| Literature DB >> 31561587 |
Xuebin Feng1, Peijun He2, Chaoya Pan3, Jin Xu4, Baoshan Xue5, Wenqing Yin6, Yan Qian7.
Abstract
This paper adopts the Design-Expert software to design an orthogonal experiment with a pulse voltage amplitude of 30 kV, processing time of three minutes, and a pulse width of 45 μs as the center points, in order to study the effects of the pulsed electric field on the cell wall and infection activity of Rhizoctonia solani. High-voltage pulse power was used to treat the bacteria solution with the pulsed electric field. Untreated Rhizoctonia solani were used as the control group. Transmission electron microscope images were used to analyze the cell wall damage. ANOVA was performed on the experimental results and the fitting degree of the model was good (F>>1). Response surface analysis was used to optimize the parameters based on chitin content and polygalacturonase activity. The optimal treatment conditions were obtained as a pulse voltage amplitude of 25 kV, processing time of 2.54 min, and a pulse width of 34.35 μs. On this basis, experiments were designed to verify the optimized conditions. The results demonstrated that, under the optimal processing conditions, the damage index of the cell wall of Rhizoctonia solani was 9.59% lower in chitin content and 83.05% lower in polygalacturonase activity compared with those of the control group. All indexes were significantly different (P < 0.001), which is consistent with the parameter optimization results. The results provide a theoretical basis for the pulsed electric field assisted sterilization and reference for the design of plant protection machinery in the latter stage.Entities:
Keywords: chitin; infection activity; polygalacturonase; pulsed electric field
Year: 2019 PMID: 31561587 PMCID: PMC6956288 DOI: 10.3390/biology8040073
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biology (Basel) ISSN: 2079-7737
Reagents used for experiment.
| Reagent Name | Reagent Parameter |
|---|---|
| KOH | 100% |
| Polygalacturonic acid | 10 g/L |
| Acetic acid-sodium acetate buffer | 0.05 mol/L, pH=5.5 |
| DNS | — |
| Glutaraldehyde solution | 2.5% |
| Osmic acid solution | 1% |
| Phosphate buffer | 0.1 m, pH = 7.0 |
| Ethanol | 50%, 70%, 80%, |
| Acetone | 100% |
Figure 1The voltage waveform recorded at center point of 20 kV, 45 μs.
Factors and levels of the orthogonal PEF experiments.
| Level | Factors | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Pulse Width (μs) | Processing Time (min) | Pulse Voltage Amplitude (kV) | |
| -1 | 30 | 1 | 15 |
| 0 | 45 | 3 | 20 |
| 1 | 60 | 5 | 25 |
Figure 2Effects of PEF treatment on the cell wall of R. solani. (A) TEM images of R. solani untreated. with PEF. (B) TEM images of R. solani treated with PEF.
Result of orthogonal experiment of PEF.
| Test NO. | Pulse | Processing | Pulse Voltage Amplitude (kV) | PG Activity (U) | Chitin Content (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control check | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.059 | 29 |
| 1 | 30 | 5 | 20 | 0.024** | 26.53** |
| 2 | 45 | 3 | 20 | 0.016** | 26.59** |
| 3 | 45 | 1 | 25 | 0.012** | 27.12** |
| 4 | 45 | 5 | 25 | 0.002** | 23.26** |
| 5 | 45 | 3 | 20 | 0.016** | 26.41** |
| 6 | 60 | 5 | 20 | 0.02** | 25.87** |
| 7 | 30 | 3 | 25 | 0.008** | 25.67** |
| 8 | 45 | 3 | 20 | 0.016** | 26.75** |
| 9 | 30 | 1 | 20 | 0.052ns | 28.73ns |
| 10 | 45 | 3 | 20 | 0.015** | 26.35** |
| 11 | 45 | 1 | 15 | 0.058** | 29.14ns |
| 12 | 60 | 3 | 15 | 0.048** | 27.95ns |
| 13 | 45 | 3 | 20 | 0.016** | 26.49** |
| 14 | 45 | 5 | 15 | 0.028** | 28.37** |
| 15 | 60 | 3 | 25 | 0.004** | 25.46** |
| 16 | 60 | 1 | 20 | 0.026** | 28.53ns |
| 17 | 30 | 3 | 15 | 0.056ns | 29.04ns |
Note: ‘*’ in the table represents significance as P < 0.05, ‘**’ in the table represents extremely significance as P < 0.01, ‘ns’ in the table represents non-significance as P > 0.05.
Response surface ANOVA results.
| Source of Variation | Chitin Content | PG Activity | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| F value | P value | F value | P value | |
| Model | 87.57 | <0.0001 | 41.38 | <0.0001 |
| V | 444.58 | <0.0001 | 245.66 | <0.0001 |
| PW | 12.29 | 0.0099 | 16.11 | 0.0051 |
| t | 237.28 | <0.0001 | 50.02 | 0.0002 |
| V·t | 50.31 | 0.0002 | 7.31 | 0.0305 |
| V·PW | 4.08 | 0.0831 | 0.29 | 0.6055 |
| PW·t | 1.12 | 0.3216 | 8.84 | 0.0207 |
| V2 | 0.11 | 0.7530 | 4.56 | 0.0701 |
| t2 | 15.64 | 0.0055 | 8.81 | 0.0209 |
| PW2 | 20.21 | 0.0028 | 26.90 | 0.0013 |
| R2 | 0.9912 | 0.9815 | ||
Note: V, pulse voltage amplitude; PW, pulse width; t, processing time; R, R-Squared.
Figure 3Effects of high-voltage PEF treatment on chitin content in R. solani. (A) Time-amplitude response surface analysis. (B) Pulse width-amplitude response surface analysis. (C) Pulse width-time response surface analysis.
Figure 4Effects of high-voltage PEF treatment on PG activity in R. solani. (A) Time-amplitude response surface analysis. (B) Pulse width-amplitude response surface analysis. (C) Pulse width-time response surface analysis.