4.6 Article Proceedings Paper

Role of redox homeostasis in thermo-tolerance under a climate change scenario

期刊

ANNALS OF BOTANY
卷 116, 期 4, 页码 487-496

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/aob/mcv071

关键词

Antioxidants; biodiversity; climate change; heat stress; reactive oxygen species; ROS; redox homeostasis; thermo-tolerance

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Climate change predictions indicate a progressive increase in average temperatures and an increase in the frequency of heatwaves, which will have a negative impact on crop productivity. Over the last decade, a number of studies have addressed the question of how model plants or specific crops modify their metabolism when exposed to heat stress. Scope This review provides an overview of the redox pathways that contribute to how plants cope with heat stress. The focus is on the role of reactive oxygen species (ROS), redox metabolites and enzymes in the signalling pathways leading to the activation of defence responses. Additional attention is paid to the regulating mechanisms that lead to an increase in specific ROS-scavenging systems during heat stress, which have been studied in different model systems. Finally, increasing thermo-tolerance in model and crop plants by exposing them to heat acclimation or to exogenous treatments is discussed. Conclusions Although there is clear evidence that several strategies are specifically activated according to the intensity and the duration of heat stress, as well as the capacity of the different species or genotypes to overcome stress, an alteration in redox homeostasis seems to be a common event. Different mechanisms that act to enhance redox systems enable crops to overcome heat stress more effectively. Knowledge of thermo-tolerance within agronomic biodiversity is thus of key importance to enable researchers to identify new strategies for overcoming the impacts of climate change, and for decision-makers in planning for an uncertain future with new choices and options open to them.

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