Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29897491›Full record

ArticleJournal of experimental botany2018

Na+ extrusion from the cytosol and tissue-specific Na+ sequestration in roots confer differential salt stress tolerance between durum and bread wheat.

Honghong Wu, Lana Shabala, Elisa Azzarello, Yuqing Huang, Camilla Pandolfi, Nana Su, Qi Wu, Shengguan Cai, Nadia Bazihizina, Lu Wang and 4 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of experimental botany, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed
16.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

35 citing papers in PubMed, 96 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. A novel natural variation in the promoter of TaDHN4D1 confers salt tolerance in wheat.TAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik · 2025
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Honghong WuSchool of Land and Food, University of Tasmania, Private Bag, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia.
Lana ShabalaSchool of Land and Food, University of Tasmania, Private Bag, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia.
Elisa AzzarelloDepartment of Horticulture, University of Florence, Sesto Fiorentino, Italy.
Yuqing HuangSchool of Science and Health, Hawkesbury Institute for the Environment, Western Sydney University, Penrith, NSW, Australia.
Camilla PandolfiDepartment of Horticulture, University of Florence, Sesto Fiorentino, Italy.
Nana SuSchool of Land and Food, University of Tasmania, Private Bag, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia.
Qi WuSchool of Land and Food, University of Tasmania, Private Bag, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia.
Shengguan CaiSchool of Science and Health, Hawkesbury Institute for the Environment, Western Sydney University, Penrith, NSW, Australia.
Nadia BazihizinaSchool of Land and Food, University of Tasmania, Private Bag, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia.
Lu WangSchool of Natural Sciences, University of Tasmania, Private Bag 55, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia.
Meixue ZhouSchool of Land and Food, University of Tasmania, Private Bag, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia.
Stefano MancusoDepartment of Horticulture, University of Florence, Sesto Fiorentino, Italy.
Zhonghua ChenSchool of Science and Health, Hawkesbury Institute for the Environment, Western Sydney University, Penrith, NSW, Australia.
Sergey ShabalaSchool of Land and Food, University of Tasmania, Private Bag, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia.
University of Tasmania · AUUniversity of Florence · ITWestern Sydney University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The progress in plant breeding for salinity stress tolerance is handicapped by the lack of understanding of the specificity of salt stress signalling and adaptation at the cellular and tissue levels. In this study, we used electrophysiological, fluorescence imaging, and real-time quantitative PCR tools to elucidate the essentiality of the cytosolic Na+ extrusion in functionally different root zones (elongation, meristem, and mature) in a large number of bread and durum wheat accessions. We show that the difference in the root's ability for vacuolar Na+ sequestration in the mature zone may explain differential salinity stress tolerance between salt-sensitive durum and salt-tolerant bread wheat species. Bread wheat genotypes also had on average 30% higher capacity for net Na+ efflux from the root elongation zone, providing the first direct evidence for the essentiality of the root salt exclusion trait at the cellular level. At the same time, cytosolic Na+ accumulation in the root meristem was significantly higher in bread wheat, leading to the suggestion that this tissue may harbour a putative salt sensor. This hypothesis was then tested by investigating patterns of Na+ distribution and the relative expression level of several key genes related to Na+ transport in leaves in plants with intact roots and in those in which the root meristems were removed. We show that tampering with this sensing mechanism has resulted in a salt-sensitive phenotype, largely due to compromising the plant's ability to sequester Na+ in mesophyll cell vacuoles. The implications of these findings for plant breeding for salinity stress tolerance are discussed.

Indexed as

Salt StressSalt ToleranceCytosolMicroscopy, ConfocalPlant RootsSodiumTriticumVacuolesSodium

Identifiers

PMID29897491
PMCPMC6054258
OpenAlexW2808336962

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.