Tomasz Hura1, Katarzyna Hura2, Agnieszka Ostrowska1, Karolina Urban1. 1. Polish Academy of Sciences, The Franciszek Górski Institute of Plant Physiology, Niezapominajek 21, 30-239 Kraków, Poland. 2. Department of Plant Breeding, Physiology and Seed Science, Faculty of Agriculture and Economics, Agricultural University, Podłużna 3, 30-239 Kraków, Poland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The study reports on four different types of flag leaf rolling under soil drought in relation to the level of cell wall-bound phenolics. The flag leaf colonization by aphids, as a possible bioindicator of the accumulation of cell wall-bound phenolics, was also estimated. METHODS: The proteins of the photosynthetic apparatus that form its core and are crucial for maintaining its stability (D1/PsbA protein), limit destructive effects of light (PsbS, a protein binding carotenoids in the antennas) and participate in efficient electron transport between photosystems II (PSII) and PSI (Rieske iron-sulfur protein of the cytochrome b6f complex) were evaluated in two types of flag leaf rolling. Additionally, biochemical and physiological reactions to drought stress in rolling and non-rolling flag leaves were compared. KEY RESULTS: The study identified four types of genome-related types of flag leaf rolling. The biochemical basis for these differences was a different number of phenolic molecules incorporated into polycarbohydrate structures of the cell wall. In an extreme case of non-rolling dehydrated flag leaves, they were found to accumulate high amounts of cell wall-bound phenolics that limited cell water loss and protected the photosynthetic apparatus against excessive light. PSII was also additionally protected against excess light by the accumulation of photosynthetic apparatus proteins that ensured stable and efficient transport of excitation energy beyond PSII and its dissipation as far-red fluorescence and heat. Our analysis revealed a new type of flag leaf rolling brought about by an interaction between wheat and rye genomes, and resulting in biochemical specialization of flexible, rolling and rigid, non-rolling parts of the flag leaf. The study confirmed limited aphid colonization of the flag leaves with enhanced content of cell wall-bound phenolics. CONCLUSIONS: Non-rolling leaves developed effective adaptation mechanisms to reduce both water loss and photoinhibitory damage to the photosynthetic apparatus under drought stress.
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The study reports on four different types of flag leaf rolling under soil drought in relation to the level of cell wall-bound phenolics. The flag leaf colonization by aphids, as a possible bioindicator of the accumulation of cell wall-bound phenolics, was also estimated. METHODS: The proteins of the photosynthetic apparatus that form its core and are crucial for maintaining its stability (D1/PsbA protein), limit destructive effects of light (PsbS, a protein binding carotenoids in the antennas) and participate in efficient electron transport between photosystems II (PSII) and PSI (Rieske iron-sulfur protein of the cytochrome b6f complex) were evaluated in two types of flag leaf rolling. Additionally, biochemical and physiological reactions to drought stress in rolling and non-rolling flag leaves were compared. KEY RESULTS: The study identified four types of genome-related types of flag leaf rolling. The biochemical basis for these differences was a different number of phenolic molecules incorporated into polycarbohydrate structures of the cell wall. In an extreme case of non-rolling dehydrated flag leaves, they were found to accumulate high amounts of cell wall-bound phenolics that limited cell water loss and protected the photosynthetic apparatus against excessive light. PSII was also additionally protected against excess light by the accumulation of photosynthetic apparatus proteins that ensured stable and efficient transport of excitation energy beyond PSII and its dissipation as far-red fluorescence and heat. Our analysis revealed a new type of flag leaf rolling brought about by an interaction between wheat and rye genomes, and resulting in biochemical specialization of flexible, rolling and rigid, non-rolling parts of the flag leaf. The study confirmed limited aphid colonization of the flag leaves with enhanced content of cell wall-bound phenolics. CONCLUSIONS: Non-rolling leaves developed effective adaptation mechanisms to reduce both water loss and photoinhibitory damage to the photosynthetic apparatus under drought stress.
Keywords:
Blue and red fluorescence; cell wall phenolics; chlorophyll fluorescence; flag leaf rolling; hydrogen peroxide; photosynthetic apparatus proteins; triticale