↓ Skip to main content

RNA Editing Responses to Oxidative Stress between a Wild Abortive Type Male-Sterile Line and Its Maintainer Line

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Plant Science, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
21 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
RNA Editing Responses to Oxidative Stress between a Wild Abortive Type Male-Sterile Line and Its Maintainer Line
Published in
Frontiers in Plant Science, November 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpls.2017.02023
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jie Xiong, Tao Tao, Zhi Luo, Shuaigang Yan, Yi Liu, Xinqiao Yu, Guolan Liu, Hui Xia, Lijun Luo

Abstract

RNA editing of mitochondrial gene transcripts plays a central role during plant development and evolutionary adaptation. RNA editing has previously been reported to differ between the rice cytoplasmic male sterile (CMS) line and its maintainer line, which has been suggested as a cause for their different performances under environmental stress. To specifically test this hypothesis, a wild abortive (WA) CMS line (Huhan-1A) and its maintainer line (Huhan-1B) were utilized to investigate performances in response to oxidative stress, as well as RNA editing efficiencies on transcripts of six selected mitochondrial genes. Compared to the maintainer line, Huhan-1A represented both lower plant height and total antioxidant capacity, possessed higher total soluble protein and chlorophyll contents, accumulated less H2O2 content on the 3rd day after treatment (DAT), and exhibited higher survival ratio after re-watering. Furthermore, a total of 90 editing sites were detected on transcripts of six mitochondrial genes (atp9, nad2, nad7, nad9, ccmB, and ccmC) in both Huhan-1A and Huhan-1B on the 0, 1st, and 3rd DAT. Forty-eight sites were furthermore determined as stress-responsive sites (SRS). Generally, in response to oxidative stress, SRS in Huhan-1A increased the resulting editing efficiencies, while SRS in Huhan-1B decreased the resulting editing efficiencies. In addition, 33 and 22 sites at ccmB and ccmC were differentially edited between Huhan-1A and Huhan-1B, respectively, on the 0, 1st, and 3rd DAT. Editing efficiencies of ccmB and ccmC were generally lower in Huhan-1A (ccmB, 37.3-47.8%; ccmC, 41.2-52.3%) than those in Huhan-1B (ccmB, 82.6-86.5%; ccmC, 81.0-82.9%). Deficiencies of RNA editing in Huhan-1A at ccmB and ccmC could lead to the loss of transmembrane domains in their protein structures. Consequently, differences in RNA editing at ccmB and ccmC between the WA-CMS line and its maintainer line partially explained their different performances under stress. Moreover, we detected differences in expressions of pentatricopeptide repeat (PPR) genes between both lines, as well as significant correlations with RNA editing. Our study indicated potential associations of RNA editing and PPR genes in rice tolerance to abiotic stresses. However, the underlying molecular mechanisms of stress-adaptation, which are attributed to RNA editing on transcripts of mitochondrial genes, require further investigation.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 21 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 24%
Student > Master 4 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 14%
Professor 2 10%
Other 1 5%
Other 3 14%
Unknown 3 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 38%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 29%
Environmental Science 1 5%
Engineering 1 5%
Unknown 5 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 January 2018.
All research outputs
#18,581,651
of 23,015,156 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Plant Science
#13,991
of 20,523 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#326,080
of 438,556 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Plant Science
#318
of 436 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,015,156 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 20,523 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 438,556 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 436 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.