| Literature DB >> 35631736 |
Wenjun He1,2,3, Qiuyi Zhong1,2,3,4, Bin He1,2,3, Boyang Wu1,2,3, Atta Mohi Ud Din1,2,3, Jielyv Han1,2, Yanfeng Ding1,2,3,5, Zhenghui Liu1,2,3,5, Weiwei Li1,2,3, Yu Jiang1,2,3,5, Ganghua Li1,2,3,5.
Abstract
The stress of transplanting injury adversely affects rice growth and productivity worldwide. N-acetylcysteine (NAC), the precursor of glutathione, is a potent ROS scavenger with powerful antioxidant activity. Previous studies on the application of NAC in plants mainly focused on alleviating the stress of heavy metals, UV-B, herbicides, etc. However, the role of NAC in alleviating transplanting injury is still not clear. A barrel experiment was carried out to explain the mechanism of NAC regulating the transplanting injury to machine-transplanted rice during the recovery stage. The results showed that NAC priming shortened the time of initiation of tillering and increased the tiller numbers within 3 weeks after transplanting. In addition, NAC priming increased the chlorophyll content, net photosynthetic rate, and sucrose content, thereby improving the dry weight at the recovery stage, especially root dry weight. At the same time, NAC priming significantly increased the activity of ascorbate peroxidase (APX), glutathione reductase (GR), catalase (CAT), and superoxide dismutase (SOD). In addition, it also regulated flavonoids and total phenols contents to reduce hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) and malondialdehyde (MDA) contents, especially at the initial days after transplanting. These results suggest that NAC priming improves the tolerance of rice seedlings against transplanting injury by enhancing photosynthesis and antioxidant systems at initial days after transplanting, thereby promoting the accumulation of dry matter and tillering for higher yield returns.Entities:
Keywords: N-acetylcysteine; antioxidant; machine-transplanted rice; photosynthetic; transplanting injury
Year: 2022 PMID: 35631736 PMCID: PMC9144612 DOI: 10.3390/plants11101311
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Plants (Basel) ISSN: 2223-7747
Figure 1Effects of different concentrations of NAC on seedling growth at the 2 and 7 days after transplanting. CK, 0 μm; NAC-20, 20 μm; NAC-200, 200 μm.
Effects of different concentrations of NAC on yield and yield components.
| Treatment | Panicles Pot−1 | Spikelets Panicle−1 | Grain Filling (%) | Grain Weight (mg) | Grain Yield (g·pot−1) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CK | 28.7 ± 1.2 b | 153.3 ± 5.5 a | 90.2 ± 1.5 b | 28.5 ± 0.2 a | 112.6 ± 2.2 b |
| NAC-20 | 31.4 ± 1.0 a | 149.1 ± 6.6 a | 92.9 ± 0.7 a | 28.8 ± 0.4 a | 125.2 ± 2.7 a |
| NAC-200 | 30.9 ± 0.7 ab | 148.4 ± 5.2 a | 92.6 ± 0.9 ab | 28.7 ± 0.5 a | 121.7 ± 4.6 a |
CK, 0 μm; NAC-20, 20 μm; NAC-200, 200 μm. Data are means ± SD (n = 3). The different letters following average values indicate significant difference (Duncan, p < 0.05).
Figure 2Effects of different concentrations of NAC on the tiller numbers within 3 weeks after transplanting. CK, 0 μm; NAC-20, 20 μm; NAC-200, 200 μm. Data are means ± SD (n = 3). The different letters following average values indicate significant difference (Duncan, p < 0.05).
Figure 3Effects of different concentrations of NAC on plant height (A), root dry weight (B), shoot dry weight (C), and ratio of root to shoot (D). CK, 0 μm; NAC-20, 20 μm; NAC-200, 200 μm. Data are means ± SD (n = 3). The different letters following average values indicate significant difference (Duncan, p < 0.05).
Figure 4Effects of different concentrations of NAC on chlorophyll (A) and carotenoid (B) content. CK, 0 μm; NAC-20, 20 μm; NAC-200, 200 μm. Data are means ± SD (n = 3). The different letters following average values indicate significant difference (Duncan, p < 0.05).
Figure 5Effects of different concentrations of NAC on Pn (A), Tr (B), Ci (C), and Gs (D). CK, 0 μm; NAC-20, 20 μm; NAC-200, 200 μm. Data are means ± SD (n = 3). The different letters following average values indicate significant difference (Duncan, p < 0.05).
Figure 6Effects of different concentrations of NAC on sucrose content. CK, 0 μm; NAC-20, 20 μm; NAC-200, 200 μm. Data are means ± SD (n = 3). The different letters following average values indicate significant difference (Duncan, p < 0.05).
Figure 7Effects of different concentrations of NAC on APX (A), GR (B), CAT (C), POD (D), and SOD (E). CK, 0 μm; NAC-20, 20 μm; NAC-200, 200 μm. Data are means ± SD (n = 3). The different letters following average values indicate significant difference (Duncan, p < 0.05).
Figure 8Effects of different concentrations of NAC on flavonoids (A), total phenols (B), and proline (C) content. CK, 0 μm; NAC-20, 20 μm; NAC-200, 200 μm. Data are means ± SD (n = 3). The different letters following average values indicate significant difference (Duncan, p < 0.05).
Figure 9Effects of different concentrations of NAC on H2O2 (A) and MDA (B) content. CK, 0 μm; NAC-20, 20 μm; NAC-200, 200 μm. Data are means ± SD (n = 3). The different letters following average values indicate significant difference (Duncan, p < 0.05).