4.6 Article

MicroRNA expression profile in common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) under nutrient deficiency stresses and manganese toxicity

期刊

NEW PHYTOLOGIST
卷 187, 期 3, 页码 805-818

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-8137.2010.03320.x

关键词

common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris); common bean microRNAs; manganese toxicity; nutrient-deficiency stress; nutrient-stress responsive microRNAs

资金

  1. Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnologia, Mexico (CONACyT) [083206, 200048]
  2. US Department of Agriculture [USDA-FAS MX161]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

MicroRNAs (miRNAs) play a pivotal role in post-transcriptional regulation of gene expression in plants. Information on miRNAs in legumes is as yet scarce. This work investigates miRNAs in an agronomically important legume, common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris). A hybridization approach employing miRNA macroarrays -printed with oligo-nucleotides complementary to 68 known miRNAs -was used to detect miRNAs in the leaves, roots and nodules of control and nutrient-stressed (phosphorus, nitrogen, or iron deficiency; acidic pH; and manganese toxicity) common bean plants. Thirty-three miRNAs were expressed in control plants and another five were only expressed under stress conditions. The miRNA expression ratios (stress: control) were evaluated using principal component and hierarchical cluster analyses. A group of miRNAs responded to nearly all stresses in the three organs analyzed. Other miRNAs showed organ-specific responses. Most of the nodule-responsive miRNAs showed up-regulation. miRNA blot expression analysis confirmed the macroarray results. Novel miRNA target genes were proposed for common bean and the expression of selected targets was evaluated by quantitative reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction. In addition to the detection of previously reported stress-responsive miRNAs, we discovered novel common bean stress-responsive miRNAs, for manganese toxicity. Our data provide a foundation for evaluating the individual roles of miRNAs in common bean.

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

4.6
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