4.5 Article

A hydroponic rice seedling culture model system for investigating proteome of salt stress in rice leaf

期刊

ELECTROPHORESIS
卷 26, 期 23, 页码 4521-4539

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/elps.200500334

关键词

antioxidative enzymes; gel electrophoresis; Oryza sativa; proteomics; salt stress

向作者/读者索取更多资源

By using an in vivo hydroponic rice seedling culture system, we investigated the physiological and biochemical responses of a model rice japonica cultivar Nipponbare to salt stress using proteomics and classical biochemical methods. Yoshida's nutrient solution (YS) was used to grow rice seedlings. YS-grown 18-day-old seedlings manifested highly stable and reproducible symptoms, prominently the wilting and browning of the 3rd leaf, reduced photosynthetic activity, inhibition in overall seedling growth, and failure to develop new (5th) leaf, when subjected to salt stress by transferring them to YS containing 130 mM NaCl for 4days. As leaf response to salt stress is least investigated in rice by proteomics, we used the 3rd leaf as source material. A comparison of 2-DE protein profiles between the untreated control and salt-stressed 3rd leaves revealed 55 differentially expressed CBB-stained spots, where 47 spots were increased over the control. Of these changed spots, the identity of 33 protein spots (27 increased and 5 decreased) was determined by nESI-LC-MS/MS. Most of these identified proteins belonged to major metabolic processes like photosynthetic carbon dioxide assimilation and photorespiration, suggesting a good correlation between salt stress-responsive proteins and leaf morphology. Moreover, 2-DE immunoblot and enzymatic activity analyses of 3rd leaves revealed remarkable changes in the key marker enzymes associated with oxidative damage to salt stress: ascorbate peroxidase and lipid peroxidation were induced, and catalase was suppressed. These results demonstrate that hydroponic culture system is best suited for proteomics of salt stress in rice seedling.

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

4.5
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