Advertisement

Planta

pp 1–13 | Cite as

Genotypic and heat stress effects on leaf cuticles of field pea using ATR-FTIR spectroscopy

  • Na Liu
  • Chithra Karunakaran
  • Rachid Lahlali
  • Tom Warkentin
  • Rosalind A. Bueckert
Original Article
  • 45 Downloads

Abstract

Main conclusion

ATR-FTIR spectroscopy in combination with uni- and multivariate analysis was used to quantify the spectral–chemical composition of the leaf cuticle of pea, investigating the effects of variety and heat stress.

Field pea (Pisum sativum L.) is sensitive to heat stress and our goal was to improve canopy cooling and flower retention by investigating the protective role of lipid-related compounds in leaf cuticle, and to use results in the future to identify heat resistant genotypes. The objective was to use Attenuated Total Reflection (ATR)-Fourier Transform Infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy, a non-invasive technique, to investigate and quantify changes in adaxial cuticles of fresh leaves of pea varieties that were subjected to heat stress. Eleven varieties were grown under control (24/18 °C day/night) and heat stress conditions (35/18 °C day/night, for 5 days at the early flowering stage). These 11 had significant spectral differences in the integrated area of the main lipid region, CH2 region, CH3 peak, asymmetric and symmetric CH2 peaks, ester carbonyl peak, and the peak area ratio of CH2 to CH3 and ester carbonyl to CH2 asymmetric peak, indicating that cuticles had spectral–chemical diversity of waxes, cutin, and polysaccharides. Results indicated considerable diversity in spectral–chemical makeup of leaf cuticles within commercially available field pea varieties and they responded differently to high growth temperature, revealing their diverse potential to resist heat stress. The ATR-FTIR spectral technique can, therefore, be further used as a medium-throughput approach for rapid screening of superior cultivars for heat tolerance.

Keywords

Pisum sativum Heat stress Infrared Leaf wax Lipid Plant cuticle 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This study was financially supported by the Saskatchewan Pulse Growers. The authors would like to thank Zhifa Wang from the Department of Plant Sciences, University of Saskatchewan, for technical support and helpful assistance. Field traits were measured by the Crop Physiology field crew (Jason Denis, Brandon Louie, Dustin Maclean, Parminderjit Bangar) and Endale Tafesse. Research described in this paper was performed at the Canadian Light Source, which is supported by the Canada Foundation for Innovation, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, the University of Saskatchewan, the Government of Saskatchewan, Western Economic Diversification Canada, the National Research Council Canada, and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. The authors would also like to thank Scott Rosendahl and Stuart Read for technical support and helpful assistance, both from the Canadian Light Source.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflict of interest to declare.

Supplementary material

425_2018_3025_MOESM1_ESM.docx (10.1 mb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 10337 kb)

References

  1. Abdel-Aal ESM, Hucl P (1999) A rapid method for quantifying total anthocyanins in blue aleurone and purple pericarp wheats. Cereal Chem 76:350–354CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baker MJ, Trevisan J, Bassan P, Bhargava R, Butler HJ, Dorling KM, Fielden PR, Fogarty SW, Fullwood NJ, Heys KA, Hughes C, Lasch P, Martin-Hirsch PL, Obinaju B, Sockalingum GD, Sule-Suso J, Strong RJ, Walsh MJ, Wood BR, Gardner P, Martin FL (2014) Using Fourier transform IR spectroscopy to analyze biological materials. Nat Protoc 9:1771–1791CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bertamini M, Muthuchelian K, Nedunchezhian N (2006) Shade effect alters leaf pigments and photosynthetic responses in Norway spruce (Picea abies L.) grown under field conditions. Photosynthetica 44:227–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bueckert RA, Wagenhoffer S, Hnatowich G, Warkentin TD (2015) Effect of heat and precipitation on pea yield and reproductive performance in the field. Can J Plant Sci 95:629–639CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bueckert RA, Warkentin T, Tar’an B, Davis A (2016) SPG project final technical report: pea yield formation in warming temperatures—phenological mechanisms. http://saskpulse.com/. Accessed 20 Jul 2017
  6. Butler HJ, McAinsh MR, Adams S, Martin FL (2015) Application of vibrational spectroscopy techniques to non-destructively monitor plant health and development. Anal Methods UK 7:4059–4070CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Butler HJ, Adams S, McAinsh MR, Martin FL (2017) Detecting nutrient deficiency in plant systems using synchrotron Fourier-transform infrared microspectroscopy. Vib Spectrosc 90:46–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dominguez E, Heredia-Guerrero JA, Heredia A (2015) Plant cutin genesis: unanswered questions. Trends Plant Sci 20:551–558CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. FAOSTAT (2017) Food and agriculture organization of the United Nations. Available online at http://www.fao.org/faostat. Accessed 13 Jul 2017
  10. Fernandez V, Guzman-Delgado P, Graca J, Santos S, Gil L (2016) Cuticle structure in relation to chemical composition: re-assessing the prevailing model. Front Plant Sci 7:427PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. Gniwotta F, Vogg G, Gartmann V, Carver TL, Riederer M, Jetter R (2005) What do microbes encounter at the plant surface? Chemical composition of pea leaf cuticular waxes. Plant Physiol 139:519–530CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Guilioni L, Wery J, Tardieu F (1997) Heat stress-induced abortion of buds and flowers in pea: is sensitivity linked to organ age or to relations between reproductive organs? Ann Bot 80:159–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Guilioni L, Wéry J, Lecoeur J (2003) High temperature and water deficit may reduce seed number in field pea purely by decreasing plant growth rate. Funct Plant Biol 30:1151–1164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Guzman P, Fernandez V, Graca J, Cabral V, Kayali N, Khayet M, Gil L (2014) Chemical and structural analysis of Eucalyptus globulus and E. camaldulensis leaf cuticles: a lipidized cell wall region. Front Plant Sci 5:481CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Guzman-Delgado P, Graca J, Cabral V, Gil L, Fernandez V (2016) The presence of cutan limits the interpretation of cuticular chemistry and structure: ficus elastica leaf as an example. Physiol Plant 157:205–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Heredia-Guerrero JA, Benitez JJ, Dominguez E, Bayer IS, Cingolani R, Athanassiou A, Heredia A (2014) Infrared and Raman spectroscopic features of plant cuticles: a review. Front Plant Sci 5:305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Heredia-Guerrero JA, Benítez JJ, Domínguez E, Bayer IS, Cingolani R, Athanassiou A, Heredia A (2016) Infrared spectroscopy as a tool to study plant cuticles. Spectrosc Eur 28:10–13Google Scholar
  18. Heredia-Guerrero JA, Guzman-Puyol S, Benitez JJ, Athanassiou A, Heredia A, Dominguez E (2018) Plant cuticle under global change: biophysical implications. Global Chang Biol 24:2749–2751CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hewitt EJ, Commonwealth Bureau of Horticulture and Plantation Crops (1952) Sand and water culture methods used in the study of plant nutrition. Sand and water culture methods used in the study of plant nutrition. Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux, Farnham RoyalGoogle Scholar
  20. Jetter R, Kunst L (2008) Plant surface lipid biosynthetic pathways and their utility for metabolic engineering of waxes and hydrocarbon biofuels. Plant J 54:670–683CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Jiang Y, Lahlali R, Karunakaran C, Kumar S, Davis AR, Bueckert RA (2015) Seed set, pollen morphology and pollen surface composition response to heat stress in field pea. Plant Cell Environ 38:2387–2397CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Khanal BP, Grimm E, Finger S, Blume A, Knoche M (2013) Intracuticular wax fixes and restricts strain in leaf and fruit cuticles. New Phytol 200:134–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lahlali R, Jiang Y, Kumar S, Karunakaran C, Liu X, Borondics F, Hallin E, Bueckert R (2014) ATR–FTIR spectroscopy reveals involvement of lipids and proteins of intact pea pollen grains to heat stress tolerance. Front Plant Sci.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2014.00747 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. Liu N, Yu P (2016) Recent research and progress in food, feed and nutrition with advanced synchrotron-based SR-IMS and DRIFT molecular spectroscopy. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 56:910–918CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. McMurray L, Davidson J, Lines M, Leonforte A, Salam M (2011) Combining management and breeding advances to improve field pea (Pisum sativum L.) grain yields under changing climatic conditions in south-eastern Australia. Euphytica 180:69–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Riederer M, Schneider G (1990) The effect of the environment on the permeability and composition of citrus leaf cuticles: II. Composition of soluble cuticular lipids and correlation with transport properties. Planta 180:154–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Sadras V, Lake L, Chenu K, McMurray L, Leonforte A (2012) Water and thermal regimes for field pea in Australia and their implications for breeding. Crop Pasture Sci 63:33–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Samuels L, Kunst L, Jetter R (2008) Sealing plant surfaces: cuticular wax formation by epidermal cells. Annu Rev Plant Biol 59:683–707CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Sánchez FJ, Ma Manzanares, de Andrés EF, Tenorio JL, Ayerbe L (2001) Residual transpiration rate, epicuticular wax load and leaf colour of pea plants in drought conditions. Influence on harvest index and canopy temperature. Eur J Agron 15:57–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. SAS Institute (2010) SAS/STAT. Release 9.3. Cary, NC, USAGoogle Scholar
  31. Saxton AM (1998) A macro for converting mean separation output to letter groupings in Proc Mixed. Proc. 23rd SAS Users Group Intl., SAS Institute, Cary, NC. p 1243–1246Google Scholar
  32. Shepherd T, Wynne Griffiths D (2006) The effects of stress on plant cuticular waxes. New Phytol 171:469–499CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Shepherd T, Robertson G, Griffiths D, Birch A, Duncan G (1995) Effects of environment on the composition of epicuticular wax from kale and swede. Phytochemistry 40:407–417CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Shepherd T, Robertson G, Griffiths D, Bircht A (1997) Effects of environment on the composition of epicuticular wax esters from kale and swede. Phytochemistry 46:83–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Suseela V, Tharayil N (2018) Decoupling the direct and indirect effects of climate on plant litter decomposition: accounting for stress-induced modifications in plant chemistry. Global Chang Biol 24:1428–1451CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Turker-Kaya S, Huck CW (2017) A review of mid-infrared and near-infrared imaging: principles, concepts and applications in plant tissue analysis. Molecules 22:168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Warkentin T, Vandenberg A, Banniza S, Slinkard A (2004) CDC golden field pea. Can J Plant Sci 84:237–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Warkentin T, Vandenberg A, Banniza S, Barlow B, Ife S (2006) CDC sage field pea. Can J Plant Sci 86:161–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Wetzel DL, Eilert AJ, Pietrzak LN, Miller SS, Sweat JA (1998) Ultraspatially-resolved synchrotron infrared microspectroscopy of plant tissue in situ. Cell Mol Biol (Noisy-le-grand) 44:145–168Google Scholar
  40. Wetzel DL, Srivarin P, Finney JR (2003) Revealing protein infrared spectral detail in a heterogeneous matrix dominated by starch. Vib Spectrosc 31:109–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Plant SciencesUniversity of SaskatchewanSaskatoonCanada
  2. 2.Canadian Light Source Inc.SaskatoonCanada
  3. 3.Département de Protection des Plantes et de l’Environnement Km10École Nationale d’Agriculture de MeknesMeknèsMorocco
  4. 4.Crop Development Centre (CDC)University of SaskatchewanSaskatoonCanada

Personalised recommendations