although recent long-read sequencing technologies have advanced the knowledge about transposable elements (TEs), the integration of TEs is still unable either to control them or to direct them to specific genomic locations. The use of existing intragenic elements to achieve the desired genome composition is better than using artificial constructs like vectors, but it is not yet clear how to control the process. Moreover, most LTR retrotransposons are inactive and unable to produce complete proteins. They are also highly mutable. In addition, it is impossible to find a full active copy of a LTR retrotransposon out of thousands of its own copies. Theoretically, if these elements were directly controlled and turned on or off using certain epigenetic mechanisms (inducing by stress or infection), LTR retrotransposons could be a great opportunity to develop a genetic engineering tool using intragenic elements in the plant genome. In this review, the recent developments in uncovering the nature of LTR retrotransposons and the possibility of using these intragenic elements as a tool for plant genetic engineering are briefly discussed.

We have estimated the length at maturity and length-weight relationships for five fish species inhabiting the deep-sea from the Andaman and Nicobar Islands off the Indian coast between 295–650 m deep in a trawl survey carried out in March–April 2017. Hauls were carried out by a high-speed Demersal Trawl Crustacean Version trawl net and analysis was performed for a total of 832 specimens. Length at first maturity of the five deep-sea fish species ranged from 14.28–105.73 cm while length at 90% maturity was in the range 17.87–159.83 cm. The length at maturity of the fish are Alepocephalus bicolor (male = 66.09, female = 105.73), Bathyclupea hoskynii (m = 15.14, f = 14.15), Chlorophthalmus corniger (m = 17.54, f = 15.31), Neoepinnula orientalis (m = 20.76, f = 16.76), and Neoscopelus microchir (m = 14.28, f = 15.40). The b value in the length-weight relationship ranged from 0.69–2.60, i.e. Alepocephalus bicolor (m = 1.93, f = 1.62), Bathyclupea hoskynii (m = 3.5, f = 1.66), Chlorophthalmus corniger (m = 2.07, f = 1.56), Neoepinnula orientalis (m = 2.86, f = 2.46) and Neoscopelus microchir (m = 0.89, f = 0.49). Based on these results, the b value showed an allometric relationship with length for all species studied, because these species have a similar morphometry, i.e. a flattened back. Since they are primary or secondary consumers at the bottom of consumer food webs, their roles are as predators of small–medium prey and as prey of top predators of food web chains.