↓ Skip to main content

Intracellular Ca2+ and K+ concentration in Brassica oleracea leaf induces differential expression of transporter and stress-related genes

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Genomics, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
31 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Intracellular Ca2+ and K+ concentration in Brassica oleracea leaf induces differential expression of transporter and stress-related genes
Published in
BMC Genomics, March 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12864-016-2512-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jeongyeo Lee, Jungeun Kim, Jae-Pil Choi, MiYe Lee, Min Keun Kim, Young Han Lee, Yoonkang Hur, Ill-Sup Nou, Sang Un Park, Sung Ran Min, HyeRan Kim

Abstract

One of the most important members of the genus Brassica, cabbage, requires a relatively high level of calcium for normal growth (Plant Cell Environ 7: 397-405, 1984; Plant Physiol 60: 854-856, 1977). Localized Ca(2+) deficiency in cabbage leaves causes tip-burn, bringing about serious economic losses (Euphytica 9:203-208, 1960; Ann Bot 43:363-372, 1979; Sci Hortic 14:131-138, 1981). Although it has been known that the occurrence of tip-burn is related to Ca(2+) deficiency, there is limited information on the underlying mechanisms of tip-burn or the relationship between Ca(2+) and tip-burn incidence. To obtain more information on the genetic control of tip-burn symptoms, we focused on the identification of genes differentially expressed in response to increasing intracellular Ca(2+) and K(+) concentrations in B. oleracea lines derived from tip-burn susceptible, tip-burn resistant cabbages (B. oleracea var. capitata), and kale (B. oleracea var. acephala). We compared the levels of major macronutrient cations, including Ca(2+) and K(+), in three leaf segments, the leaf apex (LA), middle of leaf (LM), and leaf base (LB), of tip-burn susceptible, tip-burn resistant cabbages, and kale. Ca(2+) and K(+) concentrations were highest in kale, followed by tip-burn resistant and then tip-burn susceptible cabbages. These cations generally accumulated to a greater extent in the LB than in the LA. Transcriptome analysis identified 58,096 loci as putative non-redundant genes in the three leaf segments of the three B. oleracea lines and showed significant changes in expression of 27,876 loci based on Ca(2+) and K(+) levels. Among these, 1844 loci were identified as tip-burn related phenotype-specific genes. Tip-burn resistant cabbage and kale-specific genes were largely related to stress and transport activity based on GO annotation. Tip-burn resistant cabbage and kale plants showed phenotypes clearly indicative of heat-shock, freezing, and drought stress tolerance compared to tip-burn susceptible cabbages, demonstrating a correlation between intracellular Ca(2+) and K(+) concentrations and tolerance of abiotic stress with differential gene expression. We selected 165 genes that were up- or down-regulated in response to increasing Ca(2+) and K(+) concentrations in the three leaf segments of the three plant lines. Gene ontology enrichment analysis indicated that these genes participated in regulatory metabolic processes or stress responses. Our results indicate that the genes involved in regulatory metabolic processes or stress responses were differentially expressed in response to increasing Ca(2+) and K(+) concentrations in the B. oleracea leaf. Our transcriptome data and the genes identified may serve as a starting point for understanding the mechanisms underlying essential macronutrient deficiencies in plants, as well as the features of tip-burn in cabbage and other Brassica species.

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 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 31 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 26%
Student > Master 6 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 6%
Student > Bachelor 2 6%
Other 4 13%
Unknown 4 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 16 52%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 10%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 6%
Computer Science 1 3%
Psychology 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 6 19%
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 10 March 2016.
All research outputs
#15,362,987
of 22,854,458 outputs
Outputs from BMC Genomics
#6,694
of 10,660 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#178,555
of 300,116 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Genomics
#156
of 216 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,854,458 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,660 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 300,116 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 216 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.