Skip to main content
Download PDF

Suppression of microRNA168 enhances salt tolerance in rice (Oryza sativa L.)

BMC Plant Biology volume 22, Article number: 563 (2022) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

Rice is a salt-sensitive crop. Complex gene regulatory cascades are likely involved in salinity stress in rice roots. microRNA168 (miR168) is a conserved miRNA among different plant species. It in-directly regulates the expression of all miRNAs by targeting gene ARGONAUTE1(AGO1). Short Tandem Target Mimic (STTM) technology is an ideal approach to study miRNA functions by in-activating mature miRNA in plants.

Results

In this study, rice miR168 was inactivated by STTM. The T3 generation seedlings of STTM168 exhibited significantly enhanced salt resistance. Direct target genes of rice miR168 were obtained by in silico prediction and further confirmed by degradome-sequencing. PINHEAD (OsAGO1), which was previously suggested to be a plant abiotic stress response regulator. RNA-Seq was performed in root samples of 150mM salt-treated STTM168 and control seedlings. Among these screened 481 differentially expressed genes within STTM168 and the control, 44 abiotic stress response related genes showed significant difference, including four known salt-responsive genes.

Conclusion

Based on sequencing and qRT-PCR, a “miR168-AGO1-downstream” gene regulation model was proposed to be responsible for rice salt stress response. The present study proved miR168-AGO1 cascade to play important role in rice salinity stress responding, as well as to be applied in agronomic improvement in further.

Peer Review reports

Background

During the development of crops, including rice, which need to cope with various environmental stresses. For instance, high salinity is a main limiting factor of plants growth and thereby results in crop yield reduction. As exposed to a high salinity environment, photosynthesis, protein synthesis, and energy metabolism are affected, which can cause crops physiological drought, ion toxicity, and physiological and metabolic disorders, eventually causing cell apoptosis and plant death [1]. During evolution, plants have generated multiple responding mechanisms to salinity stress. The plant prefers to avoid or minimize the effect of salinity stress for keeping the cell alive [2]. Genome-wide detection of high salinity stress-responsive genes has been reported in divergent plant species [3, 4] to reveal that plant salt stress responses and tolerance occur at both the transcriptional and post-transcriptional levels [5, 6]. The increased studies have identified transcription factors and regulatory RNAs to play important roles in abiotic stress response, including salinity stress.

MicroRNAs (miRNAs) were defined as endo-genome small non-coding RNAs that are 21–24 nt in length [7]. It is now clear that miRNA-mediated gene regulation in plants plays an important role in the response to abiotic stress [8, 9], such as drought, salt, high- and low-temperature, and heavy metal stress. Reports on the response of plant miRNAs to drought stress and salt stress, such as miR159, miR171, and miR394 respond to drought stress in Arabidopsis [10]; miR170, miR172, and miR408 are identified to be related to drought stress in rice [11]; Furthermore, miR161 is associated with salt stress in Arabidopsis [12]; miR2111 is involved in the regulation of salt tolerance in soybean [13]; miR156, miR160, miR164, miR167, miR528, and their target genes are also involved in the salt stress response in rice [14, 15]. 11 down-regulated and 3 up-regulated miRNAs were identified in Solanum plants under salt stress [16].

In rice, a recent study proved that suppression of rice miR168 could improve yield, flowering time, and immunity via the regulation of miR535, miR1320, and miR164 by AGO1 [17]. And, miR168 was also identified to express differentially under salt stress conditions by genome-wide miRNA-seq analysis [18]. In maize and wheat, differential miR168 expression was also detected in high salinity conditions [19, 20]. These results indicated that miR168 expression may be associated with plant salt stress responses. However, the roles of miR168, together with the cascade including its direct target genes in salt stress response, were not yet fully uncovered. The increasing studies indicate STTM is an efficient artificial miRNA target mimic technique that allows ones to explore the functions of individual miRNAs [21].

In this study, STTM168 was constructed and transformed into rice. As subjected to salinity stress treatment, STTM168 mutants displayed increased plant heights and root lengths compared with that in the control, indicating that STTM168 seedlings have an enhanced salt tolerance [2]. To explain the miRNA 168-dependent salt tolerance mechanism and regulation pathway, transcriptome sequencing, degradome-seq, and qRT-PCR were performed. The homeostasis within miR168 and its target gene OsAGO1a may regulate rice salt stress responses through their effect on the cellular balance of Na+ and further affect plant growth.

Results

Functional blockage of rice miR168 mediates enhanced salinity tolerance

Based on the previous study [21], STTM168 was designed and constructed in pCAMBIA3301 plasmid (Fig. 1 A). By genetic transformation in rice, STTM168 mutant plants were obtained. After genotyping and reproduction, three independent lines were chosen randomly, named STTM168-1, STTM168-2, and STTM168-3, and used in further phenotypic analyses. Compared with the control, the miR168 expression level decreased significantly in STTM168 plants (Fig. 1B). Without salinity stress, there was no significant difference in shoot height and root length between STTM168 plants and the control (Fig. 1 C; Fig. 2). Compared with the CK plants, there was a significant increase in shoot length, root length, and root number in STTM168 plants grown on 1/2 MS medium supplemented with 150 mM NaCl (Figs. 1D and 2). Thereby, STTM168 plants showed enhanced tolerance to salinity compared to the control.

Fig. 1
figure 1

miR168 suppression mediates enhanced salinity stress tolerance in rice. A The diagram of STTM168 structure with a 48 nt length spacer flanked by two non-cleavable; (B) miR168 expressed alterations mediated by salinity stress in STTM168 transgenic lines. C-D Performance of the STTM168 and the control seedlings grown on 1/2 MS medium supplemented with or without 150 mM NaCl solution. The scale bar indicates 1 cm

Full size image
Fig. 2
figure 2

Phenotypic alterations of STTM168 plant and the control under salinity stress. A The shoot length of STTM168 and CK seedlings grown on 1/2 MS medium supplemented with or without 150 mM NaCl at 21 d after planting; (B) The root length of STTM168 and CK seedlings grown on 1/2 MS medium supplemented with or without 150 mM NaCl at 21 d after planting; (C) The root number of STTM168 and CK seedlings grown on 1/2 MS medium supplemented with or without 150 mM NaCl at 21 d after planting; (D) Na+ content in the roots of STTM168 and CK seedlings grown on 1/2 MS medium supplemented with or without 150 mM NaCl at 21 d after planting. A-D The values presented in the charts are the mean ± SD (n = 3). * t-test P value ≤ 0.05; ** t-test P value ≤ 0.01

Full size image

Identification of the target genes of miR168

The relative expression of miR168 was downregulated in the STTM168 lines compared with CK (Fig. 1B). To further confirm the binding of miR168 to its target genes, degradome sequencing was performed. Two candidate genes were identified, such as OsAGO1a (LOC_Os02g45070) and LOC_Os09g02700. During salinity stress treatment, OsAGO1a showed down-regulated expression in STTM168 lines. From salinity stress treated for 10 days to 32 days, the expression of OsAGO1a exhibited an increasing trend but decreased at treated 45 days (Fig. 3 A). On the other hand, LOC_Os09g02700 exhibited a different expression trend during salinity stress treatment (Fig. 3B). These results indicated that miR168 is a major regulator of the expression of its target gene OsAGO1a. As the AGO1 gene is a key component of an RNA-induced silencing complex (RISC), a significant change in its expression level may lead to large changes in downstream genes, including a vast majority of miRNA families and their respective cascades.

Fig. 3
figure 3

The Expression profiles of miR168 target genes. A, B The relative expression of LOC_Os02g45070 and LOC_Os09g02700 in STTM168 and the control seedlings grown on 1/2 MS medium under regular condition and salinity stress. Values were normalized to the OsActin level. The values presented in the charts are the mean ± SD (n = 3). * t-test P value ≤ 0.05; ** t-test P value ≤ 0.01

Full size image

Salt response and stress response genes identified by RNA-seq and qRT-PCR analyses

To identify the downstream genes regulated by OsAGO1, salinity-stressed STTM168 and the control seedlings were subjected to RNA-seq (Fig. 4). In total, there were 481 differentially expressed genes were screened (Padj < 0.05, Log2FoldChange > 1) (Supplementary Table 2). Overall, 44 out of these 481 differentially expressed genes were marked as being stress-response genes (Supplementary Table 3), which accounts for the most abundant group in the differentially expressed genes. Among these stress response genes, there were four salt stress response genes, LOC_Os02g03840.2 (signal transduction factor), OsRCI 2–5(LOC_Os03g17790.1), LOC_Os07g07270.1 (Bric-a-Brac, E3 ubiquitin ligase), and LOC_Os02g09480.1 (MYB transcriptional factor). Among these four genes, the expression of the MYB gene was only detected in the non-transgenic control, the signal transduction factor was downregulated in the transgenic lines compared with the control, and OsRCI 2–5 and the Bric-a-Brac E3 ubiquitin ligase were upregulated in the transgenic lines and the control under salt stress conditions.

Fig. 4
figure 4

The differentially expressed genes of RNA-seq. Red dots indicate up-regulated genes and green dots for down-regulated genes (Significant level: Padj < 0.05, Log2FoldChange > 1).

Full size image

Expression profiles of four stress-responsive genes, including the four annotated as salt-responsive genes, were further validated by qRT-PCR (Fig. 5). The results showed that their expression patterns were consistent with the RNA-Seq data. Based on the above results, we concluded that the above four genes related to salt stress response may be the downstream target genes of OsAGO1a.

Fig. 5
figure 5

The expression profiles of four selected stress-responsive genes in STTM168 and the control seedlings. A-D The relative expression of salt-responsive genes in STTM168 and CK seedlings grown on 1/2 MS medium supplemented with or without 150 mM NaCl for 10, 21, 32, or 45 d. E The relative expression of the stress-responsive gene LOC_Os03g50540 in STTM168 and CK seedlings grown on 1/2 MS medium supplemented with or without 150 NaCl for 10, 21, 32, or 45 d. Values were normalized to the OsActin level. The values presented in the charts are the mean ± SD (n = 3). * t-test P value ≤ 0.05; ** t-test P value ≤ 0.01

Full size image

For defining miR168 regulated gene expression network and pathways, the screened differentially expressed genes between STTM168 and the control were subjected to GO and KEGG enrichment (Figs. 6 and 7). The GO analysis revealed that these genes are strongly associated with photosystem I, chloroplast thylakoid membrane, and transport. In turn, the KEGG enrichment analysis identified these genes to be significantly enriched in terpenoid backbone biosynthesis, porphyrin and chlorophyll metabolism, photosynthesis-antenna proteins, and photosynthesis pathways. Notably, the GO enrichment analysis for the up-regulated differentially expressed genes (DEGs) in STTM168 indicated that the most significant enriched term in the biological process category is related to ion transport, such as transmembrane transport and ion transmembrane transport. And, the up-regulated DEGs were also mainly enriched in integral component of plasma membrane and plant-type cell wall as well as cell periphery (Supplementary Table 4). Similarly, it has been reported that the P-type ATPases localized at the plasma membrane play an essential role in cellular ion transport and further regulate salt tolerance of plants [22]. Collectively, we envision that the up-regulated DEGs in STTM168 involved in ion transport may largely contribute to the salinity tolerance of the STTM168 mutants.

Fig. 6
figure 6

The gene ontology of miR168-dependent differentially expressed genes between the salinity stressed STTM168 and the control. The p-values of these genes were less than 0.1. Among them, the chloroplast thylakoid membrane term is the most

Full size image
Fig. 7
figure 7

The KEGG analysis of miR168-dependent differentially expressed genes between the salinity stressed STTM168 and the control. The p-values of these genes were less than 0.1. Among them, the chloroplast thylakoid membrane term is the most

Full size image

Discussion

miR168 regulates salinity stress response via OsAGO1a-associated miRNAs biogenesis

Activation of miRNAs under stress leads to the coherent suppression of many downstream protein-coding genes and physiological responses [23]. The direct target gene of miR168 in rice is AGO1 (LOC_Os04g47870), which encodes a key protein factor for recruiting miRNAs to the RISC. AGO1 is also called “Slicer” for its miRNA target gene binding and cutting action. The rice AGO1 was also named PINHEAD because the ago1 null mutant leads to early developmental defects in Arabidopsis [24, 25].

Recently, AGO1-dependent transcriptional activation has been reported, possibly via binding to RNA Pol II and/or TATA-box binding proteins mediated by miRNAs [26]. It is possible that miR168, together with its target AGO1, may influence downstream gene expression both at the transcriptional and post-transcriptional levels [27,28,29]. AGO protein has important functions in activating gene expression that differs from classical RNA interference in Arabidopsis. This new function plays an important regulatory role in plant responses to plant hormones and environmental stresses [30].

Here, we propose the miR168-directed AGO1-dependent gene regulation cascade (Fig. 8) to explain the differences in the salt stress response of STTM168 roots and those of the non-transgenic control. It was suggested that miR168 may interrupt salt stress responses by downregulating its target gene AGO1 to affect the RISC activities of other miRNAs. It has been reported that miR319, which is a positive regulator of salt responses, acts by repressing its target genes at the post-transcriptional level [31]. The main target genes of miRNAs are most commonly transcription factors that may, in turn, bind to downstream gene promoters and control the expression of downstream genes. In this study, the target genes LOC_Os02g03840.2, OsRCI25 (LOC_Os03g17790.1), LOC_Os07g07270.1, LOC_Os02g09480.1, and LOC_Os03g50540 were found to be differentially expressed between the STTM168 and CK plants (Fig. 4). It has been suggested that AGO1 may influence the Arabidopsis salt stress response through the regulation of miRNAs at the transcriptional and post-transcriptional level [32]. We showed that STTM168 increased rice salt stress tolerance, indicating that the miR168-AGO1 cascade may be functionally conserved in plant salt stress adaptation. The role of the direct target genes of AGO1 in the regulation of downstream salt stress responsive genes requires further analysis.

In this study, we also found a gene (LOC_Os09g02700.1) encoding a poly(A)-binding protein. The expression and activity of poly(A)-binding proteins are negatively correlated with the silencing intensity of miRNA, partly because of the antagonistic effect of target mRNA deadenylation [33]. While there is, at present, no evidence of a correlation between polyA and stress responses in plants, they might play a role in salt tolerance, thereby representing a new target gene for miR168.

Fig. 8
figure 8

The miR168-directed gene regulation cascade in the response of rice roots to salt stress

Full size image

Functional genes that may be involved in salt stress response

By analyzing the RNA-seq results, we revealed that there are four genes annotated as “salt stress-responsive” according to their GO terms, including two transcription factors, a gene encoding a membrane protein, and a Bric-a-Brac E3 ubiquitin ligase-coding gene. We speculated that these four genes may be the downstream targets of OsAGO1a.

Among the two transcriptional factors, there is a member of the MYB transcription factor family (LOC_Os02g09480.1). MYB proteins are key factors in the abiotic stress response regulatory network [34]. In wheat, 60 MYB genes have been identified, 14 of which were induced by salt stress and two that were inhibited by salt stress [35]. It was reported that R2R3-type MYB transcription factors involved in the rice salt stress response function predominately by influencing the signal transduction of ROS [36] and/or transporting ions such as potassium [37]. R2R3-MYB-type proteins play a key role in plant growth, development, and defense response [38].

The other transcription factor-coding gene (LOC_Os07g07270), a homolog of the Arabidopsis RBB1 gene, serves as a substrate adaptor to the Bric-a-Brac E3 ubiquitin ligase, which belongs to the BTB E3 ligase family. LOC_Os07g07270 was reportedly involved in Arabidopsis salt responses by regulating ERF translation [39]. In the ubiquitination system, the key enzymes mainly include E1 (Ub-activating), E2 (Ub-conjugating), and E3 (Ub-ligase) enzymes. The selective modification of ubiquitin proteins is directed by different families of ubiquitin protein ligases (or E3S). Notably, MYB and BTB cross-talk influence ERF at the transcriptional and post-translational levels [40].

OsRCI25, one of the rare cold-inducible genes, was also found to be responding directly to salt stress. This gene was reported to respond to a subset of abiotic stresses including cold, drought, and high salinity. The expression of OsRCI25 in different stress environments is organ specific [41]. This is consistent with other studies that have shown OcRCI25 responding to both iron stress and osmotic stress.

Potential application of STTM168 in rice salinity stress tolerance improvement

Salt stress is important abiotic stress that greatly inhibits crop growth and reduces yields. It is clear that rice is considered to be a salt-sensitive species and salt stress greatly influences the growth, physiological function, and biochemical performance of rice. Therefore, it is considered to be a great challenge to develop superior crop cultivars with both high yields and high salt stress resistance in rice. Discovering favorable genes involved in the balance of rice salt tolerance and identifying key regulators of functional genes could be used to enhance the salt stress resistance in rice. In this study, we found that STTM168 showed significantly enhanced salt resistance compared with the non-transgenic control via OsAGO1a-associated miRNAs biogenesis. These findings may provide excellent rice germplasm with high abiotic stress resistance. This means that the development of superior rice cultivars with high abiotic stress resistance may be possible.

In summary, our research shows that the miR168-OsAGO1 gene cascade significantly involves in rice salt stress tolerance. Further analysis of RNA-seq data showed that STTM168 transgenic plants significantly improve salt stress tolerance through increasing its target gene expression and other down-stream genes in response. Further researches are required to explore the function of target genes regulated by OsAGO1. Considering that the miR168-AGO cascade is functionally conserved in plants, it is a promising strategy to improve the abiotic stress tolerance in both rice and other important commercial crops.

Materials and methods

STTM vector construction, gene transfer, and transgenic positive plants selection

The STTM vector of rice miR168 was constructed as described previously [42]. Briefly, Briefly, to generate 35 S:STTM168 in the pCAMBIA3301 plasmid, the STTM168 sequence was designed and artificially synthesized. The sequence of STTM168 was then cloned into BglII- and BstEII-digested pCAMBIA3301 plasmid. Further, the constructed plasmid was subjected to transform in Nipponbare (BioRun, Wuhan, China). The obtained T0 generation STTM168 and the non-transgenic control seeds of the same genetic background were planted in the growthroom of Henan Agricultural University (Zhengzhou, China), at an average temperature of 32℃ and 76% humidity in the summer of 2016. Seeds of the T1 generation and the non-transgenic control lines were harvested. The T3 generation of transgenic positive lines and the non-transgenic control seeds were collected for use in the high salinity treatment.

In addition to the BASTA herbicide screening, PCR assays were conducted on the plants at each generation. Genomic DNA was extracted from leaves using the SLS method [43], as described previously. PCR assays were performed with bar gene-specific primers: Bar-F: 5′-ACCCACGTCATGCCAGTTC-3′; and Bar-R: 5′- CTGCACCATCGT CAACCACTA − 3′. Only the herbicide-resistant and PCR-positive seeds were treated as transgenic positives. Finally, we obtained three independent transformation events STTM168-1, STTM168-2, and STTM168-3, respectively.

Salt treatment and phenotyping

For the salt tolerance assay, 90 hand-selected seeds of the homogeneous transgenic T3 generation and the wild type seeds were surface-sterilized with 70% alcohol for 1 min following sterilization with a mixture of 0.1% HgCl and 2% NaClO (1:1) for 20 min. The seeds were then washed five times with sterilized distilled water before being germinated on 1/2 MS medium (MS salt 2.165 g, sucrose 60.0 g, pH 5.8) supplemented with or without 150 mM NaCl under 28℃/25°C (day/night) during a 12-h photoperiod. Germinated seeds were placed in an incubator with controlled 60% humidity and a 12,000 lx light period (12 h/12 h, light/dark). At 21 d after germination, shoot height, root length, and fresh weight of at least 30 seedlings of each line were measured. The seedlings were then cultured in nutrient solution supplemented with or without 150 mM NaCl and aerated continuously at 32 °C/25°C (day/night) at 12,000 lx light period (14 h/10 h, light/dark), with the nutrient solution changed once a week (pH = 5.5).

The root Na + content was measured as described previously [44]. Briefly, roots were harvested from non-transgenic control and STTM168 seedlings grown on 1/2 MS medium with or without 150 mM NaCl. Samples were washed three times with deionized water, fixed at 105℃ for 30 min, then dried at 70 °C for 3 d. After weighing, the dried samples were digested with 5 ml concentrated sulfuric acid until clarification and the volume increased to 50 ml. The Na+ content was measured using an atomic absorption spectrophotometer (ZA3000, HITACHI, Tokyo, Japan).

Sample collection and RNA extraction

The salt-treated root tissues of 45 days old STTM168 and the non-transgenic control seedlings were harvested for total RNA extraction and RNA-Seq. Total RNA was extracted using Trizol reagent (Invitrogen, CA, USA) following the manufacturer’s instructions. The total RNA quantity and purity were analyzed using a Bioanalyzer 2100 and RNA 6000 Nano LabChip Kit (Agilent, CA, USA) with RIN number > 7.0. Approximately 10 µg of total RNA representing a specific adipose type was subjected to isolate Poly (A) mRNA with oligodT attached magnetic beads (Invitrogen). Following purification, the mRNA was fragmented into small pieces using divalent cations under elevated temperatures. The cleaved RNA fragments were then reverse-transcribed to create the cDNA library following the protocol for the mRNA-seq sample preparation kit (Illumina, San Diego, USA). The average insert size for the paired-end libraries was 300 bp (± 50 bp). Paired-end sequencing was then performed on an Illumina Hiseq2000/2500 (LC Science, Hangzhou, China) following the vendor’s recommended protocol.

Identification of miR168 target genes in rice

To further focus on candidates, degradome sequencing of developing root samples was performed (LC-Science, Hangzhou, China). First, we constructed a library of samples from the root degradation group. Then, an improved library building process was used for sequencing [45]. According to the plan provided by LC-BIO (Hangzhou, China), single-end sequencing (36 bp) was carried out on an Illumina Hiseq 2500. Differences in the data level of the degradation group were tested by Fisher, Chi-square 2 × 2 test, Chi-square n×n test, standard t-test, and ANOVA analysis of variance. The thresholds were set at 0.01 and 0.05, respectively.

RNA-seq and data analysis

The adapters and low-quality reads of raw data were filtered using Trimmomatic [46]. The filtered reads were aligned to the rice reference genome (https://plants.ensembl.org/Oryza_sativa/Info/Index) using Hisat2 [47]. The transcripts of each sample were assembled using Featurecounts [48], and the count matrix was generated using a Perl script. The differentially expressed gene analysis was performed using the DESeq2 package in R software [49]. The genes with abs(log2 fold change) > 1 and a statistical significance (p-value < 0.05) were determined to be differentially expressed. The Gene Ontology (GO) annotations were obtained using eggNOG-Mapper v2 (http://eggnog-mapper.embl.de/) [50]. The Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) annotations were obtained on the KEGG website (https://www.kegg.jp/kegg/) [51]. The GO and KEGG enrichment analysis were performed using TBtools [52].

Relative expression amounts of selected genes were validated by qRT-PCR

The expression profiles of seven selected stress-responsive genes, including OsAGO1 and OsAGO2 salt response genes, were obtained by qRT-PCR. RT primers were designed and listed in Supplement Table 1. Relative expression levels of selected miRNAs were measured by stem-loop RT-PCR as described previously [53]. Reverse transcription reactions were then performed with MMLV reverse transcription enzymes (Mir-X miRNA First-Strand Synthesis and SYBR qRT-PCR) to obtain first-strand cDNA. PCR primers (Supplementary Table 1) were designed using Primer3 (http://primer3.ut.ee/) [54]. Each reaction was performed in triplicate and OsActin was used as the reference gene. miRNA concentration was set for each reaction with U6 as the internal control. RT-miR168a, the mRQ 3′ primer supplied with the kit, was also used (Mir-X miRNA First-Strand Synthesis and SYBR qRT-PCR, Clontech).

Availability of data and materials

The RNA-seq datasets are available from the National Center for Biotechnology Information, under BioProject number PRJNA873756.

Abbreviations

STTM:

Short Tandem Target Mimic

AGO1:

ARGONAUTE1

OsAGO1:

PINHEAD

GO:

Gene Ontology

KEGG:

Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes

qRT-PCR:

quantitative Real-time PCR

DEGs:

Differentially expressed genes

References

  1. Rana M, Mark T. Mechanisms of salinity tolerance. Annu Rev Plant Biol. 2008;59:651–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Munns R. Genes and salt tolerance: bringing them together. New Phytol. 2005;167(3):645–63.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Yang Z, Zhu P, Kang H, Liu L, Cao Q, Sun J, Dong T, Zhu M, Li Z, Xu T. High-throughput deep sequencing reveals the important role that microRNAs play in the salt response in sweet potato (Ipomoea batatas L.). BMC Genomics. 2020;21(1):1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Si J, Zhou T, Bo W, Xu F, Wu R. Genome-wide analysis of salt-responsive and novel microRNAs in Populus euphratica by deep sequencing. BMC Genet. 2014;15(1):1–11.

  5. Lee WS, Gudimella R, Wong GR, Tammi MT, Khalid N, Harikrishna JA. Transcripts and microRNAs responding to salt stress in Musa acuminata Colla (AAA Group) cv. Berangan roots. PLoS One. 2015;10(5):e0127526.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Sun X, Xu L, Wang Y, Yu R, Zhu X, Luo X, Gong Y, Wang R, Limera C, Zhang K. Identification of novel and salt-responsive miRNAs to explore miRNA-mediated regulatory network of salt stress response in radish (Raphanus sativus L.). BMC Genomics. 2015;16(1):1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Jones-Rhoades MW, Bartel DP. Computational identification of plant microRNAs and their targets, including a stress-induced miRNA. Mol Cell. 2004;14(6):787–99.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Mondal TK, Ganie SA. Identification and characterization of salt responsive miRNA-SSR markers in rice (Oryza sativa). Gene. 2014;535(2):204–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Ren Y, Chen L, Zhang Y, Kang X, Zhang Z, Wang Y. Identification and characterization of salt-responsive microRNAs in Populus tomentosa by high-throughput sequencing. Biochimie. 2013;95(4):743–50.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Barciszewska-Pacak M, Milanowska K, Knop K, Bielewicz D, Nuc P, Plewka P, Pacak AM, Vazquez F, Karlowski W, Jarmolowski A. Arabidopsis microRNA expression regulation in a wide range of abiotic stress responses. Front Plant Sci. 2015;6:410.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Zhou L, Liu Y, Liu Z, Kong D, Duan M, Luo L. Genome-wide identification and analysis of drought-responsive microRNAs in Oryza sativa. J Exp Bot. 2010;61(15):4157–68.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Liu H-H, Tian X, Li Y-J, Wu C-A, Zheng C-C. Microarray-based analysis of stress-regulated microRNAs in Arabidopsis thaliana. RNA. 2008;14(5):836–43.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Sun Z, Wang Y, Mou F, Tian Y, Chen L, Zhang S, Jiang Q, Li X. Genome-wide small RNA analysis of soybean reveals auxin-responsive microRNAs that are differentially expressed in response to salt stress in root apex. Front Plant Sci. 2016;6:1273.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Liu Q, Hu H, Zhu L, Li R, Feng Y, Zhang L, Yang Y, Liu X, Zhang H. Involvement of miR528 in the regulation of arsenite tolerance in rice (Oryza sativa L.). J Agric Food Chem. 2015;63(40):8849–61.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Peng T, Wen H, Zhao Y, Wang B, Jin Y, Sun H, Zhao Q. Identification and expressions analysis of rice miRNA related to salt and drought stresses. Acta Agric Boreali-Sinica. 2018;8:2114.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Zhuang Y, Zhou X-H, Liu J. Conserved miRNAs and their response to salt stress in wild eggplant Solanum linnaeanum roots. Int J Mol Sci. 2014;15(1):839–49.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Wang H, Li Y, Chern M, Zhu Y, Zhang L-L, Lu J-H, Li X-P, Dang W-Q, Ma X-C, Yang Z-R. Suppression of rice miR168 improves yield, flowering time and immunity. Nat Plants. 2021;7(2):129–36.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Sunkar R, Chinnusamy V, Zhu J, Zhu J-K. Small RNAs as big players in plant abiotic stress responses and nutrient deprivation. Trends Plant Sci. 2007;12(7):301–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Ding D, Zhang L, Wang H, Liu Z, Zhang Z, Zheng Y. Differential expression of miRNAs in response to salt stress in maize roots. Ann Bot. 2009;103(1):29–38.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Eren H, Pekmezci M, Okay S, Turktas M, Inal B, Ilhan E, Atak M, Erayman M, Unver T. Hexaploid wheat (Triticum aestivum) root miRNome analysis in response to salt stress. Ann Appl Biol. 2015;167(2):208–16.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Tang G, Yan J, Gu Y, Qiao M, Fan R, Mao Y, Tang X. Construction of short tandem target mimic (STTM) to block the functions of plant and animal microRNAs. Methods. 2012;58(2):118–25.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. van Zelm E, Zhang YX, Testerink C. Salt tolerance mechanisms of plants. Annu Rev Plant Biol. 2020;71:403–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Sanan-Mishra N, Kumar V, Sopory SK, Mukherjee SK. Cloning and validation of novel miRNA from basmati rice indicates cross talk between abiotic and biotic stresses. Mol Genet Genomics. 2009;282(5):463–74.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Lynn K, Fernandez A, Aida M, Sedbrook J, Tasaka M, Masson P, Barton MK. The PINHEAD/ZWILLE gene acts pleiotropically in Arabidopsis development and has overlapping functions with the ARGONAUTE1 gene. Development. 1999;126(3):469–81.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Bohmert K, Camus I, Bellini C, Bouchez D, Caboche M, Benning C. AGO1 defines a novel locus of Arabidopsis controlling leaf development. EMBO J. 1998;17(1):170–80.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Kavi HH, Birchler JA. Interaction of RNA polymerase II and the small RNA machinery affects heterochromatic silencing in Drosophila. Epigenetics Chromatin. 2009;2(1):1–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Lobbes D, Rallapalli G, Schmidt DD, Martin C, Clarke J. SERRATE: a new player on the plant microRNA scene. EMBO Rep. 2006;7(10):1052–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Vaucheret H, Vazquez F, Crété P, Bartel DP. The action of ARGONAUTE1 in the miRNA pathway and its regulation by the miRNA pathway are crucial for plant development. Genes Dev. 2004;18(10):1187–97.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Morel J-B, Godon C, Mourrain P, Béclin C, Boutet S, Feuerbach F, Proux F, Vaucheret H. Fertile hypomorphic ARGONAUTE (ago1) mutants impaired in post-transcriptional gene silencing and virus resistance. Plant Cell. 2002;14(3):629–39.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Liu C, Xin Y, Xu L, Cai Z, Xue Y, Liu Y, Xie D, Liu Y, Qi Y. Arabidopsis ARGONAUTE 1 binds chromatin to promote gene transcription in response to hormones and stresses. Dev Cell. 2018;44(3):348–61. e347.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Zhou M, Li D, Li Z, Hu Q, Yang C, Zhu L, Luo H. Constitutive expression of a miR319 gene alters plant development and enhances salt and drought tolerance in transgenic creeping bentgrass. Plant Physiol. 2013;161(3):1375–91.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Dolata J, Bajczyk M, Bielewicz D, Niedojadlo K, Niedojadlo J, Pietrykowska H, Walczak W, Szweykowska-Kulinska Z, Jarmolowski A. Salt stress reveals a new role for ARGONAUTE1 in miRNA biogenesis at the transcriptional and posttranscriptional levels. Plant Physiol. 2016;172(1):297–312.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Walters RW, Bradrick SS, Gromeier M. Poly (A)-binding protein modulates mRNA susceptibility to cap-dependent miRNA-mediated repression. RNA. 2010;16(1):239–50.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Dubos C, Stracke R, Grotewold E, Weisshaar B, Martin C, Lepiniec L. MYB transcription factors in Arabidopsis. Trends Plant Sci. 2010;15(10):573–81.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Zhang L, Zhao G, Jia J, Liu X, Kong X. Molecular characterization of 60 isolated wheat MYB genes and analysis of their expression during abiotic stress. J Exp Bot. 2012;63(1):203–14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Schmidt R, Mieulet D, Hubberten H-M, Obata T, Hoefgen R, Fernie AR, Fisahn J, San Segundo B, Guiderdoni E, Schippers JH. SALT-RESPONSIVE ERF1 regulates reactive oxygen species–dependent signaling during the initial response to salt stress in rice. Plant Cell. 2013;25(6):2115–31.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Wang R, Jing W, Xiao L, Jin Y, Shen L, Zhang W. The rice high-affinity potassium transporter1; 1 is involved in salt tolerance and regulated by an MYB-type transcription factor. Plant Physiol. 2015;168(3):1076–90.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Gao F, Zhao H-X, Yao H-P, Li C-L, Chen H, Wang A-H, Park S-U, Wu Q. Identification, isolation and expression analysis of eight stress-related R2R3-MYB genes in tartary buckwheat (Fagopyrum tataricum). Plant Cell Rep. 2016;35(6):1385–96.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Weber H, Hellmann H. Arabidopsis thaliana BTB/POZ-MATH proteins interact with members of the ERF/AP2 transcription factor family. FEBS J. 2009;276(22):6624–35.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Tischner R, Koltermann M, Hesse H, Plath M. Early responses of Arabidopsis thaliana to infection by Verticillium longisporum. Physiol Mol Plant Pathol. 2010;74(5–6):419–27.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Li L, Li N, Song S, Li Y, Xia X, Fu X, Chen G, Deng H. Cloning and characterization of the drought-resistance OsRCI2-5 gene in rice (Oryza sativa L.). Genet Mol Res. 2014;13(2):4022–35.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Tang G, Yan J, Gu Y, Qiao M, Fan R, Mao Y, Tang X. Construction of short tandem target mimic (STTM) to block the functions of plant and animal microRNAs. Methods. 2012;58(2):118–25.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  43. Wu XDD, Song G. Rapid methods of genomic DNA extraction from maize. J Henan Agricultural Univ. 2012;46(01):7–10.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Hong Y, Zhang H, Huang L, Li D, Song F. Overexpression of a stress-responsive NAC transcription factor gene ONAC022 improves drought and salt tolerance in rice. Front Plant Sci. 2016;7:4.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  45. Ason B, Darnell DK, Wittbrodt B, Berezikov E, Kloosterman WP, Wittbrodt J, Antin PB, Plasterk RH. Differences in vertebrate microRNA expression. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2006;103(39):14385–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. Bolger AM, Lohse M, Usadel B. Trimmomatic: a flexible trimmer for Illumina sequence data. Bioinformatics. 2014;30(15):2114–20.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  47. Kim D, Landmead B, Salzberg SL. HISAT: a fast spliced aligner with low memory requirements. Nat Methods. 2015;12(4):357-U121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Liao Y, Smyth GK, Shi W. The R package rsubread is easier, faster, cheaper and better for alignment and quantification of RNA sequencing reads. Nucleic Acids Res. 2019;47(8):e47–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  49. Love MI, Huber W, Anders S. Moderated estimation of fold change and dispersion for RNA-seq data with DESeq2. Genome Biol. 2014;15(12):1–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Cantalapiedra CP, Hernandez-Plaza A, Letunic I, Bork P, Huerta-Cepas J. eggNOG-mapper v2: functional annotation, Orthology assignments, and Domain Prediction at the Metagenomic Scale. Mol Biol Evol. 2021;38(12):5825–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. Kanehisa M, Furumichi M, Sato Y, Ishiguro-Watanabe M, Tanabe M. KEGG: integrating viruses and cellular organisms. Nucleic Acids Res. 2021;49(D1):D545–51.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Chen C, Chen H, Zhang Y, Thomas HR, Frank MH, He Y, Xia R. TBtools: an integrative toolkit developed for interactive analyses of big biological data. Mol Plant. 2020;13(8):1194–202.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Caifu C. Real-time quantification of microRNAs by stem-loop RT-PCR. Nucleic Acids Res. 2005;20(33):e179-e179.

  54. Andreas U. Primer3–new capabilities and interfaces. Nucleic Acids Res. 2012;40(15):e115-e115.

Download references

Acknowledgements

Not applicable.

Funding

This research was funded by grants from the National Nature Science Foundation of China (31871641, 31971961), and a National Science and Technology Major Project grant (2018ZX0800908B).

Author information

Author notes

  1. Jiong Wan and Shujun Meng contributed equally to this work.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. National Key Laboratory of Wheat and Maize Crop Science, College of Agronomy, Henan Agricultural University, 450002, Zhengzhou, China

    Jiong Wan, Shujun Meng, Qiyue Wang, Jiawen Zhao, Xiaoqian Qiu, Liqin Mu, Kuntai Dang, Qiankun Xie, Jihua Tang, Dong Ding & Zhanhui Zhang

  2. Hebi Academy of Agricultural Sciences, 458030, Hebi, China

    Liangfa Wang & Yuan Lin

  3. Institute of Crop Germplasm Resources, Guizhou Academy of Agricultural Sciences, 550006, Guiyang, China

    Juan Li

  4. The Shennong laboratory, 450002, Zhengzhou, China

    Jihua Tang

Authors
  1. Jiong Wan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Shujun Meng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Qiyue Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jiawen Zhao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Xiaoqian Qiu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Liangfa Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Juan Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Yuan Lin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Liqin Mu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Kuntai Dang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Qiankun Xie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Jihua Tang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Dong Ding
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  14. Zhanhui Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

DD and ZHZ designed the research. QYW, JWZ, and XQQ performed the experiments. JW and SJM wrote the manuscripts. LFW, JL, YL, LQM, KTD, and QKX revised the manuscript. All authors approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Dong Ding or Zhanhui Zhang.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

All experimental studies on plants were complied with relevant institutional, national, and international guidelines and legislation.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Additional file 1:

Table S1. The qRT-PCR primer list.

Additional file 2:

Table S2. Differentially expressed stress response genes.

Additional file 3:

Table S3. Stress-responsive genes differentially expressed between the roots of CK and STTM168 plants grown in salt.

Additional file 4:

Table S4. Distribution of up-regulated DEGs into different categories of Gene Ontology (GO).

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wan, J., Meng, S., Wang, Q. et al. Suppression of microRNA168 enhances salt tolerance in rice (Oryza sativa L.). BMC Plant Biol 22, 563 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12870-022-03959-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12870-022-03959-1

Keywords

BMC Plant Biology

ISSN: 1471-2229

Contact us