欢迎访问作物学报，今天是
作物学报

作物学报 ›› 2023, Vol. 49 ›› Issue (7): 1785-1798.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2023.24137

• 作物遗传育种·种质资源·分子遗传学 • 上一篇    下一篇

转录组与代谢组联合分析揭示遮阴胁迫下甘薯的代谢响应途径

王雁楠1(), 陈金金1, 卞倩倩1, 胡琳琳2, 张莉3, 尹雨萌1, 乔守晨1, 曹郭郑1, 康志河1, 赵国瑞1, 杨国红1, 杨育峰1,*()   

  1. 1河南省农业科学院粮食作物研究所, 河南郑州 450002
    2郑州大学农学院, 河南郑州 450001
    3河南省农业科学院农业经济与信息研究所, 河南郑州 450002
  • 收稿日期:2022-06-08 接受日期:2022-11-25 出版日期:2023-07-12 网络出版日期:2022-12-28
  • 通讯作者: *杨育峰, E-mail: yyfyyf5@163.com
  • 作者简介:E-mail: alman001@qq.com
  • 基金资助:
    本研究由河南省自然科学基金项目(212300410170);河南省科技攻关项目(212102110251);河南省农业良种联合攻关项目(2022010401-2);河南省现代农业产业技术体系建设专项资金(HARS-22-04-G1);财政部和农业农村部国家现代农业产业技术体系建设专项(甘薯);财政部和农业农村部国家现代农业产业技术体系建设专项(CARS-10-C14)

Integrated analysis of transcriptome and metabolome reveals the metabolic response pathways of sweetpotato under shade stress

WANG Yan-Nan1(), CHEN Jin-Jin1, BIAN Qian-Qian1, HU Lin-Lin2, ZHANG Li3, YIN Yu-Meng1, QIAO Shou-Chen1, CAO Guo-Zheng1, KANG Zhi-He1, ZHAO Guo-Rui1, YANG Guo-Hong1, YANG Yu-Feng1,*()   

  1. 1Cereal Crops Research Institute, Henan Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Zhengzhou 450002, Henan, China
    2School of Agricultural Sciences, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, Henan, China
    3Institute of Agricultural Economics and Information, Henan Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Zhengzhou 450002, Henan, China
  • Received:2022-06-08 Accepted:2022-11-25 Published:2023-07-12 Published online:2022-12-28
  • Contact: *E-mail: yyfyyf5@163.com
  • Supported by:
    The Natural Science Foundation of Henan Province(212300410170);The Science and Technology Research Program of Henan Province(212102110251);The Henan Joint Research Program for Improved Agricultural Varieties(2022010401-2);The Special Fund for Henan Agriculture Research System(HARS-22-04-G1);The China Agriculture Research System of MOF and MARA(甘薯);The China Agriculture Research System of MOF and MARA(CARS-10-C14)

RichHTML

40

PDF

458

摘要：

甘薯是喜光作物, 但其在套种栽培模式中一般处于低位被遮阴, 大田生长中后期也时常面临阴雨寡照天气而影响块根干物质积累, 因此, 解析甘薯在遮阴胁迫下的代谢响应途径可为其耐荫性品种改良提供理论依据。本研究对甘薯品种郑红23号进行透光率50%的遮阴胁迫15 d后发现, 遮阴胁迫下郑红23号的叶绿素b以及总叶绿素含量较自然光照下均显著提高; 叶绿素光系统PSII最大光化学效率(Fv/Fm)、PSII潜在活性(Fv/Fo)和光合性能综合指数(PIABS)在遮阴胁迫下均显著下降; 净光合速率和水分利用率显著降低, SOD酶和POD酶活性则显著提高; 此外, 遮阴胁迫显著提高了郑红23号的蔓长和比叶面积, 根鲜重则显著降低。对遮阴胁迫和自然光照条件下的叶片组织进行转录组和代谢组联合分析发现, 差异基因和差异代谢物主要共同富集于苯丙素合成途径、糖代谢相关途径、鞘脂代谢途径和精氨酸合成途径。苯丙素合成途径富集到的上调差异表达基因多数为POD酶家族基因, 说明遮阴胁迫触发了甘薯的ROS活性氧清除系统。同时, 遮阴胁迫降低了甘薯植株的糖代谢水平, 叶片可溶性糖含量下降, 淀粉合成与降解均受到抑制, 块根膨大受阻。而鞘脂及精氨酸代谢途径则可能通过提高生物膜的稳定性以及增加多胺类抗逆因子的合成底物来使植株更好地适应遮阴胁迫。以上结果为理解遮阴胁迫下甘薯的代谢响应途径提供了新的理论依据。

关键词: 甘薯, 遮阴胁迫, 转录组, 代谢组, 响应途径

Abstract:

Sweetpotato is a heliophile crop. However, it is usually shaded in the lower position in the interplanting cultivation mode. During the middle and late field growing period, it often faces rainy weather with little illumination, which affects the dry matter accumulation in tuberous roots. Thus, analyzing the metabolic response pathways of sweetpotato under shade stress will provide the theoretical basis for the varieties’ genetic improvement of shade tolerance. In this study, the sweetpotato variety Zhenghong 23 was exposed to shade stress with 50% light transmittance for 15 days. Results showed that chlorophyll b and the total chlorophyll contents of Zhenghong 23 under shade stress were significantly increased compared with those under natural light. The maximum photochemical efficiency (Fv/Fm), the potential activity (Fv/Fo), and the comprehensive index of photosynthetic performance (PIABS) of the chlorophyll photosystem PSII decreased significantly under shade stress. The net photosynthetic rate and water use efficiency decreased significantly, while SOD and POD enzyme activities increased significantly. In addition, shade stress increased significantly the vine length and specific leaf area of Zhenghong 23, but reduced significantly the fresh weight of roots. Transcriptome and metabolome analysis of leaf tissues under shade stress and natural light conditions showed that the DEGs and DMs were mainly enriched in phenylpropanoid biosynthesis, sugar metabolism, sphinolipid metabolism, and arginine biosynthesis pathways. Most of the up-regulated DEGs enriched in the phenylpropanoid biosynthesis pathway were POD enzyme family genes, indicating that the shade stress triggered the ROS scavenging system in sweetpotato. Meanwhile, shade stress reduced sugar metabolism level of sweetpotato, decreased the soluble sugar content of leaves, inhibited both the synthesis and degradation of starch, and blocked the expansion of tuberous roots. In addition, the sphinolipid and arginine metabolism pathways may better adapt sweetptoato plants to shade stress through improving the stability of biomembranes and increase the synthetic substrates of polyamine anti-stress factors. These results provide new theoretical basis for understanding the metabolic response pathways of sweetpotato under shade stress.

Key words: sweetpotato, shade stress, transciptome, metabolome, the response pathways

图1

郑红23号自然光照与遮阴胁迫下的植株形态对比"

表1

遮阴胁迫对郑红23号植株形态指标及叶片酶活的影响"

光处理
Light
treatment		 蔓长
Vine length
(cm)		 茎节数
Stem internode number		 比叶面积
Specific leaf area
(cm2 g-1)		 根鲜重
Root fresh weight (g)		 SOD活性
SOD activity
(U g-1 FW)		 POD活性
POD activity
(U g-1 FW)
光照Light 43.5 (6.9) 13.3 (0.5) 211.9 (28.3) 17.9 (9.9) 339.7 (80.2) 1096.1 (230.0)
遮阴Shade 65.7 (9.3)** 14.8 (2.1) 457.6 (39.2)*** 1.2 (0.5)* 547.2 (72.8)** 2366.9 (398.0)**

表2

遮阴胁迫对郑红23号叶绿素含量(mg g-1 FW)及荧光特性的影响"

光处理
Light treatment		 叶绿素a
Chlorophyll a		 叶绿素b
Chlorophyll b		 叶绿素a/b
Chlorophyll a/b		 总叶绿素
Total chlorophyll		 Fv/Fm Fv/Fo PIABS
光照Light 1.08 (0.11) 0.45 (0.12) 2.44 (0.34) 1.53 (0.23) 0.749 (0.022) 2.838 (0.210) 0.570 (0.055)
遮阴Shade 1.21 (0.04) 0.73 (0.05)** 1.66 (0.15)** 1.94 (0.05)* 0.670 (0.033)** 2.107 (0.364)* 0.398 (0.046)**

表3

遮阴胁迫对郑红23号光合参数的影响"

光处理
Light
treatment		 净光合速率
Net photosynthetic rate
(μmol m-2 s-1)		 蒸腾速率
Transpiration
rate
(mmol m-2 s-1)		 胞间CO2浓度
Intercellular CO2 concentration
(μmol mol-1)		 气孔导度
Stomatal
conductance
(mmol m-2 s-1)		 水汽压亏缺
Vapor pressure deficit
(mb)		 水分利用效率
Water use
efficiency
(%)
光照Light 9.13 (0.87) 2.29 (0.53) 241.8 (28.2) 103.5 (8.9) 2.07 (0.18) 4.07 (0.54)
遮阴Shade 2.45 (0.54)*** 1.93 (0.46) 341.0 (13.7)** 97.3 (10.1) 2.18 (0.23) 1.02 (0.37)***

图2

RNA-seq样品相关性热图(a)及代谢组各样品间的主成分分析(b) S: 遮阴; L: 光照。"

表4

样品RNA-seq质量"

样品
Sample name		 原始序列数
Raw
reads		 过滤后序列及占比
Clean reads and
percentage (%)		 比对到基因组上的reads数及占比
Number and proportion of reads
on the genome (%)		 单一位置reads数及百分比
Unique mapped reads
and percentage (%)		 Q30比例
Q30 ratio
(%)
S1 46,514,384 45,395,970 (97.60) 32,813,096 (72.28%) 31,148,789 (68.62%) 92.72
S2 45,595,318 44,524,818 (97.65) 32,073,379 (72.03%) 30,310,383 (68.08%) 93.15
S3 48,243,946 46,619,848 (96.63) 33,903,203 (72.72%) 32,580,570 (69.89%) 93.16
S4 45,242,868 43,886,694 (97.00) 31,090,577 (70.84%) 29,766,110 (67.82%) 92.72
L1 51,826,126 50,453,206 (97.35) 36,601,089 (72.54%) 35,349,491 (70.06%) 92.79
L2 52,046,026 50,516,688 (97.06) 35,620,398 (70.51%) 34,152,030 (67.61%) 93.27
L3 43,082,564 42,246,862 (98.06) 29,421,358 (69.64%) 28,373,138 (67.16%) 92.76
L4 45,214,902 43,699,856 (96.65) 30,949,611 (70.82%) 29,612,170 (67.76%) 93.30

图3

遮阴胁迫和自然光照下鉴定出的表达基因数(a)和差异表达基因数(b) S: 遮阴; L: 光照。"

图4

差异表达基因GO富集中显著性排名前30的功能类(a)和KEGG富集中显著性排名前20的通路(b) BP: 生物过程; CC: 细胞组成; MF: 分子功能。柱上数字代表富集到的差异基因个数。纵坐标为显著性水平, 数值越高越显著。"

图5

Top20差异代谢物相关性图(a)及差异代谢物KEGG富集气泡图(b) (a) 红色代表正相关, 蓝色代表负相关, 没有颜色的点表示无显著相关性(P > 0.05)。(b) 气泡颜色与大小代表富集可信度及富集到的差异代谢物数目。-log10(P-value)越大, 富集可信度越高。S: 遮阴; L: 光照。"

图6

Top50的DMs (顶部)与Top100的DEGs (左侧)之间的相关性热图(a)以及代谢-转录KEGG共有富集通路气泡图(b) (a) 红色代表正相关, 蓝色代表负相关。椭圆越扁, 代表相关性的绝对值越高。相关性统计检验P < 0.05会进行星号(*)标记。(b) 三角形代表差异基因, 圆点代表差异代谢物。-log10(P-value)越大, 富集可信度越高。S: 遮阴; L: 光照。"

图7

苯丙素合成途径DMs的含量热图(a)以及DMs与DEGs之间的相关性热图(b)"

图8

糖代谢相关途径DMs的含量热图(a)以及DMs与DEGs之间的相关性热图(b)"

[1] Liu Q C. Improvement for agronomically important traits by gene engineering in sweetpotato. Breed Sci, 2017, 67: 15-26.
doi: 10.1270/jsbbs.16126
[2] Gommers C M M, Visser E J W, Onge K R S, Voesenek L A C J, Pierik R. Shade tolerance: when growing tall is not an option. Trends Plant Sci, 2012, 18: 65-71.
doi: 10.1016/j.tplants.2012.09.008
[3] Fraser D P, Hayes S, Franklin K A. Photoreceptor crosstalk in shade avoidance. Curr Opin Plant Biol, 2016, 33: 1-7.
doi: S1369-5266(16)30035-8 pmid: 27060719
[4] Carriedo L G, Maloof J N, Brady S M. Molecular control of crop shade avoidance. Curr Opin Plant Biol, 2016, 30: 151-158.
doi: 10.1016/j.pbi.2016.03.005 pmid: 27016665
[5] Leivar P, Quail P H. PIFs: pivotal components in a cellular signaling hub. Trends Plant Sci, 2011, 16: 19-28.
doi: 10.1016/j.tplants.2010.08.003 pmid: 20833098
[6] Zhang Y, Mayba O, Pfeiffer A, Shi H, Tepperman J M, Speed T P, Quail P H. A quartet of PIF bHLH factors provides a transcriptionally centered signaling hub that regulates seedling morphogenesis through differential expression patterning of shared target genes in Arabidopsis. PLoS Genet, 2013, 9: e1003244.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1003244
[7] Warnasooriya S N, Brutnell T P. Enhancing the productivity of grasses under high-density planting by engineering light responses: from model systems to feedstocks. J Exp Bot, 2014, 65: 2825-2834.
doi: 10.1093/jxb/eru221 pmid: 24868036
[8] Evans J R, Poorter H. Photosynthetic acclimation of plants to growth irradiance: the relative importance of specific leaf area and nitrogen partitioning in maximizing carbon gain. Plant Cell Environ, 2001, 24: 755-767.
doi: 10.1046/j.1365-3040.2001.00724.x
[9] Valladares F, Niinemets Ü. Shade tolerance, a key plant feature of complex nature and consequences. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst, 2008, 39: 237-257.
doi: 10.1146/ecolsys.2008.39.issue-1
[10] Roig-Villanova I, Bou-Torrent J, Galstyan A, Carretero-Paulet L, Portolés S, Rodrígues-Concepción M, Martínez-García J F. Interaction of shade avoidance and auxin responses: a role for two novel atypical bHLH proteins. EMBO J, 2007, 26: 4756-4767.
doi: 10.1038/sj.emboj.7601890 pmid: 17948056
[11] Galstyan A, Cifuentes-Esquivel N, Bou-Torrent J, Martinez-Garcia J F. The shade avoidance syndrome in Arabidopsis: a fundamental role for atypical basic helix-loop-helix proteins as transcriptional cofactors. Plant J, 2011, 66: 258-267.
doi: 10.1111/tpj.2011.66.issue-2
[12] Brouwer B, Ziolkowska A, Bagard M, Keech O, Gardeström P. The impact of light intensity on shade-induced leaf senescence. Plant Cell Environ, 2012, 35: 1084-1098.
doi: 10.1111/pce.2012.35.issue-6
[13] Tamim S A, Li F M, Wang Y, Shang L L, Zhang X Y, Tao J B, Wang Y R, Gai W X, Dong H Q, Ahiakpa J K, Mumtaz M A, Zhang Y Y. Effect of shading on ascorbic acid accumulation and biosynthetic gene expression during tomato fruit development and ripening. Veg Res, 2022, 2: 1.
[14] 陈勤操, 戴伟东, 蔺志远, 解东超, 吕美玲, 林智. 代谢组学解析遮阴对茶叶主要品质成分的影响. 中国农业科学, 2019, 52: 1066-1077.
doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2019.06.010
Chen Q C, Dai W D, Lin Z Y, Xie D C, Lyu M L, Lin Z. Effects of shading on main quality components in tea (Camellia sinensis (L.) O. Kuntze) leaves based on metabolomics analysis. Sci Agric Sin, 2019, 52: 1066-1077. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[15] 王庆美, 侯夫云, 汪宝卿, 王振林, 董顺旭, 张海燕, 李爱贤, 张立明, 解备涛. 遮阴处理对紫甘薯块根品质的影响. 中国农业科学, 2011, 44: 192-200.
Wang Q M, Hou F Y, Wang B Q, Wang Z L, Dong S X, Zhang H Y, Li A X, Zhang L M, Xie B T. Effects of shading stress on qualities of purple sweetpotato storage roots. Sci Agric Sin, 2011, 44: 192-200. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[16] 王庆美, 侯夫云, 汪宝卿, 董顺旭, 王振林, 张海燕, 李爱贤, 解备涛, 张立明. 大田遮阴对紫心甘薯块根中酶活性的影响. 核农学报, 2012, 26: 960-966.
Wang Q M, Hou F Y, Wang B Q, Dong S X, Wang Z L, Zhang H Y, Li A X, Xie B T, Zhang L M. Enzymatic activity of root qualities in purple-fleshed sweetpotato under field shading stress. J Nucl Agric Sci, 2012, 26: 960-966 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[17] 赵习武, 王晨静, 周雅倩, 郭迪, 陆国权. 不同遮阴处理对四种观赏甘薯光合特性的影响. 北方园艺, 2013, (24): 55-59.
Zhao X W, Wang C J, Zhou Y Q, Guo D, Lu G Q. Effects of different shading treatments on the photosynthetic properties of four ornamental sweetpotato varieties. North Hortic, 2013, (24): 55-59. (in Chinese)
[18] 周雅倩, 陆国权. 主成分分析法对观赏甘薯品种耐弱光性综合评价. 浙江农业学报, 2013, 25: 1194-1201.
Zhou Y Q, Lu G Q. Comprehensive evaluation of weak light tolerance of ornamental sweetpotato cultivars with main factor analysis. Acta Agric Zhejiangensis, 2013, 25: 1194-1201. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[19] 蒋亚. 甘薯耐荫性评价及其对弱光的生理响应. 西南大学硕士学位论文, 重庆, 2020.
Jiang Y. Evaluation of Shade Tolerance of Sweet Potato and Its Physiological Response to Low Light. MS Thesis of Southwest University, Chongqing, China, 2020 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[20] Li J, Yin J, Rong C, Li K E, Wu J X, Huang L Q, Zeng H Y, Sahu S K, Yao N. Orosomucoid proteins interact with the small subunit of serine palmitoyltransferase and contribute to sphingolipid homeostasis and stress responses in Arabidopsis. Plant Cell, 2016, 28: 3038-3051.
doi: 10.1105/tpc.16.00574
[21] Zheng P, Wu J X, Sahu S K, Zeng H Y, Huang L Q, Liu Z, Xiao S, Yao N. Loss of alkaline ceramidase inhibits autophagy in Arabidopsis and plays an important role during environmental stress response. Plant Cell Environ, 2018, 41: 837-849.
doi: 10.1111/pce.v41.4
[22] 杨洪强, 高华君. 植物精氨酸及其代谢产物的生理功能. 植物生理与分子生物学学报, 2007, 33: 1-8.
Yang H Q, Gao H J. Physiological function of arginine and its metabolites in plants. J Plant Physiol Mol Biol, 2007, 33: 1-8. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[23] 李伟, 黄金丽, 眭晓蕾, 王绍辉, 关秋竹, 周明, 胡丽萍, 张振贤. 黄瓜幼苗光合及荧光特性对弱光的响应. 园艺学报, 2008, 35: 119-122.
Li W, Huang J L, Sui X L, Wang S H, Guan Q Z, Zhou M, Hu L P, Zhang Z X. Effects of low light on photosynthetic and fluorescent characteristics of seedlings of Cucumis sativus. Acta Hortic Sin, 2008, 35: 119-122. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[24] 付景. 玉米耐荫性指标的筛选与评价. 河南农业大学硕士学位论文, 河南郑州, 2009.
Fu J. Selection and Evaluation on Maize (Zea mays L.) Shade-tolerance Indexes. MS Thesis of Henan Agricultural University, Zhengzhou, Henan, China, 2009. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[25] Evans J R, Poorter H. Photosynthetic acclimation of plants to growth irradiance: the relative importance of specific leaf area and nitrogen partitioning in maximizing carbon gain. Plant Cell Environ, 2001, 24: 755-767.
doi: 10.1046/j.1365-3040.2001.00724.x
[26] Zhang X B, Liu C J. Multifaceted regulations of gateway enzyme phenylalanine ammonia-lyase in the biosynthesis of phenylpropanoids. Mol Plant, 2015, 8: 17-27.
doi: 10.1016/j.molp.2014.11.001 pmid: 25578269
[27] Dong N Q, Lin H X. Contribution of phenylpropanoid metabolism to plant development and plant-environment interactions. J Integr Plant Biol, 2021, 63: 180-209.
doi: 10.1111/jipb.v63.1
[28] Zhu Y C, Wang Q Y, Wang Y, Xu Y, Li J W, Zhao S H, Wang D D, Ma Z P, Yan F, Liu Y J. Combined transcriptomic and metabolomic analysis reveals the role of phenylpropanoid biosynthesis pathway in the salt tolerance process of Sophora alopecuroides. Int J Mol Sci, 2021, 22: 2399.
doi: 10.3390/ijms22052399
[29] Kang C, He S Z, Zhai H, Li R J, Zhao N, Liu Q C. A sweetpotato auxin response factor gene (IbARF5) is involved in carotenoid biosynthesis and salt and drought tolerance in transgenic Arabidopsis. Front Plant Sci, 2018, 9: 1307.
doi: 10.3389/fpls.2018.01307
[30] Zhang H, Gao X R, Zhi Y H, Li X, Zhang Q, Niu J B, Wang J, Zhai H, Zhao N, Li J G, Liu Q C, He S Z. A non-tandem CCCH-type zinc-finger protein, IbC3H18, functions as a nuclear transcriptional activator and enhances abiotic stress tolerance in sweet potato. New Phytol, 2019, 223: 1918-1936.
doi: 10.1111/nph.15925 pmid: 31091337
[31] Shi H T, Chan Z L. Improvement of plant abiotic stress tolerance through modulation of the polyamine pathway. J Integr Plant Biol, 2014, 56: 114-121.
doi: 10.1111/jipb.12128
[32] Minocha R, Majumdar R, Minocha S C. Polyamines and abiotic stress in plants: a complex relationship. Front Plant Sci, 2014, 5: 175.
doi: 10.3389/fpls.2014.00175 pmid: 24847338
[33] Li B, He L Z, Guo S R, Li J, Yang Y J, Yan B, Sun J, Li J. Proteomics reveal cucumber Spd-responses under normal condition and salt stress. Plant Physiol Biochem, 2013, 67: 7-14.
doi: 10.1016/j.plaphy.2013.02.016
[34] Sagor G H M, Berberich T, Takahashi Y, Niitsu M, Kusano T. The polyamine spermine protects Arabidopsis from heat stress-induced damage by increasing expression of heat shock-related genes. Transgenic Res, 2013, 22: 595-605.
doi: 10.1007/s11248-012-9666-3 pmid: 23080295
[35] Kunz S, Pesquet E, Kleczkowski L A. Functional dissection of sugar signals affecting gene expression in Arabidopsis thaliana. PLoS One, 2014, 9: e100312.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0100312
[36] Lastdrager J, Hanson J, Smeekens S. Sugar signals and the control of plant growth and development. J Exp Bot, 2014, 65: 799-807.
doi: 10.1093/jxb/ert474 pmid: 24453229
[37] 孙智超, 张吉旺. 弱光胁迫影响玉米产量形成的生理机制及调控效应. 作物学报, 2023, 49: 12-23.
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2023.13064
Sun Z C, Zhang J W. Physiological mechanism and regulation effect of low light on maize yield formation. Acta Agron Sin, 2023, 49: 12-23. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[38] 祖超, 杨建峰, 李志刚, 王灿, 鱼欢, 邬华松. 遮阴对胡椒主花期叶片碳代谢及成花量的影响. 热带作物学报, 2015, 36: 1561-1567.
Zu C, Yang J F, Li Z G, Wang C, Yu H, Wu S H. Effect of shading on carbon metabolism and inflorescence quantity in black pepper during full-bloom stage. Chin J Trop Crops, 2015, 36: 1561-1567. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[39] 王喜蒙. 遮阴条件下白及叶片的蛋白质组学研究. 郑州大学硕士学位论文, 河南郑州, 2021.
Wang X M. Proteome Studies of Bletilla striata Leaves in Response to Shelter Covering. MS Thesis of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, Henan, China, 2021 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[40] Wu J X, Li J, Liu Z, Yin J, Chang Z Y, Rong C, Wu J L, Bi F C, Yao N. The Arabidopsis ceramidase AtACER functions in disease resistance and salt tolerance. Plant J, 2015, 81: 767-780.
doi: 10.1111/tpj.2015.81.issue-5
[41] Ng C K-Y, Carr K, McAinsh M R, Powell B, Hetherington A M. Drought-induced guard cell signal transduction involves sphingosine-1-phosphate. Nature, 2001, 410: 596-599.
doi: 10.1038/35069092
[42] Nishikawa M, Hosokawa K, Ishiguro M, Minamioka H, Tamura K, Hara-Nishimura I, Takahashi Y, Shimazaki K, Imai H. Degradation of sphingoid long-chain base 1-phosphates (LCB-1Ps): functional characterization and expression of AtDPL1 encoding LCB-1P lyase involved in the dehydration stress response in Arabidopsis. Plant Cell Physiol, 2008, 49: 1758-1763.
doi: 10.1093/pcp/pcn149 pmid: 18849574
[43] Dutilleul C, Benhassaine-Kesri G, Demandre C, Rézé N, Launay A, Pelletier S, Renou J P, Zachowski A, Baudouin E, Guillas I. Phytosphingosine-phosphate is a signal for AtMPK6 activation and Arabidopsis response to chilling. New Phytol, 2012, 194: 181-191.
doi: 10.1111/nph.2012.194.issue-1
[44] Wan T, Feng Y, Liang C L, Pan L Y, He L, Cai Y L. Metabolomics and transcriptomics analyses of two contrasting cherry rootstocks in response to drought stress. Biology, 2021, 10: 201.
doi: 10.3390/biology10030201
[45] 冯斌, 俞继华, 张宝, 宋志磊, 陈劲松, 廖海, 周嘉裕. 植物磷酸乙醇胺甲基转移酶的生物信息学分析. 西南农业学报, 2013, 26: 499-504.
Feng B, Yu J H, Zhang B, Song Z L, Chen J S, Liao H, Zhou J Y. Bioinformatics analysis of phosphoethanolamine N-methyltransferase in plants. Southwest China J Agric Sci, 2013, 26: 499-504. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[46] 李婷, 刘嘉龙, 林小玲, 彭丽梅, 周大虎, 傅军如, 徐杰. 精氨酸酶在植物胁迫应答中功能研究进展. 分子植物育种, [2021-03-15] https://kns.cnki.net/kcms/detail/46.1068.S.20210315.1126.008.html.
Li T, Liu J L, Lin X L, Peng L M, Zhou D H, Fu J R, Xu J. Research progress on the function of arginase in plant stress response. Molecular Plant Breeding, Online first: 2021-03-15, https://kns.cnki.net/kcms/detail/46.1068.S.20210315.1126.008.html.
[47] She M Y, Wang J, Wang X M, Yin G X, Wang K, Du L P, Ye X G. Comprehensive molecular analysis of arginase-encoding genes in common wheat and its progenitor species. Sci Rep, 2017, 7: 6641.
doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-07084-0 pmid: 28747704
[48] 王慧飞, 冯雪, 张一名, 冯立峰, 张瑜, 陈光, 孙艳香. 棉花精氨酸酶基因GhARG1 cDNA的克隆与表达分析. 华北农学报, 2018, 33(4): 17-24.
doi: 10.7668/hbnxb.2018.04.003
Wang H F, Feng X, Zhang Y M, Feng L F, Zhang Y, Chen G, Sun Y X. Cloning and expression analysis of arginase gene GhARG1 cDNA from Gossypium hirsutum L. Acta Agric Boreali-Sin, 2018, 33(4): 17-24. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[49] Labudda M, Różańska E, Cieśla J, Sobczak M, Dzik J M. Arginase activity in Arabidopsis thaliana infected with Heterodera schachtii. Plant Pathol, 2016, 65: 1529-1538.
doi: 10.1111/ppa.2016.65.issue-9
[1] 蔡兆琴, 何观咏, 何文, 阮丽霞, 梁振华, 李永珍, 李恒锐, 陈会鲜. 木薯分枝发育过程的动态转录组分析与关键基因发掘[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(5): 1430-1441.
[2] 张曦, 王广恩, 李邵琦, 刘祎, 李俊兰, 钱玉源. 基于转录组测序解析陆海杂交姊妹系马克隆值差异的形成机制[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(5): 1442-1458.
[3] 韩亚鑫, 何冠华, 张小琼, 张登峰, 李永祥, 刘旭洋, 王天宇, 黎裕, 邹华文, 李春辉. 基于RNA-Seq和BSA-Seq联合分析挖掘玉米侧根密度基因资源[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(5): 1341-1352.
[4] 蒋嘉卉, 江炳志, 刘冠明, 王章英, 唐朝臣. 紫肉甘薯品质性状的近红外光谱预测模型构建与优化[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(4): 1088-1102.
[5] 杨亚莉, 徐明睿, 马越飞, 海艺蕊, 刘凯栋, 刘万茂, 孙颖. 玉米根尖及整根响应缺铁的转录组比较研究[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(4): 1006-1021.
[6] 王懿涵, 李富昌, 刘意, 朱国鹏. 甘薯IbOPR2基因启动子克隆及调控因子的筛选[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(4): 1268-1276.
[7] 马亮, 马璐, 张舒钰, 章慧敏, 王仁明, 宋旭东, 张振良, 冒宇翔, 陆虎华, 陈国清, 郝德荣, 周广飞. 玉米苞叶数目转录组分析及候选基因鉴定[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(3): 790-801.
[8] 杨宗桃, 杨婷, 王禹童, 艾静, 李燕烨, 刘家勇, 邓军, 赵勇, 张跃彬. 甘蔗CLC基因家族鉴定与表达分析[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(3): 722-734.
[9] 郭颖, 张大效, 陈美霖, 陈冠宇, 刘建民, 杨晓虹, 韩冰. 野生燕麦和栽培燕麦的代谢组学分析[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(3): 945-956.
[10] 张宇, 刘芳, 蔡诚诚, 杨小华, 吉阿么石扎, 杨元军, 王西瑶. 溴乙烷与赤霉素协同处理破除马铃薯块茎休眠的机理初探[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(3): 825-838.
[11] 于永超, 刘明, 靳容, 赵鹏, 张强强, 王静, 朱晓亚, 唐忠厚. 甘薯高氮徒长的生理机制和转录组分析研究[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(3): 813-824.
[12] 张力岚, 杨军, 王让剑. 基于WGCNA发掘茶树糖苷类香气前体含量性状相关的候选基因[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(2): 494-513.
[13] 杨璇, 李健康, 何婉洁, 李友军, 程相涵, 侯文邦. 硒肥对甘薯鲜切后褐变的影响及其机理解析[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(2): 578-589.
[14] 刘迪, 黎瑞源, 石茂竹, 李洪有, 陈庆富, 石桃雄. 苦荞半矮秆突变体sd3的表型鉴定及转录组分析[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(1): 316-328.
[15] 田甲春, 葛霞, 李守强, 李梅, 田世龙, 张亚倩, 程建新, 李玉梅. 低O2高CO2贮藏环境延缓马铃薯块茎衰老的作用机制[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(1): 262-278.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!
京ICP备15008789号-2