4.1 Article

Chelator production by Deschampsia cespitosa ( L.) Beauv. in adaptive Ni/Cu hyper-tolerance derived from fields in the Sudbury region and lab assessment

期刊

BOTANY
卷 96, 期 11, 页码 711-721

出版社

CANADIAN SCIENCE PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.1139/cjb-2017-0211

关键词

metal hyper-tolerance; phytochelatins; nicotianamine; histidine; Deschampsia cespitosa

资金

  1. Natural Sciences and Engineering Council of Canada
  2. Trent University

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Plants possess a complex network of mechanisms to utilize and, if necessary, detoxify metals. Plants utilize constitutive basal tolerance mechanisms to maintain appropriate internal metal levels under normal conditions. However, adaptive hyper-tolerance mechanisms are used in order to tolerate excess metal exposure. The production of metal binding chelators could be one way to convey these tolerances. Chelator production of field and greenhouse-derived materials was investigated to determine any multi-metal hyper-tolerances in different populations of the grass Deschampsia cespitosa (L) Beauv. Plant tissue was collected from metal-contaminated mine sites, and from specimens grown in metal exposure hydroponic experiments. The chelator metabolites fro m these samples were simultaneously analyzed using HPLC-tandem mass spectrometry. In the hydroponic grown grass, histidine was produced at high concentrations solely in the hyper-tolerant populations during metal exposure. In all of the populations, the responses of chelators were metal-specific, where levels of nicotianamine were at high concentrations during Ni exposure, and levels of phytochelatins were high during Cu exposure. Moreover, a similar pattern of chelator production was seen in the root specimens collected from mine sites contaminated with Ni and (or) Cu. Histidine was the strongest Ni chelator involved in adaptive hyper-tolerance, while constitutive basal tolerance to Ni and Cu was observed via the responses of nicotianamine and phytochelatin, respectively.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据