↓ Skip to main content

Genome-wide transcriptional and physiological responses to drought stress in leaves and roots of two willow genotypes

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Plant Biology, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
47 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Genome-wide transcriptional and physiological responses to drought stress in leaves and roots of two willow genotypes
Published in
BMC Plant Biology, October 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12870-015-0630-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Pascal Pucholt, Per Sjödin, Martin Weih, Ann Christin Rönnberg-Wästljung, Sofia Berlin

Abstract

Drought is a major environmental stress that can have severe impacts on plant productivity and survival. Understanding molecular mechanisms of drought responses is crucial in order to breed for drought adapted plant cultivars. The aim of the present study was to investigate phenotypic and transcriptional drought responses in two willow genotypes (520 and 592) originating from an experimental cross between S. viminalis × (S. viminalis × S. schwerinii). Willows are woody perennials in the Salicaceae plant family that are grown as bioenergy crops worldwide. An experiment was conducted where plants were exposed to drought and different eco-physiological parameters were assessed. RNA-seq data was furthermore generated with the Illumina technology from root tips and leaves from plants grown in drought and well-watered (WW) conditions. The RNA-seq data was assembled de novo with the Trinity assembler to create a reference gene set to which the reads were mapped in order to obtain differentially expressed genes (DEGs) between the drought and WW conditions. To investigate molecular mechanisms involved in the drought response, GO enrichment analyses were conducted. Candidate genes with a putative function in the drought response were also identified. A total of 52,599 gene models were obtained and after filtering on gene expression (FPKM ≥ 1), 35,733 gene models remained, of which 24,421 contained open reading frames. A total of 5,112 unique DEGs were identified between drought and WW conditions, of which the majority were found in the root tips. Phenotypically, genotype 592 displayed less growth reduction in response to drought compared to genotype 520. At the transcriptional level, genotype 520 displayed a greater response in the leaves as more DEGs were found in genotype 520 compared to genotype 592. In contrast, the transcriptional responses in the root tips were rather similar between the two genotypes. A core set of candidate genes encoding proteins with a putative function in drought response was identified, for example MYBs and bZIPs as well as chlorophyll a/b binding proteins. We found substantial differences in drought responses between the genotypes, both at the phenotypic and transcriptional levels. In addition to the genotypic variation in several traits, we also found indications for genotypic variation in trait plasticity, which could play a role in drought adaptation. Furthermore, the two genotypes displayed overall similar transcriptional responses in the root tips, but more variation in the leaves. It is thus possible that the observed phenotypic differences could be a result of transcriptional differences mostly at the leaf level. This study has contributed to a better general understanding of drought responses in woody plants, specifically in willows, and has implications for breeding research towards more drought adapted plants.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 2%
Chile 1 2%
Sweden 1 2%
Unknown 44 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 26%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 23%
Professor 5 11%
Student > Master 5 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 6 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 30 64%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 9%
Engineering 3 6%
Environmental Science 1 2%
Physics and Astronomy 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 7 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 December 2015.
All research outputs
#18,429,163
of 22,830,751 outputs
Outputs from BMC Plant Biology
#2,097
of 3,249 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#200,678
of 279,097 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Plant Biology
#39
of 61 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,830,751 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,249 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 279,097 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 61 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.