| Literature DB >> 35336622 |
Emily Palm1, Joshua D Klein2, Stefano Mancuso1, Werther Guidi Nissim3.
Abstract
Few phytoremediation studies have been conducted under semi-arid conditions where plants are subjected to drought and/or salinity stress. Although the genus Salix is frequently used in phytoremediation, information regarding its tolerance of drought and salinity is limited. In the present study, Salix acmophylla Boiss. cuttings from three sites (Adom, Darom and Mea She'arim) were tested for tolerance to salinity stress by growing them hydroponically under either control or increasing NaCl concentrations corresponding to electrical conductivities of 3 and 6 dS m-1 in a 42-day greenhouse trial. Gas exchange parameters, chlorophyll fluorescence and concentration, and water-use efficiency were measured weekly and biomass was collected at the end of the trial. Root, leaf and stem productivity was significantly reduced in the Adom ecotype, suggesting that Darom and Mea She'arim are the more salt-tolerant of the three ecotypes. Net assimilation and stomatal conductance rates in salt-treated Adom were significantly reduced by the last week of the trial, coinciding with reduced intrinsic water use efficiency and chlorophyll a content and greater stomatal aperture. In contrast, early reductions in stomatal conductance and stomatal aperture in Darom and Mea She'arim stabilized, together with pigment concentrations, especially carotenoids. These results suggest that Darom and Mea She'arim are more tolerant to salt than Adom, and provide further phenotypic support to the recently published data demonstrating their genetic similarities and their usefulness in phytoremediation under saline conditions.Entities:
Keywords: Salix acmophylla; drought tolerance; phytoremediation; salinity stress; salt tolerance; willow
Year: 2022 PMID: 35336622 PMCID: PMC8953935 DOI: 10.3390/plants11060739
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Plants (Basel) ISSN: 2223-7747
Figure 1Weekly gas exchange measurements of the ecotypes Adom, Darom and Mea She’arim grown under control and saline conditions for 28 days. T0 = before the start of salt treatments; T1 and T2 = E.C. 3 dS m−1; T3 and T4 = E.C. 6 dS m−1. (a) AN = net assimilation rate, (b) gs = stomatal conductance rate, (c) Ci intercellular CO2 concentration, and (d) WUEi = intrinsic water use efficiency. Bars represent the means of five replicates with SE bars. Different letters represent significant differences among ecotype and treatment combinations for individual timepoints following a post hoc Tukey HSD with a significance level of p < 0.05.
Repeated measures two-way ANOVA output for gas exchange (AN, gs, Ci and WUEi), fluorescence (Fv/Fm, F′v/F′m, ΦPSII and NPQ) and pigment (Chl a, Chl b, Total Chl, a/b and carotenoids).
| Gas Exchange | A | gs | Ci | WUEi | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ecotype (E) | 0.002 | NS | <0.001 | 0.002 | ||
| Treatment (T) | <0.001 | 0.002 | 0.020 | NS | ||
| E × T | 0.004 | NS | 0.001 | 0.001 | ||
| Fluorescence | Fv/Fm | F′v/F′m | ΦPSII | NPQ | ||
| Ecotype (E) | NS | 0.006 | 0.003 | NS | ||
| Treatment (T) | NS | NS | NS | NS | ||
| E × T | NS | NS | NS | 0.044 | ||
| Pigments | Chl a | Chl b | Total Chl | a/b | Carotenoids | |
| Ecotype (E) | <0.001 | <0.001 | NS | NS | <0.001 | |
| Treatment (T) | <0.001 | <0.001 | NS | 0.044 | <0.001 | |
| E × T | NS | NS | NS | NS | NS |
Between-subject effects from repeated-measures two-way analysis of variance of main factors ecotype and treatment, and interactions. p values below 0.05 were considered significant.
Figure 2The effects of increasing salinity on photosystem II parameters. T0 = before the start of salt treatments; T1 and T2 = E.C. 3 dS m−1; T3 and T4 = E.C. 6 dS m−1. (a) Fv/Fm = dark-adapted maximum yield, (b) F′v/F′m = light-adapted efficiency of open reaction centers of PSII, (c) ϕPSII = light-adapted effective quantum yield, and (d) NPQ = non-photochemical quenching. Bars represent the means of five replicates with SE bars. Different letters represent significant differences among ecotype and treatment combinations for individual timepoints following a post hoc Tukey HSD with a significance level of p < 0.05.
Figure 3Weekly observations of leaf pigment concentrations in S. acmophylla ecotypes grown for 28 days in control and increasing salinity conditions. T0 = before the start of salt treatments; T1 and T2 = E.C. 3 dS m−1; T3 and T4 = E.C. 6 dS m−1. (a) Chl a = chlorophyll a, (b) Chl b = chlorophyll b, (c) total chlorophyll, (d) chlorophyll a/b, and (e) total carotenoids. All pigment concentrations were assessed as mg of pigment per gram fresh weight of leaf tissue. Bars represent the means of five replicates with SE bars. Different letters represent significant differences among ecotype and treatment combinations for individual timepoints following a post hoc Tukey HSD with a significance level of p < 0.05.
Summary of stomatal aperture over the 28-day experiment growing S. acmophylla ecotypes under control and saline conditions.
| Ecotype | Treatment | Stomata Aperture (µm2) | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T0 | T1 | T2 | T3 | T4 | ||||||||||||
| Mean | SEM | Mean | SEM | Mean | SEM | Mean | SEM | Mean | SEM | |||||||
| MID | ||||||||||||||||
| Adom | Control | 56.8 |
| b | 53.5 |
| b | 61.8 |
| b | 66.3 |
| a | 61.5 |
| a |
| Salt | 61.0 |
| a | 55.9 |
| b | 67.9 |
| ab | 66.9 |
| a | 55.9 |
| c | |
| Mean | 58.9 | A | 54.7 | A | 64.9 | A | 66.6 | A | 58.7 | A | ||||||
| Darom | Control | 44.5 |
| b | 64.0 |
| a | 70.1 |
| a | 61.3 |
| a | 61.8 |
| a |
| Salt | 47.8 |
| b | 46.5 |
| bc | 70.7 |
| a | 51.6 |
| b | 44.3 |
| c | |
| Mean | 46.2 | B | 55.3 | A | 70.4 | A | 56.4 | B | 53.1 | AB | ||||||
| Mea She’arim | Control | 35.3 |
| c | 37.3 |
| c | 61.2 |
| b | 56.4 |
| b | 50.2 |
| b |
| Salt | 36.9 |
| bc | 36.2 |
| c | 52.5 |
| c | 38.3 |
| c | 40.5 |
| c | |
| Mean | 36.1 | C | 36.8 | B | 56.9 | B | 47.4 | C | 45.3 | B | ||||||
| Ecotype (E) | <0.001 | 0.024 | 0.035 | 0.005 | 0.030 | |||||||||||
| Treatment (T) | NS | NS | NS | NS | 0.029 | |||||||||||
| E × T | NS | 0.045 | 0.023 | 0.043 | 0.040 | |||||||||||
|
| ||||||||||||||||
| Adom | Control | 47.4 |
| 60.3 |
| 67.7 |
| 65.6 |
| a | 49.1 |
| b | |||
| Salt | 51.8 |
| 65.7 |
| 67.2 |
| 65.0 |
| a | 65.1 |
| a | ||||
| Mean | 49.6 | A | 58.0 | A | 67.4 | 65.3 | A | 57.1 | A | |||||||
| Darom | Control | 41.3 |
| 42.8 |
| 64.8 |
| 68.7 |
| a | 64.2 |
| a | |||
| Salt | 44.8 |
| 49.8 |
| 54.8 |
| 46.5 |
| c | 54.3 |
| b | ||||
| Mean | 43.1 | B | 46.3 | B | 59.8 | 57.6 | B | 59.2 | A | |||||||
| Mea She’arim | Control | 39.3 |
| 43.5 |
| 67.5 |
| 52.9 |
| b | 49.9 |
| b | |||
| Salt | 41.2 |
| 46.5 |
| 55.2 |
| 35.0 |
| d | 42.4 |
| c | ||||
| Mean | 40.2 | B | 45.0 | B | 61.3 | 44.0 | C | 46.2 | B | |||||||
| Ecotype (E) | 0.0134 | 0.0042 | NS | <0.001 | 0.045 | |||||||||||
| Treatment (T) | NS | NS | NS | 0.001 | NS | |||||||||||
| E × T | NS | NS | NS | 0.045 | 0.023 | |||||||||||
T0 = before the start of salt treatments; T1 and T2 = E.C. 3 dS m−1; T3 and T4 = E.C. 6 dS m−1. Values for each factor are the means of five replicates ± SE. The results of a repeated measures 2-way NOVA demonstrate significant treatment and interaction effects with p < 0.05. Different letters reflect significant difference within individual timepoints, based on a post hoc Tukey HSD with a significance level of p < 0.05.
Summary of stomatal density over the 28-day experiment growing S. acmophylla under control and saline conditions.
| Ecotype | Treatment | Stomata Density (n cm−2) | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T0 | T1 | T2 | T3 | T4 | |||||||
| Mean | SE | Mean | SE | Mean | SE | Mean | SE | Mean | SE | ||
| MID | |||||||||||
| Adom | Control | 173 |
| 152 |
| 222 |
| 226 |
| 198 |
|
| Salt | 218 |
| 186 |
| 241 |
| 244 |
| 243 |
| |
| Mean | 196 | 169 | 231 | 235 | 221 | ||||||
| Darom | Control | 161 |
| 190 |
| 205 |
| 199 |
| 192 |
|
| Salt | 137 |
| 218 |
| 198 |
| 195 |
| 183 |
| |
| Mean | 149 | 204 | 201 | 197 | 188 | ||||||
| Mea She’arim | Control | 151 |
| 173 |
| 203 |
| 211 |
| 193 |
|
| Salt | 177 |
| 177 |
| 213 |
| 201 |
| 177 |
| |
| Mean | 164 | 175 | 208 | 206 | 185 | ||||||
| Ecotype (E) | NS | NS | NS | NS | NS | ||||||
| Treatment (T) | NS | NS | NS | NS | NS | ||||||
| E × T | NS | NS | NS | NS | NS | ||||||
|
| |||||||||||
| Adom | Control | 192 |
| 175 |
| 203 |
| 213 |
| 209 |
|
| Salt | 232 |
| 173 |
| 220 |
| 248 |
| 217 |
| |
| Mean | 212 | 174 | 211 | 231 | 213 | ||||||
| Darom | Control | 158 |
| 227 |
| 222 |
| 161 |
| 238 |
|
| Salt | 187 |
| 174 |
| 235 |
| 214 |
| 198 |
| |
| Mean | 173 | 201 | 228 | 187 | 218 | ||||||
| Mea She’arim | Control | 173 |
| 180 |
| 209 |
| 207 |
| 222 |
|
| Salt | 165 |
| 171 |
| 220 |
| 180 |
| 184 |
| |
| Mean | 169 | 175 | 214 | 193 | 203 | ||||||
| Ecotype (E) | NS | NS | NS | NS | NS | ||||||
| Treatment (T) | NS | NS | NS | NS | NS | ||||||
| E × T | NS | NS | NS | NS | NS | ||||||
T0 = before the start of salt treatments; T1 and T2 = E.C. 3 dS m−1; T3 and T4 = E.C. 6 dS m−1. Values for each factor are the means of five replicates ± SE. The results of a 2-way ANOVA demonstrate significant treatment and interaction effects with p < 0.05.
Biometric data (fresh weight (FW), dry weight (DW) and root-to-shoot ratio (R:S)) following 28 days of growth in control and increasing salinity conditions.
| Ecotype | Treatment | Plant Biomass (g) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Leaf | Stem | Root | Total | R:S | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| FW | DW | FW | DW | FW | DW | FW | DW | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Adom | Control | 38.6 |
| a | 9.1 |
| a | 36.9 |
| a | 10.7 |
| a | 40.8 |
| b | 6.2 |
| b | 119.3 |
| a | 26.0 |
| a | 0.32 |
| c |
| Salt | 29.2 |
| b | 6.7 |
| b | 28.8 |
| ab | 8.7 |
| b | 33.8 |
| c | 4.8 |
| c | 91.7 |
| c | 20.2 |
| b | 0.31 |
| c | |
| Mean | 33.9 | 7.9 | 32.9 | A | 9.7 | 37.3 | B | 5.5 | B | 105.5 | 23.1 | 0.32 | B | |||||||||||||||
| Darom | Control | 38.5 |
| a | 6.0 |
| b | 27.4 |
| b | 10.4 |
| a | 47.5 |
| a | 7.4 |
| a | 109.3 |
| ab | 23.8 |
| ab | 0.45 |
| a |
| Salt | 40.5 |
| a | 7.9 |
| ab | 17.2 |
|
| 8.7 |
| b | 43.9 |
| ab | 6.0 |
| b | 114.1 |
| a | 24.1 |
| ab | 0.37 |
| b | |
| Mean | 39.5 | 7.0 | 22.3 | B | 9.5 | 45.7 | A | 6.7 | A | 111.7 | 24.0 | 0.41 | A | |||||||||||||||
| Mea She’arim | Control | 30.3 |
| b | 6.8 |
| b | 34.5 |
| a | 8.9 |
| a | 42.3 |
| ab | 5.2 |
| c | 102.8 |
| b | 20.9 |
| b | 0.34 |
| bc |
| Salt | 37.9 |
| ab | 7.5 |
| b | 30.0 |
| ab | 7.6 |
| b | 43.2 |
| ab | 5.8 |
| b | 107.1 |
| ab | 20.8 |
| b | 0.39 |
| b | |
| Mean | 34.1 | 7.1 | 32.2 | A | 8.3 | 42.8 | B | 5.5 | B | 105.0 | 20.9 | 0.36 | B | |||||||||||||||
| ANOVA | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Ecotype (E) | NS | NS | 0.012 | NS | 0.022 | 0.046 | NS | NS | 0.002 | |||||||||||||||||||
| Treatment (T) | NS | NS | NS | 0.019 | NS | 0.003 | 0.091 | NS | NS | |||||||||||||||||||
| E × T | 0.018 | 0.002 | 0.014 | NS | 0.015 | 0.002 | <0.001 | 0.047 | 0.016 | |||||||||||||||||||
Values for each factor are the means of five replicates ± SE. The results of a two-way ANOVA demonstrate significant treatment and interaction effects with p < 0.05. Significant differences between groups based on a post hoc Tukey HSD are indicated by different letters.