Transcriptome and Metabolome Reveal the Molecular Mechanism of Barley Genotypes Underlying the Response to Low Nitrogen and Resupply

Nitrogen is one of the most important mineral elements for plant growth and development. Excessive nitrogen application not only pollutes the environment, but also reduces the quality of crops. However, are few studies on the mechanism of barley tolerance to low nitrogen at both the transcriptome and metabolomics levels. In this study, the nitrogen-efficient genotype (W26) and the nitrogen-sensitive genotype (W20) of barley were treated with low nitrogen (LN) for 3 days and 18 days, then treated with resupplied nitrogen (RN) from 18 to 21 days. Later, the biomass and the nitrogen content were measured, and RNA-seq and metabolites were analyzed. The nitrogen use efficiency (NUE) of W26 and W20 treated with LN for 21 days was estimated by nitrogen content and dry weight, and the values were 87.54% and 61.74%, respectively. It turned out to have a significant difference in the two genotypes under the LN condition. According to the transcriptome analysis, 7926 differentially expressed genes (DEGs) and 7537 DEGs were identified in the leaves of W26 and W20, respectively, and 6579 DEGs and 7128 DEGs were found in the roots of W26 and W20, respectively. After analysis of the metabolites, 458 differentially expressed metabolites (DAMs) and 425 DAMs were found in the leaves of W26 and W20, respectively, and 486 DAMs and 368 DAMs were found in the roots of W26 and W20, respectively. According to the KEGG joint analysis of DEGs and DAMs, it was discovered that glutathione (GSH) metabolism was the pathway of significant enrichment in the leaves of both W26 and W20. In this study, the metabolic pathways of nitrogen metabolism and GSH metabolism of barley under nitrogen were constructed based on the related DAMs and DEGs. In leaves, GSH, amino acids, and amides were the main identified DAMs, while in roots, GSH, amino acids, and phenylpropanes were mainly found DAMs. Finally, some nitrogen-efficient candidate genes and metabolites were selected based on the results of this study. The responses of W26 and W20 to low nitrogen stress were significantly different at the transcriptional and metabolic levels. The candidate genes that have been screened will be verified in future. These data not only provide new insights into how barley responds to LN, but also provide new directions for studying the molecular mechanisms of barley under abiotic stress.