Xiaoru Fan1,2
Yong Zhang3*- 1School of Chemistry and Life Science, Anshan Normal University, Anshan, China
- 2Liaoning Key Laboratory of Development and Utilization for Natural Products Active Molecules, Anshan, China
- 3Wuxi Branch of Jiangsu Academy of Agricultural, Wuxi, China
Drought stress is one of the most devastating threats to global agriculture. Understanding plant adaptation to water scarcity is of paramount importance for food security. In the last several years, epigenetic regulation, especially RNA methylation, has been shown to play an important role in post-transcriptional gene regulation in plant stress response. Here, we summarize recent advances in studying the epitranscriptomic mechanisms underlying plant drought tolerance. We will introduce various types of RNA modifications, provide an overview of “writer”, “eraser” and “reader” proteins mediating m6A modification in plant system, and discuss different technologies for detecting m6A and several other modifications including m5C, m1A, m3C, m7G and m1A with focus on principles and technical consideration. Finally, we will discuss evidence from multiple species to suggest that water deficiency can alter the abundance of m6A modification on RNA molecules in a dynamic manner. The modified transcripts go through differential stability, translation efficiency and process proficiency levels to regulate various physiological processes including but not limited to stomatal movement, ROS signaling and hormonal action. Furthermore, we will also highlight the possible means through which modulation of m6A level could be utilized for generating drought tolerant crops through genetic or biotechnological approaches. This analysis establishes RNA methylation, particularly m6A, as a pivotal and reversible regulatory mechanism in plant drought stress responses and identifies key future research avenues for both fundamental understanding and crop improvement.
1 Introduction
Drought is one of the most threatening abiotic stresses facing crops globally, and drought stress greatly reduces crop quality and yield (Zhang et al., 2023). Due to increased evapotranspiration, water scarcity will become more severe with global warming, and the annual crop yield reductions due to drought factors around the world are enormous and have exceeded the yield reductions due to other environmental factors combined (Lesk et al., 2016). Drought tolerance has been identified as a major concern for crop improvement due to the increasing problems of decreasing water resources and arable land constraints (Shan et al., 2018; Fan et al., 2024). Drought tolerant utilization of crops and development of marginal land for cultivation is gradually becoming imperative (Shan et al., 2018). Drought stress leads to a series of physiological changes in plants such as restricted leaf stomatal conductance (Lawlor and Tezara, 2009), reduced CO2 uptake, limited carbon assimilation processes, unsteady light energy utilization and altered chloroplast photochemistry, which leads to a decrease in photosynthetic rate (Ramachandra Reddy et al., 2004; Mukarram et al., 2021).
Since plants are a diverse group of organisms that cannot move from their location, they need to develop strategies to cope with changing environments without compromising their ability to survive and reproduce in the future (Alonso et al., 2019). Epigenetic regulation is closely linked to plant response to drought stress. The role of epigenetic factors, including DNA methylation, small RNAs regulation, post-translational histone modifications and RNA modification has become significant in modulating plant responses to the environment (Lamke and Baurle, 2017). Among epigenetic modifications, methylation modifications are present on DNA, RNA and histones (Shinde et al., 2023). Therefore, this review summarizes the latest research advances in RNA methylation under drought stress, focusing on its modification types, detection techniques, and regulatory mechanisms. Unlike previous reviews that primarily focused on the mechanisms of m6A in stress within single species, this review integrates dynamic changes in RNA methylation profiles across diverse crop and forest tree species under drought stress. It systematically reviews detection technologies applicable to plant samples and highlights the translational potential of epigenomics in crop improvement. By synthesizing cross-species evidence and integrating mechanistic insights with agricultural applications, this review aims to provide a timely and targeted academic resource to advance both theoretical understanding and practical strategies for enhancing crop drought tolerance.
2 RNA methylation types and features
RNA modification, a type of nucleic acid modification at the post-transcriptional level, has been a hot research topic in the field of epigenetics in recent years (Chmielowska-Bak et al., 2019). More than 150 RNA modifications have been identified, and they are widely distributed on different classes of RNAs such as messenger RNA (mRNA), transporter RNA (tRNA), ribosomal RNAs (rRNA) and other non-coding RNA (ncRNA) (Nachtergaele and He, 2017). The most abundant internal RNA modification is methylation of RNA. Methylation of RNA means that methylation is formed at specific sites on RNA bases, such as nitrogen and carbon atoms. The types of RNA methylation modifications widely found in eukaryotes include N6-methyladenine (m6A), 5-methylcytosine (m5C), 3-methylcytosine (m3C), N7-methylguanine (m7G), as well as N1-methyladenosine (m1A), N6,2-O-dimethyladenosine (m6Am) in mRNA. Meanwhile, Eukaryotic tRNAs contain base and ribose methylations, and human rRNA contains 2-O-methyl and base methylations (Roundtree et al., 2017).
N6 -Methyladenine (m6A) refers to the methylation of adenosine nucleotides at the N-6 position and is the most common and most abundant form of methylation modification in eukaryotic mRNAs (Kierzek and Kierzek, 2003; Roundtree and He, 2016). m6A modification was first identified in Novikoff hepatocellular carcinoma cells in 1974 (Desrosiers et al., 1974). Subsequently, m6A modifications have been found in mouse (Mus musculus) (Schibler et al., 1977), Drosophila (Drosophila melanogaster) (Levis and Penman, 1978), wheat (Triticum aestivum) (Kennedy and Lane, 1979), oat (Avena sativa) (Haugland and Cline, 1980), corn (Zea mays) (Nichols and Welder, 1981), yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) (Bodi et al., 2012), bacteria (Deng et al., 2015) and viruses (Courtney et al., 2017). m6A modifications account for more than 80% of all RNA methylation modifications (Kierzek and Kierzek, 2003). In yeast, the relative amount of m6A [(m6A)/A] is 0.7% to 0.9% (Bodi et al., 2010), whereas in animals and Arabidopsis thaliana, the relative amount of m6A ranges from 0.1% to 0.4% and 0.4% to 1.5%, respectively (Zhong et al., 2008; Shi et al., 2017). Sequences in the vicinity of the m6A modification site have preference and are mainly present on RRACH (R: purine; A: m6A; H: non-guanine) in mammal (Dominissini et al., 2012). In plants, such as Arabidopsis thaliana and maize, in addition to the RRACH sequence, m6A is also distributed in plant-specific UGUA sequences (Luo et al., 2014; Wei et al., 2018; Miao et al., 2020). m6A modifications are distributed in various regions of mRNA, including near the 5’UTR (untranslated region), CDS (coding sequence), 3’UTR, termination codon, and the transcription start site (TSS), and are highly enriched in the vicinity of the termination codon and within the 3’ UTR (Dominissini et al., 2012; Meyer et al., 2012; Zhou et al., 2021).
Eukaryotic mRNAs are methylated by m6A methyltransferases, which recognizes and methylates target mRNAs as a complex (Liu et al., 2014). Writing of m6A is accomplished by a methyltransferase complex. In animals, the complex consists of methyltransferase like 3 (METTL3), methyltransferase like 14 (METTL14), Wilms’ tumor 1-associating protein (WTAP), KIAA1429 (also known as VIRMA: vir-like m6A methyltransferase-associated protein) (Ping et al., 2014; Schwartz et al., 2014). In Arabidopsis thaliana, m6A methyltransferase components include mRNA adenosine methylase (MTA, METTL3 human homolog), MTB (METTL14 human homolog), FKBP12 interacting protein 37 (FIP37, WTAP human homolog), VIRILIZER (KIAA1429 human homolog), and the E3 ubiquitin ligase HAKAI (Zhong et al., 2008; Shen et al., 2016; Ruzicka et al., 2017). The m6A methyltransferase complex catalyzes the addition of methyl groups to adenosine residues at the N6 position using S-adenosylmethionine (SAM) as the methyl donor. This writer complex specifically recognizes and binds to conserved RNA motifs, such as RRACH sequences (where R = purine, A = adenine, C = cytosine, H = non-guanine), to achieve site-specific methylation, thereby establishing the m6A landscape critical for post-transcriptional regulation of gene expression during development and stress responses (Shen et al., 2016). Erasure of m6A is accomplished by demethylases. The demethylases OBESITY-ASSOCIATED PROTEIN (FTO) and ALKBH5 (alkB, alkylation repair homolog 5) have been identified in animals (Jia et al., 2011; Jia et al., 2013; Zheng et al., 2013). In Arabidopsis, the demethylases Alpha-ketoglutarate-dependent dioxygenase homolog 9B (ALKBH9B) and ALKBH10B, homologous to ALKBH5, have been shown to be able to remove m6A methylation modifications (Duan et al., 2017; Martinez-Perez et al., 2017). RNA methylation recognition is mediated by reader proteins, predominantly YTH-domain proteins such as like EVOLUTIONARILY CONSERVED C-TERMINAL REGION2/3/4 (ECT2/3/4). These readers specifically bind to m6A-modified RNAs through their conserved YT521-B homology (YTH) domains, orchestrating downstream regulatory outcomes (Liao et al., 2018). For instance, they modulate RNA stability by recruiting deadenylase complexes like CCR4-NOT, which catalyze poly (A) tail removal to promote RNA degradation (Du et al., 2016). At the same time, readers can also increase the translation efficiency by either promoting ribosome loading on the target mRNAs or help in the formation of polysomes, thereby increasing protein synthesis. Additionally, they regulate subcellular localization of methylated RNAs, either by mediating nuclear-cytoplasmic shuttling or participating in phase separation events that compartmentalize RNAs into membraneless organelles (e.g., stress granules). This multifaceted control ensures precise spatiotemporal regulation of RNA function in response to developmental cues or environmental stresses (Arribas-Hernandez et al., 2018; Wei et al., 2018; Hou et al., 2021). The coordinated actions of these writer, eraser, and reader proteins in shaping the Arabidopsis m6A methylome and regulating RNA fate are schematically summarized in Figure 1.
Figure 1. RNA N6-methyladenine in arabidopsis.
3 RNA methylation detection methods
3.1 m6A detection techniques
Since the methylated base A has not changed its base pairing ability, it cannot be detected by direct sequencing. Unlike DNA methylation, the 5mC in DNA will undergo a base change after bisulphide treatment and can be detected by sequencing, m5A has not found to have a unique chemical reaction (Fan et al., 2020). Early detection relied on techniques like thin-layer chromatography (Keith, 1995) and dot blotting (Nagarajan et al., 2019; Du et al., 2022), or by tracking radiolabeled methyl donors (Munns and Liszewski, 1977; Canaani et al., 1979).
With the development of second-generation sequencing technology, two m6A high-throughput sequencing technologies were developed by two research teams in 2012 independently, called m6A-seq (Dominissini et al., 2012) and MeRIP-seq (m6A-specific methylated RNA immunoprecipitation with next-generation sequencing) (Meyer et al., 2012). Both methods involve immunoprecipitation (IP) and m6A-specific antibodies, followed by sequencing of about 100 nucleotide RNA fragments. They provide transcriptome-wide profiles of m6A-enriched regions, with MeRIP-seq typically focusing on mRNA and m6A-seq on total RNA (Meyer and Jaffrey, 2017). Researchers have characterized m6A modifications in Arabidopsis (Luo et al., 2014; Wang et al., 2015; Shen et al., 2016), rice (Li et al., 2014; Zhang et al., 2019), tomato (Zhou et al., 2019), strawberry (Zhou et al., 2021), and maize (Luo et al., 2020) with MeRIP-seq or m6A-seq. However, their resolution is limited to 100–200 nucleotide fragments, preventing precise site identification.
To achieve single-nucleotide resolution, methods like methylation-iCLIP (miCLIP) were developed. Its principle relies on cross-linking RNA-m6A antibody binding sites, which induces mutations at these specific sites when the antibody-bound RNA is reverse transcribed. Sequencing the unique mutational signature allows precise localization of m6A (Linder et al., 2015; George et al., 2017a). While offering single-nucleotide resolution, miCLIP infers m6A sites indirectly from mutations in neighboring pyrimidines. Consequently, it cannot accurately localize m6A within clusters of adjacent adenines, analyzing m6A distribution in such regions (Tang et al., 2023).
m6A-CLIP (Crosslinking and Immunoprecipitation) sequencing combines CLIP technology with an m6A antibody. RNA is crosslinked to the antibody via UV, followed by immunoprecipitation and sequencing. This method can study the interaction between m6A and RNA-binding proteins. However, it has limitations including low resolution (~100 nt), reliance on antibodies, and potential for false-positive results (Ke et al., 2015).
m6A-REF-seq (RNA Editing-based m6A Detection) is the deamination of unmethylated adenosine (A) to inosine (I) by nitrite treatment, which reads as G in sequencing, while the m6A remains unchanged (still as A). The A-to-G mutation is utilized to identify the m6A site (Schaefer et al., 2009). The advantage is that single bases can be resolved and the level of m6A modification can be quantified. Limitations is dependent on chemical processing, which may affect RNA integrity (Chen et al., 2022). Liu et al. provided GLORI-seq (Glyoxal and nitrite-mediated deamination of unmethylated adenosine) as an improved version of m6A-REF-seq, can perform m6A site detection with higher accuracy (Liu et al., 2023).
DART-seq (Deamination Adjacent to RNA Modification Targets) utilizes the APOBEC1-YTH fusion protein to deaminate cytosine (C) to uracil (U) in the vicinity of m6A, which reads as T in sequencing, thereby inferring the m6A site. It is cost-effective, antibody-free, and suitable for low RNA input, but results depend on transfection efficiency, limiting its use to certain cell types (Meyer, 2019; Saikia et al., 2019).
m6A-SAC-seq (Selective Allyl Chemical Labeling) labels m6A as N6-allyl-m6A (am6A) using the methyltransferase MjDim1. Subsequent cyclization of am6A with iodine treatment introduces a mutation (A→T/C) during reverse transcription to detect m6A. m6A-SAC-seq is single-base resolution, which can be quantitatively determined with only 30 ng of RNA. However, because it relies on enzymatic reactions, it may have sequence preferences (Hu et al., 2022).
Nanopore (m6Anet) is a direct RNA sequencing method. Because modified bases cause changes in current, this method identifies m6A by differences in current signals. nanopore detects single molecules of m6A without the need for antibodies or chemical treatments but relies on computational models and requires high sequencing depth (Hendra et al., 2022).
MAZTER-seq (MazF-mediated m6A Sequencing) takes advantage of that MazF endonuclease can cleave unmethylated ACA sites, leaving the m6A-modified m6ACA to be sequenced. Therefore, this method does not require antibodies. However, this method can only detect about 20% of the m6A sites (ACA motifs) (Garcia-Campos et al., 2019). For this reason, MAZTER-seq is only suitable for studying the distribution of m6A in specific RNA regions like 3’UTR. A systematic comparison of the principles, resolutions, advantages, and limitations of these key m6A detection methods is provided in Table 1.
Table 1. Comparison of m6A detection methods.
3.2 Detection of other RNA modifications
The development of m6A detection methods has advanced epitranscriptomic research and provided a framework for studying other RNA modifications. Based on principles such as immunoprecipitation and nucleotide-resolution mapping established for m6A, similar approaches have been adapted for other modifications.
For m5C, bisulfite sequencing achieves single-nucleotide resolution by deaminating unmodified cytosine, though it causes significant RNA degradation (Schaefer et al., 2009). Alternative methods like DRAM-seq improve specificity by using a fusion of a deaminase with an m5C reader protein (Weigel, 2024). m5C-RIP/miCLIP-seq offers transcriptome-wide profiling through antibody-based enrichment. miCLIP providing near-base resolution via crosslinking-induced mutation signatures (George et al., 2017b; Gu and Liang, 2019).
The identification of m3C is fundamentally different from bisulfite. By using the hydrazine-aniline cleavage in the HAC-seq procedure to specifically fragment RNA at the m3C locus, the modified cytosine can be directly and resolutionly mapped in a chemically specific manner (Cui et al., 2021).
Mapping m7G in the transcriptome with m7G-MaP-seq. This method makes use of mild reduction to transform m7G to an abasic web site, which will induce signature mutations throughout reverse transcription, for transcriptome-wide, single-nucleotide decision profiling (Enroth et al., 2019).
The red-m1A-seq/m1A-ID-seq assay uses an entirely chemical-reduction-based detection and a controlled alkaline rearrangement protocol to create a reverse transcription signature that is verifiable by the sequencing technology (Li et al., 2017). Although nanopore direct RNA sequencing is a single, antibody-free method for simultaneous detection of m1A and other modifications by analyzing native RNA molecule current signatures, it does require computational expertise (Chen et al., 2024).
Distinguishing the cap-proximal modification m6Am from internal m6A can be discriminated by m6Am-seq, where the m6Am is selectively demethylated to an m6A, immunoprecipitated as m6A and subjected to sequencing (Sun et al., 2021). The techniques for identifying these different RNA modifications are summarized in Table 2.
Table 2. Methods for detecting other RNA modifications.
4 The regulatory role of m6A in plant drought stress responses
RNA methylation, especially m6A, as post-transcriptional regulators play a central role in plant responses to drought stress. It dynamically controls mRNA stability, translation and processing to fine-tune the expression of stress-responsive genes.
The functional outcomes of m6A modification are executed by a coordinated set of proteins: writers (methyltransferases), erasers (demethylases), and readers (binding proteins). Their activities collectively shape the dynamic m6A landscape under stress. Transcriptome-wide analyses across diverse species have mapped the global m6A landscape under drought stress, revealing species and context-specific patterns that reflect the actions of these regulatory proteins. In cotton, m6A is generally enriched in 3’UTRs. Drought-treated cotton plants have increased global m6A content, and drought-tolerant cotton varieties accumulate more m6A in 5’UTRs than drought-sensitive ones (Sun et al., 2021). In wheat, drought stress causes 4221 differentially expressed m6A peaks that are mainly enriched in 3’UTRs and positively correlated with gene expression level (Linder et al., 2015). In sugarcane, whole-transcriptome m6A sequencing analysis revealed that drought stress significantly increases m6A modifications on transcripts associated with stress responses. This modification finely regulates gene expression by enhancing mRNA stability, such as in pathways involved in abscisic acid (ABA) biosynthesis (Wei et al., 2023). However, drought stress can globally decrease the levels of m6A modification in Arabidopsis thaliana and sea buckthorn by up-regulating m6A demethylase gene expression, which is consistent with this contradiction due to different species-specific adaptation strategies or at different stress time points (Huong et al., 2020; Miao et al., 2020). In poplar trees, drought can increase the levels of m6A methylation near stop codons and utilizes distal poly (A) sites for mRNA degradation of secondary cell wall synthesis-related genes (Han R. et al., 2023). A combined epitranscriptomic and proteomic study further revealed that these drought-induced m6A changes in stem-differentiating xylem are closely linked to the suppression of genes involved in wood formation, highlighting a direct role of m6A in reprogramming developmental processes under stress (Gao et al., 2022). Beyond poplar, research in rice indicates that drought influences the m6A modification landscape of polysome-bound mRNAs, thereby modulating translational efficiency and presenting a crucial layer of regulation in drought response (Dawane et al., 2024). Furthermore, genome-wide analysis in switchgrass revealed that drought stress significantly alters the expression profiles of m6A-regulated genes, with particularly pronounced downregulation of reader genes. This suggests that this protein category may play a specific regulatory role in stress adaptation (Liu et al., 2024).
The writers, such as MTA in Arabidopsis, are critical for drought stress, as its loss leads to hypersensitivity. MTA-dependent m6A methylation enhances translation of drought inducible gene RD29A and COR47 (Wu et al., 2024). Writer function is conserved across species to improve drought resistance, as evinced by enhanced water melon drought resistance mediated by ClMTB, NtFIP37B of tobacco, PbrMTA1 in pear and PtrMTA of poplar (He et al., 2021; Li et al., 2023; Luo et al., 2023; Kumari et al., 2024). Specifically, in pear trees, silencing the m6A methyltransferase gene PbrMTA1 reduces plant drought tolerance, further confirming the crucial role of the “writer” function in drought resistance of woody fruit trees (Han C. et al., 2023). MdMTA improves apple’s resistance stabilizing the transcripts involved in lignin deposition and oxidative stress (Zhang et al., 2021).
Readers recognize the m6A mark to execute downstream processes. The reader protein ECT8 in Arabidopsis is an intracellular sensor of ABA, and forms phase-separated condensates that feed back to ABA signaling and drought response regulation (Yu et al., 2021). Biomolecular condensates formed through phase separation have emerged as a novel mechanism by which m6A effectors regulate RNA metabolism and mediate plant stress adaptation (Shen, 2025). In foxtail millet, the reader SiYTH1 imparts drought tolerance by stabilizing mRNAs that regulate stomatal closure and ROS scavenging; loss-of-function mutants are drought-sensitive while overexpressors are tolerant (Pan et al., 2024). The wheat reader TaETC9 is also required for full drought tolerance (Linder et al., 2015). Transcriptomic studies in pine and camellia also show that reader genes are responsive to drought, pointing towards their functional importance being conserved as well (Lu et al., 2020; Yao et al., 2024).
Erasers provide reversible control. The Arabidopsis demethylase ALKBH10B is a positive regulator of drought tolerance and seed germination during dehydration stress (Hou et al., 2022). Homologs of this enzyme, including GhALKBH10B in cotton, regulate drought response by decreasing m6A levels on ABA and Ca²+ signaling gene transcripts to accelerate their decay (Sun et al., 2021). In rice, analysis of the expression profiles of m6A-regulating genes revealed that different types of “eraser” and “writer” genes exhibit complex temporal expression changes under stresses such as drought (Hasan et al., 2024). Other erasers such as ALKBH6 and ALKBH9C in Arabidopsis can also affect drought resistance and seed germination, even though they may display complex and developmentally regulated effects (Mao et al., 2021). Drought strongly induces the expression of genes for demethylases like CcALKBH10B in pigeon pea and HrALKBH10B/C/D in sea buckthorn, emphasizing their wider involvement in responses to stress (Wei et al., 2023; Su et al., 2024).
The importance of the m6A pathway is further highlighted by recent success of biotechnological applications. Transgenic expression of the human RNA demethylase FTO in rice and potato plants increases root growth and photosynthesis, and enhances drought tolerance, underlining the biotechnological potential of utilizing epitranscriptomic information for crop improvement (Gao et al., 2022). In summary, these studies unequivocally demonstrate that m6A plays a central role in coordinating the intricate network of transcriptional and translational reprogramming for plants to cope with water-deficit stress. Compilation of evidence demonstrating the role of m6A writers, erasers and readers in drought tolerance from various plant species is provided in Table 3.
Table 3. Role of m6A in plant drought stress response.
5 Future perspectives
Progress has been made, but the epitranscriptomic regulation of plant responses to drought remains largely unexplored. Especially the field of non-m6A RNA methylation in drought response remains highly underexplored, presenting a critical knowledge gap and an exciting frontier for future research. Furthermore, more studies should focus on attaining spatiotemporal resolution of RNA modification dynamics in tissues, cell types, and compartments during stress progression, using emerging single-cell and spatial transcriptomics technologies. Understanding how the epitranscriptome crosstalks with other epigenetic processes, such as DNA methylation, histone modifications, and noncoding RNAs to establish the stress memory and coordinate the adaptive response represents a major challenge and opportunity.
Using genetic engineering, genome editing, and synthetic biology to precisely control the activity of key writer, eraser or reader proteins can offer an approach to engineer crop plants that are resilient to stress. However, translating this potential into reliable crop improvement requires careful navigation of several challenges. As observed in certain mutant studies, manipulation of m6A levels may lead to pleiotropic developmental defects (Shen et al., 2016), underscoring the necessity for precise and context-specific control as m6A inherently regulates a broad spectrum of growth and developmental processes alongside stress responses (Jia et al., 2013). Therefore, future research should explore stress-specific, spatially controllable regulatory strategies, such as employing stress-inducible promoters or tissue-specific regulatory systems. Furthermore, epigenomic engineering requires extensive testing across diverse genetic backgrounds and agronomic environments to balance stress tolerance with yield. Comprehensive field trials that evaluate changes in key yield components under realistic drought stress scenarios are indispensable for translating laboratory findings into tangible crop improvement.
Continued innovation in RNA detection methods, particularly to enhance their performance and standardization for plant samples, will be critical for uncovering new regulatory insights and translating mechanistic knowledge into crop improvement.
Author contributions
XF: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Resources, Software, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. YZ: Conceptualization, Funding acquisition, Resources, Supervision, Validation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing.
Funding
The author(s) declared that financial support was received for this work and/or its publication. This work was supported by the Liaoning Provincial Department of Science and Technology Doctoral Research Initiation Fund Program (2023-BS-209); Wuxi’s “Taihu Light” Scientific and Technological Innovation Initiative (K20241057); Scientific Research Project of Liaoning Education Department (LJ242510169001).
Acknowledgments
We acknowledge the use of BioRender.com (license agreement number PK293GGSKJ) for the creation of schematic figures in this publication.
Conflict of interest
The author(s) declared that this work was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Generative AI statement
The author(s) declared that generative AI was not used in the creation of this manuscript.
Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
References
Alonso, C., Ramos-Cruz, D., and Becker, C. (2019). The role of plant epigenetics in biotic interactions. New Phytol. 221, 731–737. doi: 10.1111/nph.15408
Arribas-Hernandez, L., Bressendorff, S., Hansen, M. H., Poulsen, C., Erdmann, S., and Brodersen, P. (2018). An m(6)A-YTH module controls developmental timing and morphogenesis in arabidopsis. Plant Cell 30, 952–967. doi: 10.1105/tpc.17.00833
Bodi, Z., Button, J. D., Grierson, D., and Fray, R. G. (2010). Yeast targets for mRNA methylation. Nucleic Acids Res. 38, 5327–5335. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkq266
Bodi, Z., Zhong, S., Mehra, S., Song, J., Graham, N., Li, H., et al. (2012). Adenosine methylation in arabidopsis mRNA is associated with the 3’ End and reduced levels cause developmental defects. Front. Plant Sci. 3. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2012.00048
Canaani, D., Kahana, C., Lavi, S., and Groner, Y. (1979). Identification and mapping of N6-methyladenosine containing sequences in simian virus 40 RNA. Nucleic Acids Res. 6, 2879–2899. doi: 10.1093/nar/6.8.2879
Chen, H. X., Zhang, Z., Ma, D. Z., Chen, L. Q., and Luo, G. Z. (2022). Mapping single-nucleotide m(6)A by m(6)A-REF-seq. Methods 203, 392–398. doi: 10.1016/j.ymeth.2021.06.013
Chen, S., Meng, J., and Zhang, Y. (2024). Quantitative profiling N1-methyladenosine (m1A) RNA methylation from Oxford nanopore direct RNA sequencing data. Methods 228, 30–37. doi: 10.1016/j.ymeth.2024.05.009
Chmielowska-Bak, J., Arasimowicz-Jelonek, M., and Deckert, J. (2019). In search of the mRNA modification landscape in plants. BMC Plant Biol. 19, 421. doi: 10.1186/s12870-019-2033-2
Courtney, D. G., Kennedy, E. M., Dumm, R. E., Bogerd, H. P., Tsai, K., Heaton, N. S., et al. (2017). Epitranscriptomic enhancement of influenza A virus gene expression and replication. Cell Host Microbe 22, 377–386. doi: 10.1016/j.chom.2017.08.004
Cui, J., Liu, Q., Sendinc, E., Shi, Y., and Gregory, R. I. (2021). Nucleotide resolution profiling of m3C RNA modification by HAC-seq. Nucleic Acids Res. 49, e27. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkaa1186
Dawane, A., Deshpande, S., Vijayaraghavreddy, P., and Vemanna, R. S. (2024). Polysome-bound mRNAs and translational mechanisms regulate drought tolerance in rice. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 208, 108513. doi: 10.1016/j.plaphy.2024.108513
Deng, X., Chen, K., Luo, G. Z., Weng, X., Ji, Q., Zhou, T., et al. (2015). Widespread occurrence of N6-methyladenosine in bacterial mRNA. Nucleic Acids Res. 43, 6557–6567. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkv596
Desrosiers, R., Friderici, K., and Rottman, F. (1974). Identification of methylated nucleosides in messenger RNA from novikoff hepatoma cells. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 71, 3971–3975. doi: 10.1073/pnas.71.10.3971
Dominissini, D., Moshitch-Moshkovitz, S., Schwartz, S., Salmon-Divon, M., Ungar, L., Osenberg, S., et al. (2012). Topology of the human and mouse m6A RNA methylomes revealed by m6A-seq. Nature 485, 201–206. doi: 10.1038/nature11112
Du, H., Zhao, Y., He, J., Zhang, Y., Xi, H., Liu, M., et al. (2016). YTHDF2 destabilizes m(6)A-containing RNA through direct recruitment of the CCR4-NOT deadenylase complex. Nat. Commun. 7, 12626. doi: 10.1038/ncomms12626
Du, Y., Xia, M., and Hu, Z. (2022). Analysis of N (6) -methyladenosine RNA modification levels by dot blotting. Bio Protoc. 12, e4565. doi: 10.21769/BioProtoc.4565
Duan, H. C., Wei, L. H., Zhang, C., Wang, Y., Chen, L., Lu, Z., et al. (2017). ALKBH10B is an RNA N(6)-methyladenosine demethylase affecting arabidopsis floral transition. Plant Cell 29, 2995–3011. doi: 10.1105/tpc.16.00912
Enroth, C., Poulsen, L. D., Iversen, S., Kirpekar, F., Albrechtsen, A., and Vinther, J. (2019). Detection of internal N7-methylguanosine (m7G) RNA modifications by mutational profiling sequencing. Nucleic Acids Res. 47, e216. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkz736
Fan, X., Chen, J., Wu, Y., Teo, C., Xu, G., and Fan, X. (2020). Genetic and global epigenetic modification, which determines the phenotype of transgenic rice? Int. J. Mol. Sci. 21, 1819. doi: 10.3390/ijms21051819
Fan, Y., Sun, C., Yan, K., Li, P., Hein, I., Gilroy, E. M., et al. (2024). Recent advances in studies of genomic DNA methylation and its involvement in regulating drought stress response in crops. Plants (Basel) 13, 1400. doi: 10.3390/plants13101400
Gao, Y., Liu, X., Jin, Y., Wu, J., Li, S., Li, Y., et al. (2022). Drought induces epitranscriptome and proteome changes in stem-differentiating xylem of Populus trichocarpa. Plant Physiol. 190, 459–479. doi: 10.1093/plphys/kiac272
Garcia-Campos, M. A., Edelheit, S., Toth, U., Safra, M., Shachar, R., Viukov, S., et al. (2019). Deciphering the &x201c;m6A code&x201d; via antibody-independent quantitative profiling. Cell 178, 731–747. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2019.06.013
George, H., Ule, J., and Hussain, S. (2017a). “Illustrating the Epitranscriptome at Nucleotide Resolution Using Methylation-iCLIP (miCLIP),” in RNA Methylation: Methods and Protocols. Ed. Lusser, A., (New York, NY: Humana Press) 1562, 91–106. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4939-6807-7_7
George, H., Ule, J., and Hussain, S. (2017b). Illustrating the epitranscriptome at nucleotide resolution using methylation-iCLIP (miCLIP). Methods Mol. Biol. 1562, 91–106. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4939-6807-7_7
Gu, X. and Liang, Z. (2019). Transcriptome-wide mapping 5-methylcytosine by m(5)C RNA immunoprecipitation followed by deep sequencing in plant. Methods Mol. Biol. 1933, 389–394. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4939-9045-0_24
Han, C., Dong, H., Qiao, Q., Dai, Y., Huang, X., and Zhang, S. (2023). Comparative genomic analysis of N6-methyladenosine regulators in nine rosaceae species and functional characterization in response to drought stress in pear. Hortic. Plant J. 9, 693–704. doi: 10.1016/j.hpj.2022.09.008
Han, R., Shoaib, Y., Cai, J., and Kang, H. (2023). ALKBH10B-mediated m6A demethylation is crucial for drought tolerance by affecting mRNA stability in Arabidopsis. Environ. Exp. Bot. 209, 105306. doi: 10.1016/j.envexpbot.2023.105306
Hasan, M., Nishat, Z. S., Hasan, M. S., Hossain, T., and Ghosh, A. (2024). Identification of m6A RNA methylation genes in Oryza sativa and expression profiling in response to different developmental and environmental stimuli. Biochem. Biophys. Rep. 38, 101677. doi: 10.1016/j.bbrep.2024.101677
Haugland, R. A. and Cline, M. G. (1980). Post-transcriptional modifications of oat coleoptile ribonucleic acids. 5’-Terminal capping and methylation of internal nucleosides in poly(A)-rich RNA. Eur. J. Biochem. 104, 271–277. doi: 10.1111/j.1432-1033.1980.tb04425.x
He, Y., Li, Y., Yao, Y., Zhang, H., Wang, Y., Gao, J., et al. (2021). Overexpression of watermelon m(6)A methyltransferase ClMTB enhances drought tolerance in tobacco by mitigating oxidative stress and photosynthesis inhibition and modulating stress-responsive gene expression. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 168, 340–352. doi: 10.1016/j.plaphy.2021.10.007
Hendra, C., Pratanwanich, P. N., Wan, Y. K., Goh, W. S. S., Thiery, A., and Goke, J. (2022). Detection of m6A from direct RNA sequencing using a multiple instance learning framework. Nat. Methods 19, 1590–1598. doi: 10.1038/s41592-022-01666-1
Hou, N., Li, C., He, J., Liu, Y., Yu, S., Malnoy, M., et al. (2022). MdMTA-mediated m(6) A modification enhances drought tolerance by promoting mRNA stability and translation efficiency of genes involved in lignin deposition and oxidative stress. New Phytol. 234, 1294–1314. doi: 10.1111/nph.18069
Hou, Y., Sun, J., Wu, B., Gao, Y., Nie, H., Nie, Z., et al. (2021). CPSF30-L-mediated recognition of mRNA m(6)A modification controls alternative polyadenylation of nitrate signaling-related gene transcripts in Arabidopsis. Mol. Plant 14, 688–699. doi: 10.1016/j.molp.2021.01.013
Hu, L., Liu, S., Peng, Y., Ge, R., Su, R., Senevirathne, C., et al. (2022). m6A RNA modifications are measured at single-base resolution across the mammalian transcriptome. Nat. Biotechnol. 40, 1210–1219. doi: 10.1038/s41587-022-01243-z
Huong, T. T., Ngoc, L. N. T., and Kang, H. (2020). Functional characterization of a putative RNA demethylase ALKBH6 in arabidopsis growth and abiotic stress responses. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 21, 6707. doi: 10.3390/ijms21186707
Jia, G., Fu, Y., and He, C. (2013). Reversible RNA adenosine methylation in biological regulation. Trends Genet. 29, 108–115. doi: 10.1016/j.tig.2012.11.003
Jia, G., Fu, Y., Zhao, X., Dai, Q., Zheng, G., Yang, Y., et al. (2011). N6-methyladenosine in nuclear RNA is a major substrate of the obesity-associated FTO. Nat. Chem. Biol. 7, 885–887. doi: 10.1038/nchembio.687
Ke, S., Alemu, E. A., Mertens, C., Gantman, E. C., Fak, J. J., Mele, A., et al. (2015). A majority of m6A residues are in the last exons, allowing the potential for 3’ UTR regulation. Genes Dev. 29, 2037–2053. doi: 10.1101/gad.269415.115
Keith, G. (1995). Mobilities of modified ribonucleotides on two-dimensional cellulose thin-layer chromatography. Biochimie 77, 142–144. doi: 10.1016/0300-9084(96)88118-1
Kennedy, T. D. and Lane, B. G. (1979). Wheat embryo ribonucleates. XIII. Methyl-substituted nucleoside constituents and 5’-terminal dinucleotide sequences in bulk poly(AR)-rich RNA from imbibing wheat embryos. Can. J. Biochem. 57, 927–931. doi: 10.1139/o79-112
Kierzek, E. and Kierzek, R. (2003). The thermodynamic stability of RNA duplexes and hairpins containing N6-alkyladenosines and 2-methylthio-N6-alkyladenosines. Nucleic Acids Res. 31, 4472–4480. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkg633
Kumari, P., Bhattacharjee, S., Venkat Raman, K., Tilgam, J., Paul, K., Senthil, K., et al. (2024). Identification of methyltransferase and demethylase genes and their expression profiling under biotic and abiotic stress in pigeon pea (Cajanus cajan [L.] Millspaugh). Front. Plant Sci. 15. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2024.1521758
Lamke, J. and Baurle, I. (2017). Epigenetic and chromatin-based mechanisms in environmental stress adaptation and stress memory in plants. Genome Biol. 18, 124. doi: 10.1186/s13059-017-1263-6
Lawlor, D. W. and Tezara, W. (2009). Causes of decreased photosynthetic rate and metabolic capacity in water-deficient leaf cells: a critical evaluation of mechanisms and integration of processes. Ann. Bot. 103, 561–579. doi: 10.1093/aob/mcn244
Lesk, C., Rowhani, P., and Ramankutty, N. (2016). Influence of extreme weather disasters on global crop production. Nature 529, 84–87. doi: 10.1038/nature16467
Levis, R. and Penman, S. (1978). 5’-terminal structures of poly(A)+ cytoplasmic messenger RNA and of poly(A)+ and poly(A)- heterogeneous nuclear RNA of cells of the dipteran Drosophila melanogaster. J. Mol. Biol. 120, 487–515. doi: 10.1016/0022-2836(78)90350-9
Li, B., Zhang, M., Sun, W., Yue, D., Ma, Y., Zhang, B., et al. (2023). N6-methyladenosine RNA modification regulates cotton drought response in a Ca(2+) and ABA-dependent manner. Plant Biotechnol. J. 21, 1270–1285. doi: 10.1111/pbi.14036
Li, X., Peng, J., and Yi, C. (2017). Transcriptome-wide mapping of N (1)-methyladenosine methylome. Methods Mol. Biol. 1562, 245–255. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4939-6807-7_16
Li, Y., Wang, X., Li, C., Hu, S., Yu, J., and Song, S. (2014). Transcriptome-wide N6-methyladenosine profiling of rice callus and leaf reveals the presence of tissue-specific competitors involved in selective mRNA modification. RNA Biol. 11, 1180–1188. doi: 10.4161/rna.36281
Liao, S., Sun, H., and Xu, C. (2018). YTH domain: A family of N6-methyladenosine (m6A) readers. Genomics Proteomics Bioinf. 16, 99–107. doi: 10.1016/j.gpb.2018.04.002
Linder, B., Grozhik, A. V., Olarerin-George, A. O., Meydan, C., Mason, C. E., and Jaffrey, S. R. (2015). Single-nucleotide-resolution mapping of m6A and m6Am throughout the transcriptome. Nat. Methods 12, 767–772. doi: 10.1038/nmeth.3453
Liu, C., Sun, H., Yi, Y., Shen, W., Li, K., Xiao, Y., et al. (2023). Absolute quantification of single-base m6A methylation in the mammalian transcriptome using GLORI. Nat. Biotechnol. 41, 355–366. doi: 10.1038/s41587-022-01487-9
Liu, H., Lin, M., Zhou, D., Liu, B., Li, X., Wang, H., et al. (2024). Characterization of the m6A gene family in switchgrass and functional analysis of PvALKBH10 during flowering. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 212, 108781. doi: 10.1016/j.plaphy.2024.108781
Liu, J., Yue, Y., Han, D., Wang, X., Fu, Y., Zhang, L., et al. (2014). A METTL3-METTL14 complex mediates mammalian nuclear RNA N6-adenosine methylation. Nat. Chem. Biol. 10, 93–95. doi: 10.1038/nchembio.1432
Lu, L., Zhang, Y., He, Q., Qi, Z., Zhang, G., Xu, W., et al. (2020). MTA, an RNA m(6)A methyltransferase, enhances drought tolerance by regulating the development of trichomes and roots in poplar. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 21, 2462. doi: 10.3390/ijms21072462
Luo, G. Z., MacQueen, A., Zheng, G., Duan, H., Dore, L. C., Lu, Z., et al. (2014). Unique features of the m6A methylome in Arabidopsis thaliana. Nat. Commun. 5, 5630. doi: 10.1038/ncomms6630
Luo, W., Tang, Y., Li, S., Zhang, L., Liu, Y., Zhang, R., et al. (2023). The m(6) A reader SiYTH1 enhances drought tolerance by affecting the messenger RNA stability of genes related to stomatal closure and reactive oxygen species scavenging in Setaria italica. J. Integr. Plant Biol. 65, 2569–2586. doi: 10.1111/jipb.13575
Luo, J. H., Wang, Y., Wang, M., Zhang, L. Y., Peng, H. R., Zhou, Y. Y., et al. (2020). Natural variation in RNA m(6)A methylation and its relationship with translational status. Plant Physiol. 182, 332–344. doi: 10.1104/pp.19.00987
Mao, X., Hou, N., Liu, Z., and He, J. (2021). Profiling of N(6)-methyladenosine (m(6)A) modification landscape in response to drought stress in apple (Malus prunifolia (Willd.) borkh). Plants (Basel) 11, 103. doi: 10.3390/plants11010103
Martinez-Perez, M., Aparicio, F., Lopez-Gresa, M. P., Belles, J. M., Sanchez-Navarro, J. A., and Pallas, V. (2017). Arabidopsis m(6)A demethylase activity modulates viral infection of a plant virus and the m(6)A abundance in its genomic RNAs. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 114, 10755–10760. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1703139114
Meyer, K. D. (2019). DART-seq: an antibody-free method for global m6A detection. Nat. Methods 16, 1275–1280. doi: 10.1038/s41592-019-0570-0
Meyer, K. D. and Jaffrey, S. R. (2017). Rethinking m(6)A readers, writers, and erasers. Annu. Rev. Cell Dev. Biol. 33, 319–342. doi: 10.1146/annurev-cellbio-100616-060758
Meyer, K. D., Saletore, Y., Zumbo, P., Elemento, O., Mason, C. E., and Jaffrey, S. R. (2012). Comprehensive analysis of mRNA methylation reveals enrichment in 3’ UTRs and near stop codons. Cell 149, 1635–1646. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2012.05.003
Miao, Z., Zhang, T., Qi, Y., Song, J., Han, Z., and Ma, C. (2020). Evolution of the RNA N (6)-methyladenosine methylome mediated by genomic duplication. Plant Physiol. 182, 345–360. doi: 10.1104/pp.19.00323
Mukarram, M., Choudhary, S., Kurjak, D., Petek, A., and Khan, M. M. A. (2021). Drought: Sensing, signalling, effects and tolerance in higher plants. Physiol. Plant 172, 1291–1300. doi: 10.1111/ppl.13423
Munns, T. W. and Liszewski, M. K. (1977). HF., S. Characterization of antibodies specific for N6-methyladenosine and for 7-methylguanosine. Biochemistry 16, 2163–2168. doi: 10.1021/bi00629a019
Nachtergaele, S. and He, C. (2017). The emerging biology of RNA post-transcriptional modifications. RNA Biol. 14, 156–163. doi: 10.1080/15476286.2016.1267096
Nagarajan, A., Janostiak, R., and Wajapeyee, N. (2019). Dot blot analysis for measuring global N(6)-methyladenosine modification of RNA. Methods Mol. Biol. 1870, 263–271. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4939-8808-2_20
Nichols, J. L. and Welder, L. (1981). Nucleotides adjacent to N6-methyladenosine in maize poly(A)-containing RNA. Plant Sci. Lett. 21, 75–81. doi: 10.1016/0304-4211(81)90071-7
Pan, Y., Jia, Y., Liu, W., Zhao, Q., Pan, W., Jia, Y., et al. (2024). Transcriptome-wide m6A methylation profile reveals its potential role underlying drought response in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Planta 260, 65. doi: 10.1007/s00425-024-04491-2
Ping, X. L., Sun, B. F., Wang, L., Xiao, W., Yang, X., Wang, W. J., et al. (2014). Mammalian WTAP is a regulatory subunit of the RNA N6-methyladenosine methyltransferase. Cell Res. 24, 177–189. doi: 10.1038/cr.2014.3
Ramachandra Reddy, A., Chaitanya, K. V., and Vivekanandan, M. (2004). Drought-induced responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants. J. Plant Physiol. 161, 1189–1202. doi: 10.1016/j.jplph.2004.01.013
Roundtree, I. A., Evans, M. E., Pan, T., and He, C. (2017). Dynamic RNA modifications in gene expression regulation. Cell 169, 1187–1200. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2017.05.045
Roundtree, I. A. and He, C. (2016). RNA epigenetics--chemical messages for posttranscriptional gene regulation. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 30, 46–51. doi: 10.1016/j.cbpa.2015.10.024
Ruzicka, K., Zhang, M., Campilho, A., Bodi, Z., Kashif, M., Saleh, M., et al. (2017). Identification of factors required for m(6) A mRNA methylation in Arabidopsis reveals a role for the conserved E3 ubiquitin ligase HAKAI. New Phytol. 215, 157–172. doi: 10.1111/nph.14586
Saikia, M., Burnham, P., Keshavjee, S. H., Wang, M. F. Z., Heyang, M., Moral-Lopez, P., et al. (2019). Simultaneous multiplexed amplicon sequencing and transcriptome profiling in single cells. Nat. Methods 16, 59–62. doi: 10.1038/s41592-018-0259-9
Schaefer, M., Pollex, T., Hanna, K., and Lyko, F. (2009). RNA cytosine methylation analysis by bisulfite sequencing. Nucleic Acids Res. 37, e12. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkn954
Schibler, U., Kelley, D. E., and Perry, R. P. (1977). Comparison of methylated sequences in messenger RNA and heterogeneous nuclear RNA from mouse L cells. J. Mol. Biol. 115, 695–714. doi: 10.1016/0022-2836(77)90110-3
Schwartz, S., Mumbach, M. R., Jovanovic, M., Wang, T., Maciag, K., Bushkin, G. G., et al. (2014). Perturbation of m6A writers reveals two distinct classes of mRNA methylation at internal and 5’ sites. Cell Rep. 8, 284–296. doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2014.05.048
Shan, Z., Luo, X., Wei, M., Huang, T., Khan, A., and Zhu, Y. (2018). Physiological and proteomic analysis on long-term drought resistance of cassava (Manihot esculenta Crantz). Sci. Rep. 8, 17982. doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-35711-x
Shen, L. (2025). Epitranscriptomic regulation through phase separation in plants. Trends Plant Sci. 30, 629–641. doi: 10.1016/j.tplants.2024.11.012
Shen, L., Liang, Z., Gu, X., Chen, Y., Teo, Z. W., Hou, X., et al. (2016). N(6)-methyladenosine RNA modification regulates shoot stem cell fate in arabidopsis. Dev. Cell 38, 186–200. doi: 10.1016/j.devcel.2016.06.008
Shi, H., Wang, X., Lu, Z., Zhao, B. S., Ma, H., Hsu, P. J., et al. (2017). YTHDF3 facilitates translation and decay of N(6)-methyladenosine-modified RNA. Cell Res. 27, 315–328. doi: 10.1038/cr.2017.15
Shinde, H., Dudhate, A., Kadam, U. S., and Hong, J. C. (2023). RNA methylation in plants: An overview. Front. Plant Sci. 14. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2023.1132959
Su, H., Meng, L., Qu, Z., Zhang, W., Liu, N., Cao, P., et al. (2024). Genome-wide identification of the N(6)-methyladenosine regulatory genes reveals NtFIP37B increases drought resistance of tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum L.). BMC Plant Biol. 24, 134. doi: 10.1186/s12870-024-04813-2
Sun, H., Li, K., Zhang, X., Liu, J., Zhang, M., Meng, H., et al. (2021). m(6)Am-seq reveals the dynamic m(6)Am methylation in the human transcriptome. Nat. Commun. 12, 4778. doi: 10.1038/s41467-021-25105-5
Tang, J., Chen, S. Y., and Jia, G. F. (2023). N6-Detection, regulation, and functions of RNA methyladenosine modification in plants. Plant Commun. 4, 100546. doi: 10.1016/j.xplc.2023.100546
Wang, X., Zhao, B. S., Roundtree, I. A., Lu, Z., Han, D., Ma, H., et al. (2015). N(6)-methyladenosine modulates messenger RNA translation efficiency. Cell 161, 1388–1399. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2015.05.014
Wei, J., Li, H., Gui, Y., Zhou, H., Zhang, R., Zhu, K., et al. (2023). Coordination of m(6)A mRNA Methylation and Gene Transcriptome in Sugarcane Response to Drought Stress. Plants (Basel) 12, 3668. doi: 10.3390/plants12213668
Wei, L. H., Song, P., Wang, Y., Lu, Z., Tang, Q., Yu, Q., et al. (2018). The m(6)A Reader ECT2 Controls Trichome Morphology by Affecting mRNA Stability in Arabidopsis. Plant Cell 30, 968–985. doi: 10.1105/tpc.17.00934
Weigel, D. (2024). Transcriptome-wide identification of 5-methylcytosine by deaminase and reader protein-assisted sequencing. eLife 13, RP98166. doi: 10.7554/eLife.98166.2.sa2
Wu, X., Su, T., Zhang, S., Zhang, Y., Wong, C. E., Ma, J., et al. (2024). N(6)-methyladenosine-mediated feedback regulation of abscisic acid perception via phase-separated ECT8 condensates in Arabidopsis. Nat. Plants 10, 469–482. doi: 10.1038/s41477-024-01638-7
Yao, S., Song, Y., Cheng, X., Wang, D., Li, Q., Zhang, J., et al. (2024). Transcriptome-Wide Identification of m(6)A Writers, Erasers and Readers and Their Expression Profiles under Various Biotic and Abiotic Stresses in Pinus massoniana Lamb. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 25, 7987. doi: 10.3390/ijms25147987
Yu, Q., Liu, S., Yu, L., Xiao, Y., Zhang, S., Wang, X., et al. (2021). RNA demethylation increases the yield and biomass of rice and potato plants in field trials. Nat. Biotechno. 39, 1581–1588. doi: 10.1038/s41587-021-00982-9
Zhang, F., Zhang, Y. C., Liao, J. Y., Yu, Y., Zhou, Y. F., Feng, Y. Z., et al. (2019). The subunit of RNA N6-methyladenosine methyltransferase OsFIP regulates early degeneration of microspores in rice. PloS Genet. 15, e1008120. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1008120
Zhang, G., Lv, Z., Diao, S., Liu, H., Duan, A., He, C., et al. (2021). Unique features of the m(6)A methylome and its response to drought stress in sea buckthorn (Hippophae rhamnoides Linn.). RNA Biol. 18, 794–803. doi: 10.1080/15476286.2021.1992996
Zhang, Y., Zhang, R., Song, Z., Fu, W., Yun, L., Gao, J., et al. (2023). Iris lactea var. chinensis plant drought tolerance depends on the response of proline metabolism, transcription factors, transporters and the ROS-scavenging system. BMC Plant Biol. 23, 17. doi: 10.1186/s12870-022-04019-4
Zheng, G., Dahl, J. A., Niu, Y., Fedorcsak, P., Huang, C. M., Li, C. J., et al. (2013). ALKBH5 is a mammalian RNA demethylase that impacts RNA metabolism and mouse fertility. Mol. Cell 49, 18–29. doi: 10.1016/j.molcel.2012.10.015
Zhong, S., Li, H., Bodi, Z., Button, J., Vespa, L., Herzog, M., et al. (2008). MTA is an Arabidopsis messenger RNA adenosine methylase and interacts with a homolog of a sex-specific splicing factor. Plant Cell 20, 1278–1288. doi: 10.1105/tpc.108.058883
Zhou, L., Tang, R., Li, X., Tian, S., Li, B., and Qin, G. (2021). N(6)-methyladenosine RNA modification regulates strawberry fruit ripening in an ABA-dependent manner. Genome Biol. 22, 168. doi: 10.1186/s13059-021-02385-0
Keywords: crop improvement, drought stress, epitranscriptomics, N6-methyladenosine, RNA methylation
Citation: Fan X and Zhang Y (2026) Mapping the RNA methylome under drought: techniques, mechanisms, and agricultural implications. Front. Plant Sci. 17:1766123. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2026.1766123
Received: 12 December 2025; Accepted: 30 January 2026; Revised: 20 January 2026;
Published: 16 February 2026.
Edited by:
Zemin Wang, Gansu Agricultural University, ChinaReviewed by:
Li Wang, Henan Normal University, ChinaJianzhong Hu, Chonnam National University, Republic of Korea
Copyright © 2026 Fan and Zhang. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Yong Zhang, MjAyMTAwNzRAamFhcy5hYy5jbg==