#PAGE_PARAMS# #ADS_HEAD_SCRIPTS# #MICRODATA#

Multi-dimensional evaluation of response to salt stress in wheat


Autoři: Said Dadshani aff001;  Ram C. Sharma aff002;  Michael Baum aff003;  Francis Chuks Ogbonnaya aff004;  Jens Léon aff001;  Agim Ballvora aff001
Působiště autorů: INRES Plant Breeding, Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-University, Bonn, Germany aff001;  International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA), Tashkent, Uzbekistan aff002;  International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA), Rabat, Morocco aff003;  Grains Research and Development Corporation, Barton, ACT, Australia aff004
Vyšlo v časopise: PLoS ONE 14(9)
Kategorie: Research Article
doi: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222659

Souhrn

Soil salinity is a major threat to crop production worldwide. The global climate change is further accelerating the process of soil salinization, particularly in dry areas of the world. Increasing genetic variability of currently used wheat varieties by introgression of exotic alleles/genes from related progenitors’ species in breeding programs is an efficient approach to overcome limitations due to the absence of valuable genetic diversity in elite cultivars. Synthetic hexaploid wheat (SHW) is widely regarded as donor of favourable exotic alleles to improve tolerance against biotic and abiotic stresses such as salinity stress. In this study, synthetic backcross lines (SBLs) winter wheat population “Z86”, derived from crosses involving synthetic hexaploid wheat Syn86L with German elite winter wheat cultivar Zentos, was evaluated for salinity tolerance at different developmental stages under controlled and field conditions in three growing seasons. High genetic variability was detected across the SBLs and their parents at various growth stages under controlled as well as under salt stress field trials. Greater performance of Zentos over Syn86L was detected at germination stage across all salt treatments and with respect to shoot dry weight (SDW) and root dry weight (RDW) at seedling stage. Whereas for the root length (RL) and the shoot length (SL) Syn86L surpassed the elite cultivar and most of the progenies. Our experiments revealed for almost all traits that some genotypes among the SBLs showed higher performance than their parents. Furthermore, positive transgressive segregations were detected among the SBLs for germination at high salinity levels, as well as for RDW and SDW at seedling stage. Therefore, the studied Z86 population is a suitable population for assessment of salinity stress on morphological and physiological traits at different plant growth stages. The identified SBLs provide a valuable source for genetic gain through recombination of superior alleles that can be directly applied in breeding programs for efficiently breeding cultivars with improved salinity tolerance and desired agronomic traits.

Klíčová slova:

Genetic polymorphism – Leaves – Plant breeding – Plant resistance to abiotic stress – Salinity – Seed germination – Seedlings – Wheat


Zdroje

1. Ahmad P, Azooz M, Prasad MNV. Salt stress in plants: signalling, omics and adaptations: Springer Science & Business Media; 2013.

2. Luo J-Y, Zhang S, Peng J, Zhu X-Z, Lv L-M, Wang C-Y, et al. Effects of soil salinity on the expression of Bt toxin (Cry1Ac) and the control efficiency of Helicoverpa armigera in field-grown transgenic Bt cotton. PloS one. 2017;12(1):e0170379. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0170379 28099508

3. Shiferaw B, Smale M, Braun H-J, Duveiller E, Reynolds M, Muricho G. Crops that feed the world 10. Past successes and future challenges to the role played by wheat in global food security. Food Security. 2013;5(3):291–317. doi: 10.1007/s12571-013-0263-y

4. El-Hendawy SE, Hassan WM, Al-Suhaibani NA, Refay Y, Abdella KA. Comparative performance of multivariable agro-physiological parameters for detecting salt tolerance of wheat cultivars under simulated saline field growing conditions. Frontiers in plant science. 2017;8:435. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2017.00435 28424718

5. Chabot P, Tondel F. A Regional View of Wheat Markets and Food Security in Central Asia: With a Focus on Afghanistan and Tajikistan. United Stated Agency for International Development Famine Early Warning Systems Network FEWS NET, United States. 2011.

6. Genc Y, Mcdonald GK, Tester M. Reassessment of tissue Na+ concentration as a criterion for salinity tolerance in bread wheat. Plant, cell & environment. 2007;30(11):1486–98.

7. Flowers T, Troke P, Yeo A. The mechanism of salt tolerance in halophytes. Annual review of plant physiology. 1977;28(1):89–121.

8. Munns R, Tester M. Mechanisms of salinity tolerance. Annu Rev Plant Biol. 2008;59:651–81. doi: 10.1146/annurev.arplant.59.032607.092911 18444910

9. Adem GD, Roy SJ, Zhou M, Bowman JP, Shabala S. Evaluating contribution of ionic, osmotic and oxidative stress components towards salinity tolerance in barley. BMC Plant Biology. 2014;14(1):113.

10. Gupta B, Huang B. Mechanism of salinity tolerance in plants: physiological, biochemical, and molecular characterization. International journal of genomics. 2014;2014.

11. Rhodes D, Nadolska-Orczyk A, Rich P. Salinity, osmolytes and compatible solutes. Salinity: Environment-plants-molecules: Springer; 2002. p. 181–204.

12. Almeida DM, Oliveira MM, Saibo NJ. Regulation of Na+ and K+ homeostasis in plants: towards improved salt stress tolerance in crop plants. Genetics and molecular biology. 2017;(AHEAD):0-.

13. Munns R, James RA, Läuchli A. Approaches to increasing the salt tolerance of wheat and other cereals. Journal of Experimental Botany. 2006;57(5):1025–43. doi: 10.1093/jxb/erj100 16510517

14. Roy SJ, Negrão S, Tester M. Salt resistant crop plants. Current Opinion in Biotechnology. 2014;26:115–24. doi: 10.1016/j.copbio.2013.12.004 24679267

15. Munns R. Genes and salt tolerance: bringing them together. New Phytologist. 2005;167(3):645–63. ISI:000230995000004. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8137.2005.01487.x 16101905

16. Genc Y, Oldach K, Taylor J, Lyons GH. Uncoupling of sodium and chloride to assist breeding for salinity tolerance in crops. New Phytologist. 2016;210(1):145–56. doi: 10.1111/nph.13757 26607560

17. Li Q, Yang A, Zhang W-H. Comparative studies on tolerance of rice genotypes differing in their tolerance to moderate salt stress. BMC Plant Biology. 2017;17(1):141. doi: 10.1186/s12870-017-1089-0 28814283

18. Mansour MMF. The plasma membrane transport systems and adaptation to salinity. Journal of plant physiology. 2014;171(18):1787–800. doi: 10.1016/j.jplph.2014.08.016 25262536

19. Asada K. Production and scavenging of reactive oxygen species in chloroplasts and their functions. Plant physiology. 2006;141(2):391–6. doi: 10.1104/pp.106.082040 16760493

20. Lawlor DW, Tezara W. Causes of decreased photosynthetic rate and metabolic capacity in water-deficient leaf cells: a critical evaluation of mechanisms and integration of processes. Annals of botany. 2009;103(4):561–79. doi: 10.1093/aob/mcn244 19155221

21. Munns R, Gilliham M. Salinity tolerance of crops–what is the cost? New Phytologist. 2015;208(3):668–73. doi: 10.1111/nph.13519 26108441

22. Kawasaki S, Borchert C, Deyholos M, Wang H, Brazille S, Kawai K, et al. Gene expression profiles during the initial phase of salt stress in rice. The Plant Cell. 2001;13(4):889–905. doi: 10.1105/tpc.13.4.889 11283343

23. Geilfus C-M, Niehaus K, Gödde V, Hasler M, Zörb C, Gorzolka K, et al. Fast responses of metabolites in Vicia faba L. to moderate NaCl stress. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry. 2015;92:19–29. doi: 10.1016/j.plaphy.2015.04.008 25900421

24. Flowers TJ. Improving crop salt tolerance. Journal of Experimental Botany. 2004;55(396):307–19. ISI:000188634500004. doi: 10.1093/jxb/erh003 14718494

25. Sanchez DH, Pieckenstain FL, Szymanski J, Erban A, Bromke M, Hannah MA, et al. Comparative functional genomics of salt stress in related model and cultivated plants identifies and overcomes limitations to translational genomics. PloS one. 2011;6(2):e17094. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0017094 21347266

26. Foolad MR. Comparison of salt tolerance during seed germination and vegetative growth in tomato by QTL mapping. Genome. 1999;42(4):727–34. ISI:000082079800024.

27. Munns R. Plant adaptations to salt and water stress: differences and commonalities. Advances in botanical research. 2011;57:1–32.

28. Flowers TJ, Yeo AR. Breeding for salinity resistance in crop plants: Where next? Australian Journal of Plant Physiology. 1995;22(6):875–84. ISI:A1995TK57900002.

29. Wilson LM, Whitt SR, Ibáñez AM, Rocheford TR, Goodman MM, Buckler ES. Dissection of maize kernel composition and starch production by candidate gene association. The Plant Cell. 2004;16(10):2719–33. doi: 10.1105/tpc.104.025700 15377761

30. Wilson C, Lesch SM, Grieve CM. Growth stage modulates salinity tolerance of New Zealand spinach (Tetragonia tetragonioides, Pall.) and red orach (Atriplex hortensis L.). Annals of Botany. 2000;85(4):501–9.

31. Läuchli A, Grattan S. Plant growth and development under salinity stress. Advances in molecular breeding toward drought and salt tolerant crops: Springer; 2007. p. 1–32.

32. Maas E, Grieve C. Spike and leaf development of sal-stressed wheat. Crop Science. 1990;30(6):1309–13.

33. Mano Y, Takeda K. Mapping quantitative trait loci for salt tolerance at germination and the seedling stage in barley (Hordeum vulgare L). Euphytica. 1997;94(3):263–72. ISI:A1997XG81500002.

34. Shannon MC. Adaptation of plants to salinity. Advances in agronomy. 1997;60:75–120.

35. Munns R, James RA. Screening methods for salinity tolerance: a case study with tetraploid wheat. Plant and soil. 2003;253(1):201–18.

36. Shannon M, Qualset C. Benefits and limitations in breeding salt-tolerant crops. California Agriculture. 1984;38(10):33–4.

37. Ashraf M, Akram NA. Improving salinity tolerance of plants through conventional breeding and genetic engineering: an analytical comparison. Biotechnology advances. 2009;27(6):744–52. doi: 10.1016/j.biotechadv.2009.05.026 19500659

38. Oyiga BC, Sharma R, Shen J, Baum M, Ogbonnaya F, Léon J, et al. Identification and characterization of salt tolerance of wheat germplasm using a multivariable screening approach. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science. 2016;202(6):472–85.

39. Tanksley SD, McCouch SR. Seed banks and molecular maps: unlocking genetic potential from the wild. Science. 1997;277(5329):1063–6. doi: 10.1126/science.277.5329.1063 9262467

40. Nevo E, Chen G. Drought and salt tolerances in wild relatives for wheat and barley improvement. Plant, cell & environment. 2010;33(4):670–85.

41. De León JLD, Escoppinichi R, Geraldo N, Castellanos T, Mujeeb-Kazi A, Röder MS. Quantitative trait loci associated with salinity tolerance in field grown bread wheat. Euphytica. 2011;181(3):371–83.

42. Puntamkar S, Sharma D, Sharma O, Seth S. Effect of common salts of sodium and calcium on the germination of different wheat varieties (Triticum aestivum L.). Indian Journal of Plant Physiology. 1970;13:233–9.

43. Sharma R. Genotypic Response to Salt Stress: I–Relative Tolerance of Certain Wheat Cultivars to Salinity. Advances in Crop Science and Technology. 2015.

44. Sayed HI. Diversity of salt tolerance in a germplasm collection of wheat (Triticum spp.). TAG Theoretical and Applied Genetics. 1985;69(5):651–7.

45. Colmer TD, Flowers TJ, Munns R. Use of wild relatives to improve salt tolerance in wheat. Journal of Experimental Botany. 2006;57(5):1059–78. doi: 10.1093/jxb/erj124 16513812

46. Lange W, Jochemsen G. Use of the Gene Pools of Triticum-Turgidum Ssp Dicoccoides and Aegilops-Squarrosa for the Breeding of Common Wheat (Triticum-Aestivum), through Chromosome-Doubled Hybrids. 1. Strategies for the Production of the Amphiploids. Euphytica. 1992;59(2–3):197–212. doi: 10.1007/Bf00041273 WOS:A1992JB97400015.

47. Ogbonnaya FC, Abdalla O, Mujeeb‐Kazi A, Kazi AG, Xu SS, Gosman N, et al. Synthetic hexaploids: harnessing species of the primary gene pool for wheat improvement. Plant Breeding Reviews, Volume 37. 2013:35–122.

48. Juenger TE, Mckay JK, Hausmann N, Keurentjes JJ, Sen S, Stowe KA, et al. Identification and characterization of QTL underlying whole‐plant physiology in Arabidopsis thaliana: δ13C, stomatal conductance and transpiration efficiency. Plant, Cell & Environment. 2005;28(6):697–708.

49. Dreisigacker S, Kishii M, Lage J, Warburton M. Use of synthetic hexaploid wheat to increase diversity for CIMMYT bread wheat improvement. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research. 2008;59(5):413–20.

50. Kunert A, Naz AA, Dedeck O, Pillen K, Léon J. AB-QTL analysis in winter wheat: I. Synthetic hexaploid wheat (T. turgidum ssp. dicoccoides× T. tauschii) as a source of favourable alleles for milling and baking quality traits. Theoretical and Applied Genetics. 2007;115(5):683–95. doi: 10.1007/s00122-007-0600-7 17634917

51. Tanksley S, Nelson J. Advanced backcross QTL analysis: a method for the simultaneous discovery and transfer of valuable QTLs from unadapted germplasm into elite breeding lines. Theoretical and Applied Genetics. 1996;92(2):191–203. doi: 10.1007/BF00223376 24166168

52. Dadshani SAW. Genetic and physiological characterization of traits related to salinity tolerance in an advanced backcross population of wheat: Universitäts-und Landesbibliothek Bonn; 2018.

53. Badridze G, Weidner A, Asch F, Börner A. Variation in salt tolerance within a Georgian wheat germplasm collection. Genetic resources and crop evolution. 2009;56(8):1125–30.

54. Mano Y, Nakazumi H, Takeda K. Varietal variation in and effects of some major genes on salt tolerance at the germination stage in barley. Breeding Science. 1996;46(3):227–33. ISI:A1996VK71000002.

55. Wasseranalyse [Internet]. 2013.

56. Shavrukov Y, Genc Y, Hayes J. The use of hydroponics in abiotic stress tolerance research. Hydroponics-A Standard Methodology for Plant Biological Researches: InTech; 2012.

57. Madejczyk M, Baralkiewicz D. Characterization of Polish rape and honeydew honey according to their mineral contents using ICP-MS and F-AAS/AES. Analytica Chimica Acta. 2008;617(1):11–7.

58. Sharma R, Duveiller E, Gyawali S, Shrestha S, Chaudhary N, Bhatta M. Resistance to Helminthosporium leaf blight and agronomic performance of spring wheat genotypes of diverse origins. Euphytica. 2004;139(1):33–44.

59. Fernandez GC, editor Effective selection criteria for assessing plant stress tolerance. Proceedings of the international symposium on adaptation of vegetables and other food crops in temperature and water stress; 1992.

60. Holland JB, Nyquist WE, Cervantes-Martínez CT. Estimating and interpreting heritability for plant breeding: an update. Plant breeding reviews. 2003;22:9–112.

61. SAS Institute C, NC, USA. The SAS system for Windows, release 9.4. TS Level 1M3. 2015.

62. Littell RC. Analysis of repeated measures data. 1990.

63. Chandna R, Azooz M, Ahmad P. Recent Advances of Metabolomics to Reveal Plant Response During Salt Stress. Salt Stress in Plants: Springer; 2013. p. 1–14.

64. Tardieu F, Varshney RK, Tuberosa R. Improving crop performance under drought–cross-fertilization of disciplines. Journal of Experimental Botany. 2017;68(7):1393–8. doi: 10.1093/jxb/erx042 28338855

65. Díaz De León J, Escoppinichi R, Zavala-Fonseca R, Castellanos T, Röder M, Mujeeb-Kazi A. Phenotypic and genotypic characterization of salt-tolerant wheat genotypes. Cereal research communications. 2010;38(1):15–22.

66. Naz AA, Kunert A, Lind V, Pillen K, Léon J. AB-QTL analysis in winter wheat: II. Genetic analysis of seedling and field resistance against leaf rust in a wheat advanced backcross population. Theoretical and Applied Genetics. 2008;116(8):1095–104. doi: 10.1007/s00122-008-0738-y 18338154

67. Lauter D, Munns D. Salt resistance of chickpea genotypes in solutions salinized with NaCl or Na 2 SO 4. Plant and Soil. 1986;95(2):271–9.

68. Almansouri M, Kinet J-M, Lutts S. Effect of salt and osmotic stresses on germination in durum wheat (Triticum durum Desf.). Plant and soil. 2001;231(2):243–54.

69. Kent L, Läuchli A. Germination and seedling growth of cotton: Salinity‐calcium interactions. Plant, Cell & Environment. 1985;8(2):155–9.

70. Singh J, Sastry EVD, Singh V. Effect of salinity on tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) during seed germination stage. Physiology and Molecular Biology of Plants. 2012;18(1):45–50. doi: 10.1007/s12298-011-0097-z 23573039

71. Chinnusamy V, Jagendorf A, Zhu JK. Understanding and improving salt tolerance in plants. Crop Science. 2005;45(2):437–48. ISI:000227602700002.

72. Charu S, Vibhut, Kiran B, Bargali s. Influence of seed size and salt stress on seed germination and seedling growth of wheat (Triticum aestivum). Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences. 2015;85(9):1134–7.

73. Aflaki F, Sedghi M, Pazuki A, Pessarakli M. Investigation of seed germination indices for early selection of salinity tolerant genotypes: A case study in wheat. Emirates Journal of Food and Agriculture. 2017;29(3):222.

74. Muhammad I, Ogbonnaya F, Van Ginkel M, Oman J. Characterization of QTL controlling genetic variation for pre-harvest sprouting in synthetic backcross derived wheat lines. Genetics. 2008.

75. Flowers TJ, Flowers SA. Why does salinity pose such a difficult problem for plant breeders? Agricultural Water Management. 2005;78(1–2):15–24. ISI:000232036800003.

76. Wang H, Chen G, Zhang H, Liu B, Yang Y, Qin L, et al. Identification of QTLs for salt tolerance at germination and seedling stage of Sorghum bicolor L. Moench. Euphytica. 2014;196(1):117–27.

77. Munns R, Guo JM, Passioura JB, Cramer GR. Leaf water status controls day-time but not daily rates of leaf expansion in salt-treated barley. Australian Journal of Plant Physiology. 2000;27(10):949–57. ISI:000089790400008.

78. Narasimhamoorthy B, Gill B, Fritz A, Nelson J, Brown-Guedira G. Advanced backcross QTL analysis of a hard winter wheat× synthetic wheat population. Theoretical and Applied Genetics. 2006;112(5):787–96. doi: 10.1007/s00122-005-0159-0 16463062

79. Del Blanco I, Rajaram S, Kronstad W, Reynolds M. Physiological performance of synthetic hexaploid wheat-derived populations. Crop Science. 2000;40(5):1257–63.

80. Becker SR, Byrne PF, Reid SD, Bauerle WL, McKay JK, Haley SD. Root traits contributing to drought tolerance of synthetic hexaploid wheat in a greenhouse study. Euphytica. 2016;207(1):213–24.

81. Yang C, Yang Z, Zhao L, Sun F, Liu B. A newly formed hexaploid wheat exhibits immediate higher tolerance to nitrogen-deficiency than its parental lines. BMC plant biology. 2018;18(1):113. doi: 10.1186/s12870-018-1334-1 29879900

82. Lopes MS, Reynolds MP. Drought adaptive traits and wide adaptation in elite lines derived from resynthesized hexaploid wheat. Crop Science. 2011;51(4):1617–26.

83. Uga Y, Sugimoto K, Ogawa S, Rane J, Ishitani M, Hara N, et al. Control of root system architecture by DEEPER ROOTING 1 increases rice yield under drought conditions. Nature genetics. 2013;45(9):1097–102. doi: 10.1038/ng.2725 23913002

84. Lindsay MP, Lagudah ES, Hare RA, Munns R. A locus for sodium exclusion (Nax1), a trait for salt tolerance, mapped in durum wheat. Functional Plant Biology. 2004;31(11):1105–14. ISI:000225301200006.

85. Gorham J, Jones RW, Bristol A. Partial characterization of the trait for enhanced K+− Na+ discrimination in the D genome of wheat. Planta. 1990;180(4):590–7. doi: 10.1007/BF02411458 24202105

86. Gorham J, Bristol A, Young EM, Jones RGW, Kashour G. Salt Tolerance in the Triticeae—K/Na Discrimination in Barley. Journal of Experimental Botany. 1990;41(230):1095–101. ISI:A1990DY71000005.

87. Pritchard DJ, Hollington PA, Davies WP, Gorham J, de Leon JLD, Mujeeb-Kazi A. K+/Na+ discrimination in synthetic hexaploid wheat lines: Transfer of the trait for K+/Na+ discrimination from Aegilops tauschii into a Triticum turgidum background. Cereal Research Communications. 2002;30(3–4):261–7. ISI:000180339400004.

88. Talbot S, Ogbonnaya F, Chalmers K, Mather D, editors. Is synthetic hexaploid wheat a useful germplasm source for increasing grain size and yield in bread wheat breeding? 11th International Wheat Genetics Symposium 2008 Proceedings; 2008: Sydney University Press.

89. Sohail Q, Inoue T, Tanaka H, Eltayeb AE, Matsuoka Y, Tsujimoto H. Applicability of Aegilops tauschii drought tolerance traits to breeding of hexaploid wheat. Breeding science. 2011;61(4):347–57. doi: 10.1270/jsbbs.61.347 23136471

90. Dubcovsky J, Dvorak J. Genome plasticity a key factor in the success of polyploid wheat under domestication. Science. 2007;316(5833):1862–6. doi: 10.1126/science.1143986 17600208

91. Li A, Liu D, Yang W, Kishii M, Mao L. Synthetic Hexaploid Wheat: Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow. Engineering. 2018.

92. Francois L, Maas E, Donovan T, Youngs V. Effect of salinity on grain yield and quality, vegetative growth, and germination of semi-dwarf and durum wheat. Agronomy Journal. 1986;78(6):1053–8.

93. Mano Y, Takahashi H, Sato K, Takeda K. Mapping genes for callus growth and shoot regeneration in barley (Hordeum vulgare L). Breeding Science. 1996;46(2):137–42. ISI:A1996UV79000006.

94. Francois LE. Growth, seed yield, and oil content of canola grown under saline conditions. Agronomy Journal. 1994;86(2):233–7.

95. Maas E, Poss J. Salt sensitivity of cowpea at various growth stages. Irrigation Science. 1989;10(4):313–20.

96. Richards R, Dennett C, Qualset C, Epstein E, Norlyn J, Winslow M. Variation in yield of grain and biomass in wheat, barley, and triticale in a salt-affected field. Field Crops Research. 1987;15(3–4):277–87.

97. Jafari-Shabestari J, Corke H, Qualset CO. Field evaluation of tolerance to salinity stress in Iranian hexaploid wheat landrace accessions. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution. 1995;42(2):147–56.

98. Richards R. Should selection for yield in saline regions be made on saline or non-saline soils? Euphytica. 1983;32(2):431–8.

99. Daniells I, Holland J, Young R, Alston C, Bernardi A. Relationship between yield of grain sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) and soil salinity under field conditions. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture. 2001;41(2):211–7.

100. Gintzburger G, Le Houerou H, Toderich K. The steppes of Middle Asia: post-1991 agricultural and rangeland adjustment. Arid Land Research and Management. 2005;19(3):215–39.

101. Mujeeb-Kazi A, Rosas V, Roldan S. Conservation of the genetic variation of Triticum tauschii (Coss.) Schmalh.(Aegilops squarrosa auct. non L.) in synthetic hexaploid wheats (T. turgidum L. s. lat. x T. tauschii; 2n = 6x = 42, AABBDD) and its potential utilization for wheat improvement. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution. 1996;43(2):129–34.

102. Plamenov D, Spetsov P. Synthetic hexaploid lines are valuable resources for biotic stress resistance in wheat improvement. Journal of Plant Pathology. 2011:251–62.

103. Neumann PM. Inhibition of root growth by salinity stress: Toxicity or an adaptive biophysical response? DEVELOPMENTS IN PLANT AND SOIL SCIENCES. 1995;58:299–.


Článek vyšel v časopise

PLOS One


2019 Číslo 9
Nejčtenější tento týden
Nejčtenější v tomto čísle
Kurzy

Zvyšte si kvalifikaci online z pohodlí domova

plice
INSIGHTS from European Respiratory Congress
nový kurz

Současné pohledy na riziko v parodontologii
Autoři: MUDr. Ladislav Korábek, CSc., MBA

Svět praktické medicíny 3/2024 (znalostní test z časopisu)

Kardiologické projevy hypereozinofilií
Autoři: prof. MUDr. Petr Němec, Ph.D.

Střevní příprava před kolonoskopií
Autoři: MUDr. Klára Kmochová, Ph.D.

Všechny kurzy
Kurzy Podcasty Doporučená témata Časopisy
Přihlášení
Zapomenuté heslo

Zadejte e-mailovou adresu, se kterou jste vytvářel(a) účet, budou Vám na ni zaslány informace k nastavení nového hesla.

Přihlášení

Nemáte účet?  Registrujte se

#ADS_BOTTOM_SCRIPTS#