Next Article in Journal
Loneliness and Health Service Utilization among the Rural Elderly in Shandong, China: A Cross-Sectional Study
Next Article in Special Issue
Silicon-Mediated Enhancement of Heavy Metal Tolerance in Rice at Different Growth Stages
Previous Article in Journal
Socio-Economic Inequalities in Tobacco Consumption of the Older Adults in China: A Decomposition Method
Previous Article in Special Issue
Characterizing the Interaction between Antibiotics and Humic Acid by Fluorescence Quenching Method
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
IJERPH
Volume 15
Issue 7
10.3390/ijerph15071467
ijerph-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Ascorbate-Glutathione Cycle and Ultrastructural Analyses of Two Kenaf Cultivars (Hibiscus cannabinus L.) under Chromium Stress

by
Lianmei Niu
1,
Rang Cao
2,
Jingquan Kang
2,
Xu Zhang
2 and
Jinyin Lv
2,*
1
College of Science, Northwest A&F University, Yangling 712100, China
2
College of Life Sciences, Northwest A&F University, Yangling 712100, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018, 15(7), 1467; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15071467
Submission received: 20 June 2018 / Revised: 7 July 2018 / Accepted: 7 July 2018 / Published: 11 July 2018
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Remediation and Analysis of Soil, Air, and Water Pollution)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Kenaf (Hibiscus cannabinus L.) with high tolerance to chromium (Cr) can be used in the phytoremediation of chromium-contaminated soil. However, the mechanisms of chromium accumulation and tolerance in kenaf are still unclear. A hydroponic experiment was taken to screen two kenaf cultivars with Cr tolerance among nine kenaf cultivars via a tolerance index. This is first time the ascorbate-glutathione (AsA-GSH) cycle and chloroplast structural changes involved in Cr tolerance of two kenaf cultivars are explored. This study indicated that enhancement of chromium concentrations reduced nine kenaf growth rates and plant biomass. In addition, in all the nine cultivars, the roots had higher Cr accumulation than the shoots. Cr-tolerant cultivar Zhe70-3 with the maximum tolerant index had the significantly higher enzymatic activities of ascorbate peroxidase (APX), glutathione reductase (GR), dehydroascorbate reductase (DHAR) and mono- dehydroascorbate reductase (MDHAR) in non-enzymatic antioxidant system compared to Cr-sensitive cultivar Zhe77-1. In addition, higher GSH and AsA contents and lower damages of chloroplast ultrastructure were observed in Zhe70-3 under Cr treatment. In conclusion, Cr stress can cause less oxidative stress and destruction of chloroplast ultrastructure in Cr-tolerant cultivar Zhe70-3, and the AsA-GSH cycle may play a crucial role in kenaf Cr tolerance.

1. Introduction

Chromium (Cr), an inorganic environmental contaminant in agricultural soil, is non-essential and toxic beyond a certain threshold level [1]. Chromium and its compounds were used in many industries, such as leather tanning, pigment manufacturing, metal finishing, drilling muds and electroplating cleaning agents, all of which can cause environmental Cr contamination [2,3,4]. Hexavalent chromium [Cr (VI)] and trivalent chromium [Cr (III)] are the most stable forms of Cr occurring in soil [5]. Cr (VI) is highly toxic (10–100 times) to plants and humans, compared to Cr (III) [6], but Cr (III) is more stable than Cr (VI) and Cr (VI) is reduced to Cr (III) in soil [1,5]. It has been demonstrated that Cr accumulation in plants can inhibit plant growth leading to decreased root and shoot biomass, affect the key enzymatic activities, induce young leaf chlorosis and change the chloroplast ultrastructure [7,8]. Therefore, due to the seriousness of Cr pollution, it is necessary to identify practicable methods for the remediation of Cr-contaminated soil.
A cost-efficient remediation technology to remove or degrade Cr from contaminated soil, phytoremediation, usually needs high biomass and fast growing plants [9,10]. Kenaf (Hibiscus cannabinus L.), with a short and rapid-growing economic fiber herbaceous crop, has been identified for use in phytoremediation [11,12]. As the largest fiber plant worldwide from the Malvaceae family, it is used to the development of adsorbents, high biomass for rope, textiles, fibers in recycled plastics and livestock feed [13,14]. Compared with other hemp species, kenaf has a wide geographical range due to its better ecological adaptability and suitablility for several types of soil [14]. However, little work has been done to improve its phytoremediation abilities by exploring the mechanisms of chromium accumulation and tolerance.
Many studies indicate that one of the major consequences of Cr toxicity is the generation of reactive oxygen species (ROS), which can cause severe damage to plant cells [15,16,17]. Plants can defend themselves against oxidative damage induced by stress through an efficient enzymatic and non-enzymatic antioxidant defense system (the AsA-GSH cycle) to scavenge produced ROS [18,19]. The AsA-GSH pathway regulates ROS levels and modulates redox signaling by changing the activities of key enzymes, including ascorbate peroxidase (APX, EC 1.11.1.11), glutathione reductase (GR, EC 1.6.4.2), monodehydroascorbate reductase (MDHAR, EC 1.6.5.4), ascorbic acid oxidase (AAO, EC 1.10.3.3) and dehydroascorbate reductase (DHAR, EC 1.8.5.1) [20,21]. A previous work revealed that GR and DHAR activities are increased in rice seedlings growing under cadmium stress [22]. AsA and GSH are the major products of the AsA-GSH cycle, and it has been observed that GSH is maintained at a high level under Cr stress [23,24].
Some previous research has reported that kenaf can accumulate heavy metals such as lead (Pb), cadmium (Cd) and copper (Cu) in its shoots and roots, which can affect the growth and antioxidant enzymatic activities [25,26,27]. In addition, we have also reported that Cr stress can alter the activities of some antioxidant enzymes like superoxide dismutase (SOD), catalase (CAT) and peroxidase (POD) in two kenaf cultivars [28]. However, until now there is no report about the effect on the ASA-GSH cycle and ultrastructural changes of kenaf under Cr stress. Therefore, in this study we selected two kenaf cultivars (Cr-tolerant and Cr-sensitive) from among nine cultivars to explore the alterations of key enzymatic activities, non-enzymatic antioxidant contents of AsA-GSH cycle and the ultrastructural changes of the two kenaf cultivars under Cr stress through a hydroponic experiment.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Plant Material and Growth Conditions

Nine cultivars of kenaf seeds, Zhe77-1, Fuhong992, Zhe54-3, Zhe70-3, VG93, Yueyin83-23, Hongyin135, Krasnadoy and T19 were purchased from the Research Institute of Bast Fiber Crops, (Hunan Province, China). Healthy seeds were sterilized with 75% ethanol for 15 min. After repeated rinsing with deionized water, they were soaked for 2 h in sterile water. The seeds were germinated in plastic plots (size: 200 cm × 130 cm × 60 cm, 15 plants per pot) containing sterilized sand in an incubator at 25 °C under a dark condition for three days, then maintained another three days under a 14/10 h light/dark photoperiod.
Afterwards, 15 uniformly germinated seeds were transplanted to similar plastic pots containing 500 mL half-strength modified Hoagland nutrient solution (after adjusting the pH to 6.5). The Hoagland nutrient solution was as described by Hoagland and Arnon [29] and renewed every three days. After seven days, 1.6 mM Cr3+ was added into solutions as CrCl3·6H2O to screen the nine kenaf cultivar seedlings. A Cr-tolerant cultivar (Zhe70-3) and a Cr-sensitive cultivar (Zhe77-1) were selected and exposed to different Cr3+ levels (0, 0.5, 1.0 and 1.5 mM). Each chromium treatment was replicated three times. The seedlings were placed in a growth cabinet under 150 μmol m−2 s−1 photosynthetically active radiation, 14/10 h light/dark photoperiod, 65–75% relative humidity and 25 °C/18 °C day/night temperature. After three days of exposure to Cr3+, plants were harvested and used to analyze the effect of chromium on various parameters. Each treatment was replicated three times.

2.2. Measurement of Chromium Content

Chromium content was determined as described by Li [30]. A 10 mL acid mixture (HNO3:HClO4 = 4:1, v/v) was used to digest the dried samples (about 0.1 g) from the roots and shoots at 220 °C until the liquid became transparent. Subsequently, flame atomic absorbance spectrometry (Hitachi 180-80, Tokyo, Japan) was used to determine Cr content.

2.3. Bio-Concentration Factor (BCF), Translocation Factor (TF) and Tolerance Index (TI)

BCF, TF and TI were calculated as described by Shi and Cai [31]. The bio-concentration factor (BCF) is used to describe a plant’s capacity to accumulate Cr, while the translocation factor (TF) indicates the plant’s potential phytoremediation capacity:
BCF = [Cr]shoot or root/[Cr]solution
TF = [Cr]shoot/[Cr]root
TI (100%) = [biomass]Cr/[biomass]control
where [Cr]solution is the concentration of total Cr in solution; [Cr]shoot and [Cr]root are the Cr concentration in the shoot and root parts, respectively. Biomass was expressed using plant growth parameters including the length and mass of roots and shoots.

2.4. Measurement of Malondialdehyde (MDA) and Hydrogen Peroxide (H2O2) Contents

Fresh samples (0.5 g) from the shoots and roots were extracted with 0.5% (w/v) cold trichloroacetic acid (TCA). After centrifugation (12,000 g, 20 min, 4 °C), the 1/2 supernatant was used to measure the MDA contents, according to the modified method of Li [30]. Another 1/2 supernatant was used to determinate the H2O2 content as described by Alexieva [32].

2.5. Chloroplast Ultrastructural Observation

After three days of Cr treatment, topmost leaf fragments without veins were cut about 0.1 mm × 0.2 mm small species. Then the samples were fixed 12 h in 4% glutaraldehyde (v/v) in 0.1 M PBS (phosphate buffer solution, pH 6.8) at 4 °C. After washing in the same PBS, they were post-fixed with 1% OsO4 for 2 h at 4 °C and washed in same PBS five times again. Subsequently, with 15-min intervals, an ascending ethanol gradient (30%, 50%, 70%, 80%, 90%, 100%) were used to dehydrate the samples once and 100% ethanol washed twice for 30 min. After embedded in LR-White resin for 12 h, the samples were incubated at 60 °C for two days. Ultrathin sections were obtained with a diamond knife and stained for 8–10 min with 4% Pb. Then morphological parameters were observed via a JEM-1230 transmission electron microscope (JEOL, Tokyo, Japan) at 80 kV.

2.6. Measurement of Enzymatic Activities

According to the modified method of Logan and Grace [33], 0.5 g of fresh plant tissues were ground with a chilled mortar and pestle. Then they were extracted with 3.0 mL of 50 mM phosphate buffer (PBS, pH 7.3). This solution containing 0.3% (w/v) Triton X-100, 1% (w/v) polyvinylpyrrolidone and 1.0 mM Na2-EDTA. Enzymes activities were measured after centrifugation (12,000 g, 30 min, 4 °C). The method of Bradford [34] was used to determine protein content, standard curve using bovine serum albumin (BSA) as standard.
APX activity was assayed via measuring the AsA oxidation rate at 290 nm. MDHAR activity was assayed via monitoring the change in absorbance at 340 nm. DHAR activity was assayed via monitoring the absorbance change at 265 nm. A change of 0.01 unit/min was defined as one enzyme unit. The five enzymatic activities were measured following the method of de Pinto [35]. AAO activity was determined by monitoring the change in absorbance at 290 nm according to Esaka [36]. Reduction of 0.01 unit/min was defined as one enzyme unit. GR activity was assayed via monitoring the absorbance change at 340 nm according to Smith [37] and reduction of 0.01 unit/min was defined as one enzyme unit. Each enzyme activity was determined using 1.0 mL total reaction volume.

2.7. Measurement of Ascorbate and Glutathione Contents

AsA and total AsA (AsA+DHA) contents were estimated as described following the methods of Zhang and Kirkham [38]. Approximately 0.5 g fresh samples from the shoots and roots were extracted with 3.0 mL pro-cooling 5% (w/v) phosphite. After centrifugation (22,000 g, 15 min, 4 °C), the supernatant was used to measure ascorbate content at 525 nm. In order to determine total AsA content, dithiothreitol was added to the supernatant to reduce DHA to AsA. The difference between total AsA and AsA were recorded as DHA content. Total GSH and GSSG contents were estimated as described and modified methods of Zhang and Kirkham [38]. Approximately 0.5 g fresh samples were extracted in 2.5 mL ice-cold 5% sulfosalicylic acid. After centrifugation (KDC-140HR, Zonkia, Hefei, China) (1200 g, 20 min, 4 °C), the half of mixture (supernatant:sulfosalicylic acid = 1:1 v/v) was used to determine total GSH (GSH+GSSG) content. Another mixture was pretreated with 2-vinylpyridine to mask GSH before determining GSSG content. The difference between total GSH and GSSG were recorded as GSH content.

2.8. Statistical Analysis

All data were obtained from three replications and analyzed using the SPSS 22.0 software package (SPSS Inc. Chicago, IL, USA) to express the significant differences between mean values at P < 0.05 and P < 0.01 based on LSD test or Duncan’s multiple range test. All results were presented as means ± standard deviation (SD).

3. Results

3.1. Screening Cr-Tolerant and Cr-Sensitive Kenaf Cultivars

The toxic effects of chromium on the morphology and productivity are shown in the Supplementary Material in Tables S1 and S2. The chromium treatment significantly decreased the shoot height from 16% to 35.5% as compared with control (Table S1). Moreover, Zhe77-1, in which the decrease of shoot height was 35.5%, was the most sensitive cultivar compared with the others. The root dry mass of all genotypes were insignificantly decreased under Cr stress compared with their controls, respectively, and the reduction rates of Zhe77-1 was 2.5 times that of Zhe70-3 (Table S2). Root Cr concentrations were significantly higher than shoot Cr concentrations in all plant cultivars (Table S3). Meanwhile, the shoot BCF was lower than the root BCF and there was a significant difference between the nine genotypes, except for the T19, Fuhong992 and Hongyin135 cultivars. TF values ranged from 51% to 86% for all cultivars (Table S3), which was used to reflect the capacity of kenaf to translocate Cr from roots to shoots. The subordinate function values of the tolerance index can indicate the degree of plant tolerance, Zhe70-3 had the maximum mean tolerance index of 0.7, while Zhe77-1 had the minimum mean tolerance index of 0.12 (Table 1).

3.2. Plant Biomass and Cr Accumulation

As shown in Table 2, under 0.5 mM Cr stress the shoot height and root length of Zhe77-1 significantly decreased by 11.1% and 18.7% compared with their respective controls, while Zhe70-3 had lower values of 8% and 7%. The reduction rates of the root lengths in Zhe77-1 were significantly (11.7%, 17.6% and 24.6%, respectively) higher than these in Zhe70-3 under three different Cr treatments. Similarly, the toxic effects of chromium on dry mass in Zhe70-3 were lower than in Zhe77-1, except under 1.5 mM Cr stress. Although Cr treatment decreased the fresh mass, there were no significant differences between Zhe70-3 and Zhe77-1, except under 1.0 mM Cr stress. Table 2 also shows the Cr accumulation in the two selected plant species under three different Cr treatments, and it was clear that the roots had a higher Cr accumulation than the shoots of both cultivars. With the enhancement of chromium concentrations, Cr contents also increased in the shoots and roots compared with their controls. Under 1.0 and 1.5 mM Cr treatments, the shoot Cr accumulation for Zhe70-3 with 3344 and 4874 mg/kg were higher than 2889 and 4156 mg/kg in Zhe77-1, respectively. All the data show that Zhe77-1 was more Cr-sensitive than Zhe70-3.

3.3. Effect of Chromium on MDA and H2O2 Contents

MDA and H2O2 contents were increased with the increase in chromium concentrations, and they were higher in the shoots than these in the roots (Table 3). Under 1.5 mM Cr concentration, the contents reached a maximum. The contents of MDA (root) and H2O2 (shoot/root) appeared to be very similar in Zhe70-3 and Zhe 77-1 at 1.5 mM Cr.

3.4. Effect of Chromium on Chloroplast Ultrastructure

Figure 1 shows the chloroplast ultrastructural changes of kenaf leaf mesophyll under control and 1.5 mM Cr stress in Zhe70-3 and Zhe77-1. The transmission electron microscope (TEM) micrographs reflected that under control condition both cultivars had well-developed chloroplasts (Chl) with thylakoid membranes (Thy) and starch grains (SG) (Figure 1A–D). There were insignificant ultrastructural changes of Zhe70-3 between the control and Cr-treated leaf mesophyll except more SG under 1.5 mM Cr stress, while Zhe77-1 showed disrupted thylakoid membranes and increased plastoglobuli (Pb) compared with their respective controls (Figure 1E,F). In addition, the numbers of chloroplasts were significantly lower compared with control in Zhe77-1. Therefore, it is clear that Zhe70-3 cultivar suffered less damage to the chloroplast ultrastructure compared to the Zhe77-1 cultivar under Cr stress.

3.5. Effect of Chromium on Enzyme Activities of AsA-GSH Cycle

As shown in Figure 2, APX, AAO, GR, MDHAR and DHAR in the AsA-GSH cycle showed different responses to Cr stress and the enzyme activities of the shoots and roots in Zhe70-3 were higher than these in Zhe77-1 (except the shoot GR).
APX activity in Zhe70-3 shoot was significantly higher than that in Zhe77-1 under 1.0 and 1.5 mM Cr stresses (Figure 2A). However, no significant changes were observed for the root APX activity in the two cultivars (except for 1.5 mM Cr treatment, Figure 2B), while for AAO, there were significant differences in the shoots and roots between the two kenaf cultivars at 1.0 mM Cr stress (Figure 2C,D). MDHAR and DHAR activities presented significant differences at 0.5, 1.0 and 1.5 mM Cr levels in the shoots. However, there were insignificant changes in the roots between both two kenaf cultivars under same Cr stresses except 1.0 mM Cr stress (Figure 2E–H). Increasing Cr concentrations from 0 to 1.5 mM lead to a similar change in GR activity in the shoots and roots compared with controls. The GR activity reached to maximum in Zhe70-3 and Zhe77-1 exposed to 1.0 mM Cr stress, but there were no significant differences in the shoots exposed to same Cr treatments between the two kenaf cultivars (Figure 2I,J). The higher enzyme activities may play an important role for plants to resist the negative effects from Cr. All the results indicated that Cr-tolerant cultivar Zhe70-3 had the higher enzymatic activities, AsA and GSH contents in both shoots and roots than Cr-sensitive cultivar Zhe77-1.

3.6. Effect of Chromium on Ascorbate and Glutathione Contents

As shown in Figure 3, Cr stress changed the contents of the two major products in AsA-GSH cycle. After exposure to different Cr concentrations, the GSH contents increased, but Zhe70-3 had a significantly higher level both in the shoot and root under 1.5 mM Cr treatment compared to Zhe77-1.
The GSSG content showed similar increase trends, but there were significant differences in the roots between the two cultivars. In contrast to GSH, AsA contents decreased in both kenaf cultivars with increasing Cr concentrations, and the lowest AsA content was observed at the highest Cr concentration. AsA and DHA contents had different trends in both tissues, roots had a lower level than shoots in both kenaf cultivars and Zhe70-3 were higher compared to Zhe77-1. AsA/DHA and GSH/GSSG ratio showed same decreasing trends in both two cultivars with increasing Cr concentrations, and the minimum values were found at the highest Cr level compared with their respective controls (Figure 4). AsA/DHA values in the shoot were higher than that in the root in two cultivars as well as GSH/GSSG values. All the results suggested that Zhe77-1 was more vulnerable than Zhe70-3 under Cr stress.

4. Discussion

Many evidences have demonstrated that Cr is a major ecotoxic heavy metal and high Cr stress inhibits plant growth and productivity [39,40]. Phytoremediation mitigation of metal toxicity has been reported in previous studies [9,10]. Kenaf, is a plant used for phytoremediation, and metal-sensitive and metal-tolerant genotypes have different molecular mechanisms to alleviate heavy metal stress. In this study, a hydroponic experiment was taken to select Cr-sensitive and Cr-tolerant kenaf cultivars according to TI value [31,41]. The Cr-tolerant cultivar Zhe70-3 had the maximum TI value (0.70) and the Cr-sensitive cultivar Zhe77-1 had the minimum TI value (0.12), based on the subordinate function values of TI (Table 1). The reduction in the growth of kenaf by Cr stress might due to Cr-induced generation of ROS as well as chloroplast ultrastructural changes [42,43]. Cr accumulation in roots was at least twice that in shoots in the two kenaf cultivars (Table 2), but compared with Zhe70-3, Cr stress significantly increased the number of starch grains and disrupted the thylakoid membrane in Zhe77-1 (Figure 1). Previously, heavy metal stress on leaf chloroplast ultrastructure was shown in Moss Taxithelium Nepalense, Brassica napus L. and Oryza sativa L. [8,44,45].
To the best of our knowledge, oxidative stress was induced by abiotic stress, resulting in enhanced ROS accumulation. The increased ROS contents may lead to H2O2 accumulation in chloroplasts and lipid peroxidation indicated by high MDA levels [46,47]. Our data showed that the MDA and H2O2 contents were lower in Zhe70-3 compared with Zhe77-1, especially Zhe77-1 was much affected after exposure to 1.0 mM Cr concentration, which indicated that it might have undergone stress (Table 3). Plants resist against abiotic and biotic stresses mainly through enzymatic and non-enzymatic antioxidants [18,48]. The AsA-GSH cycle is the most important non-enzymatic system for Cr detoxification [19,49]. In our experiment, Cr stress significantly increased all five measured enzymatic activities (APX, AAO, GR, MDHAR and DHAR) in both tissues of two kenaf cultivars (Figure 2). The results indicated that the Zhe70-3 has higher enzymatic activities (GR, MDHAR and DHAR) in shoots and roots compared with the Zhe77-1 cultivar (Figure 2E–J), which partly showed its tolerance to Cr [27,50,51].
GSH and AsA are the major non-enzymatic antioxidants involved in Cr detoxification [17,50]. A previous study indicated that Cd-tolerant cultivars have higher GSH contents than Cd-sensitive cultivars in rice [52]. Our results showed that the GSH contents in shoots and roots of the Zhe70-3 cultivar was significatly higher than in the Zhe77-1 cultivar under high Cr concentration (Figure 3A,B). Abiotic stress can increase GSH contents by increasing the enzymatic activitives [46,53]. In Figure 3A–D and Figure 4, an increase in GSH and GSSG contents were found in the two kenaf cultivars while the GSH/GSSG ratios declined, similar to previous studies [47,54]. The possible reason may be that DHAR catalyzes the oxidation reaction of GSH to GSSG [55,56]. A negative correlation was observed between the AsA and DHA contents in the two kenaf cultivars. The decreased AsA and increased DHA contents lead to a decline in the AsA/DHA ratio under Cr stress (Figure 3E–H and Figure 4), but higher levels of AsA contents were found in Zhe70-3 compared with Zhe77-1 (Figure 3) as well as the enzymatic activities (Figure 2). These results are in agreement with several previous studies [57,58,59]. All of those may provide the higher Cr-tolerant capacity observed for Zhe70-3.
The AsA-GSH cycle regulates the Cr detoxification of plants via key enzymatic reactions as summarized in Figure 5. The non-enzymatic antioxidant system modulates ROS levels via the enzymes APX, GR, MDHAR, AAO and DHAR. However, more studies are needed to provide more evidence on the molecular mechanisms of AsA-GSH cycle regulating the Cr detoxification in kenaf.

5. Conclusions

Generally, our results indicate that Cr was more accumulated in their roots that in shoots in the nine analyzed kenaf cultivars. Chromium treatment decreases the plant biomass, increases the key enzyme activities of MDHAR, DHAR, GR and APX and damages the chloroplast ultrastructure. In addition, compared to the Cr-sensitive cultivar Zhe77-1, the Cr-tolerant cultivar Zhe70-3 has a higher tolerance due to its the higher enzyme activities, ascorbate and glutathione contents of AsA-GSH cycle in response to Cr stress. These results provide an approach to understand the Cr-induced mechanism and Cr-tolerance in kenaf and initiate further studies with dissolved Cr and compare them with the effects in soil systems.

Supplementary Materials

The following are available online at https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/15/7/1467/s1, Figure S1: Effects of chromium treatments on growth of two kenaf cultivars (Zhe70-3 and Zhe77-1) in the hydroponic experiment, chromium (Cr3+) concentrations were 0, 0.5, 1.0 and 1.5 mM. (a) cultivar Zhe70-3; (b) cultivar Zhe77-1. Table S1: Effects of chromium stress (1.6 mM) on the shoot height and root length of nine kenaf cultivars. Table S2: Effects of chromium stress (1.6 mM) on the dry weight of nine kenaf cultivars. Table S3: Effects of chromium stress on Cr content, BCF and TF in shoot and root of kenaf seedlings. Extremely small amounts of Cr content under control condition in these kenaf materials can be ignored.

Author Contributions

L.N. and J.L. designed the experiments; L.N. performed the experiments; R.C., J.K., X.Z. helped in data analyses; L.N. wrote the paper. All of the authors discussed the results and commented on the manuscript.

Funding

The authors declare no competing financial interest.

Acknowledgments

This research was financially supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No.31271624) and Agricultural Science and Technology Innovation of Shaanxi Province Key Project (China, 2016NY-135).

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Hawley, E.L.; Deeb, R.A.; Kavanaugh, M.C.; Jacobs, J.A. Treatment Technologies for Chromium (VI). Cheminform 2010, 37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Schiavon, M.; Pilonsmits, E.A.; Wirtz, M.; Hell, R.; Malagoli, M. Interactions between chromium and sulfur metabolism in Brassica juncea. J. Environ. Qual. 2008, 37, 1536–1545. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Rodriguez, E.; Santos, C.; Azevedo, R.; Moutinhopereira, J.; Correia, C.; Dias, M.C. Chromium (VI) induces toxicity at different photosynthetic levels in pea. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 2012, 53, 94–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Ashraf, A.; Bibi, I.; Niazi, N.K.; Ok, Y.S.; Murtaza, G.; Shahid, M.; Kunhikrishnan, A.; Li, D.; Mahmood, T. Chromium (VI) sorption efficiency of acid-activated banana peel over organo-montmorillonite in aqueous solutions. Int. J. Phytoremediat. 2016, 19, 605–613. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Becquer, T.; Quantin, C.; Sicot, M.; Boudot, J. Chromium availability in ultramafic soils from New Caledonia. Sci. Total Environ. 2003, 301, 251–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Prado, F.E.; Hilal, M.; Chocobar-Ponce, S.; Pagano, E.; Rosa, M.; Prado, C. Chapter 6—Chromium and the Plant: A Dangerous Affair? Elsevier Inc: New York, NY, USA, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  7. Azmat, R.; Khanum, R. Effect of Chromium Metal on the Uptakes of Mineral Atoms in Seedlings of Bean Plant Vigna radiata (L.) Wilckzek. Pak. J. Boil. Sci. 2005, 8, 281–283. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Sharma, P.; Kumar, A.; Bhardwaj, R. Plant steroidal hormone epibrassinolide regulate—Heavy metal stress tolerance in Oryza sativa L. by modulating antioxidant defense expression. Environ. Exp. Bot. 2016, 122, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Chaney, R.L.; Malik, M.; Li, Y.M.; Brown, S.L.; Brewer, E.P.; Angle, J.S.; Baker, A.J. Phytoremediation of soil metal. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 1997, 8, 279–284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Zhao, F.J.; McGrath, S.P. Biofortification and phytoremediation. Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 2009, 12, 373–380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. Meints, P.D.; Smith, C.A. Kenaf seed storage duration on germination, emergence, and yield. Ind. Crops Prod. 2003, 17, 9–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Catroga, A.; Fernando, A.; Oliveira, J.S. Effects on growth, productivity and biomass quality of kenaf of soils contaminated with heavy metals. Eur. Biomass Conf. 2005, 14, 149–152. [Google Scholar]
  13. Ashori, A.; Harun, J.; Raverty, W.; Yusoff, M. Chemical and morphological characteristics of Malaysian cultivated kenaf (Hibiscus cannabinus) fiber. Polym. Plast. Technol. Eng. 2006, 45, 131–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Saba, N.; Paridah, M.T.; Jawaid, M. Mechanical properties of kenaf fibre reinforced polymer composite: A review. Constr. Build. Mater. 2015, 76, 87–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Patnaik, A.R.; Achary, V.M.M.; Panda, B.B. Chromium (VI)-induced hormesis and genotoxicity are mediated through oxidative stress in root cells of Allium cepa L. Plant Growth Regul. 2013, 71, 157–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Islam, M.K.; Khanam, M.S.; Siyoung, L.; Alam, I.; Mooryong, H. The interaction of arsenic (As) and chromium (Cr) influences growth and antioxidant status in tossa jute (Corchorus olitorius). Plant Omics 2014, 7, 499–509. [Google Scholar]
  17. Islam, F.; Yasmeen, T.; Arif, M.S.; Riaz, M.; Shahzad, S.M.; Imran, Q.; Ali, I. Combined ability of chromium (Cr) tolerant plant growth promoting bacteria (PGPB) and salicylic acid (SA) in attenuation of chromium stress in maize plants. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 2016, 108, 456–467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Miller, G.; Suzuki, N.; Cıftcıyiılmaz, S.; Mittler, R. Reactive oxygen species homeostasis and signalling during drought and salinity stresses. Plant Cell Environ. 2010, 33, 453–467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Yuan, L.Y.; Du, J.; Yuan, Y.H.; Shu, S.; Sun, J.; Guo, S.R. Effects of 24-epibrassinolide on ascorbate-glutathione cycle and polyamine levels in cucumber roots under Ca(NO3)2 stress. Acta Physiol. Plant 2013, 35, 253–262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Noctor, G.; Mhamdi, A.; Chaouch, S.; Han, Y.; Neukermans, J.; Marquezgarcia, B.; Queval, G.; Foyer, C.H. Glutathione in plants: An integrated overview. Plant Cell Environ. 2012, 35, 454–484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Qiu, B.; Zeng, F.; Cai, S.; Wu, X.; Haider, S.I.; Wu, F.; Zhang, G. Alleviation of chromium toxicity in rice seedlings by applying exogenous glutathione. J. Plant Physiol. 2013, 170, 772–779. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Nahakpam, S.; Shah, K. Expression of key antioxidant enzymes under combined effect of heat and cadmium toxicity in growing rice seedlings. Plant Growth Regul. 2011, 63, 23–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Scoccianti, V.; Iacobucci, M.; Paoletti, M.F.; Fraternale, A.; Speranza, A. Species-dependent chromium accumulation, lipid peroxidation, and glutathione levels in germinating kiwifruit pollen under Cr(III) and Cr(VI) stress. Chemosphere 2008, 73, 1042–1048. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Foyer, C.H.; Noctor, G. Ascorbate and glutathione: The heart of the redox hub. Plant Physiol. 2011, 155, 2–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Dey, S.K.; Jena, P.P.; Kundu, S. Antioxidative efficiency of Triticum aestivum L. exposed to chromium stress. J. Environ. Biol. 2009, 30, 539–544. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  26. Ajuwon, O.R.; Bada, B.S.; Olujimi, O.O. Growth and antioxidative responses to excess cadmium in Kenaf (Hibiscus cannabinus L.). Fresenius Environ. Bull. 2010, 19, 2637–2643. [Google Scholar]
  27. Cao, F.; Wang, N.; Zhang, M.; Dai, H.; Dawood, M.; Zhang, G.; Wu, F. Comparative study of alleviating effects of GSH, Se and Zn under combined contamination of cadmium and chromium in rice (Oryza sativa). BioMetals 2013, 26, 297–308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Ding, H.; Wang, G.; Lou, L.; Lv, J. Physiological responses and tolerance of kenaf (Hibiscus cannabinus L.) exposed to chromium. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2016, 133, 509–518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Hoagland, D.R.; Arnon, D.I. The water-culture method for growing plants without soil. Calif. Agric. Exp. Stn. Circ. 1950, 347, 357–359. [Google Scholar]
  30. Li, C. Physiological and biochemical responses to high Mn concentrations in two contrasting Populus cathayana populations. Chemosphere 2007, 68, 686–694. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Shi, G.; Cai, Q. Cadmium tolerance and accumulation in eight potential energy crops. Biotechnol. Adv. 2009, 27, 555–561. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Alexieva, V.; Sergiev, I.; Mapelli, S.; Karanov, E. The effect of drought and ultraviolet radiation on growth and stress markers in pea and wheat. Plant Cell Environ. 2001, 24, 1337–1344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  33. Logan, B.A.; Grace, S.C.; Adams, W.W.; Demmig-Adams, B. Seasonal Differences in Xanthophyll Cycle Characteristics and Antioxidants in Mahonia repens Growing in Different Light Environments. Oecologia 1998, 116, 9–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Bradford, M.M. A rapid and sensitive method for the quantitation of microgram quantities of protein utilizing the principle of protein-dye binding. Anal. Biochem. 1976, 72, 248–254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Pinto, M.C.D.; Tommasi, F.; Gara, L.D. Enzymes of the ascorbate biosynthesis and ascorbate-glutathione cycle in cultured cells of tobacco Bright Yellow 2. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 2000, 38, 541–550. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Esaka, M.; Hattori, T.; Fujisawa, K.; Sakajo, S.; Asahi, T. Molecular cloning and nucleotide sequence of full-length cDNA for ascorbate oxidase from cultured pumpkin cells. FEBS J. 1990, 191, 537–541. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  37. Smith, I.K.; Vierheller, T.L.; Thorne, C.A. Assay of glutathione reductase in crude tissue homogenates using 5,5′-dithiobis(2-nitrobenzoic acid). Anal. Biochem. 1988, 175, 408–413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Zhang, J.X.; Kirkham, M.B. Antioxidant responses to drought in sunflower and sorghum seedlings. New Phytol. 1996, 132, 361–373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  39. Mallick, S.; Sinam, G.; Kumar, M.R.; Sinha, S. Interactive effects of Cr and Fe treatments on plants growth, nutrition and oxidative status in Zea mays L. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2010, 73, 987–995. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Qing, X.; Zhao, X.; Hu, C.; Wang, P.; Zhang, Y.; Zhang, X.; Wang, P.; Shi, H.; Jia, F.; Qu, C. Selenium alleviates chromium toxicity by preventing oxidative stress in cabbage (Brassica campestris L. ssp. Pekinensis) leaves. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2015, 114, 179–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. Ghazy, U.M.M. Modifications of evaluation index and subordinate function formulae to determine superiority of mulberry silkworm crosses. J. Basic Appl. Zool. 2014, 67, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Bishehkolaei, R.; Fahimi, H.; Saadatmand, S.; Nejadsattari, T. Ultrastructural localisation of chromium in Ocimum basilicum. Turk. J. Bot. 2014, 35, 261–268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Ali, S.; Chaudhary, A.; Rizwan, M.; Anwar, H.T.; Adrees, M.; Farid, M.; Irshad, M.K.; Hayat, T.; Anjum, S.A. Alleviation of chromium toxicity by glycinebetaine is related to elevated antioxidant enzymes and suppressed chromium uptake and oxidative stress in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. Int. 2015, 22, 10669–10678. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Choudhury, S.; Panda, S.K. Toxic Effects, Oxidative Stress and Ultrastructural Changes in Moss Taxithelium nepalense (Schwaegr.) Broth. Under Chromium and Lead Phytotoxicity. Water Air Soil Pollut. 2005, 167, 73–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Gill, R.A.; Zang, L.; Ali, B.; Farooq, M.A.; Cui, P.; Yang, S.; Ali, S.; Zhou, W. Chromium-induced physio-chemical and ultrastructural changes in four cultivars of Brassica napus L. Chemosphere 2015, 120, 154–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Seth, C.S.; Chaturvedi, P.K.; Misra, V. The role of phytochelatins and antioxidants in tolerance to Cd accumulation in Brassica juncea L. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2008, 71, 76–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Ahmad, M.; Wahid, A.; Ahmad, S.S.; Butt, Z.A.; Tariq, M. Ecophysiological responses of rice (Oryza sativa L.) to hexavalent chromium. Pak. J. Bot. 2011, 43, 2853–2859. [Google Scholar]
  48. Singh, H.P.; Mahajan, P.; Kaur, S.; Batish, D.R.; Kohli, R.K. Chromium toxicity and tolerance in plants. Environ. Chem. Lett. 2013, 11, 229–254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Liu, Q.; Yao, H. Antioxidant activities of barley seeds extracts. Food Chem. 2007, 102, 732–737. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Haroldsen, V.M.; ChiHam, C.L.; Kulkarni, S.; Lorence, A.; Bennett, A.B. Constitutively expressed DHAR and MDHAR influence fruit, but not foliar ascorbate levels in tomato. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 2011, 49, 1244–1249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  51. Ali, S.; Bai, P.; Zeng, F.; Cai, S.; Shamsi, I.H.; Qiu, B.; Wu, F.; Zhang, G. The ecotoxicological and interactive effects of chromium and aluminum on growth, oxidative damage and antioxidant enzymes on two barley genotypes differing in Al tolerance. Environ. Exp. Bot. 2011, 70, 185–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Cai, Y.; Cao, F.; Cheng, W.; Zhang, G.; Wu, F. Modulation of exogenous glutathione in phytochelatins and photosynthetic performance against Cd stress in the two rice genotypes differing in Cd tolerance. Biol. Trace Element Res. 2011, 143, 1159–1173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Seregin, I.V.; Ivanov, V.B. Physiological Aspects of Cadmium and Lead Toxic Effects on Higher Plants. Russ. J. Plant Physiol. 2001, 48, 523–544. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Toppi, L.S.D.; Fossati, F.; Musetti, R.; Mikerezi, I.; Favali, M.A. Effects of hexavalent chromium on maize, tomato, and cauliflower plants. J. Plant. Nutr. 2002, 25, 701–717. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Gomez, L.D.; Noctor, G.; Knight, M.R.; Foyer, C.H. Regulation of calcium signalling and gene expression by glutathione. J. Exp. Bot. 2004, 55, 1851–1859. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  56. Rai, V.; Vajpayee, P.; Singh, S.N.; Mehrotra, S. Effect of chromium accumulation on photosynthetic pigments, oxidative stress defense system, nitrate reduction, proline level and eugenol content of Ocimum tenuiflorum L. Plant Sci. 2004, 167, 1159–1169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Martí, M.C.; Camejo, D.; Olmos, E.; Sandalio, L.M.; Fernández-García, N.; Jiménez, A.; Sevilla, F. Characterisation and changes in the antioxidant system of chloroplasts and chromoplasts isolated from green and mature pepper fruits. Plant Boil. 2009, 11, 613–624. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  58. Chao, Y.Y.; Hong, C.Y.; Chinghuei, K.; Tullio, M.C.D.; Stasolla, C. The decline in ascorbic acid content is associated with cadmium toxicity of rice seedlings. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 2010, 48, 374–381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  59. Hojati, M.; Modarres-Sanavy, S.A.; Enferadi, S.T.; Majdi, M.; Ghanati, F.; Farzadfar, S.; Pazoki, A. Cadmium and copper induced changes in growth, oxidative metabolism and terpenoids of Tanacetum parthenium. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. Int. 2017, 24, 12261–12272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Ijerph 15 01467 g001 550
Figure 1. Electron micrographs of leaf mesophyll of Zhe70-3 and Zhe77-1. Plants were exposed to 0 and 1.5 mM Cr stress. (A–D): TEM micrographs of leaf mesophyll cells of Zhe70-3 and Zhe77-1 under control with low and high magnifications; (E–H): TEM micrographs of leaf mesophyll cells of Zhe77-1 under 1.5 mM Cr with low and high magnification. Thy: thylakoid, SG: starch grains, Chl: chloroplast, CW: cell wall, Pb: plastoglobuli.
Figure 1. Electron micrographs of leaf mesophyll of Zhe70-3 and Zhe77-1. Plants were exposed to 0 and 1.5 mM Cr stress. (A–D): TEM micrographs of leaf mesophyll cells of Zhe70-3 and Zhe77-1 under control with low and high magnifications; (E–H): TEM micrographs of leaf mesophyll cells of Zhe77-1 under 1.5 mM Cr with low and high magnification. Thy: thylakoid, SG: starch grains, Chl: chloroplast, CW: cell wall, Pb: plastoglobuli.
Ijerph 15 01467 g001
Ijerph 15 01467 g002 550
Figure 2. Effects of chromium treatments on enzymatic activities of APX, AAO, DHAR, MDHAR and GR of Zhe70-3 and Zhe77-1. All data show the means ± SD of three replicates. Values followed by the different letters indicate significant differences based on one-way ANOVA followed by LSD test (P < 0.05) for each cultivar at different Cr treatments. * and ** indicate separation between the two kenaf cultivars at the same Cr treatment by ANOVA followed by LSD multiple comparison (* P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01 respectively).
Figure 2. Effects of chromium treatments on enzymatic activities of APX, AAO, DHAR, MDHAR and GR of Zhe70-3 and Zhe77-1. All data show the means ± SD of three replicates. Values followed by the different letters indicate significant differences based on one-way ANOVA followed by LSD test (P < 0.05) for each cultivar at different Cr treatments. * and ** indicate separation between the two kenaf cultivars at the same Cr treatment by ANOVA followed by LSD multiple comparison (* P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01 respectively).
Ijerph 15 01467 g002
Ijerph 15 01467 g003 550
Figure 3. Effect of chromium treatments on GSH and AsA contents of Zhe70-3 and Zhe77-1. All data show the means ± SD of three replicates. Values followed by the different letters indicate significant differences based on one-way ANOVA followed by LSD test (P < 0.05) for each cultivar at different Cr treatments. * and ** indicate separation between the two kenaf cultivars at the same Cr treatment by ANOVA followed by LSD multiple comparison (*: P < 0.05, **: P < 0.01 respectively).
Figure 3. Effect of chromium treatments on GSH and AsA contents of Zhe70-3 and Zhe77-1. All data show the means ± SD of three replicates. Values followed by the different letters indicate significant differences based on one-way ANOVA followed by LSD test (P < 0.05) for each cultivar at different Cr treatments. * and ** indicate separation between the two kenaf cultivars at the same Cr treatment by ANOVA followed by LSD multiple comparison (*: P < 0.05, **: P < 0.01 respectively).
Ijerph 15 01467 g003
Ijerph 15 01467 g004 550
Figure 4. Effect of chromium treatments on AsA/DHA and GSH/GSSG ratio of Zhe70-3 and Zhe77-1. All data show the means ± SD of three replicates. Values followed by the different letters indicate significant differences based on one-way ANOVA followed by LSD test (P < 0.05) for each cultivar at different Cr treatments. * indicate separation between the two kenaf cultivars at the same Cr treatment by ANOVA followed by LSD multiple comparison (*: P < 0.05).
Figure 4. Effect of chromium treatments on AsA/DHA and GSH/GSSG ratio of Zhe70-3 and Zhe77-1. All data show the means ± SD of three replicates. Values followed by the different letters indicate significant differences based on one-way ANOVA followed by LSD test (P < 0.05) for each cultivar at different Cr treatments. * indicate separation between the two kenaf cultivars at the same Cr treatment by ANOVA followed by LSD multiple comparison (*: P < 0.05).
Ijerph 15 01467 g004
Ijerph 15 01467 g005 550
Figure 5. Simplified metabolic and signal transduction pathway of AsA-GSH cycle in regulating Cr accumulation and tolerance.
Figure 5. Simplified metabolic and signal transduction pathway of AsA-GSH cycle in regulating Cr accumulation and tolerance.
Ijerph 15 01467 g005
Table
Table 1. Subordinate function values of the Tolerance Index of kenaf grown in Cr-treated Hoagland nutrient solution.
Table 1. Subordinate function values of the Tolerance Index of kenaf grown in Cr-treated Hoagland nutrient solution.
CultivarsRoot LengthShoot HeightShoot DWRoot DWMeanRank
Zhe70-31.1541.0000.3370.3100.7001
Yueyin83-230.4230.2031.0001.0000.6572
Hongyin1351.0000.4320.4080.1030.4863
Zhe54-30.8080.6190.0000.3790.4524
Fuhong9920.5000.7510.2450.2410.4345
Kransdoy0.0000.4820.7350.4140.4086
VG0.2690.4820.6220.2410.4047
T190.5390.7870.2760.0000.4008
Zhe77-10.1150.0000.1330.2410.1229
Table
Table 2. Effects of Cr treatments on growth characteristics and Cr content in shoot and root of kenaf cultivars Zhe70-3 and Zhe77-1.
Table 2. Effects of Cr treatments on growth characteristics and Cr content in shoot and root of kenaf cultivars Zhe70-3 and Zhe77-1.
CultivarsTreatment
Cr (mM)		Growth CharacteristicCr Content (mg kg−1 DW)
Shoot Height (cm)Root Length (cm)Fresh Weight (g)Dry Weight (g)ShootRoot
Zhe70-3CK21.500 ± 1.637e17.133 ± 1.270d0.928 ± 0.080e0.067 ± 0.005cNDND
0.519.733 ± 0.473d15.933 ± 0.404d0.710 ± 0.101d0.061 ± 0.008c420 ± 0.453a7897 ± 0.766a
116.633 ± 0.208c13.167 ± 2.003c0.563 ± 0.067bc0.052 ± 0.002b3344 ± 1.260c10,467 ± 0.467b
1.515.167 ± 0.321b12.900 ± 0.700c0.503 ± 0.078ab0.045 ± 0.002a4874 ± 0.897d11,233 ± 0.645c
Zhe77-1CK19.133 ± 0.451d13.567 ± 0.808c0.847 ± 0.046e0.057 ± 0.002cNDND
0.517.000 ± 0.346c11.033 ± 0.551b0.648 ± 0.081cd0.050 ± 0.003b678 ± 0.178ab6134 ± 0.269a
116.033 ± 0.416bc8.467 ± 1.159a0.486 ± 0.038ab0.045 ± 0.005a2889 ± 2.865c10,345 ± 0.563b
1.512.700 ± 0.656a7.700 ± 0.458a0.433 ± 0.033a0.040 ± 0.002a4156 ± 0.278d11,789 ± 1.678c
Biomass and Cr contents of Zhe70-3 and Zhe77-1 under four different Cr stresses. All data show the means ± SD of three replicates. Values with different letters indicate significant differences at the P < 0.05 level between treatments. ND: not detect.
Table
Table 3. Effects of Cr treatments on MDA and H2O2 contents in shoot and root of kenaf cultivars Zhe70-3 and Zhe77-1.
Table 3. Effects of Cr treatments on MDA and H2O2 contents in shoot and root of kenaf cultivars Zhe70-3 and Zhe77-1.
CultivarsTreatmentMDA (mmol·g−1 FW)H2O2 (µmol·g−1 FW)
Cr (mM)ShootRootShootRoot
Zhe70-3CK0.623 ± 0.271a0.578 ± 0.042a0.912 ± 0.213a0.879 ± 0.092a
0.51.542 ± 0.330ab0.843 ± 0.359ab1.348 ± 0.379ab1.154 ± 0.313ab
12.377 ± 0.219b1.470 ± 0.650ab2.791 ± 0.147b2.532 ± 0.131bc
1.52.775 ± 0.204b2.656 ± 0.174c3.917 ± 0.219c3.214 ± 0.326c
Zhe77-1CK0.869 ± 0.102a0.746 ± 0.233a1.386 ± 0.132a0.945 ± 0.147a
0.51.781 ± 0.121ab1.418 ± 0.347ab1.731 ± 0.426ab1.246 ± 0.314ab
12.496 ± 0.253b2.356 ± 0.195c2.324 ± 0.202b1.958 ± 0.420b
1.53.464 ± 0.146c2.853 ± 0.169c3.905 ± 0.324c3.567 ± 0.589c
All data show the means ± SD of three replicates. Values with different letters indicate significant differences at the P < 0.05 level between treatments.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Niu, L.; Cao, R.; Kang, J.; Zhang, X.; Lv, J. Ascorbate-Glutathione Cycle and Ultrastructural Analyses of Two Kenaf Cultivars (Hibiscus cannabinus L.) under Chromium Stress. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018, 15, 1467. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15071467

AMA Style

Niu L, Cao R, Kang J, Zhang X, Lv J. Ascorbate-Glutathione Cycle and Ultrastructural Analyses of Two Kenaf Cultivars (Hibiscus cannabinus L.) under Chromium Stress. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2018; 15(7):1467. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15071467

Chicago/Turabian Style

Niu, Lianmei, Rang Cao, Jingquan Kang, Xu Zhang, and Jinyin Lv. 2018. "Ascorbate-Glutathione Cycle and Ultrastructural Analyses of Two Kenaf Cultivars (Hibiscus cannabinus L.) under Chromium Stress" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 15, no. 7: 1467. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15071467

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop