| Literature DB >> 29628930 |
Ruiting Gu1,2,3, Yi Zhou1,2, Xiaoyue Song1,2,3, Shaochun Xu1,2,3, Xiaomei Zhang1,2, Haiying Lin4, Shuai Xu1,2,3, Shidong Yue1,2,3, Shuyu Zhu5.
Abstract
Seeds are important materials for the restoration of globally-threatened marine angiosperm (seagrass) populations. In this study, we investigated the differences between different Ruppia sinensis seed types and developed two feasible long-term R. sinensis seed storage methods. The ability of R. sinensis seeds to tolerate the short-term desiccation and extreme cold had been investigated. The tolerance of R. sinensis seeds to long-term exposure of high salinity, cold temperature, and desiccation had been considered as potential methods for long-term seed storage. Also, three morphological and nine physiological indices were measured and compared between two types of seeds: Shape L and Shape S. We found that: (1) wet storage at a salinity of 30-40 psu and 0°C were the optimal long-term storage conditions, and the proportion of viable seeds reached over 90% after a storage period of 11 months since the seeds were collected from the reproductive shoots; (2) dry condition was not the optimal choice for long-term storage of R. sinensis seeds; however, storing seeds in a dry condition at 5°C and 33 ± 10% relative humidity for 9 months had a relatively high percentage (74.44 ± 2.22%) of viable seeds, consequently desiccation exposure could also be an acceptable seed storage method; (3) R. sinensis seeds would lose vigor in the interaction of extreme cold (-27°C) and desiccation; (4) there were significant differences in seed weight, seed curvature, and endocarp thickness between the two types of seeds. These findings provided fundamental physiological information for R. sinensis seeds and supported the long-term storage of its seeds. Our results may also serve as useful reference for seed storage of other threatened seagrass species and facilitate their ex situ conservation and habitat restoration.Entities:
Keywords: Ruppia sinensis; desiccation; morphology; salinity; seagrass; seed; storage; temperature
Year: 2018 PMID: 29628930 PMCID: PMC5876315 DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2018.00221
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Plant Sci ISSN: 1664-462X Impact factor: 5.753
Differences between Shape L and Shape S seeds.
| Proportion in sediment (%) | Seed dry weight (mg) | Dry embryo weight (mg) | Moisture content (%) | Proportion of endocarp weight in dry seed (%) | Seed thickness (mm) | Seed curvature (°) | Endocarp thickness (μm) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Shape L | 35.99 ± 5.28a | 1.50 ± 0.05a | 0.44 ± 0.03a | 38.60 ± 2.07a | 52.09 ± 8.59a | 1.32 ± 0.02a | 177.5 ± 1.2a | 224.50 ± 13.70a |
| Shape S | 49.27 ± 4.85b | 0.67 ± 0.02b | 0.37 ± 0.02a | 39.23 ± 0.77a | 39.24 ± 4.92b | 0.67 ± 0.01b | 146.7 ± 1.6b | 18.75 ± 1.83b |
Differences in chemical compositions and germination percentage of the two types of R. sinensis seeds.
| Carbohydrate (mg/g) | Protein (%) | Fatty acids (mg/g) | Germination percentage (%) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C16.0 | C18.1 | C18.2 | Total unsaturated | Total saturated | ||||
| Shape L | 478.34 ± 68.06a | 16.95 ± 0.76a | 11.66 ± 0.46b | 76.89 ± 2.61b | 134.25 ± 7.32b | 211.40 ± 9.95a | 17.92 ± 0.76a | 53.33 ± 3.84a |
| Shape S | 543.48 ± 56.39a | 17.89 ± 0.48a | 17.38 ± 1.83a | 104.26 ± 12.26a | 206.25 ± 23.78a | 310.66 ± 36.09a | 25.77 ± 2.75a | 53.33 ± 11.76a |
Statistical differences in the effects of exposure temperature and duration on the number of germinated seeds.
| Variable | df | Sum square | Mean square | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model | 20 | 1765.524 | 88.276 | 10.493 | <0.001 |
| Exposure temperature | 4 | 1148.567 | 287.142 | 34.132 | <0.001 |
| Exposure duration | 3 | 76.583 | 25.528 | 3.034 | 0.047 |
| Exposure temperature × exposure duration | 12 | 425.167 | 35.431 | 4.212 | <0.001 |
| Different exposure durations at each exposure temperature (°C) | |||||
| -27 | 3 | 3.667 | 1.222 | 0.863 | 0.499 |
| -10 | 3 | 230.917 | 76.972 | 6.326 | 0.017 |
| 0 | 3 | 71.333 | 23.778 | 2.853 | 0.105 |
| 26 | 3 | 98.250 | 32.750 | 1.747 | 0.235 |
| 40 | 3 | 97.583 | 32.528 | 9.520 | 0.005 |
| Different exposure temperature at each exposure duration | |||||
| 2 h | 4 | 456.733 | 116.433 | 16.956 | <0.001 |
| 8 h | 4 | 349.333 | 87.333 | 6.823 | 0.006 |
| 24 h | 4 | 303.600 | 75.900 | 7.206 | 0.005 |
| 7 days | 4 | 455.067 | 113.767 | 22.454 | <0.001 |
Differences in the chemical compositions after storage of R. sinensis seeds in wet and dry conditions.
| Moisture content (%) | Carbohydrate (mg/g) | Protein (%) | Fatty acids (mg/g) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C16.0 | C18.1 | C18.2 | Total unsaturated | Total saturated | ||||
| Wet-storage seeds | 28.27 ± 0.28a | 507.94 ± 20.55a | 10.16 ± 0.37a | 3.88 ± 0.35a | 26.96 ± 0.67a | 70.28 ± 2.47a | 97.37 ± 3.13a | 6.00 ± 0.43a |
| Dry-storage seeds | 11.57 ± 1.48b | 533.97 ± 10.18a | 13.11 ± 1.94a | 2.80 ± 0.08b | 22.73 ± 0.89b | 66.73 ± 3.80a | 89.62 ± 4.70a | 4.67 ± 0.17b |