Limits...
Higher sterol content regulated by CYP51 with concomitant lower phospholipid content in membranes is a common strategy for aluminium tolerance in several plant species.

Wagatsuma T, Khan MS, Watanabe T, Maejima E, Sekimoto H, Yokota T, Nakano T, Toyomasu T, Tawaraya K, Koyama H, Uemura M, Ishikawa S, Ikka T, Ishikawa A, Kawamura T, Murakami S, Ueki N, Umetsu A, Kannari T - J. Exp. Bot. (2014)

Bottom Line: Several studies have shown that differences in lipid composition and in the lipid biosynthetic pathway affect the aluminium (Al) tolerance of plants, but little is known about the molecular mechanisms underlying these differences.Currency).This appears to be a common strategy for Al tolerance among several plant species.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Faculty of Agriculture, Yamagata University, Tsuruoka 997-8555, Japan wagatuma@tds1.tr.yamagata-u.ac.jp.

No MeSH data available.


Al tolerance of pea cultivars, wild type, and GA mutants. Seedlings (5 days old) with roots ~4cm long were treated with 0.2mM CaCl2 with or without 20 µM AlCl3 (pH 4.9) for 1h (short-term experiment, open bar) or 24h (long-term experiment, closed bar). In the short-term experiment, seedlings were treated for 1h with or without Al, then with 0.2mM CaCl2 (pH 5.2) for 9h before evaluating root re-elongation. Al tolerance was calculated as the ratio of net primary root elongation in Al treatment to that in the control after 9h re-elongation in the short-term experiment, or 24h in the long-term experiment. Values are means of three independent replicates ± standard error. Different letters indicate significant differences among cultivars and mutants at P < 0.05 (Fisher’s test; Fisher, 1958).
© Copyright Policy - creative-commons
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4321553&req=5

Figure 1: Al tolerance of pea cultivars, wild type, and GA mutants. Seedlings (5 days old) with roots ~4cm long were treated with 0.2mM CaCl2 with or without 20 µM AlCl3 (pH 4.9) for 1h (short-term experiment, open bar) or 24h (long-term experiment, closed bar). In the short-term experiment, seedlings were treated for 1h with or without Al, then with 0.2mM CaCl2 (pH 5.2) for 9h before evaluating root re-elongation. Al tolerance was calculated as the ratio of net primary root elongation in Al treatment to that in the control after 9h re-elongation in the short-term experiment, or 24h in the long-term experiment. Values are means of three independent replicates ± standard error. Different letters indicate significant differences among cultivars and mutants at P < 0.05 (Fisher’s test; Fisher, 1958).

Mentions: Using different Al treatment conditions (i.e. different durations of Al treatments), Al tolerance was compared among various cultivars, the wild type, and a mutant of pea. In one experiment, plants were exposed to toxic Al solution for 1h, and then their root re-growth over the following 9h was compared (Fig. 1, open bars). These conditions were used to assess the degree of constitutive Al tolerance in the cultivars, the wild type, and the mutant. In another experiment, roots were kept in Al toxic solution for 24h, and then their root elongation was compared (Fig. 1, closed bars). The latter conditions were used to evaluate induced Al tolerance in the cultivars and the mutant. In both conditions, the lh mutant and cv. Hyougo were significantly more Al sensitive than were cv. Harunoka and the wild type (Torsdag). The Al-sensitive genotypes accumulated more Al in the root tips than did Al-tolerant genotypes (Supplementary Figure S4). Additionally, the Al-sensitive genotypes showed fewer intact plasma membranes than did Al-tolerant genotypes after a 1-h Al treatment followed by a 3-h post-treatment with 0.2mM CaCl2 (Fig. 2).


Higher sterol content regulated by CYP51 with concomitant lower phospholipid content in membranes is a common strategy for aluminium tolerance in several plant species.

Wagatsuma T, Khan MS, Watanabe T, Maejima E, Sekimoto H, Yokota T, Nakano T, Toyomasu T, Tawaraya K, Koyama H, Uemura M, Ishikawa S, Ikka T, Ishikawa A, Kawamura T, Murakami S, Ueki N, Umetsu A, Kannari T - J. Exp. Bot. (2014)

Al tolerance of pea cultivars, wild type, and GA mutants. Seedlings (5 days old) with roots ~4cm long were treated with 0.2mM CaCl2 with or without 20 µM AlCl3 (pH 4.9) for 1h (short-term experiment, open bar) or 24h (long-term experiment, closed bar). In the short-term experiment, seedlings were treated for 1h with or without Al, then with 0.2mM CaCl2 (pH 5.2) for 9h before evaluating root re-elongation. Al tolerance was calculated as the ratio of net primary root elongation in Al treatment to that in the control after 9h re-elongation in the short-term experiment, or 24h in the long-term experiment. Values are means of three independent replicates ± standard error. Different letters indicate significant differences among cultivars and mutants at P < 0.05 (Fisher’s test; Fisher, 1958).
© Copyright Policy - creative-commons
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4321553&req=5

Figure 1: Al tolerance of pea cultivars, wild type, and GA mutants. Seedlings (5 days old) with roots ~4cm long were treated with 0.2mM CaCl2 with or without 20 µM AlCl3 (pH 4.9) for 1h (short-term experiment, open bar) or 24h (long-term experiment, closed bar). In the short-term experiment, seedlings were treated for 1h with or without Al, then with 0.2mM CaCl2 (pH 5.2) for 9h before evaluating root re-elongation. Al tolerance was calculated as the ratio of net primary root elongation in Al treatment to that in the control after 9h re-elongation in the short-term experiment, or 24h in the long-term experiment. Values are means of three independent replicates ± standard error. Different letters indicate significant differences among cultivars and mutants at P < 0.05 (Fisher’s test; Fisher, 1958).
Mentions: Using different Al treatment conditions (i.e. different durations of Al treatments), Al tolerance was compared among various cultivars, the wild type, and a mutant of pea. In one experiment, plants were exposed to toxic Al solution for 1h, and then their root re-growth over the following 9h was compared (Fig. 1, open bars). These conditions were used to assess the degree of constitutive Al tolerance in the cultivars, the wild type, and the mutant. In another experiment, roots were kept in Al toxic solution for 24h, and then their root elongation was compared (Fig. 1, closed bars). The latter conditions were used to evaluate induced Al tolerance in the cultivars and the mutant. In both conditions, the lh mutant and cv. Hyougo were significantly more Al sensitive than were cv. Harunoka and the wild type (Torsdag). The Al-sensitive genotypes accumulated more Al in the root tips than did Al-tolerant genotypes (Supplementary Figure S4). Additionally, the Al-sensitive genotypes showed fewer intact plasma membranes than did Al-tolerant genotypes after a 1-h Al treatment followed by a 3-h post-treatment with 0.2mM CaCl2 (Fig. 2).

Bottom Line: Several studies have shown that differences in lipid composition and in the lipid biosynthetic pathway affect the aluminium (Al) tolerance of plants, but little is known about the molecular mechanisms underlying these differences.Currency).This appears to be a common strategy for Al tolerance among several plant species.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Faculty of Agriculture, Yamagata University, Tsuruoka 997-8555, Japan wagatuma@tds1.tr.yamagata-u.ac.jp.

No MeSH data available.