Next Article in Journal
Editorial for the IJMS Special Issue on “Infection and the Kidney”
Previous Article in Journal
The Role of Plant Transcription Factors in the Fight against Plant Viruses
Previous Article in Special Issue
Drought-Stress Induced Physiological and Molecular Changes in Plants 2.0
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
IJMS
Volume 24
Issue 9
10.3390/ijms24098429
ijms-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Polar Metabolites Profiling of Wheat Shoots (Triticum aestivum L.) under Repeated Short-Term Soil Drought and Rewatering

by
Joanna Szablińska-Piernik
* and
Lesław Bernard Lahuta
*
Department of Plant Physiology, Genetics and Biotechnology, University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn, Oczapowskiego Street 1A/103A, 10-719 Olsztyn, Poland
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24(9), 8429; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms24098429
Submission received: 25 April 2023 / Revised: 4 May 2023 / Accepted: 6 May 2023 / Published: 8 May 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Drought-Stress Induced Physiological and Molecular Changes in Plants 2.0)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The response of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) plants to the soil drought at the metabolome level is still not fully explained. In addition, research focuses mainly on single periods of drought, and there is still a lack of data on the response of plants to short-term cyclical periods of drought. The key to this research was to find out whether wheat shoots are able to resume metabolism after the stress subsides and if the reaction to subsequent stress is the same. Gas chromatography coupled with mass spectrometry (GC-MS) is one of the most valuable and fast methods to discover changes in the primary metabolism of plants. The targeted GC-MS analyses of whole shoots of wheat plants exposed (at the juvenile stage of development) to short-term (five days) mild soil drought/rewatering cycles (until the start of shoot wilting) enabled us to identify 32 polar metabolites. The obtained results revealed an accumulation of sugars (sucrose, fructose, glucose, and 1-kestose), proline, and malic acid. During five days of recovery, shoots regained full turgor and continued to grow, and the levels of accumulated metabolites decreased. Similar changes in metabolic profiles were found during the second drought/rewatering cycle. However, the concentrations of glucose, proline, and malic acid were higher after the second drought than after the first one. Additionally, the concentration of total polar metabolites after each plant rewatering was elevated compared to control samples. Although our results confirm the participation of proline in wheat responses to drought, they also highlight the responsiveness of soluble carbohydrate metabolism to stress/recovery.

1. Introduction

Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) is one of the major crops cultivated worldwide and an important source of energy for the human diet and animal feed [1,2]. The yield of wheat may be dramatically decreased by drastic environmental and climatic changes, leading to an increasing frequency of severe drought conditions [3,4]. It is predicted that up to 60% of the current wheat-growing area will face simultaneous severe water scarcity events by the end of the twenty-first century [5,6]. Moreover, abiotic stresses, including drought, might occur individually or sequentially. Drought adversely affects crop growth, development, and yield via physiological and biochemical disturbances in whole plants. However, the negative effects are related to the drought intensity (rate of decrease in the water availability and duration of the water deficit), as well as plant species and developmental stages [7,8].
Water stress leads to weakening and inhibition of plant growth, disturbances in photosynthesis and carbon and nitrogen metabolism [9], as well as overproduction of reactive oxygen species [10]. The limited and decreasing availability of water in the soil, leading to soil drought, indicates changes in the stomata aperture in leaves to limit transpiration and water loss from the cells [11]. Water retention in cells is achieved through the accumulation of various osmolytes in the cytoplasm and vacuole—sugars, amino acids, inorganic ions, and organic acids—lowering the water potential [12]. However, prolonged water deficits and minimized gas exchange lead to a decrease in CO2 concentration in the leaf [13,14]. The decreased ratio of CO2 to O2 in chloroplasts results in the intensification of the photorespiration process [15,16]. It reduces the efficiency of CO2 assimilation and causes losses of nitrogen and energy. However, it can also be a partial CO2 recirculation pathway [17,18]. Limited water availability and reduced CO2 assimilation (in the Calvin–Benson cycle) lead to disturbances in the processes of electron transport, energy production, and maintaining redox balance in chloroplasts. As a result, there is excessive generation of reactive oxygen species, and the photosynthetic apparatus is damaged [19]. This causes disturbances in the course of various metabolic pathways and the export of photoassimilates from the leaves (as sources) to the receiving sink tissues (roots, stem, and generative organs) [20,21].
Apart from osmolytes [22,23], cells can also synthesize osmoprotectants (trehalose, glycine betaine, and polyols), maintaining membrane integrity and protecting macromolecule structure [24]. Accumulation of osmolytes and osmoprotectants affects both primary and secondary metabolism, as revealed in metabolomic studies of model plants, e.g., Arabidopsis thaliana [25] and Medicago truncatula [26], as well as major crops, e.g., maize [27], wheat [28], rice [29], barley [30], soybean [31], and pea [32,33,34]. Moreover, some metabolites accumulated under water deficit could be candidates for metabolic markers of stress, e.g., proline, found in various plant species [35], sucrose, citric acid, and phosphate in Medicago truncatula [12], and glutamine/glutamate in rice [36].
So far, research on wheat’s response to drought at the metabolome level has shown that limited water availability is associated with changes in osmotic regulation, energy production, and oxidative damage [37,38]. It has been demonstrated that sugar and nitrogen metabolism are mostly affected by water deficiency in the leaves of wheat [28,37,38,39]. Moreover, the drought-tolerant capacity of wheat seedlings was related to the accumulation of amino acids, organic acids, alkaloids, and flavonoids [40]. The important role of some metabolites in response to drought has also been revealed by metabolomic analyses carried out on other plant species (i.e., coffee, ryegrass) subjected to cyclic drought/rehydration treatment [8,41,42]. In wheat, it has been shown that not only the water deficit itself but also its frequency affects plant growth and secondary metabolism in flag leaf [43], as well as that the greatest changes are related to the accumulation of amino acids [11] and soluble sugars in leaf tissues [44]. Moreover, the drought tolerance of wheat seems to be related to sucrose metabolism [45,46].
Among various methods used in metabolomic studies [30,31], the gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) method seems to be valuable in monitoring changes in metabolic profiles in early response to drought [11,27,33,34]. In the present study, the GC-MS approach enabled us to compare changes in the polar metabolite profiles of wheat shoots (Triticum aestivum L.) during the plant’s exposure to repeated short-term (mild) soil droughts and after recovery from water deficit stress.

2. Results and Discussion

2.1. The Effect of Repeated Short-Term Soil Drought/Rewatering Cycles on Plant Growth and Development

During 20 days of vegetation (between the 14th and 34th day after sowing, DAS), well-watered (control) plants reached a height of about 30–35 cm, and shoots started tillering. The water content (WC) was stable at 6.5–7 g H2O g−1 dry weight (DW), which corresponded with 86–89% of fresh weight (Figure 1).
The fresh weight (FW) of shoots increased more than fourfold (Figure 2), and the width of fully expanded leaves was ca. 5–7 mm at mid-length (Figure 1).
The duration of the first and second droughts was relatively short (until visible loss of turgor and shoot wilting), enabling fast recovery of shoot growth after plants rewatering. After five days of drought, the WC decreased from 7.96 to 3.33 g H2O g−1 DW, whereas during rewatering it increased to 6.86 g H2O g−1 DW (as high as in the control). Both short-term soil droughts caused a strong decrease in shoot FW (twofold, compared with the control) and inhibited shoot growth (Figure 1). However, after recovery from the second stress, plants regained turgor, continued to grow, and produced new leaves (Figure 1). The FW of the shoot increased more than twofold, but to a level still lower than in the control plants (Figure 2). Moreover, the shoot tillering was restricted (Figure 1). The above disturbances in the growth of wheat plants are consistent with previous reports on the response of plants to drought stress [47,48,49]. Growth inhibition caused by the soil drought results from disturbances in photosynthesis, transpiration, photorespiration, transport of water and mineral/organic compounds, as well as photoassimilated distribution between source and sink tissues [50,51]. In our work, we focused not on the measurement of changes in physiological processes but only on rearrangements in the metabolic profiles of shoots in wheat in response to repeated soil drought/rewatering.

2.2. Changes in Polar Metabolite Profiles during Control Plant (Well-Watered) Vegetation

The targeted GC-MS-based approach, using original standards as well, enabled us to identify 32 polar metabolites, classified into soluble carbohydrates, proteinogenic and non-proteinogenic amino acids, organic acids, and remaining compounds. The same groups as well as individual polar metabolites have previously been found in wheat leaves, kernels, or phloem exudate [52,53,54] as well as in wheat sprouts [55,56] using mass spectrometry. Changes in the concentrations of polar metabolites during plant vegetation (14–34 DAS) were reflected by a shift in the distribution of samples, revealed by principal component analysis (PCA). There were clear differences between the samples collected at the 14th DAS and those collected later (Figure 3A). The distribution of samples depended mainly on phosphoric acid, glucose, fructose, and sucrose (Figure 3B).
Soluble carbohydrates were the major group of polar metabolites in the control plants, constituting 36–82% of total identified polar metabolites (TIPMs), whereas total organic acids (TOAs) shared ca. 6–11% and amino acids (proteinogenic and non-proteinogenic) ca. 7–12% (Table 1).
The trends of changes in the concentration of TIPMs among the vegetation in the wheat shoots of control plants were determined mainly by changes in soluble carbohydrates. During intensive shoot growth, between 19 and 34 DAS (Figure 1), the concentrations of fructose, glucose, and sucrose (the predominant sugars) increased gradually up to 2.45, 10.70, and 7.63 mg g−1 DW, respectively. Additionally, 1-kestose, found in traces at the 19th DAS, increased up to the 34th DAS, but to a much lower level (0.14 mg g−1 DW, Table 1). This composition of sugars seems to be typical of wheat leaf tissues [57]. Moreover, 1-kestose is one of the major fructans present in monocotyledonous plants in temperate climates, among them wheat and other cereals [58]. They occur mainly in grains, fruits, and vegetables and are used as storage carbohydrates for growing seedlings [59].
Changes in TIPMs in wheat were also influenced by changes in total organic acids (TOAs) and total proteinogenic amino acids (TPAAs), whose concentrations significantly decreased with the growth of shoots (Table 1). The dominant proteinogenic amino acids were asparagine, aspartic acid, and serine, whereas among organic acids, malate and citrate dominated. However, their content was relatively low (<2.5 mg g−1 DW, Table 1). Tissues also contained small amounts of hydroxyproline, γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA), and urea (Table 1). Additionally, tissues at the 14th DAS contained a considerable amount of phosphoric acid (13.91 mg g−1 DW), which dramatically (fourfold) decreased during the next five days and later on remained at a low level (3.65–1.44 mg g−1 DW). The content of phosphorus (P) in phosphoric acid at the 34th DAS was lower than the content of inorganic phosphorus (Pi) in a shoot of spelt wheat at the comparable developmental stage, as documented earlier [60]. Changes in the Pi content in shoots of wheat depend on P uptake from the soil, and plants’ P demand is higher at early rather than later stages of vegetation [61]. Results of our previous study, focusing on metabolomic changes in pea shoots (stems, stipules, tendrils, and shoot tips), revealed a decrease in phosphoric acid in shoot tips and tendrils, while there was an increase in stems and stipules during vegetative plant development (between the 35th and 53rd DAS) [33]. However, data on changes in phosphoric acid in wheat during plant vegetation are not known.

2.3. Changes in Polar Metabolite Profiles under Short-Term Soil Drought and Followed by Rewatering

The applied experimental conditions enabled us to characterize the metabolic adjustment of wheat to the short-term periodic water deficit manifested by the plants wilting. Results from the PCA score plots indicate a clear separation of control from droughted plants (Figure 4A). There was also a clear separation of samples from the first and second drought stresses, as well as a much lower separation of the control samples (by PC2, Figure 4A). The loading plots revealed that the discrimination of samples by PC1 was mainly due to sucrose, fructose, glucose, and malic acid, whereas phosphoric acid and proline contributed to the separation of samples by PC2.
The ability of plants to survive drought stress depends on maintaining turgor (observed in our study during recovery, Figure 2) and is possible, e.g., by closing the stomata, limiting transpiration [11], and accumulating various osmolytes in the cytoplasm and vacuoles—sugars, amino acids, but also inorganic ions and organic acids that lower the water potential of cells [12]. Indeed, the reaction of the shoots of wheat to the first and second soil droughts was an increase in the concentration of TIPMs (Table 1) to levels significantly (p < 0.05) higher after both the first and second droughts than before the drought or after rewatering. Moreover, the concentration of TIPMs was significantly (p < 0.05) higher after the second soil drought than after the first one (Table 1). It was a result of the accumulation of soluble carbohydrates, increasing from 12.05 to 59.18 and 64.12 mg g−1 DW (Table 1), mainly sucrose, glucose, fructose, and to a lesser extent 1-kestose (Figure 5A–D).
Those sugars, as osmolytes, participate in maintaining cell water homeostasis [62]. However, in the same type of experiment but performed on pea shoots [34], such changes were not observed. Moreover, different reactions to drought in terms of sucrose accumulation were also described in other species; e.g., the level of sucrose in the leaves of lentils decreased [63], while it increased in the leaves of maize [64], soybean [31], and wheat [39]. The accumulation of sucrose may also be influenced by the genetically determined resistance of plants to stress—in drought-resistant varieties, the level of sucrose increases, as was documented in soybean [65], chickpeas [66], barley [30], several species of Lotus [67], and Triticeae [68]. In our study, an accumulation of sucrose and 1-kestose (Figure 5A,D) in shoots of wheat under drought was accompanied by an increase in glucose and fructose (Figure 5B,C)—products of sucrose hydrolysis by invertases [69]. So far, a significant effect of the accumulation of sucrose and fructans on the increased resistance of plants to soil drought has been demonstrated in chicory [70] and ryegrass [71].
Among proteinogenic amino acids, there was an increase in the content of proline (Figure 5E), to a level fourfold higher during the second drought (8 mg g−1 DW) than during the first one. The level of proline dramatically decreased after each plant’s rewatering. The results of our research are consistent with those previously obtained in metabolomic studies of leaves of wheat [11] and leaves, stems, stipules, tendrils, and shoot tips of pea [32,33,34] and confirm the well-documented accumulation of proline in the response of plant vegetative tissues to abiotic stresses [72,73]. Proline increases the resistance of plants to drought, which was demonstrated, for example, in wheat [11,28], some model species, like Arabidopsis thaliana [25] and Medicago truncatula [74], and in transgenic wheat [75] and soybean [76]. The protective properties of proline result from its participation in osmotic regulation, stabilization of cellular structures (i.e., membranes and proteins), scavenging free oxygen radicals [77], and maintaining the intracellular redox potential by regulating the correct ratio of NADP+/NADPH in the cytosol, as well as the ability of proline to bind 1O2 [72,73].
Additionally, a significant increase in the content of leucine, isoleucine, and valine (branched-chain amino acids—BCAAs), but to a level much lower than that of proline, was found after the second soil drought (Table 1). The increase in those amino acids in wheat leaves was revealed earlier in both drought-tolerant and susceptible wheat cultivars [11,28].
Among the remaining polar metabolites, the content of malic acid also increased in the tissues under drought and decreased after rewatering. However, after rewatering, its concentration was still at a much higher level than in the control (Figure 5F). The accumulation of malate in response to drought was found earlier in the leaves of six wheat genotypes [39], as well as in shoots [33] and leaves of pea [32]. Malate participates in the osmotic regulation of guard cells, maintains the pH of the cytoplasm, and provides NADH for nitrate reduction [78].
The comparison of metabolite profiles of samples after drought stress and followed by recovery revealed the separation of samples according to the PC1 sharing 84.5% of variance (Figure 6A).
Samples of drought-stressed plants (D1 and D2) were grouped on the right side of the PC1, whereas samples after recovery (R1 and R2) appeared on the left side (Figure 6A). The alteration in metabolic profiles was also observed following exposure to each drought stress treatment due to PC2. Moreover, the PC2 separated each recovery (Figure 6A). Such a distribution of samples resulted from the changes in the content of sucrose, fructose, glucose, proline, and phosphoric acid in particular (Figure 6B). Moreover, HCA separated samples into several clusters (Figure 6C). Apart from the clear separation of droughted and rewatered samples revealed by PCA, there were also control samples in one cluster shown by HCA. Additionally, rewatered samples were more closely related to the initial samples (in one cluster with samples from the 14th DAS) than to appropriate controls (in the 24th and 34th DAS).
The ability of plants to restore metabolism after the stress has subsided and to modify their behavior in response to a subsequent stress seems crucial due to the increasing intensity of environmental disturbances, including the predicted further global warming, which may be associated with an increased risk of periodic drought [79]. Our study revealed that the concentration of polar metabolites in samples after each recovery to optimal hydration, in relation to control samples (at the 24th and 34th DAS), was significantly higher. This was mainly due to the persistently elevated levels of fructose, glucose, sucrose, malic acid, and phosphoric acid after the first rewatering cycle and sucrose, malic acid, and phosphoric acid after the second cycle (Table 1).

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Material

Kernels of wheat (Triticum aestivum L. cv. Forkida, winter cultivar) were purchased from a domestic seed company—DANKO Plant Breeding. The experiment was performed as previously published on peas [34]. Briefly, kernels (after surface decontamination) were sown in plastic seedling trays (32 × 32 × 5 cm), three kernels per each of 25 cells, filled with 70 cm3 of garden soil (substral osmocote). The soil moisture was kept at 70–75% field water capacity (FWC), measured using a soil moisture meter (Theta Probe ML3, Delta-T, UK). Plants were cultivated in a greenhouse laboratory in April and May 2017. Soil drought was caused by the cessation of watering at the early stage of vegetative growth (from the 14th DAS)—at the stage when three leaves formed. After five days, the FWC decreased to 20–25%, and then watering resumed for 5 days. The watering cessation followed by rewatering (for 5 days each period) was repeated. Control plants grew at optimal FWC (70–75%) until the 34th DAS.

3.2. Methods

Shoots from control wheat plants and those of two cycles of soil drought/rewatering were collected at the 14th, 19th, 24th, 29th, and 34th DAS, always between 9 and 10 a.m. (in 4 replicates), weighed, and frozen in liquid nitrogen. The time elapsed between the shoot harvesting and tissue freezing was no longer than 10 min. Samples were stored in an ultra-refrigerator (for 7 days at −76 °C) and freeze-dried for 48 h (shelf freeze-dryer, Alpha 1–2 LD, Martin Christ, Osterode am Harz, Germany). The WC was expressed in g of water per g of dry weight and calculated as WC (g g−1 DW) = (FW – DW)/DW [80].

3.2.1. Analysis of Polar Metabolites

The extraction of polar metabolites was carried out according to the method described earlier [33,81]. The polar metabolites were extracted from 40 mg of dry (freeze-dried) tissues of wheat shoots (from 4 biological replicates) with a mixture of methanol:water. Homogenates were centrifuged, and aliquots of the clear supernatant were mixed with cold chloroform to remove non-polar compounds. The polar fraction was concentrated to dryness in a speed vacuum rotary evaporator (JW Electronic, Warsaw, Poland). The metabolites were derivatized with O-methoxamine hydrochloride and a mixture of MSTFA (N-methyl-N-trimethylsilyl-trifluoroacetamide) with pyridine. The mixtures of TMS (trimethylsilyl) derivatives were separated on a ZEBRON ZB-5MSi Guardian capillary column (Phenomenex, Torrance, CA, USA). Metabolic profiling of tissues was performed with the gas chromatography (GC) technique coupled with mass spectrometry (GC-MS), using a QP-GC-2010 apparatus (Shimadzu, Tokyo, Japan). Polar metabolites were identified and characterized by comparison of their retention time (RT), retention indices (RI, determined according to the saturated hydrocarbons), and mass spectra of original standards derived from Sigma-Aldrich (Sigma-Aldrich, Merck, Rahway, NJ, USA), and from the NIST library (National Institute of Standards and Technology).

3.2.2. Statistics

The results were subjected to a one-way ANOVA with a post-hoc test (Tukey) or Student’s t-test using Statistica software (version 12.0). Graphs were prepared using GraphPad Prism (version 3.0). Principal Component Analysis (PCA) and hierarchical cluster analysis (HCA) were performed in the COVAIN program [82], using the MATLAB software (version 2013a, Math Works), in order to compare the metabolic profiles of wheat during vegetative growth as well as under soil drought and two cycles of soil drought/rewatering. In addition, we also performed a pathway analysis of differentially accumulated polar metabolites after wheat plants exposure to drought in comparison to controls. It was performed using the MetaboAnalyst 5.0 platform (https://www.metaboanalyst.ca/MetaboAnalyst/ModuleView.xhtml, accessed on 1 March 2023). Although the p-value from the enrichment analysis was less than 0.05 for several pathways, there was a very low match status of metabolites for each of the pathways (Figure S1, Table S1).

4. Conclusions

Results of the present study revealed dynamic changes in primary polar metabolites during the plants exposure to repeated short-term soil drought and rewatering. Soluble carbohydrates (sucrose, glucose, fructose, and 1-kestose), proline, and malate participate in this process due to their increasing concentration in response to drought and decreasing after rewatering. It was confirmed by repeated drought/rewatering cycles. However, the possible changes in the pattern of sugar (and other photoassimilates) translocation between shoots and roots under drought need further studies. The research also shows that GC-MS is an appropriate approach for fast screening of metabolic disturbances in primary metabolism in plants exposed to water deficit stress. However, for a deeper explanation of wheat adaptation to drought, further research focusing on prolonged periodic droughts as well as examining root tissues is needed.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/ijms24098429/s1.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, J.S.-P. and L.B.L.; methodology, J.S.-P.; software, J.S.-P.; validation, J.S.-P. and L.B.L.; formal analysis, J.S.-P. and L.B.L.; investigation, J.S.-P.; resources, J.S.-P.; data curation, L.B.L.; writing—original draft preparation, J.S.-P.; writing—review and editing, L.B.L.; visualization, J.S.-P.; supervision, L.B.L.; project administration, J.S.-P.; funding acquisition, J.S.-P. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn, Poland, through statutory funding (No. 12.610.004-110).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available in this article.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Curtis, B.C. Wheat in the world. In Bread Wheat Improvement and Production; Curtis, B.C., Rajaram, S., Macpherson, H.G., Eds.; FAO Plant Production and Protection Series; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2002; pp. 1–19. [Google Scholar]
  2. Rosenfelder, P.; Eklund, M.; Mosenthin, R. Nutritive value of wheat and wheat by-products in pig nutrition: A review. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 2013, 185, 107–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Dai, A.; Zhao, T.; Chen, J. Climate Change and Drought: A Precipitation and Evaporation Perspective. Curr. Clim. Chang. Rep. 2018, 4, 301–312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Helman, D.; Bonfil, D.J. Six decades of warming and drought in the world’s top wheat-producing countries offset the benefits of rising CO2 to yield. Sci. Rep. 2022, 12, 7921. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Trnka, M.; Feng, S.; Semenov, M.A.; Olesen, J.E.; Kersebaum, K.C.; Rötter, R.P.; Semerádová, D.; Klem, K.; Huang, W.; Ruiz-Ramos, M.; et al. Mitigation efforts will not fully alleviate the increase in water scarcity occurrence probability in wheat-producing areas. Sci. Adv. 2019, 5, eaau2406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Elahi, I.; Saeed, U.; Wadood, A.; Abbas, A.; Nawaz, H.; Jabbar, S. Effect of Climate Change on Wheat Productivity. In Wheat; IntechOpen: London, UK, 2022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Varshney, R.K.; Barmukh, R.; Roorkiwal, M.; Qi, Y.; Kholova, Y.; Tuberosa, R.; Reynolds, M.P.; Tardieu, F.; Siddique, K.H.M. Breeding custom-designed crops for improved drought adaptation. Adv. Genet. 2021, 2, e202100017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Raza, A.; Mubarik, M.S.; Sharif, R.; Habib, M.; Jabeen, W.; Zhang, C.; Chen, H.; Chen, Z.H.; Siddique, K.H.M.; Zhuang, W.; et al. Developing drought-smart, ready-to-grow future crops. Plant Genome 2022, 16, e20279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Seleiman, M.F.; Al-Suhaibani, N.; Ali, N.; Akmal, M.; Alotaibi, M.; Refay, Y.; Dindaroglu, T.; Abdul-Wajid, H.H.; Battaglia, M.L. Drought Stress Impacts on Plants and Different Approaches to Alleviate Its Adverse Effects. Plants 2021, 10, 259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Cruz de Carvalho, M.H. Drought stress and reactive oxygen species: Production, scavenging and signaling. Plant Signal Behav. 2008, 3, 156–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Bowne, J.B.; Erwina, T.A.; Juttner, J.; Schnurbusch, T.; Langridge, P.; Bacic, A.; Roessner, U. Drought responses of leaf tissues from wheat cultivars of differing drought tolerance at the metabolite level. Mol. Plant 2012, 5, 418–429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Suprasanna, P.; Nikalje, G.C.; Rai, A.N. Osmolyte accumulation and implications in plant abiotic stress tolerance. In Osmolytes and Plants Acclimation to Changing Environment: Emerging Omics Technologies; Iqbal, N., Nazar, R., Khan, N.A., Eds.; Springer: New Delhi, India, 2016; pp. 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Chaves, M.M.; Maroco, J.P.; Pereira, J.S. Understanding plant responses to drought—From genes to the whole plant. Funct. Plant Biol. 2003, 30, 239–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Hatfield, J.L.; Dold, C. Water-use efficiency: Advances and challenges in a changing climate. Front. Plant Sci. 2019, 10, 103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Dellero, Y.; Jossier, M.; Schmitz, J.; Maurino, V.G.; Hodges, M. Photorespiratory glycolate-glyoxylate metabolism. J. Exp. Bot. 2016, 67, 3041–3052. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Hodges, M.; Dellero, Y.; Keech, O.; Betti, M.; Raghavendra, A.S.; Sage, R.; Zhu, X.G.; Allen, D.K.; Weber, A.P.M. Perspectives for a better understanding of the metabolic integration of photorespiration within a complex plant primary metabolism network. J. Exp. Bot. 2016, 67, 3015–3026. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Bauwe, H.; Hagemann, M.; Fernie, A.R. Photorespiration: Players, partners and origin. Trends Plant Sci. 2010, 15, 330–336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Eisenhut, M.; Brautigam, A.; Timm, S.; Florian, A.; Tohge, T.; Fernie, A.R.; Bauwe, H.; Weber, A.P.M. Photorespiration is crucial for dynamic response of photosynthetic metabolism and stomatal movement to altered CO2 availability. Mol. Plant 2017, 10, 47–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Urban, L.; Aarrouf, J.; Bidel, L.P.R. Assessing the effects of water deficit on photosynthesis using parameters derived from measurements of leaf gas exchange and of chlorophyll a fluorescence. Front. Plant Sci. 2017, 8, 2068. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Nikinmaa, E.; Hölttä, T.; Hari, P.; Kolari, P.; Mäkelä, A.; Sevanto, S.; Vesala, T. Assimilate transport in phloem sets conditions for leaf gas exchange. Plant Cell Environ. 2013, 36, 655–669. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Durand, M.; Porcheron, B.; Hennion, N.; Maurousset, L.; Lemoine, R.; Pourtau, N. Water deficit enhances C export to the roots in Arabidopsis thaliana plants with contribution of sucrose transporters in both shoot and roots. Plant Physiol. 2016, 170, 1460–1479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Blum, A. Osmotic adjustment is a prime drought stress adaptive engine in support of plant production. Plant Cell Environ. 2017, 40, 4–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Sanders, G.J.; Arndt, S.K. Osmotic adjustment under drought conditions. In Plant Responses to Drought Stress; Aroca, R., Ed.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2012; pp. 199–229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Khan, M.S.; Ahmad, D.; Khan, M.A. Utilization of genes encoding osmoprotectants in transgenic plants for enhanced abiotic stress tolerance. Electron J. Biotechnol. 2015, 18, 257–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Urano, K.; Maruyama, K.; Ogata, Y.; Morishita, Y.; Takeda, M.; Sakurai, N.; Suzuki, H.; Saito, K.; Shibata, D.; Kobayashi, M.; et al. Characterization of the ABA-regulated global responses to dehydration in Arabidopsis by metabolomics. Plant J. 2009, 57, 1065–1078. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Dickinson, E.; Rusilowicz, M.J.; Dickinson, M.; Charlton, A.J.; Bechtold, U.; Mullineaux, P.M.; Wilson, J. Integrating transcriptomic techniques and k-means clustering in metabolomics to identify markers of abiotic and biotic stress in Medicago truncatula. Metabolomics 2018, 14, 126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Obata, T.; Witt, S.; Lisec, J.; Palacios-Rojas, N.; Florez-Sarasa, I.; Yousfi, S.; Araus, J.L.; Cairns, J.E.; Fernie, A.R. Metabolite profiles of maize leaves in drought, heat, and combined stress field trials reveal the relationship between metabolism and grain yield. Plant Physiol. 2015, 169, 2665–2683. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Michaletti, A.; Naghavi, M.R.; Toorchi, M.; Zolla, L.; Rinalducci, S. Metabolomics and proteomics reveal drought-stress responses of leaf tissues from spring-wheat. Sci. Rep. 2018, 8, 5710. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Ma, X.; Xia, H.; Liu, Y.; Wei, H.; Zheng, X.; Song, C.; Chen, L.; Liu, H.; Luo, L. Transcriptomic and metabolomic studies disclose key metabolism pathways contributing to well-maintained photosynthesis under the drought and the consequent drought-tolerance in rice. Front. Plant Sci. 2016, 7, 1886. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Templer, S.E.; Ammon, A.; Pscheidt, D.; Ciobotea, O.; Schuy, C.; McCollum, C.; Sonnewald, U.; Hanemann, A.; Förster, J.; Ordon, F.; et al. Metabolite profiling of barley flag leaves under drought and combined heat and drought stress reveals metabolic QTLs for metabolites associated with antioxidant defense. J. Exp. Bot. 2017, 68, 1697–1713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Das, A.; Rushton, P.J.; Rohila, J.S. Metabolomic profiling of soybeans (Glycine max L.) reveals the importance of sugar and nitrogen metabolism under drought and heat stress. Plants 2017, 6, 21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Charlton, A.J.; Donarski, J.A.; Harrison, M.; Jones, S.A.; Godward, J.; Oehlschlager, S.; Arques, J.L.; Ambrose, M.; Chinoy, C.; Mullineaux, P.M.; et al. Responses of the pea (Pisum sativum L.) leaf metabolome to drought stress assessed by nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy. Metabolomics 2008, 4, 312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Szablińska-Piernik, J.; Lahuta, L.B. Metabolite profiling of semi-leafless pea (Pisum sativum L.) under progressive soil drought and subsequent re-watering. J. Plant Physiol. 2021, 256, 153314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Lahuta, L.B.; Szablińska-Piernik, J.; Horbowicz, M. Changes in Metabolic Profiles of Pea (Pisum sativum L.) as a Result of Repeated Short-Term Soil Drought and Subsequent Re-Watering. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23, 1704. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Hossain, M.A.; Hoque, M.A.; Burritt, D.J.; Fujita, M. Proline protects plants against abiotic oxidative stress: Biochemical and molecular mechanisms. In Oxidative Damage to Plants; Ahmad, P., Ed.; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2014; pp. 477–522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Degenkolbe, T.; Do, P.T.; Kopka, J.; Zuther, E.; Hincha, D.K.; Köhl, K.I. Identification of drought tolerance markers in a diverse population of rice cultivars by expression and metabolite profiling. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, e63637. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Lv, L.; Chen, X.; Li, H.; Huang, J.; Liu, Y.; Zhao, A. Different adaptive patterns of wheat with different drought tolerance under drought stresses and rehydration revealed by integrated metabolomic and transcriptomic analysis. Front. Plant Sci. 2022, 13, 1008624. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Večeřová, K.; Oravec, M.; Puranik, S.; Findurová, H.; Veselá, B.; Opoku, E.; Ofori-Amanfo, K.K.; Klem, K.; Urban, O.; Sahu, P.P. Single and interactive effects of variables associated with climate change on wheat metabolome. Front. Plant Sci. 2022, 13, 1002561. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Marček, T.; Hamow, K.A.; Végh, B.; Janda, T.; Darko, E. Metabolic response to drought in six winter wheat genotypes. PLoS ONE 2019, 14, e0212411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Guo, X.; Xin, Z.; Yang, T.; Ma, X.; Zhang, Y.; Wang, Z.; Ren, Y.; Lin, T. Metabolomics response for drought stress tolerance in chinese wheat genotypes (Triticum aestivum). Plants 2020, 9, 520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. Hu, T.; Jin, Y.; Li, H.; Amombo, E.; Fu, J. Stress memory induced transcriptional and metabolic changes of perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne) in response to salt stress. Physiol. Plant 2016, 156, 54–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Menezes-Silva, P.E.; Sanglard, L.M.V.P.; Ávila, R.T.; Morais, L.E.; Martins, S.C.V.; Nobres, P.; Patreze, C.M.; Ferreira, M.A.; Araújo, W.L.; Fernie, A.R.; et al. Photosynthetic and metabolic acclimation to repeated drought events play key roles in drought tolerance in coffee. J. Exp. Bot. 2017, 68, 4309–4322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Stallmann, J.; Schweiger, R.; Pons, C.A.A.; Müller, C. Wheat growth, applied water use efficiency and flag leaf metabolome under continuous and pulsed deficit irrigation. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 10112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Abid, M.; Ali, S.; Qi, L.K.; Zahoor, R.; Tian, Z.; Jiang, D.; Snider, J.L.; Dai, T. Physiological and biochemical changes during drought and recovery periods at tillering and jointing stages in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Sci. Rep. 2018, 8, 4615. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Nemati, F.; Ghanati, F.; Ahmadi Gavlighi, H.; Sharifi, M. Comparison of sucrose metabolism in wheat seedlings during drought stress and subsequent recovery. Biol. Plant 2018, 62, 595–599. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Kutlu, İ.; Turhan, E.; Yorgancilar, Ö.; Yorgancilar, A. Differences of physiological parameters and sucrose metabolism in bread wheat genotypes exposed to drought stress. J. Anim. Plant Sci. 2021, 31, 998–1006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Farooq, M.; Wahid, A.; Kobayashi, N.; Fujita, D.; Basra, S.M.A. Plant drought stress: Effects, mechanisms and management. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2009, 29, 185–212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Jaleel, C.A.; Manivannan, P.; Wahid, A.; Farooq, M.; Somasundaram, R.; Panneerselvam, R. Drought stress in plants: A review on morphological characteristics and pigments composition. Int. J. Agric. Biol. 2009, 11, 100–105. [Google Scholar]
  49. Poething, R.S. Vegetative phase change and shoot maturation in plants. Curr. Top. Dev. Biol. 2013, 105, 125–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Wingler, A.; Quick, W.P.; Bungard, R.A.; Bailey, K.J.; Lea, P.J.; Leegood, R.C. The role of photorespiration during drought stress: An analysis utilizing barley mutants with reduced activities of photorespiratory enzymes. Plant Cell Environ. 1999, 22, 361–373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Embiale, A.; Hussein, M.; Husen, A.; Sahile, S.; Mohammed, K. Differential sensitivity of Pisum sativum L. cultivars to water-deficit stress: Changes in growth, water status, chlorophyll fluorescence and gas exchange attributes. J. Agron. 2016, 15, 45–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Palmer, L.J.; Dias, D.A.; Boughton, B.; Roessner, U.; Graham, R.D.; Stangoulis, J.C.R. Metabolite profiling of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) phloem exudate. Plant Methods 2014, 10, 27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Heyneke, E.; Watanabe, M.; Erban, A.; Duan, G.; Buchner, P.; Walther, D.; Kopka, J.; Hawkesford, M.J.; Hoefgen, R. Characterization of the Wheat Leaf Metabolome during Grain Filling and under Varied N-Supply. Front. Plant Sci. 2017, 8, 2048. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Sedlacko, E.M.; Heuberger, A.L.; Chaparro, J.M.; Cath, T.Y.; Higgins, C.P. Metabolomics reveals primary response of wheat (Triticum aestivum) to irrigation with oilfield produced water. Environ. Res. 2022, 212, 113547. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Lahuta, L.B.; Szablińska-Piernik, J.; Głowacka, K.; Stałanowska, K.; Railean-Plugaru, V.; Horbowicz, M.; Pomastowski, P.; Buszewski, B. The Effect of Bio-Synthesized Silver Nanoparticles on Germination, Early Seedling Development, and Metabolome of Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Molecules 2022, 27, 2303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Lahuta, L.B.; Szablińska-Piernik, J.; Stałanowska, K.; Głowacka, K.; Horbowicz, M. The Size-Dependent Effects of Silver Nanoparticles on Germination, Early Seedling Development and Polar Metabolite Profile of Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23, 13255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  57. Kameli, A.; Lösel, D.M. Growth and sugar accumulation in durum wheat plants under water stress. New Phytol. 1996, 132, 57–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  58. Valluru, R.; Van den Ende, W. Plant fructans in stress environments: Emerging concepts and future prospects. J. Exp. Bot. 2008, 59, 2905–2916. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  59. Van den Ende, W.; Michiels, A.; De Roover, J.; Van Laere, A. Fructan biosynthetic and breakdown enzymes in dicots evolved from different invertases. Expression of fructan genes throughout chicory development. Sci. World J. 2002, 11, 1281–1295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  60. Mäkelä, P.S.A.; Wasonga, D.O.; Solano Hernandez, A.; Santanen, A. Seedling growth and phosphorus uptake in response to different phosphorus sources. Agronomy 2020, 10, 1089. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Römer, W.; Schilling, G. Phosphorus requirements of the wheat plant in various stages of its life cycle. Plant Soil. 1986, 91, 221–229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Sami, F.; Yusuf, M.; Faizan, M.; Faraz, A.; Hayat, S. Role of sugars under abiotic stress. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 2016, 109, 54–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Sehgal, A.; Sita, K.; Kumar, J.; Kumar, S.; Singh, S.; Siddique, K.H.M.; Nayyar, H. Influence of drought and heat stress, applied independently or in combination during seed development, on qualitative and quantitative aspects of seeds of lentil (Lens culinaris Medikus) genotypes, differing in drought sensitivity. Plant Cell Environ. 2019, 42, 198–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Pelleschi, S.; Rocher, J.P.; Prioul, K.L. Effect of water restriction on carbohydrate metabolism and photosynthesis in mature maize leaves. Plant Cell Environ. 1997, 20, 493–503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Silvente, S.; Sobolev, A.P.; Lara, M. Metabolite adjustments in drought tolerant and sensitive soybean genotypes in response to water stress. PLoS ONE 2012, 7, e38554. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Matos, M.C.; Campos, P.S.; Passarinho, J.A.; Semedo, J.N.; Marques, N.M.; Ramalho, J.C.; Ricardo, C.P. Drought effect on photosynthetic activity, osmolyte accumulation and membrane integrity of two Cicer arietinum genotypes. Photosynthetica 2010, 48, 303–312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Sanchez, D.H.; Schwabe, A.F.; Erban, B.A.; Udvardi, M.K.; Kopka, J. Comparative metabolomics of drought acclimation in model and forage legumes. Plant Cell Environ. 2012, 35, 136–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  68. Ullah, N.; Yüce, M.; Gökçe, Z.N.Ö.; Budak, H. Comparative metabolite profiling of drought stress in roots and leaves of seven Triticeae species. BMC Genom. 2017, 18, 969. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  69. Winter, H.; Huber, S.C. Regulation of sucrose metabolism in higher plants: Localization and regulation of activity of key enzymes. Crit. Rev. Biochem. Mol. Biol. 2000, 35, 253–289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  70. De Roover, J.; Vandenbranden, K.; Van Laere, A.; Van den Ende, W. Drought induces fructan synthesis and 1-SSS (sucrose:sucrose fructosyltransferase) in roots and leaves of chicory seedlings (Cichorium intybus L.). Planta 2000, 210, 808–814. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  71. Thomas, H.; James, A.R. Partitioning of sugars in Lolium perenne (perennial ryegrass) during drought and on rewatering. New Phytol. 1999, 142, 295–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Szabados, L.; Savouré, A. Proline: A multifunctional amino acid. Trends Plant Sci. 2010, 15, 89–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  73. Liang, X.; Zhang, L.; Natarajan, S.K.; Becker, D.F. Proline mechanisms of stress survival. Antioxid. Redox Signal. 2013, 19, 998–1011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Zhang, J.Y.; de Carvalho, M.H.C.; Torres-Jerez, I.; Kang, Y.; Allen, S.N.; Huhman, D.V.; Tang, Y.; Murray, J.; Sumner, L.W.; Udvardi, M.K. Global reprogramming of transcription and metabolism in Medicago truncatula during progressive drought and after rewatering. Plant Cell Environ. 2014, 37, 2553–2576. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Vendruscolo, E.C.G.; Schuster, I.; Pileggi, M.; Scapim, C.A.; Molinari, H.B.C.; Marur, C.J.; Vieira, L.G.E. Stress-induced synthesis of proline confers tolerance to water deficit in transgenic wheat. J. Plant Physiol. 2007, 164, 1367–1376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Simon-Sarkadia, L.; Kocsy, G.; Várhegyi, A.; Galiba, G.; de Ronde, J.A. Effect of drought stress at supraoptimal temperature on polyamine concentrations in transgenic soybean with increased proline levels. Z. Nat. C 2006, 61, 833–839. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  77. Ashraf, M.; Foolad, M.R. Roles of glycine betaine and proline in improving plant abiotic stress resistance. Environ. Exp. Bot. 2007, 59, 206–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Jacques, C.; Salon, C.; Barnard, R.L.; Vernoud, V.; Prudent, M. Drought Stress Memory at the Plant Cycle Level: A Review. Plants 2021, 10, 1873. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Fernie, A.R.; Martinoia, E. Malate: Jack of all trades or master of a few? Phytochemistry 2009, 70, 828–832. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  80. Sun, W.Q. Methods for the study of water relations under desiccation stress. In Desiccation and Survival in Plants; Black, M., Pritchard, H.W., Eds.; CABI Publishing: Wallingford, UK, 2002; pp. 47–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Szablińska-Piernik, J.; Lahuta, L.B.; Stałanowska, K.; Horbowicz, M. The Imbibition of Pea (Pisum sativum L.) Seeds in Silver Nitrate Reduces Seed Germination, Seedlings Development and Their Metabolic Profile. Plants 2022, 11, 1877. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Sun, X.; Weckwerth, W. COVAIN: A toolbox for uni- and multivariate statistics, time-series and correlation network analysis and inverse estimation of the differential Jacobian from metabolomics covariance data. Metabolomics 2012, 8, 81–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Ijms 24 08429 g001 550
Figure 1. Plants of wheat (Triticum aestivum L., cv. Forkida) during repeated short-term soil drought during 14–19 DAS and 24–29 DAS and subsequent rewatering (19–24 and 29–34 DAS). Control plants at 34 DAS are shown on the right. The values in the bottom left side of each picture indicate the water content expressed in g H2O on g of dry weight and as % of fresh weight (in parentheses) in the shoot. Abbreviations: D1 and D2—first and second soil drought; R1 and R2—rewatering; FWC—field water capacity.
Figure 1. Plants of wheat (Triticum aestivum L., cv. Forkida) during repeated short-term soil drought during 14–19 DAS and 24–29 DAS and subsequent rewatering (19–24 and 29–34 DAS). Control plants at 34 DAS are shown on the right. The values in the bottom left side of each picture indicate the water content expressed in g H2O on g of dry weight and as % of fresh weight (in parentheses) in the shoot. Abbreviations: D1 and D2—first and second soil drought; R1 and R2—rewatering; FWC—field water capacity.
Ijms 24 08429 g001
Ijms 24 08429 g002 550
Figure 2. Changes in the fresh weight of the wheat (Triticum aestivum L., cv. Forkida) shoot during plant growth at control conditions (C) or exposed to short-term soil droughts (D, 14–19 and 24–29 DAS) and rewatering (R, 19–24, and 29–34, respectively). Values are means (n = 4) + SD. The same letters above the bars indicate no statistically significant differences (p < 0.05) based on ANOVA and the Tukey post-hoc test for control plants (a–c, 14–34 DAS) or plants before and after soil droughts and followed by recoveries (A–C). The significant differences in FW between shoots after 5 days of drought or followed by rewatering plants and control plants (from the same day after sowing, DAS) were marked with an asterisk, based on the Student’s t-test (*, p < 0.05).
Figure 2. Changes in the fresh weight of the wheat (Triticum aestivum L., cv. Forkida) shoot during plant growth at control conditions (C) or exposed to short-term soil droughts (D, 14–19 and 24–29 DAS) and rewatering (R, 19–24, and 29–34, respectively). Values are means (n = 4) + SD. The same letters above the bars indicate no statistically significant differences (p < 0.05) based on ANOVA and the Tukey post-hoc test for control plants (a–c, 14–34 DAS) or plants before and after soil droughts and followed by recoveries (A–C). The significant differences in FW between shoots after 5 days of drought or followed by rewatering plants and control plants (from the same day after sowing, DAS) were marked with an asterisk, based on the Student’s t-test (*, p < 0.05).
Ijms 24 08429 g002
Ijms 24 08429 g003 550
Figure 3. PCA of metabolite profiles of wheat shoots during plant vegetation (14–34 DAS) at control conditions (A) and PCA loading plots of polar metabolites (B).
Figure 3. PCA of metabolite profiles of wheat shoots during plant vegetation (14–34 DAS) at control conditions (A) and PCA loading plots of polar metabolites (B).
Ijms 24 08429 g003
Ijms 24 08429 g004 550
Figure 4. PCA of metabolite profiles of shoots of control (C1 and C2) and droughted (D1 and D2) plants (samples collected at 19 and 29 DAS) (A). PCA loading plots of polar metabolites are shown in (B).
Figure 4. PCA of metabolite profiles of shoots of control (C1 and C2) and droughted (D1 and D2) plants (samples collected at 19 and 29 DAS) (A). PCA loading plots of polar metabolites are shown in (B).
Ijms 24 08429 g004
Ijms 24 08429 g005 550
Figure 5. Changes in the concentration of selected polar metabolites, whose content increased under drought and decreased after rewatering (in both cycles) in wheat shoots: sucrose (A), glucose (B), fructose (C), 1-kestose (D), proline (E), and malic acid (F). Values are means (n = 4) ± SD. Abbreviation as in Figure 2.
Figure 5. Changes in the concentration of selected polar metabolites, whose content increased under drought and decreased after rewatering (in both cycles) in wheat shoots: sucrose (A), glucose (B), fructose (C), 1-kestose (D), proline (E), and malic acid (F). Values are means (n = 4) ± SD. Abbreviation as in Figure 2.
Ijms 24 08429 g005
Ijms 24 08429 g006 550
Figure 6. PCA of metabolite profiles of shoots of droughted (D1 and D2; samples collected at the 19th and 29th DAS) and rewatered (R1 and R2; samples collected at the 24th and 34th DAS) plants (A). PCA loading plots of polar metabolites are shown in (B). Hierarchical cluster analysis (HCA, C).
Figure 6. PCA of metabolite profiles of shoots of droughted (D1 and D2; samples collected at the 19th and 29th DAS) and rewatered (R1 and R2; samples collected at the 24th and 34th DAS) plants (A). PCA loading plots of polar metabolites are shown in (B). Hierarchical cluster analysis (HCA, C).
Ijms 24 08429 g006
Table
Table 1. The concentration (in mg g−1 DW) of polar metabolites in wheat shoots (Triticum aestivum L., cv. Forkida) during 20 days of plant vegetation (from the 14th to the 34th DAS) at optimal soil moisture (control), after 5 days of watering withdrawal from the 14th to the 19th and from the 24th to the 29th DAS (drought, D1 and D2, respectively) and followed by rewatering for 5 days, between the 19th and 24th and between the 29th and 34th DAS (R1 and R2, respectively). Statistical abbreviation as shown in Figure 2.
Table 1. The concentration (in mg g−1 DW) of polar metabolites in wheat shoots (Triticum aestivum L., cv. Forkida) during 20 days of plant vegetation (from the 14th to the 34th DAS) at optimal soil moisture (control), after 5 days of watering withdrawal from the 14th to the 19th and from the 24th to the 29th DAS (drought, D1 and D2, respectively) and followed by rewatering for 5 days, between the 19th and 24th and between the 29th and 34th DAS (R1 and R2, respectively). Statistical abbreviation as shown in Figure 2.
ControlDrought (D)/Rewatering (R)
DAS1419242934D1
14–19		R1
19–24		D2
24–29		R2
29–34
Metabolitesmg g−1 DW
TIPMs, including:33.74 aE11.99 c14.47 c14.19 c26.96 b84.18 B*57.56 C*95.65 A*48.52 D*
TSCs, including:12.05 bE6.12 c9.75 bc10.84 b22.17 a59.18 B*33.09 C*64.12 A*28.20 D*
fructose2.50 aB1.16 b0.85 b1.14 b2.45 a10.85 A*4.18 B*10.09 A*3.97 B*
galactose0.00 aB0.04 a0.05 a0.18 a0.27 a1.21 A*0.37 B0.10 B0.07 B
glucose3.92 bD2.00 b2.53 b4.35 b10.70 a15.45 B*8.06 C*19.76 A*9.45 C
sucrose2.43 cD2.17 c5.73 b4.56 b7.63 a28.24 A*17.70 B*31.22 A*12.40 C*
galactinol0.10 aA0.03 c0.02 c0.03 c0.06 b0.07 B*0.08 AB*0.00 C*0.00 C*
raffinose0.53 aBC0.19 b0.23 b0.17 b0.17 b0.45 C*1.11 A*0.89 AB*0.52 BC*
1-kestose0.00 bC0.02 b0.04 b0.02 b0.14 a0.78 A*0.11 BC*0.27 B*0.00 C*
myo-inositol0.40 aA0.09 bc0.06 c0.09 bc0.15 b0.32 B*0.20 C*0.46 A*0.29 B*
ribonic acid0.40 aC0.11 b0.17 b0.20 b0.39 a0.66 B*0.80 A*0.87 A*0.91 A*
fructose-6-phosphate1.77 aA0.31 b0.08 b0.09 b0.21 b1.14 B*0.49 C*0.46 C*0.58 C*
TPAAs, including:2.18 aC0.42 c0.56 c0.60 c1.05 b4.27 B*2.78 C*13.40 A*3.33 BC*
alanine0.05 aB0.02 a0.02 a0.04 a0.03 a0.13 B*0.12 B*0.26 A*0.11 B*
asparagine0.68 aA0.10 b0.13 b0.10 b0.14 b0.11 C0.67 A*0.25 BC*0.33 B*
aspartic acid0.29 aC0.05 c0.10 bc0.09 bc0.13 b0.31 C*0.58 A*0.30 C*0.44 B*
glutamine0.05 aA0.01 c0.02 c0.01 c0.03 b0.10 A*0.08 A*0.09 A*0.08 A*
glycine0.24 aB0.06 c0.07 c0.06 c0.11 b0.24 B*0.30 A*0.24 B*0.24 B*
isoleucine0.20 aB0.04 c0.05 c0.08 c0.15 b0.21 B*0.21 B*0.78 A*0.22 B*
leucine0.12 aB0.02 b0.03 b0.03 b0.04 b0.22 B*0.14 B*0.50 A*0.17 B*
phenylalanine0.03 aC0.01 b0.01 b0.01 b0.01 b0.16 B*0.03 C*0.53 A*0.07 C*
proline0.04 aD0.02 b0.01 b0.01 b0.01 b2.17 B*0.09 D*8.50 A*1.02 C*
serine0.43 aB0.09 b0.10 b0.14 b0.33 a0.34 B*0.48 B*0.93 A*0.52 B*
valine0.05 abC0.01 c0.01 c0.04 bc0.07 a0.27 B*0.08 C*1.01 A*0.15 C*
NTPAAs, including:1.61 aAB0.32 b0.34 b0.35 b0.47 b0.98 C*2.02 A*1.27 BC*1.14 BC*
hydroxyproline1.39 aAB0.27 b0.31 b0.32 b0.43 b0.70 C*1.69 A*0.99 BC*1.04 BC*
GABA0.22 aB0.05 b0.04 b0.03 b0.04 b0.27 AB*0.34 A*0.28 AB*0.10 C*
TOAs, including:3.96 aB1.47 bc1.60 bc1.26 c1.82 b8.10 A*7.66 A*8.43 A*7.62 A*
citric acid0.96 aB0.33 b0.28 b0.23 b0.29 b2.18 A*2.06 A*1.55 AB*1.77 AB*
fumaric acid0.07 aC0.04 b0.04 b0.03 b0.04 b0.05 C*0.14 AB*0.11 B*0.15 A*
malic acid2.26 aC0.93 c1.13 bc0.92 c1.36 b5.39 B*4.77 B*6.53 A*5.22 B*
oxalic acid0.06 aB0.02 b0.01 c0.01 c0.02 b0.13 A*0.06 B*0.06 B*0.07 B*
lactic acid0.13 aAB0.03 b0.02 b0.02 b0.03 b0.09 ABC*0.14 A*0.05 C*0.08 BC*
propanoic acid0.23 aA0.06 b0.04 bc0.02 c0.04 bc0.15 B*0.16 B*0.10 C*0.14 BC*
shikimic acid0.24 aB0.07 b0.09 b0.03 c0.05 c0.11 C0.34 A*0.03 D0.19 B*
TRCs, including:13.94 aA3.65 b2.21 c1.14 d1.45 cd11.65 A*12.00 A*8.43 B*8.23 B*
phosphoric acid13.93 aA3.65 b2.21 c1.13 d1.44 cd11.65 A*12.00 A*8.40 B*8.21 B*
urea0.01 aB0.00 a0.00 a0.01 a0.00 a0.00 C0.00 C*0.02 A0.02 A*
Abbreviations: DAS—day after sowing; TIPMs—total identified polar metabolites; TPAAS—total proteinogenic amino acids; TNAAs—total non-proteinogenic amino acids; TOAs—total organic acids; TRCs—total remaining compounds.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Szablińska-Piernik, J.; Lahuta, L.B. Polar Metabolites Profiling of Wheat Shoots (Triticum aestivum L.) under Repeated Short-Term Soil Drought and Rewatering. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24, 8429. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms24098429

AMA Style

Szablińska-Piernik J, Lahuta LB. Polar Metabolites Profiling of Wheat Shoots (Triticum aestivum L.) under Repeated Short-Term Soil Drought and Rewatering. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2023; 24(9):8429. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms24098429

Chicago/Turabian Style

Szablińska-Piernik, Joanna, and Lesław Bernard Lahuta. 2023. "Polar Metabolites Profiling of Wheat Shoots (Triticum aestivum L.) under Repeated Short-Term Soil Drought and Rewatering" International Journal of Molecular Sciences 24, no. 9: 8429. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms24098429

APA Style

Szablińska-Piernik, J., & Lahuta, L. B. (2023). Polar Metabolites Profiling of Wheat Shoots (Triticum aestivum L.) under Repeated Short-Term Soil Drought and Rewatering. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 24(9), 8429. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms24098429

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop