4.7 Article

Beneficial behavior of nitric oxide in copper-treated medicinal plants

期刊

JOURNAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
卷 314, 期 -, 页码 140-154

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2016.04.042

关键词

Amino acids; Antitumor alkaloids; Catharanthus roseus L.; Copper stress; Phenolic metabolism

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) [31570700]
  2. National Science and Technology Supporting Program in Eleventh Five Year Plan of China (NSTSP) [2006BA031002]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Despite numerous reports implicating nitric oxide (NO) in the environmental-stress responses of plants, the specific metabolic and ionic mechanisms of NO-mediated adaptation to metal stress remain unclear. Here, the impacts of copper (Cu) and NO donor (SNP, 50 mu M) alone or in combination on the well-known medicinal plant Catharanthus roseus L. were investigated. Our results showed that Cu markedly increased Cu2+ accumulation, decreased NO production, and disrupted mineral equilibrium and proton pumps, thereby stimulating a burst of ROS; in addition, SNP ameliorates the negative toxicity of Cu, and cPTIO reverses this action. Furthermore, the accumulations of ROS and NO resulted in reciprocal changes. Interestingly, nearly all of the investigated amino acids and the total phenolic content in the roots were promoted by the SNP treatment but were depleted by the Cu + SNP treatment, which is consistent with the self-evident increases in phenylalanine ammonia-lyase activity and total soluble phenol content induced by SNP. Unexpectedly, leaf vincristine and vinblastine as well as the total alkaloid content (ca. 1.5-fold) were decreased by Cu but markedly increased by SNP (+38% and +49% of the control levels). This study provides the first evidence of the beneficial behavior of NO, rather than other compounds, in depleting Cu toxicity by regulating mineral absorption, reestablishing ATPase activities, and stimulating secondary metabolites. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. 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