4.7 Article

Comparative effects of the herbicides dicamba, 2,4-D and paraquat on non-green potato tuber calli

期刊

JOURNAL OF PLANT PHYSIOLOGY
卷 165, 期 11, 页码 1125-1133

出版社

ELSEVIER GMBH, URBAN & FISCHER VERLAG
DOI: 10.1016/j.jplph.2007.12.013

关键词

2, 4-d; dicamba; herbicide; oxidative stress; paraquat

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The effects of the herbicides 1,1'-dimethy[-4,4'-bipyridylium dichioride (paraquat), 3,6-dichtoro-2-metoxybenzoic acid (dicamba) and 2,4-dichtorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D) on cell growth of non-green potato tuber calli are described. We attempted to relate the effects with toxicity, in particular the enzymes committed to the cellular antioxidant system. Cell cultures were exposed to the herbicides for a period of 4 weeks. Cellular integrity on the basis of fluorescein release was strongly affected by 2,4-D, followed by dicamba, and was not affected by paraquat. However, the three herbicides decreased the energy charge, with paraquat and 2,4-D being very efficient. Paraquat induced catalase (CAT) activity at low concentrations (1 mu M), whereas at higher concentrations, inhibition was observed. Dicamba and 2,4-D stimulated CAT as a function of concentration. Superoxide dismutase (SOD) activity was strongly stimulated by paraquat, whereas dicamba and 2,4-D were efficient only at higher concentrations. Glutathione reductase (GR) activity was induced by at[ the herbicides, suggesting that glutathione and glutathione-dependent enzymes are putatively involved in the detoxification of these herbicides. Paraquat slightly inhibited glutathione S-transferase (GST), whereas 2,4-D and dicamba promoted significant activation. These results indicate that the detoxifying mechanisms for 2,4-D and dicamba may be different from the mechanisms of paraquat detoxification. However, the main cause of cell death induced by paraquat and 2,4-D is putatively related with the cell energy charge decrease. (c) 2008 Elsevier GmbH. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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