Biologia Plantarum

, 27:34 | Cite as

The effect of some salts and osmotic shock on phosphate uptake in maize roots

  • Ivana Macháčková
  • Z. Zmrhal


Chlorides, nitrates, and sulfates of alkali metals, ammonium, calcium, and magnesium inhibit Pi uptake into maize root cortex segments. The concentration 100 mM brought about 50–100% inhibition, whereas 10 mM concentration (with the exception of salts of NH4+, Ca2+, Mg2+) about 15–55%. Also potassium benzenesulfonate (100 mM) dramatically decreases Pi uptake.

Osmotic shock also inhibits Pi uptake. Marked decrease of Pi uptake ability proceeds in concentration range 0.12–0.13 M NaCl. Concomitantly, proteins are released into rehydration medium and their amount is proportional to the degree of Pi uptake inhibition.

The effect of 0.13 M NaCl on Pi uptake and protein release is about the same in roots of intact plants, excised roots, root segments and segments of isolated cortex and stele. Roots of intact plants and excised roots are more responsive to osmotic shock than studied segments.

The degree of salt tolerance of glycophytes is in correlation with NaCl concentration, which brings about 50% inhibition of Pi uptake.


Salt Tolerance CaSO4 Maize Root Root Segment Intact Plant 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Amar, L., Reinhold, L.: Loss of membrane transport ability in leaf cells and release of protein as a result of osmotic shock. — Plant Physiol.51: 620–625, 1973.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Attia, A. F., Jeanjean, R.: Influence of osmotic shock and of plasmolysis on phosphate uptake by excised corn roots. — Physiol. vég.21: 39–47, 1983.Google Scholar
  3. Flowers, T. J., Troke, P. F., Yeo, A. R.: The mechanism of salt tolerance in halophytes. — Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol.28: 89–121, 1977.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Gerdes, R. G., Strickland, K. P., Rosenberg, H.: Restoration of phosphate transport by the phosphate-binding protein in spheroplasts ofEscherichia coli. — J. Bacteriol.131: 512–518, 1977.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Greenway, H., Munns, R.: Mechanism of salt tolerance in non-halophytes. — Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol.31: 149–190, 1980.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Grunwaldt, G., Ehwald, R., Pietzsch, W., Göring, H.: A special role of the rhizodermis in nutrient uptake by plant roots. — Biochem. Physiol. Pflanzen174: 831–837, 1979.Google Scholar
  7. Kafkafi, U., Valoras, N., Letey, J.: Chloride interaction with nitrate and phosphate nutrition in tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum L.). — J. Plant Nutr.5: 1369–1385, 1982.Google Scholar
  8. Laštůvka, Z. Minář, J.: [Water culture techniques of higher plants]. In Czech. — Fol. Fac. Sci. nat. Univ. purk. brunensis8: 1–83, 1967.Google Scholar
  9. Lowry, O. H., Rosebrough, N. J., Farr, A. L., Randall, R. J.: Protein measurement with the Folin phenol reagent. — J. biol. Chem.193: 265–275, 1951.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Luque, A. A., Bingham, F. T.: The effect of the osmotic potential and specific ion concentration of the nutrient solution on the uptake and reduction of nitrate by barley seedlings. — Plant Soil63: 227–237, 1981.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Maas, E. V., Ogata, G., Finkel, M. H.: Salt-induced inhibition of phosphate transport and release of membrane proteins from barley roots. — Plant Physiol.64: 139–143, 1979.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Macháčková, I., Král, J., Zmrhal, Z.: Characterization of phosphate absorption in maize root cortex segments. — Biol. Plant.25: 366–372, 1983.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Masuda, Y., Sakurai, N., Tazawa, M., Shimmen, T.: Effect of osmotic shock on auxin-induced cell extension, cell wall changes and acidification inAvena coleoptile segments. — Plant Cell Physiol.19: 857–867, 1978.Google Scholar
  14. Medveczky, N., Rosenberg, H.: The phosphate-binding protein ofEscherichia coli. — Biochim. biophys. Acta211: 158–168, 1970.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Murphy, J., Riley, J. P.: A modified single-solution method for the determination of phosphate in natural waters. — Anal. chim. Acta37: 31–36, 1962.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Nieman, R. H., Willis, C.: Correlation between suppression of glucose and phosphate uptake and the release of protein from viable carrot root cells treated with monovalent cations. — Plant Physiol.59: 369–371, 1971.Google Scholar
  17. Rubinstein, B.: Osmotic shock inhibits auxin-stimulated acidification and growth. — Plant Physiol.59: 369–371, 1977.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Rubinstein, B.: Regulation of H+ excretion. Effects of osmotic shock. — Plant Physiol.69: 939 to 944, 1982a.Google Scholar
  19. Rubinstein, B.: Regulation of H+ excretion. Role of protein released by osmotic shock. — Plant Physiol.69: 945–949, 1982b.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Rubinstein, B., Mahar, P., Tattar, T. A.: Effects of osmotic shock on some membrane - regulated events of oat coleoptile cells. — Plant Physiol.59: 365–368, 1977.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Schkarenkova, L. S., Horbacher, R., Preusser, E., Göring, H.: Osmotischer Shock an Maiswurzelspitzen. Charakterisierung der hypotonischen Shocklösung. — Biochem. Physiol. Pflanzen172: 369–377, 1978.Google Scholar
  22. Ullrich-Eberius, C. L., Novacky, A., Fischer, E., Lüttge, U.: Relationship between energydependent phosphate uptake and the electrical membrane potential inLemna gibba G 1. — Plant Physiol.67: 791–801, 1981.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Academia 1985

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ivana Macháčková
    • 2
  • Z. Zmrhal
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Plant NutritionInstitute for Crop ProductionPraha 6Czechoslovakia
  2. 2.Institute of Experimental BotanyCzechoslovak Academy of SciencesPraha 6Czechoslovakia

Personalised recommendations