| Literature DB >> 28597438 |
Yang Liu1, Chenyun Qian1, Sihui Ding1, Xulan Shang1,2, Wanxia Yang1,2, Shengzuo Fang3,4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: As a highly valued and multiple function tree species, Cyclocarya paliurus is planted and managed for timber production and medical use. However, limited information is available on its genotype selection and cultivation for growth and phytochemicals. Responses of growth and secondary metabolites to light regimes and genotypes are useful information to determine suitable habitat conditions for the cultivation of medicinal plants.Entities:
Keywords: Chlorophyll content; Cyclocarya paliurus; Environmental factor; Flavonoid content; Genotype; Leaf biomass; Palisade cell
Year: 2016 PMID: 28597438 PMCID: PMC5432901 DOI: 10.1186/s40529-016-0145-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Bot Stud ISSN: 1817-406X Impact factor: 2.787
Leaf characteristics and chlorophyll concentration of Cyclocarya paliurus leaves under different treatments
| Treatment | Leaf area per plant (cm2) | Leaf thickness (μm) | Palisade length (μm) | Total chlorophyll concentration (mg g−1) | Chlorophyll ratio |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A1B1 | 846 ± 25.8a | 244.1 ± 19.5d | 110.1 ± 4.5c | 1.69 ± 0.28abc | 4.00 ± 0.02e |
| A1B2 | 793 ± 15.8a | 301.0 ± 20.6e | 134.7 ± 2.2d | 1.43 ± 0.16a | 3.54 ± 0.04c |
| A1B3 | 1158 ± 23.2abc | 257.2 ± 9.1d | 123.1 ± 8.2cd | 1.35 ± 0.24a | 3.96 ± 0.20e |
| A2B1 | 1299 ± 177.3abc | 135.5 ± 24.4ab | 79.0 ± 6.3b | 2.19 ± 0.22d | 3.78 ± 0.06d |
| A2B2 | 867 ± 79.5a | 170.2 ± 1.5c | 78.2 ± 4.3b | 1.63 ± 0.08ab | 3.43 ± 0.03bc |
| A2B3 | 1610 ± 115.6c | 126.0 ± 14.2ab | 60.8 ± 3.2a | 1.94 ± 0.29bcd | 3.56 ± 0.06c |
| A3B1 | 959 ± 16.0ab | 105.0 ± 19.7a | 55.8 ± 6.3a | 2.15 ± 0.21cd | 3.55 ± 0.03c |
| A3B2 | 1156 ± 48.1abc | 147.8 ± 17.2ab | 76.1 ± 7.5b | 1.79 ± 0.24abcd | 3.25 ± 0.04a |
| A3B3 | 1384 ± 43.3bc | 116.3 ± 1.1a | 50.0 ± 6.5a | 2.08 ± 0.11cd | 3.38 ± 0.06b |
Mean ± SD in the same column with different letters are statistically significantly different among the treatments for each determined index (P < 0.05 by Tukey’s test)
Summary of significance levels (Two-way ANOVA) for the effects of shading, provenance and their interaction on leaf characteristics and chlorophyll concentration of Cyclocarya paliurus leaves
| Source | Leaf area (cm2) | Leaf thickness (μm) | Palisade length (μm) | Total chlorophyll concentration (mg g−1) | Chlorophyll |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Shading (A) | |||||
| f | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| MS | 5269.2 | 55,460.7 | 9643.7 | 0.6945 | 0.4441 |
| P |
|
|
|
|
|
| Provenance (B) | |||||
| f | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| MS | 67,430.7 | 3103.7 | 447.9 | 0.0159 | 0.1599 |
| P |
|
|
|
|
|
| Interaction (A × B) | |||||
| f | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 |
| MS | 743.1 | 38.2 | 59.8 | 0.0025 | 0.0125 |
| P | 0.331 | 0.647 |
| 0.561 |
|
Italic values indicate the treatment effects are statistically significant at the 0.05 level for each determined index
Tukey’s multiple-range test of leaf characteristics and chlorophyll concentration of Cyclocarya paliurus leaves after a Two-way ANOVA
| Treatment | Level | Leaf area (cm2) | Leaf thickness (μm) | Palisade length (μm) | Total chlorophyll concentration (mg g−1) | Chlorophyll |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Shading (A) | A1 | 932a | 267.4c | 122.7c | 1.49a | 3.83c |
| A2 | 1259b | 143.9b | 72.7b | 1.92b | 3.59b | |
| A3 | 1167ab | 123.0a | 60.6a | 2.01b | 3.39a | |
| Provenance (B) | B1 | 1035a | 161.6a | 81.6a | 2.01c | 3.78c |
| B2 | 939a | 206.3b | 96.3b | 1.62a | 3.40a | |
| B3 | 1384b | 166.5a | 78.0a | 1.79ab | 3.63b |
Fig. 1Anatomical structure of Cyclocarya paliurus leaves under different treatments (showed for cross sections. D, PP and ST indicate adaxial epidermis, palisade parenchyma and spongy tissue, respectively). Scale 100 μm
Summary of significance levels (Two-way ANOVA) for the effects of shading, provenance and their interaction on biomass accumulation, flavonoid concentrations and flavonoid yield in leaves of Cyclocarya paliurus
| Source | Biomass accumulation (g plant−1 dm) | Flavonoid concentrations (mg g−1 dm) | Flavonoid yield (mg plant−1 dm) | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Root | Stem | Leaf | Total | Total | Quercetin | Isoquercitrin | Kaempferol | Total | Quercetin | Isoquercitrin | Kaempferol | |
| Shading (A) | ||||||||||||
| f | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| MS | 7332.3 | 10,952.4 | 2977.3 | 58,209.7 | 806.7 | 9.4058 | 24.425 | 4.979 | 6,077,330.0 | 28,472.3 | 59,931.2 | 9511.8 |
| P |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Provenance (B) | ||||||||||||
| f | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| MS | 1827.4 | 4905.5 | 2986.8 | 35,337.9 | 19.2 | 2.3303 | 2.244 | 0.0197 | 3,853,934.2 | 16,248.5 | 19,977.7 | 2298.6 |
| P |
|
|
|
| 0.234 |
|
| 0.130 |
|
|
|
|
| Interaction | ||||||||||||
| f | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 |
| MS | 1635.3 | 4912.3 | 2940.5 | 27,709.1 | 4.9 | 0.1994 | 1.194 | 0.1436 | 4,847,762.0 | 7018.2 | 25,089.3 | 1907.3 |
| P |
|
|
|
| 0.970 |
|
| 0.078 |
|
|
|
|
Italic values indicate the treatment effects are statistically significant at the 0.05 level for each determined index
Flavonoid concentrations in leaves of Cyclocarya paliurus under various treatments of shading and provenance (mean ± SD, samples collected in October 20, 2011)
| Treatment | Flavonoid concentrations (mg g−1) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total | Quercetin | Isoquercitrin | Kaempferol | |
| A1B1 | 40.9 ± 4.6b | 2.11 ± 0.19c | 2.37 ± 0.32b | 2.12 ± 0.79b |
| A1B2 | 42.6 ± 2.8b | 2.13 ± 0.03c | 4.35 ± 0.53d | 2.10 ± 0.01b |
| A1B3 | 45.8 ± 9.3b | 1.28 ± 0.31b | 3.67 ± 0.64c | 2.97 ± 0.35c |
| A2B1 | 24.8 ± 3.4a | 0.62 ± 0.05a | 0.53 ± 0.07a | 0.87 ± 0.08a |
| A2B2 | 23.3 ± 2.2a | 0.40 ± 0.04a | 0.76 ± 0.07a | 0.59 ± 0.06a |
| A2B3 | 28.0 ± 6.1a | 0.41 ± 0.08a | 0.77 ± 0.20a | 0.91 ± 0.17a |
| A3B1 | 27.6 ± 1.8a | 0.54 ± 0.05a | 0.49 ± 0.06a | 0.71 ± 0.07a |
| A3B2 | 28.8 ± 6.4a | 0.50 ± 0.13a | 1.06 ± 0.16a | 0.44 ± 0.01a |
| A3B3 | 30.7 ± 0.6a | 0.25 ± 0.03a | 0.50 ± 0.05a | 0.35 ± 0.03a |
Different letters indicate significant differences among treatments for the same category according to Tukey’s test (p < 0.05)
Fig. 2Seasonal variation in concentrations of total and selected flavonoids (quercetin, kaempferol, and isoquercitrin) in leaves of Cyclocarya paliurus under three shading treatments (based on the means of three provenances) (mean ± SD)
Variation in biomass production of Cyclocarya paliurus under different treatments of shading and provenance (mean ± SD, samples collected in October 20, 2011)
| Treatment | Biomass production (g) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Root | Stem | Leaf | Total | |
| A1B1 | 57.9 ± 4.00cd | 62.9 ± 7.08cd | 21.6 ± 2.72a | 142.5 ± 13.8bc |
| A1B2 | 47.8 ± 5.42cd | 46.4 ± 4.70bc | 21.9 ± 2.48a | 112.6 ± 12.6b |
| A1B3 | 104.5 ± 9.50d | 129.3 ± 13.76d | 82.7 ± 8.75b | 316.5 ± 32.02d |
| A2B1 | 20.1 ± 2.08bc | 30.8 ± 2.36b | 11.5 ± 1.73a | 62.5 ± 6.18ab |
| A2B2 | 36.9 ± 3.22bcd | 40.4 ± 3.25bc | 25.8 ± 2.05a | 103.1 ± 8.53ab |
| A2B3 | 59.8 ± 5.50 cd | 106.0 ± 10.27d | 71.3 ± 6.67b | 237.2 ± 22.46cd |
| A3B1 | 9.4 ± 1.48a | 11.3 ± 0.82a | 5.6 ± 0.47a | 26.4 ± 2.77a |
| A3B2 | 17.2 ± 1.92b | 12.6 ± 0.77a | 10.3 ± 0.74a | 40.3 ± 3.44ab |
| A3B3 | 12.6 ± 2.18b | 10.7 ± 0.98a | 8.8 ± 0.46a | 32.2 ± 2.59a |
Different letters indicate significant differences among treatments for the same category according to Tukey’s test (p < 0.05)
Fig. 3Variation in total and selected flavonoid accumulation in leaves of Cyclocarya paliurus per plant among various treatments (mean ± SD, samples collected in October 20, 2011). Different lower case letters indicate significant differences among various treatments within the same flavonoid (p < 0.05 by Tukey’s test). A1, A2 and A3 represent no shading, shading with one-layer net, and shading with two-layer nets, respectively, whereas B1, B2 and B3 indicate different provenances Wufeng, Yuanling and Muchuan, respectively
Pearson correlation coefficients between environmental parameters and leaf flavonoid concentrations (n = 27)
| Environmental factor | Flavonoid concentrations (mg g−1) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total | Quercetin | Isoquercitrin | Kaempferol | |
| Monthly light intensity (μmol m−2 s−1) | 0.580* | 0.771** | 0.780** | 0.785** |
| Monthly air temperature (°C) | 0.240 | 0.298 | 0.481 | 0.292 |
| Monthly relative humidity (%) | −0.257 | −0.404 | −0.316 | −0.439 |
* and ** indicate correlation is significant at the 0.05 and 0.01 level, respectively
Pearson correlation coefficients between leaf characteristics and leaf flavonoid concentrations (n = 27)
| Leaf characteristics | Flavonoid concentrations (mg g−1) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total | Quercetin | Isoquercitrin | Kaempferol | |
| Leaf area per plant (cm2) | −0.334 | −0.614 | −0.469 | −0.339 |
| Leaf thickness (μm) | 0.859** | 0.904** | 0.962** | 0.866** |
| Palisade length (μm) | 0.829** | 0.887** | 0.948** | 0.884** |
| Total chlorophyll concentration (mg g−1) | −0.729* | −0.636 | −0.853** | −0.746* |
| Chlorophyll ratio a/b | 0.574 | 0.591 | 0.443 | 0.777* |
* and ** indicate correlation is significant at the 0.05 and 0.01 level, respectively