Next Article in Journal
Soil Moisture and Temperature Effects on Granule Dissolution and Urease Activity of Urea with and without Inhibitors—An Incubation Study
Next Article in Special Issue
Regionally Adapted Model of an Ideal Malus×domestica Borkh Apple Variety for Industrial-Scale Cultivation in European Russia
Previous Article in Journal
Biophysical Simulation of Sheep Grazing Systems Using the SGS Pasture Model
Previous Article in Special Issue
Reproductive Biology Factors Hampering Lemon [Citrus limon (L.) Burm. f.] Genetic Improvement
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Agriculture
Volume 12
Issue 12
10.3390/agriculture12122036
agriculture-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

Scion–Rootstock Relationship: Molecular Mechanism and Quality Fruit Production

by
Mukesh Shivran
1,†,
Nimisha Sharma
1,*,†,
Anil Kumar Dubey
1,†,
Sanjay Kumar Singh
1,
Neha Sharma
2,
Radha Mohan Sharma
1,
Narendra Singh
1 and
Rakesh Singh
3,†
1
Division of Fruits and Horticultural Technology, ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110012, India
2
IILM Academy of Higher Learning, College of Engineering and Technology Greater Noida, Noida 201310, India
3
ICAR-National Bureau of Plant Genetic Resources, New Delhi 110012, India
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
†
These authors contributed equally to this work.
Agriculture 2022, 12(12), 2036; https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture12122036
Submission received: 25 October 2022 / Revised: 21 November 2022 / Accepted: 25 November 2022 / Published: 28 November 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Breeding, Genetics, and Genomics of Fruit Crops)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Most tree fruits are commercially grown on different root systems, hence called composite plants. The section provides the root system as the rootstock, and the atop ground portion is called the scion. The combination is selected based on different traits of scion varieties, rootstock, and prevailing edaphic situations. The dated back plant propagation technique of joining two plants (grafting/budding) that directly communicates new physiological traits to the desirable scion variety from the rootstock remains unclear. In spite of this, this propagation technique continues widely applied in the multiplication of several fruit plant species. In a grafted plant, rootstocks impacted the scion variety’s growth, yield and quality attributes, physiology, nutrient accumulation as well as biotic and abiotic stress tolerance in many ways. Modern research in plant science for next-generation sequencing providing new vital information about the molecular interactions in composite plants multiplied using grafting. Now it was confirmed that genetic exchange is occurring between rootstock and scion variety through grafting joints. In this aspect, we discuss the process and the molecular mechanism of rootstock scion interactions. This review finally explains the dynamics of rootstock–scion interactions as well as their effect on physiology in terms of production, environmental stresses, and fruit quality. The morphological, physiochemical, and molecular mechanisms have been reviewed to develop an integrated understanding of this unknowable process that questions existing genetic paradigms. The present review summarizes the reported molecular mechanism between scion and rootstock and the impact of rootstocks on the production biology of scion varieties of economically important fruit crops and identifies numerous key points to consider when conducting rootstock scion interaction experiments. Rootstocks may offer a non-transgenic approach to rapidly respond to the changing environment and expand agricultural production of perennial fruit crops where grafting is possible in order to meet the global demand for fruit, food, and demands of the future.

1. Introduction

Horticulture is currently a major potential sector for increasing agricultural production, income generation, and nutritional security through export, employment generation, value addition, and diversification. In addition to new major challenges, low productivity per unit area continues a problem in most of the horticultural crops, with climate change impacting the greater effect on fruit productivity. Biotic (causal agents of disease, insect, nematode, etc.), and abiotic (temperature, humidity, drought, wind, water logging, salinity, etc.), stresses are also challenges. Numerous studies on graft union formation and graft compatibility between scion–rootstock plants have given rise to several scientific hypotheses in herbaceous plants. However, due to long juvenile periods and generation times, and large plant size, studies at different growth stages of grafts in woody fruit plants are meager [1,2].
Rootstock selection is one of the most important factors in orchard management because it affects the growth, nutrient accumulation, environmental tolerance, and fruit quality of scion varieties [2,3,4]. Conventional breeding must be supplemented with molecular approaches to refine biotic and abiotic stress tolerance in fruit crops as lack of knowledge, breeding programs will often be time-consuming and costly. The identification of molecular markers linked to desirable rootstock traits must first be identified. For example, DNA fragments (genes), may be related to the production of an enzyme that promotes fruit set. If the location of this genetic material (marker) has been determined and the benefits of the marker have been identified, DNA from other rootstocks can be quickly screened for the gene of interest [5]. Parental genetic maps and delineated genomic regions associated with graft (in)-compatibility parameters in apricot has been studied by Pina et al. [6]. Therefore, the selection of desirable rootstocks at the nursery seedling stages can help to reduce the testing duration and exposure required for expensive field trials. Small interfering RNAs (silencing RNA) are now being used to grow virus-resistant transgenic rootstocks [7]. In rootstocks, the potential movement of RNA and DNA genetic or epigenetic factors and the transformation of proteins can be evaluated because of their unique and identifiable characteristics. It is commonly believed that grafted rootstocks and scions maintain their genetic identity, transcription factors, regulatory small interfering RNAs (siRNAs), micro RNAs (miRNAs), mRNAs, peptides, and proteins are mobile in the plant vascular system and may cross the graft union [8,9]. The present review explains how macromolecules such as DNA, RNA, and protein are transported between rootstock and scion via vascular tissues and affect scion in various fruit crops.

2. Molecular Mechanism between Scion and Rootstock

Earlier, researchers focused on the role of hormones in vascular reconnection [10]. Now, a successful graft union formation is the function of molecular signaling via phloem which leads to the anatomical and physiological changes in both components for the smooth connectivity of vascular tissues [11,12]. It is an established fact that the transfer of the intact plastid genome is essential across the graft junction at the molecular level for the uninterrupted communication between the scion and rootstock of the grafted plant [13,14]. The protein migrates from the companion cells of the shoot into the root cells and controls various physiological processes in plants [9]. The rapid development of molecular biotechnology and “omics” approaches will allow researchers to unravel the physiological and molecular mechanisms involved in the rootstock–scion interaction [15].

DNA, RNA, and Protein Transfer during Rootstock–Scion Interaction

As essential components of the RdDM pathway in Arabidopsis, sRNAs migrate bidirectional (from shoot to root and vice versa) [7]. The graft union allows molecules such as DNA, RNA, proteins, and hormones to be transferred bidirectionally between both the component of grafted plants [16,17]as shown in Figure 1.
DNA is able to transfer from rootstock to scion via vascular uptake. During the graft union formation, generation of plasmodesmata and re-establishment of vascular bundles provide horizontal gene transfer (HGT) transport channels [14,18,19]. Plant graft hybridization may result in the horizontal transfer of nuclear DNA and the transfer of cpDNA genetic material between the rootstock and scion, but no nuclear gene exchange occurs [19]. The entire chloroplast genome can be transferred through inter-specific grafting, regardless of graft orientation, and is relatively stable [20]. The movement of the nuclear genome occurs between grafting sections, resulting in the development of stable allopolyploid and fertile plants [21].
Small RNA regulates epigenetic alteration by counteracting DNA methylation in grafted and budded plants [22]. Small interfering RNAs (siRNAs) play an important role in signaling and gene silencing [12,23]. Micro RNAs (miRNAs) play a role during the development of graft union for example cca-miR159 and cca-miR156 are upregulated at the graft site of hickory plants during graft growth, stimulating the tissue attachment process. Furthermore, miR390b is downregulated, resulting in an increase in ATP-binding protein accumulation [24]. Superoxide radical scavenging enzyme superoxide dismutase 4 (SOD4) helps in the protection of plant cells due to oxidative stress caused during the early stages of the grafting due to tissue injury. SOD4 is a target of the miRNA cca-miR827, which has been found to be down-regulated during the early stages of grafting, preferring SOD4 activation to scavenge harmful superoxide radicals at graft unions [20]. Messenger RNAs (mRNAs), which are primarily responsible for the coding of various proteins, also regulate various functional proteins involved in the normal growth and development of plant tissues after they have been transported through the graft unions [25,26,27].
Many proteins (such as chaperones) have the ability to bind mRNAs and are known for their roles in promoting molecular transport and preventing mRNA degradation. One of these chaperones CmPP16 has been found in Cucurbita maxima (winter squash) and play role in RNA transfer from the rootstock to the scion via graft union [28]. The cyclophilin protein SICyp1 is transported from the scion to the rootstock via the phloem. It increases auxin response and helps to promote root development. Proteins from the companion cells of the shoot can be transferred into the stele cells of the roots and regulate the physiology of grafted plants [29,30,31]. Plasma membrane intrinsic proteins (PIPs) are involved in the grafting process, and aquaporins are involved in cellular water transport controlling active cell proliferation [32,33]. At the grafting site, stimulated expression of an aquaporin (PIP1B) is accompanied by cell elongation and increased water levels, leading to good callus formation [34,35].
The role of differentially expressed proteins (DEPs) in grafting had been observed. In hickory plants, 369 and 341 DEPs are found to be downregulated and upregulated at graft unions, respectively [36], and increased expression of CcPIP1;2 during grafting has been found to be functional in Carya cathayensis [37]. Guo et al. [38] studied the differentially expressed genes (DEGs) to understand the mechanism of pumpkin grafting's effect on watermelon fruit ripening and quality development. Loupit and Cookson [39] well explained the changes in transcript abundance during graft union formation indicate that grafting responses are similar to responses to wounding and include the differential expression of genes related to hormone signaling, oxidative stress, formation of new vascular vessels, cell development, and secondary metabolites, in particular polyphenols. The details of the differential expression of protein are shown in Table 1.

3. Role of Hormones during Rootstock–Scion Interaction

Auxins play a key regulatory function in plants during the process of grafting and budding development. The polar auxin transport (PAT) maintains the levels of auxins in the plant portion and is involved in the development of xylem tissue [43]. In plants, auxins are needed for both shoot and root growth [20]. The production and proliferation of cambium and procambium cells are dependent on cytokinin (CK)signaling. Type-B ARR transcription factors, which are involved in callus formation and cell division, are activated by CK signaling. Plant immunity against biotic factors is provided by CK-activated ARR2 via salicylic acid (SA) mediated cell signaling [44]. Gibberellins (GAs) promote cell expansion, proliferation, and differentiation [20].
Ethylene is a gaseous hormone that regulates a wide range of processes, fruit ripening, and senescence, including root initiation and biotic and abiotic stress response. Abscisic acid (ABA) is essential for abiotic and biotic stress responses. How these phytohormones and cell signals transported and regulated callus and vascular tissue formation is well explained in Figure 2. Further, details of growth regulators along with gene names are given in Table 2.

4. Effect of Rootstock on Scion

The effect of rootstock on the scion cultivars is one of the most important influences in fruit production. The effects differ depending upon the nature of the scion and stock and environmental conditions [58]. The effects of rootstock on the scion cultivars include tree vigor (dwarfing and vigor), flowering, fruiting, time of maturity, fruit size and fruit quality, resistance to biotic (disease, insect–pest, nematodes, etc.), and abiotic (cold, drought, flooding, salt, nutrients, etc.), stresses and post-harvest fruit quality is well studied in mango, apple, citrus, tomato, etc. [2,59,60,61]. Rootstock–scion interactions demonstrated that rootstock had a greater influence than scion on tree weight and growth rate [62]. The rootstock–scion interaction affects the quality of fruit production by mitigating various biotic and abiotic stresses (Figure 1).

4.1. Effect on Tree Vigor

Most fruit crops have a wide shape and size canopy, and the development of small or even dwarf trees is of great importance from an economic point of view. Roots provide water and nutrients to shoots, while shoots provide assimilates to roots. In mango, some pre-selection criteria of rootstock selection for dwarfness are higher phloem to xylem and lower stomatal density per unit area on the leaf surface [63]. Higher phenolics content in the apical bud is associated with a reduction in vigor and causes dwarfness. In mango, Vellaikulumban seedling imparted dwarfing in contrast to Alphonso grafted on its own seedling [64]. The grape cultivar “Sultana” grows vigorously when grafted on 1103P, R2, and Ramsey, rootstocks [65]. Psidium pumilum rootstock had dwarfing effect [66,67] found that guava rootstock aneuploid No. 82 imparts dwarfness to “Allahabad Safeda” in terms of plant spread, plant volume and tree height and also reported to contribute high yield in this rootstock. Commercial citrus production relies on grafting with rootstocks that reduce tree vigor to control plant height very well studied in detail by several workers [68,69,70,71,72,73]. The detailed study on dwarfing rootstocks is very well reviewed [74,75]. In addition, the relationships between trunk radial growth and fruit yield in apple and pear trees on size-controlling rootstocks were well studied by Plavcova et al. [76]. In apples, 1rolB transgenic stock is less vigorous than the scion cultivars [77]. Upregulation of BAKI in the dwarf combination in apples grown on dwarfing rootstocks, and a possible function for brassinosteroid signaling in scion dwarfing control in sweet cherry cv. grafted onto dwarfing rootstock (Gisela 5) and semi-vigorous rootstocks, 99 transcripts were differentially expressed (Gisela 6), and genes involved in transcription regulation, flavonoid metabolism, brassinosteroid signaling, and cell-wall modification or biosynthesis [78]. Apple rootstock has a dwarfing effect when TFs are methylated, they fail to bind the IPT5b promoter region, resulting in lower gene expression, which reduces cytokinin synthesis in the roots and causes dwarfism. Unmethylated promoters resulted in increased gene expression and proper cytokinin synthesis in roots, as well as increased vigor [79]. Epigenetic changes at the union affect chromatin architecture through DNA methylation, histone modification, and the action of small RNA molecules. The mechanism triggering these effects likely is affected by hormonal crosstalk, protein and small molecules movement, nutrient uptake, and transport in the grafted trees [80]. Hence, the influence of rootstocks on scion growth and dwarfing mechanisms is induced by multiple factors, including hormone signaling, photosynthesis, mineral transport, water relations, anatomical characteristics, and genetic markers. It has been shown that the complex interactions between scion and rootstock can regulate plant development and its structure [81]. The mechanism involved in imparting rootstock induced dwarfing is presented in Table 3 and Figure 3.

4.2. Effects of Rootstock on Biotic Resistance

Biotic stresses are the most detrimental factors in fruit production, resulting in lower yields and tree longevity. In fruit crops, biotic stresses such as disease, insect pests, and nematodes are a major concern. As a result, advanced breeding approaches such as trans grafting and gene silencing must be used to increase biotic stress resistance in fruit crops. A silenced rootstock expressing a small RNA homologous to a region of the viral genome produces a double strain dsRNA that passes to the scion and activates the siRNA silencing signal, which interferes with viral genetic machinery replication, including virus resistance and systemic silencing. Apple rootstocks MM 109, MM 106, MM 111, and MM 104 are woolly aphid-resistant [87]. In cherry, the Mahaleb rootstock is resistant to the buckskin virus. Myrobalan B has been described as a plum rootstock resistant to bacterial canker disease [62]. Many diseases, such as exocortis, xyloporosis, and tristeza, are resistant to rough lemon, but nematode and gummosis are susceptible. According to Sathisha et al. [88], grape rootstocks such as 99 R, 1103 P 110 R, and 99 R had high levels of proline, total phenols, and total protein, and increased phenolic content in rootstocks may help in the reduction of disease incidence in grapes. In citrus rootstock breeding, seven RAPD markers were found linked to the Citrus tristeza virus resistance gene by bulked sergeant [89]. Guava rootstocks such as P. friedrichsthalianum (Chinese guava), P. lucidum (lemon guava), and P. cattleianum (strawberry guava) are resistant or immune to the root-knot nematode (M. enterolobii) [90] and Psidium guineense showed tolerance to the nematode [91] (Table 4).
Vitis champinii rootstock Dog Ridge and Ramsey have been discovered to have resistance to root-knot nematodes for a long time (RKN). VR O39-16 and UCD GRN1 rootstocks were selected for their resistance to the root lesion nematode [97]. Viorica is a promising rootstock for grafting to produce high resistance against papaya dieback disease, with a > 90% success rate, and has been used to reduce the susceptibility of elite scion [98]. Genetic modification of stone fruit rootstocks with genes encoding the BT (Bacillus thuringiensis) toxin for the control of Lepidopteran pests is one possible avenue [99]. The grape rootstock 41 B Mgt has the ability to induce a variety of genes involved in early responses to biotic stresses (VvNBS-LRRs, VvLOXs, VvPRs, VvNACs, VvWRKYs), with secondary metabolism genes VvSTSs being especially active [100]. The Gala/M.7 gene, which encodes a metallothionein-like protein, has the potential to play a role in E. amylovora resistance in apples.

4.3. Effect of Rootstock on Abiotic Resistance

Many unfavorable pedo-climatic conditions, such as salinity, drought, temperature, and light, cause plants to react biochemically, physiologically, and genetically. Plants respond to salinity using a variety of mechanisms, including salt excretion, salt exclusion, salt avoidance, antioxidant protection, and osmotic adjustment. Rootstocks produce ABA plant hormone in drought stress, which may be involved in water conservation processes through stomatal closure [101]. Gomera-1 is salt tolerant, limiting the transport and uptake of Na+ and Cl-ions from the root system to the plant’s above-ground portions [101]. In mango, some rootstocks such as 13-1, Kurakkan, Gomera-1, and Bappakkai are tolerant to salinity. Citrus rootstock and scion have a significant effect on each other under unfavorable conditions. Nevertheless, their specific response can be different depending on the way to translocate and compartment the toxic ions, or induce antioxidant systems. Findings showed that Cl ion accumulation presents a robust correlation with stress indicators and their scavenging enzymes in leaves and roots [102,103]. Valizadeh et al. [104] reported that Daneshgah 32, Daneshgah 8 and Daneshgah 13 used as rootstocks showed maximum drought tolerance among the cultivars. Many grape rootstocks, such as 110 R, Dogridge, B2-56 salt creek, and B2-56, have high relative water content and water use quality, allowing them to withstand drought conditions [101]. The high drought resistance in Vitis vinifera often decreases yield while higher water use efficiency [105]. Pyrus betulaefolia rootstock is well adapted to different soil conditions and it is winter hardy [66]. Poncirus trifoliata is the cold hardy rootstock of citrus. Apple rootstocks, M-16 and M-9 are resistant to winter injury. In V. vinifera, there are two genes, VvNCED and VvZEP, that have been described thought to be involved in the ABA biosynthetic pathway in response to soil water deficit in the roots [105].
In chimarrita/rootstock combinations, water deficit alters the expression of genes linked to osmotic modification, such as SDH, SIP1, GTL, and P5CS. The expression of genes involved in carbohydrate (SDH, GTL, SIP1, and S6PDH) and proline (P5CS) metabolism can be used to identify variability in Prunus persica water-deficit tolerance [106]. The PtADC gene in P. trifoliata is involved in stress resistance, including low temperature and dehydration [107]. Identified a clone from Gala/M.7 with homology to HVA22, which is a member of a family of stress-regulated (ABA, drought, salt, cold) genes of unknown function believed to play a role in stress tolerance [108] and another clone from Gala/M.7 had homology to SP1/POP3, a protein implicated in drought tolerance (Table 5). Mutual scion–rootstock relationships enable marked tolerance to salt stress through selective ion transport and metabolic modifications in avocado [109].

4.4. Effect of Rootstock on Tree Flowering and Fruiting

The apple cultivar “Pinova” was induced to flower early by over-expressing a silver birch (Betula pendula Roth) floral meristem identity MADS-box gene (BpMADS4) in the rootstock [117]. Ectopic expression of citrus FT (CiFT) in trifoliate orange (Poncirus trifoliata) induced early flowering [118]. In apple high-density plantings (HDP), dwarfing rootstocks induces precocious flowering, which enables earlier fruit production [119]. Fruiting precocity is correlated with dwarfing rootstocks and delay in fruiting with vigorous rootstocks [120]. The Tarocco Scire/C35 citrange combination showed the highest expression levels for CiFT2. This increased expression was correlated with yield and a higher number of flowers [121].

4.5. Effect of Rootstock on Fruit Quality

The rootstocks can influence fruit quality by affecting fruit size and color, fruit maturity, firmness, and soluble solids content [122,123,124,125,126]. Pacific Gala on B.9 rootstock had a smaller fruit size and earlier fruit maturity but a higher fruit starch degradation pattern (SDP) on this rootstock [127]. In pistachio, P. terebinthus and P. atlantica rootstocks led to kernels with high quality, by increasing the contents of betulinic acid and total polyphenols as compared to the fruits obtained with P. integerrima rootstock [128]. Different scion–rootstock combinations could be modulating the volatile compound composition and sensory profile in fruit crops such as citrus [129], peach [130], and lemon [131]. Kagzi Kalan lemon budded on RLC-4 and Karna Khatta rootstocks led to enhanced TSS and acid contents in the fruit juice. Similarly, the rootstocks, RLC-4 and Troyer citrange proved their superiority in terms of imparting higher ascorbic acid content to the scion [3].

5. Conclusions

A compatible rootstock can transfer outstanding traits to the scion varieties. Composite plants are the forthcoming research directions to understand the molecular mechanism involved in transferring important traits from the rootstock to the scion varieties so that more rootstocks with excellent traits and broad genetic bases can be selected for the scion varieties. It is evident from the observations that an exchange of compounds between rootstocks and scions is happening. The present review highlights the molecular mechanism of scion rootstock interactions and the involvement of single nucleotide polymorphism markers, differentially expressed genes, and proteins in composite plants. Further, it emphasized the role of macromolecules such as DNA, various types of RNA even plastid genome movement via graft union bidirectional from rootstock to scion and scion to rootstock. It is very important to know the molecular and physiological mechanism of how rootstock imparts quality scion to mitigate various biotic and abiotic stresses. Moreover, epigenetic changes at the union affect chromatin architecture by DNA methylation, histone modification, and the action of small RNA molecules with crosstalk of hormone and small molecules signaling in the grafted trees.
Understanding the molecular mechanisms underlying these effects certainly would simplify future rootstock selection for diverse agro-climatic conditions as well as for different varieties. More research is needed on molecular aspects of rootstocks for evolving rootstocks tolerant to biotic and abiotic stresses in different tropical, subtropical and temperate fruit crops. In a future where sustainable agricultural production is the need of the future, grafting could play a key role to develop products with better fruit quality, and higher yield, and minimizing the use of the chemical in a safe and “green” way.

Author Contributions

M.S. and N.S. (Nimisha Sharma), Conceptualization; M.S., N.S. (Nimisha Sharma), A.K.D. and R.M.S., contributed to writing and original draft preparation; N.S. (Neha Sharma), N.S. (Narendra Singh), A.K.D. S.K.S., R.S. and R.M.S. edited the manuscript. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

There was no fund granted for this review paper.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

Thanks to all researchers for their contribution to this work.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Baron, D.; Amaro, A.C.E.; Pina, A.; Ferreira, G. An overview of grafting re-establishment in woody fruit species. Sci. Hortic. 2019, 243, 84–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  2. Faria-Silva, L.; Gallon, C.Z.; Silva, D.M. Photosynthetic performance is determined by scion/rootstock combination in mango seedling propagation. Sci. Hortic. 2020, 265, 109247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Dubey, A.K.; Sharma, R.M. Effect of rootstocks on tree growth, yield, quality, and leaf mineral composition of lemon (Citrus limon (L.) Burm.). Sci. Hortic. 2016, 200, 131–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Wang, J.; Jiang, L.; Wu, R. Plant grafting: How genetic exchange promotes vascular reconnection. New Phytol. 2017, 214, 56–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  5. Atkinson, C.; Else, M. Understanding how rootstocks dwarf fruit trees. Compact Fruit Tree 2001, 34, 46–49. [Google Scholar]
  6. Pina, A.; Irisarri, P.; Errea, P.; Zhebentyayeva, T. Mapping quantitative trait loci associated with graft (in) compatibility in apriot (Prunus armeniaca L.). Front. Plant Sci. 2021, 12, 622906. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Law, J.A.; Jacobsen, S.E. Establishing, maintaining and modifying DNA methylation patterns in plants and animals. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2010, 11, 204–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Gaffney, T.; Friedrich, L.; Vernooij, B.; Negrotto, D.; Nye, G.; Uknes, S.; Ward, E.; Kessmann, H.; Ryals, J. Requirement of salicylic acid for the induction of systemic acquired resistance. Science 1993, 261, 754–756. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Paultre, D.S.G.; Gustin, M.P.; Molnar, A.; Oparka, K.J. Lost in transit: Long-distance tracking and phloem unloading of protein signals in Arabidopsishomografts. Plant Cell. 2016, 28, 2016–2025. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  10. Wetmore, R.H.; Rier, J.P. Experimental induction of vascular tissues in callus of angiosperms. Am. J. Bot. 1963, 50, 418–430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Miyashima, S.; Koi, S.; Hashimoto, T.; Nakajima, K. Non-cellautonomous microRNA165 acts in a dose-dependent manner to regulate multiple differentiation status in the Arabidopsis root. Development 2011, 138, 2303–2313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Melnyk, C.W.; Molnar, A.; Bassett, A.; Baulcombe, D.C. Mobile 24nt small RNAs direct transcriptional gene silencing in the root meristems of Arabidopsis thaliana. Curr. Bio. 2011, 21, 1678–1683. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  13. Stegemann, S.; Bock, R. Exchange of genetic material between cells in plant tissue grafts. Science 2009, 324, 649–651. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Stegemann, S.; Keuthe, M.; Greiner, S.; Bock, R. Horizontal transfer of chloroplast genomes between plant species. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2012, 109, 2434–2438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  15. Lu, X.; Liu, W.; Wang, T.; Zhang, J.; Li, X.; Zhang, W. Systemic Long-Distance Signaling and Communication between Rootstock and Scion in Grafted Vegetables. Front. Plant Sci. 2020, 11, 460. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Rasool, A.; Mansoor, S.; Bhat, K.M.; Hassan, G.I.; Baba, T.R.; Alyemeni, M.N.; Ahmad, P. Mechanisms underlying graft union formation and rootstock scion interaction in horticultural plants. Front. Plant Sci. 2020, 11, 1778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Kapazoglou, A.; Tani, E.; Avramidou, E.V.; Abraham, E.M.; Gerakari, M.; Megariti, S.; Doupis, G.; Doulis, A.G. Epigenetic changes and transcriptional reprogramming upon woody plant grafting for crop sustainability in a changing environment. Front. Plant Sci. 2021, 11, 613004. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Taller, J.; Hirata, Y.; Yagishita, N.; Kita, M.; Ogata, S. Graft- induced genetic changes and the inheritance of several characteristics in pepper (Capsicum annuum L.). Theor. Appl. Genet. 1998, 97, 705–713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Zhao, L.; Liu, A.; Song, T.; Jin, Y.; Xu, X.; Gao, Y.; Qi, H. Transcriptome analysis reveals the effects of grafting on sugar and α-linolenic acid metabolisms in fruits of cucumber with two different rootstocks. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 2018, 130, 289–302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Sharma, A.; Zheng, B. Molecular responses during plant grafting and its regulation by auxins, cytokinins, and gibberellins. Biomoleculess 2019, 9, 397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  21. Fuentes, I.; Stegemann, S.; Golczyk, H.; Karcher, D.; Bock, R. Horizontal genome transfer as an asexual path to the formation of new species. Nature 2014, 511, 232–235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Molnar, A.; Melnyk, C.W.; Bassett, A.; Hardcastle, T.J.; Dunn, R.; Baulcombe, D.C. Small silencing RNAs in plants are mobile and direct epigenetic modification in recipient cells. Science 2010, 328, 872–875. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  23. Chitwood, D.H.; Timmermans, M.C. Small RNAs are on the move. Nature 2010, 467, 415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Sima, X.; Jiang, B.; Fang, J.; He, Y.; Fang, Z.; Km, S.K.; Ren, W.; Qiu, L.; Chen, X.; Zheng, B. Identification by deep sequencing and profiling of conserved and novel hickory microRNAs involved in the graft process. Plant Biotechnol. Rep. 2015, 9, 115–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Kanehira, A.; Yamada, K.; Iwaya, T.; Tsuwamoto, R.; Kasai, A.; Nakazono, M.; Harada, T. Apple phloem cells contain some mRNAs transported over long distances. Tree Genet. Genomes 2010, 6, 635–642. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Yang, Y.; Mao, L.; Jittayasothorn, Y.; Kang, Y.; Jiao, C.; Fei, Z.; Zhong, G.Y. Messenger RNA exchange between scions and rootstocks in grafted grapevines. BMC Plant Biol. 2015, 15, 251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  27. Zhang, Z.; Zheng, Y.; Ham, B.K.; Chen, J.; Yoshida, A.; Kochian, L.V.; Fei, Z.; Lucas, W.J. Vascular-mediated signalling involved in early phosphate stress response in plants. Nat. Plants 2016, 2, 16033. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Xoconostle-Cazares, B.; Xiang, Y.; Ruiz-Medrano, R.; Wang, H.L.; Monzer, J.; Yoo, B.C.; McFarland, K.C.; Franceschi, V.R.; Lucas, W.J. Plant paralog to viral movement protein that potentiates transport of mRNA into the phloem. Science 1999, 283, 94–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Wu, Y.; Cosgrove, D.J. Adaptation of roots to low water potentials by changes in cell wall extensibility and cell wall proteins. J. Exp. Bot. 2000, 51, 1543–1553. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  30. Lee, Y.; Choi, D.; Kende, H. Expansins: Ever-expanding numbers and functions. Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 2001, 4, 527–532. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Duan, X.; Zhang, W.; Huang, J.; Zhao, L.; Ma, C.; Hao, L.; Yuan, H.; Harada, T.; Li, T. KNOTTED1 mRNA undergoes long-distance transport and interacts with movement protein binding protein 2C in pear (Pyrus betulaefolia). Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult. 2015, 121, 109–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Malz, S.; Sauter, M. Expression of two PIP genes in rapidly growing internodes of rice is not primarily controlled by meristem activity or cell expansion. Plant Mol. Biol. 1999, 40, 985–995. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Javot, H.; Maurel, C. The role of aquaporins in root water uptake. Ann. Bot. 2002, 90, 301–313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  34. Zheng, B.; Liu, L.; Huang, J.; Cheng, X.; Zhu, Y.; Xu, H. Analysis on physiological and biochemical traits of survival of Carya cathayensis grafted seedling. J. Fujian Coll. For. 2002, 22, 320–324. [Google Scholar]
  35. Zheng, B.S.; Chu, H.L.; Jin, S.H.; Huang, Y.J.; Wang, Z.J.; Chen, M.; Huang, J.Q. cDNA-AFLP analysis of gene expression in hickory (Carya cathayensis) during graft process. Tree Physiol. 2010, 30, 297–303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  36. Xu, D.; Yuan, H.; Tong, Y.; Zhao, L.; Qiu, L.; Guo, W.; Shen, C.; Liu, H.; Yan, D.; Zheng, B. Comparative proteomic analysis of the graft unions in hickory (Carya cathayensis) provides insights into response mechanisms to grafting process. Front. Plant Sci. 2017, 8, 676. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  37. Kumar, R.S.; Gao, L.X.; Yuan, H.W.; Xu, D.B.; Liang, Z.; Tao, S.C.; Edqvist, J. Auxin enhances grafting success in Carya cathayensis (Chinese hickory). Planta 2018, 247, 761–772. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  38. Guo, S.; Sun, H.; Tian, J.; Zhang, G.; Gong, G.; Ren, Y.; Zhang, J.; Li, M.; Zhang, H.; Li, H.; et al. Grafting delays watermelon fruit ripening by altering gene expression of ABA centric phytohormone signaling. Front. Plant Sci. 2021, 12, 624319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Loupit, G.; Cookson, S.J. Identifying Molecular Markers of Successful Graft Union Formation and Compatibility. Front. Plant Sci. 2020, 11, 610352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Spiegelman, Z.; Ham, B.K.; Zhang, Z.; Toal, T.W.; Brady, S.M.; Zheng, Y.; Fei, Z.; Lucas, W.J.; Wolf, S.A. Tomato phloem-mobile protein regulates the shoot-to-root ratio by mediating the auxin response in distant organs. Plant J. 2015, 83, 853–863. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Yuan, H.; Zhao, L.; Chen, J.; Yang, Y.; Xu, D.; Tao, S.; Zheng, B. Identification and expression profiling of the Aux/IAA gene family in Chinese hickory (Carya cathayensis Sarg.) during the grafting process. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 2018, 127, 55–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Wang, J.; Jin, Z.; Yin, H.; Yan, B.; Ren, Z.; Xu, J.; Mu, C.; Zhang, Y.; Wang, M.; Liu, H. Auxin redistribution and shifts in PIN gene expression during Arabidopsis grafting. Russ. J. Plant Physiol. 2014, 61, 688–696. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Ruzicka, K.; Ursache, R.; Hejatko, J.; Helariutta, Y. Xylem development-from the cradle to the grave. New Phytol. 2015, 207, 519–535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Choi, J.; Huh, S.U.; Kojima, M.; Sakakibara, H.; Paek, K.H.; Hwang, I. The cytokinin-activated transcriptionfactor ARR2 promotes plant immunity via TGA3/NPR1-dependent salicylic acid signaling in Arabidopsis. Dev. Cell 2010, 19, 284–295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  45. Qiu, L.; Jiang, B.; Fang, J.; Shen, Y.; Fang, Z.; Rm, S.K.; Zheng, B. Analysis of transcriptome in hickory (Carya cathayensis), and uncover the dynamics in the hormonal signaling pathway during graft process. BMC Genom. 2016, 17, 935. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  46. Corso, M.; Vannozzi, A.; Ziliotto, F.; Zouine, M.; Maza, E.; Nicolato, T.; Bonghi, C. Grapevine rootstocks differentially affect the rate of ripening and modulate auxin-related genes in cabernet sauvignon berries. Front. Plant Sci. 2016, 7, 69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  47. Melnyk, C.W.; Gabel, A.; Hardcastle, T.J.; Robinson, S.; Miyashima, S.; Grosse, I.; Meyerowitz, E.M. Transcriptome dynamics at Arabidopsis graft junctions reveal an intertissue recognition mechanism that activates vascular regeneration. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2018, 115, 2447–2456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  48. Dubrovsky, J.G.; Sauer, M.; Napsucialy-Mendivil, S.; Ivanchenko, M.G.; Friml, J.; Shishkova, S.; Benková, E. Auxin acts as a local morphogenetic trigger to specify lateral root founder cells. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2008, 105, 8790–8794. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  49. Marhavy, P.; Vanstraelen, M.; De Rybel, B.; Zhaojun, D.; Bennett, M.J.; Beeckman, T.; Benkova, E. Auxin reflux between the endodermis and pericycle promotes lateral root initiation. EMBO J. 2013, 32, 149–158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  50. Ohashi-Ito, K.; Bergmann, D.C. Regulation of the Arabidopsis root vascular initial population by LONESOME HIGHWAY. Development 2007, 134, 2959–2968. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  51. Kubo, M.; Udagawa, M.; Nishikubo, N.; Horiguchi, G.; Yamaguchi, M.; Ito, J.; Demura, T. Transcription switches for protoxylem and metaxylem vessel formation. Genes Dev. 2005, 19, 1855–1860. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  52. Dettmer, J.; Elo, A.; Helariutta, Y. Hormone interactions during vascular development. Plant Mol. Biol. 2009, 69, 347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Mo, Z.; He, H.; Su, W.; Peng, F. Analysis of differentially accumulated proteins associated with graft union formation in pecan (Carya illinoensis). Sci. Hortic. 2017, 224, 126–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Ni, J.; Gao, C.; Chen, M.S.; Pan, B.Z.; Ye, K.; Xu, Z.F. Gibberellin promotes shoot branching in the perennial woody plant Jatropha curcas. Plant Cell Physiol. 2015, 56, 1655–1666. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  55. Gu, C.; Guo, Z.H.; Hao, P.P.; Wang, G.M.; Jin, Z.M.; Zhang, S.L. Multiple regulatory roles of AP2/ERF transcription factor in angiosperm. Bot. Stud. 2017, 58, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  56. Matsuoka, K.; Sugawara, E.; Aoki, R.; Takuma, K.; Terao-Morita, M.; Satoh, S.; Asahina, M. Differential cellular control by cotyledon-derived phytohormones involved in graft reunion of Arabidopsis hypocotyls. Plant Cell Physiol. 2016, 57, 2620–2631. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  57. Hjellstrom, M.; Olsson, A.S.; Engstrom, P.; Soderman, E.M. Constitutive expression of the water deficit inducible homeobox gene ATHB7 in transgenic Arabidopsis causes a suppression of stem elongation growth. Plant Cell Environ. 2003, 26, 1127–1136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Goswami, A.K.; Singh, S.K.; Srivastav, M.; Nagaraja, A.; Prakash, J.; Kumar, C. Important rootstock in different fruit crops. Biotech Article 2017, 4, 31–36. [Google Scholar]
  59. Tietel, Z.; Srivastava, S.; Fait, A.; Tel-Zur, N.; Carmi, N.; Raveh, E. Impact of scion/rootstock reciprocal effects on metabolomics of fruit juice and phloem sap in grafted Citrus reticulata. PLoS ONE 2020, 15, e0227192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. JukicSpika, M.; Dumicic, G.; BrkicBubola, K.; Soldo, B.; Goreta-Ban, S.; VuletinSelak, G.; Ljubenkov, I.; Mandusic, M.; Zanic, K. Modification of the sensory profile and volatile aroma compounds of tomato fruits by the scion-rootstock interactive effect. Front. Plant Sci. 2021, 11, 616431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Chai, X.; Wang, X.; Li, H.; Xu, X.; Wu, T.; Zhang, X.; Han, Z. Apple scion cultivars regulate the rhizosphere microbiota of scion/rootstock combinations. Appl. Soil Ecol. 2022, 170, 104305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Jayswal, D.K.; Lal, N. Rootstock and scion relationship in fruit crops. Agrials 2020, 2, 10. [Google Scholar]
  63. Murti, G.S.R.; Upreti, K.K. Endogenous hormones and phenols in rootstock seedlings of mango cultivars and their relationship with seedling vigour. Eur. J. Hortic. Sci. 2003, 68, 2–7. [Google Scholar]
  64. Reddy, Y.T.N.; Kurian, R.M.; Ranachander, P.R.; Singh, G.; Kohali, R.R. Long-term effects of rootstocks on growth and fruit yield patterns of ‘Alphonso’ mango (Mangifera indica L.). Sci. Hortic. 2003, 97, 95–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Ezzahouani, A.; Williams, L.E. Influence of rootstock on leaf water potential, yield, and berry composition of Ruby Seedless grapevines. Amer. J. Enol. Viticult. 1995, 46, 559–563. [Google Scholar]
  66. Nimbolkar, P.K.; Awachare, C.; Reddy, Y.T.N.; Chander, S.; Hussain, F. Role of rootstocks in fruit production—A review. J. Agric. Eng. 2016, 3, 183–188. [Google Scholar]
  67. Sharma, Y.K.; Goswami, A.M.; Sharma, R.R. Effect of dwarfing aneuploid guava rootstock in high density orcharding. Indian J. Hortic. 1992, 49, 31–36. [Google Scholar]
  68. Hayat, F.; Li, J.; Liu, W.; Li, C.; Song, W.; Iqbal, S.; Khan, U.; UmerJaved, H.; Ahsan Altaf, M.; Tu, P. Influence of citrus rootstocks on scion growth, hormone levels, and metabolites profile of shatangju mandarin (Citrus reticulata Blanco). Horticulturae 2022, 8, 608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Khan, M.N.; Hayat, F.; Asim, M.; Iqbal, S.; Ashraf, T.; Asghar, S. Influence of citrus rootstocks on growth performance and leaf mineral nutrition of Salustiana sweet orange [Citrus sinensis (L.). obsek]. J. Pure Appl. Agric 2020, 5, 2617–8680. [Google Scholar]
  70. Lavagi-Craddock, I.; Dang, T.; Comstock, S.; Osman, F.; Bodaghi, S.; Vidalakis, G. Transcriptome analysis of citrus dwarfing viroid induced dwarfing phenotype of sweet orange on trifoliate orange rootstock. Microorganisms 2022, 10, 1144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Girardi, E.A.; Sola, J.G.P.; Scapin, M.d.S.; Moreira, A.S.; Bassanezi, R.B.; Ayres, A.J.; Peña, L. The perfect match: Adjusting high tree density to rootstock vigor for improving cropping and land use efficiency of sweet orange. Agronomy 2021, 11, 2569. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Hervalejo, A.; Arjona-Lopez, J.M.; Romero-Rodríguez, E.; Arenas-Arenas, F.J. Suitability of two dwarfing citrus rootstocks for ‘Salustiana’ orange trees grown under super-high-density conditions with mechanical harvesting. N. Z. J. Crop Hortic. Sci. 2022, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Continella, A.; Pannitteri, C.; La Malfa, S.; Legua, P.; Distefano, G.; Nicolosi, E.; Gentile, A. Influence of different rootstocks on yield precocity and fruit quality of ‘Tarocco Scire’ pigmented sweet orange. Sci. Hortic. 2018, 230, 62–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Hayat, F.; Li, J.; Iqbal, S.; Peng, Y.; Hong, L.; Balal, R.M.; Khan, M.N.; Nawaz, M.A.; Khan, U.; Farhan, M.A.; et al. A mini review of citrus rootstocks and their role in high-density orchards. Plants 2022, 11, 2876. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  75. Pereira Costa, D.; SanchesStuchi, E.; Girardi, E.A.; Moreira, A.S.; da Silva Gesteira, A.; Coelho Filho, M.A.; da Silva Ledo, C.A.; da Silva, A.L.V.; de Leao, H.C.; Sampaio Passos, O. Less is more: A hard way to get potential dwarfing hybrid rootstocks for Valencia sweet orange. Agriculture 2021, 11, 354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Plavcova, L.; Meszaros, M.; Silhan, K.; Jupa, R. Relationships between trunk radial growth and fruit yield in apple and pear trees on size-controlling rootstocks. Ann. Bot. 2022, 130, 477–489. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Smolka, A.; Li, X.Y.; Heikelt, C.; Welander, M.; Zhu, L.H. Effects of transgenic rootstocks on growth and development of non-transgenic scion cultivars in apple. Transgenic Res. 2010, 19, 933–948. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Prassinos, C.; Ko, J.H.; Lang, G.; Iezzoni, A.F.; Han, K.H. Rootstock-induced dwarfing in cherries is caused by differential cessation of terminal meristem growth and is triggered by rootstock-specific gene regulation. Tree Physiol. 2009, 29, 927–936. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  79. Feng, Y.; Zhang, X.; Wu, T.; Xu, X.; Han, Z.; Wang, Y. Methylation effect on IPT5b gene expression determines cytokinin biosynthesis in apple rootstock. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2017, 482, 604–609. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Habibi, F.; Liu, T.; Folta, K.; Sarkhosh, A. Physiological, biochemical, and molecular aspects of grafting in fruit trees. Hortic. Res. 2022, 9, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Hayat, F.; Iqbal, S.; Coulibaly, D.; Razzaq, M.K.; Nawaz, M.A. An insight into dwarfing mechanism: Contribution of scion-rootstock. Fruit Res. 2021, 1, 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Mayer, N.A.; Ueno, B.; Reighard, G.L. Selection of Prunus mume as rootstocks for peaches on PTSL site. Acta Hortic. 2015, 1084, 89–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Roberto, S.; Stuchi, E.S. Dwarfing-canopy and rootstock cultivars for fruit trees. Rev. Bras. 2019, 41, e-997. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Campbell, J. Pear Rootstocks. NSW 2003, 12. [Google Scholar]
  85. Lliso, I.; Forner, J.B.; Talón, M. The dwarfing mechanism of citrus rootstocks F&A 418 and 23 is related to competition between vegetative and reproductive growth. Tree Physiol. 2004, 24, 225–232. [Google Scholar]
  86. Tworkoski, T.; Fazio, G. Hormone and growth interactions of scions and size-controlling rootstocks of young apple trees. Plant Growth Regul. 2016, 78, 105–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Fazio, G. Genetics, breeding, and genomics of apple rootstocks. In The Apple Genome; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2021; pp. 105–130. [Google Scholar]
  88. Sathisha, J.; Ramteke, S.D.; Karibasappa, G.S. Physiological and biochemical characterization of guava rootstocks. S. Afr. J Enol. Vitic. 2007, 28, 163–168. [Google Scholar]
  89. Mestre, P.F.; Asins, M.J.; Pina, J.A.; Carbonell, E.A.; Navarro, L. Molecular markers flanking Citrus tristeza virus resistance gene from Poncirus trifoliata (L.) Raf. Theor. Appl. Genet. 1997, 94, 458–464. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Freitas, V.M.; Correa, V.R.; Motta, F.C.; Sousa, M.G.; Gomes, A.C.M.M.; Carneiro, M.D.G. Resistant accessions of wild Psidium spp. to Meloidogyne enterolobii and histological characterization of resistance. Plant Pathol. J. 2014, 63, 738–746. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Costa, S.R.; Santos, C.A.F.; Castro, J.M.C. Assessing Psidium guajava, P. guineense hybrid tolerance to Meloidogyne enterologii. Acta Hortic. 2012, 959, 59–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Ribeiro, I.J.A.; Rossetto, C.J.; Donadio, L.C.; Sabino, J.C.; Martins, A.I.M.; Gallo, P.B. Mango Wilt. XIV Selection of mango (Mangifera indica L.) rootstocks resistant to the mango wilt Fungus Ceratocystis fimbriata Ell &Halst. Acta Hortic. 2000, 513, 69–79. [Google Scholar]
  93. Vos, J.E.; Schoeman, M.H. In-vitro selection and commercial release of guava wilt resistant rootstock. Acta Hortic. 2000, 513, 69–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Milan, A.R. Breeding of Psidium species for root knot nematode resistance in Malaysia. Acta Hortic. 2005, 735, 61–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Kellam, M.K.; Coffey, M.D. Quantitative comparison of the resistance to Phytophthora root rot in three avocado rootstocks. J. Phytopathol. 1985, 75, 230–234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Sharma, D.R.; Kumar, R.; Rattanpal, H.S. Reaction of citrus germplasm against Citrus psylla and whitefly. Haryana J. Hortic. Sci. 2005, 34, 274. [Google Scholar]
  97. Ferris, H.; Zheng, L.; Walker, M.A. Soil temperature effects on the interaction of grape rootstocks and plant-parasitic nematodes. J. Nematol. 2013, 45, 49. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  98. Sarip, J.; Nur Sulastri, J.; Sanimah, S.; Salehudin, M.R.; Razali, M.; Noor Faimah, G.; Noraisah, R.; Puteri, D.E.Z.; Fauzam, C.H.; Zulfa, M.R. Viorica a promising rootstock in producing highly tolerance grafted papaya against papaya dieback disease. Trans. Malaysian Soc. Plant Physiol. 2018, 25, 56–60. [Google Scholar]
  99. Janick, J. Genetics and breeding of tree fruits and nuts. In Proceedings of the XXVI International Horticultural Congress, Toronto, ON, Canada, 11–17 August 2002. [Google Scholar]
  100. Chitarra, W.; Perrone, I.; Avanzato, C.G.; Minio, A.; Boccacci, P.; Santini, D.; Gambino, G. Grapevine grafting: Scion transcript profiling and defense-related metabolites induced by rootstocks. Front. Plant Sci. 2017, 8, 654. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Santhi, V.P.; Nireshkumar, N.; Vasugi, C.; Parthiban, S.; Masilamani, P. Role of rootstocks to mitigate biotic and abiotic stresses in tropical and subtropical fruit crops: A. IJCS 2020, 8, 499–510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Duran, V.H.; Raya, A.M.; Aguilar, J. Salt tolerance of mango rootstocks (Magnifera indica L. cv. Osteen). Span. J. Agric. Res. 2003, 1, 68–78. [Google Scholar]
  103. Khalid, M.F.; Morillon, R.; Anjum, M.A.; Ejaz, S.; Rao, M.J.; Ahmad, S.; Hussain, S. Volkamer lemon tetraploid rootstock transmits the salt tolerance when grafted with diploid kinnow mandarin by strong antioxidant defense mechanism and efficient osmotic adjustment. J. Plant Growth Regul. 2022, 41, 1125–1137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Valizadeh, V.; Kaji, B.; Abbasifar, A.; Bagheri, H.; Zandievakili, G.; Daryabeigi, A. First report: Grafting of three iranian commercial pomegranate cultivars on drought tolerant rootstocks. Int. J. Hortic. Sci. 2020, 7, 69–79. [Google Scholar]
  105. Serra, A.; Strever, P.; Myburgh, A.; Deloire, A. The interaction between rootstocks and cultivars (Vitis vinifera L.) to enhance drought tolerance in grapevine. Aust. J. Grape Wine Res. 2014, 20, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Rickes, L.N.; Klumb, E.K.; Benitez, L.C.; Braga, E.J.B.; Bianchi, V.J. Differential expression of the genes involved in responses to water-deficit stress in peach trees cv. Chimarrita grafted onto two different rootstocks. Bragantia 2019, 78, 60–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  107. Gong, X.Q.; Liu, J.H. Genetic transformation and genes for resistance to abiotic and biotic stresses in citrus and its related genera. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cul. 2013, 113, 137–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Shen, Q.X.; Chen, C.N.; Brands, A.; Pan, S.M.; Ho, T.H.D. The stress- and abscisic acid-induced barley gene HVA22: Developmental regulation and homologues in diverse organisms. Plant Mol. Biol. 2001, 45, 327–340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  109. Lazare, S.; Yasuor, H.; Yermiyahu, U.; Kuhalskaya, A.; Brotman, Y.; Ben-Gal, A.; Dag, A. It takes two: Reciprocal scion-rootstock relationships enable salt tolerance in ‘Hass’ avocado. Plant Sci. 2021, 312, 111048. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  110. Dubey, A.K.; Srivastav, M.; Sharma, Y.K.; Pandey, R.N.; Deshmukh, P.S. Dry mass production and distribution of nutrients in two mango rootstocks as affected by salinity. Indian J. Hortic. 2007, 64, 670–672. [Google Scholar]
  111. Gunjate, R.T. Advances in mango culture in India. Acta Hortic. 2009, 820, 69–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Souza, L.D.P.; Nobre, R.G.; Silva, E.M.D.; Lima, G.S.D.; Pinheiro, F.W.; Almeida, L.L.D.S. Formation of ‘Crioula’guava rootstock under saline water irrigation and nitrogen doses. Rev. Bras. Eng. Agric. Ambient. 2016, 20, 739–745. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  113. Lu, J.; Jiang, H.; Li, W. Effects of low temperature stress on the cold resistance of rootstock and branch of wine grapes. Int. J. Fruit Sci. 2012, 29, 1040–1046. [Google Scholar]
  114. Tramontini, S.; Vitali, M.; Centioni, L.; Schubert, A.; Lovisolo, C. Rootstock control of scion response to water stress in grapevine. Environ. Exp. Bot. 2013, 93, 20–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Guo, S.H.; Niu, Y.J.; Zhai, H.; Han, N.; Du, Y.P. Effects of alkaline stress on organic acid metabolism in roots of grape hybrid rootstocks. Sci. Hortic. 2018, 227, 255–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Garcla-Legaz, M.F.; Ortiz, J.M.; Garcla-Lidun, A.; Cerd, A. Effect of salinity on growth, ion content and CO2 assimilation rate in lemon varieties on different rootstocks. Physiol. Plant. 1993, 89, 427–432. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Flachowsky, H.; Peil, A.; Sopanen, T.; Elo, A.; Hanke, V. Overexpression of BpMADS4 from silver birch (Betula pendula Roth.) induces early-flowering in apple (Malus× domestica Borkh.). Plant Breed. 2007, 126, 137–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Nishikawa, F.; Endo, T.; Shimada, T.; Fujii, H.; Shimizu, T.; Kobayashi, Y.; Omura, M. Transcriptional changes in CiFT-introduced transgenic trifoliate orange (Poncirus trifoliata L. Raf.). Tree Physiol. 2010, 30, 431–439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  119. Knabel, M.; Friend, A.P.; Palmer, J.W.; Diack, R.; Wiedow, C.; Alspach, P.; Deng, C.; Gardiner, S.E.; Tustin, D.S.; Schaffer, R.; et al. Genetic control of pear rootstock–induced dwarfing and precocity is linked to a chromosomal region syntenic to the apple Dw1 loci. BMC Plant Biol. 2015, 15, 230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  120. Davies, F.T.; Geneve, R.L.; Kester, D.E. Hartmann and Kester’s Plant Propagation: Principles and Practice; Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  121. Bennici, S.; Las Casas, G.; Distefano, G.; Gentile, A.; Lana, G.; Di Guardo, M.; Continella, A. Rootstock affects floral induction in citrus engaging the expression of the flowering locus t (Cift). Agriculture 2021, 11, 140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Baumes, R.; Wirth, J.; Bureau, S.; Gunata, Y.; Razungles, A. Bio-generation of C13- norisoprenoid compounds: Experiments supportive for an apo-carotenoid pathway in grapevines. Anal. Chim. Acta 2002, 458, 3–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. Bindon, K. Influence of Partial Root Zone Drying on Aspects of Grape and Wine Quality. Ph.D. Thesis, School of Agriculture and Wine, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, Australia, 2004; pp. 182–204. [Google Scholar]
  124. Stern, R.A.; Doron, I. Performance of ‘Coscia’ pear (Pyrus communis L.) on nine rootstocks in the north of Israel. Sci. Hortic. 2009, 119, 252–256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Cano, A.; Bermejo, A. Influence of rootstock and cultivar on bioactive compounds in citrus peels. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2011, 91, 1702–1711. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  126. Stevens, R.M.; Pech, J.M.; Taylor, J.; Clingeleffer, P.; Walker, R.R.; Nicholas, P.R. Effects of irrigation and rootstock on Vitis vinifera (L.) cv. S hiraz berry composition and shrivel, and wine composition and wine score. Aust. J. Grape Wine Res. 2016, 22, 124–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Fallahi, E. Influence of rootstock and irrigation methods on water use, mineral nutrition, growth, fruit yield, and quality in ‘Gala’ apple. Hort Tech. 2012, 22, 731–737. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Noguera-Artiaga, L.; Perez-Lopez, D.; Burgos-Hernandez, A.; Wojdilo, A.; Carbonell-Barrachina, Á.A. Phenolic and triterpenoid composition and inhibition of α-amylase of pistachio kernels (Pistacia vera L.) as affected by rootstock and irrigation treatment. Food Chem. 2018, 261, 240–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  129. Benjamin, G.; Tietel, Z.; Porat, R. Effects of rootstock/scion combinations on the flavor of citrus fruit. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2013, 61, 11286–11294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Seker, M.; Ekinci, N.; Gür, E. Effects of different rootstocks on aroma volatile constituents in the fruits of peach (Prunus persica L. Batsch cv. ‘Cresthaven’). N. Z. J. Crop Hortic. Sci. 2017, 45, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Aguilar-Hernández, M.G.; Sanchez-Bravo, P.; Hernandez, F.; Carbonell-Barrachina, A.A.; Pastor-Perez, J.J.; Legua, P. Determination of the volatile profile of lemon peel oils as affected by rootstock. Foods 2020, 9, 241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Agriculture 12 02036 g001 550
Figure 1. Macromolecules DNA, RNA, protein, hormones, and plastid DNA bidirectional movement via graft union explain the role of molecular and hormone signaling and also explain the effect of scion–rootstock relationship on quality fruit production.
Figure 1. Macromolecules DNA, RNA, protein, hormones, and plastid DNA bidirectional movement via graft union explain the role of molecular and hormone signaling and also explain the effect of scion–rootstock relationship on quality fruit production.
Agriculture 12 02036 g001
Agriculture 12 02036 g002 550
Figure 2. Signal transduction mechanisms during callus and vascular tissue formation using various hormones and enzymes. Mechanism of signal transduction via different pathways and differentially expressed genes explain the key role of hormones and genes in callus formation during grafting and budding.
Figure 2. Signal transduction mechanisms during callus and vascular tissue formation using various hormones and enzymes. Mechanism of signal transduction via different pathways and differentially expressed genes explain the key role of hormones and genes in callus formation during grafting and budding.
Agriculture 12 02036 g002
Agriculture 12 02036 g003 550
Figure 3. Effect of differential gene expression to regulate canopy of fruit plant. This figure well explains how methylated (A) and unmethylated (B) condition regulate the plant height along with concentration of cytokinin. DNA methylation are epigenetic marks and are highly conserved and involved in altering the canopy of the plants by catalyzing changes in the chromatin structure through methylation and demethylation. Cytosine methylation (5 mC) is the key regulator in DNA.
Figure 3. Effect of differential gene expression to regulate canopy of fruit plant. This figure well explains how methylated (A) and unmethylated (B) condition regulate the plant height along with concentration of cytokinin. DNA methylation are epigenetic marks and are highly conserved and involved in altering the canopy of the plants by catalyzing changes in the chromatin structure through methylation and demethylation. Cytosine methylation (5 mC) is the key regulator in DNA.
Agriculture 12 02036 g003
Table
Table 1. Details of various proteins and their differential expression in horticultural crops.
Table 1. Details of various proteins and their differential expression in horticultural crops.
ProteinResponseCropReference
CmPP16Favoring the process of molecular transport and reduce the degradation of mRNAs.Cucurbita maxima[28]
PbPTB3Play role in long-distance movement of mRNAs across the graft junction by
binding of PbPTB3 to PbWoxT1 mRNA.		Pyrus betlaefolia[31]
Cyclophilin, SICyp1Play role in increased auxin response and promoting the growth of roots.Tomato[40]
PIP1BEnhanced water levels and cell elongation, leading to better callus formation and successful grafting.Carya cathayensis[35]
DEPsAt graft unions, 341 and 369 DEPs were found to be upregulated.Carya cathayensis[41]
PINReunion of vascular tissues is favored by the auxin movement from top to downward direction mediated by PIN proteins.Arabidopsis[42]
Table
Table 2. Function of phytohormones encoding genes in graft compatibility in various fruit crops.
Table 2. Function of phytohormones encoding genes in graft compatibility in various fruit crops.
PhytohormonesGenesResponseReference
AuxinAux/IAAControl graft union healing and graft compatibility.[45]
GH3Showed positive responses to grafting.[46]
VviGH3-21Role in the grafted plant growth.[46]
PIN1 and ABCB1Carriers in auxin transport, regulate the graft development.[47]
CcPIN1b and CcLAX3)Carriers for PAT and favor the process of grafting.[37]
ARFThe process of grafting further regulates various biochemical pathways promoting vascular connection between the scion and the stock.[35]
MrPIN1,
MrSHR		Downregulation in the gene expression of MrPIN1 and MrSHR in roots of the grafted plants.[48]
MrPIN3Upregulation and enhanced distribution of auxins, which further induces the division of pericycle cell.[49]
HCA2Grafting site which is important for the reconnection of phloem.[47]
Type-B ARRsInduction of cell division and callus formation.[50]
LHWGrowth and development of stele cells as well as in formation of protoxylem.[50]
VND7Expresses during protoxylem formation.[51]
VND6Expresses during metaxylem formation.[51]
CRE1/WOL/AHK4Regulation of proliferation and specification of vascular cells.[52]
GAGA20OXUpregulation of gene and involved in GA-biosynthesis.[53]
JcGA20ox1Enhanced stem elongation and increased outgrowth of lateral buds.[54]
EthyleneAPETALA2TFs exist in all plant species and are activated in response to multiple stresses or developmental pathways.[55]
ANAC071Reduced the formation of vascular tissues at the graft junction.[56]
ABAATHB7This gene is specifically expressed in differentiating xylem and is also induced by drought stress.[57]
Table
Table 3. Details of rootstocks effect on tree vigor in various fruit crops.
Table 3. Details of rootstocks effect on tree vigor in various fruit crops.
Fruit CropRootstockEffectReference
PeachOkinawa and CapdebosqVigor[82]
NanoSemi- dwarf[83]
MangoOlour and VellaicolambanDwarfing[64]
PearQuince CDwarfing[84]
PyrodwarfDwarfing[58]
CitrusPoncirus trifoliateDwarfing[83]
Flying DragonDwarfing[83]
Troyer citrangeDwarfing[58]
Fand A 418Dwarfing[85]
GuavaPusa srijan (Aneuploid 82)Dwarfing[58]
AppleM-2, MM-104Vigorous[58]
B-9Semi-dwarfing[58]
M-9Dwarfing[86]
Table
Table 4. Details of rootstock to mitigate biotic stresses in fruit crops.
Table 4. Details of rootstock to mitigate biotic stresses in fruit crops.
CropRootstockResistant/Tolerant TraitReference
MangoCarabao, Pico Manga d AguaResistant to wilt[92]
Guava


Psidium friedrichsthalianum, P. cattleianum var. lucidumResistance to root-knot nematode[90]
Psidium guineenseResistance to root-knot nematode[91]
Dimple, Jonelle, GU 8GWD resistance
Nematode tolerance		[93]
GU8 P. longipes and P. arayanRoot knot nematode resistant root stock[94]
Avocado
Duke 7 and G6
Resistance to P. cinnamomi
[95]
CitrusStar ruby and ruby redResistant against citrus psylla[96]
Table
Table 5. List of abiotic resistant/ tolerant rootstocks in fruit crops.
Table 5. List of abiotic resistant/ tolerant rootstocks in fruit crops.
CropRootstockResistant/Tolerant TraitReference
MangoKurukanTolerant to salinity[110]
13/3Tolerant to salinity[111]
GuavaCrioulaTolerant to salinity[112]
GrapeBetaCold hardiness[113]
140RuTolerance to water deficit condition[114]
A15 and A17Tolerance to alkalinity[115]
LoquatAngerTolerance to saline conditions[116]
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Shivran, M.; Sharma, N.; Dubey, A.K.; Singh, S.K.; Sharma, N.; Sharma, R.M.; Singh, N.; Singh, R. Scion–Rootstock Relationship: Molecular Mechanism and Quality Fruit Production. Agriculture 2022, 12, 2036. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture12122036

AMA Style

Shivran M, Sharma N, Dubey AK, Singh SK, Sharma N, Sharma RM, Singh N, Singh R. Scion–Rootstock Relationship: Molecular Mechanism and Quality Fruit Production. Agriculture. 2022; 12(12):2036. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture12122036

Chicago/Turabian Style

Shivran, Mukesh, Nimisha Sharma, Anil Kumar Dubey, Sanjay Kumar Singh, Neha Sharma, Radha Mohan Sharma, Narendra Singh, and Rakesh Singh. 2022. "Scion–Rootstock Relationship: Molecular Mechanism and Quality Fruit Production" Agriculture 12, no. 12: 2036. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture12122036

APA Style

Shivran, M., Sharma, N., Dubey, A. K., Singh, S. K., Sharma, N., Sharma, R. M., Singh, N., & Singh, R. (2022). Scion–Rootstock Relationship: Molecular Mechanism and Quality Fruit Production. Agriculture, 12(12), 2036. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture12122036

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