The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Use of wild relatives to improve salt tolerance in wheat
Open accessAbstract
There is considerable variability in salt tolerance amongst members of the Triticeae, with the tribe even containing a number of halophytes. This is a review of what is known of the differences in salt tolerance of selected species in this tribe of grasses, and the potential to use wild species to improve salt tolerance in wheat. Most investigators have concentrated on differences in ion accumulation in leaves, describing a desirable phenotype with low leaf Na+ concentration and a high K+/Na+ ratio. Little information is available on other traits (such as "tissue tolerance" of accumulated Na+ and Cl-) that might also contribute to salt tolerance. The sources of Na+ "exclusion" amongst the various genomes that make up tetraploid (AABB) durum wheat (Triticum turgidum L. ssp. durum), hexaploid (AABBDD) bread wheat (Triticum aestivum L. ssp. aestivum), and wild relatives (e.g. Aegilops spp., Thinopyrum spp., Elytrigia elongata syn. Lophopyrum elongatum, Hordeum spp.) are described. The halophytes display a capacity for Na+ "exclusion", and in some cases Cl- "exclusion", even at relatively high salinity. Significantly, it is possible to hybridize several wild species in the Triticeae with durum and bread wheat. Progenitors have been used to make synthetic hexaploids. Halophytic relatives, such as tall wheatgrass spp., have been used to produce amphiploids, disomic chromosome addition and substitution lines, and recombinant lines in wheat. Examples of improved Na+ "exclusion" and enhanced salt tolerance in various derivatives from these various hybridization programmes are given. As several sources of improved Na+ "exclusion" are now known to reside on different chromosomes in various genomes of species in the Triticeae, further work to identify the underlying mechanisms and then to pyramid the controlling genes for the various traits, that could act additively or even synergistically, might enable substantial gains in salt tolerance to be achieved.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
An examination of selection criteria for salt tolerance in wheat, barley and triticale genotypes
Rawson, H., Richards, R., & Munns, R. (1988) · Australian Journal of Agricultural Research · doi:10.1071/ar9880759 · Cited by 144
Self-citation
Cited by
Salinity tolerance in halophytes*
Flowers, T. J., & Colmer, T. D. (2008) · New Phytologist · doi:10.1111/j.1469-8137.2008.02531.x · Cited by 2,789
Self-citationPlant salt tolerance: adaptations in halophytes
Flowers, T. J., & Colmer, T. D. (2015) · Annals of Botany · doi:10.1093/aob/mcu267 · Cited by 835
Self-citationQuantitative Trait Loci and Crop Performance under Abiotic Stress: Where Do We Stand?: Table I.
Collins, N. C., Tardieu, F., & Tuberosa, R. (2008) · PLANT PHYSIOLOGY · doi:10.1104/pp.108.118117 · Cited by 559
Genetic analysis of abiotic stress tolerance in crops
Roy, S. J., Tucker, E. J., & Tester, M. (2011) · Current Opinion in Plant Biology · doi:10.1016/j.pbi.2011.03.002 · Cited by 264
Improving crop salt tolerance using transgenic approaches: an update and physiological analysis
Kotula, L., Garcia Caparros, P., Zörb, C., Colmer, T. D., & Flowers, T. J. (2020) · Plant, Cell & Environment · doi:10.1111/pce.13865 · Cited by 125
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Colmer, T. D., Flowers, T. J., & Munns, R.
- Venue
- Journal of Experimental Botany
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2006-03-01
- Volume
- 57
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1059-1078
- ISSN
- 0022-0957 (ISSN-L)
- 1460-2431
- OpenAlex
- W2150912198
- Cited by
- 523
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 20.91
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Use of wild relatives to improve salt tolerance in wheat. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/jxb/erj124
- The paper
- Colmer, T. D., Flowers, T. J., & Munns, R. (2006). Use of wild relatives to improve salt tolerance in wheat. Journal of Experimental Botany. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erj124
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.