ArticleBMC plant biology2025
Effect of developmental dynamics on WRKY expression in barley with varying phenologies and trichome micromorphologies.
Article in BMC plant biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundUnderstanding how developmental traits and epidermal structures contribute to stress tolerance is essential for improving crop resilience. In this study, four spring barley genotypes differing in phenology and epidermal features—CamBW1, CamWa1, LubBW1, and LubWa1—were evaluated under combined abiotic (mild and severe drought) and biotic (Fusarium infection) stress, with growth regulators application.
resultsThe first phase of the study focused on assessing the phenological diversity of the examined barley genotypes in order to characterize the role of earliness in response to combined abiotic and biotic stresses. Phenological analysis confirmed distinct developmental patterns between early- and late-heading genotypes, supporting the presence of a “drought escape” strategy in early-flowering lines. The expression of the key photoperiod gene HvPRR37 further reflected these phenological differences. Through a comprehensive screening of drought responses and Fusarium infection severity, we were able to determine the performance and stress tolerance of the studied genotypes, and subsequently explore the expression patterns of key transcription factors (WRKY). Scanning electron microscopy revealed clear variability in trichome micromorphology between genotypes: LubBW1 developed numerous small trichomes, whereas LubWa1 produced fewer but larger structures. These differences may underlie distinct responses to Fusarium infection, as LubBW1 trichomes appeared to trap fungal conidia more effectively. Photosynthetic performance analyses indicated that combined stress strongly affected photosystem II and I efficiency, with the most severe inhibition observed under drought + Fusarium + gibberellin application treatment. However, mild drought induced only moderate changes, suggesting adaptive physiological regulation. Gene expression profiling of WRKY34, WRKY51, and WRKY70 demonstrated genotype-specific and stress-intensity-dependent regulation. WRKY51 and WRKY70 responded rapidly to drought and pathogen stress, while WRKY34 expression appeared developmentally regulated.
conclusionThese results highlight the complex interplay between phenology, trichome micromorphology, photosynthetic efficiency, and transcriptional regulation in shaping barley responses to combined stresses, underscoring the developmental stage as a critical determinant of resistance activation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.