. Full DEG list of (Cd_R vs CK_R) and (Cd

. Comprehensive DEG list of (Cd_R vs CK_R) and (Cd_L vs CK_L) comparisons. More file six: Figure S5. Three-dimension PCA for RNAseq correlation. Principal Component coordinates have been calculated using sample read counts. Figure S6 – Hierarchical clustering map for differential expression genes. Added file 7: Figure S7. Validation of A. donax DEGs by True Time qRT-PCR. Further file 8: Figure S8. KOG functional classification. More file 9: Tables S2. (A, B, C, D, E, F, G). List of important DEGs in the Cd_R vs Cd_L comparison. Added file10: Table S3. KO description of DEGs discovered in common among salt and cadmium treatment. Acknowledgements Not applicable. Authors’ contributions DFS, ARLP, AS, GT, and SLC conceived and created the experiments. DFS carried out the experiments. DFS, ARLP, AS elaborated RNAseq information. DFS, GT and SLC elaborated morpho-biometric data. ARLP, DFS and AS wrote the manuscript. All authors study and approved the final manuscript. Funding This study function is a part of a project that has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 study and innovation program under grant agreement No 727698. Availability of information and materials The Arundo donax leaf and root transcriptome was submitted to NCBI (ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo/) accession quantity GSE195580.DeclarationsEthics approval and consent to participate Experimental investigation and field studies on plants (either cultivated or wild), such as the collection of plant material, comply with relevant institutional, national, and international guidelines and legislation. We declare to possess the permission to develop and collect Arundo donax L. plants at University of Catania, authors getting partnership of funded Horizon 2020 project. Consent to publication Not applicable. Competing interests The authors declare that they’ve no competing interests.Santoro et al. BMC Genomics(2022) 23:Page 17 ofReceived: 12 January 2022 Accepted: 5 MayReferences 1. REN21. Renewables 2016 International Status Report. 2016. ISBN 978818107. 2. Muench S, Guenther E. A systematic assessment of bioenergy life cycle assessments. Appl Power. 2013;112:2573. 3. Roos A, Ahlgren S. Consequential life cycle assessment of bioenergy systems literature critique. J Clean Prod. 2018;189:3583. 4. Lewandowski I, Clifton-Brown J, Trindade LM, Van der Linden GC, Schwarz KU, M ler-S ann K, et al. Progress on optimizing miscanthus biomass production for the European bioeconomy: Final results on the EU FP7 project OPTIMISC. Front Plant Sci. 2016;7:1620. five. United Nations, Division of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division (2019).o-Toluic acid In Vitro Globe Population Prospects 2019: Highlights (ST/ESA/SER.Kinetin Purity A/423).PMID:24455443 six. Rivera A, Bravo C, Buob G. Climate modify and land Ice. Int Encyclopedia Geogr: Individuals Earth Environ Technol. 2017:15. 7. Edelstein M, Ben-Hur M. Heavy metals and metalloids: Sources, risks and techniques to cut down their accumulation in horticultural crops. Sci Hortic. 2018;234:4314. 8. Tchounwou PB, Yedjou CG, Patlolla AK, Sutton DJ. Heavy metal toxicity as well as the environment. Exp Suppl. 2012:1334. 9. Mahar A, Wang P, Ali A, Awasthi MK, Lahori AH, Wang Q, et al. Challenges and possibilities inside the phytoremediation of heavy metals contaminated soils: a critique. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf. 2016;126:1111. 10. Pan J, Plant JA, Voulvoulis N, Oates CJ, Ihlenfeld C. Cadmium levels in Europe: implications for human overall health. Environ Geochem Wellness. 2010;32(1):12. 11. Sidhu GP, Bali AS, Bhardwaj R. In: Hasanuzzaman M, MNV P, Nah.