Damaging mechanisms of chilling- and salt stress to Arachis hypogaea L. leaves

Abstract

To investigate damaging mechanisms of chilling and salt stress to peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) leaves, LuHua 14 was used in the present work upon exposure to chilling temperature (4°C) accompanied by high irradiance (1,200 μmol m -2 s -1 ) (CH), salt stress accompanied by high irradiance (1,200 μmol m -2 s -1 ) (SH), and high-irradiance stress (1,200 μmol m -2 s -1 ) at room temperature (25°C) (NH), respectively. Additionally, plants under low irradiance (100 μmol m -2 s -1 ) at room temperature (25°C) were used as control plants (CK). Relative to CK and NH treatments, both the maximal photochemical efficiency of PSII (F v /F m ) and the absorbance at 820 nm decreased greatly in peanut leaves under CH and SH stress, which indicated that severe photoinhibition occurred in peanut leaves under such conditions. Initial fluorescence (F o ), 1 -q P and nonphotochemical quenching (NPQ) in peanut leaves significantly increased under CH-and SH stress. Additionally, the activity of superoxide dismutase (SOD), one of the key enzymes of water-water cycle, decreased greatly, the accumulation of malondialdehyde (MDA) and membrane permeability increased. These results suggested that damages to peanut photosystems might be related to the accumulation of reactive oxygen species (ROS) induced by excess energy, and the water-water cycle could not dissipate energy efficiently under the stress of CH and SH, which caused the accumulation of ROS greatly. CH and SH had similar damaging effects on peanut photosystems, except that CH has more severe effects. All the results showed that CH-and SH stress has similar damaging site and mechanisms in peanut leaves.

Proteomic analysis of changes in the Kandelia candel chloroplast proteins reveals pathways associated with salt tolerance

“…The photosynthetic parameter F 0 is related to chlorophyll content [54]. According to previous reports [55][56][57], F 0 increases when the photochemical apparatus is destructed or, more specifically, when the amount of functional chlorophylls not connected to the reaction centers of PSII. The decrease of F 0 is an indication of a high-energy dissipation in the minor antenna [56].…”

Plant Physiological, Morphological and Yield-Related Responses to Night Temperature Changes across Different Species and Plant Functional Types

“…Previous studies on night temperatures have focused either on the effects of HNT and LNT alone (Friend, 1981; Seddigh and Jolliff, 1984a,b,c; Koscielniak, 1993; Bertamini et al, 2005) or the mixed effects of night temperatures and CO 2 concentration (Mortensen and Moe, 1992; Volder et al, 2004; Cheng et al, 2008, 2009, 2010), light period (Gimenez and Rumi, 1988; Turner and Ewing, 1988; Lee et al, 1991; Verheul et al, 2007), intensity (Bunce, 1985; Mortensen, 1994; Rapacz, 1998; Flexas and Osmond, 1999; Davies et al, 2002) as well as other environmental factors (Schoppach and Sadok, 2013) and growth regulators (Shah et al, 2011; Mohammed et al, 2013; Zhang et al, 2014). These experiments had been conducted on pineapple (Neales et al, 1980), peanut (Bagnall et al, 1988; Wang, 2007; Lin et al, 2011) and shrub-grass ecosystems (Beier et al, 2004). Although the interest in the influence of night temperatures on many aspects of plants is growing, studies are scattered and there lacks a synthetic study on how and to what extent night temperature change impacts terrestrial plant growth and biomass accumulation.…”

Changes in photosynthesis, chlorophyll fluorescence, and antioxidant enzymes of mulberry (Morus ssp.) in response to salinity and high-temperature stress

“…Numerous studies have shown that salinity stress predisposes photosystem II (PSII) to photoinhibitory damage (Lu et al 2002;Maricle et al 2007;Hichem et al 2009;Qin et al 2010Qin et al , 2011Sui et al 2010). However, very little attention has been paid to the responses of PSII to salinity stress and high-temperature stress in combination (Henley et al 2002).…”