Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34641780›Full record

ArticleBMC plant biology2021

RNA-Seq reveals different responses to drought in Neotropical trees from savannas and seasonally dry forests.

Mariane B Sobreiro, Rosane G Collevatti, Yuri L A Dos Santos, Ludmila F Bandeira, Francis J F Lopes, Evandro Novaes

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC plant biology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. LMTFrontiers in plant science · 2023
    Article
  5. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Mariane B SobreiroLaboratório de Genética & Biodiversidade, Instituto de Ciências Biológicas, Universidade Federal de Goiás, Goiânia, GO, 74690-900, Brazil.
Rosane G CollevattiLaboratório de Genética & Biodiversidade, Instituto de Ciências Biológicas, Universidade Federal de Goiás, Goiânia, GO, 74690-900, Brazil.
Yuri L A Dos SantosLaboratório de Genética e Genômica de Plantas, Escola de Agronomia, Universidade Federal de Goiás, Goiânia, GO, 74690-900, Brazil.
Ludmila F BandeiraLaboratório de Genética e Genômica de Plantas, Escola de Agronomia, Universidade Federal de Goiás, Goiânia, GO, 74690-900, Brazil.
Francis J F LopesLaboratório de Fisiologia Vegetal, Instituto de Ciências Biológicas, Universidade Federal de Goiás, Goiânia, GO, 74690-900, Brazil.
Evandro NovaesLaboratório de Genética Molecular, Departamento de Biologia, Universidade Federal de Lavras, Lavras, MG, 37200-900, Brazil. evandro.novaes@ufla.br.
Universidade Federal de Goiás · BRUniversidade Federal de Lavras · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWater is one of the main limiting factors for plant growth and crop productivity. Plants constantly monitor water availability and can rapidly adjust their metabolism by altering gene expression. This leads to phenotypic plasticity, which aids rapid adaptation to climate changes. Here, we address phenotypic plasticity under drought stress by analyzing differentially expressed genes (DEG) in four phylogenetically related neotropical Bignoniaceae tree species: two from savanna, Handroanthus ochraceus and Tabebuia aurea, and two from seasonally dry tropical forests (SDTF), Handroanthus impetiginosus and Handroanthus serratifolius. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report of an RNA-Seq study comparing tree species from seasonally dry tropical forest and savanna ecosystems.

resultsUsing a completely randomized block design with 4 species × 2 treatments (drought and wet) × 3 blocks (24 plants) and an RNA-seq approach, we detected a higher number of DEGs between treatments for the SDTF species H. serratifolius (3153 up-regulated and 2821 down-regulated under drought) and H. impetiginosus (332 and 207), than for the savanna species. H. ochraceus showed the lowest number of DEGs, with only five up and nine down-regulated genes, while T. aurea exhibited 242 up- and 96 down-regulated genes. The number of shared DEGs among species was not related to habitat of origin or phylogenetic relationship, since both T. aurea and H impetiginosus shared a similar number of DEGs with H. serratifolius. All four species shared a low number of enriched gene ontology (GO) terms and, in general, exhibited different mechanisms of response to water deficit. We also found 175 down-regulated and 255 up-regulated transcription factors from several families, indicating the importance of these master regulators in drought response.

conclusionOur findings show that phylogenetically related species may respond differently at gene expression level to drought stress. Savanna species seem to be less responsive to drought at the transcriptional level, likely due to morphological and anatomical adaptations to seasonal drought. The species with the largest geographic range and widest edaphic-climatic niche, H. serratifolius, was the most responsive, exhibiting the highest number of DEG and up- and down-regulated transcription factors (TF).

Indexed as

DehydrationForestsGrasslandRNA-SeqAdaptation, PhysiologicalBignoniaceaeBiological ProductsClimate ChangeDroughtsEcosystemGene Expression Regulation, PlantGenes, PlantGenetic VariationPhylogenyTabebuiaBiological ProductsBignoniaceaeDifferential gene expressionPlasticityTabebuia AllianceTranscription factorsWater deficit

Identifiers

PMID34641780
PMCPMC8507309
OpenAlexW3205694800

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.