Back

Non-plastic gene expression underlies root phenotypes involved in drought adaptation in Vitis spp.

Chedid, E.; Patin, E. R.; Tran, J.; de Miguel, M.

2026-07-10 plant biology
10.64898/2026.07.09.737455 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Drought is a major abiotic stress threatening plant productivity and agricultural sustainability, yet the molecular mechanisms underlying adaptive root responses to water deficit in the water use strategies continuum remain insufficiently understood, particularly in perennial crops. In this study, we explored drought responses in nine accessions belonging to three wild Vitis species (V. acerifolia, V. candicans, and V. doaniana) displaying varying drought-response strategies. Plants were subjected to moderate drought stress (40% soil water content) for three weeks under greenhouse conditions. By integrating physiological, metabolic, and transcriptomic analyses, we aimed to identify both conserved and species-specific mechanisms associated with drought adaptation. Differential expression analyses revealed a conserved core set of drought-responsive genes shared among species, including genes involved in abscisic acid signaling, reactive oxygen species detoxification, solute transport, and plant defense. In parallel, each species exhibited distinct transcriptional and metabolic signatures reflecting alternative adaptive strategies related to osmoregulation, and oxidative stress mitigation. Weighted gene co-expression network analysis (WGCNA) further revealed significant associations between constitutive, non-plastic gene expression and root phenotypic traits. Overall, our findings demonstrate that wild Vitis species rely on both conserved stress-responsive pathways and species-specific constitutive regulation to cope with drought stress. These results highlight the importance of root-associated traits and intrinsic regulatory networks in shaping drought adaptation and provide new targets for the development of drought-resilient grapevine rootstocks.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Journal of Experimental Botany
219 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
30.1%
2
Plant Physiology
238 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
9.4%
3
New Phytologist
346 papers in training set
Top 2%
6.1%
4
Annals of Botany
50 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
5.3%
50% of probability mass above
5
BMC Plant Biology
57 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
5.0%
6
Plant Science
31 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
5.0%
7
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 39%
3.1%
8
Plant Direct
95 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.1%
9
Environmental and Experimental Botany
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.1%
10
Frontiers in Plant Science
256 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.7%
11
The Plant Journal
215 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.6%
12
BMC Genomics
406 papers in training set
Top 4%
2.1%
13
Horticulture Research
47 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.1%
14
Physiologia Plantarum
39 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
2.0%
15
Plant Stress
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.8%
16
Plant, Cell & Environment
78 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.7%
17
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 56%
1.7%
18
Tree Physiology
24 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.6%
19
Plants
43 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.5%
20
Plant Biology
15 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.8%
21
Plant Physiology and Biochemistry
20 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%
22
Plant and Cell Physiology
52 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%
23
Theoretical and Applied Genetics
49 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.6%