4.6 Article

Inhibition of cadmium ion uptake in rice (Oryza sativa) cells by a wall-bound form of silicon

期刊

NEW PHYTOLOGIST
卷 200, 期 3, 页码 691-699

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/nph.12494

关键词

cadmium (Cd); cell wall; organosilicon; rice (Oryza sativa); silicon (Si); Si-wall-Cd complexation

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31172027]
  2. Huazhong Agricultural University [2010BQ063, 2012BQ058]
  3. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [2011PY150]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The stresses acting on plants that are alleviated by silicon (Si) range from biotic to abiotic stresses, such as heavy metal toxicity. However, the mechanism of stress alleviation by Si at the single-cell level is poorly understood. We cultivated suspended rice (Oryza sativa) cells and protoplasts and investigated them using a combination of plant nutritional and physical techniques including inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS), the scanning ion-selective electrode technique (SIET) and X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS). We found that most Si accumulated in the cell walls in a wall-bound organosilicon compound. Total cadmium (Cd) concentrations in protoplasts from Si-accumulating (+Si) cells were significantly reduced at moderate concentrations of Cd in the culture medium compared with those from Si-limiting (-Si) cells. In situ measurement of cellular fluxes of the cadmium ion (Cd2+) in suspension cells and root cells of rice exposed to Cd2+ and/or Si treatments showed that +Si cells significantly inhibited the net Cd2+ influx, compared with that in -Si cells. Furthermore, a net negative charge (charge density) within the +Si cell walls could be neutralized by an increase in the Cd2+ concentration in the measuring solution. A mechanism of co-deposition of Si and Cd in the cell walls via a [Si-wall matrix]Cd co-complexation may explain the inhibition of Cd ion uptake, and may offer a plausible explanation for the in vivo detoxification of Cd in rice.

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