4.3 Article

Can antioxidant's reactive oxygen species (ROS) scavenging capacity contribute to aged seed recovery? Contrasting effect of melatonin, ascorbate and glutathione on germination ability of aged maize seeds

期刊

FREE RADICAL RESEARCH
卷 51, 期 9-10, 页码 765-771

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/10715762.2017.1375099

关键词

Aged seed; antioxidant enzyme; germination rate; melatonin; recovery

资金

  1. Heilongjiang Bayi Agricultural University under grants Initiation Foundation of Basic Science Research for Introduced Talent Person of Heilongjiang Bayi Agricultural University [2031011038]
  2. Special Fund for Agro-scientific Research of National Public Welfare Industry [201303007]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

It is well known that antioxidants such as AA (reduced ascorbate), glutathione (GSH) (reduced glutathione) and melatonin can delay seed ageing. Can they recover aged seed? Artificial aged maize seeds were obtained and their reduced germination rate (GR) and high lipid peroxidation were recorded. Exogenous melatonin was applied on these aged seeds and enhanced GR was observed. However, treatment with other antioxidants such as AA, GSH or DMTU (dimethyl thiourea) did not significantly improve or even reduce the GR of aged seeds. In addition, melatonin improved germination ability of theses aged seeds can be significantly impaired by DDC (diethyldithiocarbamic acid, a specific inhibitor of superoxide dismutase or superoxide dismutase (SOD)) and ATZ (aminotriazol, a specific inhibitor of catalase or CAT). In a further study, we found that melatonin but not other antioxidants (AA, GSH and DMTU) significantly induced CAT and SOD activities of aged seeds after imbibition. Accordingly, melatonin significantly reduced lipid peroxidation in aged seeds than that of other antioxidants. Taken together, these data suggest that melatonin induced antioxidant enzyme but not its direct reactive oxygen species (ROS) scavenging capacity contributing to recovery of aged maize seeds.

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

4.3
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