Next Article in Journal
Association of Anti-EGFR Antibody and MEK Inhibitor in Gynecological Cancer Harboring RAS Mutation: A Case Series
Previous Article in Journal
Genome-Wide Association Study Reveals Marker Trait Associations (MTA) for Waterlogging-Triggered Adventitious Roots and Aerenchyma Formation in Barley
Previous Article in Special Issue
Root GS and NADH-GDH Play Important Roles in Enhancing the Ammonium Tolerance in Three Bedding Plants
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
IJMS
Volume 23
Issue 6
10.3390/ijms23063342
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

Identification and Characterization of Salt- and Drought-Responsive AQP Family Genes in Medicagosativa L.

by
Yijing Luo
1,2,
Lin Ma
2,
Wenxuan Du
2,
Su Yan
1,2,
Zengyu Wang
1,* and
Yongzhen Pang
2,*
1
College of Grassland Science, Qingdao Agricultural University, Qingdao 266109, China
2
Institute of Animal Science, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100093, China
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23(6), 3342; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms23063342
Submission received: 7 February 2022 / Revised: 22 February 2022 / Accepted: 23 February 2022 / Published: 19 March 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Flower Plants Response to Multiple Abiotic Stresses)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Aquaporins (AQP) are distributed ubiquitously in plants, and they play important roles in multiple aspects of plant growth and development, as well as in plant resistance to various environmental stresses. In this study, 43 MsAQP genes were identified in the forage crop Medicago sativa. All the MsAQP proteins were clustered into four subfamilies based on sequence similarity and phylogenetic relationship, including 17 TIPs, 14 NIPs, 9 PIPs and 3 SIPs. Analyses of gene structure and conserved domains indicated that the majority of the deduced MsAQP proteins contained the signature transmembrane domains and the NPA motifs. Analyses on cis-acting elements in the promoter region of MsAQP genes revealed the presence of multiple and diverse stress-responsive and hormone-responsive cis-acting elements. In addition, by analyzing the available and comprehensive gene expression data of M. truncatula, we screened ten representative MtAQP genes that were responsive to NaCl or drought stress. By analyzing the sequence similarity and phylogenetic relationship, we finally identified the corresponding ten salt- or drought-responsive AQP genes in M. sativa, including three MsTIPs, three MsPIPs and four MsNIPs. The qPCRs showed that the relative expression levels of these ten selected MsAQP genes responded differently to NaCl or drought treatment in M. sativa. Gene expression patterns showed that most MsAQP genes were preferentially expressed in roots or in leaves, which may reflect their tissue-specific functions associated with development. Our results lay an important foundation for the future characterization of the functions of MsAQP genes, and provide candidate genes for stress resistance improvement through genetic breeding in M. sativa.

1. Introduction

Plants are exposed to various environmental stresses during their growth and development processes, including biotic and abiotic stresses, such as pathogens, salt, drought and cold [1,2]. Among these stresses, salt stress and drought stress are global environmental threats to the sustainable development of agriculture. It is estimated that at least one billion hm2 of saline-alkali land is distributed in more than 100 countries, and the arid and semi-arid regions account for about 30% of the total global area [3]. With the development of industrialization, agriculture and the economy, soil salinization has become more and more serious, which has not only discouraged the development of agriculture, but also led to serious ecological and environmental problems [4]. In the presence of excessive salt, osmotic stress and ionic toxicity are the two greatest challenges for plants, which lead to serious oxidative stress and nutritional disorders [2,4]. Drought could reduce plant growth, yield and adversely affect plant stability by affecting several morphological traits [5,6]. Therefore, investigation into the adaptation mechanism of plants to salt and/or drought stresses for further improvement is essential to accelerate agricultural production.
Salt as well as drought tolerance are complex traits that are controlled by multiple genes and involve various biochemical and physiology mechanisms [4,5]. Under either salt or drought stress, water transport driven by hydraulic and osmotic gradients plays an important role in plant adaption, besides in cell expansion, elongation, reproduction, absorption of mineral nutrients and phloem load [7]. In addition, the normal growth and development of plants are strongly dependent on the absorption of water by roots from the soil and the regulation of water movement in the plant. The diffusion of water across cell membranes is precisely regulated by water channels composed of aquaporins (AQPs), which are small (23–34 kDa) intact membrane proteins belonging to the major intrinsic protein (MIP) family [8,9].
AQP family proteins were ubiquitously distributed in the higher plants, in particular the model plants Arabidopsis thaliana, Zea mays and Oryza sativa [10,11,12]. These AQP proteins may transport water, small carbohydrates (such as glycerol), urea, NH3 and CO2 through energy-independent ion transport mechanisms [13,14]. So far, five subclasses of AQPs have been recognized from sequence comparisons and subcellular localization in plants, including: tonoplast intrinsic proteins (TIPs), plasma membrane intrinsic proteins (PIPs), nodulin 26-like intrinsic proteins (NIPs), small and basic intrinsic proteins (SIPs) and X intrinsic proteins (XIPs) [7,10,12,15]. Among them, the TIPs are predominately localized within the tonoplast membrane of the vacuoles of most plant cells [16,17]. The PIP proteins can be divided into PIP1 and PIP2, two distinct subcategories based on sequence comparisons and transport activity [10,12,18]. In comparison, the PIP1 subclass in general has a lower rate of facilitated water transport when compared to the PIP2 subclass. NIPs take their name from their subfamily patriarch, nodulin 26, which is found in symbiosomes of nitrogen-fixing nodules of soybean, and it is a major symbiosome membrane component and functions as an aquaglyceroporin [19]. NIPs’ subclass showed many characteristics of nodulin 26 and they may play broader roles in water homeostasis in non-nodulated plant tissues [19]. The SIPs’ subclass shows the most sequence divergence from the plant AQPs of other subclasses, in particular in the NPA box and the surrounding loop region [7,10,11]. It is possible that the transport selectivity and rate of these SIPs differ from the AQPs of other subclasses. The transport properties of the SIPs are not yet known, but the high amount of sequence divergence argues that they may have evolved separately from an ancestral gene [10,11]. XIPs are reported in some plant species, such as the tea plant and apricot [20,21], but not in the model plants such as A. thaliana or rice [11,12], and their functions are not very clear so far.
AQP are a large gene family in plants, and at least 35 different AQP genes were identified in A. thaliana, 31 in Zea mays and 33 in Oryza sativa [10,11,12], and the functions of many AQP genes have been characterized in different plant species, including Camellia sinensis, Prunus armeniaca, Brassica rapa, Nicotiana tabacum, Fragaria ananassa, and Triticum turgidum [20,21,22,23,24,25]. These AQP proteins were assumed to participate in different physiological processes, including the restriction of low pH-regulated rootlet water uptake [26], water use efficiency, hydraulic conductivity and photosynthesis [27]. Under favorable growth conditions, AtPIP1b over-expression significantly increased the growth rate, transpiration rate, stomatal density and photosynthetic efficiency in transgenic tobacco [28]. In particular, many AQP genes were reported to be responsive to abiotic stress during different developing stages [29,30], for example, the expression levels of seven and seventeen AQP genes from Brassica napus were responsive, respectively, to drought and salt stress during seed germination as well as in young seedlings [31]. The expression of TaAQP7 and TaAQP8 genes from wheat enhanced drought or salt tolerance in tobacco, respectively [32,33]. The over-expression of T. turgidum TdPIP1;1 or TdPIP2;1 in tobacco conferred strong tolerance towards salinity and osmotic stress [25]. The over-expression of the tobacco Aquaporin1 gene in the tobacco plant improved water use efficiency, hydraulic conductivity and yield under salt stress [27]. All these results demonstrated that the AQP genes were responsive to abiotic stresses and they could be ectopically explored to improve plant resistance by over-expression.
Alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) is a perennial legume forage crop, which is one of the most widely cultivated forage crops in the world, and it is also well-known as the “king of forages”, due to its rich content in protein, vitamins and other nutrients. With the continuous development of animal husbandry, the requirement for high-yield alfalfa is becoming higher and higher, especially under stressed conditions [34,35,36,37]. The growth and development of M. sativa were constrained by multiple environmental stress factors, such as drought, salt and extreme temperatures [6,35,36,37]. Alfalfa with strong salt and/or drought tolerance can provide high-quality protein feeds, which can smooth the way for the development of farming and animal husbandry in a saline-alkali or arid region [34]. Therefore, it is essential to investigate the salt and/or drought stress responsive mechanism and screen new genes for genetic breeding of M. sativa. So far, only one AQP gene MsPIP2;2 from M. sativa was cloned, and its over-expression in Arabidopsis increased the seed germination rate, seedling root length, survival rate, proline content and antioxidant defense activity, but decreased the cell membrane damage and reactive oxygen species’ (ROS) accumulation under salt stress [38]. Apart from this single MsAQP gene, no other AQP family genes were cloned, nor was the entire gene family systematically investigated in M. sativa. Therefore, in the present study, efforts were taken to identify all putative AQP genes from M. sativa, along with their orthologs from M. truncatula, a model legume and a close relative of M. sativa. In addition, to provide comprehensive information on MsAQP genes, we also screened MsAQP genes that were highly responsive to salt or drought stress. These candidate genes could be applied in gene editing or genetic breeding for the improvement of alfalfa resistance against salt/drought stresses in the near future.

2. Results

2.1. Identification of AQP Family Genes in the Medicago Genome

Based on a homology search and PFAM analysis, a total of 88 AQP genes were identified in M. sativa (43) and M. truncatula (45) (Table 1 and Table S1). Their nucleotide and protein sequences were obtained from the Medicago genome database and used for further analyses. The physicochemical properties of the deduced AQP proteins are listed in Table 1 for M. sativa and Table S1 for M. truncatula, including the TIGR locus, homologous gene, molecular weights, isoelectric points and putative subcellular localization. The encoded protein length of the MsAQP genes range from 131 to 810 aa, with their molecular weight (MW) from 14.02 to 87.45 kDa and the isoelectric points (pI) from 4.08 to 9.78 (Table 1). It was predicted that the subcellular locations of most MsAQP proteins were in the cell membrane (Table 1). In addition, the corresponding MsAQP homologous genes from M. truncatula are also listed in Table 1, and the detailed information on those of the MtAQPs are shown in Table S1.

2.2. Multiple Sequence Alignment, Phylogenetic Analysis and Classification of AQPs in Medicago

To investigate the evolutionary relationships of AQP from M. sativa and M. truncatula, a phylogenetic tree was constructed with the full amino acid sequences of all the AQP family proteins from M. sativa and M. truncatula, along with 35 AQP proteins from A. thaliana (Figure 1 and Table S2). It was shown that all AQP proteins could be classified into four distinct groups based on their sequence similarity, whether from M. sativa, M. truncatula or from A. thaliana: plasma membrane intrinsic proteins (PIPs, in green color), tonoplast intrinsic proteins (TIPs, in purple color), noduLin 26-like intrinsic proteins (NIPs, in yellow color) and small basic intrinsic proteins (SIPs, in red color), respectively (Figure 1).
Most of the AQP in M. sativa and M. truncatula were grouped with their homologs from Arabidopsis (Figure 1). In detail, 17 TIPs, 14 NIPs, 9 PIPs and 3 SIPs from M. sativa, and 10 PIPs, 14 TIPs, 17 NIPs and 4 SIPs from M. truncatula were grouped to the corresponding groups with those of Arabidopsis, respectively (Figure 1, Table S2). The largest cluster was for TIPs, with 17 members from M. sativa and 17 NIPs from M. truncatula, and the smallest cluster was SIPs with only three members from M. sativa (Figure 1). The phylogenetic clustering pattern of AQPs in M. sativa is consistent with that of Arabidopsis, showing a tendency to cluster with members of the same subfamily (Figure 1).

2.3. Chromosome Localization and Collinearity Analysis of AQP Genes in Medicago

Overall, 43 MsAQP genes were randomly distributed in eight chromosomes of M. sativa (Figure 2a). Nine MsAQP genes were located in chromosome 1 and 5, eight genes in chromosome 4, seven in chromosome 7, four in chromosome 2, three in chromosome 3, two in chromosome 6 and only one gene in chromosome 8 (Figure 2a). Among them, chromosomes 1 and 5 had the most AQP genes (9 TIP genes), and chromosome 8 had the least AQP genes (only TIP17 gene), all the other chromosomes have two to eight AQP genes (Figure 2a).
In addition, both tandem and segmental duplication occurred in the generation of the MsAQP family gene during the evolution. Three tandem duplicates were identified for MsAQP genes: MsNIP8/MsNIP9, MsTIP1/MsTIP2 and MsTIP3/MsTIP4. Six segmental duplication events were also identified, including MsTIP8/MsTIP17, MsPIP2/MsPIP8, MsPIP5/MsPIP9, MsNIP10/MsNIP11, MsTIP13/MsTIP14 and MsSIP1/MsSIP3 (Figure 2a, Additional file S1). All these results indicated that both tandem duplication and segmental duplication events played an important role in the evolution of AQP genes in M. sativa.
Furthermore, a comparative syntenic map with M. sativa, M. truncatula and Arabidopsis was constructed to illustrate the evolution relationship of the AQP gene family (Figure 2b). In total, 12 and 33 orthologous pairs were found between M. sativa and Arabidopsis, and between M. sativa and M. truncatula, respectively (Figure 2b, Additional file S1). Taken together, these results indicated that the AQP genes of M. sativa may have undergone a strong purification selection pressure during evolution.

2.4. Analyses of Conserved Motif and Gene Structure of AQP Genes in M. sativa

AQP proteins usually have an overall membrane topology consisting of six transmembrane spanning alpha helical domains (TM1-TM6) connected by five loop regions [39]. The NPA regions are the signature motifs for AQP family members [39], which are symmetrically oriented sequences of asparagine-proline-alanine (NPA, Figure S1). Six transmembrane domains were detected in twenty-eight members, and they showed relatively higher sequence similarity than in the other region (Figure S1). However, the remaining 15 MsAQP proteins lacked at least one of the six transmembrane domains (Figure S1). Moreover, two NPA domains were detected in 31 MsAQP proteins, while the other 12 MsAQP proteins (MsNIP2, MsNIP3, MsNIP4, MsNIP10, MsNIP11, MsTIP1, MsTIP3, MsTIP5, MsTIP11, MsTIP13, MsPIP6 and MsPIP7) possessed only one of the NPA domains. The lack of at least one of the transmembrane domains or NPA domains may lead to the improper topological structure for a normal function of AQP proteins.
Analysis on motifs showed that the MsAQPs protein members of the same subfamily shared a high similarity in the conserved motifs (Figure 3a). Multiple motifs, including motifs 5, 4, 6 and 9, and motifs 2, 7, 1 and 3 in the TIPs proteins, motifs 8, 5, 6, 4 and motifs 2, 7, 1, 3 in the PIPs proteins, motifs 5, 4, 6 and motifs 2, 7, 1 and 3 in the NIPs proteins, motif 5 and motif 1 in the SIPs proteins were the conserved motifs, which, respectively, contained the two conserved NPA domains (Figure 3b). Motifs 1 and motif 3 were common to all subfamilies, TIPs, PIPs and NIPs contain conserved motifs 5, 4 and 6, differing by one additional motif 9 in TIPs and motif 8 in PIPs (Figure 3b), which can be used to distinguish these subfamilies.
The gene structure of MsAQPs was also analyzed, and it showed that each MsAQP has multiple introns. Twelve AQP members have introns of more than five, including MsTIP7, 8, 17, MsPIP1, 5, 6, 7, 9, MsNI6, 8, 9, 14, while the other seventeen genes have introns of less than two (Figure 3c). In particular, three MsAQP genes do not have any intron (MsTIP1, MsPIP3 and MsNIP5). The structural differences in the AQPs may allow them to function differently. However, it has to be noted that the structure of many of the MsAQP genes are not complete, which may be due to the incompleteness of the genome sequence assembly of M. sativa.

2.5. Analyses of Cis-Acting Elements of MsAQP Genes

The upstream promoter regions of 2000 bp for all the AQP genes from M. sativa were analyzed. Those hormone-responsive and abiotic stress-related cis-acting elements were identified, including abscisic acid responsiveness (ABRE), anaerobic induction (ARE, GC-motif), auxin responsiveness (AuxRR-core, TGA-element), MeJA-responsiveness (CGTCA-motif, TGACG-motif), dehydration, low-temp and salt stresses (DRE), ethylene-responsiveness (ERE), gibberellin-responsiveness (GARE-motif, P-box, TATC-box), low-temperature responsiveness (LTR), drought-inducibility (MBS), flavonoid biosynthetic genes’ regulation (MBSI), salicylic acid responsiveness (TCA-element), defense and stress responsiveness (TC-rich repeats, W box) and wound-responsive element (WUN-motif) (Figure 4 and Additional file S2).
It was shown that the promoters of MsAQP genes contained various cis-acting elements with different numbers (Figure 4a). We found that the cis-acting elements related to ABA stress responsiveness, anaerobic stress and MeJA stress are widely distributed in the MsAQP family genes. In addition, most MsAQP genes contain the cis-acting elements related to defense and environmental stress, drought stress and salt-alkali stress responsiveness (Figure 4b). DRE related to dehydration, low-temp and salt stresses, is only presented in MsTIP17, and MBSI that is involved in flavonoid biosynthetic genes regulation is presented in three MsAQP members (MsTIP8, MsPIP9 and MsNIP6, Figure 4b). Among all MsAQP members, MsTIP13, MsTIP16, MsPIP8, MsNIP3 and MsNIP8 have at least five ABRE elements, MsTIP12, MsTIP4, MsTIP1 and MsNIP7 have at least five ARE repeats (Figure 4a,b).
In addition, MeJA-responsiveness elements (CGTCA-motif, TGACG-motif) were widely distributed in all the MsAQP promoter regions, with MsPIP2 having the most number of 10 (Figure 4a,b). MsTIP1, 6, 9, 11, 13, 14, 16, MsPIP1, 4, 5, 6, MsNIP1, 5, 6 and MsSIP1, two contain at least one TCA-element related to salicylic acid responsiveness (Figure 4a,b). Moreover, MsTIP4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 15, MsPIP1, 3, 5, 8, 9, MsNIP2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 12, 13 and MsSIP2 contains W box that is related to defense and stress responsiveness (Figure 4a,b). In particular, MsTIP16, MsTIP12, MsPIP2 and MsNIP2 have at least 20 different types of cis-acting elements (Figure 4a,b). The presence of various cis-acting elements in MsAQP genes indicated that they might be involved in various stress responses and hormone pathways, in particular those that have various types of cis-acting elements with a large number.

2.6. Analyses of Expression Profiles of MtAQPs for the Screening of Candidate MsAQP Genes

Currently, no comprehensive transcriptome data were available for M. sativa to further analyze the expression profiles of MsAQP genes. However, M. truncatula has a number of GeneChip® data for screening of the candidate genes. More importantly, M. truncatula is the closest relative to M. sativa, both in phylogenetic relationship and in gene sequences. Theoretically, their homologs may share similar expression profiles. Therefore, in order to further analyze the function of MsAQPs, the strategy we used was to firstly analyze the expressions’ profiles of the homology MtAQP genes under salt or drought-treatment for the screening of stress-responsive MtAQP, and then verify their corresponding homology genes in M. sativa (Table 1). In this way, we obtained the expression profiles of 29 MtAQP with available comprehensive GeneChip® data for M. truncatula.
With an emphasis on the screening of salt-responsive MsAQP genes, we analyzed their gene expression profile in the roots of 2-day-old seedlings that were treated with 180 mM NaCl at 0, 6, 24, 48 h (Figure 5a), and the roots of 2-week-old seedlings that were treated with 200 mM NaCl at 0, 1, 2, 5, 10, 24 h, respectively, from the online GeneChip® database (Figure 5b). The expression levels of most MtAQP genes were decreased over time under the 180 mM NaCl treatment, while only three genes (MtNIP4, MtNIP6 and MtNIP16) increased significantly at 48 h (Figure 5a), and four genes increased rapidly at 6 h (MtNIP3, MtNIP17, MtSIP4 and MtTIP7), but decreased at 24 h (Figure 5a). Under 200 mM NaCl treatment, the expression levels of most of the MtAQP members in roots increased at different time points, and then decreased afterwards (Figure 5b). Moreover, the expression levels of seven genes (MtPIP7, MtTIP1, MtNIP11, MtPIP9, MtNIP10, MtNIP16 and MtTIP6) decreased continuously (Figure 5b). In addition, the expression levels of three genes (MtSIP3, MtNIP3 and MtTIP5) increased gradually and reached the highest level at 24 h (Figure 5b).
Apart from the salt-stress responsive MtAQPs, we also investigated the expression changes of MtAQP gene members that related to drought stress. We explored the expression profile of MtAQP genes in roots and shoots that were under drought treatment for 2 d, 3 d, 4 d, 7 d, 10 d, 14 d and rewatered 1 d after 14-day of drought treatment. As was shown in Figure 5c–d, it was clear that the response of MtAQPs were different from each other under drought treatment. In details, the expression levels of five genes (MtNIP7, MtSIP3, MtNIP2, MtNIP16 and MtTIP14) reached the highest level at 1 d rewater after 14 d drought stress (Figure 5c). In addition, the expression levels of five genes (MtNIP4, MtTIP11, MtNIP10, MtSIP1 and MtNIP11) increased gradually from 2 d to 14 d (Figure 5c). In the shoots, the expression levels of most MtAQP members were decreased from 2 d to 14 d under drought treatment (Figure 5d). However, the expression levels of two genes (MtTIP11 and MtNIP11) reached the highest level at 14 d under drought treatment (Figure 5d). In addition, the expression levels of 4 genes (MtNIP6, MtNIP4, MtSIP3 and MtNIP16) increased gradually from 2 d to 14 d (Figure 5d).
Among all MtAQP genes, five of them were found to be highly responsive to salt stress with a distinct expression pattern (MtTIP1, MtTIP7, MtTIP10, MtNIP3 and MtNIP6, in blue in Figure 5a,b), while another five (MtNIP2, MtNIP11, MtPIP1, MtPIP7 and MtPIP9, in red in Figure 5c,d) for drought stress (Figure 5 and Additional file S3), which were typical representatives of MtAQP genes. Due to the close relationship of M. sativa to M. truncatula, as well as the close phylogenetic relationship of AQP genes between M. sativa and M. truncatula (Figure 1), we screened the corresponding 10 homology gene pairs: including MtTIP1/MsTIP4, MtTIP7/MsTIP10, MtTIP10/MsTIP12, MtNIP3/MsNIP9, MtNIP2/MsNIP1, MtNIP6/MsNIP2, MtNIP11/MsNIP6, MtPIP5/MsPIP1, MtPIP7/MsPIP4 and MtPIP2/MsPIP3 (Figure 1). By using this strategy, the 10 candidate AQP genes from M. sativa that responded to salt stress or drought stress were preliminarily selected for further analyses as representatives.

2.7. Validation of Expression Profile of Stress-Responsive MsAQP Genes by qPCR Analysis

The relative expression of these selected representative genes was further determined under 150 mM NaCl and 15% polyethylene glycol (PEG) stress treatments at different time points, respectively (Figure 6). Under 150 mM NaCl treatment, the relative expression levels of these five genes evidently increased at different time points with a different fold change. For MsTIP4, its relative expression level increased at 12 h after a slight decrease at 4 h and 8 h, and it reached the peak level at 48 h by more than 3-fold (Figure 6a, upper panel). For MsTIP10, its relative expression level was relatively higher at 12 h and 24 h with 2–2.5-fold changes (Figure 6a, upper panel). The relative expression level of MsTIP12 increased more than 4-fold at 4 h followed by a decrease, and then reached the peak at 12 h by more than a 10-fold change (Figure 6a, upper panel). For MsNIP2, its relative expression level increased from 4–48 h, and reached the highest level at 48 h (Figure 6a, lower panel). The relative expression of MsNIP9 decreased slightly at 4 h and then increased relatively stable from 8 h to 48 h with the highest fold change of more than 6 times at 48 h (Figure 6a, lower panel).
Under PEG treatment, the relative expression level of MsPIP1 decreased from 2 h to 32 h (Figure 6b), and that of MsPIP3 decreased at 2 h and 8 h, but increased slightly at 32 h (Figure 6b). For MsPIP4, its relative expression level decreased at 8 h and 32 h (Figure 6b). For the two MsNIP genes, the relative expression level of MsNIP1 was significantly increased by 2–2.5 fold at 2h, 8 h and 32 h (Figure 6b), while MsNIP6 showed a similar expression profile as MsPIP3, increased at 2 h and 8 h, and increased at 32 h. Overall, the fold changes of all selected drought-responsive genes did not change as much as the salt-responsive genes.

2.8. Spatial Expression Profiling of MsAQP

The expression levels of the above-mentioned 10 MsAQP genes were further investigated in the roots, stems, leaves and flowers (Figure 7). It was shown that the relative expression level of these 10 MsAQP genes exhibited distinct expression profiles. It was clear that the three MsTIP genes (MsTIP4, MsTIP10, and MsTIP12) responsive to NaCl treatment were highly expressed in the roots, with MsTIP4 also highly expressed in stems and flowers, and it was the same for the two MsNIPs (MsNIP2 and MsNIP9) (Figure 7, first and second panel). As for the five drought-responsive MsAQP genes, two of them were preferentially expressed in the leaves (MsPIP1 and MsPIP4), and one of them was preferentially expressed in the stems (MsPIP3) (Figure 7, third panels). In addition, MsNIP1 and MsNIP6 showed the highest expression levels in roots and leaves, respectively (Figure 7, lower panel). These data taken together indicated that these MsAQP genes participate in the growth and development of specific tissues in M. sativa, functioning alone or in combination in the same tissues.

3. Discussion

Many studies on alfalfa resistance to abiotic stress have been focused on various types of genes, in particular transcription factors, including MYB, ERF, HLH etc. [40,41,42,43]. These regulatory genes regulated multiple pathways or genes, but investigation on the mechanism of direct water regulation by the individual AQP gene was rare in alfalfa. AQPs play an important role in maintaining the cell water dynamic balance, which plays a critical role in plant growth and development under drought or salt tolerances, due to the osmotic stresses and ion toxicity [9,44]. Many plant AQP genes involved in drought and salt stress have been identified, but only one AQP gene was characterized in M. sativa so far. In a previous study, a PIP-type AQP gene MsPIP2;2 was identified by RACE techniques [38]. The closest homolog of MsPIP2;2 was MtPIP5 in M. truncatula, which was inducible by 200 mM NaCl in two-week-old seedlings in our study. This phenomenon was consistent with the results that the expression level of MsPIP2;2 was increased by 150 mM NaCl treatment after a short time treatment at 2 h and 4 h in M. sativa [38]. The expression level of MsPIP2;2 did not show a significant change as a result of drought treatment [38], which did not agree entirely with our results that its expression (as MsPIP1 in Figure 6b) was slightly reduced by PEG treatment, although the fold change was not very high.
In this study, we identified 43 MsAQP in the genome of M. sativa and 45 MtAQP genes in M. truncatula (Table 1 and Table S2). Compared with around 35 members in A. thaliana, 31 in maize, and 33 in rice [10,11,12], the number of AQP family members in Medicago was expanded to 43 during evolution. An increase in gene numbers could be due to gene duplication events. When compared with another large gene family with similar members, as in our previous study for CBL and CIPK genes that have only one segmental duplicate, and three to four tandem duplicates [45], the MsAQP gene family has more segmental duplicates (six) and less (three) tandem duplicates, indicating segmental duplicate played a more important and direct role than tandem duplicates in the evolution of the AQP gene family in M. sativa. This phenomenon of tandem and segmental repetition exists in other plant protein families and is the result of gene replication in the process of evolution. Further, in Arabidopsis [12], the PIP subfamily had the most AQP members with 13 members, but in M. sativa, the TIP subfamily had the most AQP members, with 17 members (Table 1), which may be the main reason for the expansion of the AQP gene family in M. sativa. It is interesting that XIPs were identified from some plants, such as the common bean, nicotiana glauca, tea plant, apricot [20,21,23,46], however, XIP was absent in M. sativa as in Arabidopsis and Brassica rapa [12,31], which indicated that XIPs might be unique for specific families of plant.
The amino acid composition and three-dimensional structure of aquaporins are very important for the function of aquaporin in transporting substrate molecules. Meanwhile, the loss or acquisition of the transmembrane domain may affect subcellular localization, amino acid sequence folding and the efficiency of water transporting [8,13,15,44]. However, based on the genome sequence of alfalfa, the length of MsAQP proteins was as short as 131 aa for MsNIP10, and as long as 810 aa for MsTIP8 (Table 1). In addition, we found that almost one third of total MsAQP proteins lost one or more of the conserved domains, at least one to three transmembrane domains or one NPA domain (Figure S1). By contrast, the length of the deduced AQP proteins ranged from 240 to 323 aa in A. thaliana [12], from 219 to 329 aa in apricots [21], 236 to 326 aa in tea plants [20]. Even in the close relative of M. truncatula, the length of the majority of MtAQPs fell into the range of 218–330 aa (Table S1), therefore, we suspected that the lack of partial gene sequences may be due to the incompleteness of the genome assembly. As a trial, we cloned the MsNIP2 gene by PCR, as expected, we found its extract length was 272 aa after sequencing the coding genes (816 nt). Therefore, it could be reasonably predicted that the particular relative short or long MsAQP may be due to the incomplete assembly of genome sequencing, which could be improved by better assembly technique or by experimental confirmation.
Since the C-terminal of PIPs is shorter than other subfamily protein sequences [14], there were significant differences in subcellular localization among different subfamilies of aquaporins. PIPs, NIPs and some SIPs were located on the cell membrane, most of TIPs on the vacuole and some on the cell membrane [47] and some SIPs were located on the endoplasmic reticulum [48]. In the present study, it was predicted that the majority of the MsAQP proteins were localized in the cell membrane (Table 1), beside the vacuole, mitochondrion and endoplasmic reticulum, and whether they are localized in tonoplast, endoplasmic reticulum or mitochondrion needs further investigation in the near future. Nevertheless, the multiple and diverse localizations of MsAQP indicate their various functions in different cell compartments.
It has been reported that under abiotic stresses such as drought, cold, salt, mechanical injury, osmotic stress, heavy metal and flooding hypoxia, most AQPs expression levels were decreased, thus limiting water transporting in plants, maintaining water balance and increasing tolerance to stress factors [15]. In this study, ten MsAQP genes were found to be differently responsive to salt or drought stress (Figure 6). Among them, three MsTIP genes (MsTIP4, MsTIP10 and MsTIP12) and two MsNIP genes (MsNIP2 and MsNIP9) were inducible by NaCl treatment, and they responded differently, while three MsPIP genes (MsPIP1, MsPIP3 and MsPIP4) and two MsNIP genes (MsNIP1 and MsNIP6) were inducible under PEG treatment (Figure 6). Among these genes, at least three MsPIP genes out of all nine MsPIP genes were associated with drought treatment, which is consistent with many other studies showing that a high percentage of PIP genes were associated with drought or salt stress [38,49,50]. Among them, the MsPIP1 gene was downregulated by PEG treatment, which was the same as several AQP genes that were downregulated under drought stress in Nicotiana glanuca [23]. This could be explained by the reason that these AQP likely function in limiting water loss while others maintain homeostasis in the cell. Nevertheless, the specific reasons and mechanisms of each individual gene need to be further studied.
The function of the AQP family is to transport water, glycerin and small molecules in the plant body, but their specific transporting mechanism is little known currently. It is known that different subfamilies of AQP aquaporins are regulated and expressed sequentially at different stages of plant growth and development, thereby completing the full life process of plants [51]. In our study, candidate MsAQP genes responsive to salt and drought stress were differently expressed in the main tissues of M. sativa. It was obvious that all salt-responsive MsAQP genes were more or less abundantly expressed in roots compared to other tested tissues (Figure 7). The results were consistent with the expression profiles of the corresponding MtAQP that were inducible at different level in the roots (Figure 5a,b). Our results also agree with other studies that the expression level of many PIP genes were upregulated in the root under salt stress, as in rice and maize [52,53]. While the drought-responsive MsAQP genes were highly expressed in the roots, stems, leaves and flowers (Figure 7), which was mainly because these homology genes were selected from the gene expression profile in both roots and shoots (Figure 5c,d). Meanwhile, it also indicated that drought treatment resulted in the expression of different types of MsAQP in many tissues of M. sativa, and they might function in combination against drought stress. The similar phenomena were also found in rice and maize that drought caused the upregulation of several AQP genes in roots and stems of rice [53].
It this study, we identified and analyzed all putative AQP genes in M. sativa, selected new candidate salt and drought responsive MsAQP genes, and these genes may have potential important functions in regulating water homeostasis under abiotic stress in M. sativa. Whether they have special mechanisms in stress tolerance and whether they could be utilized for genetic breeding is worthy of in-depth study.

4. Materials and Methods

4.1. Identification of AQP Genes in the Medicago Sativa and Medicago Truncatula Genome

The genome sequences and deduced protein sequences of AQPs were downloaded from the M. sativa genome website (https://figshare.com/articles/dataset/Medicago_sativa_genome_and_annotation_files/12623960, accessed on 2 June 2021) and the M. truncatula genome website (http://www.medicagogenome.org/, accessed on 9 June 2021). The Hidden Markov model (HMM) profiles of MIP (PF00230) were downloaded from the Pfam database (https://pfam.xfam.org/, accessed on 15 June 2021) and used as the query (p < 1 × 10−5) to search putative AQP proteins from the M. sativa and M. truncatula genome database. Moreover, all AQP protein sequences in Arabidopsis were downloaded from TAIR (https://www.arabidopsis.org/, accessed on 3 June 2021), which were applied as a query (p < 1 × 10−5) to blast search the protein sequences of M. sativa and M. truncatula in their genome database. All output candidate AQP protein sequences that may contain AQP domain based on HMMER and the BlastP results were confirmed by the presence of the AQP core sequences submitted to Pfam (https://pfam.xfam.org/, accessed on 15 June 2021), InterProScan (https://www.ebi.ac.uk/interpro/search/sequence-search, accessed on 15 June 2021), SMART (http://smart.embl-heidelberg.de/, accessed on 15 June 2021) program. and CDD (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/Structure/bwrpsb/bwrpsb.cgi, accessed on 15 June 2021) to confirm the conserved AQP domain. In total, 43 candidate MsAQP and 45 candidate MtAQP genes were obtained and further assigned based on their locations on chromosomes (Table 1 and Table S2).

4.2. Sequence Analysis and Structural Characterization of AQP Genes in M. sativa

Sequence alignment analysis of AQP domain sequences were performed by jalview (http://www.jalview.org/Web_Installers/install.htm, accessed on 14 September 2021). All the sequences of AQP genes were submitted to the ExPASy website (http://web.expasy.org/protparam/, accessed on 2 June 2021) to the length of amino acids, the molecular weight and theoretical isoelectric points. Conserved motifs in AQP protein sequences were identified by the MEME program (MEME-Suite version 5.1.0, http://meme-suite.org/, accessed on 2 June 2021) [54], with default settings and the motif number was set at a value of 20. Subcellular locations of AQP proteins were predicted by using the online program Plant-mPLOC (http://www.csbio.sjtu.edu.cn/bioinf/plant-multi/, accessed on 3 June 2021). The predication and visualization of exon-intron positions and conserved motifs were performed through Visualize Gene Structure program by using the software of TBtools [55].

4.3. Phylogenetic Analysis and Classification of the AQP Genes in M. sativa

In total, one hundred and twenty-three deduced AQP protein sequences from M. sativa, M. truncatula and Arabidopsis were used to construct the phylogenetic tree with the Maximum likelihood (ML) method by using MEGA7 software [56]. The default parameters were used to construct the phylogenetic tree, with 1000 bootstrap replicates. The online program EvolView (https://evolgenius.info/evolview-v2/, accessed on 27 September 2021) was used to optimize the evolutionary tree.

4.4. Analyses of Collinearity and Chromosome Location of the AQP Genes

The multiple collinear scan toolkit (MCScanX) was used to analyze gene repetitive events with default parameters [57]. The chromosomal location of all AQPs of M. sativa was analyzed with Advanced Circos program by using the software TBtools [55], and all MsAQP genes were mapped to the eight M. sativa chromosomes based on their physical location from the Medicago genome database. Gene Location Visualize program in the software of TBtools [55] were used to analyze the intraspecific synteny relationship among M. sativa, M. truncatula and Arabidopsis.

4.5. Analysis of Cis-Acting Element of the MsAQP Genes

The cis-acting elements in the upstream 2000 bp promoter sequences of the MsAQP genes were submitted to online program PlantCARE (http://bioinformatics.psb.ugent.be/webtools/plantcare/html/, accessed on 15 June 2021) [58]. Then the information was further analyzed and shown as a heatmap with the Heatmap Illustrator program in the software of TBtools [55].

4.6. Analysis of the Expression Profile of MtAQP Genes with Microarray Data

We downloaded all the microarray data from the M. truncatula Gene Expression Atlas (https://Mtgea.noble.org/v3/, accessed on 18 July 2021), and then analyzed the expression level of 29 available MtAQP genes. The selected microarray data contained the shoots and roots samples subjected to salt stress and drought stress treatment. Two-day-old seedlings were used for the 180 mM NaCl treatment, and the root samples were collected for qPCR, at time points of 0, 6, 24 and 48 h. Meanwhile, two-week-old seedlings were also used for the 200 mM NaCl treatment under hydroponic culture, and the root samples were collected at time points of 0, 1, 2, 5, 10 and 24 h. Plants were used for drought treatment at time points of 2, 3, 4, 7, 10, 14 d and 1 d rewater after 14 d drought, then the root and shoot samples were, respectively, collected for qPCR analyses. The relative expression profiles were analyzed and visualized as heatmap by using the HeatMap Illustrator program in the software of TBtools [55].

4.7. Plant Materials and Treatments

The M. sativa (cv. Zhongmu No.1) plants used in this study, and the leaves of 4-week-old M. sativa seedlings under hydroponic condition, were collected for RNA extraction and used for further qPCR analysis. To investigate the expression level of candidate MsAQP genes under different stresses, plants were grown in a growth chamber at 24 °C with 16 h light/8 h dark photoperiod for subsequent analysis. The 150 mM NaCl were used for salt stress treatment at time points of 0, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 48 h. The 15% PEG was used for drought stress treatment at time points of 0, 2, 8 and 32 h.
For the spatial expression analyses of MsAQP genes, the seedlings were grown in the greenhouse under 16/8 h light/dark regime at 25 °C. Roots, stems, leaves and flowers were taken at the initial flowering stage from three individual plants with similar growth condition.

4.8. Analysis of the AQP Gene Expression in M. sativa by qPCR

Total RNAs were isolated by using the Eastep Super total RNA Extraction kit (Promega, Shanghai, China) according to the manufacturer’s instructions. First-strand cDNA synthesis was carried out by using the Trans Script One-Step gDNA Removal and cDNA Synthesis SuperMix (TransGen Biotech, Beijing, China) according to the manufacturer’s instructions. The quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR) procedures and methods were performed by using the 2×RealStar Green Fast Mixture (GeneStar, Shanghai, China) on the ABI 7500 real-time Detection System (Applied Biosystems, USA). The detailed procedure for qPCR was 2 min at 95 °C, followed by 40 cycles of 15 s at 95 °C and 34 s at 60 °C. The MsActin gene was used as a house-keeping gene in qPCRs. Reactions were performed in biological triplicates and the data were analyzed using 2−ΔΔCT method. The results were presented as means ± standard deviation (SD). Statistically significant differences (* for p < 0.05, or ** for p < 0.01) were calculated based on Student’s t-tests, and expression levels at each time point were all compared with 0 h for either the NaCl or PEG treatment. The relative expression level at 0 h was set as a value of 1 for each gene under stress treatment, and the relative expression level in the roots was set as value of 1 for different tissue samples. The primer sequences used in this study are listed in Table S3.

Supplementary Materials

The following are available online at https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/ijms23063342/s1.

Author Contributions

Experiments were performed by Y.L., L.M. and W.D.; Y.L., W.D. and S.Y. analyzed the data; Y.L. drafted the manuscript; Z.W. and Y.P. supervised the experiments and finalized the manuscript. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This project was supported by the National Nature Science Foundation of China (U1906201), and Fundamental Research Funds for Central Non-profit Scientific Institution (2021XC11). The funding body played no role in the design of the study, analysis, and interpretation of data, and in writing the manuscript.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

All data in the present study are available in the public database as referred in the Material and Method part.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Mammadov, J.; Buyyarapu, R.; Guttikonda, S.K.; Parliament, K.; Abdurakhmonov, I.Y.; Kumpatla, S.P. Wild relatives of maize, rice, cotton, and soybean: Treasure troves for tolerance to biotic and abiotic stresses. Front. Plant Sci. 2018, 9, 886. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Türkan, I.; Demiral, T. Recent developments in understanding salinity tolerance. Environ. Exp. Bot. 2009, 67, 2–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Sivakumar, M.V.K.; Das, H.P.; Brunini, O. Impacts of present and future climate variability and change on agriculture and forestry in the arid and semi-arid tropics. Clim. Chang. 2005, 70, 31–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Zhang, J.L.; Shi, H. Physiological and molecular mechanisms of plant salt tolerance. Photosynth. Res. 2013, 115, 1–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. 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]
  6. Mouradi, M.; Farissi, M.; Bouizgaren, A.; Makoudi, B.; Kabbadj, A.; Very, A.A.; Sentenac, H.; Qaddourya, A.; Ghoulam, C. Effects of water deficit on growth, nodulation and physiological and biochemical processes in Medicago sativa-rhizobia symbiotic association. Arid. Land Res. Manag. 2015, 30, 193–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Maurel, C.; Verdoucq, L.; Luu, D.T.; Santoni, V. Plant aquaporins: Membrane channels with multiple integrated functions. Annu. Rev. Plant Biol. 2008, 59, 595–624. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  8. Chaumont, F.; Tyerman, S.D. Aquaporins: Highly regulated channels controlling plant water relations. Plant Physiol. 2014, 164, 1600–1618. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  9. Singh, R.K.; Deshmukh, R.; Muthamilarasan, M.; Rani, R.; Prasad, M. Versatile roles of aquaporin in physiological processes and stress tolerance in plants. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 2020, 149, 178–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Chaumont, F.; Barrieu, F.; Wojcik, E.; Chrispeels, M.J.; Jung, R. Aquaporins constitute a large and highly divergent protein family in maize. Plant Physiol. 2001, 125, 1206–1215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  11. Sakurai, J.; Ishikawa, F.; Yamaguchi, T.; Uemura, M.; Maeshima, M. Identification of 33 rice aquaporin genes and analysis of their expression and function. Plant Cell Physiol. 2005, 46, 1568–1577. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  12. Johanson, U.; Karlsson, M.; Johansson, I.; Gustavsson, S.; Sjovall, S.; Fraysse, L.; Weig, A.R.; Kjellbom, P. The complete set of genes encoding major intrinsic proteins in Arabidopsis provides a framework for a new nomenclature for major intrinsic proteins in plants. Plant Physiol. 2001, 126, 1358–1369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  13. Forrest, K.L.; Bhave, M. Major intrinsic proteins (MIPs) in plants: A complex gene family with major impacts on plant phenotype. Funct. Integr. Genom. 2007, 7, 263–289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Johansson, I.; Karlsson, M.; Johanson, U.; Larsson, C.; Kjellbom, P. The role of auaporins in cellular and whole plant water balance. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 2000, 1465, 324–343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  15. Maurel, C.; Boursiac, Y.; Luu, D.T.; Santoni, V.; Shahzad, Z.; Verdoucq, L. Aquaporins in plants. Physiol. Rev. 2015, 95, 1321–1358. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Reizer, J.; Reizer, A.; Saier, J.M.H. The MIP family of integral membrane channel proteins: Sequence comparisons, evolutionary relationships, reconstructed pathway of evolution, and proposed functional differentiation of the two repeated halves of the proteins. Crit. Rev. Biochem. Mol. Biol. 1993, 28, 235–257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Sudhakaran, S.; Thakral, V.; Padalkar, G.; Rajora, N.; Dhiman, P.; Raturi, G.; Sharma, Y.; Tripathi, D.K.; Deshmukh, R.; Sharma, T.R.; et al. Significance of solute specificity, expression, and gating mechanism of tonoplast intrinsic protein during development and stress response in plants. Physiol. Plant. 2021, 172, 258–274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Zardoya, P. Phylogeny and evolution of the major intrinsic protein family. Biol. Cell 2005, 97, 397–414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  19. Pommerrenig, B.; Diehn, T.A.; Bernhardt, N.; Bienert, M.D.; Mitani-Ueno, N.; Fuge, J.; Bieber, A.; Spitzer, C.; Brautigam, A.; Ma, J.F.; et al. Functional evolution of nodulin 26-like intrinsic proteins: From bacterial arsenic detoxification to plant nutrient transport. New Phytol. 2020, 225, 1383–1396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  20. Yue, C.; Cao, H.; Wang, L.; Zhou, Y.; Hao, X.; Zeng, J.; Wang, X.; Yang, Y. Molecular cloning and expression analysis of tea plant aquaporin (AQP) gene family. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 2014, 83, 65–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Li, S.; Wang, L.; Zhang, Y.; Zhu, G.; Zhu, X.; Xia, Y.; Li, J.; Gao, X.; Wang, S.; Zhang, J.; et al. Genome-wide identification and function of aquaporin genes during dormancy and sprouting periods of kernel-using apricot (Prunus armeniaca L.). Front. Plant Sci. 2021, 12, 690040. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Tao, P.; Zhong, X.M.; Li, B.Y.; Wang, W.H.; Yue, Z.C.; Lei, J.L.; Guo, W.L.; Huang, X.Y. Genome-wide identification and characterization of aquaporin genes (AQPs) in Chinese cabbage (Brassica rapa ssp. pekinensis). Mol. Genet. Genom. 2014, 289, 1131–1145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Smart, L.B.; Moskal, W.A.; Cameron, K.D.; Bennett, A.B. MIP genes are down-regulated under drought stress in Nicotiana glauca. Plant Cell Physiol. 2001, 42, 686–693. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  24. Alleva, K.; Marquez, M.; Villarreal, N.; Mut, P.; Bustamante, C.; Bellati, J.; Martinez, G.; Civello, M.; Amodeo, G. Cloning, functional characterization, and co-expression studies of a novel aquaporin (FaPIP2;1) of strawberry fruit. J. Exp. Bot. 2010, 61, 3935–3945. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  25. Ayadi, M.; Cavez, D.; Miled, N.; Chaumont, F.; Masmoudi, K. Identification and characterization of two plasma membrane aquaporins in durum wheat (Triticum turgidum L. subsp. durum) and their role in abiotic stress tolerance. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 2011, 49, 1029–1039. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Tournaire-Roux, C.; Sutka, M.; Javot, H.; Gout, E.; Gerbeau, P.; Luu, D.T.; Bligny, R.; Maurel, C. Cytosolic pH regulates root water transport during anoxic stress through gating of aquaporins. Nature 2003, 425, 393–397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Sade, N.; Gebretsadik, M.; Seligmann, R.; Schwartz, A.; Wallach, R.; Moshelion, M. The role of tobacco Aquaporin1 in improving water use efficiency, hydraulic conductivity, and yield production under salt stress. Plant Physiol. 2010, 152, 245–254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Aharon, R.; Shahak, Y.; Wininger, S.; Bendov, R.; Kapulnik, Y.; Galili, G. Overexpression of a plasma membrane aquaporin in transgenic tobacco improves plant vigor under favorable growth conditions but not under drought or salt stress. Plant Cell 2003, 15, 439–447. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Afzal, Z.; Howton, T.C.; Sun, Y.; Mukhtar, M.S. The roles of aquaporins in plant stress responses. J. Dev. Biol. 2016, 4, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  30. Alexandersson, E.; Danielson, J.A.; Rade, J.; Moparthi, V.K.; Fontes, M.; Kjellbom, P.; Johanson, U. Transcriptional regulation of aquaporins in accessions of Arabidopsis in response to drought stress. Plant J. 2010, 61, 650–660. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Kayum, M.A.; Park, J.I.; Nath, U.K.; Biswas, M.K.; Kim, H.T.; Nou, I.S. Genome-wide expression profiling of aquaporin genes confer responses to abiotic and biotic stresses in Brassica rapa. BMC Plant Biol. 2017, 17, 23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  32. Zhou, S.; Hu, W.; Deng, X.; Ma, Z.; Chen, L.; Huang, C.; Wang, C.; Wang, J.; He, Y.; Yang, G.; et al. Overexpression of the wheat aquaporin gene, TaAQP7, enhances drought tolerance in transgenic tobacco. PLoS ONE 2012, 7, e52439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  33. Hu, W.; Yuan, Q.; Wang, Y.; Cai, R.; Deng, X.; Wang, J.; Zhou, S.; Chen, M.; Chen, L.; Huang, C.; et al. Overexpression of a wheat aquaporin gene, TaAQP8, enhances salt stress tolerance in transgenic tobacco. Plant Cell Physiol. 2012, 53, 2127–2141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  34. Zhang, L.; Zang, F.; Hasi, A. Research progress on alfalfa salt tolerance. Acta Pr. Sin. 2012, 21, 296–305. [Google Scholar]
  35. Kaiwen, G.; Zisong, X.; Yuze, H.; Qi, S.; Yue, W.; Yanhui, C.; Jiechen, W.; Wei, L.; Huihui, Z. Effects of salt concentration, pH, and their interaction on plant growth, nutrient uptake, and photochemistry of alfalfa (Medicago sativa) leaves. Plant Signal. Behav. 2020, 15, 1832373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Zhang, H.H.; Li, X.; Nan, X.; Sun, G.Y.; Sun, M.L.; Cai, D.J.; Siyu Gu, S.Y. Alkalinity and salinity tolerance during seed germination and early seedling stages of three alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) cultivars. Legume Res. 2018, 40, 853–858. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  37. Huang, Z.; Liu, Y.; Cui, Z.; Fang, Y.; He, H.H.; Liu, B.R.; Wu, G.L. Soil water storage deficit of alfalfa (Medicago sativa) grasslands along ages in arid area (China). Field Crop. Res. 2018, 221, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Li, S.X.; Liu, J.L.; An, Y.R.; Cao, Y.M.; Liu, Y.S.; Zhang, J.; Geng, J.C.; Hu, T.M.; Yang, P.Z. MsPIP2;2, a novel aquaporin gene from Medicago sativa, confers salt tolerance in transgenic Arabidopsis. Environ. Exp. Bot. 2019, 165, 39–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Sui, H.; Han, B.G.; Lee, J.K.; Walian, P.; Jap, B.K. Structural basis of water-specific transport through the AQP1 water channel. Nature 2001, 414, 872–878. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  40. Chen, T.; Yang, Q.; Zhang, X.; Ding, W.; Gruber, M. An alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) ethylene response factor gene, MsERF11, enhances salt tolerance in transgenic Arabidopsis. Plant Cell Rep. 2012, 31, 1737–1746. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Winicov, I.; Bastola, D.R. Transgenic overexpression of the transcription factor Alfin1 enhances expression of the endogenous MsPRP2 gene in alfalfa and improves salinity tolerance of the plants. Plant Physiol. 1999, 120, 473–480. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  42. Dong, W.; Liu, X.; Li, D.; Gao, T.; Song, Y. Transcriptional profiling reveals that a MYB transcription factor MsMYB4 contributes to the salinity stress response of alfalfa. PLoS ONE 2018, 13, e0204033. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  43. Zheng, G.; Fan, C.; Di, S.; Wang, X.; Xiang, C.; Pang, Y. Over-expression of Arabidopsis EDT1 gene confers drought tolerance in alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.). Front. Plant Sci. 2017, 8, 2125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  44. Tyerman, S.D.; Bohnert, H.J.; Maurel, C.; Steudle, E.; Smith, J.A.C. Plant aquaporins: Their molecular biology, biophysics and significance for plant water relations. J. Exp. Bot. 1999, 50, 1055–1071. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  45. Du, W.; Yang, J.; Ma, L.; Su, Q.; Pang, Y. Identification and characterization of abiotic stress responsive CBL-CIPK family genes in Medicago. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2021, 22, 4634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Ariani, A.; Gepts, P. Genome-wide identification and characterization of aquaporin gene family in common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Mol. Genet. Genom. 2015, 290, 1771–1785. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  47. Liu, L.H.; Ludewig, U.; Gassert, B.; Frommer, W.B.; von Wiren, N. Urea transport by nitrogen-regulated tonoplast intrinsic proteins in Arabidopsis. Plant Physiol. 2003, 133, 1220–1228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  48. Ishikawa, F.; Suga, S.; Uemura, T.; Sato, M.H.; Maeshima, M. Novel type aquaporin SIPs are mainly localized to the ER membrane and show cell-specific expression in Arabidopsis thaliana. FEBS Lett. 2005, 579, 5814–5820. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  49. Xu, Y.; Hu, W.; Liu, J.H.; Zhang, J.B.; Jia, C.H.; Miao, H.X.; Xu, B.Y.; Jin, Z.Q. A banana aquaporin gene, MaPIP1;1, is involved in tolerance to drought and salt stresses. BMC Plant Biol. 2014, 14, 59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  50. Zhang, G.H.; Yu, Z.M.; Silva, T.; Jaime, A.; Wen, D.Z. Identification of aquaporin members in Acacia auriculiformis and functional characterization of AaPIP1-2 involved in drought stress. Environ. Exp. Bot. 2021, 185, 104425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Schuurmans, J.A.M.J.; Boonman, A.; Pieterse, C.M.J.; Borstlap, A.C. Members of the major intrinsic protein (MIP) family, expressed in the developing pea seed coat, include representatives of the PIP, TIP, and NIP subfamilies. Plant Mol. Biol. 2003, 53, 655–667. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  52. Zhu, C.; Schraut, D.; Hartung, W.; Schaffner, A.R. Differential responses of maize MIP genes to salt stress and ABA. J. Exp. Bot. 2005, 56, 2971–2981. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Kawasaki, S.; Borchert, C.; Deyholos, M.; Wang, H.; Brazille, S.; Kawai, K.; Galbraith, D.; Bohnert, H.J. Gene expression profiles during the initial phase of salt stress in rice. Plant Cell 2001, 13, 889–905. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  54. Bailey, T.L.; Boden, M.; Buske, F.A.; Frith, M.; Grant, C.E.; Clementi, L.; Ren, J.; Li, W.W.; Noble, W.S. MEME SUITE: Tools for motif discovery and searching. Nucleic Acids Res. 2009, 37, W202–W208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Chen, C.; Chen, H.; Zhang, Y.; Thomas, H.R.; Frank, M.H.; He, Y.; Xia, R. TBtools: An integrative toolkit developed for interactive analyses of big biological data. Mol. Plant 2020, 13, 1194–1202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. Kumar, S.; Stecher, G.; Tamura, K. MEGA7: Molecular evolutionary genetics analysis version 7.0 for bigger datasets. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2016, 33, 1870–1874. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  57. Wang, Y.; Tang, H.; Debarry, J.D.; Tan, X.; Li, J.; Wang, X.; Lee, T.H.; Jin, H.; Marler, B.; Guo, H.; et al. MCScanX: A toolkit for detection and evolutionary analysis of gene synteny and collinearity. Nucleic Acids Res. 2012, 40, e49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  58. Lescot, M.; Déhais, P.; Thijs, G.; Marchal, K.; Moreau, Y.; De Peer, Y.V.; Rouzé, P.; Rombauts, S. PlantCARE, a database of plant cis-acting regulatory elements and a portal to tools for in silico analysis of promoter sequences. Nucleic Acids Res. 2002, 30, 325–327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Ijms 23 03342 g001 550
Figure 1. The phylogenetic analysis of AQP proteins from M. sativa, M. truncatula and Arabidopsis. The deduced full-length protein sequences of AQPs were constructed by using MEGA7 software based on the Maximum likelihood (ML) method, with bootstrap value of 1000 replicates. Members of four subfamilies of TIPs, PIPs, NIPs and SIPs are highlighted with purple, green, yellow and red backgrounds, respectively. The pink circles indicate AQP proteins from M. sativa; the cyan circles indicate AQP proteins from M. truncatula; and the light-blue circles indicate AQP proteins from Arabidopsis. The AQP proteins from M. truncatula are highlighted in red; while those from M. sativa are highlighted in green.
Figure 1. The phylogenetic analysis of AQP proteins from M. sativa, M. truncatula and Arabidopsis. The deduced full-length protein sequences of AQPs were constructed by using MEGA7 software based on the Maximum likelihood (ML) method, with bootstrap value of 1000 replicates. Members of four subfamilies of TIPs, PIPs, NIPs and SIPs are highlighted with purple, green, yellow and red backgrounds, respectively. The pink circles indicate AQP proteins from M. sativa; the cyan circles indicate AQP proteins from M. truncatula; and the light-blue circles indicate AQP proteins from Arabidopsis. The AQP proteins from M. truncatula are highlighted in red; while those from M. sativa are highlighted in green.
Ijms 23 03342 g001
Ijms 23 03342 g002 550
Figure 2. Chromosomal distribution of AQP family genes in M. sativa. (a) The chromosomal location and inter-chromosomal relationships of AQP genes on the eight chromosomes of M. sativa. The segmentally duplicated genes are in red and connected by red lines. The tandem duplicated genes are in red and connected by cyan lines; (b) Synteny analysis of AQP genes among M. sativa, Arabidopsis, and M. truncatula. Gray lines in the background indicate the collinear blocks within M. sativa, and M. truncatula/Arabidopsis, and the orange lines highlight the syntenic AQP gene pairs.
Figure 2. Chromosomal distribution of AQP family genes in M. sativa. (a) The chromosomal location and inter-chromosomal relationships of AQP genes on the eight chromosomes of M. sativa. The segmentally duplicated genes are in red and connected by red lines. The tandem duplicated genes are in red and connected by cyan lines; (b) Synteny analysis of AQP genes among M. sativa, Arabidopsis, and M. truncatula. Gray lines in the background indicate the collinear blocks within M. sativa, and M. truncatula/Arabidopsis, and the orange lines highlight the syntenic AQP gene pairs.
Ijms 23 03342 g002
Ijms 23 03342 g003 550
Figure 3. Analyses of the phylogenetic relationships, motifs and gene structure of AQP genes from M. sativa. Phylogenetic relationships (a); location of motifs (b); and gene structure of MsAQP genes (c). In (c), blue boxes indicate 5′- or 3′- untranslated regions, red boxes indicate exons, and black lines indicate introns.
Figure 3. Analyses of the phylogenetic relationships, motifs and gene structure of AQP genes from M. sativa. Phylogenetic relationships (a); location of motifs (b); and gene structure of MsAQP genes (c). In (c), blue boxes indicate 5′- or 3′- untranslated regions, red boxes indicate exons, and black lines indicate introns.
Ijms 23 03342 g003
Ijms 23 03342 g004 550
Figure 4. Analyses of cis-acting elements in the upstream promoter region of AQPs in M. sativa. (a) The phylogenetic analysis of the deduced AQP proteins of M. sativa; (b) The colors and numbers on the grid indicated the numbers of different cis-acting elements in these MsAQP genes, which is presented in the form of heatmap; (c) Colored blocks represented different types of cis-acting elements and their relative location in the promoter region of each MsAQP gene.
Figure 4. Analyses of cis-acting elements in the upstream promoter region of AQPs in M. sativa. (a) The phylogenetic analysis of the deduced AQP proteins of M. sativa; (b) The colors and numbers on the grid indicated the numbers of different cis-acting elements in these MsAQP genes, which is presented in the form of heatmap; (c) Colored blocks represented different types of cis-acting elements and their relative location in the promoter region of each MsAQP gene.
Ijms 23 03342 g004
Ijms 23 03342 g005 550
Figure 5. Expression profiles of MtAQP genes under different treatments at different time points were retrieved from the M. truncatula gene expression atlas with multiple GeneChip® data. The color of circles from white to red indicates the expression level from low to high after normalization. (a) Expression profiles of MtAQP genes in roots under 180 mM NaCl treatment at 0, 6, 24 and 48 h; (b) Expression profiles of MtAQP genes in roots under 200 mM NaCl treatment at 0, 1, 2, 5, 10 and 24 h; (c) Expression profiles of MtAQP genes in roots under drought treatment at 2, 3, 4, 7, 10, 14 d and rewater 1d after 14 d drought treatment; (d) Expression profiles of MtAQP genes in shoots under drought treatment at 2, 3, 4, 7, 10, 14 d and rewater 1 d after 14 d drought treatment.
Figure 5. Expression profiles of MtAQP genes under different treatments at different time points were retrieved from the M. truncatula gene expression atlas with multiple GeneChip® data. The color of circles from white to red indicates the expression level from low to high after normalization. (a) Expression profiles of MtAQP genes in roots under 180 mM NaCl treatment at 0, 6, 24 and 48 h; (b) Expression profiles of MtAQP genes in roots under 200 mM NaCl treatment at 0, 1, 2, 5, 10 and 24 h; (c) Expression profiles of MtAQP genes in roots under drought treatment at 2, 3, 4, 7, 10, 14 d and rewater 1d after 14 d drought treatment; (d) Expression profiles of MtAQP genes in shoots under drought treatment at 2, 3, 4, 7, 10, 14 d and rewater 1 d after 14 d drought treatment.
Ijms 23 03342 g005
Ijms 23 03342 g006 550
Figure 6. Determination of gene expression levels for 10 MsAQP genes under stresses by using qPCR. Data are the average of three independent biological samples ± SE and vertical bars indicate standard deviation. (a) The value of X axis represents treatment period with 150 mM NaCl at 0, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 48 h, respectively; the value of Y axis represents relative expressions of each gene; (b) The value of X axis represents treatment period with 15% PEG at 0, 2, 8 and 32 h, respectively; the value of Y axis represents the relative expression of each gene. Data are presented as mean ± SD, Student’s t-test (n = 3, * p <0.05, ** p <0.01).
Figure 6. Determination of gene expression levels for 10 MsAQP genes under stresses by using qPCR. Data are the average of three independent biological samples ± SE and vertical bars indicate standard deviation. (a) The value of X axis represents treatment period with 150 mM NaCl at 0, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 48 h, respectively; the value of Y axis represents relative expressions of each gene; (b) The value of X axis represents treatment period with 15% PEG at 0, 2, 8 and 32 h, respectively; the value of Y axis represents the relative expression of each gene. Data are presented as mean ± SD, Student’s t-test (n = 3, * p <0.05, ** p <0.01).
Ijms 23 03342 g006
Ijms 23 03342 g007 550
Figure 7. Determination of relative expression levels for 10 MsAQP genes in different tissues in M. sativa by using qPCR. Data are the average of three independent biological samples ± SE and vertical bars indicate standard deviation. The value of the X axis represents root, stem, leaf, flower tissues. The expression level in root for each sample were set as value of 1.
Figure 7. Determination of relative expression levels for 10 MsAQP genes in different tissues in M. sativa by using qPCR. Data are the average of three independent biological samples ± SE and vertical bars indicate standard deviation. The value of the X axis represents root, stem, leaf, flower tissues. The expression level in root for each sample were set as value of 1.
Ijms 23 03342 g007
Table
Table 1. Properties of the predicted AQP proteins in M. sativa.
Table 1. Properties of the predicted AQP proteins in M. sativa.
NumberTIGR-LocusGene NameHomologous GeneLocusAaPredicted
MW		Theoretical pIPossible Localization
1MsG0180005209.01.T01MsPIP1
(MsPIP2;2)		MtPIP5Chr1: 88571578–8857820528830579.527.74Cell membrane
2MsG0380015447.01.T01MsPIP2MtPIP3Chr3: 70296270–7029868229131059.178.90 Cell membrane
3MsG0380018055.01.T01MsPIP3MtPIP4Chr3: 103800315–10380107625426902.088.31Cell membrane
4MsG0480018608.01.T01MsPIP4MtPIP7Chr4: 7319525–732333329031159.128.82Cell membrane
5MsG0480020797.01.T01MsPIP5MtPIP5Chr4: 48493988–4849599024826097.258.18Cell membrane
6MsG0480023653.01.T01MsPIP6MtPIP10Chr4: 88108160–8811338135540069.028.75Cell membrane
7MsG0580024388.01.T01MsPIP7MtPIP4Chr5: 4139613–414133019721263.978.43Cell membrane
8MsG0580029158.01.T01MsPIP8MtPIP8Chr5: 93033668–9303645729030906.218.61Cell membrane
9MsG0780040928.01.T01MsPIP9MtPIP9Chr7: 84352446–8435554028830559.858.60 Cell membrane
10MsG0180000870.01.T01MsTIP1MtTIP2Chr1: 12403720–1240413013714437.455.66Vacuole
11MsG0180000871.01.T01MsTIP2MtTIP1Chr1: 12412319–1241379624825781.495.64Vacuole
12MsG0180002324.01.T01MsTIP3MtTIP2Chr1: 36718462–3672005819921587.50 7.04Cell membrane
13MsG0180002325.01.T01MsTIP4MtTIP1Chr1: 36733969–3673632828229952.425.82Vacuole
14MsG0180004225.01.T01MsTIP5MtTIP3Chr1: 75118675–7512093017718718.899.51Vacuole
15MsG0180004352.01.T01MsTIP6MtTIP3Chr1: 76796413–7680104041545354.729.38Vacuole
16MsG0180006158.01.T01MsTIP7MtTIP4Chr1: 100812909–10081849258364517.536.37Vacuole
17MsG0280011277.01.T01MsTIP8MtTIP6Chr2: 81845004–8186068181087446.925.34Vacuole
18MsG0480019955.01.T01MsTIP9MtTIP5Chr4: 30649828–3065183325526514.827.81Cell membrane, Vacuole
19MsG0480020913.01.T01MsTIP10MtTIP7Chr4: 50479435–5048678331433087.298.89Mitochondrion, Vacuole
20MsG0480021749.01.T01MsTIP11MtTIP4Chr4: 63840282–6384393918720199.997.59Cell membrane
21MsG0580024535.01.T01MsTIP12MtTIP10Chr5: 6118582–612077425025198.30 4.80 Vacuole
22MsG0580027125.01.T01MsTIP13MtTIP11Chr5: 54044943–5404656920621848.30 6.17Cell membrane
23MsG0680034456.01.T01MsTIP14MtTIP11Chr6: 87915432–8791695325627105.246.79Vacuole
24MsG0780036905.01.T01MsTIP15MtTIP12Chr7: 16035382–1603809525325952.355.30 Vacuole
25MsG0780041015.01.T01MsTIP16MtTIP13Chr7: 85529113–8553056825125377.425.60 Vacuole
26MsG0880042325.01.T01MsTIP17MtTIP14Chr8: 7123675–713489663368553.425.94Vacuole
27MsG0180005353.01.T01MsNIP1MtNIP2Chr1: 90755063–9075927727728709.357.70 Cell membrane
28MsG0280006945.01.T01MsNIP2MtNIP6Chr2: 8392964–839561317618686.746.05Cell membrane
29MsG0280011459.01.T01MsNIP3MtNIP8Chr2: 84287469–8428906329831898.00 8.64Cell membrane
30MsG0280011463.01.T01MsNIP4MtNIP8Chr2: 84353257–8435408817718581.699.15Cell membrane
31MsG0380011693.01.T01MsNIP5MtNIP9Chr3: 3582941–358366624225411.555.88Cell membrane, Vacuole
32MsG0480018161.01.T01MsNIP6MtNIP11Chr4: 1050114–105490730631590.628.32Cell membrane
33MsG0480022137.01.T01MsNIP7MtNIP12Chr4: 68715281–6871679826828455.956.30 Cell membrane
34MsG0580024652.01.T01MsNIP8MtNIP6Chr5: 7739808–774662442445190.818.96Cell membrane
35MsG0580024653.01.T01MsNIP9MtNIP3Chr5: 7756717–775962127429033.097.77Cell membrane
36MsG0580027846.01.T01MsNIP10MtNIP13Chr5: 69497858–6949856013114025.899.78Cell membrane
37MsG0580028354.01.T01MsNIP11MtNIP13Chr5: 78973396–7897579316517535.426.18Cell membrane
38MsG0580028987.01.T01MsNIP12MtNIP14Chr5: 89952725–8995488826728363.655.69Cell membrane
39MsG0780036257.01.T01MsNIP13MtNIP3Chr7: 5446318–544972724727704.80 4.95Cell membrane
40MsG0780036261.01.T01MsNIP14MtNIP15Chr7: 5540627–554506427528728.00 9.05Cell membrane
41MsG0680031712.01.T01MsSIP1MtSIP2Chr6: 25135696–2514107231935007.479.38Cell membrane
42MsG0780040029.01.T01MsSIP2MtSIP3Chr7: 72189472–7219111219920821.918.98Cell membrane, Endoplasmic reticulum
43MsG0780040134.01.T01MsSIP3MtSIP3Chr7: 73492814–7349431815216306.227.70 Cell membrane
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Luo, Y.; Ma, L.; Du, W.; Yan, S.; Wang, Z.; Pang, Y. Identification and Characterization of Salt- and Drought-Responsive AQP Family Genes in Medicagosativa L. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23, 3342. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms23063342

AMA Style

Luo Y, Ma L, Du W, Yan S, Wang Z, Pang Y. Identification and Characterization of Salt- and Drought-Responsive AQP Family Genes in Medicagosativa L. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2022; 23(6):3342. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms23063342

Chicago/Turabian Style

Luo, Yijing, Lin Ma, Wenxuan Du, Su Yan, Zengyu Wang, and Yongzhen Pang. 2022. "Identification and Characterization of Salt- and Drought-Responsive AQP Family Genes in Medicagosativa L." International Journal of Molecular Sciences 23, no. 6: 3342. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms23063342

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