| Literature DB >> 35280551 |
Sadaf Jan1, Bhupender Singh1, Renu Bhardwaj2, Dhriti Kapoor1, Jaspreet Kour2, Rattandeep Singh1, Pravej Alam3, Ahmed Noureldeen4, Hadeer Darwish5.
Abstract
Thiamethoxam, a broad spectrum, neonicotinoid insecticide, is used on various crops including Brassica juncea L. to protect from intruding insects such as leaf-hoppers, aphids, thrips and white-flies. Exposure to thiamethoxam causes acute malady such as tumour development, cell apoptosis, liver damage and neurotoxicity. Melatonin is entailed in umpteen developmental processes of plants, including stress responses. The pleiotropic effects of melatonin in modulating plant growth validate it's imperative contribution as multi-regulatory substance. Exiguous information is known about the role of Pseudomonas putida in improving plant growth under thiamethoxam stress. Taking these aspects into consideration the contemporary study investigates the role of melatonin and Pseudomonas putida strain MTCC 3315 in alleviating the thiamethoxam induced toxicity in B. juncea plant. Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR) analysis uncloaked that thiamethoxam induced stress primarily affects the protein content of plant as compared to lipids, carbohydrates and cell wall components. Organic acid profiling of the treated samples carried-out by High-Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC), reported an upregulation in the level of organic acids, malic acid (110%), citric acid (170%), succinic acid (81%), fumaric acid (40%) and ascorbic acid (55%) in thiamethoxam treated plants compared to the investigational untreated plants. The melatonin treated seedlings grown under thiamethoxam stress, exhibit increased level of malic acid, citric acid, succinic acid, fumaric acid and ascorbic acid by 81%, 0.94%, 11%, 21% and 6% respectively. Further, thiamethoxam stressed plants inoculated with Pseudomonas putida showed stupendous up-regulation by 161% (malic acid), by 14% (citric acid), by 33% (succinic acid), by 30% (fumaric acid), by 100% (oxalic acid) respectively. Lastly, the combinatorial application of melatonin and Pseudomonas putida resulted in prodigious upsurge of malic acid by 165%, succinic acid by 69%, fumaric acid by 42% respectively in contrast to distinct melatonin and Pseudomonas putida treatments. The accumulation of organic acids ascertains the defence against thiamethoxam stress and corresponds to meet the energy generation requirement to skirmish thiamethoxam mediated abiotic stress in Brassica juncea plant.Entities:
Keywords: FTIR; HPLC; Melatonin; Organic Acid; PGPR; Plant defence mechanism; TCA cycle; Thiamethoxam
Year: 2022 PMID: 35280551 PMCID: PMC8913416 DOI: 10.1016/j.sjbs.2022.01.039
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Saudi J Biol Sci ISSN: 2213-7106 Impact factor: 4.219
Fig. 1FTIR spectra of the control untreated plant (a), Thiamethoxam treated plant (b), Thiamethoxam + melatonin treated plant (c), Thiamethoxam + P. putida treated plant (d), Thiamethoxam + melatonin + P. putida (e) treated plant respectively. The horizontal axis in the spectra denotes wavenumber in cm−1, whereas, vertical axis represents the absorbance value.
Functional group assignment to peaks obtained for the control and treated samples in FTIR spectroscopy. The peaks obtained at various wavenumber corresponds to the functional group of lipids, proteins, carbohydrates and cell wall components and their mode of vibrations has been assigned in probable functional group column.
| Control | Thiamethoxam (0.6 mM) | Thiamethoxam + Melatonin (100 mM) | Thiamethoxam + PGPR | Thiamethoxam + Melatonin + PGPR | Probable functional groups | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lipids | 3304.06 | BDL | BDL | BDL | BDL | N-H Stretching (Primary Amine) |
| BDL | 3292.49 | 3290.56 | 3290.56 | 3292.49 | C-H Stretching (Alkynes) | |
| 3008.95 | 3010.88 | 3010.88 | 3008.95 | 3008.95 | O-H Stretching (Carboxylic acids) | |
| 2924.09 | 2924.09 | 2926.01 | 2924.09 | 2924.09 | C-H Stretching (Alkene) | |
| 2852.72 | 2854.65 | 2854.65 | 2854.65 | 2854.65 | C-H Stretching (Alkanes) | |
| Proteins | 1743.65 | 1739.79 | BDL | 1743.65 | BDL | C = O Stretching (esters) |
| 1710.86 | BDL | BDL | 1710.86 | BDL | C = O Stretching (Aliphatic ketones) | |
| BDL | BDL | 1735.93 | BDL | 1743.65 | C = O Stretching (Esters) | |
| 1631.78 | 1635.64 | 1639.49 | 1637.56 | 1639.49 | C = C Stretching (Alkene) | |
| 1546.91 | 1543.05 | 1531.48 | 1544.98 | 1543.05 | N = O Stretching (Nitro compound) | |
| Carbohydrates | 1462.04 | BDL | BDL | 1454.33 | 1448.54 | C-H Bending (Alkanes) |
| BDL | 1415.75 | 1417.68 | BDL | BDL | O-H Bending (Carboxylic acids) | |
| BDL | 1319.31 | 1315.45 | 1315.45 | 1315.45 | O-H bending (Phenols) | |
| 1236.37 | 1238.3 | 1234.44 | 1238.3 | 1238.3 | C-O Stretching (Alkyl-aryl ether) | |
| Cell wall components | 1151.5 | 1145.72 | BDL | 1153.43 | 1151.5 | C-O Stretching (Aliphatic ether) |
| 1095.57 | BDL | 1091.71 | 1095.57 | 1095.57 | C-O Stretching (Secondary alcohols) | |
| BDL | BDL | BDL | 1053.13 | 1051.2 | CO-O-CO Stretching (Anhydride) | |
| 1024.2 | 1024.2 | 1028.06 | 1028.06 | BDL | C = C Bending(Alkene) | |
| BDL | 893.04 | 893.04 | 893.04 | 893.04 | C-N stretch (Amines),=C-H bend (Benzene, Alkynes) (Xyloglucan) | |
| 696.3 | BDL | BDL | BDL | BDL | C-N stretch (Amines),= C-H bend (Benzene),C-C stretch (Chlorides) | |
| 663.51 | BDL | BDL | BDL | BDL | C-N stretch (Amines),= C-H bend (Benzene),C-C stretch (Chlorides) |
Fig. 2HPLC chromatogram obtained for the control untreated plant (a), Thiamethoxam treated plant (b), Thiamethoxam + melatonin treated plant (c), Thiamethoxam + P. putida treated plant (d), Thiamethoxam + melatonin + P. putida (e) treated plant respectively. The horizontal axis in the chromatogram represents the retention time (time taken by the analyte to reach detector), whereas, vertical axis represents milli absorbance units (mAU).
Peak area percent for various organic acids detected in B. juncea subjected to numerous treatments (thiamethoxam, thiamethoxam + melatonin, thiamethoxam + and thiamethoxam + melatonin + ).
| Organic Acid | Peak Area Percent | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control(%) | TMX (%) | TMX + Melatonin (%) | TMX+ | TMX + Melatonin + | |
| Oxalic acid | 11.27 | 17.06 | 55.32 | 53.44 | 17.24 |
| Malic acid | 6.37 | 13.59 | 3.55 | 3.51 | 6.39 |
| Ascorbic acid | 1.07 | 6.00 | 2.30 | 6.05 | 6.34 |
| Citric acid | 39.74 | 53.26 | 0.99 | 5.92 | 2.79 |
| Succinic acid | 27.01 | 0 | 21.38 | 1.42 | 1.46 |
| Fumaric acid | 14.53 | 10.08 | 16.45 | 29.66 | 65.78 |
Organic acid quantification of the various treatments subjected to the HPLC analysis. The quantified value represents the mean ± standard error for three replicates of each sample. The * sign represents that mean difference for each treatment are statistically significant at P < 0.05 according to Tukey HSD test.
| Treatment | Malic Acid (Mean ± Std error) | Citric Acid (Mean ± Std error) | Succinic Acid (Mean ± Std error) | Fumaric Acid (Mean ± Std error) | Ascorbic Acid (Mean ± Std error) | Oxalic Acid (Mean ± Std error) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | 1.48 ± 0.01* | 1.95 ± 0.09* | 0.53 ± 0.03* | 0.30 ± 0.04* | 0.20 ± 0.06* | 0.01 ± 0.001* |
| Thiamethoxam | 3.11 ± 0.03* | 5.27 ± 0.08* | 0.96 ± 0.01* | 0.42 ± 0.001* | 0.31 ± 0.001* | 0.01 ± 0.001* |
| Melatonin | 1.68 ± 0.001* | 4.20 ± 0.03* | 0.89 ± 0.02* | 0.32 ± 0.001* | 0.23 ± 0.01* | 0.01 ± 0.0007* |
| 6.01 ± 0.15* | 5.13 ± 0.07* | 0.98 ± 0.04* | 0.43 ± 0.0007* | 0.21 ± 0.006* | 0.02 ± 0.0005* | |
| Thiamethoxam + Melatonin | 5.63 ± 0.16* | 5.32 ± 0.09* | 1.07 ± 0.01* | 0.51 ± 0.004* | 0.33 ± 0.008* | 0.01 ± 0.00006* |
| Thiamethoxam + | 8.12 ± 0.23* | 6.01 ± 0.09* | 1.28 ± 0.03* | 0.55 ± 0.003* | 0.28 ± 0.007* | 0.02 ± 0.0004* |
| Thiamethoxam + Melatonin + | 8.25 ± 0.39* | 5.81 ± 0.02* | 1.63 ± 0.06* | 0.60 ± 0.003* | 0.32 ± 0.006* | 0.02 ± 0.0004* |