Plant Growth Regulation

, Volume 76, Issue 2, pp 147–155 | Cite as

Variable responses of soybean chitinases to arsenic and cadmium stress at the whole plant level

  • Terézia Gálusová
  • Ľubomír Rybanský
  • Patrik Mészáros
  • Nadine Spieß
  • Beáta Piršelová
  • Roman Kuna
  • Jana Libantová
  • Jana Moravčíková
  • Pavol Hauptvogel
  • Ildikó Matuíková
Original Paper


Plant chitinases (EC are considered as typical defense components under various environmental stresses, including heavy metals. In addition, some of them play crucial role in normal plant growth and development. In this work the profile and activities of these enzymes were analyzed to study the variability of defense within soybean plants. For this, two cultivars with contrasting tolerance to metals were exposed to ecologically relevant doses of arsenic and cadmium. Enzyme profiles revealed a spatial distribution of chitinase activities throughout the individual plants, tending to decrease upwards to the top of the plants. Under metal stress, there was a single responsive isoform detected in roots that behaved opposingly in the studied soybean cultivars. In contrast, several isoforms were activated in aboveground tissue, predominantly in mature (older) leaves. Of these, two were identified (21 and 42 kDa) as more specifically involved in defense against metal stress in soybean. The 21 kDa isoform was concluded as possibly contributing to metal tolerance and deserves further investigations at molecular level. Nevertheless, no sound interaction was detected between leaf developmental stage and responsiveness to metals for either of the chitinase isoforms. Further studying the distribution of induced defense within plants is important in understanding the defense strategy of plants against environmental cues including metals.


Inducible defense Developmental stage Metal Spatial distribution of defense 



Soybean seeds were provided by Bóly Agricultural Production and Trade Ltd., Hungary and Matex, s.r.o. (Veškovce, Veľké Kapušany, Slovakia). The work was supported by grants from the Scientific Grant Agency of the Ministry of Education of Slovak Republic and the Academy of Sciences VEGA No. 2/0090/14 and 1/0509/12. The authors also acknowledge support of the COST FA1306.

Conflict of interest

The authors report no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

10725_2014_9984_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (139 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (PDF 138 kb)
10725_2014_9984_MOESM2_ESM.pdf (339 kb)
Supplementary material 2 (PDF 338 kb)
10725_2014_9984_MOESM3_ESM.pdf (354 kb)
Supplementary material 3 (PDF 353 kb)
10725_2014_9984_MOESM4_ESM.pdf (341 kb)
Supplementary material 4 (PDF 340 kb)


  1. Ahmed NU, Park JI, Seo MS, Kumar TS, Lee IH, Park BS, Nou IS (2012) Identification and expression analysis of chitinase genes related to biotic stress resistance in Brassica. Mol Biol Rep 39:3649–3657CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Ali B, Qian P, Jin R, Ali S, Khan M, Aziz R, Tian T, Zhou W (2014) Physiological and ultra-structural changes in Brassica napus seedlings induced by cadmium stress. Biol Plant 58:131–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anderson P, Agrell J (2005) Within-plant variation in induced defence in developing leaves of cotton plants. Oecologia 144:427–434CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Balmer D, Mauch-Mani B (2013) More beneath the surface? Root versus shoot antifungal plant defenses. Front Plant Sci 4:256PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Balmer D, De Papajewski DV, Planchamp C, Glauser G, Mauch-Mani B (2013) Induced resistance in maize is based on organ-specific defence responses. Plant J 74:213–225CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Békésiová B, Hraška S, Libantová J, Moravčíková J, Matušíková I (2008) Heavy-metal stress induced accumulation of chitinase isoforms in plants. Mol Biol Rep 35:579–588CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Board JE, Kahlon CS (2011) Soybean yield formation: what controls it and how it can be improved. In: El-Shemy HA (ed) Soybean physiology and biochemistry. InTech, Rijeka, pp 1–36Google Scholar
  8. Cobbett C, Goldsbrough P (2002) Phytochelatins and metallothioneins: roles in heavy metal detoxification and homeostasis. Annu Rev Plant Biol 53:159–182CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Corrales I, Poschenrieder C, Barcelo J (2008) Boron-induced amelioration of aluminium toxicity in a monocot and a dicot species. J Plant Physiol 165:504–513CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Dobroviczká T, Piršelová B, Mészáros P, Blehová A, Libantová J, Moravčiková J, Matušíková I (2013) EffectS of cadmium and arsenic ions on content of photosynthetic pigments in the leaves of Glycine max (L.) Merrill. Pak J Bot 45:105–110Google Scholar
  11. Dra̧zkiewicz M, Baszyński T (2005) Growth parameters and photosynthetic pigments in leaf segments of Zea mays exposed to cadmium, as related to protection mechanisms. J Plant Physiol 162:1013–1021CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dra̧zkiewicz M, Tukendorf A, Baszynski T (2003) Age-dependent response of maize leaf segments to cadmium treatment: effect on chlorophyll fluorescence and phytochelatin accumulation. J Plant Physiol 160:247–254CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Fluch S, Olmo CC, Tauber S, Stierschneider M, Kopecky D, Reichenauer TG, Matusikova I (2008) Transcriptomic changes in wind-exposed poplar leaves are dependent on developmental stage. Planta 228:757–764CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Gijzen M, Kuflu K, Qutob D, Chernys JT (2001) A class I chitinase from soybean seed coat. J Exp Bot 52:2283–2289CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Grover A (2012) Plant chitinases: genetic diversity and physiological roles. Crit Rev Plant Sci 31:57–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hall JL (2002) Cellular mechanisms for heavy metal detoxification and tolerance. J Exp Bot 53:1–11CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Halušková L, Valentovičová K, Huttová J, Mistrík I, Tamás L (2010) Effect of heavy metals on root growth and peroxidase activity in barley root tip. Acta Biol Plant 32:59–65Google Scholar
  18. Hurkman WJ, Tanaka CK (1986) Solubilization of plant membrane proteins for analysis by two-dimensional gel electrophoresis. Plant Physiol 81:802–806CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Jerkovic A, Kriegel AM, Bradner JR, Atwell BJ, Roberts TH, Willows RD (2010) Strategic distribution of protective proteins within bran layers of wheat protects the nutrient-rich endosperm. Plant Physiol 152:1459–1470CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Jung WJ, Mabood F, Kim TH, Smith DL (2007) Induction of pathogenesis-related proteins during biocontrol of Rhizoctonia solani with Pseudomonas aureofaciens in soybean (Glycine max L. Merr.) plants. Biocontrol 52:895–904CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kaznina NM, Titov AF, Topchieva LV, Laidinen GF, Batova YV (2013) Cadmium effect on vacuolar H + -ATPase gene expression in the roots of barley seedlings of different age. Russ J Plant Physiol 60:55–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Konotop Y, Meszaros P, Spiess N, Mistrikova V, Pirselova B, Libantova J, Moravcikova J, Taran N, Hauptvogel P, Matusikova I (2012) Defense responses of soybean roots during exposure to cadmium, excess of nitrogen supply and combinations of these stressors. Mol Biol Rep 39:10077–10087CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Krupa Z, Moniak M (1998) The stage of leaf maturity implicates the response of the photosynthetic apparatus to cadmium toxicity. Plant Sci 138:149–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Küpper H, Mijovilovich A, Meyer-Klaucke W, Kroneck PMH (2004) Tissue- and age-dependent differences in the complexation of cadmium and zinc in the cadmium/zinc hyperaccumulator Thlaspi caerulescens (Ganges Ecotype) revealed by X-ry absorption spectroscopy. Plant Physiol 134:748–757CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Laemmli UK (1970) Cleavage of structural proteins during the assembly of the head of bacteriophage T4. Nature 227:680–685CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Lange J, Mohr U, Wiemken A, Boller T, VogeliLange R (1996) Proteolytic processing of class IV chitinase in the compatible interaction of bean roots with Fusarium solani. Plant Physiol 111:1135–1144CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Lefèvre I, Marchal G, Corréal E, Zanuzzi A, Lutts S (2009) Variation in response to heavy metals during vegetative growth in Dorycnium pentaphyllum Scop. Plant Growth Regul 59:1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Liao C, Hochholdinger F, Li C (2012) Comparative analyses of three legume species reveals conserved and unique root extracellular proteins. Proteomics 12:3219–3228CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Lim PO, Woo HR, Nam HG (2003) Molecular genetics of leaf senescence in Arabidopsis. Trends Plant Sci 8:272–278CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Mészáros P, Rybanský A, Hauptvogel P, Kuna R, Libantová J, Moravčíková J, Piršelová B, Tirpáková A, Matušíková I (2013) Cultivar-specific kinetics of chitinase induction in soybean roots during exposure to arsenic. Mol Biol Rep 40:2127–2138CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Metwally A, Safronova VI, Belimov AA, Dietz KJ (2005) Genotypic variation of the response to cadmium toxicity in Pisum sativum. J Exp Bot 56:167–178PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Mohammadi M, Karr AL (2002) β-1,3-glucanase and chitinase activities in soybean root nodules. J Plant Physiol 159:245–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Nakazaki T, Tsukiyama T, Okumoto Y, Kageyama D, Naito K, Inouye K, Tanisaka T (2006) Distribution, structure, organ-specific expression, and phylogenic analysis of the pathogenesis-related protein-3 chitinase gene family in rice (Oryza sativa L.). Genome 49:619–630CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Pan SQ, Ye XS, Kuc J (1991) A technique for detection of chitinase, beta-1,3-glucanase, and protein- patterns after a single separation using polyacrylamide-gel electrophoresis or isoelectrofocusing. Phytopathol 81:970–974CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Piršelová B, Matušíková I (2011) Plant defense against heavy metals: the involvement of pathogenesis—related (PR) proteins. In: Mechanism and action of phytoconstituents, pp 179–205Google Scholar
  36. Piršelová B, Kuna R, Libantová J, Moravčíková J, Matušíková I (2011) Biochemical and physiological comparison of heavy metal-triggered defense responses in the monocot maize and dicot soybean roots. Mol Biol Rep 38:3437–3446CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Qiu J, Hallmann J, Kokalis-Burelle N, Weaver DB, Rodríguez-Kábana R, Tuzun S (1997) Activity and differential induction of chitinase isozymes in soybean cultivars resistant or susceptible to root-knot nematodes. J Nematol 29:523–530Google Scholar
  38. Schmutz J, Cannon SB, Schlueter J, Ma J, Mitros T, Nelson W, Hyten DL, Song Q, Thelen JJ, Cheng J, Xu D, Hellsten U, May GD, Yu Y, Sakurai T, Umezawa T, Bhattacharyya MK, Sandhu D, Valliyodan B, Lindquist E, Peto M, Grant D, Shu S, Goodstein D, Barry K, Futrell-Griggs M, Abernathy B, Du J, Tian Z, Zhu L, Gill N, Joshi T, Libault M, Sethuraman A, Zhang XC, Shinozaki K, Nguyen HT, Wing RA, Cregan P, Specht J, Grimwood J, Rokhsar D, Stacey G, Shoemaker RC, Jackson SA (2010) Genome sequence of the palaeopolyploid soybean. Nature 463:178–183CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Shinshi H, Mohnen D, Meins F (1987) Regulation of a plant pathogenesis-related enzyme: inhibition of chitinase and chitinase mRNA accumulation in cultured tobacco tissues by auxin and cytokinin. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 84:89–93CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Skórzyńska-Polit E, Baszyński T (1995) Photochemical activity of primary leaves in cadmium stressed Phaseolus coccineus depends on their growth stages. Acta Soc Bot Pol 64:273–279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Skórzyńska-Polit E, Baszyński T (1997) Differences in sensitivity of the photosynthetic apparatus in Cd- stressed runner bean plants in relation to their age. Plant Sci 128:11–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Skórzyńska-Polit E, Bednara J, Baszyński T (1995) Some aspects of runner bean plant response to cadmium at different stages of the primary leaf growth. Acta Soc Bot Pol 64:165–170Google Scholar
  43. Suginta W (2007) Identification of chitin binding proteins and characterization of two chitinase isoforms from Vibrio algynoliticus 283. Enzyme Microb Technol 41:212–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Trapnell C, Williams BA, Pertea G, Mortazavi A, Kwan G, van Baren MJ, Salzberg SL, Wold BJ, Pachter L (2010) Transcript assembly and quantification by RNA-Seq reveals unannotated transcripts and isoform switching during cell differentiation. Nat Biotechnol 28:U174–U511Google Scholar
  45. Trudel J, Asselin A (1989) Detection of chitinase activity after polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis. Anal Biochem 178:362–366CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Vaculík M, Konlechner C, Langer I, Adlassnig W, Puschenreiter M, Lux A, Hauser MT (2012) Root anatomy and element distribution vary between two Salix caprea isolates with different Cd accumulation capacities. Environ Pollut 163:117–126CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Visker MHPW, Keizer LCP, Budding DJ, Van Loon LC, Colon LT, Struik PC (2003) Leaf position prevails over plant age and leaf age in reflecting resistance to late blight in potato. Phytopathol 93:666–674CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Walters D, Heil M (2007) Costs and trade-offs associated with induced resistance. Physiol Mol Plant Pathol 71:3–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Xie ZP, Staehelin C, Wiemken A, Broughton WJ, Müller J, Boller T (1999) Symbiosis-stimulated chitinase isoenzymes of soybean (Glycine max (L.) Merr.). J Exp Bot 50:327–333Google Scholar
  50. Yokoyama R, Nishitani K (2004) Genomic basis for cell-wall diversity in plants. A comparative approach to gene families in rice and Arabidopsis. Plant Cell Physiol 45:1111–1121CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Yu XM, Guo SX (2000) Progress on plant chitinase induced by fungi. Prog Biochem Biophys 27:43–44Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Terézia Gálusová
    • 1
  • Ľubomír Rybanský
    • 2
  • Patrik Mészáros
    • 1
  • Nadine Spieß
    • 3
  • Beáta Piršelová
    • 1
  • Roman Kuna
    • 1
  • Jana Libantová
    • 4
  • Jana Moravčíková
    • 4
  • Pavol Hauptvogel
    • 5
  • Ildikó Matuíková
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Botany and Genetics, Faculty of Natural SciencesConstantine the Philosopher UniversityNitraSlovak Republic
  2. 2.Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Natural SciencesConstantine the Philosopher UniversityNitraSlovak Republic
  3. 3.AIT Austrian Institute of Technology GmbHTullnAustria
  4. 4.Institute of Plant Genetics and BiotechnologySlovak Academy of SciencesNitraSlovak Republic
  5. 5.National Agricultural and Food CentreResearch Institute of Plant ProductionPiešťanySlovak Republic

Personalised recommendations