» Articles » PMID: 36721093

Transcriptome Analysis Reveals the Key Pathways and Candidate Genes Involved in Salt Stress Responses in Cymbidium Ensifolium Leaves

Overview
Journal BMC Plant Biol
Publisher Biomed Central
Specialty Biology
Date 2023 Feb 1
PMID 36721093
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Cymbidium ensifolium L. is known for its ornamental value and is frequently used in cosmetics. Information about the salt stress response of C. ensifolium is scarce. In this study, we reported the physiological and transcriptomic responses of C. ensifolium leaves under the influence of 100 mM NaCl stress for 48 (T48) and 96 (T96) hours.

Results: Leaf Na content, activities of the antioxidant enzymes i.e., superoxide dismutase, glutathione S-transferase, and ascorbate peroxidase, and malondialdehyde content were increased in salt-stressed leaves of C. ensifolium. Transcriptome analysis revealed that a relatively high number of genes were differentially expressed in CKvsT48 (17,249) compared to CKvsT96 (5,376). Several genes related to salt stress sensing (calcium signaling, stomata closure, cell-wall remodeling, and ROS scavenging), ion balance (Na and H), ion homeostasis (Na/K ratios), and phytohormone signaling (abscisic acid and brassinosteroid) were differentially expressed in CKvsT48, CKvsT96, and T48vsT96. In general, the expression of genes enriched in these pathways was increased in T48 compared to CK while reduced in T96 compared to T48. Transcription factors (TFs) belonging to more than 70 families were differentially expressed; the major families of differentially expressed TFs included bHLH, NAC, MYB, WRKY, MYB-related, and C3H. A Myb-like gene (CenREV3) was further characterized by overexpressing it in Arabidopsis thaliana. CenREV3's expression was decreased with the prolongation of salt stress. As a result, the CenREV3-overexpression lines showed reduced root length, germination %, and survival % suggesting that this TF is a negative regulator of salt stress tolerance.

Conclusion: These results provide the basis for future studies to explore the salt stress response-related pathways in C. ensifolium.

Citing Articles

Dynamic molecular regulation of salt stress responses in maize ( L.) seedlings.

Maimaiti A, Gu W, Yu D, Guan Y, Qu J, Qin T Front Plant Sci. 2025; 16:1535943.

PMID: 40070712 PMC: 11893837. DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2025.1535943.


Development of KASP markers, SNP fingerprinting and population genetic analysis of (L.) Sw. germplasm resources in China.

Shen B, Shen A, Tan Y, Liu L, Li S, Tan Z Front Plant Sci. 2025; 15():1460603.

PMID: 39845486 PMC: 11750851. DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2024.1460603.


General Analysis of Heat Shock Factors in the Genome Provided Insights into Their Evolution and Special Roles with Response to Temperature.

Zheng R, Chen J, Peng Y, Zhu X, Niu M, Chen X Int J Mol Sci. 2024; 25(2).

PMID: 38256078 PMC: 10815800. DOI: 10.3390/ijms25021002.

References
1.
Cominelli E, Galbiati M, Tonelli C . Transcription factors controlling stomatal movements and drought tolerance. Transcription. 2011; 1(1):41-5. PMC: 3035188. DOI: 10.4161/trns.1.1.12064. View

2.
Li C, Wang G, Zhao J, Zhang L, Ai L, Han Y . The Receptor-Like Kinase SIT1 Mediates Salt Sensitivity by Activating MAPK3/6 and Regulating Ethylene Homeostasis in Rice. Plant Cell. 2014; 26(6):2538-2553. PMC: 4114950. DOI: 10.1105/tpc.114.125187. View

3.
Wang T, Tohge T, Ivakov A, Mueller-Roeber B, Fernie A, Mutwil M . Salt-Related MYB1 Coordinates Abscisic Acid Biosynthesis and Signaling during Salt Stress in Arabidopsis. Plant Physiol. 2015; 169(2):1027-41. PMC: 4587467. DOI: 10.1104/pp.15.00962. View

4.
Song Y, Li S, Sui Y, Zheng H, Han G, Sun X . SbbHLH85, a bHLH member, modulates resilience to salt stress by regulating root hair growth in sorghum. Theor Appl Genet. 2021; 135(1):201-216. DOI: 10.1007/s00122-021-03960-6. View

5.
Ali M, Azeem F, Nawaz M, Acet T, Abbas A, Imran Q . Transcription factors WRKY11 and WRKY17 are involved in abiotic stress responses in Arabidopsis. J Plant Physiol. 2018; 226:12-21. DOI: 10.1016/j.jplph.2018.04.007. View