|Farrell, JR., Robert - PENN STATE UNIVERSITY|
|Norelli, John (jay)|
Submitted to: Meeting Abstract
Publication Type: Proceedings
Publication Acceptance Date: April 14, 2005
Publication Date: September 27, 2005
Citation: Bassett, C.L., Artlip, T.S., Farrell, Jr., R.E., Wisniewski, M.E., Norelli, J.L. 2005. Patterns of gene expression in peach bark and leaves in response to water deficit and cold treatment. Abstracts of the Interdrought II International Conference. 2:255. Technical Abstract: Previous studies have revealed considerable overlap in the identity of genes that respond to different abiotic stresses. In addition, many of these genes have been conserved across plant taxa, ranging from herbaceous monocots to woody dicots. However, information regarding the expression of these genes in response to different stresses within a plant is scarce, particularly for woody plant species. We have identified a number of genes from peach (Prunus persica L. [Batsch.]) that are known from previous studies in herbaceous plants to be associated with response to cold treatment or dehydration. Examination of the expression patterns of these genes in peach bark or leaves with respect to cold treatment or water deficit stress was undertaken. Some of the genes associated with abiotic stress in herbaceous plants appear to be up-regulated in response to cold but down-regulated in response to water deficit stress. These include a peach pollen coat protein-like gene similar to kin1 and a novel peach dehydrin gene (Ppdhn3). Similarly, a peach RD22-like gene which was up-regulated under short day (SD) photoperiods and a peach ERD3-like gene which was down-regulated by cold treatment were both down-regulated in response to dehydrative stress. Of interest is a second, recently described peach dehydrin gene (Ppdhn2) isolated from a genomic library. Ppdhn2 was not found in either of the two subtracted libraries from cold treated trees but showed a strong response to dehydrative stress. In this context, the supposed overlap in dehydrin gene expression in response to cold and water deficit treatment does not represent the same gene responding to both stresses, but rather different family members with specific and, presumably, independent responses to these two stresses.