Lessons from Comparison of Hypoxia Signaling in Plants and Mammals.

Hypoxia is an important stress for organisms, including plants and mammals. In plants, hypoxia can be the consequence of flooding and causes important crop losses worldwide. In mammals, hypoxia stress may be the result of pathological conditions. Understanding the regulation of responses to hypoxia offers insights into novel approaches for crop improvement, particularly for the development of flooding-tolerant crops and for producing better therapeutics for hypoxia-related diseases such as inflammation and cancer. Despite their evolutionary distance, plants and mammals deploy strikingly similar mechanisms to sense and respond to the different aspects of hypoxia-related stress, including low oxygen levels and the resulting energy crisis, nutrient depletion, and oxidative stress. Over the last two decades, the ubiquitin/proteasome system and the ubiquitin-like protein SUMO have been identified as key regulators that act in concert to regulate core aspects of responses to hypoxia in plants and mammals. Here, we review ubiquitin and SUMO-dependent mechanisms underlying the regulation of hypoxia response in plants and mammals. By comparing and contrasting these mechanisms in plants and mammals, this review seeks to pinpoint conceptually similar mechanisms but also highlight future avenues of research at the junction between different fields of research.

Experimental comparison of two methods to study barley responses to partial submergence.

BACKGROUND: Crop yield is dependent on climate conditions, which are becoming both more variable and extreme in some areas of the world as a consequence of global climate change. Increased precipitation and flooding events are the cause of important yield losses due to waterlogging or (partial) submergence of crops in the field. Our ability to screen efficiently and quickly for varieties that have increased tolerance to waterlogging or (partial) submergence is important. Barley, a staple crop worldwide, is particularly sensitive to waterlogging. Screening for waterlogging tolerant barley varieties has been ongoing for many years, but methods used to screen vary greatly, from the type of soil used to the time at which the treatment is applied. This variation makes it difficult to cross-compare results. RESULTS: Here, we have devised a scoring system to assess barley tolerance to waterlogging and compare two different methods when partial submergence is applied with either water or a starch solution at an early developmental stage, which is particularly sensitive to waterlogging or partial submergence. The use of a starch solution has been previously shown to result in more reducing soil conditions and has been used to screen for waterlogging tolerance. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that the two methods provide similar results to qualitatively rank varieties as tolerant or sensitive, while also affecting plants differently, in that application of a starch solution results in stronger and earlier symptoms than applying partial submergence with water.