4.6 Article

Time-resolved laboratory micro-X-ray fluorescence reveals silicon distribution in relation to manganese toxicity in soybean and sunflower

期刊

ANNALS OF BOTANY
卷 126, 期 2, 页码 331-341

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/aob/mcaa081

关键词

Manganese; low-energy X-rays; silicon; soybean; sunflower; toxicity

资金

  1. University of Queensland Major Equipment and Infrastructure grant 'Advanced micro-X-ray Fluorescence (mu-XRF) facility for biological, medical, materials science and geochemistry' [UQMEI1835893]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background and Aims Synchrotron- and laboratory-based micro-X-ray fluorescence (mu-XRF) is a powerful technique to quantify the distribution of elements in physically large intact samples, including live plants, at room temperature and atmospheric pressure. However, analysis of light elements with atomic number (Z) less than that of phosphorus is challenging due to the need for a vacuum, which of course is not compatible with live plant material, or the availability of a helium environment. Method A new laboratory mu-XRF instrument was used to examine the effects of silicon (Si) on the manganese (Mn) status of soybean (Glycine max) and sunflower (Helianthus annuus) grown at elevated Mn in solution. The use of a helium environment allowed for highly sensitive detection of both Si and Mn to determine their distribution. Key Results The mu-XRF analysis revealed that when Si was added to the nutrient solution, the Si also accumulated in the base of the trichomes, being co-located with the Mn and reducing the darkening of the trichomes. The addition of Si did not reduce the concentrations of Mn in accumulations despite seeming to reduce its adverse effects. Conclusions The ability to gain information on the dynamics of the metallome or ionome within living plants or excised hydrated tissues can offer valuable insights into their ecophysiology, and laboratory mu-XRF is likely to become available to more plant scientists for use in their research.

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