4.7 Article

Survival of Cd-exposed Arabidopsis thaliana: Are these plants reproductively challenged?

期刊

PLANT PHYSIOLOGY AND BIOCHEMISTRY
卷 49, 期 10, 页码 1084-1091

出版社

ELSEVIER FRANCE-EDITIONS SCIENTIFIQUES MEDICALES ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.plaphy.2011.07.013

关键词

Arabidopsis thaliana; Cadmium phytotoxicity; Development; Phenotypic analysis

资金

  1. Research Foundation - Flanders (FWO)
  2. Hasselt University [BOF08G01, BOF07N05]
  3. Methusalem project [08M03VGRJ]
  4. [G.0807.09]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Plants exposed to cadmium (Cd) show morphological and physiological disorders. To increase our knowledge regarding Cd-induced signalling, most often the effects of acute exposure are investigated. However, this does not allow in-depth analysis of morphological effects. Therefore, we chronically exposed Arabidopsis thaliana plants to environmentally realistic Cd concentrations (5 or 10 mu M) and, using a described phenotypic framework methodology, we determined the impact of Cd on the plant's ability to complete its life cycle and produce germinative seeds. Visible Cd-induced morphological changes were observed within a short exposure period, with chlorotic and anthocyanous leaf colouring occurring dose-dependently. Although rosette growth was severely reduced in Cd-exposed plants, all plants were able to emerge inflorescences and produce siliques containing germinative seeds, thus confirming the non-lethality of the used Cd concentrations. Although the growth inhibition of Cd-exposed plants was dependent on the dose, both concentrations had similar effects on inflorescence height and silique counts. In conclusion, vegetative growth of plants chronically exposed to Cd is inhibited in a concentration-dependent manner. However, the effect on plant regeneration is clearly stress-determined but independent on the Cd concentration applied. In Arabidopsis thaliana, vegetative and reproductive growth are differentially influenced by Cd. (C) 2011 Elsevier Masson SAS. 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