| Title |
Transcriptome analysis in Malus halliana roots in response to iron deficiency reveals insight into sugar regulation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Molecular Genetics and Genomics, August 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00438-018-1479-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ya Hu, Yan-fang Zhu, Ai-xia Guo, Xu-mei Jia, Li Cheng, Tong Zhao, Yan-xiu Wang |
| Abstract |
Iron (Fe) deficiency is a frequent nutritional problem limiting apple production in calcareous soils. The utilization of rootstock that is resistant to Fe deficiency is an effective way to solve this problem. Malus halliana is an Fe deficiency-tolerant rootstock; however, few molecular studies have been conducted on M. halliana. In the present work, a transcriptome analysis was combined with qRT-PCR and sugar measurements to investigate Fe deficiency responses in M. halliana roots at 0 h (T1), 12 h (T2) and 72 h (T3) after Fe deficiency stress. Total of 2473, 661, and 776 differentially expressed genes (DEGs) were identified in the pairs of T2 vs. T1, T3 vs. T1, and T3 vs. T2, respectively. Several DEGs were enriched in the photosynthesis, glycolysis and gluconeogenesis, tyrosine metabolism and fatty acid degradation pathways. The glycolysis and photosynthesis pathways were upregulated under Fe deficiency. In this experiment, sucrose accumulated in Fe-deficient roots and leaves. However, the glucose content significantly decreased in the roots, while the fructose content significantly decreased in the leaves. Additionally, 15 genes related to glycolysis and sugar synthesis and sugar transport were selected to validate the accuracy of the transcriptome data by qRT-PCR. Overall, these results indicated that sugar synthesis and metabolism in the roots were affected by Fe deficiency. Sugar regulation is a way by which M. halliana responds to Fe deficiency stress. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 9 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 9 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 44% |
| Researcher | 1 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 3 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 56% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 3 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 August 2018.
All research outputs
#22,767,715
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from Molecular Genetics and Genomics
#3,137
of 3,321 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#298,651
of 341,405 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Molecular Genetics and Genomics
#16
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,321 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 341,405 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.