These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: The Interplay between Sulfur and Iron Nutrition in Tomato.
    Author: Zuchi S, Watanabe M, Hubberten HM, Bromke M, Osorio S, Fernie AR, Celletti S, Paolacci AR, Catarcione G, Ciaffi M, Hoefgen R, Astolfi S.
    Journal: Plant Physiol; 2015 Dec; 169(4):2624-39. PubMed ID: 26438787.
    Abstract:
    Plant response mechanisms to deficiency of a single nutrient, such as sulfur (S) or iron (Fe), have been described at agronomic, physiological, biochemical, metabolomics, and transcriptomic levels. However, agroecosystems are often characterized by different scenarios, in which combined nutrient deficiencies are likely to occur. Soils are becoming depleted for S, whereas Fe, although highly abundant in the soil, is poorly available for uptake because of its insolubility in the soil matrix. To this end, earlier reports showed that a limited S availability reduces Fe uptake and that Fe deficiency results in the modulation of sulfate uptake and assimilation. However, the mechanistic basis of this interaction remains largely unknown. Metabolite profiling of tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) shoots and roots from plants exposed to Fe, S, and combined Fe and S deficiency was performed to improve the understanding of the S-Fe interaction through the identification of the main players in the considered pathways. Distinct changes were revealed under the different nutritional conditions. Furthermore, we investigated the development of the Fe deficiency response through the analysis of expression of ferric chelate reductase, iron-regulated transporter, and putative transcription factor genes and plant sulfate uptake and mobilization capacity by analyzing the expression of genes encoding sulfate transporters (STs) of groups 1, 2, and 4 (SlST1.1, SlST1.2, SlST2.1, SlST2.2, and SlST4.1). We identified a high degree of common and even synergistic response patterns as well as nutrient-specific responses. The results are discussed in the context of current models of nutrient deficiency responses in crop plants.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]