Item request has been placed! ×
Item request cannot be made. ×
loading  Processing Request

Comparative physiological and biochemical mechanisms of salt tolerance in five contrasting highland quinoa cultivars.

Item request has been placed! ×
Item request cannot be made. ×
loading   Processing Request
  • Author(s): Cai ZQ;Cai ZQ;Cai ZQ; Gao Q; Gao Q
  • Source:
    BMC plant biology [BMC Plant Biol] 2020 Feb 12; Vol. 20 (1), pp. 70. Date of Electronic Publication: 2020 Feb 12.
  • Publication Type:
    Journal Article
  • Language:
    English
  • Additional Information
    • Source:
      Publisher: BioMed Central Country of Publication: England NLM ID: 100967807 Publication Model: Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1471-2229 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 14712229 NLM ISO Abbreviation: BMC Plant Biol Subsets: MEDLINE
    • Publication Information:
      Original Publication: London : BioMed Central, [2001-
    • Subject Terms:
    • Abstract:
      Background: Chenopodium quinoa Willd., a halophytic crop, shows great variability among different genotypes in response to salt. To investigate the salinity tolerance mechanisms, five contrasting quinoa cultivars belonging to highland ecotype were compared for their seed germination (under 0, 100 and 400 mM NaCl) and seedling's responses under five salinity levels (0, 100, 200, 300 and 400 mM NaCl).
      Results: Substantial variations were found in plant size (biomass) and overall salinity tolerance (plant biomass in salt treatment as % of control) among the different quinoa cultivars. Plant salinity tolerance was negatively associated with plant size, especially at lower salinity levels (< 300 mM NaCl), but salt tolerance between seed germination and seedling growth was not closely correlated. Except for shoot/root ratio, all measured plant traits responded to salt in a genotype-specific way. Salt stress resulted in decreased plant height, leaf area, root length, and root/shoot ratio in each cultivar. With increasing salinity levels, leaf superoxide dismutase (SOD) activity and lipid peroxidation generally increased, but catalase (CAT) and peroxidase (POD) activities showed non-linear patterns. Organic solutes (soluble sugar, proline and protein) accumulated in leaves, whereas inorganic ion (Na + and K + ) increased but K + /Na + decreased in both leaves and roots. Across different salinity levels and cultivars, without close relationships with antioxidant enzyme activities (SOD, POD, or CAT), salinity tolerance was significantly negatively correlated with organic solute and malondialdehyde contents in leaves and inorganic ion contents in leaves or roots (except for root K + content), but positively correlated with K + /Na + ratio in leaves or roots.
      Conclusion: Our results indicate that leaf osmoregulation, K + retention, Na + exclusion, and ion homeostasis are the main physiological mechanisms conferring salinity tolerance of these cultivars, rather than the regulations of leaf antioxidative ability. As an index of salinity tolerance, K + /Na + ratio in leaves or roots can be used for the selective breeding of highland quinoa cultivars.
    • References:
      Plant Physiol. 1991 Aug;96(4):1125-30. (PMID: 16668308)
      Anal Biochem. 1971 Nov;44(1):276-87. (PMID: 4943714)
      Annu Rev Plant Biol. 2019 Apr 29;70:559-583. (PMID: 30786237)
      Anal Biochem. 1976 May 7;72:248-54. (PMID: 942051)
      AoB Plants. 2014 Aug 19;6:. (PMID: 25139769)
      Trends Plant Sci. 2002 Sep;7(9):405-10. (PMID: 12234732)
      J Plant Physiol. 2013 Jul 1;170(10):906-14. (PMID: 23485259)
      Ecotoxicol Environ Saf. 2018 Nov 30;164:344-354. (PMID: 30130733)
      Plant Physiol Biochem. 2011 Nov;49(11):1333-41. (PMID: 22000057)
      Oecologia. 2000 Apr;123(1):90-98. (PMID: 28308749)
      Funct Plant Biol. 2011 Oct;38(10):818-831. (PMID: 32480939)
      Methods Enzymol. 1984;105:121-6. (PMID: 6727660)
      Plant J. 2010 Mar;61(5):839-53. (PMID: 20015063)
      J Exp Bot. 2007;58(15-16):4245-55. (PMID: 18182428)
      J Exp Bot. 2014 Mar;65(5):1241-57. (PMID: 24368505)
      J Exp Bot. 2009;60(3):709-12. (PMID: 19269993)
      Plant Physiol. 2013 Jun;162(2):940-52. (PMID: 23624857)
      New Phytol. 1985 Sep;101(1):25-77. (PMID: 33873830)
      Ann Bot. 2015 Feb;115(3):333-41. (PMID: 25452251)
      Annu Rev Plant Biol. 2008;59:651-81. (PMID: 18444910)
      New Phytol. 2008;179(4):945-963. (PMID: 18565144)
      Plant Cell Environ. 2010 Jun;33(6):943-58. (PMID: 20082667)
      Plant J. 2002 Sep;31(6):699-712. (PMID: 12220262)
      J Exp Bot. 2011 Jan;62(1):185-93. (PMID: 20732880)
      Curr Biol. 2018 Oct 8;28(19):3075-3085.e7. (PMID: 30245105)
      Compr Rev Food Sci Food Saf. 2015 Jul;14(4):431-445. (PMID: 27453695)
      Plant Physiol Biochem. 2017 Oct;119:294-311. (PMID: 28938176)
      Plant Physiol Biochem. 2016 Apr;101:1-13. (PMID: 26841266)
      Physiol Plant. 2011 Jun;142(2):128-43. (PMID: 21288246)
      Plant Mol Biol. 1997 Mar;33(5):857-65. (PMID: 9106509)
    • Grant Information:
      31670686, 31971697 National Natural Science Foundation of China
    • Contributed Indexing:
      Keywords: Antioxidant enzyme; Chenopodium quinoa; Growth; Inorganic ions; Organic solutes; Salt stress
    • Publication Date:
      Date Created: 20200214 Date Completed: 20200929 Latest Revision: 20240328
    • Publication Date:
      20240329
    • Accession Number:
      PMC7017487
    • Accession Number:
      10.1186/s12870-020-2279-8
    • Accession Number:
      32050903