4.6 Article

Guard cell hydrogen peroxide and nitric oxide mediate elevated CO2-induced stomatal movement in tomato

期刊

NEW PHYTOLOGIST
卷 208, 期 2, 页码 342-353

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/nph.13621

关键词

climate change; CO2 signaling; elevated CO2; hydrogen peroxide (H2O2); nitric oxide (NO); redox; Solanum lycopersicum (tomato); stomatal movement

资金

  1. National Key Technology R&D Program of China [2013AA102406]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31372108, 31430076]
  3. Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences Innovation Project [CAAS-ASTIP-2015-TRICAAS]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Climate change as a consequence of increasing atmospheric CO2 influences plant photosynthesis and transpiration. Although the involvement of stomata in plant responses to elevated CO2 has been well established, the underlying mechanism of elevated CO2-induced stomatal movement remains largely unknown. We used diverse techniques, including laser scanning confocal microscopy, transmission electron microscopy, biochemical methodologies and gene silencing to investigate the signaling pathway for elevated CO2-induced stomatal movement in tomato (Solanum lycopersicum). Elevated CO2-induced stomatal closure was dependent on the production of RESPIRATORY BURST OXIDASE 1 (RBOH1)-mediated hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) and NITRATE REDUCTASE (NR)-mediated nitric oxide (NO) in guard cells in an abscisic acid (ABA)-independent manner. Silencing of OPEN STOMATA 1 (OST1) compromised the elevated CO2-induced accumulation of H2O2 and NO, upregulation of SLOW ANION CHANNEL ASSOCIATED 1 (SLAC1) gene expression and reduction of stomatal aperture, whereas silencing of RBOH1 or NR had no effects on the expression of OST1. Our results demonstrate that as critical signaling molecules, RBOH1-dependent H2O2 and NR-dependent NO act downstream of OST1 that regulate SLAC1 expression and elevated CO2-induced stomatal movement. This information is crucial to deepen the understanding of CO2 signaling pathway in guard cells.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据