Comparative Metabolome Profile Between Tobacco and Soybean Grown Under Water-Stressed Conditions

Overview

Journal Biomed Res Int

Publisher Wiley

Specialties Biomedical Engineering
Biotechnology
General Medicine

Date 2017 Jan 28

PMID 28127554

Citations 25

Authors

Roel C Rabara

Prateek Tripathi

Paul J Rushton

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Understanding how plants respond to water deficit is important in order to develop crops tolerant to drought. In this study, we compare two large metabolomics datasets where we employed a nontargeted metabolomics approach to elucidate metabolic pathways perturbed by progressive dehydration in tobacco and soybean plants. The two datasets were created using the same strategy to create water deficit conditions and an identical metabolomics pipeline. Comparisons between the two datasets therefore reveal common responses between the two species, responses specific to one of the species, responses that occur in both root and leaf tissues, and responses that are specific to one tissue. Stomatal closure is the immediate response of the plant and this did not coincide with accumulation of abscisic acid. A total of 116 and 140 metabolites were observed in tobacco leaves and roots, respectively, while 241 and 207 were observed in soybean leaves and roots, respectively. Accumulation of metabolites is significantly correlated with the extent of dehydration in both species. Among the metabolites that show increases that are restricted to just one plant, 4-hydroxy-2-oxoglutaric acid (KHG) in tobacco roots and coumestrol in soybean roots show the highest tissue-specific accumulation. The comparisons of these two large nontargeted metabolomics datasets provide novel information and suggest that KHG will be a useful marker for drought stress for some members of Solanaceae and coumestrol for some legume species.

Citing Articles

Metabolomics combined with transcriptomics and physiology reveals the regulatory responses of soybean plants to drought stress.

Wang L, He P, Hui M, Li H, Sun A, Yin H Front Genet. 2024; 15:1458656.

PMID: 39512800 PMC: 11541050. DOI: 10.3389/fgene.2024.1458656.

Growth Properties and Metabolomic Analysis Provide Insight into Drought Tolerance in Barley ( L.).

Wang J, Yao L, Hao J, Li C, Li B, Meng Y Int J Mol Sci. 2024; 25(13).

PMID: 39000330 PMC: 11241679. DOI: 10.3390/ijms25137224.

Unraveling the genetic and molecular basis of heat stress in cotton.

Ijaz A, Anwar Z, Ali A, Ditta A, Shani M, Haidar S Front Genet. 2024; 15:1296622.

PMID: 38919956 PMC: 11196824. DOI: 10.3389/fgene.2024.1296622.

Biochemical Characterization of the Seed Quality of a Collection of White Lupin Landraces from Southern Italy.

Spina A, De Benedetti S, Heinzl G, Ceravolo G, Magni C, Emide D Plants (Basel). 2024; 13(6).

PMID: 38592821 PMC: 10974116. DOI: 10.3390/plants13060785.

Drought Stress Responses in Arabica Coffee Genotypes: Physiological and Metabolic Insights.

Chekol H, Warkineh B, Shimber T, Mierek-Adamska A, Dabrowska G, Degu A Plants (Basel). 2024; 13(6).

PMID: 38592785 PMC: 10975139. DOI: 10.3390/plants13060828.

References

Hepworth C, Doheny-Adams T, Hunt L, Cameron D, Gray J . Manipulating stomatal density enhances drought tolerance without deleterious effect on nutrient uptake. New Phytol. 2015; 208(2):336-41. PMC: 4973681. DOI: 10.1111/nph.13598. View

Cramer G, Urano K, Delrot S, Pezzotti M, Shinozaki K . Effects of abiotic stress on plants: a systems biology perspective. BMC Plant Biol. 2011; 11:163. PMC: 3252258. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2229-11-163. View

Rabara R, Tripathi P, Choudhary M, Timko M, Shen Q, Rushton P . Transcriptome profiling of tobacco under water deficit conditions. Genom Data. 2015; 5:61-3. PMC: 4583635. DOI: 10.1016/j.gdata.2015.05.025. View

Krasensky J, Jonak C . Drought, salt, and temperature stress-induced metabolic rearrangements and regulatory networks. J Exp Bot. 2012; 63(4):1593-608. PMC: 4359903. DOI: 10.1093/jxb/err460. View

Shulaev V, Cortes D, Miller G, Mittler R . Metabolomics for plant stress response. Physiol Plant. 2008; 132(2):199-208. DOI: 10.1111/j.1399-3054.2007.01025.x. View

Fiehn O . Metabolomics--the link between genotypes and phenotypes. Plant Mol Biol. 2002; 48(1-2):155-71. View

Davies H, Shepherd L, Stewart D, Frank T, Rohlig R, Engel K . Metabolome variability in crop plant species--when, where, how much and so what?. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2010; 58(3 Suppl):S54-61. DOI: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2010.07.004. View

Tripathi P, Rabara R, Shen Q, Rushton P . Transcriptomics analyses of soybean leaf and root samples during water-deficit. Genom Data. 2015; 5:164-6. PMC: 4583655. DOI: 10.1016/j.gdata.2015.05.036. View

Rabara R, Tripathi P, Reese R, Rushton D, Alexander D, Timko M . Tobacco drought stress responses reveal new targets for Solanaceae crop improvement. BMC Genomics. 2015; 16:484. PMC: 4485875. DOI: 10.1186/s12864-015-1575-4. View

10.

Chen L, Zhou X, Li W, Chang W, Zhou R, Wang C . Genome-wide transcriptional analysis of two soybean genotypes under dehydration and rehydration conditions. BMC Genomics. 2013; 14:687. PMC: 3827939. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2164-14-687. View

11.

Amiard V, Morvan-Bertrand A, Billard J, Huault C, Keller F, Prudhomme M . Fructans, but not the sucrosyl-galactosides, raffinose and loliose, are affected by drought stress in perennial ryegrass. Plant Physiol. 2003; 132(4):2218-29. PMC: 181305. DOI: 10.1104/pp.103.022335. View

12.

Hopper D, Ghan R, Cramer G . A rapid dehydration leaf assay reveals stomatal response differences in grapevine genotypes. Hortic Res. 2015; 1:2. PMC: 4591676. DOI: 10.1038/hortres.2014.2. View

13.

Zhao Y, Zhao C, Lu X, Zhou H, Li Y, Zhou J . Investigation of the relationship between the metabolic profile of tobacco leaves in different planting regions and climate factors using a pseudotargeted method based on gas chromatography/mass spectrometry. J Proteome Res. 2013; 12(11):5072-83. DOI: 10.1021/pr400799a. View

14.

Holbrook N, Shashidhar V, James R, Munns R . Stomatal control in tomato with ABA-deficient roots: response of grafted plants to soil drying. J Exp Bot. 2002; 53(373):1503-14. View

15.

Caldwell C, Britz S, Mirecki R . Effect of temperature, elevated carbon dioxide, and drought during seed development on the isoflavone content of dwarf soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merrill] grown in controlled environments. J Agric Food Chem. 2005; 53(4):1125-9. DOI: 10.1021/jf0355351. View

16.

Cominelli E, Conti L, Tonelli C, Galbiati M . Challenges and perspectives to improve crop drought and salinity tolerance. N Biotechnol. 2012; 30(4):355-61. DOI: 10.1016/j.nbt.2012.11.001. View

17.

Bino R, Hall R, Fiehn O, Kopka J, Saito K, Draper J . Potential of metabolomics as a functional genomics tool. Trends Plant Sci. 2004; 9(9):418-25. DOI: 10.1016/j.tplants.2004.07.004. View

18.

Schachtman D, Goodger J . Chemical root to shoot signaling under drought. Trends Plant Sci. 2008; 13(6):281-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.tplants.2008.04.003. View

19.

Oliver M, Guo L, Alexander D, Ryals J, Wone B, Cushman J . A sister group contrast using untargeted global metabolomic analysis delineates the biochemical regulation underlying desiccation tolerance in Sporobolus stapfianus. Plant Cell. 2011; 23(4):1231-48. PMC: 3101564. DOI: 10.1105/tpc.110.082800. View

20.

Bowne J, Erwin T, Juttner J, Schnurbusch T, Langridge P, Bacic A . Drought responses of leaf tissues from wheat cultivars of differing drought tolerance at the metabolite level. Mol Plant. 2011; 5(2):418-29. DOI: 10.1093/mp/ssr114. View