Advertisement

Acetate-induced modulation of ascorbate: glutathione cycle and restriction of sodium accumulation in shoot confer salt tolerance in Lens culinaris Medik.

  • Md. Shahadat Hossain
  • Mirza Hasanuzzaman
  • Md. Mahmodul Hasan Sohag
  • M. H. M. Borhannuddin Bhuyan
  • Masayuki FujitaEmail author
Research Article
  • 13 Downloads

Abstract

Physiological and biochemical changes in six-day-old hydroponically grown lentil seedlings exposed to 100 mM salinity stress with or without 5 and 10 mM Na-acetate were studied. Results showed that salt stress reduced recovery percentage, fresh weight (FW), chlorophyll (chl) content, disturbed water balance, disrupted antioxidant defense pathway by decreasing reduced ascorbate content, and caused ion toxicity resulting from increased Na+ accumulation, severe K+ loss from roots in hydroponic culture. However, exogenous application of Na-acetate improved the seedling growth by maintaining water balance and increasing chl content. Furthermore, Na-acetate application reduced oxidative damage by modulating antioxidant defense pathway, and sustained ion homeostasis by reducing Na+ uptake and K+ loss. In the second experiment in glass house, we investigated the role of Na-acetate on lentil for long-term salinity. Acetate application increased FW and dry weight, reduced oxidative and membrane damage, and lowered the accumulation of Na+ in shoot compared with salt stressed seedlings alone. From the results of both experiments, it is clear that the exogenous application of Na-acetate enhanced salt tolerance in lentil seedlings.

Keywords

Ion toxicity Lentil Oxidative stress Recovery Salinity Na-acetate 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research was funded by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT), Japan. We thank Mr. Sayed Mohammad Mohsin and Khursheda Parvin, Faculty of Agriculture, Kagawa University, Japan for a critical review and editing the English of the manuscript. We also thank Dr. Md. Motiar Rohman, Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute, Gazipur, Bangladesh for providing lentil seeds.

Author contributions

MSH conceived, designed, and performed the experiment and prepared the manuscript. MMHS, and MHMBB actively participated in executing the experiment. MH designed the experiment, analyzed the data and edited the manuscript. MF conceived, designed, and monitored the experiment. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest.

Supplementary material

12298_2018_640_MOESM1_ESM.docx (82 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 82 kb)
12298_2018_640_MOESM2_ESM.tif (156 kb)
Chlorophyll content (a) and Proline content (b) under salt stress with or without acetate in experiment I Treatments are the same as described in Fig. 1. Mean (± SD) were calculated from three replicates for each treatment. Values with different letters are significantly different at P≤ 0.05 applying Fisher’s LSD test (TIFF 155 kb)

References

  1. Abogadallah GM (2010) Insights into the significance of antioxidative defense under salt stress. Plant Signal Behav 5:369–374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Afzal F, Khan T, Khan A, Khan S, Raza H, Ihsan A, Ahanger MA, Kazi AG (2014) Nutrient deficiencies under stress in legumes. In: Azooz MM, Ahmad P (eds) Legumes under environmental stress: yield, improvement and adaptations, 1st edn. Wiley, West Sussex, pp 53–65Google Scholar
  3. Arnon DT (1949) Copper enzymes in isolated chloroplasts polyphenol oxidase in Beta vulgaris. Plant Physiol 24:1–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ashraf M (2009) Biotechnological approach of improving plant salt tolerance using antioxidants as markers. Biotechnol Adv 27:84–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Assaha DV, Ueda A, Saneoka H, Al-Yahyai R, Yaish MW (2017) The role of Na+ and K+ transporters in salt stress adaptation in glycophytes. Front Physiol 8:509.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2017.00509 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bandeoğlu E, Eyidoğan F, Yücel M, Öktem HA (2004) Antioxidant responses of shoots and roots of lentil to NaCl-salinity stress. Plant Growth Regul 42:69–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bates LS, Waldren RP, Teari D (1973) Rapid determination of free proline for water stress studies. Plant Soil 39:205–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bradford MM (1976) A rapid and sensitive method for the quantitation of microgram quantities of protein utilizing the principle of protein-dye binding. Anal Biochem 72:248–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dionisio-Sese ML, Tobita S (1998) Antioxidant responses of rice seedlings to salinity stress. Plant Sci 135:1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. El-Shabrawi H, Kumar B, Kaul T, Reddy MK, Singla-Pareek SL, Sopory SK (2010) Redox homeostasis, antioxidant defense, and methylglyoxal detoxification as markers for salt tolerance in Pokkali rice. Protoplasma 245:85–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gill SS, Tuteja N (2010) Reactive oxygen species and antioxidant machinery in abiotic stress tolerance in crop plants. Plant Physiol Biochem 48:909–930CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Golldack D, Li C, Mohan H, Probst N (2014) Tolerance to drought and salt stress in plants: unraveling the signaling networks. Front Plant Sci 5:151.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2014.00151 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gong M, Chen BO, Li ZG, Guo LH (2001) Heat-shock-induced cross adaptation to heat, chilling, drought and salt stress in maize seedlings and involvement of H2O2. J Plant Physiol 158:1125–1130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Griffiths OW (1980) Determination of glutathione and glutathione disulphide using glutathione reductase and 2-vinylpyridine. Anal Biochem 106:207–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hanin M, Ebel C, Ngom M, Laplaze L, Masmoudi K (2016) New insights on plant salt tolerance mechanisms and their potential use for breeding. Front Plant Sci 7:1787CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hasanuzzaman M, Nahar K, Fujita M (2013) Plant response to salt stress and role of exogenous protectants to mitigate salt-induced damages. In: Ahmed P, Azooz MM, Prasad MNV (eds) Ecophysiology and responses of plants under salt stress. Springer, New York, pp 25–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Heath RL, Packer L (1968) Photo peroxidation in isolated chloroplast: I. Kinetics and stoichiometry of fatty acid peroxidation. Arch Biochem Biophys 125:189–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hiscox JT, Israelstam G (1979) A method for the extraction of chlorophyll from leaf tissue without maceration. Can J Bot 57:1332–1334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hossain MS, Alam MU, Rahman A, Hasanuzzaman M, Nahar K, Al Mahmud J, Fujita M (2017) Use of iso-osmotic solution to understand salt stress responses in lentil (Lens culinaris Medik.). South Afr J Bot 113:346–354CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ismail A, Riemann M, Nick P (2012) The jasmonate pathway mediates salt tolerance in grapevines. J Exp Bot 63(5):2127–2139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ismail AM, Horie T (2017) Genomics, physiology, and molecular breeding approaches for improving salt tolerance. Annu Rev Plant Biol 68:405–434CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kibria MG, Hossain M, Murata Y, Hoque MA (2017) Antioxidant defense mechanisms of salinity tolerance in rice genotypes. Rice Sci 24:155–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kim JM, To TK, Matsui A, Tanoi K, Kobayashi NI, Matsuda F, Bashir K (2017) Acetate-mediated novel survival strategy against drought in plants. Nat Plants 3:17097.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nplants.2017.97 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Maathuis FJ (2013) Sodium in plants: perception, signalling, and regulation of sodium fluxes. J Expt Bot 65:849–858CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Mauch-Mani B, Baccelli I, Luna E, Flors V (2017) Defense priming: an adaptive part of induced resistance. Annual Rev Plant Biol 68:485–512CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Misra N, Saxena P (2009) Effect of salicylic acid on proline metabolism in lentil grown under salinity stress. Plant Sci 177:181–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Mittler R (2002) Oxidative stress, antioxidants and stress tolerance. Trends Plant Sci 7(9):405–410CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Mittler R (2017) ROS are good. Trends in Plant Sci 22:11–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Munns R, Tester M (2008) Mechanism of salinity tolerance. Annu Rev Plant Biol 59:651–681CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Nahar K, Hasanuzzaman M, Rahman A, Alam MM, Mahmud JA, Suzuki T, Fujita M (2016) Polyamines confer salt tolerance in mung bean (Vigna radiata L.) by reducing sodium uptake, improving nutrient homeostasis, antioxidant defense, and methylglyoxal detoxification systems. Front Plant Sci 7:1104.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2016.01104 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Noctor G, Mhamdi A, Foyer CH (2016) Oxidative stress and antioxidative systems: recipes for successful data collection and interpretation. Plant Cell Environ 39:1140–1160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Noreen Z, Ashraf M (2009) Assessment of variation in antioxidative defense system in salt-treated pea (Pisum sativum) cultivars and its putative use as salinity tolerance markers. J Plant Physiol 166:1764–1774CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Nounjan N, Nghia PT, Theerakulpisut P (2012) Exogenous proline and trehalose promote recovery of rice seedlings from salt-stress and differentially modulate antioxidant enzymes and expression of related genes. J Plant Physiol 169:596–604CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Pastor V, Luna E, Mauch-Mani B, Ton J, Flors V (2013) Primed plants do not forget. Environ Exp Bot 94:46–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Rahman A, Hossain MS, Mahmud JA, Nahar K, Hasanuzzaman M, Fujita M (2016) Manganese-induced salt stress tolerance in rice seedlings: regulation of ion homeostasis, antioxidant defense and glyoxalase systems. Physiol Mol Biol Plants 22:291–306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Rahman A, Nahar K, Al Mahmud J, Hasanuzzaman M, Hossain MS, Fujita M (2017) Salt stress tolerance in rice: emerging role of exogenous phytoprotectants. In: Li JQ (ed) Advances in international rice research. InTech, Rijeka, pp 139–174Google Scholar
  37. Richardson AD, Duigan SP, Berlyn GP (2002) An evaluation of noninvasive methods to estimate foliar chlorophyll content. New Phytol 153:185–194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Sako K, Kim JM, Matsui A, Nakamura K, Tanaka M, Kobayashi M, Yoshida M (2015) Ky-2, a histone deacetylase inhibitor, enhances high-salinity stress tolerance in Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant Cell Physiol 57:776–783CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Savvides A, Ali S, Tester M, Fotopoulos V (2016) Chemical priming of plants against multiple abiotic stresses: mission possible? Trends Plant Sci 21:329–340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Seckin B, Turkan I, Sekmen AH, Ozfidan C (2010) The role of antioxidant defense systems at differential salt tolerance of Hordeum marinum Huds. (sea barleygrass) and Hordeum vulgare L. (cultivated barley). Environ Exp Bot 69:76–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Shabala S, Pottosin I (2014) Regulation of potassium transport in plants under hostile conditions: implication for abiotic and biotic stress tolerance. Physiol Plant 151:257–279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Shalata A, Neumann PM (2001) Exogenous ascorbic acid (vitamin C) increases resistance to salt stress and reduces lipid peroxidation. J Exp Bot 52:2207–2211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Sidari M, Santonoceto C, Anastasi U, Preiti G, Muscolo A (2008) Variations in four genotypes of lentil under NaCl-salinity stress. Am J Agric Biol Sci 3(1):410–416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Singh D, Singh CK, Kumari S, Tomar RSS, Karwa S, Singh R, Pal M (2017) Discerning morpho-anatomical, physiological and molecular multiformity in cultivated and wild genotypes of lentil with reconciliation to salinity stress. PLoS ONE 12:e0177465.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0177465 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Sun YL, Hong SK (2011) Effects of citric acid as an important component of the responses to saline and alkaline stress in the halophyte Leymus chinensis (Trin.). Plant Growth Regul 64:129–139.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10725-010-9547-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Tester M, Davenport RJ (2003) Na+ transport and Na+ tolerance in higher plants. Ann Bot 91:503–527CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Xiong L, Schumaker KS, Zhu JK (2002) Cell signaling during cold, drought, and salt stress. Plant Cell 14:165–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Prof. H.S. Srivastava Foundation for Science and Society 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Md. Shahadat Hossain
    • 1
  • Mirza Hasanuzzaman
    • 2
  • Md. Mahmodul Hasan Sohag
    • 1
  • M. H. M. Borhannuddin Bhuyan
    • 1
  • Masayuki Fujita
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Laboratory of Plant Stress Responses, Faculty of AgricultureKagawa UniversityMiki-cho, Kita-gunJapan
  2. 2.Department of Agronomy, Faculty of AgricultureSher-e-Bangla Agricultural UniversityDhakaBangladesh

Personalised recommendations