Transcriptome analysis and differential gene expression profiling of two contrasting quinoa genotypes in response to salt stress

被引:39
|
作者
Shi, Pibiao [1 ]
Gu, Minfeng [1 ]
机构
[1] Xinyang Agr Expt Stn Yancheng City, Yancheng 224049, Jiangsu, Peoples R China
关键词
RNA-Seq; Transcriptome analysis; Quinoa; Salt stress; Candidate genes; Differential expression; CHENOPODIUM-QUINOA; SALINITY TOLERANCE; DROUGHT; MECHANISMS; GENOME; WILLD; COLD; GROWTH; IDENTIFICATION; ANNOTATION;
D O I
10.1186/s12870-020-02753-1
中图分类号
Q94 [植物学];
学科分类号
071001 ;
摘要
Background Soil salinity is one of the major abiotic stress factors that affect crop growth and yield, which seriously restricts the sustainable development of agriculture. Quinoa is considered as one of the most promising crops in the future for its high nutrition value and strong adaptability to extreme weather and soil conditions. However, the molecular mechanisms underlying the adaptive response to salinity stress of quinoa remain poorly understood. To identify candidate genes related to salt tolerance, we performed reference-guided assembly and compared the gene expression in roots treated with 300 mM NaCl for 0, 0.5, 2, and 24 h of two contrasting quinoa genotypes differing in salt tolerance. Results The salt-tolerant (ST) genotype displayed higher seed germination rate and plant survival rate, and stronger seedling growth potential as well than the salt-sensitive (SS) genotype under salt stress. An average of 38,510,203 high-quality clean reads were generated. Significant Gene Ontology (GO) terms and Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) pathways were identified to deeper understand the differential response. Transcriptome analysis indicated that salt-responsive genes in quinoa were mainly related to biosynthesis of secondary metabolites, alpha-Linolenic acid metabolism, plant hormone signal transduction, and metabolic pathways. Moreover, several pathways were significantly enriched amongst the differentially expressed genes (DEGs) in ST genotypes, such as phenylpropanoid biosynthesis, plant-pathogen interaction, isoquinoline alkaloid biosynthesis, and tyrosine metabolism. One hundred seventeen DEGs were common to various stages of both genotypes, identified as core salt-responsive genes, including some transcription factor members, like MYB, WRKY and NAC, and some plant hormone signal transduction related genes, like PYL, PP2C and TIFY10A, which play an important role in the adaptation to salt conditions of this species. The expression patterns of 21 DEGs were detected by quantitative real-time PCR (qRT-PCR) and confirmed the reliability of the RNA-Seq results. Conclusions We identified candidate genes involved in salt tolerance in quinoa, as well as some DEGs exclusively expressed in ST genotype. The DEGs common to both genotypes under salt stress may be the key genes for quinoa to adapt to salinity environment. These candidate genes regulate salt tolerance primarily by participating in reactive oxygen species (ROS) scavenging system, protein kinases biosynthesis, plant hormone signal transduction and other important biological processes. These findings provide theoretical basis for further understanding the regulation mechanism underlying salt tolerance network of quinoa, as well establish foundation for improving its tolerance to salinity in future breeding programs.
引用
收藏
页数:15
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Transcriptome analysis and differential gene expression profiling of two contrasting quinoa genotypes in response to salt stress
    Pibiao Shi
    Minfeng Gu
    BMC Plant Biology, 20
  • [2] Transcriptome sequencing and gene expression analysis reveals differential expression in response to YVMV infection in contrasting genotypes of okra
    Muthaiah, Gayathri
    Mottaiyan, Pitchaimuthu
    Reddy, M. Krishna
    Ravishankar, Kundapura V.
    SCIENTIA HORTICULTURAE, 2024, 337
  • [3] Transcriptome profiling of two contrasting pigeon pea (Cajanus cajan) genotypes in response to waterlogging stress
    Tyagi, Anshika
    Sharma, Sandhya
    Srivastava, Harsha
    Singh, Anuradha
    Kaila, Tanvi
    Ali, Sajad
    Gaikwad, Ambika B.
    Singh, N. K.
    Gaikwad, Kishor
    FRONTIERS IN GENETICS, 2023, 13
  • [4] Comparative Transcriptional Analysis of Two Contrasting Rice Genotypes in Response to Salt Stress
    Ye, Xiaoxue
    Tie, Weiwei
    Xu, Jianlong
    Ding, Zehong
    Hu, Wei
    AGRONOMY-BASEL, 2022, 12 (05):
  • [5] Comparative Transcriptome Profiling of Chilling Stress Responsiveness in Two Contrasting Rice Genotypes
    Zhang, Ting
    Zhao, Xiuqin
    Wang, Wensheng
    Pan, Yajiao
    Huang, Liyu
    Liu, Xiaoyue
    Zong, Ying
    Zhu, Linghua
    Yang, Daichang
    Fu, Binying
    PLOS ONE, 2012, 7 (08):
  • [6] iTRAQ-Based Protein Profiling and Biochemical Analysis of Two Contrasting Rice Genotypes Revealed Their Differential Responses to Salt Stress
    Hussain, Sajid
    Zhu, Chunquan
    Bai, Zhigang
    Huang, Jie
    Zhu, Lianfeng
    Cao, Xiaochuang
    Nanda, Satyabrata
    Hussain, Saddam
    Riaz, Aamir
    Liang, Qingduo
    Wang, Liping
    Li, Yefeng
    Jin, Qianyu
    Zhang, Junhua
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MOLECULAR SCIENCES, 2019, 20 (03)
  • [7] Transcriptome and DNA Methylome Analysis of Two Contrasting Rice Genotypes under Salt Stress during Germination
    Li, Yongqiang
    Guo, Dianjing
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MOLECULAR SCIENCES, 2023, 24 (04)
  • [8] Transcriptome and methylome changes in two contrasting mungbean genotypes in response to drought stress
    Peilei Zhao
    Bao Ma
    Chunmei Cai
    Jihua Xu
    BMC Genomics, 23
  • [9] Transcriptome and methylome changes in two contrasting mungbean genotypes in response to drought stress
    Zhao, Peilei
    Ma, Bao
    Cai, Chunmei
    Xu, Jihua
    BMC GENOMICS, 2022, 23 (01)
  • [10] Comparative proteomic analysis of two sesame genotypes with contrasting salinity tolerance in response to salt stress
    Zhang, Yujuan
    Wei, Mengyuan
    Liu, Aili
    Zhou, Rong
    Li, Donghua
    Dossa, Komivi
    Wang, Linhai
    Zhang, Yanxin
    Gong, Huihui
    Zhang, Xiurong
    You, Jun
    JOURNAL OF PROTEOMICS, 2019, 201 : 73 - 83