4.7 Article

Identification of drought-responsive compounds in potato through a combined transcriptomic and targeted metabolite approach

期刊

JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL BOTANY
卷 61, 期 9, 页码 2327-2343

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/jxb/erq060

关键词

Abiotic stress; drought; microarrays; potato; polyamines; proline

资金

  1. Ministry of Finance (Luxembourg)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Two potato clones (Solanum tuberosum L.) of the Andean cultivar group, called Sullu and SS2613, with different drought-tolerance phenotypes were exposed to a continuously increasing drought stress in a field trial. At the physiological level, while relative leaf water contents were similar in both clones, osmotic potential was lower in Sullu and declined more strongly during drought compared with SS2613. In the drought-stressed plants, tuber yield was reduced by about 70% compared with control plants in both clones. Potato cDNA microarrays and target metabolite analysis were performed on leaves sampled at several time-points after the onset of drought. At the transcriptomic level, photosynthesis-related genes were already strongly repressed in Sullu after 28 d of withholding irrigation and even more strongly after a longer stress duration, whereas, in SS2613, repression occurred only after 49 d of soil drying; similarly, a strong perturbation of carbohydrate-related genes was observed in Sullu. At the metabolite level, differential accumulation of osmotically active solutes was observed between the two cultivars; indeed, in Sullu, contents of galactose, inositol, galactinol, proline, and proline analogues were higher upon drought stress compared with SS2613. These results point to different drought responses in the cultivars at the leaf level, with, however, similar tuber yield reductions. The previously shown tolerant clone Sullu lost part of its tolerance under the experimental conditions used here; it was, however, able to maintain an absolute yield three times higher than SS2613.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据