Next Article in Journal
Bifunctional Silica-Supported Ionic Liquid Phase (SILP) Catalysts in Silane Production: Their Synthesis, Characterization and Catalytic Activity
Next Article in Special Issue
Identification of Gene Responsible for Conferring Resistance against Race KN2 of Podosphaera xanthii in Melon
Previous Article in Journal
Different Transcriptome Features of Peripheral Blood Mononuclear Cells in Non-Emphysematous Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
Previous Article in Special Issue
Molecular Mapping of Putative Genomic Regions Controlling Fruit and Seed Morphology of Watermelon
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Integrated Bulk Segregant Analysis, Fine Mapping, and Transcriptome Revealed QTLs and Candidate Genes Associated with Drought Adaptation in Wild Watermelon

1
Institute of Vegetable Science, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China
2
Hainan Institute of Zhejiang University, Yazhou District, Sanya 572025, China
3
Key Laboratory of Horticultural Plant Growth, Development & Quality Improvement, Ministry of Agriculture, Hangzhou 310058, China
4
Horticulture Research Institute, Agricultural Research Center, 9 Cairo University St, Giza 12619, Egypt
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2024, 25(1), 65; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms25010065
Submission received: 7 October 2023 / Revised: 7 December 2023 / Accepted: 9 December 2023 / Published: 20 December 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Melon Breeding and Molecular Research)

Abstract

:
Drought stress has detrimental effects on crop productivity worldwide. A strong root system is crucial for maintaining water and nutrients uptake under drought stress. Wild watermelons possess resilient roots with excellent drought adaptability. However, the genetic factors controlling this trait remain uninvestigated. In this study, we conducted a bulk segregant analysis (BSA) on an F2 population consisting of two watermelon genotypes, wild and domesticated, which differ in their lateral root development under drought conditions. We identified two quantitative trait loci (qNLR_Dr. Chr01 and qNLR_Dr. Chr02) associated with the lateral root response to drought. Furthermore, we determined that a small region (0.93 Mb in qNLR_Dr. Chr01) is closely linked to drought adaptation through quantitative trait loci (QTL) validation and fine mapping. Transcriptome analysis of the parent roots under drought stress revealed unique effects on numerous genes in the sensitive genotype but not in the tolerant genotype. By integrating BSA, fine mapping, and the transcriptome, we identified six genes, namely L-Ascorbate Oxidase (AO), Cellulose Synthase-Interactive Protein 1 (CSI1), Late Embryogenesis Abundant Protein (LEA), Zinc-Finger Homeodomain Protein 2 (ZHD2), Pericycle Factor Type-A 5 (PFA5), and bZIP transcription factor 53-like (bZIP53-like), that might be involved in the drought adaptation. Our findings provide valuable QTLs and genes for marker-assisted selection in improving water-use efficiency and drought tolerance in watermelon. They also lay the groundwork for the genetic manipulation of drought-adapting genes in watermelon and other Cucurbitacea species.

1. Introduction

In recent years, climate changes have been predicted to cause severe consequences for the entire agroecosystem, including the growing challenge of agricultural water resources [1]. Recent statistics from the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) state that more than 60% of the Earth’s inhabitants might face the risk of water shortage by 2025 [2]. Drought is a severe abiotic stress that affects plant growth and development, directly impacting the yield and quality of economic crops [3,4]. Therefore, plant breeders are seeking unique solutions to overcome water deficiency and achieve sustainable agricultural production [5,6]. Since the root system is the first line of defense for maintaining crop survival and growth under drought conditions, breeding new cultivars with a robust root could be a promising approach [7]. Generally, the root’s ability to uptake water depends on the lateral root architectures, starting with lateral root emergence and ending with root hairs [7,8,9,10,11,12,13]. The number of lateral roots (NLR) represents the initial ability of lateral roots to uptake water and nutrients, as the fewer lateral roots there are, the less water and fewer nutrients are absorbed from the soil. Therefore, the much-branched root system, as an essential index for drought tolerance, was previously reported in several plants [7,14,15]; however, this relationship remains unknown in watermelon [16,17].
To date, new varieties with vigorous root systems and drought tolerance are still limited in many terrestrial crops [17]. Wild crops usually possess desirable natural alleles and often display promising characteristics for drought tolerance [18]. Transferring such desirable features to modern cultivars is critical to producing better performance in a stressful environment. This approach requires detecting tolerant germplasms, identifying desirable natural alleles, and then integrating them into cultivated varieties via marker-assisted breeding or genomic selection approaches [19]. Wild watermelon, which originates in the dry areas of Africa, is an important xerophytic crop grown throughout the world [20]. The ancestral genes found in wild watermelons, such as Citrullus amarus and Citrullus colocynthesis, offer valuable genetic resources for developing new cultivars with stress-resistance traits, particularly a strong root system [15,21,22]. Although previous studies stated that wild watermelons possess resilient roots with unique drought resistance, the genetic factors controlling this trait remain unclear [23,24,25,26]. Moreover, the difficulties in the root phenotyping and hunting of multiple quantitative trait loci (QTLs)/genes related to desirable root traits remain challenges [22].
Wild watermelon was described as exhibiting several drought-adaptation mechanisms with three main strategies: avoidance, tolerance, and escape [26]. Root and shoot architecture responses contribute to avoidance by maintaining water uptake–loss homeostasis, while tolerance is associated with transcriptomic, proteomic, and metabolic regulation, and the escape strategy is related to the shortening of the plant life cycle [26]. Several drought-mechanism studies and germplasm screenings based on leaves and roots’ responses in watermelon were reported; however, no genetic mapping investigations have been conducted yet [4,23,24,25,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46]. A strong drought-tolerance ability has mainly been observed in Citrullus amarus, Citrullus colocynthis [4,27,36,38,39,41], and, in some cases, wild Citrullus lanatus [23,28,37,45,46]. Interestingly, enhanced [23,28,38,41] and inhibited [37] root growth were defined as drought-adaptation strategies in watermelon. Both short- and long-term (water withholding or Polyethylene Glycol (PEG) treatments) drought stress in soil or hydroponics under controlled (growth chambers), greenhouse, and field conditions at the seedling stage (1–5 leaves) were examined [4,23,27,28,36,37,38,39,41,43,44,45,46]; however, no investigation has been conducted at the post-germination stage. Specifically, four genes were described as associated with drought-stress adaptation in watermelon, namely drought-induced polypeptide (DRIP-1) [24,34], Ran GTPase CLRan1 [23,28], Cytochrome b561 (CLb561A and CLb561B) [32], and Metallothionein Type-2 (CLMT2) [33].
Conventional selection in plant breeding is a laborious process due to several rounds of inbreeding and the large number of offspring per phenotype, especially when the target trait is controlled by polygenes [47]. Alternatively, marker-assisted selection provides an excellent breeding method [48]. This strategy is achieved by identifying markers that enable high-throughput genotyping for specific traits at the seedling stage [48,49]. Genetic variations can be identified via QTL mapping using bi-parental populations or genome-wide association study (GWAS) in natural populations [50]. Root traits are primarily controlled by several genes and often differ due to environmental changes [51,52]. Most QTLs related to root traits contributing to drought tolerance were discovered in monocots, mainly in cereals, such as root length, biomass, root number, seminal root angle and length, deep root growth, root diameter, root branching, and aquaporin activity [7,16,53]. In contrast, fewer efforts were published concerning drought-tolerance-related root traits in dicots, mainly in legumes [17]. Although the NLR-associated QTLs have been discovered in lentil [54], soybean [55], and lettuce [56], among dicots, the QTLs/genes related to this trait in response to drought stress in watermelon have not been well explored yet.
The aim of this work was to elucidate the genetic control of lateral root growth in watermelon exposed to drought stress. In this study, for the first time, we report two QTLs associated with the NLR discrepancy in response to drought using the bulk segregant analysis (BSA) approach in watermelon. Additionally, the transcriptome analysis has enhanced our understanding of the molecular regulation of root growth under drought stress. Furthermore, the integrated QTL mapping, fine mapping, and RNA-sequencing (RNA-seq) have revealed candidate genes within the detected QTLs. Overall, this study provides new insights into the genetic regulation of root growth in response to drought, which can aid in developing high water-use efficiency breeding in Cucurbitaceae crops.

2. Results

2.1. Root Phenotyping of Watermelon Accessions, Parental Line Selection, and Mapping Population Screening under Drought Stress

The preliminary experiments performed at the seedling stage in pouches indicated that the suitable condition for phenotyping watermelon root response to drought stress was 4 days treatment with 15% PEG6000 (Figure S1). Further, the drought tolerance index (DTI) was calculated based on the NLR values of 38 watermelon accessions. This analysis divided the tested genotypes into five categories, namely highly sensitive (2 accessions), sensitive (3 accessions), moderate (12 accessions), tolerant (13 accessions), and highly tolerant (8 accessions) (Figure 1). From these, the highly sensitive accession (ZJU196) and the tolerant genotype (ZJU076) were selected as excellent parents for QTL mapping.
The DTI in ZJU076 (tolerant, 0.99) was higher than that of ZJU196 (sensitive, 0.07) by 14.14-fold (Figure 2a,b & Figure S2). With 15% PEG exposure, the average number of lateral roots was 62.5 in the tolerant genotype (ZJU076) and 2.7 in the sensitive (ZJU196) (Figure 2a,b & Figure S2). Significant differences in the survival rate of the two genotypes in response to water withholding in soil (with a final water content of 2%) for 15 days were confirmed (Figure 2c). Additionally, one week after rehydration, the seedlings phenotype of the tolerant parent exhibited green leaves and viable stems compared to the sensitive parent, supporting a strong tolerance of ZJU076 to drought stress (Figure S3). The F1 individuals showed intermediate NLR (28 roots) with 15% PEG in pouches, and their DTI was close to the tolerant parent (0.88; Figure 2a,b). Moreover, the NLR of 484 F2 individuals ranged from 0.0 to 75.0 roots and presented a normal distribution (Figure 2d), suggesting that the drought tolerance in this population is likely to be a quantitative trait controlled by polygenes.

2.2. Identification and Fine-Mapping of the QTLs Associated with the Drought Adaptation in Watermelon

BSA analysis was conducted to identify the QTLs associated with drought tolerance in watermelon. The Illumina HiSeq4000 sequencing of the ZJU196 (sensitive), ZJU076 (tolerant), high pool, and low pool generated 32.9488 giga-base pairs (Gb) of clean data. The majority of the data presented a high quality, with Q20 ≥ 97.22% and Q30 ≥ 92.94%, and the GC content ranged from 36.39 to 42.75% (Table S1). Approximately 5.472, 5.573, 11.292, and 10.647 Gb clean reads were obtained from ZJU196, ZJU076, the low pool, and the high pool, respectively. Furthermore, the mapping rates of ZJU076, ZJU196, low, and high pools were 68.23, 88.92, 94.97, and 95.33%, respectively.
To detect the QTLs, we calculated and plotted the single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) indexes of the low and high pools and delta SNP (ΔSNP) to the genome position of watermelon (Figure 3). The QTL-seqr analysis revealed two QTLs associated with NLR-based drought tolerance on chromosome 1 (Cla97Chr01: 31,601,839–32,694,379) and chromosome 2 (Cla97Chr02: 3,943,142–4,743,502) with an approximate peak ΔSNPs of −0.43 and −0.40, respectively, at a threshold of 95% (Figure 3c; Table S2). The region lengths of the QTL1 and QTL2 were 1.09 and 0.80 mega-base-pairs (Mb), involving 134 and 86 genes, respectively (Table S2). These candidate regions also presented G prime (G’) values above the threshold (Figure 3d; Table S2). Accordingly, we designated the two candidate QTLs associated with drought tolerance as qNLR_Dr. Chr01 (qtl of the number of lateral roots associated with drought tolerance on Chr01) and qNLR_Dr. Chr02.
To validate the detected QTLs, the SNP haplotype analysis of 305 F2 individuals was conducted using twelve Kompetitive allele specific PCR (KASP) markers (six/QTL) designed in the qNLR_Dr. Chr01 and qNLR_Dr. Chr02 regions (Figure 4). We arranged the genotyping data from top to bottom ascendingly depending on the NLR. Furthermore, the NLR and the other root traits, including the total root system and the lateral root system, were observed and largely co-distributed throughout the sidebars, while the primary root length did not show any clear association with the genotyping data in this population (Figure 4 & Table S3). In the qNLR_Dr. Chr01 region, we observed most homozygous segments from the tolerant parent gathered at the lower half of the heatmap, while most homozygous segments from the sensitive parent were located at the upper half (Figure 4 & Table S3). In the qNL_Dr. Chr02 region, the homozygous segments from the sensitive and tolerant parents were distributed across the heatmap, with many sensitive segments at the top and numerous tolerant segments at the bottom (Figure 4 & Table S3). These results support a high association of qNLR_Dr. Chr01 with drought tolerance compared to qNLR_Dr. Chr02.
To fine-map the target intervals, two F2 recombinants around the detected QTLs were screened from 100 F2 individuals using 12 KASP markers (Figure 5a). F2:3 individuals were divided into two groups (a and b) for each recombinant based on the allelic similarity with the parents (Figure 5a). When the F2:3 individuals were classified into two groups based on their genotypes of qNLR_Dr. Chr02, regardless of qNLR_Dr. Chr01 genotypes, we did not observe a clear difference in NLR between the F2:3 groups of the used recombinants compared to the parents (Figure 5b). However, when we classified the F2:3 individuals into two groups based only on qNLR_Dr. Chr01 genotypes, the F3-a group of both 36 and 215 recombinants showed similar NLR to the drought-sensitive parent (ZJU196), while the F3-b group of both recombinants exhibited the NLR close to the drought-tolerant parent (ZJU076; Figure 5c). This result suggests that the qNLR_Dr. Chr01 might play a stronger role in drought tolerance compared to qNLR_Dr. Chr02. Furthermore, the recombination in the 215-F2 offspring of qNLR_Dr. Chr01 helped us to narrow down the candidate qNLR_Dr. Chr01 to the left region of SNP Chr01_32348964, with a chromosome length of 0.93 Mbp (Chr01: 31601839-32348964).

2.3. Transcriptome Analysis of the Watermelon Root under Drought Stress

To determine potential genes implicated in drought response, we conducted RNA sequencing for ZJU076 (tolerant) and ZJU196 (sensitive) exposed to drought (Dr, 15% PEG6000) and control (CK, 0% PEG6000) treatments for two days (Figure S4). In total, 26.08, 25.87, 26.5, and 25.51 giga-base-pairs (Gb) of clean data were obtained from CK_76 (control_ZJU076), DR_76 (drought_ZJU076), CK_196 (control_ZJU196), and DR_196 (drought_ZJU196), respectively. The majority of the obtained data presented a high quality, with Q20 ≥ 95.08% and Q30 ≥ 87.15%, and the GC content was between 44.72 and 45.23% (Table S4). The alignment results showed that 77.31–79.11% of the sixteen samples’ clean reads were mapped to the watermelon reference genome (Table S4). On average, approximately 37.6 (90.98%) and 39.43 (95.13%) million reads were uniquely mapped to the watermelon reference genome for ZJU076 (tolerant) and ZJU196 (sensitive), respectively (Table S5). The heatmap clustering of the Pearson correlation coefficient between the sixteen samples indicated a robust correlation between replicates of the same treatment (Figure S5), supporting the reliability of the experiment and sample selection. The obtained data presented a high quality and provided a solid basis for detecting associated genes with drought tolerance in watermelon. We compared the two watermelon genotypes through four groups with the drought and control treatments, namely CK_76 vs. Dr_76, CK_196 vs. Dr_196, CK_76 vs. CK_196, and Dr_76 vs. Dr_196. Only the differentially expressed genes (DEGs) with false discovery rate (FDR) < 0.05, |log2(Foldchange)| > 1 were considered. The global hierarchical clustering of the DEGs revealed that the drought and control samples were clustered as one group for each variety (Figure S6), implying that the expression patterns of most DEGs in both genotypes were consistent in the control and drought treatments. In total, 11,709 unique DEGs were distinguished in all four comparison groups (Figure S7). We observed 2269 DEGs in CK_76 vs. Dr_76, 5647 in CK_196 vs. Dr_196, 6081 in CK_76 vs. CK_196, and 7852 in Dr_76 vs. Dr_196 (Figure S7). These overlapping significant DEGs could be analyzed through 15 disjointed subgroups; among them, 227 (1.9%), 1200 (10.2%), 979 (8.4%), and 1615 (13.79%) were DEGs specifically found in CK_76 vs. Dr_76, CK_196 vs. Dr_196, CK_76 vs. CK, and Dr_76 vs. Dr_196, respectively (Figure S7). These findings suggest that the drought stress uniquely affected the transcripts of multiple genes in the sensitive genotype compared to the tolerant genotype, supporting a significant difference in the drought tolerance between the selected parents.
Furthermore, we constructed volcano plots for the DEGs to identify the significant changes within the four groups by considering −log10 (padj) > 1.3 (padj < 0.05). The data indicated significant changes in the transcript levels within the treatments and genotypes (Figure S8). Due to drought treatment in ZJ076, 1091 and 1178 DEGs were up- and down-regulated, respectively (Figure S8a). In the drought-sensitive (ZJU196), many DEGs were up- and down-regulated (2824 and 2823) in response to drought (Figure S8b). These results implied that the impact of drought stress might be more significant in the drought-sensitive than in the tolerant genotype.
Due to drought stress, a total of 1608 (70.87%) and 4010 (71.01%) DEGs were assigned to Gene ontology (GO) analysis in CK_76 vs. Dr_76 and CK_196 vs. Dr_196, respectively (Figure S9 and Table S6). The catalytic activity (corrected_pValue of 1.45 × 10−7, includes 913 DEGs) and the oxidoreductase activity (corrected_pValue of 4.74 × 10−5 includes 543 DEGs) were the most significant molecular functions associated with the drought response in tolerant-ZJU076 (CK vs. Dr) and sensitive-ZJU196 (CK vs. Dr), respectively (Figure S10a,b and Table S6). Moreover, the GO terms related to the cellular components revealed the significance of the cell wall (corrected_pValue of 0.003, includes 24 DEGs) and apoplast (corrected_pValue of 0.0001, includes 20 DEGs) in response to drought stress in tolerant-ZJU076 (CK vs. Dr) and sensitive-ZJU196 (CK vs. Dr), respectively (Figure S9a,b and Table S6). GO analysis suggests the implication of the oxidation-reduction pathway in the response of the watermelon root to drought stress.
The Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) pathways were analyzed to determine the enriched and significant metabolic pathways relevant to drought stress tolerance in watermelon roots. Among significant pathways with qvalue ≤ 0.05, Wnt signaling, starch and sucrose metabolism, retinol metabolism, fatty acid degradation, and cytochrome P450 could be associated with the drought tolerance mechanism in ZJ076 (Figure S10a, Table S7). By contrast, no significant enriched pathways existed in the drought-sensitive genotype (ZJU196) (Figure S10b and Table S7). This finding indicates that significantly induced pathways in ZJU076 (tolerant) might contribute to drought tolerance.
We integrated the QTL-seq and RNA-seq results to discover the candidate genes. Among the predicted genes in qNLR_Dr. Chr01 and qNLR_Dr. Chr02, only 17 and 10 genes were differentially expressed (p < 0.05), respectively, under drought stress (Table S8). In the 0.93 Mb region (Chr01: 31,601,839-32,348,964) within the qNLR_Dr. Chr01 identified by fine-mapping, 13 significant (Padj < 0.05) differentially expressed genes were observed (Figure 6). Among them, 12 genes contain at least one nonsynonymous SNP (Table S9). The annotation and functions of these genes have suggested six candidate genes that could be further studied to uncover the underlying mechanism of drought tolerance in watermelon based on the root growth, namely Cla97C01G018460 (L-Ascorbate Oxidase, AO), Cla97C01G018500 (Cellulose Synthase-Interactive Protein 1, CSI1), Cla97C01G018900 (Late Embryogenesis Abundant Protein, LEA), Cla97C01G019010 (Zinc-Finger Homeodomain Protein 2, ZHD2), Cla97C01G019320 (Pericycle Factor Type-A 5, PFA5), and Cla97C01G019330 (bZIP transcription factor 53-like, bZIP53-like) (Table S9).

3. Discussion

Water scarcity during the seedling stage undoubtedly affects the functions of different plant parts, especially the root, which is the first plant organ to interact with the environment [17,37,39]. Thus, breeding cultivars with a robust root has become an urgent need in modern agriculture [7]. In the present study, we investigated the drought tolerance index (DTI) of 38 watermelon accessions based on the number of lateral roots (NLR) observed in watermelon seedlings exposed to 15% PEG6000 and control treatments in pouches (Figure 1). Further, we selected an extreme drought-tolerant genotype (ZJU076) and a sensitive genotype (ZJU196) for gene mining related to drought adaptation in watermelon. The wild-tolerant- watermelon (ZJU076), unlike the domesticated-sensitive-genotype (ZJU196), tends to maintain better root growth under normal and water scarcity conditions (Figure 2). Root growth preservation during drought is essential for maintaining the water and nutrient supply to establish the aboveground parts [57]. The consistency of the phenotyping of the two genotypes under water withholding stress in soil (Figure 2c) supported the correlation between long-term drought tolerance and early-stage root response to 15% PEG in pouches (Figure 2a,b). Malambane et al. [27] revealed that watermelon exhibits a similar response pattern in artificial and natural environments under drought stress. The domesticated C. lanatus, such as ZJU196 (sensitive), and wild types, such as ZJU076 (tolerant), were recognized in previous studies as drought-sensitive and tolerant species, respectively [41,58]. Moreover, our results agree with the earlier reports that continuous root growth under water limitation conditions is essential in wild watermelon regardless of growth conditions or development stage [23].
Watermelon has been found to cope with drought stress in several ways, including root elongation, photosystem II protection, regulation of abscisic acid (ABA), melatonin and citrulline levels, wax, osmoprotectants, and antioxidant accumulation, as well as changes in the transcriptome and proteome [4,23,24,29,35,37,59]. The drought-induced polypeptide (DRIP-1) gene, an essential enzyme in citrulline biosynthesis, plays a vital role in the drought tolerance of wild watermelon [24,34]. The root system was suggested to be involved in feeling drought by releasing a signaling molecule to the shoot and inducing the transcript of DRIP-1 [34]. In another study, the Ran GTPase CLRan1 gene, functioning in cell division and proliferation, was described as a potential enhancer of primary root growth under drought stress in wild watermelon [23,28]. Also, Nanasato et al. [32] stated that the Cytochrome b561 (CLb561A and CLb561B) and Ascorbate Oxidase (AO) are involved in drought and high light tolerance in the leaves of wild watermelon. Similarly, Akashi et al. [33] proposed Metallothionein Type-2 (CLMT2) as a significant contributor to wild watermelon survival under extreme drought and high light stresses. Herein, we mapped two QTLs related to the drought tolerance on chromosomes 1 (qNLR_Dr. Chr01) and 2 (qNLR_Dr. Chr02) (Figure 3 and Figure 4), and haplotype analysis indicated qNLR_Dr. Chr01 is likely a major contributor to the phenotypic variation in NLR in watermelon (Figure 4). Moreover, RNA-seq results suggested that 13 differentially expressed genes in this QTL might be related to the difference in drought tolerance (Figure 6). Collectively, our results provide the first understanding of the genetic control of NLR response to drought stress in watermelon.
In several studies, combined forward and reverse genetics have been applied for gene detection and mining [60,61,62,63,64,65,66,67,68,69,70,71,72,73]. Our study has joined BSA, fine mapping, transcriptome, and polymorphism to detect candidate genes associated with drought tolerance in watermelon. The fine-mapping results suggested a region of 0.93 Mbp (Chr01: 31601839-32348964) within the qNLR_Dr. Chr01 as more likely to be associated with drought tolerance than qNLR_Dr. Chr02 in the present mapping population. The RNA-seq results show that this region includes 12 significant differentially expressed genes with nonsynonymous SNPs (Figure 6). Based on their annotation and roles published in the previous literature, six genes could be further studied to shed light on the drought tolerance mechanism according to root growth. Three transcription factors (TFs) were detected, namely Cla97C01G019010 (ZHD2), Cla97C01G019320 (bHLH), and Cla97C01G019330 (bZIP53-like). Cla97C01G019010 (ZHD2) encodes a zinc-finger homeobox TF, described recently to promote seminal and lateral root growth in rice by acting on the ethylene biosynthesis gene ACS5 [74]. Cla97C01G019320 is a homologous gene of AT1G27660 (Pericycle Factor Type-A 5, PFA5), which is a basic helix–loop–helix (bHLH) DNA-binding superfamily protein and has been reported to control the initiation of lateral roots in Arabidopsis [75]. Cla97C01G019330 (bZIP53-like) is homologous to Arabidopsis Basic Leucine-Zipper 11 (ATBZIP11). This bZIP family has been reported to be involved in the molecular regulation of several plant organs and tissues, such as vascular development [76], floral initiation and development [77], seed germination and maturation [78,79], embryogenesis [80], and photomorphogenesis [81]. Moreover, the bZIP family has been reported to regulate stress tolerance, including drought [82,83].
Three other candidate genes, Cla97C01G018460 (L-ascorbate oxidase), Cla97C01G018500 (U-box domain-containing 4-like protein), and Cla97C01G018900 (Late embryogenesis abundant proteins, LEA), were also possibly involved in regulating root development or/and drought tolerance. The Cla97C01G018460 (L-ascorbate oxidase) encoding ascorbate oxidase protein was described as essential in root development and stress tolerance in several species [84,85,86,87]. Cla97C01G018500 (U-box domain-containing 4-like protein) is homologous to AT2G22125 (Cellulose Synthase-Interactive Protein 1, CSI1), an armadillo repeat-containing protein (ARCP) that is required for root and anther development [88,89]. Moreover, PUB4, a similar gene to CS11, has been reported as a regulator of cell division and proliferation in the root meristem of Arabidopsis thaliana [90]. The overexpression of LEA proteins has been proven to play a role in stress tolerance, especially drought [91,92]. In another study, two LEA genes (Cla015386 and Cla009416) were described as involved in watermelon osmotic stress tolerance [37], indicating Cla97C01G018900 as a candidate gene for NLR response to drought.

4. Materials and Methods

4.1. Plant Materials, Experimental Design, and Phenotyping Procedures

A preliminary experiment was conducted at the seedling post-germination stage in pouches using one genotype exposed to 10, 15, and 20% PEG6000 (w/v) to determine the best phenotyping procedure. Distilled water was used as a basal solution for PEG treatments and a control (0% PEG6000). We started the root phenotyping at the 3–4 cm primary root length stage because, in general, at this stage, the watermelon root showed no lateral roots, allowing us to efficiently study the effect of drought stress (PEG treatment) on lateral root initiation (NLR). After exposure, we observed the root response within four days at four time points (1, 2, 3, and 4 days). We found that the 15% PEG6000 treatment for 4 days was the best condition to observe a clear difference in the lateral root system between stress and the control (Figure S1).
Accordingly, we phenotyped 38 watermelon accessions (Table S10) exposed to 0 and 15% PEG6000 to select mapping parents. Three independent replications were performed in a completely randomized design. The seed germination was performed as described in our published paper on watermelon root [22]. At 3–5 cm length of the primary root, 18 similar seedlings of each accession were divided equally into two groups (distilled water for the control and PEG 15% for the drought stress at pH = 6.00). The seedlings were transferred to new pouches (3 seedlings per pouch) and kept as described by Mahmoud et al. [22]. The phenotyping images were taken twice, on day 0 at 3–5 cm length and four days later. The manual process of the EZ-Root-VIS pipeline was used to analyze the roots [93,94]. To detect the roots, (i) the roots less than 50 pixels were rejected, (ii) the roots closer than 5 pixels were merged, and (iii) the terminal roots less than 20 pixels were pruned. We considered four root traits to make the final decision of drought tolerance, including the NLR, lateral root system (cm), primary root length (cm), and total root system (cm), which were calculated by subtraction between days 4 and 0. Interestingly, the NLR represented the main difference among the tested genotypes. Accordingly, the drought tolerance index (DTI) was developed for each studied genotype by dividing the NLR in control (CK, 0% PEG6000) by the NLR under drought stress (15% PEG6000). After that, we selected two extreme genotypes as mapping parents based on the NLR’s drought tolerance index (DTI), ZJU076 (drought-tolerant, wild watermelon) and ZJU196 (drought-sensitive, Citrullus lanatus (Thunb.) Matsumura and Nakai, domesticated watermelon).
To validate the root phenotypes of the selected tolerant (ZJU076) and sensitive (ZJU196) parents, we grew them in trays filled with soil (pool experiment). Briefly, seeds of each parent were sown (three rows, four seedlings/row) in a pool containing a sand/peat mixture (1:1 v/v). After germination, substrate moisture was maintained close to 50% (measured by soil moisture meter HH2; Delta Devices Co., Cambridge, UK) by watering with half-strengthening Hoagland solution every three days until the seedlings reached the two true leaf stage. At that stage, the drought was started by withholding water for 15 days (soil water content ≈ 2%, and the sensitive genotype was severely wilted). At that point, the plants were thoroughly watered to observe their recovery ability. One week after rehydration, the seedling’s phenotypes were observed. Seedlings with apparent green and viable stems were considered as tolerant. The maximum water-holding capacity of the substrate (substrate’s container capacity) was measured following the method described by Álvarez et al. [95].

4.2. Population Construction, Offspring Screening, and Sampling

The initial F1 and F2 populations from the ZJU076 (tolerant, ♂) × ZJU196 (sensitive, ♀) cross were obtained as described by Mahmoud et al. [22]. Accordingly, 484 F2 individuals were phenotyped in pouches with 15% PEG treatment for 4 d to allow BSA analysis. All F2 individuals were transferred to a hydroponic system to collect enough samples. After 10 days of continuous growth, samples of leaves were gathered and kept at −80 °C for further DNA extraction and pools sequencing.

4.3. DNA Extraction, Quality Detection, and Library Construction

The DNA was extracted using the cetyl trimethyl ammonium bromide (CTAB) procedure [96]. DNA quality and concentration were determined, as mentioned by Mahmoud et al. [22]. The DNA samples were bulked into the high pool and low pool by equally mixing 20 extreme F2 individuals representing tolerant and sensitive pools in addition to the two parent samples. DNA library construction and sequencing procedures were performed as described by Liao et al. [97].

4.4. Bulk Segregant Analysis Pipelines

The sequence alignment, mapping, SNP variant calling and annotation, SNP indexes, and G prime determination were conducted as described in Mahmoud et al. [22].

4.5. Haplotype Analysis for QTL Validation and Fine Mapping

We performed haplotype analysis to validate the detected QTLs in 305 F2 individuals and fine-mapped the target intervals with two F2 recombinants that covered both detected QTLs through the association between their phenotypic and genotypic variations. Briefly, the candidate regions were extracted from the VCF file after the SNPs calling pipelines. Hence, specific KASP primers were designed based on the variation in the low and high pools and parental genotypes. Twelve KASP primers (Table S11) were designed for the KASP assay and used for QTL validation and fine mapping. The KASP assay was conducted as described by Liao et al. [97]. Consequently, the genotyping data were transformed into a visual heatmap by changing the genotype values to ‘Allele 1’, ‘Allele 2’, and ‘Allele 1 & Allele 2’, representing the variants of ZJU196 (sensitive), ZJU076 (tolerant), and heterozygous, respectively. Later, ‘Allele 1’, ‘Allele 2’; and ‘Allele 1 & Allele 2’ were transformed to ‘0’;, ‘1’, and ‘2’ and labeled with green, yellow, and red, respectively, and presented in a heatmap.

4.6. RNA-Seq Methods

4.6.1. Sample Preparation, Library Construction, and Sequencing

The whole roots of both parents were collected two days after 15% PEG6000 or control (distilled water) treatments with four biological replications (3 roots/replicate) and stored at −80 °C. Following the manufacturer’s guidelines, the total RNA was extracted using a TianGen kit (TianGen Biotech Co. Ltd., Beijing, China). RNA degradation and contamination were examined on 1% agarose gels, and the purity was evaluated using a NanoPhotometer® spectrophotometer (IMPLEN, Westlake Village, CA, USA). The RNA Nano 6000 Assay Kit of the Bioanalyzer 2100 system (Santa Clara, CA, USA) was used to test the RNA integrity in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions. The RNA libraries were prepared using total RNA for Illumina paired-end sequencing according to the Illumina protocol. Subsequently, the Illumina HiSeq 2000 platform (Illumina, San Diego, CA, USA) was used to sequence the library preparations, and 150 bp paired-end reads were created at Novogene Bioinformatics Technology Co., Ltd. (Beijing, China).

4.6.2. RNA Data Analysis

Raw reads from fastq files were managed using in-house Perl scripts. Briefly, adaptor, ploy-N, and low-quality reads were eliminated from the raw reads to obtain clean reads. Simultaneously, Q20, Q30, and GC content of the clean reads were calculated [98]. UMI-tools v1.0.0 extracted the Unique Molecular Identifiers (UMIs), and the clean UMI reads with high quality were used in all the downstream analyses. The index of the watermelon reference genome V2 was built using Hisat2 v2.0.4, and paired-end clean reads were matched to the reference genome utilizing Hisat2 v2.0.4 [99]. UMI-tools v1.0.0 were used to deduplicate reads based on the mapping coordinate and the UMI attached to the reads [100]. The read numbers mapped to each gene were counted using HTSeq v0.9.1 [101] to quantify the gene expression. Consequently, the fragments per kilobase per million mapped reads (FPKM) were estimated for each gene according to the gene length and read count mapped to the same gene [102]. Differential expression analysis of 4 biological replications was conducted via the DESeq R package (1.18.0) [103]. The resulting p-values were adjusted via the Benjamini and Hochberg approach [104]. Corrected p-value < 0.05 and fold change (log2) of 1 were considered the threshold for significant DEGs. Gene ontology (GO) of the DEGs was applied using the GOseq R package [105], in which gene length bias was corrected. GO terms with corrected p-value < 0.05 were assigned as significantly enriched by DEGs. The enrichment statistics of DEGs in KEGG pathways (http://www.genome.jp/kegg/, accessed on 30 September 2021) were implemented using KOBAS v3.0 software [106]. For combined QTL and RNA-seq, only genes presenting adjusted p-values < 0.05 were considered for the significant DEGs in ZJU076 (tolerant) and ZJU196 (sensitive) within the detected QTLs. The CK and DR abbreviations in the RNA-Seq results indicate the control and drought stress treatments, respectively, while 76 and 196 represent the ZJU076 (tolerant) and ZJU0196 (sensitive) genotypes.

4.7. Detection of the Candidate Genes

We integrated the BSA, fine mapping, RNA-seq, and polymorphism results to detect the candidate genes. We only considered the DEGs with p-values < 0.05 in both CK_76 vs. DR_76 and CK_ 196 vs. D.R._ 196 within the detected QTLs by BSA. Specific candidate genes were proposed based on the genetic polymorphism, gene annotation, and their functions in root growth published in the previous studies.

5. Conclusions

Our study provides a substantial advancement in comprehending the genetic foundation of drought-associated QTLs and candidate gene detection in watermelon. We successfully mapped two QTLs (qNLR_Dr.Chr01 and qNLR_Dr.Chr02) associated with NLR-dependent drought adaptation in wild watermelon. The integrated QTL mapping, fine mapping, transcriptome, and polymorphism suggested six candidate genes for drought tolerance in wild watermelon. Wild watermelon could be an excellent genetic material, rendering it valuable for pinpointing new alleles for resistance breeding. Moreover, identifying candidate genes associated with drought lays a path for subsequent studies on the underlying mechanism and provides valuable markers for drought tolerance breeding in watermelon.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/ijms25010065/s1.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, A.M. and Z.H.; Data curation, A.M., N.L., A.A., R.Q., X.C. and Z.H.; Formal analysis, A.M., N.L. and G.K.M.; Funding acquisition, A.M., J.Y., M.Z. and Z.H.; Investigation, A.M. and M.Z.; Methodology, A.M., N.L., R.Q., X.C. and G.K.M.; Resources, M.Z., M.M.-F. and Z.H.; Software, A.M., N.L., A.A., G.K.M., X.C., M.M.-F. and Z.H.; Supervision, J.Y., Z.H. and M.Z.; Validation, J.Y., Z.H. and M.Z.; Visualization, A.A., R.Q., J.Y., Z.H. and M.Z; Writing—original draft, A.M.; Writing—review and editing, G.K.M., M.M.-F., Z.H. and M.Z. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work was supported by the Project of Sanya Yazhou Bay Science and Technology City (SCKJ-JYRC-2022-18), the Natural Science Foundation of Hainan Province (321MS064), the Earmarked Fund for China Agriculture Research System (CARS25-17), the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (+226-2022-00100), Science and technology innovation platform for the watermelon and melon breeding, reproduction, and spreading of Zhejiang Province (2020-KYY-NSFZ-0314), and the Key Research Project of Ningbo Municipal Government (2021Z057).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Regan, P.M.; Kim, H.; Maiden, E. Climate change, adaptation, and agricultural output. Reg. Environ. Chang. 2018, 19, 113–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. FAOSTAT. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Available online: http://faostat.fao.org (accessed on 16 August 2022).
  3. Mall, M.; Kumar, R.; Akhtar, M.Q. Chapter 1—Horticultural crops and abiotic stress challenges. In Stress Tolerance in Horticultural Crops; Chandra Rai, A., Rai, A., Kumar Rai, K., Rai, V.P., Kumar, A., Eds.; Woodhead Publishing: Sawston, UK, 2021; pp. 1–19. [Google Scholar]
  4. Li, H.; Mo, Y.; Cui, Q.; Yang, X.; Guo, Y.; Wei, C.; Yang, J.; Zhang, Y.; Ma, J.; Zhang, X. Transcriptomic and physiological analyses reveal drought adaptation strategies in drought-tolerant and -susceptible watermelon genotypes. Plant Sci. 2019, 278, 32–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Fahad, S.; Bajwa, A.A.; Nazir, U.; Anjum, S.A.; Farooq, A.; Zohaib, A.; Sadia, S.; Nasim, W.; Adkins, S.; Saud, S.; et al. Crop Production under Drought and Heat Stress: Plant Responses and Management Options. Front. Plant Sci. 2017, 8, 1147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Lammerts van Bueren, E.T.; Struik, P.C.; van Eekeren, N.; Nuijten, E. Towards resilience through systems-based plant breeding. A review. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2018, 38, 42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Comas, L.H.; Becker, S.R.; Cruz, V.M.; Byrne, P.F.; Dierig, D.A. Root traits contributing to plant productivity under drought. Front. Plant Sci. 2013, 4, 442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Gaur, P.M.; Krishnamurthy, L.; Kashiwagi, J. Improving Drought-Avoidance Root Traits in Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)—Current Status of Research at ICRISAT. Plant Prod. Sci. 2015, 11, 3–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Satbhai, S.B.; Ristova, D.; Busch, W. Underground tuning: Quantitative regulation of root growth. J. Exp. Bot. 2015, 66, 1099–1112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Sofi, P.A.; Rehman, K.; Gull, M.; Kumari, J.; Djanaguiraman, M.; Prasad, P.V.V. Integrating root architecture and physiological approaches for improving drought tolerance in common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Plant Physiol. Rep. 2021, 26, 4–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Chen, Y.; Rengel, Z.; Palta, J.; Siddique, K.H.M. Efficient root systems for enhancing tolerance of crops to water and phosphorus limitation. Indian. J. Plant Physiol. 2018, 23, 689–696. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Xiong, L.; Wang, R.G.; Mao, G.; Koczan, J.M. Identification of drought tolerance determinants by genetic analysis of root response to drought stress and abscisic Acid. Plant Physiol. 2006, 142, 1065–1074. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Maurel, C.; Nacry, P. Root architecture and hydraulics converge for acclimation to changing water availability. Nat. Plants 2020, 6, 744–749. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Wasaya, A.; Zhang, X.; Fang, Q.; Yan, Z. Root phenotyping for drought tolerance: A review. Agronomy 2018, 8, 241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Katuuramu, D.N.; Wechter, W.P.; Washington, M.L.; Horry, M.; Cutulle, M.A.; Jarret, R.L.; Levi, A. Phenotypic Diversity for Root Traits and Identification of Superior Germplasm for Root Breeding in Watermelon. HortScience 2020, 55, 1272–1279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Siddiqui, M.N.; Leon, J.; Naz, A.A.; Ballvora, A. Genetics and genomics of root system variation in adaptation to drought stress in cereal crops. J. Exp. Bot. 2021, 72, 1007–1019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Ye, H.; Roorkiwal, M.; Valliyodan, B.; Zhou, L.; Chen, P.; Varshney, R.K.; Nguyen, H.T. Genetic diversity of root system architecture in response to drought stress in grain legumes. J. Exp. Bot. 2018, 69, 3267–3277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Mickelbart, M.V.; Hasegawa, P.M.; Bailey-Serres, J. Genetic mechanisms of abiotic stress tolerance that translate to crop yield stability. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2015, 16, 237–251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Yoon, J.B.; Kwon, S.-W.; Ham, T.-H.; Kim, S.; Thomson, M.; Hechanova, S.L.; Jena, K.K.; Park, Y. Marker-Assisted Breeding. In Current Technologies in Plant Molecular Breeding: A Guide Book of Plant Molecular Breeding for Researchers; Koh, H.-J., Kwon, S.-Y., Thomson, M., Eds.; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2015; pp. 95–144. [Google Scholar]
  20. Paris, H.S. Origin and emergence of the sweet dessert watermelon. Citrullus Lanatus. Ann. Bot. 2015, 116, 133–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Dube, J.; Ddamulira, G.; Maphosa, M. Watermelon production in Africa: Challenges and opportunities. Int. J. Veg. Sci. 2020, 27, 211–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Mahmoud, A.; Qi, R.; Zhao, H.; Yang, H.; Liao, N.; Ali, A.; Malangisha, G.K.; Ma, Y.; Zhang, K.; Zhou, Y.; et al. An allelic variant in the ACS7 gene promotes primary root growth in watermelon. Theor. Appl. Genet. 2022, 135, 3357–3373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Yoshimura, K.; Masuda, A.; Kuwano, M.; Yokota, A.; Akashi, K. Programmed proteome response for drought avoidance/tolerance in the root of a C(3) xerophyte (wild watermelon) under water deficits. Plant Cell Physiol. 2008, 49, 226–241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Kawasaki, S.; Miyake, C.; Kohchi, T.; Fujii, S.; Uchida, M.; Yokota, A. Responses of wild watermelon to drought stress: Accumulation of an ArgE homologue and citrulline in leaves during water deficits. Plant Cell Physiol. 2000, 41, 864–873. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Takahara, K.; Akashi, K.; Yokota, A. Purification and characterization of glutamate N-acetyltransferase involved in citrulline accumulation in wild watermelon. FEBS J. 2005, 272, 5353–5364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Mandizvo, T.; Odindo, A.O.; Mashilo, J. Citron Watermelon Potential to Improve Crop Diversification and Reduce Negative Impacts of Climate Change. Sustainability 2021, 13, 2269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Malambane, G.; Batlang, U.; Ramolekwa, K.; Tsujimoto, H.; Akashi, K. Growth chamber and field evaluation of physiological factors of two watermelon genotypes. Plant Stress. 2021, 2, 100017–100027. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Akashi, K.; Yoshimura, K.; Kajikawa, M.; Hanada, K.; Kosaka, R.; Kato, A.; Katoh, A.; Nanasato, Y.; Tsujimoto, H.; Yokota, A. Potential involvement of drought-induced Ran GTPase CLRan1 in root growth enhancement in a xerophyte wild watermelon. Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2016, 80, 1907–1916. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Sanda, S.; Yoshida, K.; Kuwano, M.; Kawamura, T.; Munekage, Y.N.; Akashi, K.; Yokota, A. Responses of the photosynthetic electron transport system to excess light energy caused by water deficit in wild watermelon. Physiol. Plant 2011, 142, 247–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Nanasato, Y.; Miyake, C.; Takahara, K.; Kohzuma, K.; Munekage, Y.N.; Yokota, A.; Akashi, K. Chapter 23 Mechanisms of Drought and High Light Stress Tolerance Studied in a Xerophyte, Citrullus lanatus (Wild Watermelon). In The Chloroplast: Basics and Applications; Rebeiz, C.A., Benning, C., Bohnert, H.J., Daniell, H., Hoober, J.K., Lichtenthaler, H.K., Portis, A.R., Tripathy, B.C., Eds.; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2010; pp. 363–378. [Google Scholar]
  31. Akashi, K.; Yoshimura, K.; Nanasato, Y.; Takahara, K.; Munekage, Y.; Yokota, A. Wild plant resources for studying molecular mechanisms of drought/strong light stress tolerance. Plant Biotechnol. J. 2008, 25, 257–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Nanasato, Y.; Akashi, K.; Yokota, A. Co-expression of cytochrome b561 and ascorbate oxidase in leaves of wild watermelon under drought and high light conditions. Plant Cell Physiol. 2005, 46, 1515–1524. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Akashi, K.; Nishimura, N.; Ishida, Y.; Yokota, A. Potent hydroxyl radical-scavenging activity of drought-induced type-2 metallothionein in wild watermelon. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2004, 323, 72–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Yokota, A.; Kawasaki, S.; Iwano, M.; Nakamura, C.; Miyake, C.; Akashi, K. Citrulline and DRIP-1 Protein (ArgE Homologue) in Drought Tolerance of Wild Watermelon. Ann. Bot. 2002, 89, 825–832. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Akashi, K.; Miyake, C.; Yokota, A. Citrulline, a novel compatible solute in drought-tolerant wild watermelon leaves, is an efficient hydroxyl radical scavenger. FEBS Lett. 2001, 508, 438–442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Li, H.; Guo, Y.; Cui, Q.; Zhang, Z.; Yan, X.; Ahammed, G.J.; Yang, X.; Yang, J.; Wei, C.; Zhang, X. Alkanes (C29 and C31)-Mediated Intracuticular Wax Accumulation Contributes to Melatonin- and ABA-Induced Drought Tolerance in Watermelon. J. Plant Growth Regul. 2020, 39, 1441–1450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Yang, Y.; Mo, Y.; Yang, X.; Zhang, H.; Wang, Y.; Li, H.; Wei, C.; Zhang, X. Transcriptome Profiling of Watermelon Root in Response to Short-Term Osmotic Stress. PLoS ONE 2016, 11, e0166314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Mo, Y.-l.; Zheng, J.-x.; Yang, R.-p.; Liu, C.-m.; Gu, X.-r.; Zhang, X.; Wei, C.-h. Physiological responses and tolerance to drought stress of different watermelon genotypes. Yingyong Shengtai Xuebao 2016, 27, 1942–1952. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  39. Mo, Y.; Yang, R.; Liu, L.; Gu, X.; Yang, X.; Wang, Y.; Zhang, X.; Li, H. Growth, photosynthesis and adaptive responses of wild and domesticated watermelon genotypes to drought stress and subsequent re-watering. Plant Growth Regul. 2016, 79, 229–241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Mo, Y.; Wang, Y.; Yang, R.; Zheng, J.; Liu, C.; Li, H.; Ma, J.; Zhang, Y.; Wei, C.; Zhang, X. Regulation of Plant Growth, Photosynthesis, Antioxidation and Osmosis by an Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungus in Watermelon Seedlings under Well-Watered and Drought Conditions. Front. Plant Sci. 2016, 7, 644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Guzzon, F.; Müller, J.V.; do Nascimento Araujo, M.; Cauzzi, P.; Orsenigo, S.; Mondoni, A.; Abeli, T. Drought avoidance adaptive traits in seed germination and seedling growth of Citrullus amarus landraces. S. Afr. J. Bot. 2017, 113, 382–388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Zhang, H.; Gong, G.; Guo, S.; Ren, Y.; Xu, Y.; Ling, K.-S. Screening the USDA watermelon germplasm collection for drought tolerance at the seedling stage. HortScience 2011, 46, 1245–1248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Yang, J.; Zhu, J.; Yang, Y. Genome-Wide Identification and Expression Analysis of NF-Y Transcription Factor Families in Watermelon (Citrullus lanatus). J. Plant Growth Regul. 2017, 36, 590–607. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Song, Q.; Joshi, M.; DiPiazza, J.; Joshi, V. Functional Relevance of Citrulline in the Vegetative Tissues of Watermelon During Abiotic Stresses. Front. Plant Sci. 2020, 11, 512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Erez, M.E.; İnal, B.; Karipçin, M.Z.; Altıntaş, S. Physiological and Gene-Expression Variations in Watermelon (Citrullus lanatus L.) Cultivars Exposed to Drought Stress. Acta Soc. Bot. Pol. 2020, 89, 8921. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Chung, J.-S.; Park, S.-H.; Min, J.-H.; Min, K.-H.; Lee, S.; Lee, K.-H.; Kim, C.S. Reduced Expression of Gongdae Ring Zinc Finger 1 (GdRZF1) Enhances Drought Stress Tolerance in Watermelon (Citrullus lanatus). Korean J. Hortic. Sci. Technol. 2017, 35, 637–646. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Lema, M. Marker Assisted Selection in Comparison to Conventional Plant Breeding: Review Article. Agric. Res. J. 2018, 14, 555913. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Jiang, G.-L. Molecular Marker-Assisted Breeding: A Plant Breeder’s Review. In Advances in Plant Breeding Strategies: Breeding, Biotechnology and Molecular Tools; Al-Khayri, J.M., Jain, S.M., Johnson, D.V., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2015; pp. 431–472. [Google Scholar]
  49. Jamann, T.M.; Balint-Kurti, P.J.; Holland, J.B. QTL Mapping Using High-Throughput Sequencing. In Plant Functional Genomics: Methods and Protocols; Alonso, J.M., Stepanova, A.N., Eds.; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2015; Volume 1284, pp. 257–285. [Google Scholar]
  50. Varshney, R.K.; Singh, V.K.; Hickey, J.M.; Xun, X.; Marshall, D.F.; Wang, J.; Edwards, D.; Ribaut, J.M. Analytical and Decision Support Tools for Genomics-Assisted Breeding. Trends Plant Sci. 2016, 21, 354–363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. de Dorlodot, S.; Forster, B.; Pages, L.; Price, A.; Tuberosa, R.; Draye, X. Root system architecture: Opportunities and constraints for genetic improvement of crops. Trends Plant Sci. 2007, 12, 474–481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Cooper, M.; van Eeuwijk, F.A.; Hammer, G.L.; Podlich, D.W.; Messina, C. Modeling QTL for complex traits: Detection and context for plant breeding. Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 2009, 12, 231–240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Meister, R.; Rajani, M.S.; Ruzicka, D.; Schachtman, D.P. Challenges of modifying root traits in crops for agriculture. Trends Plant Sci. 2014, 19, 779–788. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Idrissi, O.; Udupa, S.M.; De Keyser, E.; McGee, R.J.; Coyne, C.J.; Saha, G.C.; Muehlbauer, F.J.; Van Damme, P.; De Riek, J. Identification of Quantitative Trait Loci Controlling Root and Shoot Traits Associated with Drought Tolerance in a Lentil (Lens culinaris Medik.) Recombinant Inbred Line Population. Front. Plant Sci. 2016, 7, 1174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Liang, H.; Yu, Y.; Yang, H.; Xu, L.; Dong, W.; Du, H.; Cui, W.; Zhang, H. Inheritance and QTL mapping of related root traits in soybean at the seedling stage. Theor. Appl. Genet. 2014, 127, 2127–2137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Johnson, W.C.; Jackson, L.E.; Ochoa, O.; van Wijk, R.; Peleman, J.; Clair, D.A.S.; Michelmore, R.W. Lettuce, a shallow-rooted crop, and Lactuca serriola, its wild progenitor, differ at QTL determining root architecture and deep soil water exploitation. Theor. Appl. Genet. 2000, 101, 1066–1073. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Khan, A.; Pan, X.; Najeeb, U.; Tan, D.K.Y.; Fahad, S.; Zahoor, R.; Luo, H. Coping with drought: Stress and adaptive mechanisms, and management through cultural and molecular alternatives in cotton as vital constituents for plant stress resilience and fitness. Biol. Res. 2018, 51, 47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Ngwepe, R.M.; Mashilo, J.; Shimelis, H. Progress in genetic improvement of citron watermelon (Citrullus lanatus var. citroides): A review. Genet. Resour. Crop. Evol. 2019, 66, 735–758. [Google Scholar]
  59. Wang, Z.; Hu, H.; Goertzen, L.R.; McElroy, J.S.; Dane, F. Analysis of the Citrullus colocynthis transcriptome during water deficit stress. PLoS ONE 2014, 9, e104657. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Zhao, D.; Yang, L.; Liu, D.; Zeng, J.; Cao, S.; Xia, X.; Yan, J.; Song, X.; He, Z.; Zhang, Y. Fine mapping and validation of a major QTL for grain weight on chromosome 5B in bread wheat. Theor. Appl. Genet. 2021, 13, 3731–3741. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Lei, L.; Zheng, H.; Bi, Y.; Yang, L.; Liu, H.; Wang, J.; Sun, J.; Zhao, H.; Li, X.; Li, J.; et al. Identification of a Major QTL and Candidate Gene Analysis of Salt Tolerance at the Bud Burst Stage in Rice (Oryza sativa L.) Using QTL-Seq and RNA-Seq. Rice 2020, 13, 55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Zhang, D.; Zhang, H.; Chu, S.; Li, H.; Chi, Y.; Triebwasser-Freese, D.; Lv, H.; Yu, D. Integrating QTL mapping and transcriptomics identifies candidate genes underlying QTLs associated with soybean tolerance to low-phosphorus stress. Plant Mol. Biol. 2017, 93, 137–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Ma, Y.; Min, L.; Wang, J.; Li, Y.; Wu, Y.; Hu, Q.; Ding, Y.; Wang, M.; Liang, Y.; Gong, Z.; et al. A combination of genome-wide and transcriptome-wide association studies reveals genetic elements leading to male sterility during high temperature stress in cotton. New Phytol. 2021, 231, 165–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Wang, T.; Hou, L.; Jian, H.; Di, F.; Li, J.; Liu, L. Combined QTL mapping, physiological and transcriptomic analyses to identify candidate genes involved in Brassica napus seed aging. Mol. Genet. Genom. 2018, 293, 1421–1435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Magwanga, R.O.; Lu, P.; Kirungu, J.N.; Cai, X.; Zhou, Z.; Agong, S.G.; Wang, K.; Liu, F. Identification of QTLs and candidate genes for physiological traits associated with drought tolerance in cotton. J. Cotton Res. 2020, 3, 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Diouf, I.; Albert, E.; Duboscq, R.; Santoni, S.; Bitton, F.; Gricourt, J.; Causse, M. Integration of QTL, Transcriptome and Polymorphism Studies Reveals Candidate Genes for Water Stress Response in Tomato. Genes. 2020, 11, 900. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Sheng, C.; Song, S.; Zhou, R.; Li, D.; Gao, Y.; Cui, X.; Tang, X.; Zhang, Y.; Tu, J.; Zhang, X.; et al. QTL-Seq and Transcriptome Analysis Disclose Major QTL and Candidate Genes Controlling Leaf Size in Sesame (Sesamum indicum L.). Front. Plant Sci. 2021, 12, 580846. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Di, F.; Wang, T.; Ding, Y.; Chen, X.; Wang, H.; Li, J.; Liu, L. Genetic Mapping Combined with a Transcriptome Analysis to Screen for Candidate Genes Responsive to Abscisic Acid Treatment in Brassica napus Embryos During Seed Germination. DNA Cell Biol. 2020, 39, 533–547. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Li, Y.; Xiong, H.; Guo, H.; Zhou, C.; Xie, Y.; Zhao, L.; Gu, J.; Zhao, S.; Ding, Y.; Liu, L. Identification of the vernalization gene VRN-B1 responsible for heading date variation by QTL mapping using a RIL population in wheat. BMC Plant Biol. 2020, 20, 331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Gelli, M.; Konda, A.R.; Liu, K.; Zhang, C.; Clemente, T.E.; Holding, D.R.; Dweikat, I.M. Validation of QTL mapping and transcriptome profiling for identification of candidate genes associated with nitrogen stress tolerance in sorghum. BMC Plant Biol. 2017, 17, 123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Liu, D.; Zhang, J.; Liu, X.; Wang, W.; Liu, D.; Teng, Z.; Fang, X.; Tan, Z.; Tang, S.; Yang, J.; et al. Fine mapping and RNA-Seq unravels candidate genes for a major QTL controlling multiple fiber quality traits at the T1 region in upland cotton. BMC Genom. 2016, 17, 295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Diouf, I.A.; Derivot, L.; Bitton, F.; Pascual, L.; Causse, M. Water Deficit and Salinity Stress Reveal Many Specific QTL for Plant Growth and Fruit Quality Traits in Tomato. Front. Plant Sci. 2018, 9, 279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Yue, Z.; Ma, R.; Cheng, D.; Yan, X.; He, Y.; Wang, C.; Pan, X.; Yin, L.; Zhang, X.; Wei, C. Candidate gene analysis of watermelon stripe pattern locus ClSP ongoing recombination suppression. Theor. Appl. Genet. 2021, 134, 3263–3277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Yoon, J.; Cho, L.H.; Yang, W.; Pasriga, R.; Wu, Y.; Hong, W.J.; Bureau, C.; Wi, S.J.; Zhang, T.; Wang, R.; et al. Homeobox transcription factor OsZHD2 promotes root meristem activity in rice by inducing ethylene biosynthesis. J. Exp. Bot. 2020, 71, 5348–5364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Zhang, Y.; Mitsuda, N.; Yoshizumi, T.; Horii, Y.; Oshima, Y.; Ohme-Takagi, M.; Matsui, M.; Kakimoto, T. Two types of bHLH transcription factor determine the competence of the pericycle for lateral root initiation. Nat. Plants 2021, 7, 633–643. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Yin, Y.; Zhu, Q.; Dai, S.; Lamb, C.; Beachy, R.N. RF2a, a bZIP transcriptional activator of the phloem-specific rice tungro bacilliform virus promoter, functions in vascular development. EMBO J. 1997, 16, 5247–5259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Iven, T.; Strathmann, A.; Böttner, S.; Zwafink, T.; Heinekamp, T.; Guivarc’h, A.; Roitsch, T.; Dröge-Laser, W. Homo- and heterodimers of tobacco bZIP proteins counteract as positive or negative regulators of transcription during pollen development. Plant J. 2010, 63, 155–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Toh, S.; McCourt, P.; Tsuchiya, Y. HY5 is involved in strigolactone-dependent seed germination in Arabidopsis. Plant Signal Behav. 2012, 7, 556–558. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Izawa, T.; Foster, R.; Nakajima, M.; Shimamoto, K.; Chua, N.H. The rice bZIP transcriptional activator RITA-1 is highly expressed during seed development. Plant Cell 1994, 6, 1277–1287. [Google Scholar]
  80. Guan, Y.; Ren, H.; Xie, H.; Ma, Z.; Chen, F. Identification and characterization of bZIP-type transcription factors involved in carrot (Daucus carota L.) somatic embryogenesis. Plant J. 2009, 60, 207–217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Huang, X.; Ouyang, X.; Yang, P.; Lau, O.S.; Li, G.; Li, J.; Chen, H.; Deng, X.W. Arabidopsis FHY3 and HY5 Positively Mediate Induction of COP1 Transcription in Response to Photomorphogenic UV-B Light. Plant Cell 2012, 24, 4590–4606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Chen, H.; Chen, W.; Zhou, J.; He, H.; Chen, L.; Chen, H.; Deng, X.W. Basic leucine zipper transcription factor OsbZIP16 positively regulates drought resistance in rice. Plant Sci. 2012, 193–194, 8–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Yoshida, T.; Fujita, Y.; Sayama, H.; Kidokoro, S.; Maruyama, K.; Mizoi, J.; Shinozaki, K.; Yamaguchi-Shinozaki, K. AREB1, AREB2, and ABF3 are master transcription factors that cooperatively regulate ABRE-dependent ABA signaling involved in drought stress tolerance and require ABA for full activation. Plant J. 2010, 61, 672–685. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Yamamoto, A.; Bhuiyan, M.N.; Waditee, R.; Tanaka, Y.; Esaka, M.; Oba, K.; Jagendorf, A.T.; Takabe, T. Suppressed expression of the apoplastic ascorbate oxidase gene increases salt tolerance in tobacco and Arabidopsis plants. J. Exp. Bot. 2005, 56, 1785–1796. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Stevens, R.; Truffault, V.; Baldet, P.; Gautier, H. Ascorbate Oxidase in Plant Growth, Development, and Stress Tolerance. In Ascorbic Acid in Plant Growth, Development and Stress Tolerance; Hossain, M.A., Munné-Bosch, S., Burritt, D.J., Diaz-Vivancos, P., Fujita, M., Lorence, A., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; pp. 273–295. [Google Scholar]
  86. Pignocchi, C.; Fletcher, J.M.; Wilkinson, J.E.; Barnes, J.D.; Foyer, C.H. The function of ascorbate oxidase in tobacco. Plant Physiol. 2003, 132, 1631–1641. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Kerk, N.M.; Jiang, K.; Feldman, L.J. Auxin Metabolism in the Root Apical Meristem1. Plant Physiol. 2000, 122, 925–932. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Mei, Y.; Gao, H.B.; Yuan, M.; Xue, H.W. The Arabidopsis ARCP protein, CSI1, which is required for microtubule stability, is necessary for root and anther development. Plant Cell 2012, 24, 1066–1080. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Coates, J.C.; Laplaze, L.; Haseloff, J. Armadillo-related proteins promote lateral root development in Arabidopsis. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2006, 103, 1621–1626. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Kinoshita, A.; ten Hove, C.A.; Tabata, R.; Yamada, M.; Shimizu, N.; Ishida, T.; Yamaguchi, K.; Shigenobu, S.; Takebayashi, Y.; Iuchi, S.; et al. A plant U-box protein, PUB4, regulates asymmetric cell division and cell proliferation in the root meristem. Development 2015, 142, 444–453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Sivamani, E.; Bahieldin, A.; Wraith, J.M.; Al-Niemi, T.; Dyer, W.E.; Ho, T.-H.D.; Qu, R. Improved biomass productivity and water use efficiency under water deficit conditions in transgenic wheat constitutively expressing the barley HVA1 gene. Plant Sci. 2000, 155, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Xu, D.; Duan, X.; Wang, B.; Hong, B.; Ho, T.; Wu, R. Expression of a Late Embryogenesis Abundant Protein Gene, HVA1, from Barley Confers Tolerance to Water Deficit and Salt Stress in Transgenic Rice. Plant Physiol. 1996, 110, 249–257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Shahzad, Z.; Kellermeier, F.; Armstrong, E.M.; Rogers, S.; Lobet, G.; Amtmann, A.; Hills, A. EZ-Root-VIS: A Software Pipeline for the Rapid Analysis and Visual Reconstruction of Root System Architecture. Plant Physiol. 2018, 177, 1368–1381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Armengaud, P.; Zambaux, K.; Hills, A.; Sulpice, R.; Pattison, R.J.; Blatt, M.R.; Amtmann, A. EZ-Rhizo: Integrated software for the fast and accurate measurement of root system architecture. Plant J. 2009, 57, 945–956. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Álvarez, S.; Bañón, S.; Sánchez-Blanco, M.J. Regulated deficit irrigation in different phenological stages of potted geranium plants: Water consumption, water relations and ornamental quality. Acta Physiol. Plant 2013, 35, 1257–1267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. CIMMYT. Laboratory Protocols: CIMMYT Applied Molecular Genetics Laboratory, 3rd ed.; CIMMYT: Méx, Mexico, 2005; iii+92p. [Google Scholar]
  97. Liao, N.; Hu, Z.; Li, Y.; Hao, J.; Chen, S.; Xue, Q.; Ma, Y.; Zhang, K.; Mahmoud, A.; Ali, A.; et al. Ethylene-responsive factor 4 is associated with the desirable rind hardness trait conferring cracking resistance in fresh fruits of watermelon. Plant Biotechnol. J. 2019, 18, 1066–1077. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Ai, Y.; Zhang, Q.; Wang, W.; Zhang, C.; Cao, Z.; Bao, M.; He, Y. Transcriptomic Analysis of Differentially Expressed Genes during Flower Organ Development in Genetic Male Sterile and Male Fertile Tagetes erecta by Digital Gene-Expression Profiling. PLoS ONE 2016, 11, e0150892. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Kim, D.; Langmead, B.; Salzberg, S.L. HISAT: A fast spliced aligner with low memory requirements. Nat. Methods 2015, 12, 357–360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  100. Smith, T.; Heger, A.; Sudbery, I. UMI-tools: Modeling sequencing errors in Unique Molecular Identifiers to improve quantification accuracy. Genome Res. 2017, 27, 491–499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  101. Anders, S.; Pyl, P.T.; Huber, W. HTSeq—A Python framework to work with high-throughput sequencing data. Bioinformatics 2014, 31, 166–169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  102. Trapnell, C.; Williams, B.A.; Pertea, G.; Mortazavi, A.; Kwan, G.; van Baren, M.J.; Salzberg, S.L.; Wold, B.J.; Pachter, L. Transcript assembly and quantification by RNA-Seq reveals unannotated transcripts and isoform switching during cell differentiation. Nat. Biotechnol. 2010, 28, 511–515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Anders, S.; Huber, W. Differential expression analysis for sequence count data. Genome Biol. 2010, 11, R106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Haynes, W. Benjamini–Hochberg Method. In Encyclopedia of Systems Biology; Dubitzky, W., Wolkenhauer, O., Cho, K.-H., Yokota, H., Eds.; Springer: New York, NY, 2013; p. 78. [Google Scholar]
  105. Young, M.D.; Wakefield, M.J.; Smyth, G.K.; Oshlack, A. Gene ontology analysis for RNA-seq: Accounting for selection bias. Genome Biol. 2010, 11, R14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Mao, X.; Cai, T.; Olyarchuk, J.G.; Wei, L. Automated genome annotation and pathway identification using the KEGG Orthology (KO) as a controlled vocabulary. Bioinformatics 2005, 21, 3787–3793. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Drought tolerance index (DTI) based on the number of lateral roots (NLR) in 38 watermelon accessions exposed to 15% Polyethylene Glycol (PEG, drought) and distilled water (CK, control) for 4 days in pouches. The DTI was calculated as the ratio between NLR with drought and CK treatments. The tested genotypes were categorized into five groups based on their DTI. The plotted values are averages of three independent biological replications (nine plants/replication/treatment).
Figure 1. Drought tolerance index (DTI) based on the number of lateral roots (NLR) in 38 watermelon accessions exposed to 15% Polyethylene Glycol (PEG, drought) and distilled water (CK, control) for 4 days in pouches. The DTI was calculated as the ratio between NLR with drought and CK treatments. The tested genotypes were categorized into five groups based on their DTI. The plotted values are averages of three independent biological replications (nine plants/replication/treatment).
Ijms 25 00065 g001
Figure 2. Root phenotyping and validation of drought tolerance in the parents, F1 and F2 individuals. (a) Root phenotypes of ZJU076 (tolerant), ZJU196 (sensitive), and F1 after 4 days of growth with 15% PEG6000 (drought, Dr) and distilled water (control, CK). (b) Drought tolerance index (DTI) of the parents and F1. Values are means ± S.D. (n = 18). (c) After 15 days of water withholding (the final soil water content ≈ is 2%), (d) Frequency distribution of the number of lateral roots (as drought tolerance indicator) among 484 F2 individuals exposed to 15% Polyethylene Glycol (PEG) for four days.
Figure 2. Root phenotyping and validation of drought tolerance in the parents, F1 and F2 individuals. (a) Root phenotypes of ZJU076 (tolerant), ZJU196 (sensitive), and F1 after 4 days of growth with 15% PEG6000 (drought, Dr) and distilled water (control, CK). (b) Drought tolerance index (DTI) of the parents and F1. Values are means ± S.D. (n = 18). (c) After 15 days of water withholding (the final soil water content ≈ is 2%), (d) Frequency distribution of the number of lateral roots (as drought tolerance indicator) among 484 F2 individuals exposed to 15% Polyethylene Glycol (PEG) for four days.
Ijms 25 00065 g002
Figure 3. Bulk segregant analysis (BSA) results of the drought tolerance in watermelon. (a) The single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) index of the high pool, (b) the SNP index of the low pool, and (c) the delta SNP index values used for the association analysis. The x and y axes show the 11 chromosomes of watermelon and the SNP index, respectively. The curved line indicates the fitted SNP index or delta SNP index. The horizontal line indicates the association threshold with FFN of a 95% confidence interval. (d) Major QTLs for drought tolerance in watermelon detected by the G prime (G’) method. The QTL1, and QTL2 represent qNLR_Dr. Chr01 and qNLR_Dr. Chr02, respectively.
Figure 3. Bulk segregant analysis (BSA) results of the drought tolerance in watermelon. (a) The single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) index of the high pool, (b) the SNP index of the low pool, and (c) the delta SNP index values used for the association analysis. The x and y axes show the 11 chromosomes of watermelon and the SNP index, respectively. The curved line indicates the fitted SNP index or delta SNP index. The horizontal line indicates the association threshold with FFN of a 95% confidence interval. (d) Major QTLs for drought tolerance in watermelon detected by the G prime (G’) method. The QTL1, and QTL2 represent qNLR_Dr. Chr01 and qNLR_Dr. Chr02, respectively.
Ijms 25 00065 g003
Figure 4. Validation of the detected QTLs through haplotype analysis using six Kompetitive allele specific PCR (KASP) markers for each QTL in 305 F2 individuals. Green and red indicate homozygous segments from sensitive and tolerant parents, respectively. Yellow indicates heterozygous segments. The sidebars (on the left) represent the root traits of F2 individuals: primary root length (PRL), total root system (TRS), lateral root system (LRS), and the number of lateral roots (NLR). The single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) data are arranged in ascending order from top to bottom based on the NLR values. Zooming in will make the sample IDs and root trait values much more visible.
Figure 4. Validation of the detected QTLs through haplotype analysis using six Kompetitive allele specific PCR (KASP) markers for each QTL in 305 F2 individuals. Green and red indicate homozygous segments from sensitive and tolerant parents, respectively. Yellow indicates heterozygous segments. The sidebars (on the left) represent the root traits of F2 individuals: primary root length (PRL), total root system (TRS), lateral root system (LRS), and the number of lateral roots (NLR). The single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) data are arranged in ascending order from top to bottom based on the NLR values. Zooming in will make the sample IDs and root trait values much more visible.
Ijms 25 00065 g004
Figure 5. Fine mapping of the detected QTLs with 12 Kompetitive allele specific PCR (KASP) markers. (a) Parent genotypes and two F2 recombinants in the target regions. The left part represents qNLR_Dr. Chr01, while the right part shows qNLR_Dr. Chr02. (b) The recombinant offspring individuals of F2 are sorted based on qNLR_Dr. Chr02. (c) The recombinant offspring individuals of F2 are sorted based on qNLR_Dr. Chr01. The F2 offspring were classified into two groups based on the segment origins. Red indicates the homozygous ZJU076 (tolerant) segment, green indicates the homozygous ZJU196 (sensitive) segment, yellow shows the heterozygous region, and gray represents mixed (involved individuals similar to the parents or heterozygous). The average number of lateral roots (NLR) of each family was calculated from ten individuals.
Figure 5. Fine mapping of the detected QTLs with 12 Kompetitive allele specific PCR (KASP) markers. (a) Parent genotypes and two F2 recombinants in the target regions. The left part represents qNLR_Dr. Chr01, while the right part shows qNLR_Dr. Chr02. (b) The recombinant offspring individuals of F2 are sorted based on qNLR_Dr. Chr02. (c) The recombinant offspring individuals of F2 are sorted based on qNLR_Dr. Chr01. The F2 offspring were classified into two groups based on the segment origins. Red indicates the homozygous ZJU076 (tolerant) segment, green indicates the homozygous ZJU196 (sensitive) segment, yellow shows the heterozygous region, and gray represents mixed (involved individuals similar to the parents or heterozygous). The average number of lateral roots (NLR) of each family was calculated from ten individuals.
Ijms 25 00065 g005
Figure 6. The significant differentially expressed genes (DEGs) within the delimited region of qNLR_Dr. Chr01. Log2 (fold change) of the 13 DEGs (p < 0.05) in CK_76 vs. DR_76 and CK_ 196 vs. D.R._ 196 within the delimited region of qNLR_Dr. Chr01.
Figure 6. The significant differentially expressed genes (DEGs) within the delimited region of qNLR_Dr. Chr01. Log2 (fold change) of the 13 DEGs (p < 0.05) in CK_76 vs. DR_76 and CK_ 196 vs. D.R._ 196 within the delimited region of qNLR_Dr. Chr01.
Ijms 25 00065 g006
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Mahmoud, A.; Qi, R.; Chi, X.; Liao, N.; Malangisha, G.K.; Ali, A.; Moustafa-Farag, M.; Yang, J.; Zhang, M.; Hu, Z. Integrated Bulk Segregant Analysis, Fine Mapping, and Transcriptome Revealed QTLs and Candidate Genes Associated with Drought Adaptation in Wild Watermelon. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2024, 25, 65. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms25010065

AMA Style

Mahmoud A, Qi R, Chi X, Liao N, Malangisha GK, Ali A, Moustafa-Farag M, Yang J, Zhang M, Hu Z. Integrated Bulk Segregant Analysis, Fine Mapping, and Transcriptome Revealed QTLs and Candidate Genes Associated with Drought Adaptation in Wild Watermelon. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2024; 25(1):65. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms25010065

Chicago/Turabian Style

Mahmoud, Ahmed, Rui Qi, Xiaolu Chi, Nanqiao Liao, Guy Kateta Malangisha, Abid Ali, Mohamed Moustafa-Farag, Jinghua Yang, Mingfang Zhang, and Zhongyuan Hu. 2024. "Integrated Bulk Segregant Analysis, Fine Mapping, and Transcriptome Revealed QTLs and Candidate Genes Associated with Drought Adaptation in Wild Watermelon" International Journal of Molecular Sciences 25, no. 1: 65. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms25010065

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop