» Articles » PMID: 29692552

Elucidating the Role of Osmotic, Ionic and Major Salt Responsive Transcript Components Towards Salinity Tolerance in Contrasting Chickpea ( L.) Genotypes

Overview
Specialty Biology
Date 2018 Apr 26
PMID 29692552
Citations 11
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The growth of chickpea ( L.) is extremely hampered by salt stress. Understanding of physio-biochemical and molecular attributes along with morphological traits contributing to the salinity tolerance is important for developing salt tolerant chickpea varieties. To explore these facts, two genotypes CSG8962 and HC5 with contrasting salt tolerance were evaluated in the salinity stress (Control and 120 mM NaCl) conditions. CSG8962 maintained lower Na/K ratio in root and shoot, trammeled Na translocation to the shoots from roots compared to HC5 which ascribed to better exclusion of salt from its roots and compartmentation in the shoot. In chickpea, salt stress specifically induced genes/sequences involved at several levels in the salt stress signaling pathway. Higher induction of trehalose 6 phosphate synthase and protein kinase genes pertaining to the osmotic and signaling modules, respectively, were evident in CSG8962 compared to HC5. Further transcripts of late embryogenesis abundant, non-specific lipid transfer protein, HI and 219 genes/sequences were also highly induced in CSG8962 compared to HC5 which emphasizes the better protection of cellular membranous network and membrane-bound macromolecules under salt stress. This further suppressed the stress enhanced electrolyte leakage, loss of turgidity, promoted the higher compatible solute accumulation and maintained better cellular ion homoeostasis in CSG8962 compared to HC5. Our study further adds to the importance of these genes in salt tolerance by comparing their behavior in contrasting chickpea genotypes.

Citing Articles

Physical Seed Dormancy in Legumes: Molecular Advances and Perspectives.

Wen Z, Lu X, Wen J, Wang Z, Chai M Plants (Basel). 2024; 13(11).

PMID: 38891282 PMC: 11174410. DOI: 10.3390/plants13111473.


Moving forward to understand the alteration of physiological mechanism by seed priming with different halo-agents under salt stress.

Paul A, Mondal S, Chakraborty K, Biswas A Plant Mol Biol. 2024; 114(2):24.

PMID: 38457044 DOI: 10.1007/s11103-024-01425-0.


Network interactions with functional roles and evolutionary relationships for BURP domain-containing proteins in chickpea and model species.

Soren K, Tripathi S, Hembram M, Kumar N, Konda K A, Gupta N Bioinformation. 2024; 19(12):1197-1211.

PMID: 38250539 PMC: 10794749. DOI: 10.6026/973206300191197.


Comprehensive Evaluation and Transcriptome Analysis Reveal the Salt Tolerance Mechanism in Semi-Wild Cotton ().

Peng Z, Rehman A, Li X, Jiang X, Tian C, Wang X Int J Mol Sci. 2023; 24(16).

PMID: 37629034 PMC: 10454576. DOI: 10.3390/ijms241612853.


Comparative transcriptome analysis reveals molecular regulation of salt tolerance in two contrasting chickpea genotypes.

Khan H, Sharma N, Siddique K, Colmer T, Sutton T, Baumann U Front Plant Sci. 2023; 14:1191457.

PMID: 37360702 PMC: 10289292. DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2023.1191457.


References
1.
Munns R, Tester M . Mechanisms of salinity tolerance. Annu Rev Plant Biol. 2008; 59:651-81. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.arplant.59.032607.092911. View

2.
Arnon D . COPPER ENZYMES IN ISOLATED CHLOROPLASTS. POLYPHENOLOXIDASE IN BETA VULGARIS. Plant Physiol. 1949; 24(1):1-15. PMC: 437905. DOI: 10.1104/pp.24.1.1. View

3.
Kulik A, Wawer I, Krzywinska E, Bucholc M, Dobrowolska G . SnRK2 protein kinases--key regulators of plant response to abiotic stresses. OMICS. 2011; 15(12):859-72. PMC: 3241737. DOI: 10.1089/omi.2011.0091. View

4.
Gao W, Wang X, Liu Q, Peng H, Chen C, Li J . Comparative analysis of ESTs in response to drought stress in chickpea (C. arietinum L.). Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2008; 376(3):578-83. DOI: 10.1016/j.bbrc.2008.09.030. View

5.
Sanchez D, Siahpoosh M, Roessner U, Udvardi M, Kopka J . Plant metabolomics reveals conserved and divergent metabolic responses to salinity. Physiol Plant. 2008; 132(2):209-19. DOI: 10.1111/j.1399-3054.2007.00993.x. View