| Literature DB >> 26198226 |
Arne Van Hoeck1,2, Nele Horemans3,4, May Van Hees5, Robin Nauts6, Dries Knapen7, Hildegarde Vandenhove8, Ronny Blust9.
Abstract
In the following study, dose dependent effects on growth and oxidative stress induced by β-radiation were examined to gain better insights in the mode of action of β-radiation induced stress in plant species. Radiostrontium (⁹⁰Sr) was used to test for β-radiation induced responses in the freshwater macrophyte Lemna minor. The accumulation pattern of 90Sr was examined for L. minor root and fronds separately over a seven-day time period and was subsequently used in a dynamic dosimetric model to calculate β-radiation dose rates. Exposing L. minor plants for seven days to a ⁹⁰Sr activity concentration of 25 up to 25,000 kBq·L⁻¹ resulted in a dose rate between 0.084 ± 0.004 and 97 ± 8 mGy·h⁻¹. After seven days of exposure, root fresh weight showed a dose dependent decrease starting from a dose rate of 9.4 ± 0.5 mGy·h⁻¹. Based on these data, an EDR10 value of 1.5 ± 0.4 mGy·h⁻¹ was estimated for root fresh weight and 52 ± 17 mGy·h⁻¹ for frond fresh weight. Different antioxidative enzymes and metabolites were further examined to analyze if β-radiation induces oxidative stress in L. minor.Entities:
Keywords: Lemna minor; abiotic stress; dosimetry; oxidative stress; radiation responses; strontium-90
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26198226 PMCID: PMC4519901 DOI: 10.3390/ijms160715309
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Mol Sci ISSN: 1422-0067 Impact factor: 5.923
Nominal and measured medium activity concentrations of 90Sr, biomass of L. minor fronds and roots given as fresh weight (FW) and dry weight (DW) of each activity concentration, 90Sr concentration ratios expressed in fresh weights and dry weights for L. minor fronds and roots after seven days of exposure and the calculated absorbed dose rates in L. minor organs. All values are given as mean ± SE with at least three biological replicates. Significant differences from control plants (p < 0.05, one-way ANOVA) are given as *.
| Activity Concentration | Biomass | Uptake Parameters | Dosimetric Parameters | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nominal | Measured | FW | DW | Conc. Ratio FW | Conc. Ratio DW | Dose Rate Intern | Dose Rate Extern | Total Dose Rate | |
| 0 | 0 ± 0.001 | plant | 199.5 ± 10 | 13.9 ± 0.7 | na | na | na | na | na |
| frond | 165.6 ± 7.8 | 12.3 ± 0.6 | na | na | na | na | na | ||
| root | 33.8 ± 2.3 | 1.6 ± 0.1 | na | na | na | na | na | ||
| 25 | 25 ± 0.1 | plant | 225.3 ± 10.4 | 15.3 ± 0.5 | 60 ± 3 | 832 ± 21 | 85 ± 4 | 5 ± 0.2 | 84 ± 4 |
| frond | 186 ± 8.8 | 13.5 ± 0.3 | 62 ± 2 | 829 ± 30 | 86 ± 4 | 5 ± 0.2 | 89 ± 4 | ||
| root | 38.8 ± 1.8 | 1.8 ± 0.2 | 28 ± 2 | 783 ± 23 | 41 ± 3 | 10 ± 0.4 | 51 ± 2 | ||
| 250 | 247 ± 0.1 | plant | 210.2 ± 9.6 | 15.1 ± 0.9 | 60 ± 4 | 767 ± 65 | 918 ± 63 | 53 ± 3 | 967 ± 58 |
| frond | 178 ± 8 | 13.7 ± 0.7 | 65 ± 5 | 789 ± 71 | 1000 ± 76 | 53 ± 3 | 1053 ± 74 | ||
| root | 31.2 ± 1.6 | 1.5 ± 0.1 | 29 ± 1 | 752 ± 15 | 454 ± 20 | 107 ± 5 | 562 ± 21 | ||
| 2500 | 2453 ± 2 | plant | 195.6 ± 5.6 | 14.0 ± 0.2 | 60 ± 3 | 844 ± 23 | 8881 ± 486 | 530 ± 3 | 9432 ± 483 |
| frond | 178.5 ± 5 | 13.2 ± 0.3 | 63 ± 3 | 858 ± 24 | 9185 ± 477 | 530 ± 3 | 9715 ± 476 | ||
| root | 16.8 ± 0.7 * | 0.9 ± 0.1 * | 37 ± 3 | 820 ± 48 | 5486 ± 469 | 1070 ± 6 | 6556 ± 464 | ||
| 25,000 | 24,567 ± 13 | plant | 124.4 ± 3.4 | 12.5 ± 0.1 | 57 ± 5 | 540 ± 35 * | 91,063 ± 8607 | 6006 ± 98 | 97,264 ± 8490 |
| frond | 118.7 ± 3.5 * | 12.2 ± 0.1 | 59 ± 6 | 542 ± 36 * | 92,827 ± 9130 | 6006 ± 98 | 98,834 ± 9033 | ||
| root | 5.7 ± 0.2 * | 0.4 ± 0.02 * | 36 ± 2 | 474 ± 20 * | 56,904 ± 2287 | 12,121 ± 197 | 69,025 ± 2181 | ||
Figure 1Time course of Sr90 uptake in L. minor for time period of 168 hours exposed to 10 kBq·L−1 of 90Sr. Black dots refers to concentration ratios on fresh weight for frond and root, white dots refers to concentration ratios on dry weight for frond and root. Legend shows the equation of each fit with the R2 value. Each data point represents the mean ± SE of six biological replicas.
Figure 2Dose response curve of L. minor plants treated for seven days with β-radation. The dose response curces are given by relative growth inhibition based on frond area (), frond number (), plant fresh weight (), frond fresh weight (), frond dry weight (), root fresh weight () and root dry weight (). Each data point represents the mean ± SE of nine biological replicas for frond related endpoints and three biological replicas for root related endpoints. In addition to the average values of each point, the log-logistic function fitted through the data is added.
Figure 3Enzyme activities of (A) catalase (CAT); (B) ascorbate peroxidase (APX); (C) glutathione reductase (GR); (D) guaiacol type peroxidase (GPOD); (E) syringaldizine peroxidase (SPOD); and (F) superoxide dismutase (SOD) in L. minor exposed to different dose rates levels of β-radation for seven days. Each data point represents the mean ± SE of three biological replicas. Different capital letters indicate significant differences between treated plants and control plants (p < 0.05, one-way ANOVA).
Figure 4Metabolite concentrations of (a) ascorbate (ASC) and (b) glutathione (GSH) in L. minor exposed to different dose rates levels of β-radation for seven days. Concentration levels of reduced and oxidized forms of the metabolites are shown in light and dark grey bars, respectively. Each data point represents the mean ± SE of three biological replicas. Different capital letters indicate significant differences between treated plants and control plants (p < 0.05, one-way ANOVA).