Immune-metabolic crop management through phase-timed anti-stress interventions

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7124/FEEO.v39.1841
Keywords: phase-time management, immune-metabolic states, stress regulators

Abstract

Aim. To develop a phase–time management (PTM) framework linking the efficiency of stress-protective interventions to plant physiological state, and to define phase-specific protocols with verifiable field predictions. Methods. System analysis of plant molecular physiology literature, conceptual modelling of the SA–JA/ET–ABA–TOR multistable signalling network, comparative evaluation of stress modulators across plant states, and formulation of experimentally testable hypotheses for field validation. Results. The PTM concept is based on immune-metabolic multistability with five attractor states (S₁–S₅), hysteresis of signalling transitions, and defined sensitivity windows (PSW, RSW, BSW). Three phase-specific protocols are proposed: (A) cytokinin application during post-ABA recovery phase resulting in + 15% grain yield; (B) glycine betaine applied 72 h before stress preserving ≥ 40% cell wall invertase activity; (C) melatonin + nitrate applied after herbicide stress reducing SnRK1-dominant state duration by 2–3 days. Field diagnostic markers include Fv/Fm, leaf water potential, stomatal conductance, and leaf temperature. Conclusions. PTM represents a novel systems-level agronomic framework integrating plant physiological state into the timing and selection of stress-protective interventions. Proper alignment of compound, dose, and sensitivity window improves ROI to 9:1–15:1 compared to reactive management.

References

Conrath U., Beckers G. J. M., Langenbach C. J. G., Jaskiewicz M. R. Priming for enhanced defense. Annual Review of Phytopathology. 2015. Vol. 53. P. 97–119. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-phyto-080614-120132.

Cortleven A., Schmülling T. Regulation of chloroplast development and function by cytokinin. Journal of Experimental Botany. 2015. Vol. 66, No. 16. P. 4999–5013. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erv132.

FAO. World Food and Agriculture – Statistical Yearbook 2023. Rome : FAO, 2023. 368 p. https://doi.org/10.4060/cc8166en.

Ferrell J. E., Jr., Ha S. H. Ultrasensitivity part III: cascades, bistable switches, and oscillators. Trends in Biochemical Sciences. 2014. Vol. 39, No. 12. P. 612–618. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tibs.2014.10.002.

González A., Hall M. N. Nutrient sensing and TOR signaling in yeast and mammals. EMBO Journal. 2017. Vol. 36, No. 4. P. 397–408. https://doi.org/10.15252/embj.201696010.

Gupta A., Rico-Medina A., Caño-Delgado A. I. The physiology of plant responses to drought. Science. 2020. Vol. 368, No. 6488. P. 266–269. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaz7614.

Hartwell L. H., Hopfield J. J., Leibler S., Murray A. W. From molecular to modular cell biology. Nature. 1999. Vol. 402, No. 6761 (Suppl.). P. C47–C52. https://doi.org/10.1038/35011540.

Khablak S. G., Spivak S. I., Pastukhova N. L., Yemets A. I., Blume Y. B. Cytokinin oxidase/dehydrogenase as an important target for increasing plant productivity. Cytology and Genetics. 2024. Vol. 58, No. 2. P. 115–125. https://doi.org/10.3103/S0095452724020051.

Khablak S. H., Bondareva L. M., Dolia M. M., Spychak V. M., Lykholat T. Y., Sklyar T. V., Lykholat Y. V. Integrative model of plant immunity to pathogens and stresses: A multilevel signal-metabolic network. Regulatory Mechanisms in Biosystems. 2025. Vol. 16 (4). P. e25175. https://doi.org/10.15421/0225175.

Rivero R. M., Mittler R., Blumwald E., Zandalinas S. I. Developing climate-resilient crops: improving plant tolerance to stress combination. Plant Journal. 2022. Vol. 109, No. 2. P. 373–389. https://doi.org/10.1111/tpj.15483.

Roitsch T., González M.-C. Function and regulation of plant invertases: sweet sensations. Trends in Biochemical Sciences. 2004. Vol. 9, No. 12. P. 606–613. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tplants.2004.10.009.

Ruan Y.-L., Jin Y., Yang Y.-J., Li G.-J., Boyer J. S. Sugar input, metabolism, and signaling mediated by invertase: roles in development, yield potential, and response to drought and heat. Molecular Plant. 2010. Vol. 3, No. 6. P. 942–955. https://doi.org/10.1093/mp/ssq044.

Wang P., Zhao Y., Li Z., Hsu C.-C., Liu X., Fu L., Zhu J.-K., Xiong Y. Reciprocal regulation of the TOR kinase and ABA receptor balances plant growth and stress response. Molecular Cell. 2018. Vol. 69, No. 1. P. 100–112.e6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2017.12.002.

Yasuda M., Ishikawa A., Jikumaru Y., Seki M., Umezawa T., Asami T., Nakashita H. Antagonistic interaction between systemic acquired resistance and the abscisic acid-mediated abiotic stress response in Arabidopsis. Plant Cell. 2008. Vol. 20, No. 6. P. 1678–1692. https://doi.org/10.1105/tpc.107.054296.

Zandalinas S. I., Fichman Y., Devireddy A. R., Sengupta S., Azad R. K., Mittler R. Systemic signaling during abiotic stress combination in plants. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2020. Vol. 117, No. 24. P. 13810–13820. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2005077117.