Abstract
While global climate change poses a significant environmental threat to agriculture, the increasing population is another big challenge to food security. To address this, develo** crop varieties with increased productivity and tolerance to biotic and abiotic stresses is crucial. Breeders must identify traits to ensure higher and consistent yields under inconsistent environmental challenges, possess resilience against emerging biotic and abiotic stresses and satisfy customer demands for safer and more nutritious meals. With the advent of omics-based technologies, molecular tools are now integrated with breeding to understand the molecular genetics of genotype-based traits and develop better climate-smart crops. The rapid development of omics technologies offers an opportunity to generate novel datasets for crop species. Identifying genes and pathways responsible for significant agronomic traits has been made possible by integrating omics data with genetic and phenotypic information. This paper discusses the importance and use of omics-based strategies, including genomics, transcriptomics, proteomics and phenomics, for agricultural and horticultural crop improvement, which aligns with develo** better adaptability in these crop species to the changing climate conditions.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
Not applicable.
Code availability
Not applicable.
References
FAO (1983) World food security: a reappraisal of the concepts and approaches. FAO, Rome
Husaini AM, Sohail M (2023) Robotics-assisted, organic agricultural-biotechnology based environment-friendly healthy food option: beyond the binary of GM versus organic crops. J Biotechnol 361:41–48
Husaini AM (2022) High-value pleiotropic genes for develo** multiple stress-tolerant biofortified crops for 21st-century challenges. Heredity. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41437-022-00500-w
Husaini AM, Tuteja N (2013) Biotech crops: imperative for achieving the Millenium development goals and sustainability of agriculture in the climate change era. GM Crops Food 4(1):1–9
Nilsson C, Polvi LE, Lind L (2015) Extreme events in streams and rivers in arctic and subarctic regions in an uncertain future. Freshw Biol 60(12):2535–2546
Bates B, Kundzewicz Z, Wu S (2008) Climate change and water. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Scheffran J, Battaglini A (2011) Climate and conflicts: the security risks of global warming. Reg Environ Change 11(1):27–39
Godfray HCJ et al (2010) Food security: the challenge of feeding 9 billion people. Science 327(5967):812–818
Duc G et al (2015) Breeding annual grain legumes for sustainable agriculture: new methods to approach complex traits and target new cultivar ideotypes. Crit Rev Plant Sci 34(1–3):381–411
Trienekens J, Zuurbier P (2008) Quality and safety standards in the food industry, developments and challenges. Int J Prod Econ 113(1):107–122
Chen HS et al (2020) Consumer attitudes and purchase intentions toward food delivery platform services. Sustainability 12(23):10177
Brozynska M, Furtado A, Henry RJ (2016) Genomics of crop wild relatives: expanding the gene pool for crop improvement. Plant Biotechnol J 14(4):1070–1085
Snowdon RJ et al (2021) Crop adaptation to climate change as a consequence of long-term breeding. Theor Appl Genet 134(6):1613–1623
Husaini AM (2014) Challenges of climate change: omics-based biology of saffron plants and organic agricultural biotechnology for sustainable saffron production. GM Crops Food 5(2):97–105
Atkinson NJ, Urwin PE (2012) The interaction of plant biotic and abiotic stresses: from genes to the field. J Exp Bot 63(10):3523–3543
Zhang H et al (2022) Abiotic stress responses in plants. Nat Rev Genet 23(2):104–119
Deryng D et al (2011) Simulating the effects of climate and agricultural management practices on global crop yield. Global Biogeochem Cycles. https://doi.org/10.1029/2009GB003765
Jump AS, Marchant R, Peñuelas J (2009) Environmental change and the option value of genetic diversity. Trends Plant Sci 14(1):51–58
Dolferus R, Ji X, Richards RA (2011) Abiotic stress and control of grain number in cereals. Plant Sci 181(4):331–341
Skendžić S et al (2021) The impact of climate change on agricultural insect pests. Insects 12(5):440
Deutsch CA et al (2018) Increase in crop losses to insect pests in a warming climate. Science 361(6405):916–919
Takeda S, Matsuoka M (2008) Genetic approaches to crop improvement: responding to environmental and population changes. Nat Rev Genet 9(6):444–457
Husaini AM (2021) Organic GMOs: combining ancient wisdom with modern biotechnology. In: Srivastava Kumar D, Thakur umar A, Kumar P (eds) Agricultural biotechnology: latest research and trends. Springer, Singapore, pp 323–328
Husaini AM, Khurshid A (2021) Nanotechnology and robotics: the twin drivers of agriculture in future. In: Srivastava Kumar D, Thakur Kumar A, Kumar P (eds) Agricultural biotechnology: latest research and trends. Springer, Singapore, pp 553–571
Raza A et al (2019) Impact of climate change on crops adaptation and strategies to tackle its outcome: a review. Plants 8(2):34
Rejeb IB, Pastor V, Mauch-Mani B (2014) Plant responses to simultaneous biotic and abiotic stress: molecular mechanisms. Plants 3(4):458–475
Husaini AM, Haq SAU, Jiménez AJL (2022) Understanding saffron biology using omics and bioinformatics tools: step** towards a better Crocus phenome. Mol Biol Rep 49(6):5325–5340
Imadi SR et al (2015) Plant transcriptomics and responses to environmental stress: an overview. J Genet 94(3):525–537
Langridge P, Fleury D (2011) Making the most of ‘omics’ for crop breeding. Trends Biotechnol 29(1):33–40
Bashir T et al (2023) Quality trait improvement in horticultural crops: OMICS and modern biotechnological approaches. Mol Biol Rep 50:8729
Lobos GA et al (2017) Plant phenoty** and phenomics for plant breeding. Front Plant Sci 8:2181
Husaini AM, Ashraf N (2010) Understanding saffron biology using bioinformatics tools. Funct Plant Sci Biotechnol 4(2):31–37
Husaini AM et al (2009) Bioinformatics for saffron (Crocus sativus L.) improvement. Commun Biometry Crop Sci 4(1):3–8
Haq SAU, Salami SA, Husaini AM (2022) Bioinformatics for saffron-omics and crop improvement. The saffron genome. Springer, Singapore, pp 63–82
Haq SA, Salami SA, Husaini AM (2022) Omics in saffron (Crocus sativus L.): a spice of immense medicinal value. Omics in horticultural crops. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 573–587
Scossa F, Alseekh S, Fernie AR (2021) Integrating multi-omics data for crop improvement. J Plant Physiol 257:153352
Mir RR et al (2019) High-throughput phenoty** for crop improvement in the genomics era. Plant Sci 282:60–72
Avise JC (2012) Molecular markers, natural history and evolution. Springer Science & Business Media, Berlin
Appleby N et al (2009) New technologies for ultra-high throughput genoty** in plants. Humana Press, Totowa, pp 19–39
Mackay TF, Stone EA, Ayroles JF (2009) The genetics of quantitative traits: challenges and prospects. Nat Rev Genet 10(8):565–577
Wani AB, Husaini AM (2021) Conventional approaches to rice improvement. In: Kearns HN (ed) Oryza sativa: production, cultivation and uses. Nova Science Publishers, New York
Guo T et al (2019) Integrating GWAS, QTL, map** and RNA-seq to identify candidate genes for seed vigor in rice (Oryza sativa L.). Mol Breeding 39(6):1–16
Boyles RE et al (2017) Genetic dissection of sorghum grain quality traits using diverse and segregating populations. Theor Appl Genet 130(4):697–716
Wu Q-H et al (2015) High-density genetic linkage map construction and QTL map** of grain shape and size in the wheat population Yanda 1817× Beinong6. PLoS ONE 10(2):e0118144
Tian X et al (2017) Molecular map** of reduced plant height gene Rht24 in bread wheat. Front Plant Sci 8:1379
Gao F et al (2015) Genome-wide linkage map** of QTL for yield components, plant height and yield-related physiological traits in the Chinese wheat cross Zhou 8425B/Chinese Spring. Front Plant Sci 6:1099
Tibbs Cortes L, Zhang Z, Yu J (2021) Status and prospects of genome-wide association studies in plants. Plant Genome 14(1):e20077
Yu J, Buckler ES (2006) Genetic association map** and genome organization of maize. Curr Opin Biotechnol 17(2):155–160
Guo Z et al (2017) Genome-wide association analyses of 54 traits identified multiple loci for the determination of floret fertility in wheat. New Phytol 214(1):257–270
Muqaddasi QH et al (2019) TaAPO-A1, an ortholog of rice ABERRANT PANICLE ORGANIZATION 1, is associated with total spikelet number per spike in elite European hexaploid winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) varieties. Sci Rep 9(1):1–12
Yuan J et al (2020) Genetic basis and identification of candidate genes for salt tolerance in rice by GWAS. Sci Rep 10(1):1–9
Yano K et al (2019) GWAS with principal component analysis identifies a gene comprehensively controlling rice architecture. Proc Natl Acad Sci 116(42):21262–21267
Li X et al (2016) Combined linkage and association map** reveals QTL and candidate genes for plant and ear height in maize. Front Plant Sci 7:833
Wu X et al (2016) Joint-linkage map** and GWAS reveal extensive genetic loci that regulate male inflorescence size in maize. Plant Biotechnol J 14(7):1551–1562
Li H et al (2019) Leveraging GWAS data to identify metabolic pathways and networks involved in maize lipid biosynthesis. Plant J 98(5):853–863
Wang H et al (2019) Integrating GWAS and gene expression analysis identifies candidate genes for root morphology traits in maize at the seedling stage. Genes 10(10):773
Poland JA et al (2011) Genome-wide nested association map** of quantitative resistance to northern leaf blight in maize. Proc Natl Acad Sci 108(17):6893–6898
Rhodes DH et al (2017) Genetic architecture of kernel composition in global sorghum germplasm. BMC Genomics 18(1):1–8
Zhao J et al (2016) Genome-wide association study for nine plant architecture traits in Sorghum. Plant Genome. https://doi.org/10.3835/plantgenome2015.06.0044
Tao Y et al (2020) Large-scale GWAS in sorghum reveals common genetic control of grain size among cereals. Plant Biotechnol J 18(4):1093–1105
Liller CB et al (2017) Fine map** of a major QTL for awn length in barley using a multiparent map** population. Theor Appl Genet 130(2):269–281
Wang J et al (2014) A new QTL for plant height in barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) showing no negative effects on grain yield. PLoS ONE 9(2):e90144
Karunarathne SD et al (2020) Genome-wide association study and identification of candidate genes for nitrogen use efficiency in barley (Hordeum vulgare L.). Front Plant Sci. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2020.571912
Alqudah AM et al (2014) Genetic dissection of photoperiod response based on GWAS of pre-anthesis phase duration in spring barley. PLoS ONE 9(11):e113120
Thabet SG et al (2020) Natural variation uncovers candidate genes for barley spikelet number and grain yield under drought stress. Genes 11(5):533
Mangin B et al (2017) Genetic control of plasticity of oil yield for combined abiotic stresses using a joint approach of crop modelling and genome-wide association. Plan Cell Environ 40(10):2276–2291
Lasky JR et al (2015) Genome-environment associations in sorghum landraces predict adaptive traits. Sci Adv 1(6):e1400218
Shikha M et al (2017) Genomic selection for drought tolerance using genome-wide SNPs in maize. Front Plant Sci 8:550
Millet EJ et al (2016) Genome-wide analysis of yield in Europe: allelic effects vary with drought and heat scenarios. Plant Physiol 172(2):749–764
Cameron DL, Di Stefano L, Papenfuss AT (2019) Comprehensive evaluation and characterisation of short read general-purpose structural variant calling software. Nat Commun 10(1):1–11
Padmarasu S et al (2019) In situ hi-C for plants: an improved method to detect long-range chromatin interactions. Plant long non-coding RNAs. Springer, pp 441–472
Yuan Y, Chung CY-L, Chan T-F (2020) Advances in optical map** for genomic research. Comput Struct Biotechnol J 18:2051–2062
Zhu T et al (2021) Optical maps refine the bread wheat Triticum aestivum cv. Chinese spring genome assembly. Plant J 107(1):303–314
Wafai AH, Husaini AM, Qadri RA (2019) Temporal expression of floral proteins interacting with CArG1 region of CsAP3 gene in Crocus sativus L. Gene Rep 16:100446
Pandit AA, Shah RA, Husaini AM (2018) Transcriptomics: a time-efficient tool with wide applications in crop and animal biotechnology. J Pharmac Phytochem 7:1701–1704
Hong W-J et al (2020) Systematic analysis of cold stress response and diurnal rhythm using transcriptome data in rice reveals the molecular networks related to various biological processes. Int J Mol Sci 21(18):6872
Formentin E et al (2018) Transcriptome and cell physiological analyses in different rice cultivars provide new insights into adaptive and salinity stress responses. Front Plant Sci 9:204
Muthuramalingam P et al (2017) Global transcriptome analysis of combined abiotic stress signaling genes unravels key players in Oryza sativa L.: an in silico approach. Front Plant Sci 8:759
Kawaura K et al (2006) Transcriptome analysis of salinity stress responses in common wheat using a 22k oligo-DNA microarray. Funct Integr Genomics 6(2):132–142
Zhang H et al (2014) Large-scale transcriptome comparison reveals distinct gene activations in wheat responding to stripe rust and powdery mildew. BMC Genomics 15:1–14
Nan W et al (2018) Transcriptomes of early develo** tassels under drought stress reveal differential expression of genes related to drought tolerance in maize. J Integr Agric 17(6):1276–1288
Wang M et al (2019) Comparative transcriptome analysis of salt-sensitive and salt-tolerant maize reveals potential mechanisms to enhance salt resistance. Genes Genomics 41(7):781–801
Li P et al (2017) Transcriptomic profiling of the maize (Zea mays L.) leaf response to abiotic stresses at the seedling stage. Front Plant Sci 8:290
Janiak A et al (2019) Insights into barley root transcriptome under mild drought stress with an emphasis on gene expression regulatory mechanisms. Int J Mol Sci 20(24):6139
Kreszies T et al (2019) Osmotic stress enhances suberization of apoplastic barriers in barley seminal roots: analysis of chemical, transcriptomic and physiological responses. New Phytol 221(1):180–194
Punia H et al (2020) Proteome dynamics and transcriptome profiling in sorghum [Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench] under salt stress. 3 Biotech 10(9):1–10
Leisner CP, Yendrek CR, Ainsworth EAJBPB (2017) Physiological and transcriptomic responses in the seed coat of field-grown soybean (Glycine max L. Merr.) to abiotic stress. BMC Plant Biol 17(1):1–11
Shen W et al (2019) Genomic and transcriptomic analyses of HD-Zip family transcription factors and their responses to abiotic stress in tea plant (Camellia sinensis). Genomics 111(5):1142–1151
Ruan MB et al (2017) Genome-wide characterization and expression analysis enables identification of abiotic stress-responsive MYB transcription factors in cassava (Manihot esculenta). J Exp Botany 68(13):3657–3672
Guo WL et al (2018) Transcriptome profiling of pumpkin (Cucurbita moschata Duch) leaves infected with powdery mildew. PLoS ONE 13(1):e0190175
Zhang Z et al (2023) Transcriptome sequence analysis of defense response of resistant and susceptible bottle gourd to powdery mildew. Agronomy 13(5):1406
Li J et al (2016) Transcriptome analysis reveals a comprehensive insect resistance response mechanism in cotton to infestation by the phloem feeding insect Bemisia tabaci (whitefly). Plant Biotechnol J 14(10):1956–1975
Misra P et al (2010) Modulation of transcriptome and metabolome of tobacco by Arabidopsis transcription factor, AtMYB12, leads to insect resistance. Plant Physiol 152(4):2258–2268
Wu J et al (2010) Whole genome wide expression profiles of Vitis amurensis grape responding to downy mildew by using Solexa sequencing technology. BMC Plant Biol 10:1–16
Chen T et al (2013) Comparative transcriptome profiling of a resistant vs. susceptible tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) cultivar in response to infection by tomato yellow leaf curl virus. PLoS ONE 8(11):e80816
Seo JK et al (2018) Molecular dissection of distinct symptoms induced by tomato chlorosis virus and tomato yellow leaf curl virus based on comparative transcriptome analysis. Virology 516(1):20
Song L et al (2022) Transcriptome profiling unravels the involvement of phytohormones in tomato resistance to the tomato yellow leaf curl virus (TYLCV). Horticulturae 8(2):143
Zhu Y et al (2022) Comparative transcriptome analysis reveals differential gene expression in resistant and susceptible watermelon varieties in response to meloidogyne incognita. Front Plant Sci 12(7):1003
Zhu YN et al (2013) Transcriptome analysis reveals crosstalk of responsive genes to multiple abiotic stresses in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.). PLoS ONE 8(11):e80218
He P et al (2017) The PIN gene family in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum): genome-wide identification and gene expression analyses during root development and abiotic stress responses. BMC Genomics 18:1–10
Lowe R et al (2017) Transcriptomics technologies. PLoS Comput Biol 13(5):e1005457
Guénin S et al (2009) Normalization of qRT-PCR data: the necessity of adopting a systematic, experimental conditions-specific, validation of references. J Exp Bot 60(2):487–493
Velculescu VE et al (1995) Serial analysis of gene expression. Science 270(5235):484–487
Hardiman G (2004) Microarray platforms–comparisons and contrasts. Pharmacogenomics 5(5):487–502
Zhao S et al (2014) Comparison of RNA-Seq and microarray in transcriptome profiling of activated T cells. PLoS ONE 9(1):e78644
Knierim E et al (2011) Systematic comparison of three methods for fragmentation of long-range PCR products for next generation sequencing. PLoS ONE 6(11):e28240
Rasmussen S et al (2013) Transcriptome responses to combinations of stresses in Arabidopsis. Plant Physiol 161(4):1783–1794
De Vos M et al (2005) Signal signature and transcriptome changes of Arabidopsis during pathogen and insect attack. Mol Plant-microbe Interact 18(9):923–937
Jensen ON (2006) Interpreting the protein language using proteomics. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 7(6):391–403
Wilkins MR et al (2008) Proteome research: concepts, technology and application. Springer Science & Business Media, Berlin
Wu Y et al (2016) Quantitative proteomic analysis of two different rice varieties reveals that drought tolerance is correlated with reduced abundance of photosynthetic machinery and increased abundance of ClpD1 protease. J Proteomics 143:73–82
Ji Z et al (2019) Proteomic dissection of the rice-Fusarium fujikuroi interaction and the correlation between the proteome and transcriptome under disease stress. BMC Genomics 20(1):1–11
Frukh A et al (2020) Modulation in growth, biochemical attributes and proteome profile of rice cultivars under salt stress. Plant Physiol Biochem 146:55–70
Hussain S et al (2019) iTRAQ-based protein profiling and biochemical analysis of two contrasting rice genotypes revealed their differential responses to salt stress. Int J Mol Sci 20(3):547
Hao P et al (2015) An integrative proteome analysis of different seedling organs in tolerant and sensitive wheat cultivars under drought stress and recovery. Proteomics 15(9):1544–1563
Maytalman D et al (2013) Proteomic analysis of early responsive resistance proteins of wheat (Triticum aestivum) to yellow rust (Puccinia striiformis f. sp. tritici) using ProteomeLab PF2D. Plant Omics 6(1):24–35
Kacem N et al (2016) Diagonal two-dimensional electrophoresis (D-2DE): a new approach to study the effect of osmotic stress induced by polyethylene glycol in durum wheat (Triticum durum Desf.). Mol Biol Rep 43(9):897–909
Yang Y et al (2016) Correction: corrigendum: quantitative proteomics reveals the defense response of wheat against Puccinia striiformis f. sp. tritici. Sci Rep 6(1):38464
Zeng W et al (2019) Comparative proteomics analysis of the seedling root response of drought-sensitive and drought-tolerant maize varieties to drought stress. Int J Mol Sci 20(11):2793
Wang X et al (2019) Comparative proteomics and physiological analyses reveal important maize filling-kernel drought-responsive genes and metabolic pathways. Int J Mol Sci 20(15):3743
Zenda T et al (2018) Comparative proteomic and physiological analyses of two divergent maize inbred lines provide more insights into drought-stress tolerance mechanisms. Int J Mol Sci 19(10):3225
Dang M et al (2019) Proteomic changes during MCMV infection revealed by iTRAQ quantitative proteomic analysis in maize. Int J Mol Sci 21(1):35
Zhang XL et al (2014) Proteomics identification of differentially expressed leaf proteins in response to Setosphaeria turcica infection in resistant maize. J Integr Agric 13(4):789–803
Jadhav K et al (2018) Proteomic analysis of a compatible interaction between sorghum downy mildew pathogen (Peronosclerospora sorghi) and maize (Zea mays L.). Int J Curr Microbiol Appl Sci 7:653–670
Eggert K, Pawelzik E (2011) Proteome analysis of Fusarium head blight in grains of naked barley (Hordeum vulgare subsp. nudum). Proteomics 11(5):972–985
Zhu J et al (2020) Understanding mechanisms of salinity tolerance in barley by proteomic and biochemical analysis of near-isogenic lines. Int J Mol Sci 21(4):1516
Roy SK et al (2016) Morpho-physiological and proteome level responses to cadmium stress in sorghum. PLoS ONE 11(2):e0150431
Tamhane VA et al (2021) Label-free quantitative proteomics of Sorghum bicolor reveals the proteins strengthening plant defense against insect pest Chilo partellus. Proteome Sci 19(1):1–25
Arefian M et al (2019) Comparative proteomics and gene expression analyses revealed responsive proteins and mechanisms for salt tolerance in chickpea genotypes. BMC Plant Biol 19(1):1–26
Katam R et al (2020) Proteomics, physiological, and biochemical analysis of cross tolerance mechanisms in response to heat and water stresses in soybean. PLoS ONE 15(6):e0233905
Alam I et al (2011) Comparative proteomic approach to identify proteins involved in flooding combined with salinity stress in soybean. Plant Soil 346(45):62
Di Carli M et al (2010) Proteomic analysis of the plant− virus interaction in cucumber mosaic virus (CMV) resistant transgenic tomato. J Proteome Res 9(11):5684–5697
Huang Y et al (2016) Comparative proteomic analysis provides novel insight into the interaction between resistant vs susceptible tomato cultivars and TYLCV infection. BMC Plant Biol 16(1):21
Milli A et al (2012) Proteomic analysis of the compatible interaction between Vitis vinifera and Plasmopara viticola. J Proteom 75(4):1284–1302
Ribeiro DG et al (2023) Proteomic insights of cowpea response to combined biotic and abiotic stresses. Plants 12:1900
Yuan L et al (2019) Comparative proteomics indicates that redox homeostasis is involved in high-and low-temperature stress tolerance in a novel Wucai (Brassica campestris L.) genotype. Int J Mol Sci 20(15):3760
Zhan Y et al (2019) Comparative proteomic analysis of okra (Abelmoschus esculentus L.) seedlings under salt stress. BMC Genomics 20(1):1–12
Zhu X et al (2019) Physiological and iTRAQ-based proteomic analyses reveal the function of exogenous γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA) in improving tea plant (Camellia sinensis L.) tolerance at cold temperature. BMC Plant Biol 19(1):1–20
Ashwin N et al (2017) Advances in proteomic technologies and their scope of application in understanding plant–pathogen interactions. J Plant Biochem Biotechnol 26(4):371–386
Altelaar A, Munoz J, Heck AJ (2013) Next-generation proteomics: towards an integrative view of proteome dynamics. Nat Rev Genet 14(1):35–48
Eldakak M et al (2013) Proteomics: a biotechnology tool for crop improvement. Front Plant Sci 4:35
Tan BC, Lim YS, Lau SE (2017) Proteomics in commercial crops: an overview. J Proteomics 169:176–188
Marouga R, David S, Hawkins E (2005) The development of the DIGE system: 2D fluorescence difference gel analysis technology. Anal Bioanal Chem 382(3):669–678
Sriyam S et al (2007) Enhanced detectability in proteome studies. J Chromatogr B 849(1–2):91–104
Rabilloud T (2013) When 2 D is not enough, go for an extra dimension. Proteomics 13(14):2065–2068
Quach TTT et al (2003) Development and applications of in-gel CNBr/tryptic digestion combined with mass spectrometry for the analysis of membrane proteins. J Proteome Res 2(5):543–552
El-Aneed A, Cohen A, Banoub J (2009) Mass spectrometry, review of the basics: electrospray, MALDI and commonly used mass analyzers. Appl Spectrosc Rev 44(3):210–230
Shiio Y, Aebersold R (2006) Quantitative proteome analysis using isotope-coded affinity tags and mass spectrometry. Nat Protoc 1(1):139–145
Barkla BJ, Vera-Estrella R, Pantoja O (2013) Progress and challenges for abiotic stress proteomics of crop plants. Proteomics 13(12–13):1801–1815
Evans C et al (2012) An insight into iTRAQ: where do we stand now? Anal Bioanal Chem 404(4):1011–1027
Su J et al (2019) Current achievements and future prospects in the genetic breeding of chrysanthemum: a review. Horticulture Res. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41438-019-0193-8
Soufi B, Macek B (2014) Stable isotope labeling by amino acids applied to bacterial cell culture. Stable isotope labeling by amino acids in cell culture (SILAC). Springer, New York, pp 9–22
Mastrobuoni G et al (2012) Proteome dynamics and early salt stress response of the photosynthetic organism Chlamydomonas reinhardtii. BMC Genomics 13(1):1–13
Zhang X et al (2010) Multi-dimensional liquid chromatography in proteomics—a review. Anal Chim Acta 664(2):101–113
Lee J et al (2011) Shotgun proteomic analysis for detecting differentially expressed proteins in the reduced culm number rice. Proteomics 11(3):455–468
Kushalappa AC, Gunnaiah R (2013) Metabolo-proteomics to discover plant biotic stress resistance genes. Trends Plant Sci 18(9):522–531
Vanderschuren H et al (2013) Proteomics of model and crop plant species: status, current limitations and strategic advances for crop improvement. J Proteomics 93:5–19
Jorrín-Novo JV et al (2015) Fourteen years of plant proteomics reflected in proteomics: moving from model species and 2DE-based approaches to orphan species and gel-free platforms. Proteomics 15(5–6):1089–1112
Yocum AK, Chinnaiyan AM (2009) Current affairs in quantitative targeted proteomics: multiple reaction monitoring–mass spectrometry. Brief Funct Genomic Proteomic 8(2):145–157
del Toro N et al (2014) PRIDE Proteomes: a condensed view of the plethora of public proteomics data available in the PRIDE repository. DILS 2014:21
Kusebauch U et al (2014) Using PeptideAtlas, SRMAtlas and PASSEL: comprehensive resources for discovery and targeted proteomics. Curr Protoc Bioinform. https://doi.org/10.1002/0471250953.bi1325s46
Kosová K et al (2011) Plant proteome changes under abiotic stress—contribution of proteomics studies to understanding plant stress response. J Proteomics 74(8):1301–1322
Senkler M, Braun H-P (2012) Functional annotation of 2D protein maps: the GelMap portal. Front Plant Sci 3:87
Cham JA et al (2010) MRMaid-DB: a repository of published SRM transitions. J Proteome Res 9(1):620–625
Farrah T et al (2012) PASSEL: The peptide atlas SRM experiment library. Proteomics 12(8):1170–1175
Das A et al (2016) Leaf proteome analysis reveals prospective drought and heat stress response mechanisms in soybean. BioMed Res Int. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/6021047
Goche T et al (2020) Comparative physiological and root proteome analyses of two sorghum varieties responding to water limitation. Sci Rep 10(1):11835
Luan H et al (2018) Elucidating the hypoxic stress response in barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) during waterlogging: a proteomics approach. Sci Rep 8(1):9655
Shah P et al (2012) Proteomic analysis of ripening tomato fruit infected by Botrytis cinerea. J Proteome Res 11(4):2178–2192
Deery DM, Jones HG (2021) Field phenomics: will it enable crop improvement? Plant Phenomics. https://doi.org/10.34133/2021/9871989
Lee SK et al (2011) Current statues of phenomics and its application for crop improvement: imaging systems for high-throughput screening. Korean J Breeding Sci 43(4):1–10
Singh A et al (2016) Machine learning for high-throughput stress phenoty** in plants. Trends Plant Sci 21(2):110–124
Rahaman M et al (2015) Advanced phenoty** and phenotype data analysis for the study of plant growth and development. Front Plant Sci 6:619
Delaney JK et al (2016) Visible and infrared imaging spectroscopy of paintings and improved reflectography. Herit Sci 4(1):1–10
Sarić R et al (2022) Applications of hyperspectral imaging in plant phenoty**. Trends Plant Sci. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tplants.2021.12.003
Deery DM et al (2016) Methodology for high-throughput field phenoty** of canopy temperature using airborne thermography. Front Plant Sci 7:1808
Gerhards M et al (2016) Water stress detection in potato plants using leaf temperature, emissivity, and reflectance. Int J Appl Earth Obs Geoinf 53:27–39
Pérez-Bueno ML, Pineda M, Barón M (2019) Phenoty** plant responses to biotic stress by chlorophyll fluorescence imaging. Front Plant Sci 10:1135
Pfeifer J et al (2015) Rapid phenoty** of crop root systems in undisturbed field soils using X-ray computed tomography. Plant Methods 11(1):1–8
Furbank RT, Tester MJTIPS (2011) Phenomics–technologies to relieve the phenoty** bottleneck. Trends Plant Sci 16(12):635–644
McGrail RK, Van Sanford DA, McNear DHJA Jr (2020) Trait-based root phenoty** as a necessary tool for crop selection and improvement. Agronomy 10(9):1328
Großkinsky DK, Syaifullah SJ, Roitsch TJJOEB (2018) Integration of multi-omics techniques and physiological phenoty** within a holistic phenomics approach to study senescence in model and crop plants. J Exp Botany 69(4):825–844
Bodner G et al (2017) RGB and spectral root imaging for plant phenoty** and physiological research: experimental setup and imaging protocols. J Vis Exp 126:e56251
Mahlein AKJPD (2016) Plant disease detection by imaging sensors–parallels and specific demands for precision agriculture and plant phenoty**. Plant Dis 100(2):241–251
Sirault XR, James RA, Furbank RTJFPB (2009) A new screening method for osmotic component of salinity tolerance in cereals using infrared thermography. Funct Plant Biol 36(11):970–977
Schnurbusch T, Hayes J, Sutton TJBS (2010) Boron toxicity tolerance in wheat and barley: Australian perspectives. Breeding Sci 60(4):297–304
Chaerle L et al (2009) Multi-sensor plant imaging: towards the development of a stress-catalogue. Biotechnol J Healthcare Nutr Technol 4(8):1152–1167
Jansen M et al (2009) Simultaneous phenoty** of leaf growth and chlorophyll fluorescence via GROWSCREEN FLUORO allows detection of stress tolerance in Arabidopsis thaliana and other rosette plants. Funct Plant Biol 36(11):902–914
Rungrat T et al (2016) Using phenomic analysis of photosynthetic function for abiotic stress response gene discovery. Am Soc Plant Biol 14:e0185
Qiu GY, Omasa K, Sase SJFPB (2009) An infrared-based coefficient to screen plant environmental stress: concept, test and applications. Funct Plant Biol 36(11):990–997
Wedeking R et al (2016) Osmotic adjustment of young sugar beets (Beta vulgaris) under progressive drought stress and subsequent rewatering assessed by metabolite analysis and infrared thermography. Funct Plant Biol 44(1):119–133
Zenda T et al (2021) Advances in cereal crop genomics for resilience under climate change. Life 11(6):502
Henson J, Tischler G, Ning Z (2012) Next-generation sequencing and large genome assemblies. Pharmacogenomics 13(8):901–915
Paun O, Verhoeven KJ, Richards CLJNP (2019) Opportunities and limitations of reduced representation bisulfite sequencing in plant ecological epigenomics. New Phytol 221(2):738–742
Pandey G et al (2017) Salinity induced differential methylation patterns in contrasting cultivars of foxtail millet (Setaria italica L.). Plant Cell Rep 36:759–772
Tettelin H, Medini D (2020) The pangenome: diversity, dynamics and evolution of genomes. Springer, Cham
Tettelin H et al (2005) Genome analysis of multiple pathogenic isolates of Streptococcus agalactiae: implications for the microbial “pan-genome.” Proc Natl Acad Sci 102(39):13950–13955
Yuan Y et al (2018) Single-cell genomic analysis in plants. Genes (Basel) 9(1):50
Lee S et al (2011) Accurate quantification of transcriptome from RNA-Seq data by effective length normalization. Nucleic Acids Res 39(2):e9
Kaur H et al (2023) Single-cell transcriptomics is revolutionizing the improvement of plant biotechnology research: recent advances and future opportunities. Crit Rev Biotechnol. https://doi.org/10.1080/07388551.2023.2165900p.1-16
Zhang TQ et al (2021) Single-cell transcriptome atlas and chromatin accessibility landscape reveal differentiation trajectories in the rice root. Nat Commun 12(1):2053
Liu Z et al (2020) Global dynamic molecular profiling of stomatal lineage cell development by single-cell RNA sequencing. Mol Plant 13(8):1178–1193
Kang M et al (2022) Single-cell RNA-sequencing of Nicotiana attenuata corolla cells reveals the biosynthetic pathway of a floral scent. New Phytol 234(2):527–544
Tian C et al (2020) Single-nucleus RNA-seq resolves spatiotemporal developmental trajectories in the tomato shoot apex. bioRxiv. https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.09.20.305029
Baslam M, Mitsui T (2020) Proteomic for quality: mining the proteome as a strategy to elucidate the protein complex applied for quality improvement. The future of rice demand: quality beyond productivity. Springer, Cham, pp 473–494
Husaini AM et al (2018) Multiplex fluorescent, activity-based protein profiling identifies active α-glycosidases and other hydrolases in plants. Plant Physiol 177(1):24–37
Husaini AM et al (2022) The menace of saffron adulteration: Low-cost rapid identification of fake look-alike saffron using Foldscope and machine learning technology. Front Plant Sci. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2022.945291
Acknowledgements
The authors are highly grateful to the SKUAST-K authorities especially Hon’ble VC Prof. Nazir A. Ganai, for promoting plant biotechnology and encouraging critical thinking among students.
Funding
The authors declare that no funds, grants or other support were received during the preparation of this manuscript.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
AMH conceptualized, analysed and edited the manuscript. SAH and TB wrote the paper with critical inputs from THR and AMH. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors have no conflict of interest and nothing to disclose.
Ethical approval
This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.
Informed consent
Not applicable.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Haq, S.A.U., Bashir, T., Roberts, T.H. et al. Ameliorating the effects of multiple stresses on agronomic traits in crops: modern biotechnological and omics approaches. Mol Biol Rep 51, 41 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11033-023-09042-8
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11033-023-09042-8