4.7 Article

Sulfur-selenium-molybdenum interactions distinguish selenium hyperaccumulator Stanleya pinnata from non-hyperaccumulator Brassica juncea (Brassicaceae)

期刊

PLANTA
卷 239, 期 2, 页码 479-491

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00425-013-1996-8

关键词

Selenium specificity; Phytoremediation; Biofortification; Indian mustard; Prince's plume

资金

  1. National Science Foundation [IOS-0,817,748]
  2. Colorado State University graduate Plant Molecular Biology Program fellowship

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Long-term sulfate, selenate and molybdate accumulation and translocation were investigated in two ecotypes of Stanleya pinnata and non-hyperaccumulator Brassica juncea under different levels of applied sulfate and selenate. Morphological differences were observed between the ecotypes of S. pinnata, but few differences in selenium (Se) and sulfur (S) accumulation were measured. Se-to-S ratios were nearly identical between the ecotypes under all treatments. When compared with B. juncea, several unique trends were observed in the hyperaccumulators. While both S. pinnata ecotypes showed no significant effect on Se content of young leaves when the supplied sulfate in the growth medium was increased tenfold (from 0.5 to 5 mM), the Se levels in B. juncea decreased 4- to 12-fold with increased sulfate in the growth medium. Furthermore, S. pinnata's S levels decreased slightly with high levels of supplied Se, suggesting competitive inhibition of uptake, while B. juncea showed higher S levels with increasing Se, possibly due to up-regulation of sulfate transporters. Both ecotypes of S. pinnata showed much larger Se concentrations in young leaves, while B. juncea showed slightly higher levels of Se in older leaves relative to young. Molybdenum (Mo) levels significantly decreased in S. pinnata with increasing sulfate and selenate in the medium; B. juncea did not show the same trends. These findings support the hypothesis that S. pinnata contains a modified sulfate transporter with a higher specificity for selenate.

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