Loading content, please wait..
loading..
Logo
Version 3.18
or
Publication Type J
Authors Parida, AK; Das, AB; Mohanty, P
Author Full Name Parida, AK; Das, AB; Mohanty, P
Title Defense potentials to NaCl in a mangrove, Bruguiera parviflora: Differential changes of isoforms of some antioxidative enzymes
Source JOURNAL OF PLANT PHYSIOLOGY
Language English
Document Type Article
Author Keywords antioxidative enzymes; Bruguiera parviflora; hydroponic culture; lipid peroxidation; mangrove; sodium chloride
Keywords Plus SUPEROXIDE-DISMUTASE; SALT STRESS; GLUTATHIONE-REDUCTASE; HYDROGEN-PEROXIDE; LIPID-PEROXIDATION; TEMPERATURE STRESS; OXIDATIVE STRESS; SALINITY STRESS; RESPONSES; CATALASE
Abstract In order to assess the role of the antioxidative defense system against salt treatment, the activities of some antioxidative enzymes and levels of antioxidants were monitored in a true mangrove, Bruguiera parviflora, subjected to varying levels of NaCl under hydroponic culture. In the leaves of B. parviflora, salt treatment preferentially enhanced the content of H2O2 as well as the activity of ascorbate peroxidase (APX), guaiacol peroxidase (GPX), glutathione reductase (GR), and superoxide dismutase (SOD), whereas it induced the decrease of total ascorbate and glutathione (GSH+GSSG) content as well as catalase (CAT) activity. Analysis of isoforms of antioxidative enzymes by native PAGE and activity staining revealed that leaves of B. parviflora had one isoform each of Mn-SOD and Cu/ZnSOD and three isoforms of Fe-SOD. Expression of Mn-SOD and Fe-SOD-2 was preferentially elevated by NaCl. Similarly, out of the six isoforms of GPX, the GPX-1, 2, 3 and 6 were enhanced by salt treatment but the levels of GPX-4 and -5 changed minimally as compared to those of a control. Activity staining gel revealed only one prominent isoform of APX and two isoforms of GR (GR-1 and GR-2), all of these isoforms increased upon salt exposure. Four CAT-isoforms were identified, among which the prominent CAT-2 isoform level was maximally reduced, suggesting differential down regulation of CAT isoforms by NaCl. The concentrations of malondialdehyde (MDA), a product of lipid peroxidation, remained unchanged in leaves of the plant treated with different concentrations of NaCl. This suggests that plants are protected against activated oxygen species by the elevated levels of certain antioxidative enzymes, thus avoiding lipid peroxidation during salt exposure. The differential changes in the levels of the isoforms due to NaCl treatment may be useful as markers for recognizing salt tolerance in mangroves.
Author Address Natl Inst Plant Biodivers Conservt & Res, Bhubaneswar 751015, Orissa, India; Reg Plant Resource Ctr, Bhubaneswar 751015, Orissa, India
Reprint Address Das, AB (reprint author), Natl Inst Plant Biodivers Conservt & Res, Bhubaneswar 751015, Orissa, India.
E-mail Address a_b_das@hotmail.com
ResearcherID Number PARIDA, ASISH KUMAR/C-4771-2009
Cited References Allakhverdiev SI, 2000, PLANT PHYSIOL, V123, P1047, DOI 10.1104/pp.123.3.1047; Asada K., 1994, Causes of photooxidative stress and amelioration of defense systems in plants., P77; ASADA K, 1992, PHYSIOL PLANTARUM, V85, P235, DOI 10.1111/j.1399-3054.1992.tb04728.x; BEAUCHAM.C, 1971, ANAL BIOCHEM, V44, P276, DOI 10.1016/0003-2697(71)90370-8; BEYER WF, 1987, ANAL BIOCHEM, V161, P559, DOI 10.1016/0003-2697(87)90489-1; Birecka H., 1975, PLANT PHYSIOL, V61, P561; BRADFORD MM, 1976, ANAL BIOCHEM, V72, P248, DOI 10.1006/abio.1976.9999; BRYAN JK, 1977, ANAL BIOCHEM, V78, P513, DOI 10.1016/0003-2697(77)90111-7; Cheeseman JM, 1997, PLANT CELL ENVIRON, V20, P579, DOI 10.1111/j.1365-3040.1997.00096.x; CHEN G, 1989, PLANT CELL PHYSL, V130, P987; Cherian Sam, 1999, Indian Journal of Plant Physiology, V4, P266; Comba ME, 1998, AUST J PLANT PHYSIOL, V25, P665; Dash S, 2002, J PLANT PHYSIOL, V159, P49, DOI 10.1078/0176-1617-00594; DELRIO LA, 1983, PLANTA, V158, P158; DHINDSA RS, 1981, J EXP BOT, V32, P93, DOI 10.1093/jxb/32.1.93; Dionisio-Sese ML, 1998, PLANT SCI, V135, P1, DOI 10.1016/S0168-9452(98)00025-9; EDWARDS EA, 1990, PLANTA, V180, P278, DOI 10.1007/BF00194008; Elstner EF, 1987, BIOCH PLANTS, P252, DOI 10.1016/B978-0-12-675411-7.50014-8; FEIERABEND J, 1992, PLANT PHYSIOL, V100, P1554, DOI 10.1104/pp.100.3.1554; Foyer C.H., 1994, CAUSES PHOTOOXIDATIV; FRIDOVICH I, 1986, ARCH BIOCHEM BIOPHYS, V247, P1, DOI 10.1016/0003-9861(86)90526-6; GOSSETT DR, 1994, CROP SCI, V34, P706; GRIFFITH OW, 1980, ANAL BIOCHEM, V106, P207, DOI 10.1016/0003-2697(80)90139-6; Guri A., 1983, CAN J PLANT SCI, V63, P732; HAGARTH PJ, 1999, BIOL MANGROVES; HALLIWELL B, 1978, PLANTA, V139, P9, DOI 10.1007/BF00390803; Halliwell B, 1982, SUPEROXIDE DISMUTASE, VI, P89; Halliwell B, 1985, FREE RADICALS BIOL M; Hasegawa PM, 2000, ANNU REV PLANT PHYS, V51, P463, DOI 10.1146/annurev.arplant.51.1.463; HERNANDEZ JA, 1995, PLANT SCI, V105, P151, DOI 10.1016/0168-9452(94)04047-8; Hernandez JA, 2000, PLANT CELL ENVIRON, V23, P853, DOI 10.1046/j.1365-3040.2000.00602.x; HURKMAN WJ, 1989, PLANT PHYSIOL, V90, P1444, DOI 10.1104/pp.90.4.1444; LAEMMLI UK, 1970, NATURE, V227, P680, DOI 10.1038/227680a0; Lee DH, 2001, J PLANT PHYSIOL, V158, P737, DOI 10.1078/0176-1617-00174; Miszalski Z, 1998, PLANT CELL ENVIRON, V21, P169, DOI 10.1046/j.1365-3040.1998.00266.x; Miyagawa Y, 2000, PLANT CELL PHYSIOL, V41, P311; NAKANO Y, 1981, PLANT CELL PHYSIOL, V22, P867; OKUDA T, 1991, PLANT PHYSIOL, V97, P1265, DOI 10.1104/pp.97.3.1265; Parida Asish, 2002, Journal of Plant Biology, V45, P28; PATTERSON BD, 1984, PLANT PHYSIOL, V76, P1014, DOI 10.1104/pp.76.4.1014; Rao MV, 1996, PLANT PHYSIOL, V110, P125, DOI 10.1104/pp.110.1.125; Salin ML, 1981, Z PFLANZENPHYSIOL, V99, P37; Sano S, 2001, PLANT CELL PHYSIOL, V42, P433, DOI 10.1093/pcp/pce054; Santos CLV, 2001, J EXP BOT, V52, P351, DOI 10.1093/jexbot/52.355.351; Scandalios JG, 2000, PLANT SCI, V156, P103, DOI 10.1016/S0168-9452(00)00235-1; SLOOTEN L, 1995, PLANT PHYSIOL, V107, P737; Sobrado MA, 1999, PHOTOSYNTHETICA, V36, P547, DOI 10.1023/A:1007092004582; Sokal R.R., 1995, BIOMETRY PRINCIPLES, P321; Sreenivasulu N, 2000, PHYSIOL PLANTARUM, V109, P435, DOI 10.1034/j.1399-3054.2000.100410.x; Sreenivasulu N, 1999, PLANT SCI, V141, P1, DOI 10.1016/S0168-9452(98)00204-0; Sudhakar C, 2001, PLANT SCI, V161, P613, DOI 10.1016/S0168-9452(01)00450-2; Takemura T, 2000, AQUAT BOT, V68, P15, DOI 10.1016/S0304-3770(00)00106-6; Tatiana Z., 1999, PLANT CELL PHYSL, V40, P273; THORUP OA, 1961, J LAB CLIN MED, V58, P122; YE XS, 1990, PHYTOPATHOLOGY, V80, P1295, DOI 10.1094/Phyto-80-1295; Zhang JX, 1996, PLANT SCI, V113, P139, DOI 10.1016/0168-9452(95)04295-4
Cited Reference Count 56
Times Cited 135
Total Times Cited Count (WoS, BCI, and CSCD) 157
Publisher URBAN & FISCHER VERLAG
Publisher City JENA
Publisher Address BRANCH OFFICE JENA, P O BOX 100537, D-07705 JENA, GERMANY
ISSN 0176-1617
29-Character Source Abbreviation J PLANT PHYSIOL
ISO Source Abbreviation J. Plant Physiol.
Publication Date MAY
Year Published 2004
Volume 161
Issue 5
Beginning Page 531
Ending Page 542
Digital Object Identifier (DOI) 10.1078/0176-1617-01084
Page Count 12
Web of Science Category Plant Sciences
Subject Category Plant Sciences
Document Delivery Number 823LI
Unique Article Identifier WOS:000221613300004
Plants associated with this reference

LEGAL NOTICES — This website is protected by Copyright © The University of Sussex, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019. The eHALOPH database is protected by Database Right and Copyright © The University of Sussex and other contributors, 2006, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019. This database is based on an earlier work by James Aronson.
THIS WEBSITE AND THIS DATABASE ARE PROVIDED ON AN "AS IS" BASIS, AND YOU USE THEM AND RELY ON THEM AT YOUR OWN RISK.

Contact email: halophytes@sussex.ac.uk
Credits – Tim Flowers, Joaquim Santos, Moritz Jahns, Brian Warburton, Peter Reed