Review examines salt-stress responses and functional genes in Populus, highlighting implications for breeding salt-tolerant varieties.
Soil salinization represents one of the most severe abiotic constraints on global forest productivity. Populus, the most widely cultivated fast-growing timber tree and a premier model woody plant, exhibits striking intrageneric variation in salt tolerance—from the extremely halophytic Populus euphratica to highly salt-sensitive cultivated clones. Understanding the molecular basis of this variation has profound implications for saline–alkali land reclamation and salt-tolerant variety breeding. This review systematically synthesizes current knowledge on Populus salt-stress responses, covering three primary injury mechanisms (osmotic stress, ionic toxicity, and oxidative damage) and the corresponding physiological countermeasures. We further survey functional genes across four major categories: ion transporters, osmotic-adjustment enzymes, antioxidant-defense components, and transcription factors. Crucially, we extend beyond the herbaceous-plant paradigm by examining salt-tolerance strategies that are specific to the woody architecture of Populus: long-distance radial and axial Na+ transport through tall stems, salt sequestration in senescent bark and wood parenchyma, and deep-root ion exclusion strategies. Comparative insights from other woody genera are incorporated to highlight convergent and divergent mechanisms. On this basis, we propose an integrated multi-level regulatory model in which Na+ compartmentalization/efflux serves as the core, ROS homeostasis as the key regulatory axis, and osmotic adjustment as the auxiliary strategy. Outstanding challenges—including unresolved primary salt-signal perception, insufficient pathway integration, and limited in planta gene-function verification—are critically assessed, and future research priorities encompassing multi-omics integration, CRISPR-based gene editing, and natural-population genomics are outlined.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
He et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: