4.3 Article

The effect of cold stress on endogenous hormones and CBF 1 homolog in four contrasting bamboo species

期刊

JOURNAL OF FOREST RESEARCH
卷 17, 期 1, 页码 72-78

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1007/s10310-011-0253-x

关键词

Abscisic acid (ABA); Cold stress; C-repeat binding factor 1(CBF1) gene; Gibberellin-like substances (GA(s)); Real-time quantitative RT-PCR

类别

资金

  1. 11th Five Years Key Programs for forest breeding of Sichuan province [2006YZGG]
  2. Sichuan Education Office [08ZA072]
  3. Sichuan Agricultural University [00330800, 00330700]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

An unusually severe snow disaster in southern China in 2008 exposed variation among different species of bamboo: some species were highly tolerant to low-temperature damage, but some suffered extensive damage or death. Therefore, this study was conducted to determine the effects of cold stress on endogenous hormones and the expression of homologs of CBF (1) in four bamboo species differing in their tolerance to cold. All four bamboo species were subjected to cold stress with a temperature gradient (10, 5, 0, -5, and -10A degrees C), and each low temperature treatment was maintained for 48 h. Results showed that ABA, GA(1), and GA(4) were significantly affected by cold stress: ABA increased with cold stress in all species, while GA(1) and GA(4) reduced with cold stress. ABA levels and the ratio of ABA/(GA(1) + GA(4)) in leaves of Neosinocalamus affinis and Bambusa rigida were both higher than those of hybrid bamboo (Bambusa pervariabilis x Dendrocalamopsis grandis) and Dendrocalamus latiflorus for all treatments, while GA(1) and GA(4) were conversely lower as compared to the hybrid variety and D. latiflorus. Moreover, CBF (1) homolog was up-regulated during cold stress, with higher expression levels in the leaves of cold-tolerant species than cold-sensitive ones. Results revealed that high levels of ABA and CBF (1) , as well as the ABA/GA(s) balance, are important in increased plant resistance to cold stress.

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

4.3
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