Next Article in Journal
ATP Hydrolases Superfamily Protein 1 (ASP1) Maintains Root Stem Cell Niche Identity through Regulating Reactive Oxygen Species Signaling in Arabidopsis
Next Article in Special Issue
High Concentrations of Se Inhibited the Growth of Rice Seedlings
Previous Article in Journal
Saffron, a Potential Bridge between Nutrition and Disease Therapeutics: Global Health Challenges and Therapeutic Opportunities
Previous Article in Special Issue
Growth, Productivity, Yield Components and Seasonality of Different Genotypes of Forage Clover Lotus corniculatus L. under Varied Soil Moisture Contents
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

The Role of Plant Ubiquitin-like Modifiers in the Formation of Salt Stress Tolerance

by
Siarhei A. Dabravolski
1 and
Stanislav V. Isayenkov
2,3,4,*
1
Department of Biotechnology Engineering, Braude Academic College of Engineering, Snunit 51, Karmiel 2161002, Israel
2
International Research Centre for Environmental Membrane Biology, Foshan University, Foshan 528000, China
3
Institute of Agricultural and Nutritional Sciences, Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Betty-Heimann-Strasse 3, 06120 Halle, Germany
4
Department of Plant Food Products and Biofortification, Institute of Food Biotechnology and Genomics, The National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, Baidi-Vyshneveckogo Str. 2a, 04123 Kyiv, Ukraine
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Plants 2024, 13(11), 1468; https://doi.org/10.3390/plants13111468
Submission received: 9 May 2024 / Revised: 22 May 2024 / Accepted: 23 May 2024 / Published: 25 May 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Mitigation Strategies and Tolerance of Plants to Abiotic Stresses)

Abstract

:
The climate-driven challenges facing Earth necessitate a comprehensive understanding of the mechanisms facilitating plant resilience to environmental stressors. This review delves into the crucial role of ubiquitin-like modifiers, particularly focusing on ATG8-mediated autophagy, in bolstering plant tolerance to salt stress. Synthesising recent research, we unveil the multifaceted contributions of ATG8 to plant adaptation mechanisms amidst salt stress conditions, including stomatal regulation, photosynthetic efficiency, osmotic adjustment, and antioxidant defence. Furthermore, we elucidate the interconnectedness of autophagy with key phytohormone signalling pathways, advocating for further exploration into their molecular mechanisms. Our findings underscore the significance of understanding molecular mechanisms underlying ubiquitin-based protein degradation systems and autophagy in salt stress tolerance, offering valuable insights for designing innovative strategies to improve crop productivity and ensure global food security amidst increasing soil salinisation. By harnessing the potential of autophagy and other molecular mechanisms, we can foster sustainable agricultural practices and develop stress-tolerant crops resilient to salt stress.

1. Ubiquitin-Mediated Protein Degradation in Plant Adaptation to Salt Stress

The climate of Earth is undergoing constant changes, which are often characterised by the increased number of frequent and severe adverse weather events such as inundations, hurricanes, drought, desertification, and others, making plants, more so than ever, dependent on effective mechanisms to withstand these environmental fluctuations [1,2]. In such challenging environmental conditions, for plants, given their stationary lifestyle, the effective removal and utilisation of malfunctioning and damaged proteins is crucial for the proper functioning of signal transduction systems and timely adaptation to environmental disturbances. Ubiquitination, a process of post-translational protein modification, plays a crucial role in almost every aspect of plant growth, development, and response to various stresses [3,4]. Thus, ubiquitin is the major component orchestrating protein degradation and turnover by ubiquitination [5]. The major ubiquitin-based protein degradation systems are ubiquitin (Ub)-26S proteasome system (UPS), small ubiquitin-like modifier (SUMO), and ubiquitin-like modifier autophagy-related protein 8 (ATG8) (Figure 1).
Salt stress is one of the most common adverse environmental factors affecting plant growth and productivity around the world. Improper irrigation practices, misuse of fertilisers, and global climate change in general gradually increase the severity of global soil salinisation [6]. Salt stress affects plant growth and productivity in various ways, such as osmotic and water stress, ion toxicity, nutrition disorders, dysregulation of biochemical, metabolic and physiological processes, membrane disorganisation, genotoxicity, repressed cell division, and others [7,8]. The stress-associated accumulation of reactive oxygen species (ROS) plays a crucial role in salt stress responses by causing oxidative damage to biomolecules and by initiating various cell signalling pathways [9]. Also, plants have developed several sophisticated defence mechanisms to alleviate salt stress, such as ion homeostasis, compartmentalisation and export, production of osmoprotectants and ROS scavengers, modulation of cytoskeleton dynamics and the cell wall composition, phytohormones-mediated reactions, and others [8,10]. Additionally, ROS accumulation is a crucial factor linking autophagy and salt stress responses [11]. The UPS and SUMO systems have been extensively reviewed in several recent reviews [12,13,14,15,16,17,18]; thus they will be introduced only briefly. Further, in this review we discuss the recent research deciphering the role of autophagy in salt stress tolerance, with a particular focus on ATG8 as the key player in selective autophagy.

2. Ubiquitin (Ub)-26S Proteasome System (UPS) and Its Role in Salinity Stress Tolerance

Ub is extremely conserved across eukaryotic kingdoms, with only minor amino acid variations between such distant organisms as humans and plants [19]. In the process of protein ubiquitylation, a 76-amino acid Ub polypeptide covalently attached to substrate lysine residues through the sequential activation by the E1 Ub-activating enzyme, resulting in conjugation onto an E2 Ub-conjugating enzyme, and subsequent catalysis by a specific E3 Ub ligase [20]. Such ubiquitylated proteins are recognised by the 26S proteasome for degradation [21,22]. Furthermore, the attachment of a single Ub (monoubiquitylation) can serve as a traffic signal for substrate transport within the cell or targeting for degradation in vacuoles or lysosomes, while the topology of polyubiquitylation can regulate protein activity and localisation, or target it for degradation by the 26S proteasome [23]. A diverse array of E3 ubiquitin ligases encoded in plant genomes plays the primary role in regulating the specificity of the UPS in targeting polyubiquitylated proteins for degradation [24]. Based on the structural compositions and the mechanics of the conjugation process of activated Ub moieties, plant E3 ligases can be classified into three main types: really interesting new gene (RING)-containing E3 ligases, homologous to the E6-AP carboxyl terminus (HECT), and plant U-box (PUB) (Figure 1) [25,26,27].
Considering specifically salt stress tolerance, UPS was recently shown to play a crucial role in various salt stress tolerance-related processes. Thus, the expression of the Oryza sativa (L.) salt-induced RING Finger Protein 1 (OsSIRP1) gene was up-regulated in roots after salt, heat, drought, and ABA treatments. Furthermore, transgenic Arabidopsis plants expressing OsSIRP1 showed lower salt stress tolerance during seed germination and root growth, suggesting that OsSIRP1 acted through the ubiquitin 26S proteasome system to negatively regulate rice salt stress tolerance [28]. Another rice RING H2-type E3 ligase, OsSIRH2-14, was characterised as a positive regulator of salinity tolerance. Mechanically, OsSIRH2-14 interacted and regulated the stability of the HKT-type Na+ transporter OsHKT2;1 through the 26S proteasome system only in high salt but not in normal conditions. Accordingly, OsSIRH2-14-overexpressing rice plants showed a higher tolerance to salt stress and reduced Na+ accumulation in the aerial shoot and root tissues compared to wild-type plants [29]. Similarly, wheat (Triticum. aestivum L.) E3 ubiquitin ligase TaDIS1 (an orthologous of the Oryza sativa gene drought-induced SINA protein 1, a C3HC4 RING finger E3 ligase) was shown to interact and regulate the stability of the salt-tolerant protein (TaSTP) via the 26S proteasome pathway. Additionally, the expression level of TaSTP was up-regulated by salt, drought stresses, and ABA treatment, thus suggesting its involvement in different abiotic stress responses [30].

3. Small Ubiquitin Like-Modifiers (SUMO) and The Role in Salinity Stress Tolerance

Similarly to Ub, SUMO resulted in mono- or multi-SUMOylation of a substrate protein by attaching to the lysine residues (Figure 1) [31]. Interestingly, SUMOylation sites often have a consensus pattern (such hydrophobic/KxD/E motif, with x = any amino acid) recognised by a SUMO conjugation enzyme, while in some cases SUMO can be ligated onto its substrate even in the absence of a SUMO E3 ligase [18]. Recent proteome analysis demonstrated the significant enrichment of SUMOylated proteins involved in chromatin remodelling/repair, transcription, RNA metabolism, protein trafficking, and other vital functions [32,33], including also involvement in the response to various biotic and abiotic stresses [34,35,36,37]. However, it is important to note that SUMOylation and ubiquitylation intersect in multiple pathways and interact with various hormonal signalling pathways leading to antagonistic, synergistic, and even more complex outcomes [38]. In the case of abiotic stress tolerance, the ABA signalling pathway may be considered the primary target, which is modulated and regulated by Ub-SUMO systems [39,40,41].
Accordingly, the SUMO system was shown to play a crucial role in plant salt stress tolerance. Thus, overexpressing the rice Ubiquitin-like-specific protease 1D OVERLY TOLERANT TO SALT 1 (OsOTS1) increased the root biomass, reduced the levels of SUMOylated proteins, and increased salt stress tolerance. Also, salt treatment of rice plants with RNAi silenced the OsOTS1/2 increased accumulation of SUMO-conjugated proteins and greatly reduced salt stress tolerance, while in normal conditions these plants were not different from wild-type controls [42]. Similarly, the expression of rice SUMO E3 ligase SIZ1 (SAP AND MIZ1 DOMAIN CONTAINING LIGASE1) in Arabidopsis increased tolerance to heat, drought, and salt stresses and increased seed yields in stressed conditions. Also, SIZ1-expressing plants produced more osmoprotectant proline, accumulated more potassium ions, and excluded sodium ions more effectively in comparison to wild-type plants [43]. Furthermore, the heterologous expression of SIZ1a/b/c genes from sweet potato (Ipomoea batatas (L.) Lam.) in Arabidopsis atsiz1 plants rescued the defective germination and growth phenotype, while SIZ1a/b/c expression in wild-type Arabidopsis plants enhanced tolerance to salt and drought stress [44]. Similarly, the expression of the SUMO-conjugating enzyme SCE1e from Zea mays (L.) in tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum L.) plants increased levels of SUMO conjugates and enhanced tolerances to salt and drought stress. Additionally, ZmSCE1e-expressing transgenic plants demonstrated a higher activity of antioxidant enzymes (SOD, CAT, APX, and GPX), lower H2O2 and malondialdehyde (MDA) accumulations, and higher expression of stress-responsive genes LEA5, ERD10C, CDPK2, and AREB under salt and drought stress treatments [45]. These results demonstrated that SUMO genes play a crucial role in salt stress tolerance by modulating protein sumoylation levels, antioxidant amount and activities, and the expression of general stress defence genes.

4. Overview of the Core Plant Autophagy Components

Autophagy is a crucial regulatory system to maintain homeostasis; it is based on the degradation and recycling of damaged and malfunctioning cellular components during the normal plant’s life cycle and in response to environmental biotic and abiotic stresses [46]. Adverse environmental conditions like starvation, abiotic (such as salt, drought, cold, and heat) and biotic (such as pathogens) stresses are known to activate autophagy [47]. Depending on the target substrate and involved regulatory mechanisms, several forms of autophagy have been identified (macro-autophagy, micro-autophagy, organelle-specific, and chaperone-mediated autophagy) [48,49]. Despite some variation among plant species, different forms of autophagy have well-conserved core regulatory components identified in species ranging from lower photosynthetic algae to major agricultural species [50,51]. Originally, more than 40 autophagy-related genes (ATGs) were identified in yeast, while their homologues were further searched in Arabidopsis thaliana (L.) Heynh. and Oryza sativa L.—the major model species to study autophagy in plants. Among the core ATG identified in yeast, Arabidopsis has 3 ATG1 homologues and 2 ATG13, while rice has 4 ATG1 and 2 ATG1 homologues. ATG11 acted as a scaffold protein to facilitate the formation of a kinase complex between ATG1 and ATG13 under starvation conditions [52].
Two sensor kinases identified in Arabidopsis and rice, TARGET OF RAPAMYCIN (TOR) and SUCROSE NONFERMENTING1-RELATED PROTEIN KINASE1 (SnRK1), have been found to cooperatively perceive nutritional status and to activate or inhibit autophagy by regulating ATG1–ATG13 kinase complex states [53,54]. Additionally, an ATG1-independent autophagy pathway has been identified in Arabidopsis under prolonged carbon starvation, where the SnRK1 catalytic SNF1 KINASE HOMOLOG 10 (KIN10) subunit directly phosphorylates the ATG6 subunit to trigger autophagy [55]. These data confirmed that, although the core autophagy mechanism is conserved in all eukaryotic cells, plants employ alternative pathways to activate autophagy to ensure an appropriate response to dynamic changes in the environment.
The Arabidopsis homologue of yeast ATG14 was shown to regulate autophagosome assembly, while it was not yet discovered in rice [56]. ATG9 cycles between the ER and the cytoplasmic pool, regulating the trafficking of ATG18 on the autophagosomal membrane in a PI3P-dependent manner, thus ensuring efficient autophagosome budding from the initial autophagosome formed from the ER membrane [57,58].
Two essential ubiquitin-like conjugation systems, ATG8-PE (phosphatidylethanolamine) and ATG12-ATG5-ATG16, are crucial for the progression of autophagy. Thus, the formation of the ATG8-PE lipid complex requires cleavage by the cysteine protease ATG4, and the ATG12-ATG5 complex promotes ATG8 lipidation, while the specific function for ATG16 homologue in plants is still unknown [59,60,61]. ATG8 plays a central role in selective autophagy, because almost all currently known autophagy-related receptors/adaptors have an ATG8 interaction motif (AIM) or ubiquitin-interacting motif (UIM)-like sequences [62,63]. Subsequently, the autophagosome becomes laden with cargoes. The mature autophagosome subsequently fuses with and delivers its contents to the vacuole, where various hydrolases break down the contents into carbohydrates, amino acids, and lipids. These components are then returned to the cytosol and recycled to synthesize new products, or they are reused for other purposes.

4.1. The TOR-Dependent Autophagy Regulation and Its Interplay with Plant Phytohormones

Through TOR kinase phytohormones, ROS, nutrients, amino acids, and various small molecules regulate the functions of ATG proteins and autophagy in plants [64]. Among amino acids, the role of cysteine has been extensively studied, with sulphur and carbon/nitrogen (C/N) precursors sensed by TOR kinase and GENERAL CONTROL NON-DEPRESSIBLE2 (GCN2) kinase, respectively. Further research demonstrated that elevated sulphur levels led to an increase in glucose levels, activating TOR, while low glucose levels during sulphur deficiency or impaired photosynthesis inhibit TOR and activate autophagy [65]. Prolonged carbon starvation and phosphate deficit resulted in autophagy through the induction of ER stress [55,66]. Nitrogen depletion inhibited TOR and activated autophagy; however, it also led to sugar accumulation (including glucose), which activated TOR and inhibited autophagy [67]. The deficit of many metals (such as zinc, iron, and manganese) also can induce autophagy, although the underlying mechanisms are poorly understood [68,69].
Phytohormones are crucial regulators of the TOR kinase and, subsequently, TOR-dependent autophagy (Figure 2). For example, auxin stimulated TOR activity thus inhibiting stress-induced autophagy [70]. Treatment with salicylic acid (SA) up-regulated autophagy during methyl jasmonate-induced leaf senescence [71]. Also, the accumulation of SA and ROS, associated with pathogens that attack and plant immunity, has been considered as autophagy-stimulating factors [72,73]. TOR inhibited abscisic acid (ABA) signalling under unstressed environmental conditions, while under stressed conditions ABA repressed TOR activity and activated autophagy [74]. The complex interplay between brassinosteroids (BRs) regulates plant growth, stress responses and nitrogen starvation. Thus, the blockage of BR signalling or biosynthesis up-regulated autophagy, while the increased activity of the BR pathway down-regulated autophagy. The brassinazole-resistant 1 (BZR1) transcription factor, brassinosteroid-insensitive 2 (BIN2) kinase, and regulatory-associated protein of TOR 1B (RAPTOR1B) have been defined as the major players coordinating interaction between BR and TOR [75,76]. The levels of active forms of gibberellins (GAs) and cytokinin (trans-zeatin) were lower in the anthers of autophagy-defective rice mutant Osatg7–1, while the exact role of these hormones in autophagy regulation remains unclear [77].

4.2. Plant Autophagy-Related Ubiquitin-like Modifier (ATG8) and Its Role in the Responses to Environmental Stresses

ATG8 is the key component of the autophagy pathway, it conjugates with phospholipids to form a double-membrane vesicle (autophagosome), which further degrades intracellular components in selective or non-selective manners [78] (Figure 1). Unlike UPS, autophagosome has a much larger volume and is involved in bulk and selective recycling of huge protein complexes and aggregates, and malfunctioning and damaged organelles by delivering them to the vacuole. Since organelles (chloroplasts in particular) are extremely sensitive to various stresses, organelles’ recycling is considered as one of the primary targets in autophagy-mediated stress response regulation [reviewed in [79]]. Under normal conditions, the autophagy pathway engages at a basal level to maintain cellular homeostasis and facilitate plant development, but in the case of stress, it is further activated to provide necessary relief from a certain stress factor and to secure plant survival. Thus, ATG8 is tightly regulated by external and internal factors via plant hormones and diverse transcription factors, which, in total, contribute to plant survival during stress conditions [11,80].
ATG8, a protein crucial for the autophagic process, is normally activated through post-translational cleavage by the ATG4 protease at the C-terminus. ROS generated under stressed conditions inactivates ATG4 and guarantees a high level of ATG8 lipidation and, subsequently, autophagy progression. Additionally, the particular ATG4 homologues tend to interact with the preferred ATG8 isoforms, thus fine-tuning the specific and efficient induction of autophagy [59,81]. Furthermore, ATG8 can interact with several receptors and adaptor proteins, such as:
(1)
Neighbour of BRCA1 (NBR1) and the ATG8-interacting protein 1 (ATI1) and ATI2 proteins, which target plastid proteins for degradation upon carbon starvation [82];
(2)
Arabidopsis Orosomucoid (ORM) proteins 1 and 2, which are involved in plant immunity regulation through the degradation of Flagellin-Sensing 2 (FLS2) receptor kinase [83];
(3)
Tryptophan-rich sensory protein/translocator (TSPO), which is involved in the abiotic stress response through the regulation of the levels of PIP2;7 aquaporin on the cell surface [84];
(4)
DOMINANT SUPPRESSOR OF KAR 2 (DSK2), targeting the brassinosteroid pathway regulator BES1 for degradation [85];
(5)
A dehydrin, Medicago truncatula (Gaertn.) MtCAS31 (cold acclimation-specific 31), which under drought stress facilitated the autophagic degradation of MtPIP2;7, thus reducing water loss and improving drought tolerance [86];
(6)
S-nitrosoglutathione reductase 1 (GSNOR1) in hypoxic conditions [87];
(7)
ROOT HAIR DEFECTIVE3 (RHD3), an atlastin GTPases family member involved in ER stress response, was recently shown to have two AIM, through which it acted as a receptor for the selective autophagy of the ER (ER-phagy) during nutrient starvation. Thus, rhd3 plants were defective in ER-phagy under ER stress. Furthermore, the RHD3–ATG8e interaction was enhanced under ER stress, but not RHD3(ΔAIM1) plants [88];
(8)
E3 enzyme Ufm1-protein Ligase 1 (Ufl1), one of the proteins regulating Ufmylation, a novel PTM characterised by multiple functions in diverse cellular processes, was shown to interact with ATG8e under salt stress. Furthermore, the core components in the Ufmylation cascade (Ufl1 and ubiquitin-fold modifier 1 (Ufm1)) interacted also with ATG1 and ATG6. Also, Ufl1 plants showed salt hypersensitive phenotype and abnormal ER morphology, and the expression of Ufmylation cascade components was up-regulated by salt stress. These results suggested that autophagy machinery acted together with the Ufmylation cascade to maintain ER homeostasis under salt stress by regulating ER-phagy [89], and many others.
However, given the number and diversity of ATG8 isoforms, it is likely that particular ATG8s may be induced by different stress factors and interact with different effectors, while it is difficult to identify the role of each isoform because of the functional redundancy between isoforms and certain overlap in their inducers and interaction partners, which makes the analysis of single knock-out mutants ineffective [62,63,90,91].

4.3. Role of the Neighbour of BRCA1 (NBR1) Protein in the Regulation of Plant Stress Response

NBR1, one of the best-characterised plant autophagy receptors, is a structural homologue and functional hybrid of mammalian autophagy receptors NBR1 and p62. In plants, NBR1 contains five domains (an N-terminal PB1 (Phox and Bem1p), a central ZZ-type zinc finger and NBR1_like, a two C-terminal UBA (ubiquitin-associated)), and an LC3-interacting region (LIR motif) (also known as AIM motif in yeast and plants) [92]. The biological functions of NBR1 have been investigated through an analysis of nbr1 mutants or transgenic silencing lines. Arabidopsis nbr1 plants showed normal growth and development under normal conditions and had no deviation in general and selective (peroxisomes, mitochondria, or the endoplasmic reticulum (ER)) autophagy [93]. Furthermore, NBR1 is not essential for age- and darkness-induced senescence but may modulate growth or senescence in short-day growth conditions or under mineral deficiency [94,95].
The role of NBR1 in plant abiotic stress tolerance is mediated by selective autophagy and, depending on its interaction with ATG8, it is also associated with the clearance of aggregation-prone misfolded proteins and protein aggregates [93]. Also, NBR1 was shown to participate in the regulation of plant tolerance to heat [96], oxidative [97], salt [98], and drought [99] stresses, and regulates heat stress memory [100] and resistance to some bacterial (like, for example, Pseudomonas syringae [101]) and viral (like cauliflower mosaic virus [102]) pathogens. In addition, Arabidopsis NBR1 was shown to interact with several crucial proteins of the ABA signalling pathway (such as ABSCISIC ACID INSENSITIVE (ABI3/4/5) [103], which suggested a wide role of autophagy in general stress-related processes.
The role of NBR1 in salt stress tolerance is mediated through several mechanisms. As it was recently shown, the transgenic poplar hybrid plants’ (Populus alba × P. tremula var. glandulosa) overexpression PagNBR1 had higher rates of enzyme activities of antioxidants (SOD, POD, and CAT) and a higher expression of ROS scavengers (APX, MDHAR, DHAR, and GR), resulting in lower malonaldehyde (MDA) concentration, electrolyte leakage, and membrane lipid peroxidation. Also, PagNBR1 overexpression prevented a decrease in photosynthetic parameters (PSII conversion efficiency and maximum optical quantum yield), thus providing higher net photosynthesis rates under salt stress. Also, transgenic plants maintained a higher K+/Na+ ratio in the roots, which, at least partially, was mediated through the up-regulated expression of SOS1. Furthermore, PagNBR1 was localised in the autophagosome and interacted with ATG8, whose expression was also up-regulated in transgenic plants. Finally, transgenic plants formed more autophagosomes, resulting in a lower accumulation of insoluble ubiquitinated protein aggregates compared to wild-type plants under salt stress. In total, these results suggested that PagNBR1 enhanced salt tolerance by up-regulating antioxidant defence and ROS scavengers, protecting photosynthetic apparatus, maintaining the K+/Na+ ratio, and promoting the degradation of insoluble ubiquitinated protein in transgenic poplar plants under salt stress [104].
Therefore, NBR1-mediated selective autophagy plays a critical role in response and adaptation to both biotic- and abiotic stresses. Specific to the role of NBR1 in salt stress, it would be interesting to determine the possible regulatory function of NBR1 in other stress-related hormonal signalling pathways (such as ABA and SA), and in the degradation of ABA pathway regulatory proteins ABSCISIC ACID INSENSITIVE (ABI3, ABI4, and ABI5).

5. Universal Role of ATGs in the Regulation of Plant Salinity Stress

5.1. Stress Protective Role of ATGs in Microalgae

The unicellular alga Chlamydomonas reinhardtii (P.A.Dang.) has responded to salt stress through the activation of antioxidant enzymes, cell damage, autophagy, and nitric oxide metabolism processes. The application of comparative proteomics and physiological approaches helped to identify 74 proteins, such as antioxidant enzymes (Monodehydroascorbate reductase (MDHAR), Dehydroascorbate reductase (DHAR), Ascorbate peroxidase (APX), and glutathione reductase (GR)), nitric oxide metabolism-related proteins (S-Nitrosoglutathione reductase (GSNOR)), DNA damage (DNA damage checkpoint protein, DNA repair protein, DNA damage-inducible protein, RAN-binding proteins RANBP1, RAD 51, and REX1-B, and putative defender against death (DAD)) and autophagy (VPS30, ATP-dependent Clp protease proteolytic subunit, vacuolar trafficking protein, ATG3, and ATG8)), the accumulation of which was altered by short-term salt stress. These data suggested that ROS and GSNOR are involved in the activation of salt stress-induced autophagy and DNA damage [105]. Similarly, the cross-species meta-analysis on the transcriptomes of two microalgae (Dunaliella salina and Dunaliella tertiolecta) species under salt stress demonstrated that chaperone-mediated autophagy, lipid and nitrogen metabolism, photosynthesis, and ROS detoxification were core systems engaged in the Dunaliella salt stress response [106].

5.2. ATGs as Crucial Players in Adaptation to Various Abiotic Stresses

Recent genome-wide research has identified autophagy-related genes and their activation by different stresses in Foxtail millet (Setaria italica (L.) P. Beauvois), which is generally known for its strong resistance to various environmental stresses. From the total of 37 SiATG genes, the expression of 31 SiATG genes was induced by phytohormones (GA, methyl jasmonate (MeJA), SA, and ABA), 26 SiATG genes by cold, salt, and drought stresses, 24 SiATG genes by darkness, and 25 SiATG genes by nitrogen starvation [107]. In parallel, 49 ATG genes were identified in the genome of Tartary buckwheat (Fagopyrum tataricum (L.) Gaertn.). Among them, the eight FtATG8 genes showed a high expression level under both salt and drought stresses. Also, all FtATG8 genes contained MYB-family transcription factors binding and light-responsive cis-acting elements, and strongly correlated with other stress-associated transcription factors, suggesting their vital role in stress resistance in buckwheat plants [108].
In total, 29 ATG genes were identified in pepper (Capsicum annuum L.) another important agricultural species. Various abiotic stresses (heat, drought, cold, salt, and carbohydrate starvation) affected the expression of CaATG genes in a stress type-dependent pattern, thus suggesting the connection between autophagy and pepper tolerance to abiotic stresses. In particular, salt stress up-regulated eight CaATGs (2, 7, 8a, 8e, 12, 13a, 18b, and 18g) and VPS34, with no ATG genes that were down-regulated. Stem salt stress up-regulated 15 CaATG genes (especially 5, 8a, 8c, and 15), while 4 CaATG genes were down-regulated (especially 2 and 4) [109].
Also, nine well-expressed ATG8 genes were identified in pear (Pyrus × bretschneideri Rehder). While PbrATG8a/c/g/i were up-regulated under salt stress conditions, only the PbrATG8c gene was up-regulated by all tested stresses (salt, drought, and Botryosphaeria dothidea infection) in pear [110]. Similarly, the expression of 35 ATG genes identified in sweet orange (Citrus × sinensis (L.) Osbeck) was affected by different stresses (salt, drought, cold, heat, and mannitol, and surplus manganese, copper, and cadmium). Under salt stress treatment, CsATG8a, CsATG18e, and CsVTI12c were up-regulated, while only CsATG1a was down-regulated in the seedlings. Furthermore, Arabidopsis plants transformed with CsATG18a and CsATG18b showed increased tolerance to salt, drought, cold, and osmotic stresses compared to control plants [111].
In potato (Solanum tuberosum L.), SA treatment, heat, and wounding stresses up-regulated the expression of StATG3, StATG9, StATG11, and StATG13a, while the expression of StATG101 was up-regulated after wounding stress, but down-regulated by heat stress. Also, StATG11 and StATG101 expressions were up-regulated by salt stress. Furthermore, StATG8 isoforms responded differently to various stresses, with StATG8-2.1, StATG8-2.2, StATG8-3.2, and StATG8-4 up-regulated, while the expression of StATG8-3.1 was down-regulated by heat stress, and StATG8-1.1, StATG8-2.1, and StATG8-3.2 were up-regulated by wounding stress. Among the StATG8 isoforms, only StATG8-2.1 was up-regulated by SA treatment, and the expression of StATG8-1.1, StATG8-2.1, and StATG8-3.2 was up-regulated after NaCl treatment [112].
In total, these results suggested that ATG genes are crucial players in response and adaptation to various abiotic stresses, which, at least partially, were mediated through interactions with different plant hormones. Further functional characterisations of ATG genes can provide promising new genetic resources for the development of novel stress-resistant varieties of crop species.

5.3. Functional Characterisation of ATG8 Isoforms in Adaptation to Salt Stress

Experiments on marker GFP-ATG8a overexpressing lines demonstrated that autophagy is activated by salt stress, peaking at 30 min after stress exposure to alleviate the negative effects of salt stress on plants and to establish new homeostasis. In particular, autophagy removed more oxidised proteins, facilitated the accumulation of proline and soluble sugars, and promoted Na+ sequestration in the central vacuole of root cortex cells of the ATG8 overexpressing plants. Such autophagy induction was absent in autophagy-defective plants (atg2, atg5, atg7, atg9, and atg10). Thus, atg mutants were hypersensitive to both osmotic and salt stress, while ATG8 overexpressing plants showed stress-tolerant phenotypes, suggesting that a functional autophagy mechanism is absolutely required for salt stress tolerance in Arabidopsis [113].
In total, 77 ATG genes were defined in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) and its di- and tetraploid-related species (51 in T. turgidum ssp. dicoccoides (wild emmer), 29 in T. urartu, and 30 in Aegilops tauschii). Further characterisations showed that transgenic wheat and Arabidopsis plants expressing TaVAMP727 have higher resistance to cold, drought, and salt stresses [114]. Furthermore, 29 ATG8 homologues were identified in allotetraploid rapeseed (AACC, Brassica napus L.). Among them, 13 BnaATG8 genes were up-regulated in shoots, while 3 genes (BnaA3.ATG8E, BnaA7.ATG8E, and BnaC3.ATG8E) were down-regulated in the roots after salt treatment. Additionally, transgenic plants overexpressing the BnaA8.ATG8F gene showed reduced tolerance to salt stress, while the transcription level of BnaA8.ATG8F in the transgenic plants was about 30% lower in comparison to the wild type. Also, the total Na+ concentration was higher in the wild type than in bnaa8.atg8f plants, and the ratio of shoot/root Na+ accumulation in bnaa8.atg8f plants was almost three times that in wild type. These data suggested that under salt stress BnaA8.ATG8F expression is down-regulated and causes more Na+ translocation to shoots, thus reducing plant tolerance to salt [115].
In the poplar tree (Populus. alba × P. tremula var. glandulosa)), 48 ATG genes were identified and characterised. Thus, ABA treatment up-regulated ATG1c/f, ATG2b, ATG4b, ATG5, ATG8a/g/j/k, ATG10, and ATG8a/c, while ATG1b/d, ATG2a, ATG3a/b, ATG7, ATG8c/d/e/f/h/i, and ATG13b/c/d were down-regulated. The BR treatment, on the contrary, up-regulated ATG7, ATG8a/b/j, and ATG18c/g/h, while the ATG1 subfamily was mostly down-regulated after BR treatment. Interestingly, in the ATG18 subfamily salt treatment up-regulated mostly ATG18a/c members. Furthermore, PagATG18a overexpression enhanced salt stress tolerance and improved photosynthesis and antioxidant activities in salt-stressed poplar plants [116].
These results provide valuable information for further research on the functional characteristics of ATG8 isoforms and other ATG genes in various agricultural and model species under biotic and abiotic stresses, interaction with hormonal signalling pathways and various stress response-related mechanisms, and prepare the necessary theoretical background for the future breeding of salt stress-tolerant varieties.

6. Conclusions

In conclusion, in this review we discuss the role of ubiquitin-like modifiers in enhancing plant tolerance to salt stress, particularly focusing on the ATG8-mediated autophagy under salt stress. We have unveiled the multifaceted contributions of ATG8 to plant salt stress adaptation mechanisms. Specifically, ATG8 positively influences various physiological processes crucial for salt adaptation, including stomatal regulation, photosynthetic efficiency, osmotic adjustment, Na+ sequestration, antioxidant defence, and metabolic activities (Figure 3). Notably, ATG8-overexpressing plants exhibit enhanced photosynthetic capacity, improved osmotic adjustment, and superior growth performance compared to wild-type plants under salt stress. These results highlight the potential of autophagy modulation as a promising strategy for enhancing plant resilience to salt stress conditions, while minimising trade-offs between growth and stress tolerance.
Moreover, we unveil the interconnectedness of autophagy with key phytohormone signalling pathways (such as abscisic and salicylic acids, brassinosteroids, and auxins). However, further exploration should focus on the molecular mechanisms underlying interplay with other hormones (such as cytokinins, and gibberellic and jasmonic acids), because their role in salt stress-stimulated autophagy is still unknown. Additionally, investigating the potential synergies between autophagy and other stress response pathways could unveil novel avenues for enhancing plant resilience to salt stress resistance.
Overall, the discussed results suggested that understanding the molecular mechanisms underlying the role of ubiquitin-based protein degradation systems and particularly autophagy in salt stress tolerance may offer valuable insights for the design of innovative strategies to improve crop productivity and ensure global food security in the face of the globally increasing severity of soil salinisation. By harnessing the potential of autophagy and other molecular mechanisms, we can pave the way for sustainable agriculture practices that mitigate the adverse effects of salt stress on crop yields and develop novel stress-tolerant crops.

Author Contributions

Conceptualisation, methodology, and formal analysis, S.A.D. and S.V.I.; writing—original draft preparation, S.A.D.; supervision, S.V.I.; writing—review and editing, S.A.D. and S.V.I. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Shah, I.H.; Manzoor, M.A.; Jinhui, W.; Li, X.; Hameed, M.K.; Rehaman, A.; Li, P.; Zhang, Y.; Niu, Q.; Chang, L. Comprehensive Review: Effects of Climate Change and Greenhouse Gases Emission Relevance to Environmental Stress on Horticultural Crops and Management. J. Environ. Manag. 2024, 351, 119978. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Benitez-Alfonso, Y.; Soanes, B.K.; Zimba, S.; Sinanaj, B.; German, L.; Sharma, V.; Bohra, A.; Kolesnikova, A.; Dunn, J.A.; Martin, A.C.; et al. Enhancing Climate Change Resilience in Agricultural Crops. Curr. Biol. 2023, 33, R1246–R1261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Varshney, V.; Majee, M. Emerging Roles of the Ubiquitin–Proteasome Pathway in Enhancing Crop Yield by Optimizing Seed Agronomic Traits. Plant Cell Rep. 2022, 41, 1805–1826. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Doroodian, P.; Hua, Z. The Ubiquitin Switch in Plant Stress Response. Plants 2021, 10, 246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Raffeiner, M.; Zhu, S.; González-Fuente, M.; Üstün, S. Interplay between Autophagy and Proteasome during Protein Turnover. Trends Plant Sci. 2023, 28, 698–714. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Mukhopadhyay, R.; Sarkar, B.; Jat, H.S.; Sharma, P.C.; Bolan, N.S. Soil Salinity under Climate Change: Challenges for Sustainable Agriculture and Food Security. J. Environ. Manag. 2021, 280, 111736. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Xiao, F.; Zhou, H. Plant Salt Response: Perception, Signaling, and Tolerance. Front. Plant Sci. 2023, 13, 1053699. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Zhao, S.; Zhang, Q.; Liu, M.; Zhou, H.; Ma, C.; Wang, P. Regulation of Plant Responses to Salt Stress. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2021, 22, 4609. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Mittler, R. ROS Are Good. Trends Plant Sci. 2017, 22, 11–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Balasubramaniam, T.; Shen, G.; Esmaeili, N.; Zhang, H. Plants’ Response Mechanisms to Salinity Stress. Plants 2023, 12, 2253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Signorelli, S.; Tarkowski, Ł.P.; Van den Ende, W.; Bassham, D.C. Linking Autophagy to Abiotic and Biotic Stress Responses. Trends Plant Sci. 2019, 24, 413–430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Xu, J.; Liu, H.; Zhou, C.; Wang, J.; Wang, J.; Han, Y.; Zheng, N.; Zhang, M.; Li, X. The Ubiquitin-Proteasome System in the Plant Response to Abiotic Stress: Potential Role in Crop Resilience Improvement. Plant Sci. 2024, 342, 112035. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Mackinnon, E.; Stone, S.L. The Ubiquitin Proteasome System and Nutrient Stress Response. Front. Plant Sci. 2022, 13, 867419. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Saxena, H.; Negi, H.; Sharma, B. Role of F-Box E3-Ubiquitin Ligases in Plant Development and Stress Responses. Plant Cell Rep. 2023, 42, 1133–1146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Ghimire, S.; Tang, X.; Liu, W.; Fu, X.; Zhang, H.; Zhang, N.; Si, H. SUMO Conjugating Enzyme: A Vital Player of SUMO Pathway in Plants. Physiol. Mol. Biol. Plants 2021, 27, 2421–2431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Jmii, S.; Cappadocia, L. Plant SUMO E3 Ligases: Function, Structural Organization, and Connection With DNA. Front. Plant Sci. 2021, 12, 652170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Srivastava, M.; Sadanandom, A.; Srivastava, A.K. Towards Understanding the Multifaceted Role of SUMOylation in Plant Growth and Development. Physiol. Plant. 2021, 171, 77–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Morrell, R.; Sadanandom, A. Dealing With Stress: A Review of Plant SUMO Proteases. Front. Plant Sci. 2019, 10, 1122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Yau, R.; Rape, M. The Increasing Complexity of the Ubiquitin Code. Nat. Cell Biol. 2016, 18, 579–586. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Sharma, S.; Prasad, A.; Sharma, N.; Prasad, M. Role of Ubiquitination Enzymes in Abiotic Environmental Interactions with Plants. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2021, 181, 494–507. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Marshall, R.S.; Vierstra, R.D. Dynamic Regulation of the 26S Proteasome: From Synthesis to Degradation. Front. Mol. Biosci. 2019, 6, 40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Mao, Y. Structure, Dynamics and Function of the 26S Proteasome. In Macromolecular Protein Complexes III: Structure and Function; Subcellular Biochemistry; Harris, J.R., Marles-Wright, J., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2021; Volume 96, pp. 1–151. ISBN 978-3-030-58970-7. [Google Scholar]
  23. Schwihla, M.; Korbei, B. The Beginning of the End: Initial Steps in the Degradation of Plasma Membrane Proteins. Front. Plant Sci. 2020, 11, 680. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Martinez-Fonts, K.; Davis, C.; Tomita, T.; Elsasser, S.; Nager, A.R.; Shi, Y.; Finley, D.; Matouschek, A. The Proteasome 19S Cap and Its Ubiquitin Receptors Provide a Versatile Recognition Platform for Substrates. Nat. Commun. 2020, 11, 477. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Han, G.; Qiao, Z.; Li, Y.; Yang, Z.; Wang, C.; Zhang, Y.; Liu, L.; Wang, B. RING Zinc Finger Proteins in Plant Abiotic Stress Tolerance. Front. Plant Sci. 2022, 13, 877011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Trenner, J.; Monaghan, J.; Saeed, B.; Quint, M.; Shabek, N.; Trujillo, M. Evolution and Functions of Plant U-Box Proteins: From Protein Quality Control to Signaling. Annu. Rev. Plant Biol. 2022, 73, 93–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Lan, W.; Miao, Y. New Aspects of HECT-E3 Ligases in Cell Senescence and Cell Death of Plants. Plants 2019, 8, 483. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Hwang, S.; Kim, J.J.; Lim, S.D.; Park, Y.C.; Moon, J.; Jang, C.S. Molecular Dissection of Oryza Sativa Salt-induced RING Finger Protein 1 (OsSIRP1): Possible Involvement in the Sensitivity Response to Salinity Stress. Physiol. Plant. 2016, 158, 168–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Park, Y.C.; Lim, S.D.; Moon, J.; Jang, C.S. A Rice Really Interesting New Gene H 2-type E 3 Ligase, OsSIRH2-14, Enhances Salinity Tolerance via Ubiquitin/26 S Proteasome-mediated Degradation of Salt-related Proteins. Plant Cell Environ. 2019, 42, 3061–3076. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Lv, Q.; Zhang, L.; Zan, T.; Li, L.; Li, X. Wheat RING E3 Ubiquitin Ligase TaDIS1 Degrade TaSTP via the 26S Proteasome Pathway. Plant Sci. 2020, 296, 110494. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Augustine, R.C.; Vierstra, R.D. SUMOylation: Re-Wiring the Plant Nucleus during Stress and Development. Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 2018, 45, 143–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Castro, P.H.; Santos, M.Â.; Freitas, S.; Cana-Quijada, P.; Lourenço, T.; Rodrigues, M.A.A.; Fonseca, F.; Ruiz-Albert, J.; Azevedo, J.E.; Tavares, R.M.; et al. Arabidopsis Thaliana SPF1 and SPF2 Are Nuclear-Located ULP2-like SUMO Proteases That Act Downstream of SIZ1 in Plant Development. J. Exp. Bot. 2018, 69, 4633–4649. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Nukarinen, E.; Tomanov, K.; Ziba, I.; Weckwerth, W.; Bachmair, A. Protein Sumoylation and Phosphorylation Intersect in Arabidopsis Signaling. Plant J. 2017, 91, 505–517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Han, D.; Chen, C.; Xia, S.; Liu, J.; Shu, J.; Nguyen, V.; Lai, J.; Cui, Y.; Yang, C. Chromatin-Associated SUMOylation Controls the Transcriptional Switch between Plant Development and Heat Stress Responses. Plant Commun. 2021, 2, 100091. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Benlloch, R.; Lois, L.M. Sumoylation in Plants: Mechanistic Insights and Its Role in Drought Stress. J. Exp. Bot. 2018, 69, 4539–4554. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Clark, L.; Sue-Ob, K.; Mukkawar, V.; Jones, A.R.; Sadanandom, A. Understanding SUMO-Mediated Adaptive Responses in Plants to Improve Crop Productivity. Essays Biochem. 2022, 66, 155–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Smalley, S.; Hellmann, H. Review: Exploring Possible Approaches Using Ubiquitylation and Sumoylation Pathways in Modifying Plant Stress Tolerance. Plant Sci. 2022, 319, 111275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Hua, Z.; Doroodian, P.; Vu, W. Contrasting Duplication Patterns Reflect Functional Diversities of Ubiquitin and Ubiquitin-like Protein Modifiers in Plants. Plant J. 2018, 95, 296–311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Singh, M.; Singh, A.; Yadav, N.; Yadav, D.K. Current Perspectives of Ubiquitination and SUMOylation in Abiotic Stress Tolerance in Plants. Front. Plant Sci. 2022, 13, 993194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Pan, W.; Lin, B.; Yang, X.; Liu, L.; Xia, R.; Li, J.; Wu, Y.; Xie, Q. The UBC27–AIRP3 Ubiquitination Complex Modulates ABA Signaling by Promoting the Degradation of ABI1 in Arabidopsis. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2020, 117, 27694–27702. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. Liu, Y.; Peng, L.; Gao, X.; Liu, Y.; Liu, Z.; Li, X.; Yang, Y.; Wang, J. AtPPRT3, a Novel E3 Ubiquitin Ligase, Plays a Positive Role in ABA Signaling. Plant Cell Rep. 2020, 39, 1467–1478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Srivastava, A.K.; Zhang, C.; Yates, G.; Bailey, M.; Brown, A.; Sadanandom, A. SUMO Is a Critical Regulator of Salt Stress Responses in Rice. Plant Physiol. 2016, 170, 2378–2391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Mishra, N.; Srivastava, A.P.; Esmaeili, N.; Hu, W.; Shen, G. Overexpression of the Rice Gene OsSIZ1 in Arabidopsis Improves Drought-, Heat-, and Salt-Tolerance Simultaneously. PLoS ONE 2018, 13, e0201716. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Zhang, Y.; Lyu, S.; Hu, Z.; Yang, X.; Zhu, H.; Deng, S. Identification and Functional Characterization of the SUMO System in Sweet Potato under Salt and Drought Stress. Plant Sci. 2023, 330, 111645. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Wang, H.; Wang, M.; Xia, Z. Overexpression of a Maize SUMO Conjugating Enzyme Gene (ZmSCE1e) Increases Sumoylation Levels and Enhances Salt and Drought Tolerance in Transgenic Tobacco. Plant Sci. 2019, 281, 113–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Wang, S.; Hu, W.; Liu, F. Autophagy in the Lifetime of Plants: From Seed to Seed. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23, 11410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Su, W.; Bao, Y.; Yu, X.; Xia, X.; Liu, C.; Yin, W. Autophagy and Its Regulators in Response to Stress in Plants. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2020, 21, 8889. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Qi, H.; Xia, F.; Xiao, S. Autophagy in Plants: Physiological Roles and Post-translational Regulation. JIPB 2021, 63, 161–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Sieńko, K.; Poormassalehgoo, A.; Yamada, K.; Goto-Yamada, S. Microautophagy in Plants: Consideration of Its Molecular Mechanism. Cells 2020, 9, 887. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  50. Li, Y.; Xu, X.; Qi, G.; Cui, D.; Huang, C.; Sui, X.; Li, G.; Fan, Q. Mechanisms of Autophagy Function and Regulation in Plant Growth, Development, and Response to Abiotic Stress. Crop J. 2023, 11, 1611–1625. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Shemi, A.; Ben-Dor, S.; Vardi, A. Elucidating the Composition and Conservation of the Autophagy Pathway in Photosynthetic Eukaryotes. Autophagy 2015, 11, 701–715. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Li, F.; Vierstra, R.D. Arabidopsis ATG11, a Scaffold That Links the ATG1-ATG13 Kinase Complex to General Autophagy and Selective Mitophagy. Autophagy 2014, 10, 1466–1467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. McCready, K.; Spencer, V.; Kim, M. The Importance of TOR Kinase in Plant Development. Front. Plant Sci. 2020, 11, 16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Soto-Burgos, J.; Bassham, D.C. SnRK1 Activates Autophagy via the TOR Signaling Pathway in Arabidopsis Thaliana. PLoS ONE 2017, 12, e0182591. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Huang, X.; Zheng, C.; Liu, F.; Yang, C.; Zheng, P.; Lu, X.; Tian, J.; Chung, T.; Otegui, M.S.; Xiao, S.; et al. Genetic Analyses of the Arabidopsis ATG1 Kinase Complex Reveal Both Kinase-Dependent and Independent Autophagic Routes during Fixed-Carbon Starvation. Plant Cell 2019, 31, 2973–2995. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Liu, F.; Hu, W.; Li, F.; Marshall, R.S.; Zarza, X.; Munnik, T.; Vierstra, R.D. AUTOPHAGY-RELATED14 and Its Associated Phosphatidylinositol 3-Kinase Complex Promote Autophagy in Arabidopsis. Plant Cell 2020, 32, 3939–3960. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Zhuang, X.; Chung, K.P.; Cui, Y.; Lin, W.; Gao, C.; Kang, B.-H.; Jiang, L. ATG9 Regulates Autophagosome Progression from the Endoplasmic Reticulum in Arabidopsis. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2017, 114, E426–E435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Huang, L.; Wen, X.; Jin, L.; Han, H.; Guo, H. HOOKLESS1 Acetylates AUTOPHAGY-RELATED PROTEIN18a to Promote Autophagy during Nutrient Starvation in Arabidopsis. Plant Cell 2023, 36, 136–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Seo, E.; Woo, J.; Park, E.; Bertolani, S.J.; Siegel, J.B.; Choi, D.; Dinesh-Kumar, S.P. Comparative Analyses of Ubiquitin-like ATG8 and Cysteine Protease ATG4 Autophagy Genes in the Plant Lineage and Cross-Kingdom Processing of ATG8 by ATG4. Autophagy 2016, 12, 2054–2068. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Zhen, X.; Li, X.; Yu, J.; Xu, F. OsATG8c-Mediated Increased Autophagy Regulates the Yield and Nitrogen Use Efficiency in Rice. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2019, 20, 4956. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Le Bars, R.; Marion, J.; Satiat-Jeunemaitre, B.; Bianchi, M.W. Folding into an Autophagosome: ATG5 Sheds Light on How Plants Do It. Autophagy 2014, 10, 1861–1863. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Luo, S.; Li, X.; Zhang, Y.; Fu, Y.; Fan, B.; Zhu, C.; Chen, Z. Cargo Recognition and Function of Selective Autophagy Receptors in Plants. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2021, 22, 1013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Boycheva Woltering, S.; Isono, E. Knowing When to Self-Eat–Fine-Tuning Autophagy Through ATG8 Iso-Forms in Plants. Front. Plant Sci. 2020, 11, 579875. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  64. Shen, J.Z.; Wu, G.; Guo, S. Amino Acids in Autophagy: Regulation and Function. In Amino Acids in Nutrition and Health; Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology; Wu, G., Ed.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2021; Volume 1332, pp. 51–66. ISBN 978-3-030-74179-2. [Google Scholar]
  65. Fu, L.; Wang, P.; Xiong, Y. Target of Rapamycin Signaling in Plant Stress Responses. Plant Physiol. 2020, 182, 1613–1623. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Naumann, C.; Müller, J.; Sakhonwasee, S.; Wieghaus, A.; Hause, G.; Heisters, M.; Bürstenbinder, K.; Abel, S. The Local Phosphate Deficiency Response Activates Endoplasmic Reticulum Stress-Dependent Autophagy. Plant Physiol. 2019, 179, 460–476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Cao, P.; Kim, S.-J.; Xing, A.; Schenck, C.A.; Liu, L.; Jiang, N.; Wang, J.; Last, R.L.; Brandizzi, F. Homeostasis of Branched-Chain Amino Acids Is Critical for the Activity of TOR Signaling in Arabidopsis. Elife 2019, 8, e50747. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  68. Shinozaki, D.; Merkulova, E.A.; Naya, L.; Horie, T.; Kanno, Y.; Seo, M.; Ohsumi, Y.; Masclaux-Daubresse, C.; Yoshimoto, K. Autophagy Increases Zinc Bioavailability to Avoid Light-Mediated Reactive Oxygen Species Production under Zinc Deficiency. Plant Physiol. 2020, 182, 1284–1296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Pottier, M.; Dumont, J.; Masclaux-Daubresse, C.; Thomine, S. Autophagy Is Essential for Optimal Translocation of Iron to Seeds in Arabidopsis. J. Exp. Bot. 2018, 70, 859–869. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Schepetilnikov, M.; Makarian, J.; Srour, O.; Geldreich, A.; Yang, Z.; Chicher, J.; Hammann, P.; Ryabova, L.A. GTP Ase ROP 2 Binds and Promotes Activation of Target of Rapamycin, TOR, in Response to Auxin. EMBO J. 2017, 36, 886–903. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Yin, R.; Liu, X.; Yu, J.; Ji, Y.; Liu, J.; Cheng, L.; Zhou, J. Up-Regulation of Autophagy by Low Concentration of Salicylic Acid Delays Methyl Jasmonate-Induced Leaf Senescence. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 11472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Rigault, M.; Citerne, S.; Masclaux-Daubresse, C.; Dellagi, A. Salicylic Acid Is a Key Player of Arabidopsis Autophagy Mutant Susceptibility to the Necrotrophic Bacterium Dickeya Dadantii. Sci. Rep. 2021, 11, 3624. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Gong, W.; Li, B.; Zhang, B.; Chen, W. ATG4 Mediated Psm ES4326/AvrRpt2-Induced Autophagy Dependent on Salicylic Acid in Arabidopsis Thaliana. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2020, 21, 5147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  74. Wang, P.; Zhao, Y.; Li, Z.; Hsu, C.-C.; Liu, X.; Fu, L.; Hou, Y.-J.; Du, Y.; Xie, S.; Zhang, C.; et al. Reciprocal Regulation of the TOR Kinase and ABA Receptor Balances Plant Growth and Stress Response. Mol. Cell 2018, 69, 100–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  75. Liao, C.-Y.; Pu, Y.; Nolan, T.M.; Montes, C.; Guo, H.; Walley, J.W.; Yin, Y.; Bassham, D.C. Brassinosteroids Modulate Autophagy through Phosphorylation of RAPTOR1B by the GSK3-like Kinase BIN2 in Arabidopsis. Autophagy 2023, 19, 1293–1310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  76. Wang, Y.; Cao, J.-J.; Wang, K.-X.; Xia, X.-J.; Shi, K.; Zhou, Y.-H.; Yu, J.-Q.; Zhou, J. BZR1 Mediates Brassinosteroid-Induced Autophagy and Nitrogen Starvation in Tomato. Plant Physiol. 2019, 179, 671–685. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  77. Kurusu, T.; Koyano, T.; Kitahata, N.; Kojima, M.; Hanamata, S.; Sakakibara, H.; Kuchitsu, K. Autophagy-Mediated Regulation of Phytohormone Metabolism during Rice Anther Development. Plant Signal. Behav. 2017, 12, e1365211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  78. Marshall, R.S.; Vierstra, R.D. Autophagy: The Master of Bulk and Selective Recycling. Annu. Rev. Plant Biol. 2018, 69, 173–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  79. Sharma, I.; Kirti, P.B.; Pati, P.K. Autophagy: A Game Changer for Plant Development and Crop Improvement. Planta 2022, 256, 103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Wang, P.; Nolan, T.M.; Yin, Y.; Bassham, D.C. Identification of Transcription Factors That Regulate ATG8 Expression and Autophagy in Arabidopsis. Autophagy 2020, 16, 123–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Pérez-Pérez, M.E.; Lemaire, S.D.; Crespo, J.L. The ATG4 Protease Integrates Redox and Stress Signals to Regulate Autophagy. J. Exp. Bot. 2021, 72, 3340–3351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Michaeli, S.; Honig, A.; Levanony, H.; Peled-Zehavi, H.; Galili, G. Arabidopsis ATG8-INTERACTING PROTEIN1 Is Involved in Autophagy-Dependent Vesicular Trafficking of Plastid Proteins to the Vacuole. Plant Cell 2014, 26, 4084–4101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Yang, F.; Kimberlin, A.N.; Elowsky, C.G.; Liu, Y.; Gonzalez-Solis, A.; Cahoon, E.B.; Alfano, J.R. A Plant Immune Receptor Degraded by Selective Autophagy. Mol. Plant 2019, 12, 113–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  84. Hachez, C.; Veljanovski, V.; Reinhardt, H.; Guillaumot, D.; Vanhee, C.; Chaumont, F.; Batoko, H. The Arabidopsis Abiotic Stress-Induced TSPO-Related Protein Reduces Cell-Surface Expression of the Aquaporin PIP2;7 through Protein-Protein Interactions and Autophagic Degradation. Plant Cell 2014, 26, 4974–4990. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  85. Nolan, T.M.; Brennan, B.; Yang, M.; Chen, J.; Zhang, M.; Li, Z.; Wang, X.; Bassham, D.C.; Walley, J.; Yin, Y. Selective Autophagy of BES1 Mediated by DSK2 Balances Plant Growth and Survival. Dev. Cell 2017, 41, 33–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Li, X.; Liu, Q.; Feng, H.; Deng, J.; Zhang, R.; Wen, J.; Dong, J.; Wang, T. Dehydrin MtCAS31 Promotes Autophagic Degradation under Drought Stress. Autophagy 2020, 16, 862–877. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  87. Zhan, N.; Wang, C.; Chen, L.; Yang, H.; Feng, J.; Gong, X.; Ren, B.; Wu, R.; Mu, J.; Li, Y.; et al. S-Nitrosylation Targets GSNO Reductase for Selective Autophagy during Hypoxia Responses in Plants. Mol. Cell 2018, 71, 142–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Sun, J.; Wang, W.; Zheng, H. ROOT HAIR DEFECTIVE3 Is a Receptor for Selective Autophagy of the Endoplasmic Reticulum in Arabidopsis. Front. Plant Sci. 2022, 13, 817251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  89. Li, B.; Niu, F.; Zeng, Y.; Tse, M.K.; Deng, C.; Hong, L.; Gao, S.; Lo, S.W.; Cao, W.; Huang, S.; et al. Ufmylation Reconciles Salt Stress-Induced Unfolded Protein Responses via ER-Phagy in Arabidopsis. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2023, 120, e2208351120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Chen, Q.; Soulay, F.; Saudemont, B.; Elmayan, T.; Marmagne, A.; Masclaux-Daubresse, C. Overexpression of ATG8 in Arabidopsis Stimulates Autophagic Activity and Increases Nitrogen Remobilization Efficiency and Grain Filling. Plant Cell Physiol. 2019, 60, 343–352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Li, B.; Liu, G.; Wang, Y.; Wei, Y.; Shi, H. Overexpression of Banana ATG8f Modulates Drought Stress Resistance in Arabidopsis. Biomolecules 2019, 9, 814. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Rasmussen, N.L.; Kournoutis, A.; Lamark, T.; Johansen, T. NBR1: The Archetypal Selective Autophagy Receptor. J. Cell Biol. 2022, 221, e202208092. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Zhang, Y.; Chen, Z. Broad and Complex Roles of NBR1-Mediated Selective Autophagy in Plant Stress Responses. Cells 2020, 9, 2562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  94. Ji, C.; Zhou, J.; Guo, R.; Lin, Y.; Kung, C.-H.; Hu, S.; Ng, W.Y.; Zhuang, X.; Jiang, L. AtNBR1 Is a Selective Autophagic Receptor for AtExo70E2 in Arabidopsis. Plant Physiol. 2020, 184, 777–791. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  95. Tarnowski, L.; Collados Rodriguez, M.; Brzywczy, J.; Cysewski, D.; Wawrzynska, A.; Sirko, A. Overexpression of the Selective Autophagy Cargo Receptor NBR1 Modifies Plant Response to Sulfur Deficit. Cells 2020, 9, 669. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  96. Jung, H.; Lee, H.N.; Marshall, R.S.; Lomax, A.W.; Yoon, M.J.; Kim, J.; Kim, J.H.; Vierstra, R.D.; Chung, T. Arabidopsis Cargo Receptor NBR1 Mediates Selective Autophagy of Defective Proteins. J. Exp. Bot. 2020, 71, 73–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  97. Zhou, J.; Zhang, Y.; Qi, J.; Chi, Y.; Fan, B.; Yu, J.-Q.; Chen, Z. E3 Ubiquitin Ligase CHIP and NBR1-Mediated Selective Autophagy Protect Additively against Proteotoxicity in Plant Stress Responses. PLoS Genet. 2014, 10, e1004116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  98. Ma, A.; Nan, N.; Shi, Y.; Wang, J.; Guo, P.; Liu, W.; Zhou, G.; Yu, J.; Zhou, D.; Yun, D.-J.; et al. Autophagy Receptor OsNBR1 Modulates Salt Stress Tolerance in Rice. Plant Cell Rep. 2024, 43, 17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  99. Chen, L.; Lv, Q.; Yang, W.; Yang, H.; Chen, Q.; Wang, B.; Lei, Y.; Xie, Y. TaNBR1, a Novel Wheat NBR1-like Domain Gene Negatively Regulates Drought Stress Tolerance in Transgenic Arabidopsis. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23, 4519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Thirumalaikumar, V.P.; Gorka, M.; Schulz, K.; Masclaux-Daubresse, C.; Sampathkumar, A.; Skirycz, A.; Vierstra, R.D.; Balazadeh, S. Selective Autophagy Regulates Heat Stress Memory in Arabidopsis by NBR1-Mediated Targeting of HSP90.1 and ROF1. Autophagy 2021, 17, 2184–2199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  101. Üstün, S.; Hofius, D. Anti- and pro-Microbial Roles of Autophagy in Plant-Bacteria Interactions. Autophagy 2018, 14, 1465–1466. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Hafrén, A.; Macia, J.-L.; Love, A.J.; Milner, J.J.; Drucker, M.; Hofius, D. Selective Autophagy Limits Cauliflower Mosaic Virus Infection by NBR1-Mediated Targeting of Viral Capsid Protein and Particles. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2017, 114, E2026–E2035. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Tarnowski, L.; Rodriguez, M.C.; Brzywczy, J.; Piecho-Kabacik, M.; Krčkova, Z.; Martinec, J.; Wawrzynska, A.; Sirko, A. A Selective Autophagy Cargo Receptor NBR1 Modulates Abscisic Acid Signalling in Arabidopsis Thaliana. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 7778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  104. Su, W.; Bao, Y.; Lu, Y.; He, F.; Wang, S.; Wang, D.; Yu, X.; Yin, W.; Xia, X.; Liu, C. Poplar Autophagy Receptor NBR1 Enhances Salt Stress Tolerance by Regulating Selective Autophagy and Antioxidant System. Front. Plant Sci. 2021, 11, 568411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  105. Chen, X.; Tian, D.; Kong, X.; Chen, Q.; Ef, A.; Hu, X.; Jia, A. The Role of Nitric Oxide Signalling in Response to Salt Stress in Chlamydomonas Reinhardtii. Planta 2016, 244, 651–669. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  106. Panahi, B.; Frahadian, M.; Dums, J.T.; Hejazi, M.A. Integration of Cross Species RNA-Seq Meta-Analysis and Machine-Learning Models Identifies the Most Important Salt Stress–Responsive Pathways in Microalga Dunaliella. Front. Genet. 2019, 10, 752. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  107. Li, W.; Chen, M.; Wang, E.; Hu, L.; Hawkesford, M.J.; Zhong, L.; Chen, Z.; Xu, Z.; Li, L.; Zhou, Y.; et al. Genome-Wide Analysis of Autophagy-Associated Genes in Foxtail Millet (Setaria italica L.) and Characterization of the Function of SiATG8a in Conferring Tolerance to Nitrogen Starvation in Rice. BMC Genom. 2016, 17, 797. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  108. Fang, Y.; Wang, S.; Wu, H.; Li, C.; Zhao, H.; Chen, H.; Wang, X.; Wu, Q. Genome-Wide Identification of ATG Gene Family Members in Fagopyrum Tataricum and Their Expression during Stress Responses. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23, 14845. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  109. Zhai, Y.; Guo, M.; Wang, H.; Lu, J.; Liu, J.; Zhang, C.; Gong, Z.; Lu, M. Autophagy, a Conserved Mechanism for Protein Degradation, Responds to Heat, and Other Abiotic Stresses in Capsicum annuum L. Front. Plant Sci. 2016, 7, 175103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  110. Sun, X.; Pan, B.; Xu, W.; Chen, Q.; Wang, Y.; Ban, Q.; Xing, C.; Zhang, S. Genome-Wide Identification and Expression Analysis of the Pear Autophagy-Related Gene PbrATG8 and Functional Verification of PbrATG8c in Pyrus Bretschneideri Rehd. Planta 2021, 253, 32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  111. Fu, X.-Z.; Zhou, X.; Xu, Y.-Y.; Hui, Q.-L.; Chun, C.-P.; Ling, L.-L.; Peng, L.-Z. Comprehensive Analysis of Autophagy-Related Genes in Sweet Orange (Citrus sinensis) Highlights Their Roles in Response to Abiotic Stresses. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2020, 21, 2699. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Song, I.; Hong, S.; Huh, S.U. Identification and Expression Analysis of the Solanum Tuberosum StATG8 Family Associated with the WRKY Transcription Factor. Plants 2022, 11, 2858. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Luo, L.; Zhang, P.; Zhu, R.; Fu, J.; Su, J.; Zheng, J.; Wang, Z.; Wang, D.; Gong, Q. Autophagy Is Rapidly Induced by Salt Stress and Is Required for Salt Tolerance in Arabidopsis. Front. Plant Sci. 2017, 8, 1459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  114. Yue, W.; Zhang, H.; Sun, X.; Su, N.; Zhao, Q.; Yan, Z.; Weining, S.; Yue, H. The Landscape of Autophagy-Related (ATG) Genes and Functional Characterization of TaVAMP727 to Autophagy in Wheat. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23, 891. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  115. Zhang, T.; Zhou, T.; Zhang, Y.; Chen, J.; Song, H.; Wu, P.; Yue, C.; Huang, J.; Zhang, Z.; Hua, Y. Genome-Wide Identification and Functional Characterization Reveals the Pivotal Roles of BnaA8.ATG8F in Salt Stress Tolerance and Nitrogen Limitation Adaptation in Allotetraploid Rapeseed. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23, 11318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Yu, X.-Q.; Su, W.; Zhang, H.; Niu, M.; Liu, X.; Li, Z.; Liu, C.; Wang, H.-L.; Yin, W.; Xia, X. Genome-Wide Analysis of Autophagy-Related Gene Family and PagATG18a Enhances Salt Tolerance by Regulating ROS Homeostasis in Poplar. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2023, 224, 1524–1540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Figure 1. Schematic representation of the functioning mechanics of the ubiquitin (Ub), small ubiquitin-like-modifier (SUMO), and ubiquitin-like modifier autophagy-related protein 8 (ATG8). (A,B) The Ub and SUMOylation processes engaged similar cascade reactions with different enzymes (E1, E2, and E3) in an ATP-dependent way to add Ub or SUMO moieties, respectively, onto a target protein. In the UPS (A), marked proteins are recognised and degraded by the 26S proteasomes, which return back to the cytosol and the nucleus recycled Ub and short peptides. These short peptides then further degraded into free amino acids by various cellular peptidases. SUMOylation (B) may occur also in the absence of E3. (C) The autophagosome formation is mediated by various ATG proteins with three distinct processes: (1) formation of ATG12-ATG5-ATG16 complex; (2) sequential ATG8 cleavage and lipidation to form ATG8-PE (phosphatidylethanolamine); and (3) cargo, induced by the ATG1 complex, engulfed through interaction with ATG8 to form autophagosome.
Figure 1. Schematic representation of the functioning mechanics of the ubiquitin (Ub), small ubiquitin-like-modifier (SUMO), and ubiquitin-like modifier autophagy-related protein 8 (ATG8). (A,B) The Ub and SUMOylation processes engaged similar cascade reactions with different enzymes (E1, E2, and E3) in an ATP-dependent way to add Ub or SUMO moieties, respectively, onto a target protein. In the UPS (A), marked proteins are recognised and degraded by the 26S proteasomes, which return back to the cytosol and the nucleus recycled Ub and short peptides. These short peptides then further degraded into free amino acids by various cellular peptidases. SUMOylation (B) may occur also in the absence of E3. (C) The autophagosome formation is mediated by various ATG proteins with three distinct processes: (1) formation of ATG12-ATG5-ATG16 complex; (2) sequential ATG8 cleavage and lipidation to form ATG8-PE (phosphatidylethanolamine); and (3) cargo, induced by the ATG1 complex, engulfed through interaction with ATG8 to form autophagosome.
Plants 13 01468 g001
Figure 2. Autophagy sensors and regulators. The deficiency of nutrients activates autophagy through TOR inhibition. SnRK1 kinase senses sugars upstream of TOR. Glucose activates TOR, while glucose deficiency inhibits the TOR kinase, thus activating autophagy. ROS can activate autophagy by inhibiting TOR or acting directly through ATG downstream of the TOR kinase. ABA inhibits TOR kinase activity under stress, while in favourable conditions TOR suppresses ABA signalling. Auxin stimulates TOR, thus inhibiting the autophagy process. SA interacts with ROS to stimulate autophagy during senescence and plant immune response. BR inhibits autophagy through TOR activation, while autophagy regulates BR signalling by degrading its components. GA, CKs, and JA have been shown to regulate the autophagy process, although the exact mechanisms are still unknown (depicted with “?” and dashed circle). Arrows represent positive regulation and blunt lines—negative. TOR—target of rapamycin; RAPTOR—regulatory-associated protein of mTOR; SnRK1—sucrose non-fermenting related kinase 1; ROS—reactive oxygen species; ATG—autophagy related; ABA—abscisic acid; SA—salicylic acid; BR—brassinosteroids; CKs—cytokinins; GA—gibberellic acid; and JA—jasmonic acid.
Figure 2. Autophagy sensors and regulators. The deficiency of nutrients activates autophagy through TOR inhibition. SnRK1 kinase senses sugars upstream of TOR. Glucose activates TOR, while glucose deficiency inhibits the TOR kinase, thus activating autophagy. ROS can activate autophagy by inhibiting TOR or acting directly through ATG downstream of the TOR kinase. ABA inhibits TOR kinase activity under stress, while in favourable conditions TOR suppresses ABA signalling. Auxin stimulates TOR, thus inhibiting the autophagy process. SA interacts with ROS to stimulate autophagy during senescence and plant immune response. BR inhibits autophagy through TOR activation, while autophagy regulates BR signalling by degrading its components. GA, CKs, and JA have been shown to regulate the autophagy process, although the exact mechanisms are still unknown (depicted with “?” and dashed circle). Arrows represent positive regulation and blunt lines—negative. TOR—target of rapamycin; RAPTOR—regulatory-associated protein of mTOR; SnRK1—sucrose non-fermenting related kinase 1; ROS—reactive oxygen species; ATG—autophagy related; ABA—abscisic acid; SA—salicylic acid; BR—brassinosteroids; CKs—cytokinins; GA—gibberellic acid; and JA—jasmonic acid.
Plants 13 01468 g002
Figure 3. A proposed model on the regulatory roles of ATG8 and autophagy in salinity stress tolerance. There are five beneficial effects of autophagy: (1) soluble sugars’ production and amino acids’ recycling to improve plant osmotic status; (2) ATG8 contributes to the maintenance of optimal stomatal aperture and chloroplasts integrity, thus improving photosynthesis efficiency; (3) modulates expression/activity of various transporters, resulting in Na+ sequestration into the vacuole; (4) increased production of antioxidants, which reduces ROS levels and decreases oxidative stress; (5) salt stress-activated autophagy increases the clearance of oxidised and damaged proteins. In total, these beneficial effects increase plant tolerance to salt stress. Arrow lines indicate activation; blunt line—negative regulation.
Figure 3. A proposed model on the regulatory roles of ATG8 and autophagy in salinity stress tolerance. There are five beneficial effects of autophagy: (1) soluble sugars’ production and amino acids’ recycling to improve plant osmotic status; (2) ATG8 contributes to the maintenance of optimal stomatal aperture and chloroplasts integrity, thus improving photosynthesis efficiency; (3) modulates expression/activity of various transporters, resulting in Na+ sequestration into the vacuole; (4) increased production of antioxidants, which reduces ROS levels and decreases oxidative stress; (5) salt stress-activated autophagy increases the clearance of oxidised and damaged proteins. In total, these beneficial effects increase plant tolerance to salt stress. Arrow lines indicate activation; blunt line—negative regulation.
Plants 13 01468 g003
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Dabravolski, S.A.; Isayenkov, S.V. The Role of Plant Ubiquitin-like Modifiers in the Formation of Salt Stress Tolerance. Plants 2024, 13, 1468. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants13111468

AMA Style

Dabravolski SA, Isayenkov SV. The Role of Plant Ubiquitin-like Modifiers in the Formation of Salt Stress Tolerance. Plants. 2024; 13(11):1468. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants13111468

Chicago/Turabian Style

Dabravolski, Siarhei A., and Stanislav V. Isayenkov. 2024. "The Role of Plant Ubiquitin-like Modifiers in the Formation of Salt Stress Tolerance" Plants 13, no. 11: 1468. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants13111468

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