Advertisement

Molecular Approaches and Salt Tolerance Mechanisms in Leguminous Plants

  • Sagar S. Datir
  • Mohit Kochle
  • Shruti Jindal
Chapter

Abstract

Legumes are one of the most important food crops not only serving an excellent source for human nutrition around the world but also improving soil quality through biological nitrogen fixation. Its production and yield is mainly hampered by abiotic stresses. Among them salt stress is threatening legume production worldwide. Hence, considering the importance of legumes, it is essential to understand and develop the strategies to improve their performance under salt stress. To develop the salt stress-tolerant legume varieties requires knowledge of morphological, physiological as well as key biochemical processes along with molecular controls of salt traits at different plant development stages. Molecular approaches such as transgenics, molecular marker-assisted selection, gene expression microarray, genomics, transgenomics, transcriptomics, and proteomics have identified several key factors, proteins, and genes in different cellular pathways underlying salt stress tolerance in leguminous crops. Both genetic engineering and molecular marker-assisted selection are efficient approaches to the development of salt-tolerant legumes. Omics approaches led to the identification of various metabolites as well as functional and regulatory genes in response to salt stress which not only provide new avenues to understand key molecular mechanisms underlying salt stress tolerance but also eventually beneficial to produce stress-tolerant legumes with improved characteristics. The aim of this chapter is to provide an overview on salt tolerance mechanism and also briefly discuss about molecular approaches in improvement of leguminous crops.

Keywords

Legume Molecular mechanisms Proteomics Salt Transcriptomics Transgenic 

Abbreviations

APX

Ascorbate peroxidase

ISSR

Inter simple sequence repeat

NGS

Next-generation sequencing

POX

Peroxidase

QTL

Quantitative trait loci

RAPD

Rapid amplified polymorphic DNA

RILs

Recombinant inbred lines

SNPs

Single nucleotide polymorphisms

SOD

superoxide dismutase

ST

salt stress

Notes

Acknowledgments

Authors are extremely grateful to Prof. R. N. Gacche, Head, Department of Biotechnology, for his valuable insights. We also thank Mr. Keshav Jindal for helping us in artwork.

References

  1. Abdelrahman M, Jogaiah S, Burritt DJ, Tran LSP (2017) Legume genetic resources and transcriptome dynamics under abiotic stress conditions. Plant Cell Environ 2018:1–12Google Scholar
  2. Ahmad P, Arafat AH, Latef A, Rasool S, Akram NA, Ashraf M, Gucel S (2016) Role of proteomics in crop stress tolerance. Front Plant Sci 7:1336.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2016.01336CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. Alejandra AC, Reyes JL (2010) Post-transcriptional gene regulation of salinity and drought responses by plant microRNAs. Plant Cell Environ 33:481–489CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Anjum NA (2016) Book review: legumes under environmental stress: yield, improvement and adaptations. Front Plant Sci 7:798.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2016.00798CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. Arraouadi S, Chardon F, Huguet T, Aouani ME, Badri M (2011) QTL mapping of morphological traits related to salt tolerance in Medicago truncatula. Acta Physiol Plant 33:917–929Google Scholar
  6. Aydi S, Sassi S, Debouba M, Hessini K, Larrainzar E, Gouia H, Abdelly C (2010) Resistance of Medicago truncatula to salt stress is related to glutamine synthetase activity and sodium sequestration. J Plant Nutr Soil Sci 173:892–899CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Baloda A, Madanpotra S, Jaiwal PK (2017) Transformation of mung bean plants for abiotic stress tolerance by introducing codA gene, for an osmoprotectant glycine betaine. J Plant Stress Physiol.  https://doi.org/10.19071/jpsp.2017.v3.3148
  8. Banavath JN, Chakradhar T, Pandit V, Konduru S, Guduru KK, Akila CS, Podha S, Puli COR (2018) Stress inducible overexpression of AtHDG11 leads to improved drought and salt stress tolerance in peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.). Front Chem 6:34.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fchem.2018.00034CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. Banjara M, Zhu L, Shen G, Payton P, Zhang H (2012) Expression of an Arabidopsis sodium/proton antiporter gene (AtNHX1) in peanut to improve salt tolerance. Plant Biotechnol Rep 6:59–67.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11816-011-0200-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bargaz A, Zaman-Allah M, Farissi M, Lazali M, Drevon JJ, Maougal RT, Carlsson G (2015) Physiological and molecular aspects of tolerance to environmental constraints in grain and forage legumes. Int J Mol Sci 16:18976–19008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Barkla BJ (2016) Identification of abiotic stress protein biomarkers by proteomic screening of crop cultivar diversity. Proteomes 4:26.  https://doi.org/10.3390/proteomes4030026CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. Bruning B, Logtestijn RV, Broekman R, de Vos A, González AP, Rozema J (2015) Growth and nitrogen fixation of legumes at increased salinity under field conditions: implications for the use of green manures in saline environments. AoB Plants 7:plv010.  https://doi.org/10.1093/aobpla/plv010CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. Choudhary AK, Sultanab R, Valesc MI, Saxena KB, Kumar RR, Ratnakumare K (2018) Integrated physiological and molecular approaches to improvement of abiotic stress tolerance in two pulse crops of the semi-arid tropics. Crop J 6:99–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Deshmukh R, Sonah H, Patil G, Chen W, Prince S, Mutava R, Vuong T, Valliyodan B, Nguyen HT (2014) Integrating omic approaches for abiotic stress tolerance in soybean. Front Plant Sci 2014:244.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2014.00244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Farooq M, Gogoi N, Hussain M, Barthakur S, Paul S, Bharadwaj N, Migdadi HM, Alghamdi SS, Siddique KHM (2017) Effects, tolerance mechanisms and management of salt stress in grain legumes. Plant Physiol Biochem 118:199–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Faghire M, Farissi M, Bargaz A, Mandri B, Oufdou K, Amenc L, Cherki G, Drevon JJ (2013) Genotypic variation of nodules enzymatic activities in symbiotic nitrogen fixation among common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) genotypes grown under salinity constraint. Symbiosis 60:115–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Farissi M, Faghire M, Bouizgaren A, Bargaz A, Makoudi B, Ghoulam C (2014) Growth, nutrients concentrations and enzymes involved in plants nutrition of alfalfa populations under saline conditions. J Agric Sci Technol 16:301–314Google Scholar
  18. Farissi M, Ghoulam C, Bouizgaren A (2013) Changes in water deficit saturation and photosynthetic pigments of Alfalfa populations under salinity and assessment of proline role in salt tolerance. Agric Sci Res J 3:29–35Google Scholar
  19. Garg R, Shankar R, Thakkar B, Kudapa H, Krishnamurthy L, Mantri N, Varshney RK, Bhatia S (2016) Transcriptome analyses reveal genotype- and developmental stage-specific molecular responses to drought and salinity stresses in chickpea. Sci Rep 6:19228.  https://doi.org/10.1038/srep19228CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. Ge Y, Li Y, Zhu YM, Bai X, Lv DK, Guo D, Ji W, Cai H (2010) Global transcriptome profiling of wild soybean (Glycine soja) roots under NaHCO3 treatment. BMC Plant Biol 10:153.  https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2229-10-153CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. Gill SS, Tuteja N (2010) Reactive oxygen species and antioxidant machinery in abiotic stress tolerance in crop plants. Plant Physiol Biochem 48:909–930CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hernández-Lucero E, Rodríguez-Hernández AA, Ortega-Amaro MA, Jiménez-Bremont JF (2014) Differential expression of genes for tolerance to salt stress in common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Plant Mol Biol Report 32:318–327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hiz MC, Canher B, Niron H, Turet M (2014) Transcriptome analysis of salt tolerant common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) under saline conditions. PLoS One 9:e92598.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0092598CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. Hossain Z, Khatoon A, Komatsu S (2013) Soybean proteomics for unraveling abiotic stress response mechanism. J Proteome Res 12:4670–4684CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hu J, Rampitsch C, Bykova NV (2015) Advances in plant proteomics toward improvement of crop productivity and stress resistance. Front Plant Sci 6:209.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2015.00209CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. Ji W, Cong R, Li S, Li R, Qin Z, Li Y, Zhou X, Chen S, Li J (2016) Comparative proteomic analysis of soybean leaves and roots by iTRAQ provides insights into response mechanisms to short-term salt stress. Front Plant Sci 7:573.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2016.00573CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. Joseph B, Jini D (2010) Proteomic analysis of salinity stress-responsive proteins in plants. Asian J Plant Sci 9:307–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kaashyap M, Ford R, Kudapa H, Jain M, Edwards D, Varshney RK, Mantri N (2018) Differential regulation of genes involved in root morphogenesis and cell wall modification is associated with salinity tolerance in chickpea. Sci Rep 8:4855CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kant C, Pandey V, Verma S, Tiwari M, Kumar S, Bhatia S (2017) Transcriptome analysis in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.): applications in study of gene expression, non-coding RNA prediction, and molecular marker development. Intech 2017, pp 245–263Google Scholar
  30. Kesari V, Rangan L (2010) Development of Pongamia pinnata as an alternative biofuel crop – current status and scope of plantations in India. J Crop Sci Biotechnol 13:127–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Khandal H, Parween S, Roy R, Meena MK, Chattopadhyay D (2017) MicroRNA profiling provides insights into post-transcriptional regulation of gene expression in chickpea root apex under salinity and water deficiency. Sci Rep 7:4632CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Khan HA, Siddique KH, Munir R, Colmer TD (2015) Salt sensitivity in chickpea: growth, photosynthesis, seed yield components and tissue ion regulation in contrasting genotypes. J Plant Physiol 182:1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kohli D, Joshi G, Deokar AA, Bhardwaj AR, Agarwal M, Katiyar-Agarwal S, Srinivasan R, Jain PK (2014) Identification and characterization of wilt and salt stress-responsive microRNAs in chickpea through highthroughput sequencing. PLoS One 9:e108851.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0108851CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  34. Kumar S, Kalita A, Srivastava R, Sahoo L (2017) Co-expression of Arabidopsis NHX1 and bar improves the tolerance to salinity, oxidative stress, and herbicide in transgenic Mungbean. Front Plant Sci 2017:1896.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2017.01896CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Latrach L, Farissi M, Mouradi M, Makoudi B, Bouizgaren A, Ghoulam C (2014) Growth and nodulation in alfalfa-rhizobia symbiosis under salinity: effect on electrolyte leakage, stomatal conductance and chlorophyll fluorescence. Turk J Agric For 38:320–326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Li D, Zhang Y, Hu X, Shen X, Ma L, Su Z, Wang T, Dong J (2011) Transcriptional profiling of Medicago truncatula under salt stress identified a novel CBF transcription factor MtCBF4 that plays an important role in abiotic stress responses. BMC Plant Biol 11:109.  https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2229-11-109CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  37. Long R, Li M, Zhang T, Kang J, Sun Y, Cong L, Gao Y, Liu F, Yang Q (2016) Comparative proteomic analysis reveals differential root proteins in Medicago sativa and Medicago truncatula in response to salt stress. Front Plant Sci 7:424PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  38. Leonforte A, Sudheesh S, Cogan NOI, Salisbury PA, Nicolas ME, Materne M, Forster JW, Kaur S (2013) SNP marker discovery, linkage map construction and identification of QTLs for enhanced salinity tolerance in field pea (Pisum sativum L.). BMC Plant Biol 13:161.  https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2229-13-161CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  39. Liu S, Hao H, Lu X, Zhao X, Wang Y, Zhang Y, Xie Z, Wang R (2017) Transcriptome profiling of genes involved in induced systemic salt tolerance conferred by Bacillus amyloliquefaciens FZB42 in Arabidopsis thaliana. Sci Rep 7:10795.  https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-11308-8CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  40. Lüscher A, Mueller-Harvey I, Soussana JF, Rees RM, Peyraud JL (2014) Potential of legume-based grassland–livestock systems in Europe: a review. Grass Forage Sci 69:206–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Lv Y, Liang Z, Ge M, Qi W, Zhang T, Lin F et al (2016) Genome-wide identification and functional prediction of nitrogen-responsive intergenic and intronic long non-coding RNAs in maize (Zea mays L.). BMC Genomics 17:350.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s12864-016-2650-1CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  42. Ma H, Song L, Huang Z, Yang Y, Wang S, Wang W, Tong J, Gu W, Ma H, Xiao L (2014) Comparative proteomic analysis reveals molecular mechanism of seedling roots of different salt tolerant soybean genotypes in responses to salinity stress. EuPA Open Proteom 4:40–57Google Scholar
  43. Mahgoub HAM, Sofy AR, Abdel-Azeem EA, Abo-Zahra MS (2016) Molecular markers associated with salt-tolerance of different soybean (Glycine max L.) cultivars under salt stress. Int J Adv Res Biol Sci 3:241–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Mhadhbi H, Fotopoulos V, Mylona PV, Jebara M, Elarbi Aouani M, Polidoros AN (2011) Antioxidant gene–enzyme responses in Medicago truncatula genotypes with different degree of sensitivity to salinity. Physiol Plant 141:201–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Molina C, Zaman-Allah M, Khan F, Fatnassi N, Horres R, Rotter B, Steinhauer D, Amenc L, Drevon JJ, Winter P, Kahl G (2011) The salt-responsive transcriptome of chickpea roots and nodules via deep super SAGE. BMC Plant Biol 11:31.  https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2229-11-31CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  46. Ouyang SQ, Liu YF, Liu P, Lei G, He SJ, Ma B, Zhang WK, Zhang JS, Chen SY (2010) Receptor-like kinase OsSIK1 improves drought and salt stress tolerance in rice (Oryza sativa) plants. Plant J 62:316–329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Pandey MK, Roorkiwal M, Singh VK, Ramalingam A, Kudapa H, Thudi M, Chitikineni A, Rathore A, Varshney RK (2016) Emerging genomic tools for legume breeding: current status and future prospects. Front Plant Sci 7:455.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2016.00455CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  48. Patil G, Do T, Vuong TD, Valliyodan B, Lee JD, Chaudhary J, Shannon JG, Nguyen T (2016) Genomic-assisted haplotype analysis and the development of high-throughput SNP markers for salinity tolerance in soybean. Sci Rep 6:19199.  https://doi.org/10.1038/srep19199CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  49. Qin H, Gu Q, Kuppu S, Sun L, Zhu X, Mishra N, Hu R, Shen G, Zhang J, Zhang Y, Zhu L, Zhang X, Burow M, Payton P, Zhang H (2013) Expression of the Arabidopsis vacuolar H+-pyrophosphatase gene AVP1 in peanut to improve drought and salt tolerance. Plant Biotechnol Rep 7:345–355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Salwa AO, Mekki BB, Faida AS (2013) Alleviation of adverse effects of salt stress on faba bean (Vicia faba L.) plants by exogenous application of salicylic acid. World Appl Sci J 27:418–427Google Scholar
  51. Schmutz J, Cannon SB, Schlueter J, Ma J, Mitros T, Nelson W, Hyten DL, Song Q, Thelen JJ, Cheng J, Xu D, Hellsten U, May GD, Yu Y, Sakurai T, Umezawa T, Bhattacharyya MK, Sandhu D, Valliyodan B, Lindquist E, Peto M, Grant D, Shu S, Goodstein D, Barry K, Futrell-Griggs M, Abernathy B, Du J, Tian Z, Zhu L, Gill N, Joshi T, Libault M, Sethuraman A, Zhang XC, Shinozaki K, Nguyen HT, Wing RA, Cregan P, Specht J, Grimwood J, Rokhsar D, Stacey G, Shoemaker RC, Jackson SA (2010) Genome sequence of the palaeopolyploid soybean. Nature 463:178–183.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nature08670CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Sha PS, Khan V, Basha PO (2015) Salt stress and leguminous crops: present status and prospects. In: Azooz MM, Ahmad P (eds) Legumes under environmental stress: yield, improvement and adaptations, 1st edn. Wiley, ChichesterGoogle Scholar
  53. Shi XL, Yan L, Yang CY, Yan W, Moseley DO, Wang T, Liu BQ, Di R, Chen PY, Zhang MC (2018) Identification of a major quantitative trait locus underlying salt tolerance in ‘Jidou 12’ soybean cultivar. BMC Res Notes 11:95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Sobhanian H, Razavizadeh R, Nanjo Y, Ehsanpour AA, Jazii FR, Motamed N, Komastu S (2010) Proteome analysis of soybean leaves, hypocotyls and roots under salt stress. Proteome Sci 8:19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Song Q, Jia G, Zhu Y, Grant D, Nelson RT, Hwang EY, Hyten DL, Cregan PB (2010) Abundance of SSR motifs and development of candidate polymorphic SSR markers (BARCSOYSSR_1. 0) in soybean. Crop Sci 50:1950–1960.  https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2009.10.0607CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Tang L, Cai H, Ji W, Luo X, Wang Z, Wu J, Wang X, Cui L, Wang Y, Zhu Y, Bai X (2013) Overexpression of GsZFP1 enhances salt and drought tolerance in transgenic alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.). Plant Physiol Biochem 71:22–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Tang H, Krishnakumar V, Bidwell S, Rosen B, Chan A, Zhou S, Gentzbittel L, Childs KL, Yandell M, Gundlach H, Mayer KFX, Schwartz DC, Town CD (2014) An improved genome release (version Mt4.0) for the model legume Medicago truncatula. Genome 15:312Google Scholar
  58. Tuyen DD, Lal SK, Xu DH (2010) Identification of a major QTL allele from wild soybean (Glycine soja Sieb. & Zucc.) for increasing alkaline salt tolerance in soybean. Theor Appl Genet 121:229–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Varshney RK, Roorkiwal M, Nguyen HT (2013) Legume genomics: from genomic resources to molecular breeding. Plant Genome 6:1–7Google Scholar
  60. Wang T-Z, Liu M, Zhao M-G, Chen R, Zhang W-H (2015) Identification and characterization of long non-coding RNAs involved in osmotic and salt stress in Medicago truncatula using genome-wide high-throughput sequencing. BMC Plant Biol 15:131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Wang J, Meng X, Dobrovolskaya OB, Orlov YL, Chen M (2017) Non-coding RNAs and their roles in stress response in plants. Genom Proteom Bioinform 15:301–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Xiong J, Sun Y, Yang Q, Tian H, Zhang H, Liu Y, Chen M (2017) Proteomic analysis of early salt stress responsive proteins in alfalfa roots and shoots. Proteome Sci 15:19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Xu XW, Zhou XH, Wang RR, Peng WL, An Y, Chen LL (2016) Functional analysis of long intergenic non-coding RNAs in phosphate-starved rice using competing endogenous RNA network. Sci Rep 6:20715.  https://doi.org/10.1038/srep20715CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  64. Yaish MW, Colasanti J, Rothstein SJ (2011) The role of epigenetic processes in controlling flowering time in plants exposed to stress. J Exp Bot 62:3727–3735CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Zahaf O, Blanchet S, de Źelicourt A, Alunni B, Plet J, Laffont C, de Lorenzo L, Imbeaud S, Ichanté JL, Diet A, Badri M, Zabalza A, González EM, Delacroix H, Gruber V, Frugier F, Crespi M (2012) Comparative transcriptomic analysis of salt adaptation in roots of contrasting Medicago truncatula genotypes. Mol Plant 5:1068–1081CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Zhang JL, Shi H (2013) Physiological and molecular mechanisms of plant salt tolerance. Photosynth Res 115:1–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Zhang WJ, Wang T (2015) Enhanced salt tolerance of alfalfa (Medicago sativa) by rstB gene transformation. Plant Sci 234:110–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sagar S. Datir
    • 1
  • Mohit Kochle
    • 1
  • Shruti Jindal
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of BiotechnologySavitribai Phule Pune UniversityPuneIndia

Personalised recommendations