Next Article in Journal
Genome-Wide Identification and Expression Profiling Analysis of the Galactinol Synthase Gene Family in Cassava (Manihot esculenta Crantz)
Previous Article in Journal
The Effect of an Edible Coating with Tomato Oily Extract on the Physicochemical and Antioxidant Properties of Garambullo (Myrtillocactus geometrizans) Fruits
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Agronomy
Volume 8
Issue 11
10.3390/agronomy8110249
agronomy-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Breeding Low-Cadmium Wheat: Progress and Perspectives

by
Imdad Ullah Zaid
1,
Xin Zheng
1 and
Xiaofang Li
1,2,*
1
Key Laboratory of Agricultural Water Resources, Centre for Agricultural Resources Research, Institute of Genetics and Developmental Biology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, No. 286 Huaizhong Rd, Shijiazhuang 050021, China
2
CMLR, Sustainable Minerals Institute, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland 4072, Australia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Agronomy 2018, 8(11), 249; https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy8110249
Submission received: 26 September 2018 / Revised: 12 October 2018 / Accepted: 31 October 2018 / Published: 3 November 2018
(This article belongs to the Section Crop Breeding and Genetics)
Browse Figure
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Farmland cadmium (Cd) contamination has adverse impacts on both wheat grain yield and people’s well-being through food consumption. Safe farming using low-Cd cultivars has been proposed as a promising approach to address the farmland Cd pollution problem. To date, several dozen low-Cd wheat cultivars have been screened worldwide based on a Cd inhibition test, representing candidates for wheat Cd minimization. Unfortunately, the breeding of low-Cd wheat cultivars with desired traits or enhanced Cd exclusion has not been extensively explored. Moreover, the wheat Cd inhibition test for variety screening and conventional breeding is expensive and time-consuming. As an alternative, low-Cd wheat cultivars that were developed with molecular genetics and breeding approaches can be promising, typically by the association of marker-assisted selection (MAS) with conventional breeding practices. In this review, we provide a synthetics view of the background and knowledge basis for the breeding of low-Cd wheat cultivars.

1. Introduction

Cadmium (Cd), being a non-essential element, is among the most toxic metals [1]. Cd and Cd-bearing minerals have been widely used in modern industries and agriculture. Globally, metal industries produce 24,000 tons of Cd each year, with China being the top producer [1]. Meanwhile, worldwide, 17.5 Tg of Cd-bearing phosphate fertilizers are applied annually in recent years, about 50% of which are applied in China, the United States (US), and India [2]. Surveys showed that European phosphate fertilizers contain 7.4 mg/kg Cd on average [3], which is around 20-fold higher than the Cd geological background. Phosphate fertilizers that are produced in the US contain considerable amounts of Cd as well (4–109 mg/kg) [4]. Globally, the increasing use of phosphate fertilizers since the 1960s has inevitably caused widespread farmland Cd pollution. Wastewater irrigation and dry deposition have also created hotspots of Cd-polluted land [5]. As a result, farmland Cd pollution has been a major concern for decades in many industrialized and developing countries. For example, about 9.5% of Japanese paddy soil is more or less polluted by Cd. In China, official reports showed that 7% of China’s farmland is Cd-contaminated.
Farmland Cd pollution poses considerable risks to human health through the consumption of foods with excess Cd, particularly staple foods. Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) is a staple food crop for nearly 35% of the world population [6]. Since 1991, China has been one of the top wheat producers in the world. In the year 2016, China produced 128 million metric tons of wheat on its 24 million hectares of farmland. Nonetheless, wheat Cd contamination has inevitably been a hot topic in China as a result of farmland pollution. In Dakuai Town of Xinxiang, Henan, China, at least 150,000 kg of wheat with Cd levels 1.7–12.8-fold higher than the national food standards is produced each year. More "Cd wheat" can be found in the vicinity of many industrial gathering areas in Xinxiang. In 2016, about 666 ha of wheat field in the Muye District of Xinxiang was changed to a plantation of garden plants and flowers due to heavy metal contamination. Moreover, "Cd wheat" has also been detected in some wastewater irrigation areas of Shijiazhuang [7], Kaifeng [8], Beijing [9], and Tianjin [10]. The identified, as well as more unidentified, wheat Cd contamination has posed a considerable health risk to people, particularly the local people. Long-term exposure to Cd, even at a low rate, will cause bone diseases, emphysema, and proteinuri [11]. Therefore, minimizing food heavy metal pollution, including wheat Cd contamination, is now a priority task in the “Prevention and Control of Soil Pollution Action Plan” released by the Chinese government on 28 May 2016.
Safe farming of the polluted farmland, which aims to produce metal-safe crops without purposefully removing soil heavy metals, is thought to be one of the best strategies. Safe farming in Cd-polluted farmland has involved several biomaterials and agronomic measures, and low-Cd cultivars are recognized as an economic and sustainable one. Low-Cd wheat cultivars are supposed to be effective and essential in the polluted farmland of wheat–maize rotation areas, typically in the Yellow River and Huai River Valleys of China. The screening of low-Cd cultivars was started decades ago [12], though it was not proposed as a formal measure for heavy metal pollution control until 2006 [13]. Since then, many studies have been purposefully dedicated to the screening of low-Cd cultivars, most of which are wheat and rice cultivars. There have also been several excellent reviews on the selection of low-Cd (Cd-safe) cultivars [14,15]. In this review, we focus on the exploration of possible schemes of low-Cd cultivars breeding, based on a synthetic view of the phenotypic and genotypic responses of wheat to Cd and the available breeding strategies.

2. Cd Effects on Wheat Growth and Development

In general, the presence of more than 5–10 mg/kg of Cd in agricultural soil has adverse effects on crop cultivations [16]. The Cd toxicity symptoms that were observed in crops may arise due to the wide range of interactions at the cellular level. A huge number of studies have reported the impacts of excess Cd uptake on crops metabolism and physiological processes [17,18,19,20,21,22].
In wheat, Cd stress has induced several biochemical disorders of the cell membrane, lipid and protein synthesis, and nutrient metabolism, as well as decreases in the chlorophyll content [23,24,25]. Wheat exposed to high levels of Cd shows visible symptoms of chlorosis, necrosis, spotting of roots, and a reduction in leaf number and leaf area [26,27]. In wheat, root epidermis is the primary acting site of Cd toxicity, where roots significantly accumulate more Cd than other plant parts [28,29]. Cd had intensive effects on root growth and elongation, normally decreasing the root/top ratio. Cd induces several oxidative signals at root membrane sites that elicit programmed cell death (PCD). Wheat photosynthetic pigments are also sensitive to Cd stress, especially the structure and function of chloroplasts [30].
Soil Cd contamination has a substantial impact on the quantitative traits of wheat plants. Rebekic and Loncaric [31] evaluated 51 winter wheat cultivars under 20 mg Cd kg−1 soil for yield and yield-related traits. Their results showed that high soil Cd concentrations caused a significant reduction in wheat seed weight per spike by 27%, followed by reductions in kernel weight and seed number per spike by 5.2% and 23%, respectively. Similarly, Ci and his colleagues (2009) evaluated four wheat cultivars under 0.050 M of Cd concentration for morphological characteristics. They found a visible decrement in most of the growth and root parameters under Cd toxicity [32]. In roots, Cd competes for absorption with other mineral nutrients sharing similar chemical properties with Cd, such as Ca2+ and Mg2+, causing a mineral deficiency in plants. The available evidence showed that Cd treatment reduced the amount of nitrate salts and sugar concentrations, while it amplified the free amino acid concentrations in wheat roots and shoots [32,33].

3. Molecular Mechanisms of Cd Resistance in Wheat

Unlike rice, wheat (a hexaploid) has not been extensively explored regarding its genetic determinants for Cd tolerance. In this section, we reviewed the identified genes and molecules that are involved in wheat antioxidation processes, metal sequestration, exclusion, signaling pathways, and transcriptional regulation (Figure 1).

3.1. Antioxidation and Sequestration

Cd can inhibit the antioxidant defense system of plants and induce the formation of reactive oxygen species (ROS), which could cause oxidative stress [34,35,36]. As a conservation strategy, plants accumulate a variety of antioxidant products, such as reduced glutathiones (GSHs), to protect functional proteins from oxidative damages. In wheat, chronic Cd exposure increased the activity of glutathione reductase (GR), a key enzyme maintaining the content of GSH [37]. Induction of distinctive isoforms of GR has been observed in wheat, indicating a GR-associated defense mechanism against Cd stress [37].
Heavy metal-GSH conjugates can be transported into vacuoles by ABCC (ATP binding cassette subfamily C) transporters [38,39,40]. Heterologous expression of TaABCC13 conferred tolerance to heavy metals by the utilization of GSH, which was in accordance with the fact that the silencing of TaABCC13 leads to sensitivity to Cd in transgenic wheat [41]. TaABCC13, also called TaMRP3, enhanced the Cd tolerance of yeast ycf1 mutant through the GSH-mediated detoxification pathway [42,43]. GSH is also the precursor of many phytochelatins (PCs), synthesized by PC synthase (PCS) [44,45].
Heavy-metal-complexing PCs could decrease Cd content in eukaryotic cells by Cd sequestration and thus ameliorate Cd-induced oxidative stress [46,47]. Arabidopsis alcohol dehydrogenase (Adh) promoter-driven TaPCS1 expression caused a specific root expression of TaPCS1 in cad1-3 (an AtPCS1 loss-of-function mutant) [48]. Adh::TaPCS1/cad1-3 complemented the Cd sensitivities of the cad1-3 and showed induced Cd2+ and PC content in Arabidopsis shoots [48], indicating an enhanced Cd tolerance function. However, contradictory results were also observed when PCS was overexpressed in Arabidopsis and tobacco [49,50,51]. Wang et al. [52] reported that the heteroexpression of TaPCS1 in rice reduced Cd tolerance and increased Cd accumulation and PC content in shoots. GSH reduction might result in Cd sensitivity, yet more evidence is required to clarify the function of a single PCS gene in response to Cd stress.
Another reported sequestration-related protein in wheat is TaVP1, a vacuolar H+-pyrophosphatase (V-H-PPase). TaVP1 was first cloned by Brini et al. [53], and its function in Cd tolerance was evaluated by being ectopically expressed into tobacco [54]. The transgenic lines showed enhanced Cd tolerance, higher Cd accumulation, and higher CAT activity when compared with the wild type [54].

3.2. Exclusion

The ability to preclude or reduce root Cd uptake is a key resistance mechanism in plants. To date, little is known about Cd exclusion-related genes in wheat. Kim et al. [55] reported a wheat transmembrane protein, encoded by TaTM20, which conferred Cd tolerance when expressed in yeast cells. The expression of TaTM20 induced Cd efflux, which caused lower Cd content in yeast cells, even under the condition of reduced GSH content.

3.3. Phytohormone and Signal Molecule Regulation

A number of studies showed that plant hormones and signal molecules were involved in plant Cd response, such as salicylic acid (SA), abscisic acid (ABA), jasmonic acid (JA), ascorbic acid (AsA), and nitric oxide (NO) [56]. Exogenous AsA treatment significantly increased NO and endogenous AsA contents, inhibited ROS accumulation and Cd absorption, and enhanced the Cd tolerance of wheat seedlings [57]. NO is a well-known secondary messenger that regulates plant response to abiotic stress. Evidence was also shown that exogenous NO induced Cd resistance in wheat seedlings [57]. Similarly, results have also indicated the protective role of exogenous SA against Cd stress in maize and barley [58,59]. Kovács et al. reported that Cd induced SA synthesis in wheat, and wheat genotypes with different levels of tolerance exhibited various SA contents in accordance with GSH metabolism, indicating a role of SA-related signaling in Cd tolerance in wheat [60].

3.4. Transcriptional Regulation

Transcriptional factors (TFs) play important roles in regulating Cd detoxification-related genes in plants. A number of studies demonstrated that some Cd response TFs, such as AtbHLH29/38/39 [61], BnbZIP2 [62], ZAT6 [63], and PvERF15 [64], enhanced plant Cd tolerance transcriptionally. Shim et al. reported that TaHsfA4a, a class a4 heat shock transcription factor from wheat, conferred Cd resistance in both yeast and rice [65]. The knockdown of OsHsfA4a, which is a homolog of TaHsfA4a, decreased Cd resistance in transgenic rice [65]. Further functional analysis showed that the DNA binding domain (DBD) of TaHsfA4a was crucial for Cd tolerance. Moreover, TaHsfA4a-mediated Cd tolerance in yeast cells was found to be metallothionein (MT) gene-dependent, suggesting that TaHsfA4a might confer Cd tolerance by upregulating the expression of MTs in wheat [65].

3.5. Other Mechanisms

Recently, Dobrikova et al. [66] reported a wheat Rht-B1c mutant that showed enhanced Cd tolerance under 100 μM Cd treatment. The mutant expressing aberrant DELLA proteins showed limited gibberellic acid (GA) responsiveness, which caused growth repression [67].
Ren et al. reported a wheat expansin gene, TaEXPA2, which was upregulated in leaves when subjected to Cd stress [68]. Expansins are cell wall-located proteins that regulate plant development and response to various abiotic stresses [69,70,71,72]. Under Cd stress, TaEXPA2 conferred improved germination rate, root elongation, biomass accumulation, and photosynthesis when overexpressed in tobacco. The transgenic lines exhibited an efficient efflux of Cd, lower Cd accumulation, and enhanced antioxidant enzyme activities in comparison with the wild type [68]. These results suggested that TaEXPA2 may regulate plant Cd tolerance, probably through the activation of Cd efflux and antioxidation.
P1B-ATPases, also called heavy metal ATPases (HMAs), play direct roles in plant heavy metal transmembrane transport. Tan et al. reported that TaHMA2 was involved in the long-distance transport of Zn/Cd in transgenic rice [73]. TaHMA2 conferred transgenic yeast cells a better Cd tolerance. The overexpression of TaHMA2 in rice increased the root-to-shoot transport of Cd, and the transgenic rice showed better Cd resistance under low Cd treatment [73].

4. Breeding Strategies for Low-Cd Wheat Cultivars

Low-Cd wheat cultivars are the most effective, viable, and economic mean to reduce Cd health risks that are related to food consumption. Enhancement of wheat Cd-stress and reduction in grain Cd uptake can be realized by both conventional and modern breeding methods. In conventional breeding, low-Cd wheat cultivars are selected based on the measurements of morphological, physiological, or biochemical parameters that are associated with Cd stress. To improve the genetic background of wheat cultivars with enhanced Cd resistance, intra-specific crosses among superior individuals are usually developed, followed by selection in succeeding generations. To handle segregating materials, breeding methods, such as mass selection, pure line, and recurrent selection methods can be effectively used in the development of low-Cd wheat cultivars. However, the tolerance established in crops with conventional methods is usually not very robust or broad-spectrum [74]. Conventional selections are dependent upon several environmental variations and thus require a widespread location/generation field trial, delaying the progress of cultivar development [75]. As a general breeding criterion, 8–10 years of substantial breeding efforts are required to breed a cultivar right from the pre-breeding phase up to commercial release [76]. Modern breeding practices that create genetic difference along with enhancements in screening and selection compensate to a large extent for conventional breeding.
The recent advancements in molecular genetics knowledge have established many modern breeding methods to confer Cd resistance in wheat. Progress in wheat against Cd stress continues by exploiting molecular breeding tools, such as marker-assisted selection, allele discovery, allele pyramiding, genome mutation, association mapping, genome selection, and next-generation sequencing [77]. Currently, there are two key molecular approaches to assess Cd stress in wheat: marker-assisted selection and genomic selection [78]. Molecular markers have been widely used in bi-parental mapping and genome-wide association (GWA) studies to underline and characterize candidate genes and favorable alleles that are associated with Cd stress in wheat [79]. On the functional basis, the associated markers have a breeding value that is based on the association of phenotype and marker genotype. The summation of all breeding values has potential impact in the selection process of low-Cd cultivars. Yet, as these breeding methods are becoming progressively fast and accurate, plant breeders favor them for decreasing the environmental pressure on breeder selections. The adoption of molecular breeding methods and their successful integration with conventional breeding methods will have potential impact on the development of low-Cd wheat germplasm.

4.1. Genetic Variation and Selection of Low-Cd Wheat Cultivars—Conventional Breeding Approaches

Conventional breeding has been successfully utilized and considerable breeding progresses/genetic gain has been achieved in many traits, such as yield, quality, and stress ability. Practicing conventional methods for adaptation to abiotic stresses is challenging, as compared to breeding for other plant characters. For each of the abiotic stresses there are different mechanisms of resistance, which can be contrary, depending on the plant stress-adaptive nature [80]. However, conventional breeding methods have certain limitations and drawbacks, and thus little achievement has been gained so far in the breeding of wheat for abiotic stresses, especially Cd stress. Plant breeders generally practice conventional breeding methods, i.e., introduction, selection, and hybridization in favor of the development of low-Cd wheat cultivars. As a result, several low-Cd wheat cultivars were imperatively developed through conventional breeding approaches. For example, Yue et al. (2018) evaluated three wheat cultivars—Sumai 3, Jingdong 8 (JD 8), and Nannong 9918—under four different Cd levels [81]. Their results listed JD 8 as a Cd-tolerant cultivate, containing the lowest Cd content and relatively less toxicity as compared to Sumai 3 and Nannong 9918 cultivars. Similarly, 15 wheat cultivars were tested under Cd concentrations of 15, 30, and 45 µM. The results revealed that Lasani-2008 and Iqbal-2000 exhibited the lowest Cd contents, while Sehar-2006 and Inqlab-91 exhibited the highest Cd concentration in shoots [82]. Moreover, a large number of conventional studies were performed to screen out Cd-safe wheat cultivars (Table 1).
Breeding for the low-Cd trait requires reliable knowledge of natural variation among the given population, pedigree information of cultivars, and future breeding strategies for developing and pyramiding low-Cd traits with other quantitative traits [14]. Wheat species and cultivars vary extensively in their ability to grip, accumulate, and tolerate Cd [83]. The available literature showed significant variations in Cd tolerance between wheat species, both in bread wheat and durum wheat [12]. However, its concentration in hexaploid bread wheat is less characterized [84]. This inter-varietal variation may evolve due to differences among cultivars in Cd adsorption or uptake or agents of internal transport systems or due to the retention of Cd in different vascular tissues [85]. Furthermore, differences in Cd accumulation may also depend on the adaptation of different genotypes to environmental and production conditions [86].
In conventional breeding practices, genetic variation is created through planned or random cross combinations of genotypes. The presence of valuable genetic resources leads to the exploitation of heterotic performances evolved by the interaction of gene actions. In wheat, low-Cd cultivars are often developed by the hybridization of parental lines possessing Cd resistance ability. It has been reported that hybrid wheat showed a 10% increase in tolerance under Cd stress as compared to other traditionally used wheat cultivars [87].
We believe that conventional breeding methods have had partial success in the development of low-Cd wheat. However, with these breeding methods, breeders can only select low-Cd wheat cultivars. So far, there is no breeding strategy that has been developed for the enhancement of the Cd-resistant potential in wheat. The main obstacle for Cd breeding in wheat is the low magnitude of genetic variation. Conventional breeding practices need to create genetic variations among wheat cultivars. Once the variation is there, it provides an opportunity to select the desired genotypes—those that have an absolute expression of specific characters. Hence, conventional breeding methods typically require a tedious effort, while the complexity of the wheat genome and the time-consuming selection process inhibit the identification of low-Cd cultivars.

4.2. Marker-Quantitative Trait Loci (QTL) Analysis for Cd Toxicity in Wheat

With the advances in the production of cost-effective genome wide molecular markers, quantitative trait loci (QTL) analysis has been frequently addressed for wheat genetic mapping of Cd toxicity. In the last decades, numerous studies have been performed to identify Cd-associated QTL determining Cd uptake and stress in wheat plants. Different categories of molecular markers were used for tagging the marker-QTL of Cd resistance in wheat (Table 2). A major QTL (designated QCdu.ndsu-5B) of Cd uptake on chromosome arm 5BL within a 0.3 cM distance in durum wheat was identified with SNP markers [77]. Similarly, Penner et al (1995) detected a dominant random amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD) marker (OPC-20) for low Cd uptake in western Canadian durum wheat [88]. An SNP marker (IWA1775) on chromosome 5BL was found to be associated with grain Cd content in durum wheat cultivars [89]. The associated QTL explained 54.3% of phenotypic variation, and it was further was converted to the user-friendly KASPar assay in order to discern Cd-resistant lines. Moreover, a major locus (Cdu1) on chromosome 5B conferring low grain Cd in durum wheat was mapped with an SSR marker [90]. This locus was found to be collinear with rice and Brachypodium distachyon through newly developed ESM markers using recombinant substitution lines (RSLs) [91].
The availability of adequately dense molecular markers in the wheat genome has been the main limitation in the identification of Cd-associated QTL. However, high-throughput genome sequencing technologies have begun to overcome this obstacle. The advent of multiplexed sequencing technology has enhanced the identification of closely linked QTL as well markers within genes/QTL controlling wheat Cd toxicity metabolism. In this regard, the high-quality reference sequence of wheat can be used as a genomic resource to accelerate wheat Cd research and breeding. Future studies may focus on the exploration of Cd-associated QTLs, paving the way for routine pyramiding [92], multiline [93], and mixture strategies to breed low-Cd wheat cultivars with the desired traits.

5. Conclusions

Cd is one of the most prevalent toxins in the environment worldwide. Its existence within soil has been acknowledged as a serious hazard to agricultural production. The excessive amount of Cd in the environment has had adverse effects on wheat growth and development. Conventional and molecular breeding strategies in wheat have been devised to minimize Cd uptake and toxicity. The potential of conventional breeding is still an attractive approach to change the Cd profile of wheat cultivars, if this is perceived as a priority. Molecular markers are powerful in the selection of wheat varieties with low Cd and other desired traits [114,115]. The manipulation of heterosis also presents new perspectives for improving wheat Cd potential and adaptation to Cd stresses. However, there remain several constraints to breeding low-Cd wheat cultivars, as it is time-consuming and the process of genetic enhancement is slow.
Modern breeding tools also lend great potential to plant breeding programs to be used along with conventional breeding for the development of low-Cd cultivars. Candidate gene and QTL identification through GWAS analysis could accelerate wheat Cd breeding programs. While genome editing tools are mature [116], molecular breeding for wheat with the desired traits is becoming a reality. Future studies may focus more on the tagging of these candidate genes with markers as well as on pyramiding these genes through MAS.

Author Contributions

X.L. initiated the concept. All authors contributed to the writing and approved the submitted version.

Funding

This research was funded by the CAS President’s International Fellowship Initiative (PIFI) fund (2018PB0084), the National Key Research and Development Program (2018YFD0800306), and the Hebei Science Fund for Distinguished Young Scholars (D2018503005).

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Tolcin, A.C. Mineral resource of the month: Zinc. Earth 2009, 54, 29. [Google Scholar]
  2. Lu, C.; Tian, H. Global nitrogen and phosphorus fertilizer use for agriculture production in the past half century: Shifted hot spots and nutrient imbalance. Earth Syst. Sci. Data 2017, 9, 1–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Nziguheba, G.; Smolders, E. Inputs of trace elements in agricultural soils via phosphate fertilizers in European countries. Sci. Total Environ. 2008, 390, 53–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Mortvedt, J.J. Cadmium Levels in Soils and Plants from Some Long-term Soil Fertility Experiments in the United States of America. J. Environ. Qual. 1987, 16, 137–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Zhang, X.; Zhong, T.; Liu, L.; Ouyang, X. Impact of Soil Heavy Metal Pollution on Food Safety in China. PLoS ONE 2015, 10, e0135182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Jing, R.L.; Chang, X.P. Genetic diversity in wheat (T. aestivum) germplasm resources with drought resistance. Acta Bot. Boreal.-Occident. Sin. 2003, 23, 410. [Google Scholar]
  7. Wu, R. The Pollution Status and Health Risk Assessment of Heavy Metals from the Sewage-Irrigated Wheat and Corn in Shijiazhuang; Hebei Medical University: Shijiazhuang, China, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  8. Han, J.; Ma, J. Polluting, transferring and accumulating of heavy metals in soil-wheat system in sewage irrigation region: A case study in Huafei River in Kaifeng, Guangdong. Ecol. Environ. 2004, 13, 578–580. [Google Scholar]
  9. Yang, J.; Cheng, T.; Zheng, Y.; Luo, J.; Liu, H.; Wu, W.; Chen, Y. Dynamic of heavy metals in wheat grains collected from the Liangfeng Irrigated Area, Beijing and a discussion of availability and human health risks. Acta Sci. Circumst. 2005, 25, 1661–1668. [Google Scholar]
  10. Zhang, X. Risk Assessment of Heavy Metal Toxicity through Wheat and Rice Grow in Tianjin Sewage Irrigated Area; Tianjin Normal Univesity: Tianjin, China, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  11. Nordberg, G.F. Historical perspectives on cadmium toxicology. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 2009, 238, 192–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Oliver, D.P.; Gartrell, J.W.; Tiller, K.G.; Correll, R.; Cozens, G.D.; Youngberg, B.L. Differential responses of Australian wheat cultivars to cadmium concentration in wheat grain. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 1995, 46, 873–886. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Yu, H.; Wang, J.; Fang, W.; Yuan, J.; Yang, Z. Cadmium accumulation in different rice cultivars and screening for pollution-safe cultivars of rice. Sci. Total Environ. 2006, 370, 302–309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Grant, C.A.; Clarke, J.M.; Duguid, S.; Chaney, R.L. Selection and breeding of plant cultivars to minimize cadmium accumulation. Sci. Total Environ. 2008, 390, 301–310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Ashrafzadeh, S.; Leung, D.W.M. Development of Cadmium-Safe Crop Cultivars: A Mini Review. J. Crop Improv. 2016, 30, 107–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Siedlecka, A. Some aspects of interactions between heavy metals and plant mineral nutrients. Acta Soc. Bot. Pol. 1995, 64, 265–272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Benavides, M.P.; Gallego, S.M.; Tomaro, M.L. Cadmium toxicity in plants. Braz. J. Plant Physiol. 2005, 17, 21–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Grant, C.; Buckley, W.; Bailey, L.D.; Selles, F. Cadmium accumulation in crops. Can. J. Plant Sci. 1998, 78, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  19. Irfan, M.; Hayat, S.; Ahmad, A.; Alyemeni, M.N. Soil cadmium enrichment: Allocation and plant physiological manifestations. Saudi J. Biol. Sci. 2013, 20, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Maksymiec, W.; Krupa, Z. The effects of short-term exposition to Cd, excess Cu ions and jasmonate on oxidative stress appearing in Arabidopsis thaliana. Environ. Exp. Bot. 2006, 57, 187–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Lin, R.; Wang, X.; Luo, Y.; Du, W.; Guo, H.; Yin, D. Effects of soil cadmium on growth, oxidative stress and antioxidant system in wheat seedlings (Triticum aestivum L.). Chemosphere 2007, 69, 89–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Sgherri, C.; Quartacci, M.F.; Izzo, R.; Navari-Izzo, F. Relation between lipoic acid and cell redox status in wheat grown in excess copper. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 2002, 40, 591–597. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Lesser, M.P. Oxidative stress in marine environments: Biochemistry and physiological ecology. Annu. Rev. Physiol. 2006, 68, 253–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Chugh, L.K.; Sawhney, S.K. Photosynthetic activities of Pisum sativum seedlings grown in presence of cadmium. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 1999, 37, 297–303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Costa, G.; Spitz, E. Influence of cadmium on soluble carbohydrates, free amino acids, protein content of in vitro cultured Lupinus albus. Plant Sci. 1997, 128, 131–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Rizwan, M.; Meunier, J.-D.; Davidian, J.-C.; Pokrovsky, O.; Bovet, N.; Keller, C. Silicon alleviates Cd stress of wheat seedlings (Triticum turgidum L. cv. Claudio) grown in hydroponics. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2016, 23, 1414–1427. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Khan, N.; Singh, S.; Nazar, R. Activities of antioxidative enzymes, sulphur assimilation, photosynthetic activity and growth of wheat (Triticum aestivum) cultivars differing in yield potential under cadmium stress. J. Agron. Crop Sci. 2007, 193, 435–444. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Di Toppi, L.S.; Gabbrielli, R. Response to cadmium in higher plants. Environ. Exp. Bot. 1999, 41, 105–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Black, A.; McLaren, R.G.; Speir, T.W.; Clucas, L.; Condron, L.M. Gradient differences in soil metal solubility and uptake by shoots and roots of wheat (T. aestivum). Biol. Fertil. Soils 2014, 50, 685–694. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Atal, N.; Saradhi, P.P.; Mohanty, P. Inhibition of the chloroplast photochemical reactions by treatment of wheat seedlings with low concentrations of cadmium: Analysis of electron transport activities and changes in fluorescence yield. Plant Cell Physiol. 1991, 32, 943–951. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Rebekić, A.; Lončarić, Z. Genotypic difference in cadmium effect on agronomic traits and grain zinc and iron concentration in winter wheat. Emir. J. Food Agric. 2016, 28, 772–778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Ci, D.; Jiang, D.; Dai, T.; Jing, Q.; Cao, W. Effects of cadmium on plant growth and physiological traits in contrast wheat recombinant inbred lines differing in cadmium tolerance. Chemosphere 2009, 77, 1620–1625. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Stolt, J.; Oscarson, P. Influence of cadmium on net nitrate uptake kinetics in wheat. J. Plant Nutr. 2002, 25, 2763–2774. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Mohamed, A.A.; Castagna, A.; Ranieri, A.; Sanita di Toppi, L. Cadmium tolerance in Brassica juncea roots and shoots is affected by antioxidant status and phytochelatin biosynthesis. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 2012, 57, 15–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Cuypers, A.; Smeets, K.; Ruytinx, J.; Opdenakker, K.; Keunen, E.; Remans, T.; Horemans, N.; Vanhoudt, N.; Van Sanden, S.; Van Belleghem, F.; et al. The cellular redox state as a modulator in cadmium and copper responses in Arabidopsis thaliana seedlings. J. Plant Physiol. 2011, 168, 309–316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Sharma, S.S.; Dietz, K.J. The relationship between metal toxicity and cellular redox imbalance. Trends Plant Sci. 2009, 14, 43–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Yannarelli, G.G.; Fernandez-Alvarez, A.J.; Santa-Cruz, D.M.; Tomaro, M.L. Glutathione reductase activity and isoforms in leaves and roots of wheat plants subjected to cadmium stress. Phytochemistry 2007, 68, 505–512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Ishikawa, T.; Li, Z.S.; Lu, Y.P.; Rea, P.A. The GS-X pump in plant, yeast, and animal cells: Structure, function, and gene expression. Biosci. Rep. 1997, 17, 189–207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Martinoia, E.; Klein, M.; Geisler, M.; Bovet, L.; Forestier, C.; Kolukisaoglu, U.; Muller-Rober, B.; Schulz, B. Multifunctionality of plant ABC transporters—More than just detoxifiers. Planta 2002, 214, 345–355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Tommasini, R.; Vogt, E.; Fromenteau, M.; Hortensteiner, S.; Matile, P.; Amrhein, N.; Martinoia, E. An ABC-transporter of Arabidopsis thaliana has both glutathione-conjugate and chlorophyll catabolite transport activity. Plant J. 1998, 13, 773–780. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  41. Bhati, K.K.; Alok, A.; Kumar, A.; Kaur, J.; Tiwari, S.; Pandey, A.K. Silencing of ABCC13 transporter in wheat reveals its involvement in grain development, phytic acid accumulation and lateral root formation. J. Exp. Bot. 2016, 67, 4379–4389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  42. Bhati, K.K.; Aggarwal, S.; Sharma, S.; Mantri, S.; Singh, S.P.; Bhalla, S.; Kaur, J.; Tiwari, S.; Roy, J.K.; Tuli, R.; et al. Differential expression of structural genes for the late phase of phytic acid biosynthesis in developing seeds of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Plant Sci. 2014, 224, 74–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Bhati, K.K.; Sharma, S.; Aggarwal, S.; Kaur, M.; Shukla, V.; Kaur, J.; Mantri, S.; Pandey, A.K. Genome-wide identification and expression characterization of ABCC-MRP transporters in hexaploid wheat. Front. Plant Sci. 2015, 6, 488. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Grill, E.; Loffler, S.; Winnacker, E.L.; Zenk, M.H. Phytochelatins, the heavy-metal-binding peptides of plants, are synthesized from glutathione by a specific gamma-glutamylcysteine dipeptidyl transpeptidase (phytochelatin synthase). Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1989, 86, 6838–6842. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Ha, S.B.; Smith, A.P.; Howden, R.; Dietrich, W.M.; Bugg, S.; O’Connell, M.J.; Goldsbrough, P.B.; Cobbett, C.S. Phytochelatin synthase genes from Arabidopsis and the yeast Schizosaccharomyces pombe. Plant Cell 1999, 11, 1153–1164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Ranieri, A.; Castagna, A.; Scebba, F.; Careri, M.; Zagnoni, I.; Predieri, G.; Pagliari, M.; di Toppi, L.S. Oxidative stress and phytochelatin characterisation in bread wheat exposed to cadmium excess. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 2005, 43, 45–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Salt, D.E.; Rauser, W.E. MgATP-Dependent Transport of Phytochelatins Across the Tonoplast of Oat Roots. Plant Physiol. 1995, 107, 1293–1301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  48. Gong, J.M.; Lee, D.A.; Schroeder, J.I. Long-distance root-to-shoot transport of phytochelatins and cadmium in Arabidopsis. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2003, 100, 10118–10123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  49. Lee, S.; Moon, J.S.; Ko, T.S.; Petros, D.; Goldsbrough, P.B.; Korban, S.S. Overexpression of Arabidopsis phytochelatin synthase paradoxically leads to hypersensitivity to cadmium stress. Plant Physiol. 2003, 131, 656–663. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  50. Wojas, S.; Clemens, S.; Hennig, J.; Sklodowska, A.; Kopera, E.; Schat, H.; Bal, W.; Antosiewicz, D.M. Overexpression of phytochelatin synthase in tobacco: Distinctive effects of AtPCS1 and CePCS genes on plant response to cadmium. J. Exp. Bot. 2008, 59, 2205–2219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. Li, Y.; Dhankher, O.P.; Carreira, L.; Lee, D.; Chen, A.; Schroeder, J.I.; Balish, R.S.; Meagher, R.B. Overexpression of phytochelatin synthase in Arabidopsis leads to enhanced arsenic tolerance and cadmium hypersensitivity. Plant Cell Physiol. 2004, 45, 1787–1797. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Wang, F.; Wang, Z.; Zhu, C. Heteroexpression of the wheat phytochelatin synthase gene (TaPCS1) in rice enhances cadmium sensitivity. Acta Biochim. Biophys. Sin. 2012, 44, 886–893. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  53. Brini, F.; Gaxiola, R.A.; Berkowitz, G.A.; Masmoudi, K. Cloning and characterization of a wheat vacuolar cation/proton antiporter and pyrophosphatase proton pump. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 2005, 43, 347–354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Khoudi, H.; Maatar, Y.; Gouiaa, S.; Masmoudi, K. Transgenic tobacco plants expressing ectopically wheat H(+)-pyrophosphatase (H(+)-PPase) gene TaVP1 show enhanced accumulation and tolerance to cadmium. J. Plant Physiol. 2012, 169, 98–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Kim, Y.Y.; Kim, D.Y.; Shim, D.; Song, W.Y.; Lee, J.; Schroeder, J.I.; Kim, S.; Moran, N.; Lee, Y. Expression of the novel wheat gene TM20 confers enhanced cadmium tolerance to bakers’ yeast. J. Biol. Chem. 2008, 283, 15893–15902. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. Tran, T.A.; Popova, L.P. Functions and toxicity of cadmium in plants: Recent advances and future prospects. Turk. J. Bot. 2013, 37, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Wang, Z.; Li, Q.; Wu, W.; Guo, J.; Yang, Y. Cadmium stress tolerance in wheat seedlings induced by ascorbic acid was mediated by NO signaling pathways. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2017, 135, 75–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  58. Metwally, A.; Finkemeier, I.; Georgi, M.; Dietz, K.J. Salicylic acid alleviates the cadmium toxicity in barley seedlings. Plant Physiol. 2003, 132, 272–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  59. Krantev, A.; Yordanova, R.; Janda, T.; Szalai, G.; Popova, L. Treatment with salicylic acid decreases the effect of cadmium on photosynthesis in maize plants. J. Plant Physiol. 2008, 165, 920–931. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  60. Kovacs, V.; Gondor, O.K.; Szalai, G.; Darko, E.; Majlath, I.; Janda, T.; Pal, M. Synthesis and role of salicylic acid in wheat varieties with different levels of cadmium tolerance. J. Hazard. Mater. 2014, 280, 12–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  61. Wu, H.; Chen, C.; Du, J.; Liu, H.; Cui, Y.; Zhang, Y.; He, Y.; Wang, Y.; Chu, C.; Feng, Z.; et al. Co-overexpression FIT with AtbHLH38 or AtbHLH39 in Arabidopsis-enhanced cadmium tolerance via increased cadmium sequestration in roots and improved iron homeostasis of shoots. Plant Physiol. 2012, 158, 790–800. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  62. Huang, C.; Zhou, J.; Jie, Y.; Xing, H.; Zhong, Y.; Yu, W.; She, W.; Ma, Y.; Liu, Z.; Zhang, Y. A Ramie bZIP Transcription Factor BnbZIP2 Is Involved in Drought, Salt, and Heavy Metal Stress Response. DNA Cell Biol. 2016, 35, 776–786. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Chen, J.; Yang, L.; Yan, X.; Liu, Y.; Wang, R.; Fan, T.; Ren, Y.; Tang, X.; Xiao, F.; Liu, Y.; et al. Zinc-Finger Transcription Factor ZAT6 Positively Regulates Cadmium Tolerance through the Glutathione-Dependent Pathway in Arabidopsis. Plant Physiol. 2016, 171, 707–719. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  64. Lin, T.; Yang, W.; Lu, W.; Wang, Y.; Qi, X. Transcription Factors PvERF15 and PvMTF-1 Form a Cadmium Stress Transcriptional Pathway. Plant Physiol. 2017, 173, 1565–1573. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  65. Shim, D.; Hwang, J.-U.; Lee, J.; Lee, S.; Choi, Y.; An, G.; Martinoia, E.; Lee, Y. Orthologs of the class A4 heat shock transcription factor HsfA4a confer cadmium tolerance in wheat and rice. Plant Cell 2009, 21, 4031–4043. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  66. Dobrikova, A.G.; Yotsova, E.K.; Borner, A.; Landjeva, S.P.; Apostolova, E.L. The wheat mutant DELLA-encoding gene (Rht-B1c) affects plant photosynthetic responses to cadmium stress. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 2017, 114, 10–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Wen, W.; Deng, Q.; Jia, H.; Wei, L.; Wei, J.; Wan, H.; Yang, L.; Cao, W.; Ma, Z. Sequence variations of the partially dominant DELLA gene Rht-B1c in wheat and their functional impacts. J. Exp. Bot. 2013, 64, 3299–3312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  68. Ren, Y.; Chen, Y.; An, J.; Zhao, Z.; Zhang, G.; Wang, Y.; Wang, W. Wheat expansin gene TaEXPA2 is involved in conferring plant tolerance to Cd toxicity. Plant Sci. 2018, 270, 245–256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  69. Han, Y.; Chen, Y.; Yin, S.; Zhang, M.; Wang, W. Over-expression of TaEXPB23, a wheat expansin gene, improves oxidative stress tolerance in transgenic tobacco plants. J. Plant Physiol. 2015, 173, 62–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  70. Mcqueenmason, S.; Cosgrove, D.J. Disruption of Hydrogen-Bonding between Plant-Cell Wall Polymers by Proteins That Induce Wall Extension. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1994, 91, 6574–6578. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Yan, A.; Wu, M.; Yan, L.; Hu, R.; Ali, I.; Gan, Y. AtEXP2 is involved in seed germination and abiotic stress response in Arabidopsis. PLoS ONE 2014, 9, e85208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  72. Kwon, Y.R.; Lee, H.J.; Kim, K.H.; Hong, S.W.; Lee, S.J.; Lee, H. Ectopic expression of Expansin3 or Expansinbeta1 causes enhanced hormone and salt stress sensitivity in Arabidopsis. Biotechnol. Lett. 2008, 30, 1281–1288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  73. Tan, J.; Wang, J.; Chai, T.; Zhang, Y.; Feng, S.; Li, Y.; Zhao, H.; Liu, H.; Chai, X. Functional analyses of TaHMA2, a P(1B)-type ATPase in wheat. Plant Biotechnol. J. 2013, 11, 420–431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  74. Collard, B.C.; Mackill, D.J. Marker-assisted selection: An approach for precision plant breeding in the twenty-first century. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 2008, 363, 557–572. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  75. Savadi, S.; Prasad, P.; Kashyap, P.L.; Bhardwaj, S.C. Molecular breeding technologies and strategies for rust resistance in wheat (Triticum aestivum) for sustained food security. Plant Pathol. 2018, 67, 771–791. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Forster, B.; Till, B.; Ghanim, A.; Huynh, H.; Burstmayr, H.; Caligari, P. Accelerated plant breeding. CAB Rev. 2014, 9, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Abbasabadi, A.O.; Kumar, A.; Pirseyedi, S.; Salsman, E.; Dobrydina, M.; Poudel, R.S.; AbuHammad, W.A.; Chao, S.; Faris, J.D.; Elias, E.M. Identification and Validation of a New Source of Low Grain Cadmium Accumulation in Durum Wheat. G3 Genes, Genomes Genet. 2018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  78. Randhawa, H.S.; Asif, M.; Pozniak, C.; Clarke, J.M.; Graf, R.J.; Fox, S.L.; Humphreys, D.G.; Knox, R.E.; DePauw, R.M.; Singh, A.K. Application of molecular markers to wheat breeding in Canada. Plant Breed. 2013, 132, 458–471. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Zhao, X.; Luo, L.; Cao, Y.; Liu, Y.; Li, Y.; Wu, W.; Lan, Y.; Jiang, Y.; Gao, S.; Zhang, Z. Genome-wide association analysis and QTL mapping reveal the genetic control of cadmium accumulation in maize leaf. BMC Genom. 2018, 19, 91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  80. Reynolds, M.; Mujeeb-Kazi, A.; Sawkins, M. Prospects for utilising plant-adaptive mechanisms to improve wheat and other crops in drought-and salinity-prone environments. Ann. Appl. Biol. 2005, 146, 239–259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Yue, J.; Wei, X.; Wang, H. Cadmium tolerant and sensitive wheat lines: Their differences in pollutant accumulation, cell damage, and autophagy. Biol. Plant. 2018, 62, 379–387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Naeem, A.; Saifullah; Rehman, M.Z.-U.; Akhtar, T.; Ok, Y.S.; Rengel, Z. Genetic Variation in Cadmium Accumulation and Tolerance among Wheat Cultivars at the Seedling Stage. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 2016, 47, 554–562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Clarke, J.M.; Norvell, W.A.; Clarke, F.R.; Buckley, W.T. Concentration of cadmium and other elements in the grain of near-isogenic durum lines. Can. J. Plant Sci. 2002, 82, 27–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  84. Guttieri, M.; Frels, K.; Waters, B.M.; El-Basyoni, I.S.; Akhunov, E.; Baenziger, P.S. Genetic Variation for Grain Cadmium in Hard Winter Wheat. In Proceedings of the International Plant and Animal Genome Conference Xxii, San Diego, CA, USA, 11–15 January 2014. [Google Scholar]
  85. Jalil, A.; Selles, F.; Clarke, J.M. Effect of cadmium on growth and the uptake of cadmium and other elements by durum wheat. J. Plant Nutr. 1994, 17, 1839–1858. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Stolt, P.; Asp, H.; Hultin, S. Genetic variation in wheat cadmium accumulation on soils with different cadmium concentrations. J. Agron. Crop Sci. 2010, 192, 201–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Jordaan, J.P. Hybrid wheat: Advances and challenges. Increasing Yield Potential Wheat Break. Barriers 1996, 66, 66–67. [Google Scholar]
  88. Penner, G.A.; Bezte, L.J.; Leisle, D.; Clarke, J. Identification of RAPD markers linked to a gene governing cadmium uptake in durum wheat. Genome 1995, 38, 543–547. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  89. AbuHammad, W.A.; Mamidi, S.; Kumar, A.; Pirseyedi, S.; Manthey, F.A.; Kianian, S.F.; Alamri, M.S.; Mergoum, M.; Elias, E.M. Identification and validation of a major cadmium accumulation locus and closely associated SNP markers in North Dakota durum wheat cultivars. Mol. Breed. 2016, 36, 112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Knox, R.E.; Pozniak, C.J.; Clarke, F.R.; Clarke, J.M.; Houshmand, S.; Singh, A.K. Chromosomal location of the cadmium uptake gene (Cdu1) in durum wheat. Genome Natl. Res. Counc. Can. 2009, 52, 741–747. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  91. Wiebe, K.; Harris, N.S.; Faris, J.D.; Clarke, J.M.; Knox, R.E.; Taylor, G.J.; Pozniak, C.J. Targeted mapping of Cdu1, a major locus regulating grain cadmium concentration in durum wheat (Triticum turgidum L. var durum). Theor. Appl. Genet. 2010, 121, 1047–1058. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  92. Bonman, J.M.; Khush, G.S.; Nelson, R.J. Breeding Rice for Resistance to Pests. Ann. Rev. Phytopathol. 1992, 30, 507–528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Abe, S. Breeding of a blast resistant multiline variety of rice, Sasanishiki BL. Jpn. Agric. Res. Q. 2014, 38, 149–154. [Google Scholar]
  94. Perrier, F.; Yan, B.; Candaudap, F.; Pokrovsky, O.S.; Gourdain, E.; Meleard, B.; Bussière, S.; Coriou, C.; Robert, T.; Nguyen, C. Variability in grain cadmium concentration among durum wheat cultivars: Impact of aboveground biomass partitioning. Plant Soil 2016, 404, 307–320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Xiong, Z.; Li, J.-M.; Zhao, H.W.; Ma, Y.-B. Accumulation and translocation of cadmium in different wheat cultivars in farmland. J. Agro-Environ. Sci. 2018, 37, 36–44. [Google Scholar]
  96. Zhang, G.; Fukami, M.; Sekimoto, H. Genotypic differences in effects of cadmium on growth and nutrient compositions in wheat. J. Plant Nutr. 2008, 23, 1337–1350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Ji, S.-Q.; Guo, R.; Wang, H.F.; Zhang, D.Q.; Zhao, S.Z.; Xu, L.-C. Estimate of Pollution by Heavy Metals on Wheat in Henan and the Rule of Cadmium Absorption in Wheat. J. Triticeae Crop. 2006, 26, 154–157. [Google Scholar]
  98. Liu, W.; Liang, L.; Zhang, X.; Zhou, Q. Cultivar variations in cadmium and lead accumulation and distribution among 30 wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) cultivars. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2015, 22, 8432–8441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  99. Öztürk, L.; Eker, S.; Özkutlu, F.; Çakmak, İ. Effect of cadmium on growth and concentrations of cadmium, ascorbic acid and sulphydryl groups in durum wheat cultivars. Turk. J. Agric. For. 2003, 27, 161–168. [Google Scholar]
  100. Greger, M.; Löfstedt, M. Comparison of Uptake and Distribution of Cadmium in Different Cultivars of Bread and Durum Wheat. Crop Sci. 2004, 44, 501–507. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Ahmad, I.; Akhtar, M.J.; Zahir, Z.A.; Jamil, A. Effect of cadmium on seed germination and seedling growth of four wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) cultivars. Pak. J. Bot. 2012, 44, 1569–1574. [Google Scholar]
  102. Duan, Y.P.; Yuan, S.; Tu, S.H.; Feng, W.Q.; Xu, F.; Zhang, Z.W.; Chen, Y.E.; Wang, X.; Shang, J.; Lin, H.H. Effects of cadmium stress on alternative oxidase and photosystem II in three wheat cultivars. Z. Naturforsch. C J. Biosci. 2010, 65, 87–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Idrees, S.; Shabir, S.; Ilyas, N.; Batool, N.; Kanwal, S. Assessment of cadmium on wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) in hydroponics medium. Agrociencia 2015, 49, 917–929. [Google Scholar]
  104. Khan, N.A.; Ahmad, I.; Singh, S.; Nazar, R. Variation in growth, photosynthesis and yield of five wheat cultivars exposed to cadmium stress. World J. Agric. Sci. 2006, 2, 223–226. [Google Scholar]
  105. Shafi, M.; Zhang, G.P.; Bakht, J.; Khan, M.A.; Ejazulislam; Khan, M.D.; Raziuddin. Effect of cadmium and salinity stresses on root morphology of wheat. Pak. J. Bot. 2010, 42, 2747–2754. [Google Scholar]
  106. Zhang, L.; Li, J.M.; Wang, H.X. Physiological and ecological responses of wheat (Triticum aestivm L.) root to cadmium stress. Chin. J. Soil Sci. 2002, 33, 61–65. [Google Scholar]
  107. Ci, D.; Jiang, D.; Wollenweber, B.; Dai, T.; Jing, Q.; Cao, W. Genetic variance in cadmium tolerance and accumulation in wheat materials differing in ploidy and genome at seedling stage. J. Agron. Crop Sci. 2010, 196, 302–310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Ci, D.; Jiang, D.; Wollenweber, B.; Dai, T.; Jing, Q.; Cao, W. Cadmium stress in wheat seedlings: Growth, cadmium accumulation and photosynthesis. Acta Physiol. Plant. 2010, 32, 365–373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Ci, D.; Jiang, D.; Li, S.; Wollenweber, B.; Dai, T.; Cao, W. Identification of quantitative trait loci for cadmium tolerance and accumulation in wheat. Acta Physiol. Plant. 2012, 34, 191–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Wiebe, K. Molecular Characterization of Cdu-B1, a Major Locus Controlling Cadmium Accumulation in Durum Wheat (Triticum turgidum L. var durum) Grain; University of Saskatchewan: Saskatoon, SK, Canada, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  111. Salsman, E.; Kumar, A.; AbuHammad, W.; Abbasabadi, A.O.; Dobrydina, M.; Chao, S.; Li, X.; Manthey, F.A.; Elias, E.M. Development and validation of molecular markers for grain cadmium in durum wheat. Mol. Breed. 2018, 38, 28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Rad, B.S.; Shokrpour, M.; Sofalian, O.; Nezhad, S.E.H.; Avanes, A.; Esfandiari, E. Association Analysis of AFLP and RAPD Markers with Cadmium Accumulation in Wheat. J. Crop Breed. 2016, 8, 126–133. [Google Scholar]
  113. Abuhammad, W.; Elias, E.M.; Mamidi, S.; Mergoum, M. Association Mapping of Cadmium Uptake Locus in Durum Wheat Advanced Breeding Lines. In Proceedings of the American Society of Agronomy International Meeting, Tampa, FL, USA, 3–6 November 2013. [Google Scholar]
  114. Arduini, I.; Masoni, A.; Mariotti, M.; Pampana, S.; Ercoli, L. Cadmium uptake and translocation in durum wheat varieties differing in grain-Cd accumulation. Plant Soil Environ. 2014, 60, 43–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  115. Vergine, M.; Aprile, A.; Sabella, E.; Genga, A.; Siciliano, M.; Rampino, P.; Lenucci, M.S.; Luvisi, A.; Bellis, L. Cadmium Concentration in Grains of Durum Wheat (Triticum turgidum L. subsp. durum). J. Agric. Food Chem. 2017, 65, 6240–6246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  116. Shan, Q.W.; Wang, Y.P.; Li, J.; Gao, C.X. Genome editing in rice and wheat using the CRISPR/Cas system. Nat. Protoc. 2014, 9, 2395–2410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Agronomy 08 00249 g001 550
Figure 1. A diagram explaining the molecular mechanisms of cadmium (Cd) resistance in wheat. ABA, abscisic acid; SA, salicylic acid; JA, jasmonic acid; AsA, ascorbic acid; NO, nitric oxide. ROS, reactive oxygen species; GR, glutathione reductase; GSH, reduced glutathione; PCs, phytochelatins; PCS1, PC synthase 1; MTs, metallothioneins. ABCC13, ATP binding cassette subfamily C member 13.
Figure 1. A diagram explaining the molecular mechanisms of cadmium (Cd) resistance in wheat. ABA, abscisic acid; SA, salicylic acid; JA, jasmonic acid; AsA, ascorbic acid; NO, nitric oxide. ROS, reactive oxygen species; GR, glutathione reductase; GSH, reduced glutathione; PCs, phytochelatins; PCS1, PC synthase 1; MTs, metallothioneins. ABCC13, ATP binding cassette subfamily C member 13.
Agronomy 08 00249 g001
Table
Table 1. Phenotypic evaluation of wheat cultivars under Cd stress.
Table 1. Phenotypic evaluation of wheat cultivars under Cd stress.
Culture ConditionsNumber of Cultivars TestedTreatmentsToxicological IndicatorsCd Concentrations in Traits (Average) (mg kg−1)Tolerant and Low-Metal CultivarsHigh AccumulatorsReference
Hydroponic culture150, 15, 30, and 45 μM for 2 weeksBiomass Cd at seedling stage51–67 (60) (shoot Cd at 15 mM treatment)Lasani-2008 and Iqbal-2000Sehar-2006 and Inqlab-91[82]
Field pot culture5120 mg/kg for life cycleGrain Cd1.09–6.15 (3.5)Ilirija-[31]
Hydroponic culture102 nM for life cycleBiomass and Cd among organs0.03–0.08 μg/g (grain)StrongfieldDakter[94]
Field survey590.107–2.292 mg/kgGrain Cd0.005–0.150Jimai518, Heng0628, Heng09, and Guan29-[95]
Hydroponic culture161 μmol/L for 7 weeksGrowth parameters and biomass Cd32.2-63.0 (48.1) (based on shoot dry weight)E81513-[96]
Field trial20Around 10. 5 mg/kgGrain Cd0.1–0.17 Kaimai18Zhengmai9405[97]
Hydroponic culture301 mg/L for 21 daysSeedling biomass Cd 0.91–6.74 (3.83) (shoot)LF-13, LF-16, and LF-21 (both root and shoot)LF-1[98]
Hydroponic culture20, 6, 30, 75, and 150 µM for 15 daysRoot, shoot, and leaf traits under CdFor BALCALI-85 shoot Cd on average was 135, and root Cd was 3371, for C1252 shoot Cd was 162 and root Cd was 1556 C-1252-[99]
Hydroponic culture400.5 mMRoots, flag leaf, grain, and grain coats under CdCd in root on average was 29.1, in flag leaf it was 8.4, and in grains it was 2.6-Mjolner, Rental, Tjalve, Hanno, Grandur, and Extradur[100]
Sand was used in thermophore plates40, 5, 20, 50, and 80 mg/LSeed germination and seedling growth Seed germination 68.8%, germination index 6.4%, germination energy 60%, and mean germination time 5.1 daysSehar-06-[101]
Hydroponic culture3200 μmol/L for 8 daysRoot and leaf Cd0.125 for 4 days and 0.14 for 8 daysCM42 and CM47CY12 [102]
Hydroponic solution2150 μM, 200 μM, and 250 μM for 36 daysSeed germination and seedling growthOn average, 20.1% reduction was observed in NARC-11 and 23% in GalaxyNARC-11-[103]
Greenhouse experiment50, 25, 50, and 100 mg Cd/kgPhotosynthesis and yield characteristicsAverage Cd for shoot length was 30, shoot dry weight 221, leaf area 29.6, and the net photosynthesis rate was 12.7 (mg Cd/kg)PBW343-[104]
Hydroponic culture30, 2, and 4 μMCd root morphologyCd for shoot dry weight was 0.27 g plant-1, root dry weight was 0.14 g plant-1, root tip was 941, and total root length was 694 cmBakhtawar-92-[105]
Hydroponic culture51 mgBiomass production, yield, and yield components of wheatAverage Cd is root was 601.4, in shoot 27.8, and in grains 3.6 mg/kgLi 667 and Ailuyuang-[106]
Hydroponic culture2450 µM for 24 daysRoot and shoot parameters under CdAverage Cd for shoot Cd concentration was 104.0, shoot Cd concentration was 1773, and total Cd accumulation was 0.055 B and D genomes cultivars showed tolerance R genome wheat cultivars [107]
Hydroponic culture30, 0.1, 0.5, 1.0, and 2.0 µMShoot and root biomass, root length, and leaf area Concentrations higher than 0.1 (imole/L) significantly decreased the traits’ performancesKyle and SC84-994-[85]
Hydroponic culture30, 10, 20, 30, 40, and 50 μM for 24 daysCd effect on wheat growth, leaf photon energy conversion, gas exchange, and Cd accumulationAverage Cd shoot dry weight under 6 Cd concentration was 0.27 g/plant, root dry weight 0.08 g/plant, shoot height 20.9 cm, tiller number 3.1 per plant, and secondary root number 15.6 per plantJing 411 and Yangmai 10 -[108]
Table
Table 2. Marker genotype and quantitative trait loci (QTL) analysis for low Cd in wheat.
Table 2. Marker genotype and quantitative trait loci (QTL) analysis for low Cd in wheat.
Wheat GermplasmTraits InvestigatedMarkerAssociated Marker/QTL Breeding TechniqueReferences
103 RIL population13 traits of germination, growth, and physiology and 6 other traits were investigated for Cd tolerance and accumulationA linkage map was used, constructed using different markers26 QTLMarker-assisted selection (MAS)[109]
190 RIL mapping populationGrain Cd content90K wheat SNP arraysA single major QTLInclusive composite interval mapping (ICIM) method[77]
167 RILsCd level90K wheat SNP arraysA single putative QTLComposite interval mapping[89]
70 F8 lines developed by the single-seed descent method-Random amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD) markers2 RAPD markers were found to be associatedMAS[88]
155 DH linesGrain Cd concentrationSSR markersCdu1 locusMAS[90]
155 recombinant substitution linesGrain Cd concentrationPCR-based markers were developed for ESTs2 ESM markers, 1 STS, and 1 minor QTL for grain Cd content were detectedMAS[91]
155 recombinant substitution linesCd concentrationESTs and STS markers2 ESMs and 5 STS markers were identified that co-segregated with Cdu-B1MAS[110]
Total of 4178 advance, elite and, uniform regional durum nurseries were usedGrain Cd contentSNP markers3 markers on chromosome 5B were found to be linked; 1 marker with Cd was polymorphic while the other 2 were not polymorphic in all of the population MAB[111]
14 wheat cultivarsCd concentrationAFLP and RAPD markers113 AFLP and 77 RAPD markers were found to be associatedMAS[112]
2 durum wheat linesCd in grainsSNPs1 QTL on chromosome 2B with 3% phenotypic variations and 1 SNP marker on chromosome 5B explaining 34% of the phenotypic variation were detectedAssociation mapping analysis[113]

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Zaid, I.U.; Zheng, X.; Li, X. Breeding Low-Cadmium Wheat: Progress and Perspectives. Agronomy 2018, 8, 249. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy8110249

AMA Style

Zaid IU, Zheng X, Li X. Breeding Low-Cadmium Wheat: Progress and Perspectives. Agronomy. 2018; 8(11):249. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy8110249

Chicago/Turabian Style

Zaid, Imdad Ullah, Xin Zheng, and Xiaofang Li. 2018. "Breeding Low-Cadmium Wheat: Progress and Perspectives" Agronomy 8, no. 11: 249. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy8110249

APA Style

Zaid, I. U., Zheng, X., & Li, X. (2018). Breeding Low-Cadmium Wheat: Progress and Perspectives. Agronomy, 8(11), 249. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy8110249

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