4.7 Article

Involvement of the ethylene-signalling pathway in sugar-induced tolerance to the herbicide atrazine in Arabidopsis thaliana seedlings

期刊

JOURNAL OF PLANT PHYSIOLOGY
卷 164, 期 8, 页码 1083-1092

出版社

ELSEVIER GMBH, URBAN & FISCHER VERLAG
DOI: 10.1016/j.jplph.2006.11.005

关键词

atrazine; ethylene; signalling pathways; soluble sugars; tolerance

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Soluble sugars can induce tolerance to otherwise lethal concentrations of the Ethylene; herbicide atrazine in Arabidopsis thaliana seedlings. This sugar-induced tolerance Signalling pathways; involves modifications of gene expression which are likely to be related to sugar and Soluble sugars; xenobiotic signal transduction. Since it has been suggested that ethylene- and sugarTolerance signalling pathways may interact, the effects of glucose (Glc) and sucrose (Suc) on seedling growth and tolerance to atrazine were analysed in etrl-1, ein2-1, ein4, and sis/ctrl-12 ethylene- signalling mutant backgrounds, where key steps of ethylene signal transduction are affected. Both ethylene-insensitive and ethylene-constitutive types of mutants were found to be affected in sugar-induced chlorophyll accumulation and root growth and in sugar-induced tolerance to atrazine. Interactions between ethylene and sugars were thus shown to take place during enhancement of seedling growth by low-to-moderate (up to 80mM) sugar concentrations. The strong impairment of sugar-induced atrazine tolerance in etr1-1, ein2-1, and ein4 mutants demonstrated that this tolerance required active signalling pathways and could not be ascribed to mere metabolic effects nor to mere growth enhancement. Sugar-induced atrazine tolerance thus seemed to involve activation by sugar and atrazine of hexokinase-independent sugar signalling pathways and of ethylene signalling pathways, resulting in derepression of hexokinase-mediated Glc repression and in induction of protection mechanisms against atrazine injury. (C) 2006 Elsevier GmbH. 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