4.8 Article

ROS-mediated vascular homeostatic control of root-to-shoot soil Na delivery in Arabidopsis

期刊

EMBO JOURNAL
卷 31, 期 22, 页码 4359-4370

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1038/emboj.2012.273

关键词

Arabidopsis; Na homeostasis; NADPH oxidase; ROS; salt tolerance

资金

  1. King Abdullah University of Science and Technology [KUK-I1-002-03]
  2. Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC) [BB/F020759/1, BB/F022697/1]
  3. Wellcome Trust [075491/Z/04]
  4. BBSRC [BB/F020759/1, BB/F022697/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  5. Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council [BB/F020759/1, BB/F022697/1] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Sodium (Na) is ubiquitous in soils, and is transported to plant shoots via transpiration through xylem elements in the vascular tissue. However, excess Na is damaging. Accordingly, control of xylem-sap Na concentration is important for maintenance of shoot Na homeostasis, especially under Na stress conditions. Here we report that shoot Na homeostasis of Arabidopsis thaliana plants grown in saline soils is conferred by reactive oxygen species (ROS) regulation of xylem-sap Na concentrations. We show that lack of A. thaliana respiratory burst oxidase protein F (AtrbohF; an NADPH oxidase catalysing ROS production) causes hypersensitivity of shoots to soil salinity. Lack of AtrbohF-dependent salinity-induced vascular ROS accumulation leads to increased Na concentrations in root vasculature cells and in xylem sap, thus causing delivery of damaging amounts of Na to the shoot. We also show that the excess shoot Na delivery caused by lack of AtrbohF is dependent upon transpiration. We conclude that AtrbohF increases ROS levels in wild-type root vasculature in response to raised soil salinity, thereby limiting Na concentrations in xylem sap, and in turn protecting shoot cells from transpiration-dependent delivery of excess Na. The EMBO Journal (2012) 31, 4359-4370. doi:10.1038/emboj.2012.273; Published online 12 October 2012

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

4.8
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