Comparative Leaf and Root Transcriptomic Analysis of two Rice Japonica Cultivars Reveals Major Differences in the Root Early Response to Osmotic Stress

Rice

Table 1 Relative water content (RWC) measurements of rice cultivars

	start		3 h		24 h		48 h
CV	mean	p	mean	p	mean	p	mean	p
Carnaroli	95.3	bcd	68.3	abcd	16.8	abc	14.3	a
Gigante Vercelli	94.4	abcd	66.9	abc	17.2	abc	12.0	a
Loto	91.8	a	64.6	ab	33.9	abcde	11.7	a
Maratelli	92.9	ab	63.4	a	13.7	ab	13.8	a
Vialone Nano	93.3	abc	62.8	a	11.9	a	9.2	a
Thaibonnet	96.7	d	84.0	efg	39.7	cdef	18.5	ab
Baldo	94.6	abcd	78.1	defg	35.7	bcdef	23.6	abc
Gladio	97.0	d	85.6	fg	28.1	abcd	31.5	abc
Koral	92.9	ab	77.9	defg	50.6	defg	27.0	abc
Salvo	96.2	cd	76.8	cdef	30.3	abcde	28.1	abc
SISR215	95.3	bcd	78.4	defg	37.1	cdef	30.4	abc
Volano	93.9	abcd	74.7	bcde	34.4	abcdef	26.7	abc
Arborio	95.7	bcd	79.8	efg	52.8	efg	37.6	bc
Venere	96.4	cd	87.9	g	62.9	gh	44.6	cd
Asia	96.1	cd	85.3	efg	57.0	fgh	63.5	de
Augusto	94.3	abcd	76.9	cdef	76.6	hi	82.4	ef
Eurosis	94.2	abcd	87.0	fg	89.7	i	86.4	f

Data were taken following 0, 3, 24 and 48 h of PEG treatment. Each percentage value is the mean of 5 plants. For each sampling time, data were subjected to a one-way analysis of variance to compare the different varieties. Different letters in the same column show significant differences based on a Tukey’s test (p ≤ 0.001)