4.7 Article

Long-term plum pox virus infection produces an oxidative stress in a susceptible apricot, Prunus armeniaca, cultivar but not in a resistant cultivar

期刊

PHYSIOLOGIA PLANTARUM
卷 126, 期 1, 页码 140-152

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1399-3054.2005.00581.x

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The effect of plum pox virus (PPV) infection on the response of some antioxidant enzymes was studied in two apricot cultivars, which behaved differently against PPV infection: cultivar Real Fino (susceptible) and cultivar Stark Early Orange (cv. SEO, resistant). In the susceptible cultivar, PPV produced a decrease in Phi(PSII), F'(v)/F'(m) and Q(p). PPV infection produced a drop in p-hydroxy mercury benzoic acid (pHMB)-sensitive ascorbate peroxidase, dehydroascorbate reductase and peroxidase in the soluble fraction from susceptible plants, whereas in the resistant apricot cultivar, pHMB-insensitive ascorbate peroxidase, monodehydroascorbate reductase, glutathione reductase and superoxide dismutase increased. However, catalase decreased in the soluble fractions from both infected cultivars. Long-term PPV infection also produced a decrease in the chloroplastic ascorbate-glutathione cycle enzymes only in the susceptible plants. As a consequence of PPV infection, an oxidative stress, indicated by an increase in lipid peroxidation and in protein oxidation, was produced only in the leaves from the susceptible cultivar which was also monitored by the diaminobenzidine peroxidase-coupled H2O2 probe. The loss of Phi(PSII), indicative of activated oxygen species production, and the decrease in the levels of antioxidant enzymes in chloroplasts from susceptible plants could be responsible for the chlorosis symptoms observed. The results suggest that the higher antioxidant capacity showed by cv. SEO could be a consequence of a systemic acquired resistance induced by PPV penetration in stem tissue at the graft site and could be related, among other factors, to their resistance to PPV.

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