| Literature DB >> 23260180 |
Xiaoning Li1, Yingli Yang, Lingyun Jia, Haijian Chen, Xia Wei.
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to evaluate antioxidative responses and proline metabolism in roots and leaves of wheat seedlings after treatment with different zinc (Zn) concentrations (0, 0.5, 1 and 3mM) for 6 days. A notable reduction in Zn content was observed in 0.5mM Zn-treated leaves, but a significant elevation in response to 1 and 3mM Zn treatment. Significant increases in Zn levels were observed in roots exposed to all applied Zn concentration. The highest Zn concentration resulted in significant reduction in the amount of total chlorophyll (chl) and chl a, while chl b content decreased under all applied Zn concentrations. In wheat leaves, Zn excess caused an insignificant enhancement of hydrogen peroxide (H(2)O(2)) content as well as unaltered malondialdehyde (MDA) level. Unchanged superoxide dismutase (SOD) activity, increased peroxidase (POD), catalase (CAT), glutathione reductase (GR) and ascorbate peroxidase (APX) activities were also observed in the leaves of Zn-treated seedlings. By contrast, higher H(2)O(2) and MDA contents in Zn-treated roots were correlated with the stimulation of SOD and the inhibition of POD and GR. There were significant enhancements of soluble sugar and proline in both leaves and roots of wheat seedlings under Zn stress, but the increased rate of proline was higher in the roots than in the leaves. Differently, soluble protein content due to Zn treatment was lower in the leaves but higher in the roots, as compared with untreated seedlings. Additionally, ornithine δ-aminotransferase in both leaves and roots was stimulated by Zn stress, but different Zn concentrations exhibited inhibitory effect on glutamate kinase activity in wheat seedlings. In contrast, all applied Zn concentration resulted in an elevation of proline dehydrogenase activity in the leaves while the highest Zn concentration inhibited this parameter in the roots.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2012 PMID: 23260180 DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoenv.2012.11.025
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ecotoxicol Environ Saf ISSN: 0147-6513 Impact factor: 6.291