4.7 Article

Alteration of oxidative and carbohydrate metabolism under abiotic stress in two rice (Oryza sativa L.) genotypes contrasting in chilling tolerance

Journal

JOURNAL OF PLANT PHYSIOLOGY
Volume 164, Issue 2, Pages 157-167

Publisher

ELSEVIER GMBH, URBAN & FISCHER VERLAG
DOI: 10.1016/j.jplph.2005.12.004

Keywords

antioxidative enzymes; lipid peroxidation; metabolites anatyses; rice (Oryza sativa); stress

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Abiotic stress is a major limiting factor in crop production. Physiological comparisons between contrasting abiotic stress-tolerant genotypes wilt improve understanding of stress-tolerant mechanisms. Rice seedlings (S3 stage) of a chilling-tolerant (CT) genotype (CT6748-8-CA-17) and a chilling-sensitive (CS) genotype (INIAP12) were subjected to abiotic stresses including chilling (13/12 degrees C), salt (100 mM NaCl), and osmotic (200 mM mannitol). Measures of physiological response to the stresses included changes in stress-related sugars, oxidative products and protective enzymes, parameters that could be used as possible markers for selection of improved tolerant varieties. Metabolite analyses showed that the two genotypes responded differently to different stresses. Genotype survival under chilling-stress was as expected, however, CT was more sensitive to salt stress than the CS genotype. The CT genotype was able to maintain membrane integrity better than CS, perhaps by reduction of lipid peroxidation via increased levels of antioxidant enzymes during chilling stress. This genotype accumulated sugars in response to stress, but the accumulation was usually less than in the CS genotype. Chill-stressed CT accumulated galactose and raffinose whereas these saccharides declined in CS. On the other hand, the tolerance mechanism in the more salt- and water-deficit-tolerant CS may be associated with accumulation of osmoprotectants such as glucose, trehalose and mannitol. (c) 2006 Elsevier GmbH. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available