
==== Front
BMC Genomics
BMC Genomics
BMC Genomics
1471-2164
BioMed Central London

10732
10.1186/s12864-024-10732-1
Research
Transcriptome analysis and genome-wide identification of the dehydration-responsive element binding gene family in jackfruit under cold stress
Ma Xiangwei 12
Zhu Pengjin zhupengjin04@163.com

12
Du Yingjun 12
Song Qiqi 12
Ye Weiyan 12
Tang Xiuguan 12
He Jiang 12
Zhong Yunjie 12
Ou Jingli 12
Pang Xinhua 12
1 https://ror.org/01k56kn83 grid.469561.9 0000 0004 7537 5667 Present Address: Guangxi Subtropical Crops Research Institute , Nanning, 530000 China
2 Guangxi Key Laboratory of Quality and Safety Control for Subtropical Fruits, Nanning, 530000 China
4 9 2024
4 9 2024
2024
25 8334 3 2024
21 8 2024
© The Author(s) 2024
2024
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Background

Jackfruit (Artocarpus heterophyllus Lam.) is the world’s largest and heaviest fruit and adapts to hot, humid tropical climates. Low-temperature injury in winter is a primary abiotic stress, which affects jackfruit growth and development. Therefore, breeding cold-resistant varieties and identifying the vital genes in the process of cold resistance are essential. The dehydration-responsive element binding (DREB) gene family is among the subfamily of the APETALA2/ethylene response factor transcription factor family and is significant in plant abiotic stress responses.

Methods

In this study, a comparative analysis of the cold resistance property of ‘GuangXi’ (‘GX’) and ‘Thailand’ (‘THA’) jackfruit strains with different cold resistance characteristics was performed through chlorophyll fluorescence and transcriptome sequencing.

Results

We found that differentially expressed genes (DEGs) are significantly enriched in the metabolic processes. Here, 93 DREB genes were identified in the jackfruit genome, and phylogenetic analysis was used to classify them into seven groups. Gene structure, conserved motifs, chromosomal location, and homologous relationships were used to analyze the structural characteristics of the DREB family. Transcriptomics indicated that most of the AhDREB genes exhibited down-regulated expression in ‘THA.’ The DEGs AhDREB12, AhDREB21, AhDREB29, and AhDREB34 were selected for quantitative real-time PCR, and the results showed that these genes also had down-regulated expression in ‘THA.’

Conclusions

The above results suggest the significance of the DREB family in improving the cold resistance property of ‘GX.’

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12864-024-10732-1.

Keywords

Jackfruit
Dehydration responsive element binding (DREB)
Expression profile
Cold stress
http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100017691 Guangxi Key Research and Development Program GK AB21220003 Science and technology development fund project of Guangxi Academy of Agricultural SciencesGNK 2023014 issue-copyright-statement© BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2024
==== Body
pmcBackground

The frequent occurrence of cold damage in winter is a significant factor affecting plant growth and development, and the selection of plant varieties with strong cold resistance remains challenging in production [1, 2]. The expression of transcription factors (TFs) is crucial in these complex processes [3, 4]. TFs are trans-acting factors, which are specific proteins that can bind to cis-acting elements associated with gene promoter regions to activate or inhibit gene expression [5]. Dehydration-responsive element binding protein (DREB), which belongs to the APETAL2/ethylene responsive element binding factor subfamily APETALA2/ethylene response factor (AP2/ERF), has been identified as a major regulator of cold adaptation in many angiosperms [6–9]. The DREB family contains a conserved AP2 domain of 57–70 amino acid residues, regulates the expression of various downstream stress genes, and endows plants with stress tolerance by interacting with the dehydration-responsive element/C-repeat (DRE/CRT) in the promoter regions of stress-inducing genes [6]. An increasing number of studies have shown that the function of DREB in cold resistance is conserved in maize [10], Brassica napus [11], barley [12], and other higher plants [13]. The DREB is also known as the C-repeat binding factor (CBF) protein [14]. By integrating multi-omics data from genomes, transcriptomics, and CBFs/DREB1s whole-genome binding profiles, Nie et al. [15] proposed that CBFs/DREB1s may be an evolutionary strategy for angiosperms to adapt to global cooling. Song et al. [16] focused on the CBF-dependent pathway during cold domestication in Arabidopsis. CBFs, as an essential signal integrator, were found to be critical in the early response of Arabidopsis to cold stress by activating target gene transcription [16]. AtCBF1, AtCBF2, and AtCBF3 are distributed in tandem on Chromosome 4 of Arabidopsis, and CBF1 or CBF3 knockout causes the sensitivity of downstream target genes to freezing stress [17]. Chen et al. [18] isolated DREB from soybeans through rapid amplification of cDNA ends, and Northern blotting indicated that DREB3 participates in an abscisic acid-independent cold stress-responsive signaling pathway. Furthermore, cold resistance was enhanced in GmDREB3-overexpression plants, and fresh weight and osmolality in these plants were higher than those in wild-type plants under cold stress. These results indicate the significance of the DREB family in plant responses to cold stress. Therefore, identifying the DREB gene family in plants and revealing their stress resistance functions and pathways are essential.

Jackfruit (Artocarpus heterophyllus Lam.) is a tropical climacteric fruit belonging to the Moraceae family and is a popular tropical fruit planted in the tropical and subtropical areas of China, with a planting area exceeding 500,000 acres [19, 20]. Jackfruit adapts to hot and humid tropical climates, and temperature is the crucial factor affecting its growth and development. When the temperature is below 5–7 ℃, it does not easily bloom and fruit [16]. The scale of jackfruit planting in Guangxi Province, China, has been continuously expanding recently; however, cold damage has become a significant factor limiting the development of the jackfruit industry in Guangxi [21]. Mining germplasm resources with strong cold to provide parent or donor genes has become a focus in stress-resistant jackfruit breeding. Therefore, identifying crucial pathways and genes in jackfruit with strong cold resistance will enable high-efficiency screening of jackfruit germplasm resources for cold stress resistance. In a previous study, cold-tolerant (‘GX’) and cold-sensitive (‘THA’) varieties were selected through performance observation and physiological index determination [16]. ‘Guangxi’ (‘GX’) is a local variety in Guangxi Province (China) that has good cold resistance and can grow normally even under a low temperature of 3 ℃. ‘Thailand’ (‘THA’) is a variety introduced from Thailand with good fruit quality and is currently a mainstream variety in the market. However, the cold sensitivity of ‘THA’ limits its cultivation and promotion. Therefore, ‘GX’ and ‘THA’ are good materials for studying the cold resistance property of jackfruit. The DREB family is also significant during jackfruit response to cold stress, with the ‘S10’ cultivar genome facilitating thestudy of the effect of the DREB family on cold tolerance in the species. However, the DREB family in jackfruit remains uninvestigated.

We used transcriptomics to analyze the primary metabolic pathways and differentially expressed genes (DEGs) of two jackfruit cultivars, ‘Guangxi’ (‘GX’) and ‘Thailand’ (‘THA’), under cold stress. The DREB family from the DEGs was screened, and 93 jackfruit DREB genes were identified. Basic parameters, phylogenetic relationships, gene structure, motif composition, chromosomal distribution, gene duplication, and expression patterns under cold stress were analyzed. The results expand the understanding of DREB genes in jackfruit and have significance for the improvement and breeding of cold-resistant jackfruit varieties.

Methods

Plant materials

To explore the adaptability of jackfruit in response to cold stress, two jackfruit cultivars, ‘GX’ (GXRZBLM00051) and ‘THA’ (GXRZBLM00013), preserved in the jackfruit germplasm resource nursery of the Guangxi Subtropical Crops Research Institute (22.899°N, 108.343°E), were selected for field sampling and follow-up. After exposure to low-temperature stress under natural conditions (between February 19 and 24, 2022), there was continuous low temperature in Nanning, with daily minimum and maximum temperatures of 3 and 15 ℃, respectively. For jackfruit tree crown temperature, the daily minimum and maximum temperatures were 3.5 and 14 ℃, respectively. The leaves of the two cultivars were collected (the first leaf on each branch was counted from top to bottom). We achieved all required permits for the protected areas from the local governments and relevant institution. This research was carried out in compliance with the relevant laws of Nanning, Guangxi, China. The materials collected were divided into two parts. One part was used for chlorophyll fluorescence imaging, and the other was stored at -80 ℃ for transcriptomic sequencing and RNA extraction. The temperatures were measured using an environmental Meteorological Automatic Monitoring system (RR-9150, Beijing, Yugen Technology) and a temperature recorder (COS-04, Shandong Jianda Renke Electronic Technology).

Identification and classification of the AhDREB gene family

The genome of the jackfruit cultivar ‘S10’ [21] was downloaded from the National Center for Biotechnology Information Sequence Read Archive database (PRJNA788174 and PRJNA791757). Sequence information for the AP2/ERF family of Arabidopsis was downloaded from the online TAIR database (https://www.arabidopsis.org/index.jsp) and used as the probe sequence (e-value < 0.001) for the Basic Local Alignment Search Tool (BLAST). The sequence of the AP2/ERF conserved domain (PF00847) was downloaded from the Protein Family Analysis and Modeling (Pfam) website (http://pfam.xfam.org/) and used to further identify AP2/ERF family members (e-value < e − 5). The conserved domain of AP2/ERF was confirmed using the online Simple Modular Architecture Research Tool [22] (http://smart.embl.de/), and biosequence analysis was performed using profile hidden Markov models (https://www.ebi.ac.uk/Tools/hmmer/) [23]. Strawberry (Favaria vesca) DERB sequences were downloaded from the Genome Database for Rosaceae [24]. Phylogenetic trees of AP2/ERF in jackfruit and DREB in strawberry and jackfruit were constructed using the neighbor-joining method and 1,000 bootstrap replicates in MEGA [25], respectively. The AP2/ERF and AP2/EREBP proteins of jackfruit and Arabidopsis, respectively, were compared and classified into different groups (RAV, AP2, ERF, and DREB). The fourteenth valine, the nineteenth glutamic acid, and AP2 domains were the standards for distinguishing the DREB gene family. The amino acids, theoretical isoelectric point, and molecular weight were analyzed using Expasy ProtParam (https://web.expasy.org/protparam/), and subcellular localization was predicted using WoLF PSORT (https://www.genscript.com/wolf-psort.html).

Gene structure and conserved motif analysis of the AhDREB gene family

The full-length sequences of the DREB family and jackfruit genome files were used to build gene structures using the Gene Structure Display Server 2.0 [26]. Conserved motif analysis of the DREB family was conducted with Multiple Em for Motif Elicitation (MEME) [27] (https://meme-suite.org/meme/index.html) using the default parameters, and the maximum number of pattern parameters was set to 20.

Chromosomal localization and synteny analyses

The chromosomal localization information of the DREB family was retrieved from the jackfruit genome files and graphically represented using Tbtools v2.031 [28]. Gene Location Visualization from GTF/GFF program. The syntenic gene pairs of AhDREB genes were analyzed using One Step MCScanX; BLASTP results and gene location information were used for the next step input of Tbtools [29]. The proximal, dispersed tandem of AhREB family genes was identified using Tbtools, and the results were visualized using Tbtools Advanced Circos [30].

Chlorophyll fluorescence assay

‘GX’ and ‘THA’ leaves were used to analyze chlorophyll fluorescence parameters. The leaves were darkened for 30 min and placed in a chlorophyll fluorescence (CF) imager (Technologica, Colchester, UK) to determine the initial fluorescence (Fo) and maximum fluorescence (Fm). After 30 min of full-light adaptation, the Fo’, Fm’, and steady-state fluorescence (F’) were measured, and fluorescence parameters, such as maximum quantum yield of Photosystem II (Fv’/Fm’), non-photochemical quenching (NPQ), and the effective quantum yield of Photosystem II (Fq’/Fm’) were controlled and calculated using the software.

RNA sequencing, data, and quantitative real-time PCR (qRT-PCR) analysis

Total RNA was extracted from ‘GX’ and ‘THA’ leaves (each sample was prepared in triplicate), and RNA integrity and purity were assessed through agarose gel electrophoresis and spectrophotometry (NanoPhotometer; Implen, Munich, Germany). RNA concentration was measured using the Qubit 2.0 fluorometer (Thermo Scientific, USA), and RNA integrity was measured with Agilent 2100 bioanalyzer (HACH, USA). The enriched mRNA was broken into short fragments; the first cDNA strand was synthesized using the short fragment mRNA as the template, and the second cDNA strand was synthesized using the first cDNA strand as the mold plate by adding buffer solution, dNTPs, and DNA polymerase. After purification, end repair, the addition of poly (A) tail, and connection of sequencing joints, AMPureXPbeads were used for fragment size selection, and PCR enrichment was performed to obtain the final cDNA library. After qualification, the library was sequenced using an Illumi-TMnaHiSeq platform. Trinity software was used to concatenate clean reads, and Corset hierarchical clustering was used to obtain the longest Cluster sequence, which was further analyzed as Unigene. DIAMOND BLASTX software was used to compare Unigene with Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG), RefSeq non-redundant proteins (NR), Swiss-Prot, Gene Ontology (GO), clusters of orthologous groups (COG) / euKaryotic Ortholog Groups (KOG), and TrEMBL databases to predict the amino acid sequence of Unigene. Subsequently, the HMMER software was compared with the Pfam database, and finally the annotation information of Unigene was obtained. The transcriptome sequencing analysis of six samples was completed, and 41.12 Gb of Clean Data was obtained. The Clcan Data of each sample reached 6 GB, and the percentage of Q30 bases was ≥ 92%.

The RNA sequencing of ‘GX’ and ‘THA’ was performed using the HiScript® Q RT SuperMix for qPCR (+ gDNA wiper) (Vazyme, Nanjing, China) to synthesize cDNA, which was used as a template for amplification after 10-fold dilution. The expression levels of DREB genes associated with cold stress response were determined through qRT − PCR on a QuantStudio™ 5 Real-Time PCR System (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, CA, USA). Reaction system 20 μL: upstream and downstream primers (10 μmol/L) 1μL, dd H2O 7 μL, 1 μL cDNA, and SYBR Premix Ex Taq 10 μL. Reaction procedure: predenaturation at 95 ℃ for 30 s; denaturation at 95 ℃ for 10 s, annealing at 60 ℃ for 30 s, extension at 72 ℃ for 30 s, a total of 50 cycles, and three sets of repeats were performed. The results were calculated using the 2−∆∆Ct method.

Statistical analysis

Significant differences were determined using a one-way analysis of variance with Duncan’s test. The data were imported into IBM SPSS Statistics 16.0 to analyze significant differences (Student’s t-test, p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001, and ****p < 0.0001) and were graphically displayed using GraphPad Prism 9. The differential expression analysis of transcriptome was performed using the DESeq2 package with the criteria of fold change |1og2Fold Chang| ≥ 1 and FDR (False Discovery Rate) < 0.01.

Results

Phenotypic differences in ‘GX’ and ‘THA’ under cold stress

A phenotypic difference between ‘GX’ and ‘THA’ plants was observed under cold stress (Fig. 1A). The leaves of the ‘GX’ jackfruit were dark green with no apparent damage to their surface and back, whereas those of the ‘THA’ jackfruit were green with small dotted brown spots on their back. The leaves of the ‘GX’ trees were thicker than those of the ‘THA’ trees, indicating that the resistance to cold stress in the ‘GX’ trees was stronger than that in the ‘THA’ trees. To further verify this result, CF imaging was used to investigate the response of photosynthetic energy dissipation to cold stress in ‘GX’ and ‘THA.’ Chlorophyll fluorescence parameters Fvʹ/Fmʹ, Fqʹ/Fmʹ, and NPQ were considered significant indices to evaluate plant stress resistance during early stage [31]. The CF parameters showed significant differences between ‘GX’ and ‘THA’ (Fig. 1B); the fluorescent signals Fvʹ/Fmʹ and Fqʹ/Fmʹ in ‘GX’ were stronger than that in ‘THA,’ and the same was true of the corresponding values, indicating that cold stress caused a decreased proportion of excitation energy used for photochemical pathways in ‘THA.’ The fluorescent signal of NPQ in ‘THA’ was weaker than that in ‘GX,’ indicating that the ability of ‘THA’ to dissipate superheated excitation energy was weaker than that of ‘GX.’ These results show that ‘GX’ is more resistant to cold than ‘THA.’

Fig. 1 Evaluation of cold resistance in different jackfruit phenotypes ‘Guangxi’ (‘GX’) and ‘Thailand’ (‘THA’). (A) Phenotypic characteristics of jackfruit under cold stress. Left: jackfruit of ‘GX’ variety. Right: jackfruit of ‘THA’ (B) Chlorophyll fluorescence assay of jackfruit after cold stress. Fv’/Fm’: photochemicalefficiency of photosystemII in the light. Fqʹ/Fmʹ: NPQ: non-photochemical quenching. The effective quantum yield of PSII

‘GX’ regulates resistance to cold stress through metabolic pathways

To further investigate the mechanism of ‘GX’ resistance to cold stress, RNA-seq was performed on ‘GX’ and ‘THA’ leaves. Pearson’s correlation coefficient showed good reproducibility among the three biological replicates (Figure S1). The FDR < 0.05 and ¦log2 Fold Change¦ ≥1 were used to identify the DEGs. Among these DEGs, 17,083 and 13,502 were up- and down-regulated, respectively (Fig. 2A). A study [32] has shown that plants can improve their resistance to cold stress by regulating certain metabolic pathways and metabolism-related complexes to get a steady-state balance. KEGG and GO analyses revealed that the DEGs were significantly enriched in metabolic processes (Fig. 2C, D), including “tyrosine metabolism,” “starch and sucrose metabolisms,” “phenylpropanoid biosynthesis,” “phenylalanine metabolism,” “metabolic pathways,” “carbon metabolism,” and “biosynthesis of secondary metabolites.” Thus, we speculated that DEGs might be involved in certain metabolic pathways that increase resistance to cold stress in ‘GX.’ Moreover, there were differentially expressed 1,617 TFs, and the AP2/ERF genes were the most abundant (Fig. 2B), suggesting the significance of AP2/ERF genes in ‘GX’ resistance to cold stress.

Fig. 2 Transcriptome data analysis of different jackfruits under cold stress. (A) Number of up- or down-regulated differentially expressed genes (DEGs) in the comparison between ‘GX’ and ‘THA’ jackfruits. (B) The pie chart of transcription factors in different families. (C) The Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) enrichment analysis of DEGs in ‘GX’ vs. ‘THA’. (D) Gene ontology (GO) enrichment analysis. |1og2Fold Chang| ≥ 1, FDR < 0.01

Identification of AP2/ERF family genes in jackfruit

Based on the number of conserved AP2 domains and motif similarity, the AP2/ERF family of TFs was divided into DREB, ERF, AP2 (APETALA2), RAV (related to ABI3/VP), and unclassified factors [33]. The phylogenetic tree was used to classify the jackfruit AP2/ERF proteins into four typical subfamilies (Fig. 3A), namely AP2, RAV, ERF, and DREB, which comprised 2, 43, 95, and 93 proteins, respectively. The jackfruit genome was scanned, and 93 DREB genes were identified using BLAST with Arabidopsis DREB genes. The annotations of the 93 identified DREB genes were named according to their chromosomal positions. Basic parameters were analyzed to explore the functions of the DREB family (Table 1). The number of amino acids in the DREB family protein sequences ranged from 132 (AhDREB58) to 432 (AhDREB64), the theoretical isoelectric points ranged from 4.57 (AhDREB11) to 10.87 (AhDREB50), and the molecular weights ranged from 14.91 KDa to 48.63 KDa. Subcellular localization analysis indicated that most AhDREB family proteins were localized in the nucleus, whereas other members were localized in the cytoplasm and nucleus.

Fig. 3 Phylogenetic tree analysis of the APETALA2/ethylene response factor (AP2/ERF) family and dehydration-responsive element binding protein (DREB) subfamily proteins. (A) The phylogenetic tree of AP2/ERF proteins from jackfruit. Different colors represent different subgroups. (B) Phylogenetic tree of DREB subfamily proteins from jackfruit, Arabidopsis, and strawberry. The color of the gene ID of jackfruit was red; I, II, III, IV, and V represent different subfamilies

Table 1 Basic parameter analysis of the AhDREB gene family

Gene Name	Gene ID	Chromosome location	Group	No. amino acids	pI	MW	Subcellular localization	
AhDREB1	AHE.Chr01.887	Chr01:16732611–16,733,174	A-5	187	9.48	20714.92	Cytoplasm. Nucleus.	
AhDREB2	AHE.Chr02.303	Chr02:10543402–10,545,288	A-6	335	5.61	37062.81	Nucleus.	
AhDREB3	AHE.Chr02.699	Chr02:19782345–19,783,914	A-5	175	7.72	18808.83	Cytoplasm.	
AhDREB4	AHE.Chr03.167	Chr03:1762897–1,764,301	A-4	277	5.42	30235.92	Cytoplasm. Nucleus.	
AhDREB5	AHE.Chr03.226	Chr03:2397189–2,398,423	A-4	305	5.34	32624.83	Cytoplasm. Nucleus.	
AhDREB6	AHE.Chr03.745	Chr03:8177686–8,178,705	A-4	213	5.06	22951.52	Cytoplasm. Nucleus.	
AhDREB7	AHE.Chr04.1522	Chr04:24027287–24,028,144	A-6	285	8.67	31293.69	Nucleus.	
AhDREB8	AHE.Chr04.188	Chr04:2581076–2,582,421	A-4	271	5.42	29699.28	Nucleus.	
AhDREB9	AHE.Chr04.352	Chr04:4586969–4,588,725	A-4	282	4.99	30447.3	Nucleus.	
AhDREB10	AHE.Chr04.47	Chr04:620029–621,381	A-4	273	5.31	29908.56	Nucleus.	
AhDREB11	AHE.Chr04.618	Chr04:7160220–7,161,285	A-5	206	4.57	22844.11	Cytoplasm. Nucleus.	
AhDREB12	AHE.Chr04.896	Chr04:11516658–11,517,667	A-4	206	5.06	22276.83	Nucleus.	
AhDREB13	AHE.Chr05.1186	Chr05:24946573–24,947,453	A-6	198	9.37	21751.35	Nucleus.	
AhDREB14	AHE.Chr06.735	Chr06:18582228–18,583,457	A-6	192	9.2	21195.87	Nucleus.	
AhDREB15	AHE.Chr07.1004	Chr07:10742057–10,742,971	A-5	277	4.94	31273.74	Cytoplasm. Nucleus.	
AhDREB16	AHE.Chr07.1284	Chr07:13780770–13,783,523	A-6	361	6.4	39663.36	Nucleus.	
AhDREB17	AHE.Chr07.1499	Chr07:16470647–16,471,240	A-4	197	5.29	21520.07	Nucleus.	
AhDREB18	AHE.Chr07.1503	Chr07:16509996–16,510,826	A-4	213	5.64	23778.61	Cytoplasm. Nucleus.	
AhDREB19	AHE.Chr07.2425	Chr07:36171251–36,171,979	A-4	242	5.88	26039.94	Nucleus.	
AhDREB20	AHE.Chr07.342	Chr07:4010841–4,011,617	A-2	258	6.05	28158.15	Nucleus.	
AhDREB21	AHE.Chr07.586	Chr07:6272941–6,275,552	A-6	206	9.03	23230.25	Nucleus.	
AhDREB22	AHE.Chr07.756	Chr07:8150352–8,152,462	A-5	181	7.86	20427.55	Cytoplasm. Nucleus.	
AhDREB23	AHE.Chr08.1170	Chr08:12516982–12,518,454	A-6	271	7.2	30231.5	Nucleus.	
AhDREB24	AHE.Chr08.1239	Chr08:13439343–13,441,558	A-6	363	7.14	39618.26	Nucleus.	
AhDREB25	AHE.Chr08.1414	Chr08:15168275–15,168,979	A-4	197	5.26	21374.94	Nucleus.	
AhDREB26	AHE.Chr08.1415	Chr08:15181865–15,182,509	A-4	214	5.45	23741.52	Nucleus.	
AhDREB27	AHE.Chr08.2105	Chr08:30674013–30,675,096	A-4	244	6.23	26385.3	Nucleus.	
AhDREB28	AHE.Chr08.251	Chr08:2465072–2,466,427	A-2	257	8.86	27640.58	Nucleus.	
AhDREB29	AHE.Chr08.401	Chr08:3964741–3,967,960	A-6	140	10.4	15621.41	Nucleus.	
AhDREB30	AHE.Chr08.690	Chr08:7013331–7,013,879	A-5	182	7.87	20612.87	Cytoplasm. Nucleus.	
AhDREB31	AHE.Chr08.919	Chr08:9626628–9,627,443	A-5	271	4.77	30549.02	Cytoplasm. Nucleus.	
AhDREB32	AHE.Chr09.2000	Chr09:30020435–30,021,265	A-6	276	9.23	30907.89	Cytoplasm. Nucleus.	
AhDREB33	AHE.Chr09.2064	Chr09:31042796–31,044,004	A-1	246	5.35	26886.1	Cytoplasm. Nucleus.	
AhDREB34	AHE.Chr09.2065	Chr09:31052890–31,054,293	A-4	267	5.56	28494.66	Cytoplasm. Nucleus.	
AhDREB35	AHE.Chr10.2047	Chr10:36505720–36,506,559	A-6	279	8.65	30929.66	Nucleus.	
AhDREB36	AHE.Chr14.596	Chr14:6307226–6,308,452	A-6	408	4.95	45969.67	Nucleus.	
AhDREB37	AHE.Chr15.1123	Chr15:14600920–14,603,232	A-6	397	9	44356.83	Cytoplasm. Nucleus.	
AhDREB38	AHE.Chr16.1115	Chr16:13775047–13,776,768	A-6	396	8.77	44153.72	Nucleus.	
AhDREB39	AHE.Chr16.1118	Chr16:13812025–13,813,747	A-6	396	8.77	44153.72	Nucleus.	
AhDREB40	AHE.Chr17.1004	Chr17:28120730–28,121,799	A-4	270	5.55	29544.82	Nucleus.	
AhDREB41	AHE.Chr17.1180	Chr17:29983075–29,984,043	A-6	322	9.02	35424.62	Nucleus.	
AhDREB42	AHE.Chr17.1423	Chr17:32597833–32,598,768	A-1	226	5.17	25160.04	Cytoplasm. Nucleus.	
AhDREB43	AHE.Chr17.1426	Chr17:32612394–32,613,411	A-1	207	5.6	23143.08	Cytoplasm. Nucleus.	
AhDREB44	AHE.Chr17.1617	Chr17:35015250–35,016,186	A-1	226	5.17	25160.04	Cytoplasm. Nucleus.	
AhDREB45	AHE.Chr17.1619	Chr17:35039968–35,040,728	A-4	182	4.93	19104.44	Nucleus.	
AhDREB46	AHE.Chr17.286	Chr17:14797803–14,799,624	A-2	321	6.14	35757.96	Nucleus.	
AhDREB47	AHE.Chr18.165	Chr18:2089806–2,090,504	A-1	211	5.13	23363.08	Nucleus.	
AhDREB48	AHE.Chr18.166	Chr18:2093861–2,094,762	A-1	235	5.27	25906.96	Cytoplasm. Nucleus.	
AhDREB49	AHE.Chr18.169	Chr18:2134958–2,135,593	A-1	211	4.85	23291.2	Cytoplasm. Nucleus.	
AhDREB50	AHE.Chr18.170	Chr18:2141155–2,141,715	A-1	186	10.87	21898.34	Nucleus.	
AhDREB51	AHE.Chr18.179	Chr18:2217284–2,218,030	A-1	201	5.57	22376.97	Cytoplasm. Nucleus.	
AhDREB52	AHE.Chr18.187	Chr18:2341530–2,342,069	A-4	179	4.99	19121.48	Nucleus.	
AhDREB53	AHE.Chr18.189	Chr18:2381623–2,382,162	A-4	179	4.87	19002.29	Nucleus.	
AhDREB54	AHE.Chr18.465	Chr18:5350537–5,352,190	A-6	326	8.87	35786.22	Nucleus.	
AhDREB55	AHE.Chr18.491	Chr18:5614621–5,616,274	A-6	326	8.87	35786.22	Nucleus.	
AhDREB56	AHE.Chr18.766	Chr18:9221856–9,222,987	A-4	273	5.5	29747.02	Cytoplasm. Nucleus.	
AhDREB57	AHE.Chr19.1202	Chr19:17676186–17,676,818	A-6	210	9.56	23387.32	Nucleus.	
AhDREB58	AHE.Chr19.2	Chr19:38198–38,596	A-5	132	9.71	14913.18	Chloroplast.Cytoplasm.	
AhDREB59	AHE.Chr20.1355	Chr20:23665663–23,667,517	A-6	251	9.01	27979.5	Nucleus.	
AhDREB60	AHE.Chr20.4	Chr20:57654–59,105	A-5	187	10.51	21904.94	Cytoplasm.	
AhDREB61	AHE.Chr20.692	Chr20:8007217–8,007,846	A-4	209	9.95	22430.44	Nucleus.	
AhDREB62	AHE.Chr21.2113	Chr21:32491889–32,493,910	A-6	345	5.49	38322.07	Nucleus.	
AhDREB63	AHE.Chr21.793	Chr21:7728009–7,729,232	A-6	407	4.76	45316.1	Cytoplasm. Nucleus.	
AhDREB64	AHE.Chr22.1042	Chr22:11903441–11,906,057	A-6	432	7.68	48632.16	Nucleus.	
AhDREB65	AHE.Chr22.1627	Chr22:20415877–20,417,805	A-2	197	9.46	20709.22	Nucleus.	
AhDREB66	AHE.Chr22.665	Chr22:6829285–6,830,752	A-6	407	4.76	45301.08	Nucleus.	
AhDREB67	AHE.Chr23.1106	Chr23:11110494–11,111,202	A-6	197	8.34	22145.94	Nucleus.	
AhDREB68	AHE.Chr23.674	Chr23:6445261–6,446,481	A-4	269	4.96	28636.44	Cytoplasm. Nucleus.	
AhDREB69	AHE.Chr23.861	Chr23:8364788–8,366,681	A-6	219	6.24	24435.47	Nucleus.	
AhDREB70	AHE.Chr24.1023	Chr24:10798380–10,799,591	A-6	198	8.4	21838.56	Nucleus.	
AhDREB71	AHE.Chr24.754	Chr24:8114979–8,116,243	A-4	270	4.8	28926.97	Cytoplasm. Nucleus.	
AhDREB72	AHE.Chr24.774	Chr24:8243565–8,244,830	A-4	270	4.8	28939.02	Cytoplasm. Nucleus.	
AhDREB73	AHE.Chr25.1287	Chr25:26504762–26,505,963	A-2	304	5.88	33851.88	Nucleus.	
AhDREB74	AHE.Chr25.56	Chr25:673351–674,202	A-6	283	8.53	32037.42	Nucleus.	
AhDREB75	AHE.Chr26.378	Chr26:4387488–4,388,120	A-4	210	5.09	21875.09	Cytoplasm. Nucleus.	
AhDREB76	AHE.Chr26.382	Chr26:4425221–4,425,988	A-4	255	7.63	28273.54	Cytoplasm. Nucleus.	
AhDREB77	AHE.Chr26.42	Chr26:511918–512,799	A-6	293	6.46	32795.23	Nucleus.	
AhDREB78	AHE.Chr26.916	Chr26:12098244–12,099,140	A-2	298	6.01	33318.15	Nucleus.	
AhDREB79	AHE.Chr27.186	Chr27:1895680–1,896,662	A-4	265	5.04	28343.4	Cytoplasm. Nucleus.	
AhDREB80	AHE.Chr27.187	Chr27:1907201–1,907,908	A-1	235	5.26	25879.08	Nucleus.	
AhDREB81	AHE.Chr27.702	Chr27:6892622–6,895,142	A-2	367	4.9	40439.86	Nucleus.	
AhDREB82	AHE.Chr27.736	Chr27:7218622–7,219,716	A-3	364	6.64	39193.96	Nucleus.	
AhDREB83	AHE.Chr28.794	Chr28:8073594–8,074,703	A-2	369	4.82	40793.23	Nucleus.	
AhDREB84	AHE.Chr28.843	Chr28:8591686–8,592,783	A-3	365	6.32	39087.85	Cytoplasm. Nucleus.	
AhDREB85	AHE.fragScaff_scaffold_218_pilon.20	fragScaff_scaffold_218_pilon:270,866–271,708	A-6	280	9.07	30,650	Nucleus.	
AhDREB86	AHE.original_scaffold_1148_pilon.6	original_scaffold_1148_pilon:26,433–27,662	A-6	409	4.8	45512.31	Cytoplasm. Nucleus.	
AhDREB87	AHE.original_scaffold_348_pilon.3	original_scaffold_348_pilon:50,437–53,037	A-6	430	6.62	48429.9	Nucleus.	
AhDREB88	AHE.original_scaffold_611_pilon.21	original_scaffold_611_pilon:325,847–327,469	A-4	251	8.66	27724.86	Cytoplasm. Nucleus.	
AhDREB89	AHE.original_scaffold_611_pilon.23	original_scaffold_611_pilon:352,854–353,483	A-4	209	5.52	21935.19	Cytoplasm. Nucleus.	
AhDREB90	AHE.original_scaffold_697_pilon.10	original_scaffold_697_pilon:66,344–66,862	A-5	172	9.14	19004.68	Cytoplasm. Nucleus.	
AhDREB91	AHE.original_scaffold_708_pilon.26	original_scaffold_708_pilon:243,515–244,063	A-5	182	7.87	20612.87	Cytoplasm. Nucleus.	
AhDREB92	AHE.original_scaffold_771_pilon.15	original_scaffold_771_pilon:94,336–94,821	A-5	161	5.64	17269.1	Cytoplasm. Nucleus.	
AhDREB93	AHE.original_scaffold_851_pilon.6	original_scaffold_851_pilon:147,620–148,496	A-6	198	9.48	21740.36	Nucleus.	

To explore the phylogenetic relationships between DREB genes in jackfruit and other plants, a phylogenetic tree of the DREB family was constructed using A. heterophyllus Lam. (93 members), Arabidopsis thaliana (L.) Heynh (63 members), and F. vesca (32 members) (Fig. 3B). The results showed that the DREB genes of the three species were divided into five subgroups (I–V), with 27, 13, 19, 22, and 12 AhDREB genes in each subgroup, respectively. Subgroups I and V had the most and least DREB genes, respectively. In addition, compared with strawberries, AhWRKY genes were closely related to Arabidopsis WRKY family members, indicating that AhWRKY genes are more closely related to monocotyledonous plants.

Gene structure and conserved motif analysis of the AhDREB gene family

The exon/intron distribution was analyzed to better understand the AhDREB function and its structural characteristics. All but eleven AhDREB genes contained at least one exon; of the exceptions, AhDREBs 13, 14, 21, 23, 29, 46, 59, 67, 70, and 93 had two exons, and one AhDREB (69) had three exons (Fig. 4).

Fig. 4 Phylogenetic relationships, gene structure cluster, conserved motif analysis of the AhDREB family The AhDREB protein are classified into six subfamily. Different subfamilies are represented by different colors. Different conserved motifs indicate blocks of different colors and sizes

In addition, five conserved motifs of AhDREB proteins were predicted through the MEME website and named Motifs 1–5 (Fig. 4). Motifs 1, 2, and 4 were detected in all AhDREB proteins except AhDREB46, which lacked Motif 1. The results indicated that Motifs 1, 2, and 4 were related to the AP2 family conserved domain.

Chromosomal localization and synteny analysis of the AhDREB gene family

According to the information on chromosome gene position, 93 AhDREB members were distributed unevenly on 26 chromosomes (Fig. 5A). Chromosome 18 had the largest number (10) of AhDREB genes, whereas Chromosomes 1, 5, 6, 10, 14, and 15 had the smallest number (1). In addition, 10 tandem duplication events involving 23 AhDREB genes were observed, namely, AhDREB17 and AhDREB18, AhDREB25 and AhDREB26, AhDREB33 and AhDREB34, AhDREB38 and AhDREB39, AhDREB42 and AhDREB43, AhDREB44 and AhDREB45, AhDREB47, AhDREB48, AhDREB49, AhDREB50 and AhDREB51, AhDREB52 and AhDREB53, AhDREB75 and AhDREB76, and AhDREB79 and AhDREB80. Notably, AhDREB was in the tandem cluster of Chromosome 18, which contained seven consecutive aligned members (AhDREB47, AhDREB48, AhDREB49, AhDREB50, AhDREB51, AhDREB52, and AhDREB53).

Fig. 5 Chromosomal distribution and gene duplication event collinearity of the DREBfamily. (A) Chromosomal locations of the DREB family. Pink frames represent tandem duplications. (B) Gene duplication event collinearity of the DREB family. The Circos map drawn by TBtools shows the position relationship of 42 pairs of tandem duplications detected in jackfruit genome. The different color lines represent collinearity pairs among the DREB family inside the circle

In the plant genome, tandem repeat events are the primary factors driving plant evolution and are crucial in species diversity. The One Step MCScanX function of TBtool software was used to analyze gene fragment replication events in AhDREB genes (Fig. 5B). The results revealed 42 tandem duplications involving 84 AhDREB genes, which were distributed on 25 chromosomes. In addition, the abundant segmental duplication events indicated that the AhDREB family genes were possibly generated by segmentation or tandem duplication, which may have favored the evolution and expansion of the AhDREB family.

Expression profile analyses of the AhDREB gene family in jackfruit leaves under cold stress

A study has shown that parts of the DERB family are affected by various abiotic stress responses in plants [34]. RNA sequence datasets from ‘GX’ and ‘THA’ plants exposed to cold stress conditions were used to investigate the expression profiles of the AhDREB family. Most AhDREB genes had higher expression levels in ‘GX’ leaves than they did in ‘THA’ leaves (69%), suggesting the significance of the AhDREB family in cold stress. Notably, AhDREB12, AhDREB21, AhDREB29, and AhDREB34 were differentially expressed in the ‘GX’ and ‘THA’ leaves under cold stress (Fig. 6). The results indicated that the resistance to cold stress of the four AhDREB genes in ‘GX’ might be stronger than that in ‘THA.’

Fig. 6 Expression profile of the DREB family in ‘GX’ and ‘THA’ under cold stress. (A) The heatmap of the DREB family and only four biological replication was used for ‘GX’ and ‘THA’. (B) The expression profiles of AhDREB12, AhDREB21, AhDREB29, and AhDREB34 in ‘GX’ and ‘THA’ under cold stress, as revealed by qRT − PCR. The data were calculated by the 2−∆∆Ct method. The internal reference gene was Tubulin, and the error line represented the standard deviation (n = 3). (**p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001, and ****p < 0.0001)

For a detailed analysis of the resistance of the four AhDREB genes to cold stress in ‘GX’ and ‘THA,’ qRT − PCR was used to measure the expression of AhDREB12, AhDREB21, AhDREB29, and AhDREB34 in ‘GX’ and ‘THA’ exposed to cold stress. The expression levels of AhDREB12, AhDREB21, AhDREB29, and AhDREB34 were significantly down-regulated in ‘THA,’ and the four AhDREB genes, almost without expression, consistent with the RNA-seq dataset. Moreover, these results further confirmed that the resistance to cold stress of the four AhDREB genes in the ‘GX’ is stronger than that in ‘THA.’

Discussion

Physiological differences between ‘GX’ and ‘THA’ under cold stress

Unpredicted variability in temperature is associated with sudden cold stress events, and cold stress is a significant factor that limits the development, distribution, and production of plants and even leads to plant death [7, 35]. Photosynthetic capacity is closely related to plant yield and quality; however, the photosynthetic process is sensitive to temperature stress. Therefore, it is used to assess the ability of plants to cope with stress [36]. In this study, CF imaging was used to analyze the photosynthetic state of jackfruit varieties ‘GX’ and ‘THA,’ and the results showed that Fvʹ/Fmʹ, Fqʹ/Fmʹ, and NPQ in GX were markedly stronger than those in THA. Cold stress affects the absorption, conversion, and electron transfer of light energy, resulting in excess excitation energy accumulation in the reaction center of Photosystem II and damage to the photosynthetic mechanism, reducing Fvʹ/Fmʹ, Fqʹ/Fmʹ, and NPQ and leading to the decline of photosynthetic capacity [37, 38]. Hence, we concluded that ‘GX’ adapts to cold stress more than ‘THA’ does.

When plants are subjected to cold stress, a series of signaling, gene regulation, metabolic pathways, and other reactions are triggered to regulate their growth, development, and metabolic status to adapt to cold environments [39]. Under natural selection, different populations of the same plant have different genetic resources. In this study, ‘GX’ and ‘THA’ had differences in cold resistance and gene expression levels, and 30,585 DEGs were identified. Transcriptome functional enrichment showed that the DEGs were enriched in various metabolism-related pathways, including “tyrosine metabolism,” “starch and sucrose metabolisms,” “phenylpropanoid biosynthesis,” “phenylalanine metabolism,” “metabolic pathways,” “carbon metabolism,” and “biosynthesis of secondary metabolites.” A study has shown that the cold tolerance of Erianthus fulvus was related to starch and sucrose metabolic pathways [40]. In the comparison of cold-tolerant and cold-sensitive varieties of Brassica napus, many differential metabolites and genes were related to starch and sucrose metabolisms [41]. This suggests that the difference in cold tolerance between ‘GX’ and ‘THA’ may be related to the accumulation of some carbohydrates. Starch and sucrose are carbohydrates, and carbohydrates are the primary products of photosynthesis. The DEGs of ‘GX’ and ‘THA’ were significantly enriched in “photosynthesis,” “photosynthesis-antenna proteins,” and “carbon metabolism” pathways, further indicating that ‘GX’ and ‘THA’ had different responses to cold stress. In addition, “plant hormone signal transduction” and “mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK)” signaling pathway were differentially enriched in ‘GX’ and ‘THA.’ A study has shown that plant perception of environmental conditions triggers stress-specific signal transduction, which can induce whole genome transcriptional reprogramming, inducing other transcriptional mechanisms [42]. Therefore, the difference in cold resistance between ‘GX’ and ‘THA’ may differ from their signal transduction ability.

AhDREB family is evolutionarily conserved

DREB TFs are members of the AP2/ERF family and are crucial in cold acclimation to attain the maximum freezing tolerance in plants [43]. Increasing evidence suggests that the function of DREB genes in cold resistance is conserved in higher plants, and they can specifically bind to CRT/DRE (CCGAC) motifs in cold response gene promoters to activate their expression [10]. In our study, 93 nonredundant DREB genes were identified in the jackfruit S10 cultivar. Abundant DREB genes have been identified in various plant species; the number of DREB genes detected in jackfruit was lower than that in Triticum aestivum (204) [44] and higher than that in soybean (Glycine max) (73) [45], apple (Malus pumila Mill.) (60) [46], and mung bean (Vigna radiata) (71) [47]. Gene structure analysis showed that 81.73% of AhDREB genes were intron-less, which was lower than those in strawberries (Fragaria × ananassa Duch.) [48] and higher than those in rice (Oryza sativa L.) [49]. Conserved motif analysis revealed that Motifs 1, 2, and 4 were detected in all AhDREB proteins except AhDREB46, indicating that they might comprise AP2 conserved motifs. Moreover, the same subgroup of AhDREB genes in the phylogenetic tree had similar gene structures and conserved motifs, indicating that the same subgroup of AhDREB genes possibly had similar functions. The diversification of plants and the expansion of gene families are believed to be caused by whole-genome and tandem duplications [50, 51]. Chromosomal localization and synteny analyses indicated that AhDREB genes were unevenly distributed in 25 of the 28 jackfruit chromosomes and in the entire jackfruit genome, and two tandem duplication gene pairs were in the AhDREB family. The number of AhDREB genes in jackfruit was greater than that in most other plants, possibly owing to the large number of tandem and whole-genome duplication events.

DREB family genes may be critical regulatory factors of cold stress resistance in jackfruit

TFs are groups of proteins that specifically bind to the promoter cis-elements of downstream genes, regulate stress target genes, and ensure the transcription and expression of target genes at a certain time and place, playing a crucial role in plant growth and development and environmental responses [52]. Over 50 TFs, including AP2/ERF, bZIP, NAC, C2H2, MADS, MYB, and WRKY, have been identified in plants [53]. A study has shown that the AP2/ERF family participates in abiotic stress [54]. In strawberries (Fragaria × ananassa Duch.), FvDREB1 expression was correlated with the early and middle stages of drought stress. However, FvDREB2 expression was correlated with the middle and late stages of drought stress, indicating that gene expressions under the same conditions differ and that FvDREB18 regulates the expression of downstream genes in response to drought stress by controlling FvDREB1 and FvDREB2 [44]. Qian et al. [55] used transcriptomic data and qRT − PCR analyses to reveal that Erianthus fulvus has five and two DREB genes that respond to cold and drought stress conditions, respectively. In oil palms (Elaeis species), EgDREB1 participates in signaling communication from root to shoot under mild drought, and ectopic expression of EgDREB1 in transgenic tomatoes enhances the expression of reactive oxygen species (ROS)-related genes under PolyethyleneGlycol (PEG) treatment and cold stress [56]. Sheng et al. showed that alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) DREB genes, which were cold-stress responsive, were significantly downregulated in the cold-resistant alfalfa variety. Moreover, eight DREB genes were implicated in a long-term freezing-stress adaptation with a great potential [57]. AnDREB5.1 overexpression improved tolerance to cold, osmotic, and oxidative stress conditions in Ammopiptanthus nanus (A. nanus). Under cold stress, AnDREB5.1 overexpression increased antioxidant enzyme activity and inhibited excessive elevation of ROS levels in Ammopiptanthus nanus [58]. A recent study showed that MdDREB2A can directly bind to the promoter of MdSWEET12 to promote sucrose transport under drought conditions [59]. PeDREB28 can directly bind to the promoter of the ABA receptor protein pyrabactin-resistance-like (DlaPYL3) gene and activate its expression, suggesting that PeDREB28 may change the stress resistance of bamboo by regulating the ABA signaling pathway [60]. In our study, most AhDREB genes were up-regulated in ‘GX’ under cold stress. DEGs between cold-resistant (‘GX’) and cold-sensitive (‘THA’) varieties were enriched in signal transduction and metabolism pathways. These results suggest that the DREBe family may be involved in cold stress response in jackfruit by regulating various signal transduction and metabolic pathways. The results of the study provide significant insights into the response of jackfruit to cold stress, which will reveal the potential molecular mechanism and contribute to the screening and breeding of jackfruit.

Conclusions

In this study, two jackfruit cultivars (‘GX’ and ‘THA’) were subjected to cold stress. By combining transcriptomics data and chlorophyll fluorescence assay, the DEGs and metabolic pathways involved in response to cold stress were identified. In ‘GX’ and ‘THA,’ phenylalanine metabolism, metabolic pathways, and carbon metabolism were significantly enriched, indicating they might be the basic metabolic pathways in jackfruit for responding to cold stress. DEG analysis showed that the AP2/ERF genes had the largest proportion, suggesting the significance of AP2/ERFs in increasing cold resistance in jackfruit. Therefore, we analyzed the DREBfamily, the subfamily of AP2/ERFfamily. We identified 93 DREB gene family members in the whole genome of A. heterophyllus, a detailed investigation of the basic physicochemical properties, phylogenetic, gene structure, conserved motif, synteny, and expression profile of the AhDREB gene family in ‘GX’ and ‘THA’ under cold stress was conducted. These findings provide a valuable reference in exploring the crucial gene and breeding of jackfruit cold-resistant varieties.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary Material 1: Supplementary Data 1 Summary of primers used in this study

Supplementary Material 2: Supplementary Figure 1 Correlation analysis of leaf samples of two jackfruit strains

Acknowledgements

We thank Dr. Xinggu Lin and Prof. Ming Kang for their helpful advice on this study.

Author contributions

Conceived the project: PJZ and XHP; the experiments data collection: XWM, YJD and QQS; analysis and interpretation of results: WYY, XGT and JH; draft manuscript preparation: XWM, YJZ and OJL. All authors reviewed and approved the final manuscript;

Funding

This research was supported by the Guangxi Key Research and Development Program (GK AB21220003), a Science and technology development fund project of the Guangxi Academy of Agricultural Sciences (GNK 2023014). We thank Dr. Xinggu Lin and Prof. Ming Kang for their helpful advice on this study.

Data availability

The datasets generated and analyzed during the current study are included in this article. The sequencing data that support the findings of this study are openly available in the global pharmacopoeia genome database (http://www.gpgenome.com/species/92). Raw reads for RNA-Seq were downloaded from the NCBI database with accessionnumber SRP129502 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sra/?term=SRP129502) and SRP092562 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sra/SRP092562) and the materials used during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Experimental materials provided by the Guangxi Subtropical Crops Research Institute, Nanning, Guangxi, China. The study was conducted the plant material that complies with relevant institutional, national, and international guidelines and legislation.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Abbreviations

BLAST Basic Local Alignment Search Tool

CBF C-repeat binding factor

CF Chlorophyll fluorescence

DEG Differentially expressed gene

DRE/CRT Dehydration-responsive element/C-repeat

DREB Dehydration-responsive element binding protein

GX Artocarpus heterophyllus Lam. (jackfruit) variety ‘Guangxi’

MEME Multiple Em for Motif Elicitation

NPQ Non-photochemical quenching

PCR Polymerase chain reaction

TF Transcription factor

THA Artocarpus heterophyllus Lam. (jackfruit) variety ‘Thailand’

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
==== Refs
References

1. Wang Z Jia C Wang W Tong W Jiang Y Effects of low temperature storage on energy metabolism, related physiology and quality in ‘Jinhong’apple fruit Acta Horticulturae Sinica 2020 47 12 2277 89
Wang Z, Jia C, Wang W, Tong W, Jiang Y. Effects of low temperature storage on energy metabolism, related physiology and quality in ‘Jinhong’apple fruit. Acta Horticulturae Sinica. 2020;47(12):2277–89.
2. Waadt R Seller CA Hsu P-K Takahashi Y Munemasa S Schroeder JI Plant hormone regulation of abiotic stress responses Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 2022 23 10 680 94 10.1038/s41580-022-00479-6 35513717
Waadt R, Seller CA, Hsu P-K, Takahashi Y, Munemasa S, Schroeder JI. Plant hormone regulation of abiotic stress responses. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2022;23(10):680–94.35513717 10.1038/s41580-022-00479-6
3. Mehari TG Xu Y Magwanga RO Umer MJ Shiraku ML Hou Y Identification and functional characterization of Gh_D01G0514 (GhNAC072) transcription factor in response to drought stress tolerance in cotton Plant Physiol Biochem 2021 166 361 75 10.1016/j.plaphy.2021.05.050 34153881
Mehari TG, Xu Y, Magwanga RO, Umer MJ, Shiraku ML, Hou Y, et al. Identification and functional characterization of Gh_D01G0514 (GhNAC072) transcription factor in response to drought stress tolerance in cotton. Plant Physiol Biochem. 2021;166:361–75.34153881 10.1016/j.plaphy.2021.05.050
4. An JP Wang XF Zhang XW Xu HF Bi SQ You CX An apple MYB transcription factor regulates cold tolerance and anthocyanin accumulation and undergoes MIEL1-mediated degradation Plant Biotechnol J 2020 18 2 337 53 10.1111/pbi.13201 31250952
An JP, Wang XF, Zhang XW, Xu HF, Bi SQ, You CX, et al. An apple MYB transcription factor regulates cold tolerance and anthocyanin accumulation and undergoes MIEL1-mediated degradation. Plant Biotechnol J. 2020;18(2):337–53.31250952 10.1111/pbi.13201
5. Lambert SA Jolma A Campitelli LF Das PK Yin Y Albu M The human transcription factors Cell 2018 172 4 650 65 10.1016/j.cell.2018.01.029 29425488
Lambert SA, Jolma A, Campitelli LF, Das PK, Yin Y, Albu M, et al. The human transcription factors. Cell. 2018;172(4):650–65.29425488 10.1016/j.cell.2018.01.029
6. Sakuma Y Liu Q Dubouzet JG Abe H Shinozaki K Yamaguchi-Shinozaki K DNA-binding specificity of the ERF/AP2 domain of Arabidopsis DREBs, transcription factors involved in dehydration-and cold-inducible gene expression Biochem Biophys Res Commun 2002 290 3 998 1009 10.1006/bbrc.2001.6299 11798174
Sakuma Y, Liu Q, Dubouzet JG, Abe H, Shinozaki K, Yamaguchi-Shinozaki K. DNA-binding specificity of the ERF/AP2 domain of Arabidopsis DREBs, transcription factors involved in dehydration-and cold-inducible gene expression. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2002;290(3):998–1009.11798174 10.1006/bbrc.2001.6299
7. Kidokoro S, Shinozaki K, Yamaguchi-Shinozaki K. Transcriptional regulatory network of plant cold-stress responses. Trends Plant Sci. 2022.
8. Chinnusamy V Zhu J Zhu J-K Cold stress regulation of gene expression in plants Trends Plant Sci 2007 12 10 444 51 10.1016/j.tplants.2007.07.002 17855156
Chinnusamy V, Zhu J, Zhu J-K. Cold stress regulation of gene expression in plants. Trends Plant Sci. 2007;12(10):444–51.17855156 10.1016/j.tplants.2007.07.002
9. Dos Santos TB Ribas AF de Souza SGH Budzinski IGF Domingues DS Physiological responses to drought, salinity, and heat stress in plants: a review Stresses 2022 2 1 113 35 10.3390/stresses2010009
Dos Santos TB, Ribas AF, de Souza SGH, Budzinski IGF, Domingues DS. Physiological responses to drought, salinity, and heat stress in plants: a review. Stresses. 2022;2(1):113–35.10.3390/stresses2010009
10. Xiao S Zang J Pei Y Liu J Liu J Song W Activation of mitochondrial orf355 gene expression by a nuclear-encoded DREB transcription factor causes cytoplasmic male sterility in maize Mol Plant 2020 13 9 1270 83 10.1016/j.molp.2020.07.002 32629120
Xiao S, Zang J, Pei Y, Liu J, Liu J, Song W, et al. Activation of mitochondrial orf355 gene expression by a nuclear-encoded DREB transcription factor causes cytoplasmic male sterility in maize. Mol Plant. 2020;13(9):1270–83.32629120 10.1016/j.molp.2020.07.002
11. Savitch LV, Ghislaine A, Motoaki S, Robert LS, Tinker NA, Huner NPA et al. The effect of overexpression of two Brassica CBF/DREB1-like transcription factors on photosynthetic capacity and freezing tolerance in Brassica napus. Plant Cell Physiol. 2005;(9):1525–39.
12. Alexandra S, Mark S, Ildikó V, Gábor G, Wendy H, Attila V. Transgenic barley lines prove the involvement of TaCBF14 and TaCBF15 in the cold acclimation process and in frost tolerance. J Exp Bot. 2013;(7):1849–62.
13. Zhao C, Zhang Z, Xie S, Si T, Li Y, Zhu JK. Mutational evidence for the critical role of CBF transcription factors in cold acclimation in Arabidopsis. Plant Physiol. 2016;2744.
14. Okamuro JK, Caster B, Villarroel R, Van Montagu M, Jofuku KD. The AP2 domain of APETALA2 defines a large new family of DNA binding proteins in Arabidopsis. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 1997;94(13):7076–7081.
15. Nie Y Guo L Cui F Shen Y Ye X Deng D Innovations and stepwise evolution of CBFs/DREB1s and their regulatory networks in angiosperms J Integr Plant Biol 2022 64 11 2111 25 10.1111/jipb.13357 36070250
Nie Y, Guo L, Cui F, Shen Y, Ye X, Deng D, et al. Innovations and stepwise evolution of CBFs/DREB1s and their regulatory networks in angiosperms. J Integr Plant Biol. 2022;64(11):2111–25.36070250 10.1111/jipb.13357
16. Song QQ Zhu PJ He J Ye WY Ou JL Tang XG Li JH Effect of low temperature on photosynthetic physiological characteristics of different Artocarpus heterophyllus Lam. Germplasm resources Agricultural Res Application 2021 34 6 7
Song QQ, Zhu PJ, He J, Ye WY, Ou JL, Tang XG, Li JH, et al. Effect of low temperature on photosynthetic physiological characteristics of different Artocarpus heterophyllus Lam. Germplasm resources. Agricultural Res Application. 2021;34(6):7.
17. Novillo F Alonso JM Ecker JR Salinas J CBF2/DREB1C is a negative regulator of CBF1/DREB1B and CBF3/DREB1A expression and plays a central role in stress tolerance in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci 2004 101 11 3985 90 10.1073/pnas.0303029101 15004278
Novillo F, Alonso JM, Ecker JR, Salinas J. CBF2/DREB1C is a negative regulator of CBF1/DREB1B and CBF3/DREB1A expression and plays a central role in stress tolerance in Arabidopsis. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2004;101(11):3985–90.15004278 10.1073/pnas.0303029101
18. Chen M Xu Z Xia L Li L Cheng X Dong J Cold-induced modulation and functional analyses of the DRE-binding transcription factor gene, GmDREB3, in soybean (Glycine max L) J Exp Bot 2009 60 1 121 35 10.1093/jxb/ern269 18988621
Chen M, Xu Z, Xia L, Li L, Cheng X, Dong J, et al. Cold-induced modulation and functional analyses of the DRE-binding transcription factor gene, GmDREB3, in soybean (Glycine max L). J Exp Bot. 2009;60(1):121–35.18988621 10.1093/jxb/ern269
19. Hossain A, Haq N. Jackfruit: artocarpus heterophyllus. Crops for the Future. 2006:10.
20. Khan AU, Ema IJ, Faruk MR, Tarapder SA, Khan AU, Noreen S et al. A review on importance of Artocarpus heterophyllus L.(Jackfruit). J Multidisciplinary Appl Nat Sci. 2021.
21. Lin X Feng C Lin T Harris A Li Y Kang M Jackfruit genome and population genomics provide insights into fruit evolution and domestication history in China Hortic Res 2022 9 uhac173 10.1093/hr/uhac173 36204202
Lin X, Feng C, Lin T, Harris A, Li Y, Kang M. Jackfruit genome and population genomics provide insights into fruit evolution and domestication history in China. Hortic Res. 2022;9:uhac173.36204202 10.1093/hr/uhac173
22. Letunic I, Tobias_Doerks, Bork P. SMART: recent updates, new developments and status in 2015. 2014.
23. Finn RD, Clements J, Eddy SR. HMMER web server: interactive sequence similarity searching. Nucleic Acids Res. 2011;39(Web Server issue):29–37.
24. Jung S Ficklin SP Lee T Cheng C-H Blenda A Zheng P The genome database for Rosaceae (GDR): year 10 update Nucleic Acids Res 2014 42 D1 D1237 44 10.1093/nar/gkt1012 24225320
Jung S, Ficklin SP, Lee T, Cheng C-H, Blenda A, Zheng P, et al. The genome database for Rosaceae (GDR): year 10 update. Nucleic Acids Res. 2014;42(D1):D1237–44.24225320 10.1093/nar/gkt1012
25. Kumar S Tamura K Nei M MEGA: molecular evolutionary genetics analysis software for microcomputers Bioinformatics 1994 10 2 189 91 10.1093/bioinformatics/10.2.189
Kumar S, Tamura K, Nei M. MEGA: molecular evolutionary genetics analysis software for microcomputers. Bioinformatics. 1994;10(2):189–91.10.1093/bioinformatics/10.2.189
26. Hu B Jin J Guo A-Y Zhang H Luo J Gao G GSDS 2.0: an upgraded gene feature visualization server Bioinformatics 2015 31 8 1296 7 10.1093/bioinformatics/btu817 25504850
Hu B, Jin J, Guo A-Y, Zhang H, Luo J, Gao G. GSDS 2.0: an upgraded gene feature visualization server. Bioinformatics. 2015;31(8):1296–7.25504850 10.1093/bioinformatics/btu817
27. Bailey TL Johnson J Grant CE Noble WS The MEME suite Nucleic Acids Res 2015 43 W1 W39 49 10.1093/nar/gkv416 25953851
Bailey TL, Johnson J, Grant CE, Noble WS. The MEME suite. Nucleic Acids Res. 2015;43(W1):W39–49.25953851 10.1093/nar/gkv416
28. Chen C Chen H Zhang Y Thomas HR Frank MH He Y TBtools: an integrative toolkit developed for interactive analyses of big biological data Mol Plant 2020 13 8 1194 202 10.1016/j.molp.2020.06.009 32585190
Chen C, Chen H, Zhang Y, Thomas HR, Frank MH, He Y, et al. TBtools: an integrative toolkit developed for interactive analyses of big biological data. Mol Plant. 2020;13(8):1194–202.32585190 10.1016/j.molp.2020.06.009
29. Wang Y Tang H DeBarry JD Tan X Li J Wang X MCScanX: a toolkit for detection and evolutionary analysis of gene synteny and collinearity Nucleic Acids Res 2012 40 7 e49 49 10.1093/nar/gkr1293 22217600
Wang Y, Tang H, DeBarry JD, Tan X, Li J, Wang X, et al. MCScanX: a toolkit for detection and evolutionary analysis of gene synteny and collinearity. Nucleic Acids Res. 2012;40(7):e49–49.22217600 10.1093/nar/gkr1293
30. Chen C Wu Y Xia R A painless way to customize Circos plot: from data preparation to visualization using TBtools iMeta 2022 1 3 e35 10.1002/imt2.35 38868708
Chen C, Wu Y, Xia R. A painless way to customize Circos plot: from data preparation to visualization using TBtools. iMeta. 2022;1(3):e35.38868708 10.1002/imt2.35
31. Pedruzzi DP Araujo LO Falco WF Machado G Caires ARL ZnO nanoparticles impact on the photosynthetic activity of Vicia faba: effect of particle size and concentration NanoImpact 2020 19 100246 10.1016/j.impact.2020.100246
Pedruzzi DP, Araujo LO, Falco WF, Machado G, Caires ARL. ZnO nanoparticles impact on the photosynthetic activity of Vicia faba: effect of particle size and concentration. NanoImpact. 2020;19:100246.10.1016/j.impact.2020.100246
32. Cai P Lan Y Gong F Li C Xia F Li Y Comparative physiology and transcriptome response patterns in cold-tolerant and cold-sensitive varieties of Solanum melongena BMC Plant Biol 2024 24 1 256 10.1186/s12870-024-04922-y 38594627
Cai P, Lan Y, Gong F, Li C, Xia F, Li Y, et al. Comparative physiology and transcriptome response patterns in cold-tolerant and cold-sensitive varieties of Solanum melongena. BMC Plant Biol. 2024;24(1):256.38594627 10.1186/s12870-024-04922-y
33. Nakano T Suzuki K Fujimura T Shinshi H Genome-wide analysis of the ERF gene family in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 2006 140 2 411 32 10.1104/pp.105.073783 16407444
Nakano T, Suzuki K, Fujimura T, Shinshi H. Genome-wide analysis of the ERF gene family in Arabidopsis and rice. Plant Physiol. 2006;140(2):411–32.16407444 10.1104/pp.105.073783
34. Zhang Y, Xia P. The DREB transcription factor, a biomacromolecule, responds to abiotic stress by regulating the expression of stress-related genes. Int J Biol Macromol. 2023;125231.
35. Hassan MA Xiang C Farooq M Muhammad N Yan Z Hui X Cold stress in wheat: plant acclimation responses and management strategies Front Plant Sci 2021 12 676884 10.3389/fpls.2021.676884 34305976
Hassan MA, Xiang C, Farooq M, Muhammad N, Yan Z, Hui X, et al. Cold stress in wheat: plant acclimation responses and management strategies. Front Plant Sci. 2021;12:676884.34305976 10.3389/fpls.2021.676884
36. Sharma A Kumar V Shahzad B Ramakrishnan M Singh Sidhu GP Bali AS Photosynthetic response of plants under different abiotic stresses: a review J Plant Growth Regul 2020 39 509 31 10.1007/s00344-019-10018-x
Sharma A, Kumar V, Shahzad B, Ramakrishnan M, Singh Sidhu GP, Bali AS, et al. Photosynthetic response of plants under different abiotic stresses: a review. J Plant Growth Regul. 2020;39:509–31.10.1007/s00344-019-10018-x
37. Bhagooli R Mattan-Moorgawa S Kaullysing D Louis YD Gopeechund A Ramah S Chlorophyll fluorescence–A tool to assess photosynthetic performance and stress photophysiology in symbiotic marine invertebrates and seaplants Mar Pollut Bull 2021 165 112059 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2021.112059 33677415
Bhagooli R, Mattan-Moorgawa S, Kaullysing D, Louis YD, Gopeechund A, Ramah S, et al. Chlorophyll fluorescence–A tool to assess photosynthetic performance and stress photophysiology in symbiotic marine invertebrates and seaplants. Mar Pollut Bull. 2021;165:112059.33677415 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2021.112059
38. Xu S Atherton J Riikonen A Zhang C Oivukkamäki J MacArthur A Structural and photosynthetic dynamics mediate the response of SIF to water stress in a potato crop Remote Sens Environ 2021 263 112555 10.1016/j.rse.2021.112555
Xu S, Atherton J, Riikonen A, Zhang C, Oivukkamäki J, MacArthur A, et al. Structural and photosynthetic dynamics mediate the response of SIF to water stress in a potato crop. Remote Sens Environ. 2021;263:112555.10.1016/j.rse.2021.112555
39. Kazemi-Shahandashti S-S Reza Maali-Amiri. Global insights of protein responses to cold stress in plants: signaling, defence, and degradation J Plant Physiol 2018 226 123 35 10.1016/j.jplph.2018.03.022 29758377
Kazemi-Shahandashti S-S, Reza Maali-Amiri. Global insights of protein responses to cold stress in plants: signaling, defence, and degradation. J Plant Physiol. 2018;226:123–35.29758377 10.1016/j.jplph.2018.03.022
40. Kui L, Majeed A, Wang X, Yang Z, Chen J, He L et al. A chromosome-level genome assembly for Erianthus Fulvus provides insights into its biofuel potential and facilitates breeding for improvement of sugarcane. Plant Commun. 2023;4(4).
41. Raza A Su W Hussain MA Mehmood SS Zhang X Cheng Y Integrated Analysis of Metabolome and Transcriptome reveals insights for Cold Tolerance in Rapeseed (Brassica napus L) Front Plant Sci 2021 12 721681 10.3389/fpls.2021.721681 34691103
Raza A, Su W, Hussain MA, Mehmood SS, Zhang X, Cheng Y, et al. Integrated analysis of metabolome and transcriptome reveals insights for cold tolerance in rapeseed (Brassica napus L). Front Plant Sci. 2021;12:721681.34691103 10.3389/fpls.2021.721681
42. Zhu JK Abiotic Stress Signaling and responses in plants Cell 2016 167 2 313 24 10.1016/j.cell.2016.08.029 27716505
Zhu JK. Abiotic stress signaling and responses in plants. Cell. 2016;167(2):313–24.27716505 10.1016/j.cell.2016.08.029
43. Jaglo-Ottosen KR Arabidopsis CBF1 overexpression induces COR genes and enhances freezing Tolerance ence 1998 280 5360 104 6 10.1126/science.280.5360.104
Jaglo-Ottosen KR. Arabidopsis CBF1 overexpression induces COR genes and enhances freezing tolerance. ence. 1998;280(5360):104–6.10.1126/science.280.5360.104
44. Tian W Guo QP Li ZZ Ding N Zhang S Wen SS Genome-Wide Identification and Expression Analysis under heat stress of the DREB Transcription Factor Family in Bread Wheat (Triticum aestivum L) Ournal Triticeae Crops 2018 38 10 11
Tian W, Guo QP, Li ZZ, Ding N, Zhang S, Wen SS. Genome-wide identification and expression analysis under heat stress of the DREB transcription factor family in bread wheat (Triticum aestivum L). Ournal Triticeae Crops. 2018;38(10):11.
45. Zhou Y, Zhou W, Liu H, Liu P, Li Z. Genome-wide analysis of the soybean DREB gene family: identification, genomic organization and expression profiles in response to drought stress. Plant Breeding. 2020;(6):139.
46. Bingqi S, Xiaoyu G, Dawei W, Jun Z, Lang D, Fan Z, et al. Genome-wide identification and analysis of the DREB transcription factor gene family in apple. Acta Botanica Boreali-Occidentalia Sinica. 2017.
47. Labbo AM, Mehmood M, Akhtar MN, Khan MJ, Tariq A, Sadiq I. Genome-wide identification of AP2/ERF transcription factors in mungbean (Vigna radiata) and expression profiling of the VrDREB subfamily under drought stress. Crop Pasture Sci. 2018;69.
48. Dong C, Xi Y, Chen X, Cheng ZM. Genome-wide identification of AP2/EREBP in Fragaria vesca and expression pattern analysis of the FvDREB subfamily under drought stress. BMC Plant Biol. 2021;21(1).
49. Jin JH Wang M Zhang HX Khan A Wei AM Luo DX Genome-wide identification of the AP2/ERF transcription factor family in pepper (Capsicum annuum L) Genome 2018 61 9 663 74 10.1139/gen-2018-0036 29958096
Jin JH, Wang M, Zhang HX, Khan A, Wei AM, Luo DX, et al. Genome-wide identification of the AP2/ERF transcription factor family in pepper (Capsicum annuum L). Genome. 2018;61(9):663–74.29958096 10.1139/gen-2018-0036
50. Hanada K, Zou C, Lehti-Shiu MD, Shinozaki K, Shiu SH. Importance of lineage-specific expansion of plant tandem duplicates in the adaptive response to environmental stimuli. Plant Physiology. 2008.
51. Jiao Y, Wickett N, Ayyampalayam S, Chanderbali A, Landherr L, Ralph P et al. Ancestral polyploidy in seed plants and angiosperms. 2011.
52. Eickhardt E, Als TD, Grove J, Boerglum A, Lescai F. Estimating the functional impact of INDELs in transcription factor binding sites: a genome-wide landscape. 2016.
53. Feng K Hou XL Xing GM Liu JX Duan AQ Xu ZS Advances in AP2/ERF super-family transcription factors in plant Crit Rev Biotechnol 2020 40 6 750 76 10.1080/07388551.2020.1768509 32522044
Feng K, Hou XL, Xing GM, Liu JX, Duan AQ, Xu ZS, et al. Advances in AP2/ERF super-family transcription factors in plant. Crit Rev Biotechnol. 2020;40(6):750–76.32522044 10.1080/07388551.2020.1768509
54. Xu G Li L Zhou J Lyu D Zhao D Qin S Comparison of transcriptome and metabolome analysis revealed differences in cold resistant metabolic pathways in different apple cultivars under low temperature stress Hortic Plant J 2023 9 2 183 98 10.1016/j.hpj.2022.09.002
Xu G, Li L, Zhou J, Lyu D, Zhao D, Qin S. Comparison of transcriptome and metabolome analysis revealed differences in cold resistant metabolic pathways in different apple cultivars under low temperature stress. Hortic Plant J. 2023;9(2):183–98.10.1016/j.hpj.2022.09.002
55. Qian Z Rao X Zhang R Gu S Shen Q Wu H Genome-wide identification, evolution, and expression analyses of AP2/ERF family transcription factors in Erianthus Fulvus Int J Mol Sci 2023 24 8 7102 10.3390/ijms24087102 37108264
Qian Z, Rao X, Zhang R, Gu S, Shen Q, Wu H, et al. Genome-wide identification, evolution, and expression analyses of AP2/ERF family transcription factors in Erianthus Fulvus. Int J Mol Sci. 2023;24(8):7102.37108264 10.3390/ijms24087102
56. Azzeme AM Abdullah SNA Abd Aziz M Wahab PEM Oil palm drought inducible DREB1 induced expression of DRE/CRT-and non-DRE/CRT- containing genes in lowland transgenic tomato under cold and PEG treatments Plant Physiol Biochem 2017 112 129 51 10.1016/j.plaphy.2016.12.025 28068641
Azzeme AM, Abdullah SNA, Abd Aziz M, Wahab PEM. Oil palm drought inducible DREB1 induced expression of DRE/CRT-and non-DRE/CRT- containing genes in lowland transgenic tomato under cold and PEG treatments. Plant Physiol Biochem. 2017;112:129–51.28068641 10.1016/j.plaphy.2016.12.025
57. Sheng S Guo X Wu C Xiang Y Duan S Yang W Genome-wide identification and expression analysis of DREB genes in alfalfa (Medicago sativa) in response to cold stress Plant Signal Behav 2022 17 1 2081420 10.1080/15592324.2022.2081420 35642507
Sheng S, Guo X, Wu C, Xiang Y, Duan S, Yang W, et al. Genome-wide identification and expression analysis of DREB genes in alfalfa (Medicago sativa) in response to cold stress. Plant Signal Behav. 2022;17(1):2081420.35642507 10.1080/15592324.2022.2081420
58. Zhu M Zheng L Cao S Liu Q Wei S Zhou Y AnDREB5. 1, a A5 group DREB gene from desert shrub Ammopiptanthus Nanus, confers osmotic and cold stress tolerances in transgenic tobacco Physiol Plant 2024 176 2 e14272 10.1111/ppl.14272 38566275
Zhu M, Zheng L, Cao S, Liu Q, Wei S, Zhou Y, et al. AnDREB5. 1, a A5 group DREB gene from desert shrub Ammopiptanthus Nanus, confers osmotic and cold stress tolerances in transgenic tobacco. Physiol Plant. 2024;176(2):e14272.38566275 10.1111/ppl.14272
59. Zhang TT Lin YJ Liu HF Liu YQ Zeng ZF Lu XY The AP2/ERF transcription factor MdDREB2A regulates nitrogen utilisation and sucrose transport under drought stress Plant Cell Environ 2024 47 5 1668 84 10.1111/pce.14834 38282271
Zhang TT, Lin YJ, Liu HF, Liu YQ, Zeng ZF, Lu XY, et al. The AP2/ERF transcription factor MdDREB2A regulates nitrogen utilisation and sucrose transport under drought stress. Plant Cell Environ. 2024;47(5):1668–84.38282271 10.1111/pce.14834
60. Hu X Liang J Wang W Cai C Ye S Wang N Comprehensive genome-wide analysis of the DREB gene family in Moso bamboo (Phyllostachys edulis): evidence for the role of PeDREB28 in plant abiotic stress response Plant J 2023 116 5 1248 70 10.1111/tpj.16420 37566437
Hu X, Liang J, Wang W, Cai C, Ye S, Wang N, et al. Comprehensive genome-wide analysis of the DREB gene family in Moso bamboo (Phyllostachys edulis): evidence for the role of PeDREB28 in plant abiotic stress response. Plant J. 2023;116(5):1248–70.37566437 10.1111/tpj.16420
