Upload
danchitwood
View
507
Download
2
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Quantifying Phenotypic Variation in Tomato Introgression Lines through Local Persistent Homology
New and old ways of looking at shape: morphometric analysis of leavesDan ChitwoodDonald Danforth Plant Science CenterSeptember 3, 2016
Chitwood & Sinha, 2016Leaf shape varies byevolution, genetics, development andby present climates & ancient climates
Leaf shape varies byevolution, genetics, development andby present climates & ancient climatesChitwood & Sinha, 2016
Paleomap, scotese.com
Leaf shape varies byevolution, genetics, development andby present climates & ancient climatesChitwood & Sinha, 2016
There are many ways to measure shape:Pseudo-landmarks
Chitwood & Sinha, 2016
There are many ways to measure shape:Elliptical Fourier Descriptors
Chitwood & Sinha, 2016
There are many ways to measure shape:Homologous landmarks
Chitwood & Sinha, 2016
There are many ways to measure shape:All methods are comprehensive,but theyre not equivalent
LandmarksElliptical Fourier DescriptorsChitwood & Sinha, 2016
GrapevineExamples of leaf morphometrics
Passiflora
Persistent homology
Homologous landmarks:On every grape leaf
Homologous landmarks:On every grape leaf
Homologous landmarks:On every grape leaf
Homologous landmarks:On every grape leaf
Homologous landmarks:On every grape leaf
Homologous landmarks:On every grape leaf
Homologous landmarks:Species differences
ShootbaseShoottipLeaf numberDevelopmental stageUnequal expansionDifferent leaf typesHomologous landmarks:Species differences manifest in adevelopmental context
ShootbaseShoottipLeaf numberDevelopmental stageUnequal expansionDifferent leaf types
Homologous landmarks:Species differences manifest in adevelopmental context
ShootbaseShoottipLeaf numberDevelopmental stageUnequal expansionDifferent leaf typesHomologous landmarks:Species differences manifest in adevelopmental context
Evolutionary vs. developmental pathsin the leaf morphospace
Species effects
Evolutionary vs. developmental pathsin the leaf morphospace
Developmental effects
Species can be predictedindependently from development
Development can be predictedindependently from species
Vein landmarks more sensitive to development
Vein landmarks more sensitive to development
Discriminating leaves from different years:Same vines, same developmental stages
Discriminating leaves from different years:Same vines, same developmental stages
Climate interannual variability:2014/15 was colder & drier than 2012/13
Climate interannual variability:2014/15 was colder & drier than 2012/13
Climate interannual variability:Plasticity and evolutionary changes in leaf shape go in the same direction?
Measuring future climates:To California, wine grapes, and rootstocks!
GrapevineExamples of leaf morphometrics
Passiflora
Persistent homology
Landmarks vs. Elliptical Fourier Descriptors
Landmarks vs. Elliptical Fourier Descriptors
Landmarks vs. Elliptical Fourier Descriptors:Similar morphospaces
Landmarks vs. Elliptical Fourier Descriptors:Similar morphospaces
Landmarks vs. Elliptical Fourier Descriptors:Similar morphospaces
Landmarks vs. Elliptical Fourier Descriptors
Landmarks vs. Elliptical Fourier Descriptors:Correlational matrix
Heteroblasty in PassifloraMetamorphosis
Heteroblastyin PassifloraMetamorphosis
Heteroblastyin PassifloraMetamorphosis
Heteroblasty in PassifloraMetamorphosis
GrapevineExamples of leaf morphometrics
Passiflora
Persistent homology
These slides made by:Mao LiDonald Danforth Plant Science CenterChitwood Lab & Topp Lab
Persistent homology: a tool to universally measureplant morphologies across organs and scales
r
Persistence: track the evolution of features across scales 0-homology: connected components 1-homology: loops (holes)Verri et al. Biological Cybernetics, 1993Carlsson, Bulletin AMS, 2009Edelsbrunner et al., AMS, 2010
Persistent Homology, WHY? WHAT?
Sublevel Set Filtration:
Blue RedSuperlevel Set Filtration:
Red BlueA Persistent Homology Primer How to get a nest sequence of shapes
rPersistent Homology, HOW?
Persistence Barcode
# connected componentsrNow, apply!
50
tomato introgression linesEshed et al. , Genetic, 1999Chitwood et al., The Plant Cell 2013
(domesticated, cv. M82)(wild)
IL4_3Significant difference is caused by the gene in the small regionThe difference is usually subtle
MeasureLeaf Shape
16 annulus (rings)density estimatorA tool: Local and smoothside view
Blind to size, position, and orientation
A robust metric between barcodes: bottleneck distanceplane height(level value)
connected component
CV1 Our approach integrates very different morphological characteristics into a single descriptor.Leaf Shape QTLStatistical techniques: Multidimensional scaling (MDS, reduce dimension) Canonical variate analysis (CVA, feature that most distinguish groups)
ResultLeaf Shape QTL
Measure Serrations
Coarse approximation
Elliptical Fourier Transformhttp://haitham.ece.illinois.edu
First harmonics5 harmonics10 harmonics20 harmonics
Euler characteristics = # connected component - # loopslevel
59
Leaf Serrations QTL
level
ResultLeaf Serrations QTL
MeasureRoot Architecture
Root Architecture QTL
ResultRoot Architecture QTL
Persistent homology detects concerted changes in shoot and root architecture
Leaf Shape Root Architecture Serrations
Persistent homology detects concerted changes in shoot and root architecturemedian values plots
Persistent Homologyrobust to noise invariant with respect to orientation capable of application across diverse scales compatible with diverse functions to quantify disparate plant morphologies, architectures, and textures
Acknowledgments
FSUMio LabDonald Danforth Plant Science CenterTopp LabDonald Danforth Plant Science CenterChitwood Lab