Next Article in Journal / Special Issue
Lost in Translation: Exploring microRNA Biogenesis and Messenger RNA Fate in Anoxia-Tolerant Turtles
Previous Article in Journal / Special Issue
Oxidative Stress and Its Role in Cd-Induced Epigenetic Modifications: Use of Antioxidants as a Possible Preventive Strategy
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Conquering Space with Crops That Produce Ample Oxygen and Antioxidants

by
Stephanie K. Polutchko
1,
William W. Adams III
1,
Christine M. Escobar
2,3 and
Barbara Demmig-Adams
1,*
1
Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO 80309, USA
2
Department of Aerospace Engineering Sciences, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO 80309, USA
3
Space Lab Technologies, LLC, Boulder, CO 80301, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Oxygen 2022, 2(2), 211-226; https://doi.org/10.3390/oxygen2020016
Submission received: 28 April 2022 / Revised: 31 May 2022 / Accepted: 2 June 2022 / Published: 6 June 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Feature Papers in Oxygen)

Abstract

:
Sustainable long-term space missions require regenerative life support from plants. Traditional crop plants lack some features desirable for use in space environments. The aquatic plant family Lemnaceae (duckweeds) has enormous potential as a space crop, featuring (i) fast growth, with very high rates of O2 production and CO2 sequestration, (ii) an exceptional nutritional quality (with respect to radiation-fighting antioxidants and high-quality protein), (iii) easy propagation and high productivity in small spaces, and (iv) resilience to the stresses (radiation, microgravity, and elevated CO2) of the human-inhabited space environment. These traits of Lemnaceae are placed into the context of their unique adaptations to the aquatic environment. Furthermore, an overview is provided of the challenges of galactic cosmic radiation to plant and human physiology and the mechanisms involved in oxidative injury and the prevention/mitigation of such effects by antioxidant micronutrients. A focus is placed on the carotenoid zeaxanthin accumulated by Lemnaceae in unusually high amounts and its role in counteracting system-wide inflammation, cognitive dysfunction, and other oxidative injuries in humans.

1. Introduction

1.1. Molecular Oxygen Plays Unique and Essential Roles for Life

Molecular oxygen (O2) is necessary for much of life on Earth to function. Most of the oxygen in the atmosphere has been produced over the last two billion years by photosynthetic organisms, which supported the evolution of multicellular organisms that depend on aerobic respiration [1,2]. This dependency applies to both heterotrophs and autotrophs, such as plants that can be killed when roots have diminished access to oxygen because of insufficient aerobic respiration in water-logged soils [3] (except for specialist plants with unique adaptations facilitating oxygen diffusion to the roots [4]).
For space travel and habitation, enough molecular oxygen must be transported or continuously generated for long missions to sustain a human crew. Currently, molecular oxygen is produced on the International Space Station through electrolysis or the splitting of water [5]. For long human-crewed space missions, plants can serve as a regenerative life support system that continuously produces O2 and removes CO2 [6,7] and provides additional essential services (highlighted below).

1.2. Reactive Oxygen Can Kill

While essential for much of life on earth, oxygen is a double-edged sword. The first mass species extinction event was likely caused by the rise in atmospheric O2 levels, deemed the Great Oxidation Event [8,9]. Today, aerobic organisms carefully maintain internal redox homeostasis, i.e., the balance between oxidants and antioxidants [10]. Notably, primary energy metabolism in the organellar powerhouses that interact with O2 (chloroplasts and mitochondria) continuously creates reactive oxygen species (ROS; [10,11]). ROS are essential in small doses, but excess ROS can cause a host of adverse effects (see below). The life-supporting quality of oxygen is thus inextricably linked to its potential dangers.
In small quantities, ROS act as universal regulators of master control genes that orchestrate growth, development, aging, and various metabolic defenses of humans, plants, and many microorganisms [12,13]. For example, ROS can stimulate the cell cycle as well as trigger programmed cell death [14,15], both of which can be enhanced in spaceflight environments [16] (for details, see the next section). One example of an ROS is superoxide (superoxide anion radical; O2●−), which various organisms actively produce to kill pathogens [17] and other unwanted cells. However, excess superoxide can cause cell damage unless redox homeostasis is maintained by keeping ROS in check with antioxidants. A lasting departure from redox homeostasis can cause continuous low-grade activation of the human immune system with system-wide inflammation and a host of resulting diseases, disorders, and dysfunctions (see below). In large quantities, ROS can be lethal. In viral diseases (such as HIV-AIDS and, evidently, COVID-19), snowballing production of ROS and other inflammation-promoting messengers (the cytokine storm) can lead to massive organ damage (i.e., “cellular suicide” rather than direct “virological murder”; [18]).
Superoxide can be detoxified by antioxidant enzymes like superoxide dismutase that converts two O2 to one uncharged O2 and one doubly reduced O22− corresponding to hydrogen peroxide (H2O2). H2O2 can, in turn, be converted to harmless water by enzymes like catalase [19] or ascorbate peroxidase with the cofactor ascorbate (vitamin C, an antioxidant metabolite) as the source of electrons [20]. While plants can produce all necessary antioxidant metabolites de novo, humans must consume many of these antioxidants with their diet to maintain internal redox homeostasis. Space crops with superior antioxidant levels are needed to protect the plant and the human consumer from radiation damage in space (see, e.g., [21]). For the future of space travel, astronaut diets will need to strike the right balance to prevent the negative effects of excess ROS without dampening the positive effects of small amounts of ROS.

2. The Challenges of Space Environments

A major challenge for human utilization of space is exposure to galactic cosmic radiation (GCR, consisting of heavy ions/high-density charged particles [16,22]) that generates dangerous amounts of ROS through radiolysis of water in all hydrated cells. This ROS can lead to DNA mutations, and GCR can also produce direct DNA breaks (Figure 1; [23]). The effects of GCR-induced ROS on gene regulation are complex and include induction of some protective (e.g., antioxidant) effects as well as negative snowballing effects that further exacerbate ROS production and DNA damage. For example, a feed-forward cycle in space environments involves ROS stimulation of the human ROS-producing enzyme NADPH oxidase [24,25] via genetic programs that normally potentiate superoxide production during a pathogen attack. Specifically, an initial wave of ROS production triggers consecutive waves of ROS production to activate and recruit other immune cells (as may be warranted under pathogen attack [15]). Excess ROS production and DNA damage can thus lead to signaling cascades that produce more and more ROS (Figure 1).

ROS and Chronic Inflammation in Astronauts

In humans, continuous exposure to excess ROS triggers immune-system dysfunction with chronic, non-resolving inflammation [26]. Astronauts return from space missions with elevated levels of inflammation markers and evidence of inflammation-related cognitive dysfunction [27], cellular aging [28], and other adverse conditions [29]. Humans must consume essential ROS-balancing antioxidant micronutrients in their diet to counter such oxidative stress. Identification of space crops that produce high levels of essential dietary antioxidants will thus be essential to oppose radiation damage and chronic inflammation in human-inhabited space environments.

3. The Multi-Hit Hypothesis: Interaction among Different Stresses in a Space Environment

This section addresses additional factors present in space environments that can exacerbate the effects of GCR in plants or humans. This phenomenon and associated inquiry have been described as the multi-hit hypothesis [30]. These additional stressors include microgravity and elevated CO2 in a cabin environment. Microgravity can interfere with DNA repair in humans [31] and exacerbate DNA damage, which leads to “genomic instability” [32]. For example, the end portions of chromosomes (telomeres) that are determinants of cellular aging and human lifespan increase in average length in space environments and then rearrange within 48 h upon astronauts returning to earth, thereby revealing a much shorter average telomere length post-space exposure [33,34]. This behavior is like the increase of average telomere length observed on Earth under exposure to ionizing radiation [23]. Telomere length has been found to respond directly to ROS level [16].
Inhibition of DNA repair by microgravity in the presence of GCR can, furthermore, trigger programmed cell death [35] and inflammatory responses [36]. As shown in Figure 1, both inhibitory and stimulatory effects of microgravity on DNA repair are principally possible. For example, an unusual radiation-resistant bacterium, Deinococcus radiodurans, exhibited an increase in DNA repair and other defenses in the presence of microgravity [37,38]. More studies in spaceflight environments are needed to understand the synergistic effects of radiation and microgravity in humans [39].

3.1. Specific Plant Responses

In land plants, microgravity can interfere with plant responses to radiation by inhibiting directional signal translocation between shoots and roots [40]. More research is needed into the effect of microgravity in space environments as different species can respond in different ways [41]. Elevated CO2 in a confined environment is also a concern. Plants growing under elevated atmospheric CO2 levels can produce excessive levels of ROS (Figure 2), which can lead to an imbalance in redox homeostasis [42]. Specifically, elevated CO2 can enhance ROS production via carbohydrate backup as photosynthesis utilizes the greater level of available CO2 to produce more sugars and starch. The resulting backup of electrons in photosynthetic electron transport leads to the transfer of electrons and/or excitation to oxygen, forming ROS [42]. Land plants tend to respond to prolonged exposure to elevated CO2 with photosynthetic downregulation and growth inhibition, and accelerated senescence in some but not all species (Figure 2; [42]). In particular, elevated CO2 can exacerbate growth penalties imposed by other environmental factors [43,44,45,46]. In other words, ROS production is additively increased by various environmental stressors that offset the source-sink balance between carbohydrate production in leaves (sugar source) relative to carbohydrate consumption in all the plant’s sugar sinks [42].
Various additional environmental conditions can further unbalance the plant source-sink ratio and enhance ROS production [47,48]. For example, excess light supply adds to carbohydrate production and unfavorable nutrients/temperatures (Figure 2) slow growth and the consumption of carbohydrates in plant sinks [49]. Whereas increased ROS production generally triggers upregulation of ROS-detoxifying processes (see above), chlorophyll-associated carotenoids exhibit a different response. One effect of excess ROS under source-sink imbalance is downregulation of photosynthesis (as the sugar source) via repression of photosynthetic proteins, including chlorophyll-binding proteins [50]. In plants grown under elevated CO2 levels, lower chlorophyll levels were, furthermore, accompanied by lower levels of the carotenoids that protect chlorophyll [51]. A lowering of plant antioxidant metabolite content in space environments with elevated CO2 levels in the habitable enclosure would be problematic. However, an intriguing possibility is that the combination of elevated CO2 (lowering antioxidant production) and GCR (that may increase antioxidant levels) could potentially offset each other to some extent in plants (that are able to upregulate antioxidant metabolites).

3.2. Human Physiology

To mitigate the risks associated with spaceflight, it is important to consider multiple lifestyle factors for humans [52]. Diet, physical activity, and psychological stress (Figure 2) all provide inputs into cellular redox homeostasis and thus affect health outcomes [53,54] (see [55] for specific effects on telomere length). For example, the combination of physical inactivity and chronic psychological stress can constitute additional “hits” in a space environment. Specifically, chronic stress fatigues the immune-suppressive stress response, resulting in chronic (non-resolving) inflammation associated with excess ROS production [56]. In addition, whereas physical activity triggers the synthesis of endogenous antioxidant enzymes to combat ROS production during exercise, physical inactivity fails to induce antioxidant enzymes [57] and thus to counter ROS production (Figure 2).
In addition to high levels of radiation and microgravity, the elevated levels of CO2 typical of a spacecraft cabin environment also have the potential to induce adverse physiological changes in humans, including vascular leakage, edema, and interference with the draining of cerebrospinal fluid [30,58,59].

4. Redox-Based Orchestration of Growth, Development, and Defenses

4.1. Early-Warning Systems for Oxidative Stress

A hallmark of metabolically active cells is to allow for moderate amounts of ROS to play fundamental roles in cellular metabolism and other biological processes [60,61] while avoiding unwanted effects of excess ROS. To support this redox homeostasis, macromolecules—particularly sensitive to oxidation—serve as sentinels for rising internal ROS production. For example, oxidation products of highly oxidation-prone polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) of membrane lipids serve as gene regulators [62,63]. These regulators target antioxidant production and other protective responses [64,65] as well as multiple other processes that are redox-modulated (see above). In humans, immunostimulatory regulators are mainly derived from omega-6 PUFAs and inflammation-resolving regulators mainly from omega-3 PUFAs [66]. In addition, easily oxidized thiol-containing proteins are also linked to redox-based gene-regulation [67,68,69].

4.2. Gene Regulation by Derivatives of Lipid Peroxidation and the Need for Dietary Antioxidant Metabolites

Just like ROS and their various products, antioxidant systems are potent modulators of redox-modulated signaling networks and genes [70]. Dietary membrane-embedded antioxidants keep the formation of PUFA-derived regulators in check and thus control and resolve acute inflammation in humans [71]. Furthermore, a balanced dietary ratio of omega-3 to omega-6 fatty acids is critical to support immunity and avoid non-resolving inflammation.
The human brain is particularly susceptible to non-resolving inflammation due to its large complement of biological membranes, with a high proportion of PUFAs and a high level of oxygenation that increases the propensity for PUFA oxidation [72,73,74]. Resulting non-resolving neuroinflammation leads to low mental function in otherwise healthy individuals as well as to mental and learning disorders and neurodegenerative diseases [54,75]. Antioxidation is needed to prevent neuroinflammation [54,76].
Whereas a whole suite of diet-derived antioxidant metabolites can operate in aqueous environments, only a few are able to dissolve in biological membranes. These latter lipophilic antioxidant metabolites include the antioxidant vitamin E (tocopherol) and carotenoids [54,77,78]. The structure of these molecules determines their orientation in the membrane, and two carotenoids can integrate into biological membranes in a way that can provide stabilization [79] and oppose PUFA oxidation [54,80,81]. These two are the xanthophyll (oxygen-containing) carotenoids zeaxanthin and lutein [54,80] (see also [82]).
Zeaxanthin is the more potent antioxidant of the two [83], exhibiting a particularly stabilizing orientation in biological membranes [84] (see also [26] for a recent review). Zeaxanthin and/or lutein can reduce neuroinflammation [54,85,86]. Specifically, supplementation with zeaxanthin and lutein lowered markers of inflammation [87,88] (see also [89,90]) and enhanced cognitive function [54,91,92,93,94] (see also [95,96,97]).
The dietary supply of zeaxanthin and lutein is thus highly relevant for humans living and working in space environments. Healthy astronauts exposed to elevated levels of GCR for even a few weeks developed significant cognitive dysfunction, even when signs of accelerated cellular aging and increased chronic disease were mild. Commercial airline pilots are also at an elevated risk of exposure to GCR; pilots who consumed greater levels of zeaxanthin exhibited significantly reduced levels of inflammation and decreased cumulative DNA damage [98]. Future research should test the attractive hypothesis that astronauts will benefit from zeaxanthin and/or lutein supplementation in conjunction with (i) additional dietary antioxidant metabolites capable of recycling oxidized carotenoids (see below) and (ii) sufficient intake of omega-3 PUFAs such as docosahexaenoic acid (DHA). Supplementation with a combination of xanthophylls and DHA (i) enhanced memory as well as the rate and efficiency of learning [96] and (ii) resulted in positive outcomes in patients with Alzheimer’s disease [97].

4.3. Zeaxanthin and Lutein Protect Photosynthesis

Unlike humans, plants synthesize zeaxanthin and lutein de novo for specific roles in the prevention of radiation damage. Whereas lutein is constitutively present in leafy crops, zeaxanthin is formed only under bright light and quickly removed again when light levels drop in these photosynthetic systems [99]. Only leafy greens harvested and eaten shortly after exposure to bright light thus deliver significant levels of zeaxanthin. In contrast, leafy green produce purchased at a grocery store provides lutein but little to no zeaxanthin. Moreover, typical edible crops are fast-growing annual plants that accumulate much less zeaxanthin than the inedible leaves of slow-growing evergreens [99] (see next paragraph for details). Food other than leaves can provide high levels of zeaxanthin and lutein on earth, including orange peppers, corn, and eggs (Figure 3; [100,101,102,103]). Zeaxanthin was named after the yellow color of an ear of corn (genus Zea, with “xanthos” the Greek word for golden/yellow). While being unable to synthesize carotenoids de novo, most animals do accumulate carotenoids when they have access to carotenoid-containing food [104]. For example, chickens raised with alfalfa-based feed, corn, or other sources of zeaxanthin and lutein transfer considerable amounts of these carotenoids into their eggs [105,106]. However, egg production is not feasible on a spaceship, and the growth of peppers or ears of corn is much less volume-efficient than a crop like duckweed that is 100% edible.
The above-mentioned general tradeoff between fast growth and accumulation of high levels of zeaxanthin in photosynthetic plant organs occurs because zeaxanthin diverts light away from photochemical pathways and into alternative nonphotochemical pathways [99]. Such removal of absorbed light energy is desirable only when more light is absorbed than can be utilized in photosynthesis. Under exposure to full sunlight, fast-growing crops with high maximal photosynthesis rates experience much less excess absorbed light than slow-growing evergreens with low maximal photosynthesis rates. Consequently, leaves of slow-growing plants accumulate more zeaxanthin than those of fast-growing plants [99]. Due to this inverse relationship between photosynthesis/growth rate and zeaxanthin accumulation, fast-growing, rapidly photosynthesizing crops produce high oxygen levels and consume large quantities of CO2 but accumulate little zeaxanthin.
On the other hand, slow-growing plants produce less oxygen, consume less CO2, and accumulate more zeaxanthin [99]. Bacteria growing on a radioactive site in Japan had an exceptionally high zeaxanthin content suggesting an additional role of zeaxanthin in protection against ionizing radiation [107]. In contrast to zeaxanthin, lutein is a constitutive component of the photosynthetic apparatus in plants growing naturally across a wide range of light environments, from deep shade to full sunlight [108] (see also [99]).
To extend the lifetime of xanthophylls in membranes, their oxidation products must be recycled (by re-reduction) to prevent them from becoming harmful oxidants themselves (Figure 4; [109,110]). The recycling of zeaxanthin radicals by membrane-soluble vitamin E and/or water-soluble vitamin C (and other water-soluble antioxidants), neither of which can be synthesized by humans, has been studied extensively in lipid bilayers [78]. It is thus desirable to provide a balanced mix of antioxidant metabolites in the human diet, preferably through the consumption of whole foods rich in essential micronutrients [111], because high-dose antioxidant supplementation can have negative effects [112]. Specifically, excess dietary consumption of antioxidants from high-dose supplements can lower ROS levels to the extent that essential ROS signals fail to be produced and, e.g., the synthesis of endogenous antioxidant enzymes is suppressed [57]. Due to the benefits of whole food as well as the finite lifetime of vitamin supplements, nutritious crops will be critical to extended space missions.

5. The Case for Lemnaceae as Space Crops

5.1. An Unusual Combination of Multiple Attractive Traits

Successful long-term space missions will likely require regenerative life-support from plants that provide oxygen, recycle waste and CO2, and produce high-quality food, including micronutrients that mitigate radiation damage (Figure 4). In addition, a space crop must be resilient under the stresses of the space environment. The first step in identifying suitable food crops and cultivation conditions for long-duration missions is understanding the effect of the space environment on crop physiology, especially growth, propagation, and nutritional quality.
Traditional model plants lack some features desirable for space crops. The enormous potential of the aquatic plant family Lemnaceae (duckweeds) as both model species (for, e.g., radiobiology and genomic studies) and edible space crops has been recognized since the beginning of the space program (Figure 5). Lemnaceae were the very first plants studied for photosynthesis in space, grew well under these conditions [113], and have been recommended as a good candidate for bioregenerative life support systems [114,115,116,117]. Additional flight experiments, including NASA STS-4 Getaway Special (1982), Russian satellite Bion 8 (1987), Russian satellite Bion 10 (1992), NASA STS-60 Getaway Special (1994), and STS-67 (1995), indicated the tolerance of Lemnaceae to GCR and microgravity of space.
Lemnaceae are consumed around the globe and hailed as a new superfood (e.g., [118]). Lemnaceae have multiple features that make them particularly attractive candidates for space crops (Figure 5). In addition to fast growth, which entails very high rates of O2 production and CO2 sequestration, Lemnaceae have an exceptional nutritional quality (especially radiation-fighting antioxidants and high-quality protein with all essential amino acids for humans; see next section for further details), is highly volume-efficient (with particularly small size and the complete or near-complete absence of non-photosynthetic parts), and easy to propagate, allowing for rapid multi-generational studies [119]. Additionally, Lemnaceae have a higher edible protein content than any known terrestrial plant as they accumulate storage protein throughout the whole plant.

5.2. Can the Aquatic Lifestyle Be Seen as a Pre-Adaptation for Spaceflight Environments

The attractive traits of Lemnaceae for spaceflight environments listed in Figure 5 can be traced back to apparent selective pressures acting on plants in aquatic environments [46]. In other words, evolution may have led to a group of plants with traits that can be viewed as pre-adaptations for spaceflight environments.
To design a plant suitable as a regenerative life support system for a space environment (Figure 4), one would want the plant to consist mainly, or only, of leaves—that produce O2 and take in CO2—with little to no tissue allocated to stems, roots, or any other parts that consume O2 and release CO2. Aquatic plants like the Lemnaceae naturally consist mostly or entirely of photosynthetic tissue. Duckweed’s almost total (or total in some species) absence of non-photosynthetic tissue makes it such that all photosynthetically produced sugar can be reinvested in more photosynthetic tissue that supports more O2 production and sequesters more CO2. By re-investing most, or all, photosynthetically produced sugars into additional photosynthetic tissue, aquatic plants can also sustain much higher growth rates than land plants that must invest substantial resources in non-photosynthetic tissues (see Figure 5; [51]).
Land plants must invest resources into substantial structures to hold themselves in place and display their photosynthetic organs for efficient light capture, mine for water and nutrients in the soil, and transport the latter from roots to shoots. Their upright shoots and downward-growing roots also make land plants susceptible to disruption of the necessary directional communication between these organs by microgravity [41,120]. In contrast, aquatic plants consisting of fronds with minimal or no roots, stems, and branches are apparently impervious to the lack of gravity; in fact, Lemnaceae exhibited growth stimulation rather than inhibition under microgravity (Figure 5; [115]). Moreover, unlike most land plants, Lemnaceae can be propagated indefinitely without requiring the processes, such as flowering, pollination, seed development, or seed germination, which can be susceptible to disruption by microgravity (see Figure 5; [40,121]).
Each green leaf-like structure of Lemnaceae is, in fact, a plant that divides and forms clonal colonies vegetatively. When conditions are not conducive to growth, Lemnaceae produce vegetative storage forms that can quickly resume growth when conditions permit [119]. Due to their diminutive size and aquatic nature, Lemnaceae can be grown on thin films of water that adhere to shallow growth trays, making them independent of gravity and allowing stacking of multiple layers for an exceptionally high volumetric yield (Figure 5; [122]).
A good space crop should also recycle human nitrogenous waste (Figure 5). Unlike land plants that typically prefer to take up nitrogen from the soil as nitrate, aquatic plants have an exceptional genetic capacity to take up ammonium from animal waste [123], efficiently convert it to amino acids [124,125], and accumulate large amounts of protein. This protein is accumulated throughout the whole plant (rather than mainly in seeds like land plants), which helps avoid the ammonium toxicity seen in most land plants [126] (see also below). The protein accumulated in Lemnaceae contains all essential amino acids needed by humans [127]. The combination of duckweed’s small size and high capacity to store vegetative protein throughout the plant results in 20 times greater edible protein production per plant-cultivating area compared to soybean [128].
A combination of several classes of essential antioxidant micronutrients that act in tandem to protect the human consumer against GCR-induced ROS production and its multiple adverse effects (Figure 1; for more details, see next section) is also desirable in a space crop. These antioxidants are needed in the plant to remove excess ROS under the influence of GCR (Figure 5). Such antioxidant protection will likely be instrumental in allowing space crops to render their life-supporting services.

5.3. Exceptional Antioxidant Content

Duckweeds are an exception to the general trend that fast-growing plants do not accumulate large amounts of zeaxanthin in their leaves. Two Lemna species showed similarly high levels of zeaxanthin accumulation as sun-grown slow-growing land plants when the duckweeds were grown either under full natural sunlight or in continuous low light in growth chambers [129,130]. Moreover, Lemna exhibited uniquely high levels of zeaxanthin when grown under continuous high light in a growth chamber [129,130], where zeaxanthin levels reached 0.4 mg/g plant dry weight (based on [129]), which corresponds to 3.4 mg/100 g plant fresh weight (assuming 8.5% dry weight; [127]). Therewith, duckweed’s zeaxanthin levels fall within the range reported for orange peppers as a superb zeaxanthin source. Typical values for orange pepper range from 1.4 mg/100 g fresh weight [131] and 1.7 mg/100 g fresh weight [132] to 6.2 mg/100 g fresh weight [133] (see also [134,135]).
Duckweed is thus the only known plant that accumulates high levels of zeaxanthin in its photosynthetic organs while also growing very rapidly [51]. Duckweed may also be unique among dietary zeaxanthin sources in providing a particularly well-rounded cocktail of dietary factors that interact synergistically with zeaxanthin in opposing inflammation. Duckweed also has a high content of vitamin E [130,136] and phenolic antioxidants [137,138]. In addition, duckweed has a high ratio of inflammation-resolving omega-3 PUFAs to immunostimulatory omega-6 PUFAs (Figure 5; [128]).
Overall, duckweed has a unique pigment composition with an emphasis on carotenoids that prevent radiation damage [129,130]. The architecture of Lemnaceae is consistent with the exceptionally high antioxidant production in this group of plants [129,130]. Specifically, the relatively thin fronds and absence of a fixed tiered canopy maximize light receipt as well as exposure to excess light in high-light environments. The high antioxidant levels support the plant’s ability to avoid radiation damage and could thus provide its life-sustaining services to a crew in space environments. The essential human antioxidant metabolites accumulated by duckweed counter chronic inflammation and associated mental dysfunction as well as other adverse health outcomes experienced by astronauts.

5.4. Performance under Elevated CO2

Growth under the elevated CO2 levels typical of a space cabin environment was unimpaired in Lemnaceae even under continuous very high light levels that lead to carbohydrate build-up [51]. In contrast, the other candidates of leafy vegetable species considered for use on the International Space Station, such as Chinese cabbage (Brassica rapa cv. Tokyo Bekana), exhibited decreases in growth, leaf number and leaf area, and shoot dry biomass under elevated CO2 concentrations [139]. The robustness of Lemnaceae may be related to (i) a relaxation of the controls on growth rate acting in land plants [140] and (ii) preferential use of ammonium over nitrate. It is the use of nitrate as a nitrogen source that can enhance ROS production under elevated CO2 [47]. The combination of high nitrate levels and elevated CO2 can trigger premature senescence in land plants [43,45,141]. In terms of environmental controls on growth, most land plants quickly curb growth when water or nutrients begin to become limiting, which is accompanied by carbohydrate build-up that causes feedback downregulation of photosynthesis (see above) and speeds up the completion of the plant life cycle [142]. In contrast, Lemnaceae floating on water and with large nitrogen stores (in the form of storage protein) exhibited unabated growth across a wide range of environmental conditions irrespective of carbohydrate build-up under earth-ambient CO2 levels [129,130].
On the other hand, exposure to elevated CO2 did cause some of the same regulatory adjustments in the photosynthetic apparatus in Lemna as commonly seen in C3 land plants, with a lowered content of protein and chlorophyll [129,130]. Furthermore, the lower chlorophyll level was associated with lower levels of the antioxidants that protect chloroplasts from radiation damage [51]. In theory, elevated CO2 could thus make plants, including Lemnaceae, more vulnerable to damaging effects by GCR because of lowered plant antioxidant levels. However, there is an intriguing possibility that GCR may offer some protection against the loss of nutritional quality under elevated CO2, especially for zeaxanthin. The enzyme zeaxanthin epoxidase (ZEP) removes zeaxanthin when plants exposed to high light are returned to low light levels and operates concurrently with the zeaxanthin-forming enzyme violaxanthin de-epoxidase [143,144] in high light. There are several reports that ZEP is downregulated under conditions of oxidative stress [145,146,147]. Such inhibition of zeaxanthin removal can be expected to enhance zeaxanthin levels across a range of light levels.

6. Conclusions

Here we identify the importance as well as the dangers of oxygen and the formation of ROS. Organisms need to maintain a delicate balance between antioxidants and oxidants to support cellular redox homeostasis and cell signaling in support of growth, development, and stress protection. Space environments expose plants and astronauts to additional stresses. Identification of plant species with superior rates of production of oxygen and essential human micronutrients as well as the removal of CO2 and recycling of human waste, are essential to the success of future long-term space missions (Figure 4). Plants of the family Lemnaceae have multiple traits that may help minimize the negative impacts of the combination of stressors encountered in space environments. Unlike land plants, Lemnaceae showed a stimulation, rather than inhibition, of growth under microgravity and exhibited relatively low sensitivity to elevated CO2. Lemnaceae’s exceptional antioxidant content may also reduce its sensitivity to GCR. These attractive genetic traits of Lemnaceae for space environments are features of the plants adapted to the unique aquatic environment.

Author Contributions

B.D.-A. conceptualized the manuscript and designed the figures; S.K.P. created the figures; B.D.-A., S.K.P. and W.W.A.III prepared the first draft of the manuscript; C.M.E. edited the manuscript. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Acknowledgments

This research was made possible by support from the University of Colorado. We would like to thank Adam Escobar and Jared Stewart for their valuable discussions.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Berkner, L.V.; Marshall, L.C. On the Origin and Rise of Oxygen Concentration in the Earth’s Atmosphere. J. Atmos. Sci. 1965, 22, 225–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  2. Nursall, J.R. Oxygen as a Prerequisite to the Origin of the Metazoa. Nature 1959, 183, 1170–1172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Loreti, E.; Perata, P. The Many Facets of Hypoxia in Plants. Plants 2020, 9, 745. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Srikanth, S.; Lum, S.K.Y.; Chen, Z. Mangrove Root: Adaptations and Ecological Importance. Trees 2016, 30, 451–465. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Tobias, B.; Garr, J.; Erne, M. International Space Station Water Balance Operations. In Proceedings of the 41st International Conference on Environmental Systems, Portland, OR, USA, 17–21 July 2011; p. 5150. [Google Scholar]
  6. Ferl, R.; Wheeler, R.; Levine, H.G.; Paul, A.-L. Plants in Space. Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 2002, 5, 258–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Fu, Y.; Li, L.; Xie, B.; Dong, C.; Wang, M.; Jia, B.; Shao, L.; Dong, Y.; Deng, S.; Liu, H. How to Establish a Bioregenerative Life Support System for Long-Term Crewed Missions to the Moon or Mars. Astrobiology 2016, 16, 925–936. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Ligrone, R. The Great Oxygenation Event. In Biological Innovations that Built the World; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 129–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Lyons, T.W.; Reinhard, C.T.; Planavsky, N.J. The Rise of Oxygen in Earth’s Early Ocean and Atmosphere. Nature 2014, 506, 307–315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. Brigelius-Flohé, R. Commentary: Oxidative Stress Reconsidered. Genes Nutr. 2009, 4, 161–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  11. Edreva, A. Generation and Scavenging of Reactive Oxygen Species in Chloroplasts: A Submolecular Approach. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2005, 106, 119–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Alfadda, A.A.; Sallam, R.M. Reactive Oxygen Species in Health and Disease. J. Biomed. Biotechnol. 2012, 2012, 936486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Fichman, Y.; Mittler, R. Rapid Systemic Signaling during Abiotic and Biotic Stresses: Is the ROS Wave Master of All Trades? Plant J. 2020, 102, 887–896. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  14. Cai, Q.; Zhao, M.; Liu, X.; Wang, X.; Nie, Y.; Li, P.; Liu, T.; Ge, R.; Han, F. Reduced Expression of Citrate Synthase Leads to Excessive Superoxide Formation and Cell Apoptosis. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2017, 485, 388–394. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Forrester, S.J.; Kikuchi, D.S.; Hernandes, M.S.; Xu, Q.; Griendling, K.K. Reactive Oxygen Species in Metabolic and Inflammatory Signaling. Circ. Res. 2018, 122, 877–902. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Gómez, X.; Sanon, S.; Zambrano, K.; Asquel, S.; Bassantes, M.; Morales, J.E.; Otáñez, G.; Pomaquero, C.; Villarroel, S.; Zurita, A.; et al. Key Points for the Development of Antioxidant Cocktails to Prevent Cellular Stress and Damage Caused by Reactive Oxygen Species (ROS) during Manned Space Missions. npj Microgravity 2021, 7, 35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Phan, Q.T.; Sipka, T.; Gonzalez, C.; Levraud, J.-P.; Lutfalla, G.; Nguyen-Chi, M. Neutrophils Use Superoxide to Control Bacterial Infection at a Distance. PLoS Pathog. 2018, 14, e1007157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Doitsh, G.; Greene, W.C. Dissecting How CD4 T Cells Are Lost during HIV Infection. Cell Host Microbe 2016, 19, 280–291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  19. Che, M.; Wang, R.; Li, X.; Wang, H.-Y.; Zheng, X.S. Expanding Roles of Superoxide Dismutases in Cell Regulation and Cancer. Drug Discov. Today 2016, 21, 143–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  20. Asada, K. Ascorbate Peroxidase–a Hydrogen Peroxide-scavenging Enzyme in Plants. Physiol. Plant. 1992, 85, 235–241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Zhang, Y.; Richards, J.T.; Feiveson, A.H.; Richards, S.E.; Neelam, S.; Dreschel, T.W.; Plante, I.; Hada, M.; Wu, H.; Massa, G.D. Response of Arabidopsis thaliana and Mizuna Mustard Seeds to Simulated Space Radiation Exposures. Life 2022, 12, 144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Datta, K.; Suman, S.; Kallakury, B.V.S.; Fornace, A.J. Exposure to Heavy Ion Radiation Induces Persistent Oxidative Stress in Mouse Intestine. PLoS ONE 2012, 7, e42224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Arena, C.; De Micco, V.; Macaeva, E.; Quintens, R. Space Radiation Effects on Plant and Mammalian Cells. Acta Astronaut. 2014, 104, 419–431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Pazhanisamy, S.K.; Li, H.; Wang, Y.; Batinic-Haberle, I.; Zhou, D. NADPH Oxidase Inhibition Attenuates Total Body Irradiation-Induced Haematopoietic Genomic Instability. Mutagenesis 2011, 26, 431–435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  25. Wang, M.; Zhang, J.; Walker, S.J.; Dworakowski, R.; Lakatta, E.G.; Shah, A.M. Involvement of NADPH Oxidase in Age-Associated Cardiac Remodeling. J. Mol. Cell. Cardiol. 2010, 48, 765–772. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  26. Demmig-Adams, B.; López-Pozo, M.; Stewart, J.J.; Adams, W.W., III. Zeaxanthin and Lutein: Photoprotectors, Anti-Inflammatories, and Brain Food. Molecules 2020, 25, 3607. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Parihar, V.K.; Allen, B.D.; Caressi, C.; Kwok, S.; Chu, E.; Tran, K.K.; Chmielewski, N.N.; Giedzinski, E.; Acharya, M.M.; Britten, R.A.; et al. Cosmic Radiation Exposure and Persistent Cognitive Dysfunction. Sci. Rep. 2016, 6, 34774. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Giovanetti, A.; Tortolici, F.; Rufini, S. Why Do the Cosmic Rays Induce Aging? Front. Physiol. 2020, 11, 955. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Sridharan, D.M.; Asaithamby, A.; Bailey, S.M.; Costes, S.V.; Doetsch, P.W.; Dynan, W.S.; Kronenberg, A.; Rithidech, K.N.; Saha, J.; Snijders, A.M.; et al. Understanding Cancer Development Processes after HZE-Particle Exposure: Roles of ROS, DNA Damage Repair and Inflammation. Radiat. Res. 2015, 183, 1–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Smith, S.M.; Zwart, S.R. Spaceflight-Related Ocular Changes: The Potential Role of Genetics, and the Potential of B Vitamins as a Countermeasure. Curr. Opin. Clin. Nutr. Metab. Care 2018, 21, 481–488. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Yatagai, F.; Honma, M.; Dohmae, N.; Ishioka, N. Biological Effects of Space Environmental Factors: A Possible Interaction between Space Radiation and Microgravity. Life Sci. Space Res. 2019, 20, 113–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Ikeda, H.; Muratani, M.; Hidema, J.; Hada, M.; Fujiwara, K.; Souda, H.; Yoshida, Y.; Takahashi, A. Expression Profile of Cell Cycle-Related Genes in Human Fibroblasts Exposed Simultaneously to Radiation and Simulated Microgravity. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2019, 20, 4791. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  33. Bailey, S.M.; Luxton, J.J.; McKenna, M.J.; Taylor, L.E.; George, K.A.; Jhavar, S.G.; Swanson, G.P. Ad Astra—Telomeres in Space! Int. J. Radiat. Biol. 2022, 98, 395–403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Luxton, J.J.; Bailey, S.M. Twins, Telomeres, and Aging—In Space! Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 2021, 147, 7S–14S. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Tan, S.; Pei, W.; Huang, H.; Zhou, G.; Hu, W. Additive Effects of Simulated Microgravity and Ionizing Radiation in Cell Death, Induction of ROS and Expression of RAC2 in Human Bronchial Epithelial Cells. npj Microgravity 2020, 6, 34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Fisher, R.; Baselet, B.; Vermeesen, R.; Moreels, M.; Baatout, S.; Rahiman, F.; Miles, X.; Nair, S.; du Plessis, P.; Engelbrecht, M.; et al. Immunological Changes During Space Travel: A Ground-Based Evaluation of the Impact of Neutron Dose Rate on Plasma Cytokine Levels in Human Whole Blood Cultures. Front. Phys. 2020, 8, 568124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Kobayashi, Y.; Narumi, I.; Satoh, K.; Funayama, T.; Kikuchi, M.; Kitayama, S.; Watanabe, H. Radiation Response Mechanisms of the Extremely Radioresistant Bacterium Deinococcus radiodurans. Biol. Sci. Space 2004, 18, 134–135. [Google Scholar]
  38. Moors, K.A.; Ott, E.; Weckwerth, W.; Milojevic, T. Proteomic Response of Deinococcus radiodurans to Short-Term Real Microgravity during Parabolic Flight Reveals Altered Abundance of Proteins Involved in Stress Response and Cell Envelope Functions. Life 2021, 12, 23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Barravecchia, I.; De Cesari, C.; Forcato, M.; Scebba, F.; Pyankova, O.V.; Bridger, J.M.; Foster, H.A.; Signore, G.; Borghini, A.; Andreassi, M. Microgravity and Space Radiation Inhibit Autophagy in Human Capillary Endothelial Cells, through Either Opposite or Synergistic Effects on Specific Molecular Pathways. Cell. Mol. Life Sci. 2022, 79, 28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Wang, T.; Sun, Q.; Xu, W.; Li, F.; Li, H.; Lu, J.; Wu, L.; Wu, Y.; Liu, M.; Bian, P. Modulation of Modeled Microgravity on Radiation-Induced Bystander Effects in Arabidopsis thaliana. Mutat. Res. 2015, 773, 27–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Kordyum, E.L. Biology of Plant Cells in Microgravity and under Clinostating. Int. Rev. Cytol. 1997, 171, 1–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Demmig-Adams, B.; Polutchko, S.K.; Zenir, M.C.; Fourounjian, P.; Stewart, J.J.; López-Pozo, M.; Adams, W.W., III. Intersections: Photosynthesis, Abiotic Stress, and the Plant Microbiome. Photosynthetica 2022, 60, 59–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Agüera, E.; De la Haba, P. Leaf Senescence in Response to Elevated Atmospheric CO2 Concentration and Low Nitrogen Supply. Biol. Plant. 2018, 62, 401–408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Tausz-Posch, S.; Tausz, M.; Bourgault, M. Elevated [CO2] Effects on Crops: Advances in Understanding Acclimation, Nitrogen Dynamics and Interactions with Drought and Other Organisms. Plant Biol. 2020, 22, 38–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Adavi, S.B.; Sathee, L. Elevated CO2 Alters Tissue Balance of Nitrogen Metabolism and Downregulates Nitrogen Assimilation and Signalling Gene Expression in Wheat Seedlings Receiving High Nitrate Supply. Protoplasma 2021, 258, 219–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Adavi, S.B.; Sathee, L. Elevated CO2 Differentially Regulates Root Nitrate Transporter Kinetics in a Genotype and Nitrate Dose-Dependent Manner. Plant Sci. 2021, 305, 110807. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Foyer, C.H.; Noctor, G. Redox Regulation in Photosynthetic Organisms: Signaling, Acclimation, and Practical Implications. Antioxid. Redox Signal. 2009, 11, 861–905. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Paul, M.J.; Foyer, C.H. Sink Regulation of Photosynthesis. J. Exp. Bot. 2001, 52, 1383–1400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Adams, W.W., III; Stewart, J.J.; Demmig-Adams, B. Photosynthetic Modulation in Response to Plant Activity and Environment. In The Leaf: A Platform for Performing Photosynthesis, Advances in Photosynthesis and Respiration; Adams, W.W., III, Terashima, I., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; Volume 44, pp. 493–563. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Adams, W.W., III; Muller, O.; Cohu, C.M.; Demmig-Adams, B. May Photoinhibition Be a Consequence, Rather than a Cause, of Limited Plant Productivity? Photosynth. Res. 2013, 117, 31–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Demmig-Adams, B.; López-Pozo, M.; Polutchko, S.K.; Fourounjian, P.; Stewart, J.J.; Zenir, M.C.; Adams, W.W., III. Growth and Nutritional Quality of Lemnaceae Viewed Comparatively in an Ecological and Evolutionary Context. Plants 2022, 11, 145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Furman, D.; Campisi, J.; Verdin, E.; Carrera-Bastos, P.; Targ, S.; Franceschi, C.; Ferrucci, L.; Gilroy, D.W.; Fasano, A.; Miller, G.W. Chronic Inflammation in the Etiology of Disease across the Life Span. Nat. Med. 2019, 25, 1822–1832. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Phillips, C. Lifestyle Modulators of Neuroplasticity: How Physical Activity, Mental Engagement, and Diet Promote Cognitive Health during Aging. Neural Plast. 2017, 2017, 3589271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Polutchko, S.K.; Glime, G.N.; Demmig-Adams, B. Synergistic Action of Membrane-Bound and Water-Soluble Antioxidants in Neuroprotection. Molecules 2021, 26, 5385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Qiao, S.; Jiang, Y.; Li, X. The Impact of Health Promotion Interventions on Telomere Length: A Systematic Review. Am. J. Health Promot. 2020, 34, 633–647. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. Tian, R.; Hou, G.; Li, D.; Yuan, T.-F. A Possible Change Process of Inflammatory Cytokines in the Prolonged Chronic Stress and Its Ultimate Implications for Health. Sci. World J. 2014, 2014, 780616. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Adams, R.B.; Egbo, K.N.; Demmig-Adams, B. High-Dose Vitamin C Supplements Diminish the Benefits of Exercise in Athletic Training and Disease Prevention. Nutr. Food Sci. 2014, 44, 95–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. McGregor, H.R.; Lee, J.K.; Mulder, E.R.; De Dios, Y.E.; Beltran, N.E.; Kofman, I.S.; Bloomberg, J.J.; Mulavara, A.P.; Seidler, R.D. Brain Connectivity and Behavioral Changes in a Spaceflight Analog Environment with Elevated CO2. NeuroImage 2021, 225, 117450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Zwart, S.R.; Gibson, C.R.; Gregory, J.F.; Mader, T.H.; Stover, P.J.; Zeisel, S.H.; Smith, S.M. Astronaut Ophthalmic Syndrome. FASEB J. 2017, 31, 3746–3756. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  60. Jackson, M.J. Free Radicals Generated by Contracting Muscle: By-Products of Metabolism or Key Regulators of Muscle Function? Free Radic. Biol. Med. 2008, 44, 132–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  61. Mittler, R. ROS Are Good. Trends Plant Sci. 2017, 22, 11–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  62. Maccarrone, M.; Nieuwenhuizen, W.F.; Dullens, H.F.; Catani, M.V.; Melino, G.; Veldink, G.A.; Vliegenthart, J.F.; Agrò, A.F. Membrane Modifications in Human Erythroleukemia K562 Cells during Induction of Programmed Cell Death by Transforming Growth Factor Β1 or Cisplatin. Eur. J. Biochem. 1996, 241, 297–302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Wojcik, M.; Burzynska-Pedziwiatr, I.; Wozniak, L.A. A Review of Natural and Synthetic Antioxidants Important for Health and Longevity. Curr. Med. Chem. 2010, 17, 3262–3288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  64. Kuhn, H.; Banthiya, S.; Van Leyen, K. Mammalian Lipoxygenases and Their Biological Relevance. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 2015, 1851, 308–330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  65. Mosblech, A.; Feussner, I.; Heilmann, I. Oxylipins: Structurally Diverse Metabolites from Fatty Acid Oxidation. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 2009, 47, 511–517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  66. DiNicolantonio, J.J.; O’Keefe, J. The Importance of Maintaining a Low Omega-6/Omega-3 Ratio for Reducing the Risk of Inflammatory Cytokine Storms. Mo. Med. 2020, 117, 539–542. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  67. Dietz, K.-J.; Hell, R. Thiol Switches in Redox Regulation of Chloroplasts: Balancing Redox State, Metabolism and Oxidative Stress. Biol. Chem. 2015, 396, 483–494. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  68. Lee, M.H.; Yang, Z.; Lim, C.W.; Lee, Y.H.; Dongbang, S.; Kang, C.; Kim, J.S. Disulfide-Cleavage-Triggered Chemosensors and Their Biological Applications. Chem. Rev. 2013, 113, 5071–5109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  69. Martins, L.; Trujillo-Hernandez, J.A.; Reichheld, J.-P. Thiol Based Redox Signaling in Plant Nucleus. Front. Plant Sci. 2018, 9, 705. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Noctor, G.; Reichheld, J.-P.; Foyer, C.H. ROS-Related Redox Regulation and Signaling in Plants. Semin. Cell Dev. Biol. 2018, 80, 3–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  71. Artiach, G.; Sarajlic, P.; Bäck, M. Inflammation and Its Resolution in Coronary Artery Disease: A Tightrope Walk between Omega-6 and Omega-3 Polyunsaturated Fatty Acids. Kardiol. Pol. 2020, 78, 93–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  72. Chang, C.-Y.; Ke, D.-S.; Chen, J.-Y. Essential Fatty Acids and Human Brain. Acta Neurol. Taiwan 2009, 18, 231–241. [Google Scholar]
  73. Masamoto, K.; Tanishita, K. Oxygen Transport in Brain Tissue. J. Biomech. Eng. 2009, 131, 074002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. McNamara, R.K.; Asch, R.H.; Lindquist, D.M.; Krikorian, R. Role of Polyunsaturated Fatty Acids in Human Brain Structure and Function across the Lifespan: An Update on Neuroimaging Findings. Prostaglandins Leukot. Essent. Fatty Acids 2018, 136, 23–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  75. Lyman, M.; Lloyd, D.G.; Ji, X.; Vizcaychipi, M.P.; Ma, D. Neuroinflammation: The Role and Consequences. Neurosci. Res. 2014, 79, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Catorce, M.N.; Gevorkian, G. Evaluation of Anti-Inflammatory Nutraceuticals in LPS-Induced Mouse Neuroinflammation Model: An Update. Curr. Neuropharmacol. 2020, 18, 636–654. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  77. Wang, X.; Quinn, P.J. The Location and Function of Vitamin E in Membranes. Mol. Membr. Biol. 2000, 17, 143–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Krinsky, N.I.; Johnson, E.J. Carotenoid Actions and Their Relation to Health and Disease. Mol. Asp. Med. 2005, 26, 459–516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Gruszecki, W.I.; Strzałka, K. Carotenoids as Modulators of Lipid Membrane Physical Properties. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 2005, 1740, 108–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  80. Sujak, A.; Gabrielska, J.; Grudziński, W.; Borc, R.; Mazurek, P.; Gruszecki, W.I. Lutein and Zeaxanthin as Protectors of Lipid Membranes against Oxidative Damage: The Structural Aspects. Arch. Biochem. Biophys. 1999, 371, 301–307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Havaux, M.; García-Plazaola, J.I. Beyond Non-Photochemical Fluorescence Quenching: The Overlapping Antioxidant Functions of Zeaxanthin and Tocopherols. In Non-Photochemical Quenching and Energy Dissipation in Plants, Algae and Cyanobacteria; Demmig-Adams, B., Garab, G., Adams, W.W., III, Govindjee, Eds.; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2014; Volume 40, pp. 583–603. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Demmig-Adams, B.; Polutchko, S.K.; Adams, W.W., III. Structure-Function-Environment Relationship of the Isomers Zeaxanthin and Lutein. Photochem 2022, 2, 308–325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Havaux, M.; Dall’Osto, L.; Bassi, R. Zeaxanthin Has Enhanced Antioxidant Capacity with Respect to All Other Xanthophylls in Arabidopsis Leaves and Functions Independent of Binding to PSII Antennae. Plant Physiol. 2007, 145, 1506–1520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  84. Grudzinski, W.; Nierzwicki, L.; Welc, R.; Reszczynska, E.; Luchowski, R.; Czub, J.; Gruszecki, W.I. Localization and Orientation of Xanthophylls in a Lipid Bilayer. Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 9619. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  85. Wu, W.; Li, Y.; Wu, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Wang, Z.; Liu, X. Lutein Suppresses Inflammatory Responses through Nrf2 Activation and NF-ΚB Inactivation in Lipopolysaccharide-Stimulated BV-2 Microglia. Mol. Nutr. Food Res. 2015, 59, 1663–1673. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Zhou, X.; Gan, T.; Fang, G.; Wang, S.; Mao, Y.; Ying, C. Zeaxanthin Improved Diabetes-Induced Anxiety and Depression through Inhibiting Inflammation in Hippocampus. Metab. Brain Dis. 2018, 33, 705–711. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  87. Davinelli, S.; Ali, S.; Solfrizzi, V.; Scapagnini, G.; Corbi, G. Carotenoids and Cognitive Outcomes: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Intervention Trials. Antioxidants 2021, 10, 223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Hajizadeh-Sharafabad, F.; Zahabi, E.S.; Malekahmadi, M.; Zarrin, R.; Alizadeh, M. Carotenoids Supplementation and Inflammation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2021, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Li, J.; Abdel-Aal, E.-S.M. Dietary Lutein and Cognitive Function in Adults: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Molecules 2021, 26, 5794. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Nouchi, R.; Suiko, T.; Kimura, E.; Takenaka, H.; Murakoshi, M.; Uchiyama, A.; Aono, M.; Kawashima, R. Effects of Lutein and Astaxanthin Intake on the Improvement of Cognitive Functions among Healthy Adults: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials. Nutrients 2020, 12, 617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  91. Hammond, B.R., Jr.; Miller, L.S.; Bello, M.O.; Lindbergh, C.A.; Mewborn, C.; Renzi-Hammond, L.M. Effects of Lutein/Zeaxanthin Supplementation on the Cognitive Function of Community Dwelling Older Adults: A Randomized, Double-Masked, Placebo-Controlled Trial. Front. Aging Neurosci. 2017, 9, 254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  92. Khalil, A.; Tazeddinova, D.; Aljoumaa, K.; Kazhmukhanbetkyzy, Z.A.; Orazov, A.; Toshev, A.D. Carotenoids: Therapeutic Strategy in the Battle against Viral Emerging Diseases, COVID-19: An Overview. Prev. Nutr. Food Sci. 2021, 26, 241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Lu, W.; Shi, Y.; Wang, R.; Su, D.; Tang, M.; Liu, Y.; Li, Z. Antioxidant Activity and Healthy Benefits of Natural Pigments in Fruits: A Review. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2021, 22, 4945. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  94. Renzi-Hammond, L.M.; Bovier, E.R.; Fletcher, L.M.; Miller, L.S.; Mewborn, C.M.; Lindbergh, C.A.; Baxter, J.H.; Hammond, B.R. Effects of a Lutein and Zeaxanthin Intervention on Cognitive Function: A Randomized, Double-Masked, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Younger Healthy Adults. Nutrients 2017, 9, 1246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  95. Beydoun, M.A.; Canas, J.A.; Fanelli-Kuczmarski, M.T.; Maldonado, A.I.; Shaked, D.; Kivimaki, M.; Evans, M.K.; Zonderman, A.B. Association of Antioxidant Vitamins A, C, E and Carotenoids with Cognitive Performance over Time: A Cohort Study of Middle-Aged Adults. Nutrients 2020, 12, 3558. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Johnson, E.J.; McDonald, K.; Caldarella, S.M.; Chung, H.; Troen, A.M.; Snodderly, D.M. Cognitive Findings of an Exploratory Trial of Docosahexaenoic Acid and Lutein Supplementation in Older Women. Nutr. Neurosci. 2008, 11, 75–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  97. Nolan, J.M.; Mulcahy, R.; Power, R.; Moran, R.; Howard, A.N. Nutritional Intervention to Prevent Alzheimer’s Disease: Potential Benefits of Xanthophyll Carotenoids and Omega-3 Fatty Acids Combined. J. Alzheimers Dis. 2018, 64, 367–378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  98. Yong, L.C.; Petersen, M.R.; Sigurdson, A.J.; Sampson, L.A.; Ward, E.M. High Dietary Antioxidant Intakes Are Associated with Decreased Chromosome Translocation Frequency in Airline Pilots. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2009, 90, 1402–1410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  99. Demmig-Adams, B.; Stewart, J.J.; López-Pozo, M.; Polutchko, S.K.; Adams, W.W., III. Zeaxanthin, a Molecule for Photoprotection in Many Different Environments. Molecules 2020, 25, 5825. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Baseggio, M.; Murray, M.; Magallanes-Lundback, M.; Kaczmar, N.; Chamness, J.; Buckler, E.S.; Smith, M.E.; DellaPenna, D.; Tracy, W.F.; Gore, M.A. Natural Variation for Carotenoids in Fresh Kernels Is Controlled by Uncommon Variants in Sweet Corn. Plant Genome 2020, 13, e20008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  101. Khoo, H.-E.; Prasad, K.N.; Kong, K.-W.; Jiang, Y.; Ismail, A. Carotenoids and Their Isomers: Color Pigments in Fruits and Vegetables. Molecules 2011, 16, 1710–1738. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Saini, R.K.; Nile, S.H.; Park, S.W. Carotenoids from Fruits and Vegetables: Chemistry, Analysis, Occurrence, Bioavailability and Biological Activities. Food Res. Int. 2015, 76, 735–750. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  103. Zaheer, K. Hen Egg Carotenoids (Lutein and Zeaxanthin) and Nutritional Impacts on Human Health: A Review. CyTA J. Food 2017, 15, 474–487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  104. Phelan, D.; Prado-Cabrero, A.; Nolan, J.M. Analysis of Lutein, Zeaxanthin, and Meso-Zeaxanthin in the Organs of Carotenoid-Supplemented Chickens. Foods 2018, 7, 20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  105. Moreno, J.A.; Díaz-Gómez, J.; Fuentes-Font, L.; Angulo, E.; Gosálvez, L.F.; Sandmann, G.; Portero-Otin, M.; Capell, T.; Zhu, C.; Christou, P. Poultry Diets Containing (Keto) Carotenoid-Enriched Maize Improve Egg Yolk Color and Maintain Quality. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 2020, 260, 114334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Skřivan, M.; Englmaierová, M.; Skřivanová, E.; Bubancová, I. Increase in Lutein and Zeaxanthin Content in the Eggs of Hens Fed Marigold Flower Extract. Czech J. Anim. Sci. 2015, 60, 89–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Asker, D.; Beppu, T.; Ueda, K. Unique Diversity of Carotenoid-Producing Bacteria Isolated from Misasa, a Radioactive Site in Japan. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2007, 77, 383–392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  108. Logan, B.A.; Barker, D.H.; Demmig-Adams, B.; Adams, W.W., III. Acclimation of Leaf Carotenoid Composition and Ascorbate Levels to Gradients in the Light Environment within an Australian Rainforest. Plant Cell Environ. 1996, 19, 1083–1090. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Burke, M.; Edge, R.; Land, E.J.; Truscott, T.G. Characterisation of Carotenoid Radical Cations in Liposomal Environments: Interaction with Vitamin C. J. Photochem. Photobiol. B 2001, 60, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Serbinova, E.; Kagan, V.; Han, D.; Packer, L. Free Radical Recycling and Intramembrane Mobility in the Antioxidant Properties of Alpha-Tocopherol and Alpha-Tocotrienol. Free Radic. Biol. Med. 1991, 10, 263–275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Liu, R.H. Potential Synergy of Phytochemicals in Cancer Prevention: Mechanism of Action. J. Nutr. 2004, 134, 3479S–3485S. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  112. Tran, E.; Demmig-Adams, B. Vitamins and Minerals: Powerful Medicine or Potent Toxins? Nutr. Food Sci. 2007, 37, 50–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Ward, C.H.; Wilks, S.S.; Craft, H.L. Effects of Prolonged near Weightlessness on Growth and Gas Exchange of Photosynthetic Plants. Dev. Ind. Microbiol. 1970, 11, 276–295. [Google Scholar]
  114. Escobar, C.M.; Escobar, A.C. Duckweed: A Tiny Aquatic Plant with Enormous Potential for Bioregenerative Life Support Systems. In Proceedings of the 47th International Conference on Environmental Systems, Charleston, SC, USA, 16–20 July 2017. [Google Scholar]
  115. Yuan, J.; Xu, K. Effects of Simulated Microgravity on the Performance of the Duckweeds Lemna aequinoctialis and Wolffia globosa. Aquat. Bot. 2017, 137, 65–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Romano, L.E.; Aronne, G. The World Smallest Plants (Wolffia sp.) as Potential Species for Bioregenerative Life Support Systems in Space. Plants 2021, 10, 1896. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Ward, C.H.; Wilks, S.S. Use of Algae and Other Plants in the Development of Life Support Systems. Am. Biol. Teach. 1963, 25, 512–521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Kawamata, Y.; Shibui, Y.; Takumi, A.; Seki, T.; Shimada, T.; Hashimoto, M.; Inoue, N.; Kobayashi, H.; Narita, T. Genotoxicity and Repeated-Dose Toxicity Evaluation of Dried Wolffia globosa Mankai. Toxicol. Rep. 2020, 7, 1233–1241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Acosta, K.; Appenroth, K.J.; Borisjuk, L.; Edelman, M.; Heinig, U.; Jansen, M.A.; Oyama, T.; Pasaribu, B.; Schubert, I.; Sorrels, S. Return of the Lemnaceae: Duckweed as a Model Plant System in the Genomics and Postgenomics Era. Plant Cell 2021, 33, 3207–3234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  120. Zheng, H.Q.; Han, F.; Le, J. Higher Plants in Space: Microgravity Perception, Response, and Adaptation. Microgravity Sci. Technol. 2015, 27, 377–386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Anikeeva, I.D.; Kostina, L.N.; Vaulina, E.N. Experiments with Air-Dried Seeds of Arabidopsis thaliana (L.) Heynh. and Crepis capillaris (L.) Wallr., Aboard Salyut 6. Adv. Space Res. 1983, 3, 129–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Escobar, C.M.; Escobar, A.C.; Power, G.J.; Nabity, J.A. µG-LilyPondTM: Preliminary Design of a Floating Plant Pond for Microgravity. In Proceedings of the 50th International Conference on Environmental Systems, Lisbon, Portugal, 12–16 July 2020. [Google Scholar]
  123. Gale, J.; Smernoff, D.T.; Macler, B.A.; MacElroy, R.D. Carbon Balance and Productivity of Lemna gibba, a Candidate Plant for CELSS. Adv. Space Res. 1989, 9, 43–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Oron, G.; Wildschut, L.; Porath, D. Waste Water Recycling by Duckweed for Protein Production and Effluent Renovation. Water Sci. Technol. 1985, 17, 803–817. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Wolverton, B.; McDonald, R. Upgrading Facultative Wastewater Lagoons with Vascular Aquatic Plants. J. Water Pollut. Control Fed. 1979, 51, 305–313. [Google Scholar]
  126. Britto, D.T.; Kronzucker, H.J. NH4+ Toxicity in Higher Plants: A Critical Review. J. Plant Physiol. 2002, 159, 567–584. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  127. Appenroth, K.-J.; Sree, K.S.; Bog, M.; Ecker, J.; Seeliger, C.; Böhm, V.; Lorkowski, S.; Sommer, K.; Vetter, W.; Tolzin-Banasch, K. Nutritional Value of the Duckweed Species of the Genus Wolffia (Lemnaceae) as Human Food. Front. Chem. 2018, 6, 483. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  128. Mohedano, R.A.; Costa, R.H.; Tavares, F.A.; Belli Filho, P. High Nutrient Removal Rate from Swine Wastes and Protein Biomass Production by Full-Scale Duckweed Ponds. Bioresour. Technol. 2012, 112, 98–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  129. Stewart, J.J.; Adams, W.W., III; Escobar, C.M.; López-Pozo, M.; Demmig-Adams, B. Growth and Essential Carotenoid Micronutrients in Lemna gibba as a Function of Growth Light Intensity. Front. Plant Sci. 2020, 11, 480. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  130. Stewart, J.J.; Adams, W.W., III; López-Pozo, M.; Doherty Garcia, N.; McNamara, M.; Escobar, C.M.; Demmig-Adams, B. Features of the Duckweed Lemna That Support Rapid Growth under Extremes of Light Intensity. Cells 2021, 10, 1481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Al-Ahmary, K.M. The Carotenoids of Some Food Stuffs in Saudi Arabia. Int. J. Food Sci. Nutr. 2010, 61, 823–828. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  132. Perry, A.; Rasmussen, H.; Johnson, E.J. Xanthophyll (Lutein, Zeaxanthin) Content in Fruits, Vegetables and Corn and Egg Products. J. Food Compos. Anal. 2009, 22, 9–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  133. Murillo, E.; Meléndez-Martínez, A.J.; Portugal, F. Screening of Vegetables and Fruits from Panama for Rich Sources of Lutein and Zeaxanthin. Food Chem. 2010, 122, 167–172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  134. Sommerburg, O.; Keunen, J.E.; Bird, A.C.; Van Kuijk, F.J. Fruits and Vegetables That Are Sources for Lutein and Zeaxanthin: The Macular Pigment in Human Eyes. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1998, 82, 907–910. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  135. Kim, J.-S.; An, C.G.; Park, J.-S.; Lim, Y.P.; Kim, S. Carotenoid Profiling from 27 Types of Paprika (Capsicum annuum L.) with Different Colors, Shapes, and Cultivation Methods. Food Chem. 2016, 201, 64–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  136. Hemminge Natesh, N.; Abbey, L.; Asiedu, S.K. An Overview of Nutritional and Antinutritional Factors in Green Leafy Vegetables. Horticult. Int. J. 2017, 1, 00011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  137. Diotallevi, C.; Angeli, A.; Vrhovsek, U.; Gobbetti, M.; Shai, I.; Lapidot, M.; Tuohy, K. Measuring Phenolic Compounds in Mankai: A Novel Polyphenol and Amino Rich Plant Protein Source. Proc. Nutr. Soc. 2020, 79, E434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  138. Hu, Z.; Fang, Y.; Yi, Z.; Tian, X.; Li, J.; Jin, Y.; He, K.; Liu, P.; Du, A.; Huang, Y. Determining the Nutritional Value and Antioxidant Capacity of Duckweed (Wolffia arrhiza) under Artificial Conditions. LWT 2022, 153, 112477. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  139. Burgner, S.E.; Nemali, K.; Massa, G.D.; Wheeler, R.M.; Morrow, R.C.; Mitchell, C.A. Growth and Photosynthetic Responses of Chinese Cabbage (Brassica rapa L. cv. Tokyo Bekana) to Continuously Elevated Carbon Dioxide in a Simulated Space Station “Veggie” Crop-Production Environment. Life Sci. Space Res. 2020, 27, 83–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  140. Michael, T.P.; Ernst, E.; Hartwick, N.; Chu, P.; Bryant, D.; Gilbert, S.; Ortleb, S.; Baggs, E.L.; Sree, K.S.; Appenroth, K.J. Genome and Time-of-Day Transcriptome of Wolffia australiana Link Morphological Minimization with Gene Loss and Less Growth Control. Genome Res. 2021, 31, 225–238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  141. Padhan, B.K.; Sathee, L.; Meena, H.S.; Adavi, S.B.; Jha, S.K.; Chinnusamy, V. CO2 Elevation Accelerates Phenology and Alters Carbon/Nitrogen Metabolism vis-à-vis ROS Abundance in Bread Wheat. Front. Plant Sci. 2020, 11, 1061. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  142. Wingler, A.; Henriques, R. Sugars and the Speed of Life—Metabolic Signals That Determine Plant Growth, Development and Death. Physiol. Plant. 2022, 174, e13656. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  143. Hieber, A.D.; Bugos, R.C.; Yamamoto, H.Y. Plant Lipocalins: Violaxanthin de-Epoxidase and Zeaxanthin Epoxidase. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 2000, 1482, 84–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  144. Jahns, P.; Latowski, D.; Strzalka, K. Mechanism and Regulation of the Violaxanthin Cycle: The Role of Antenna Proteins and Membrane Lipids. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 2009, 1787, 3–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  145. Bethmann, S.; Melzer, M.; Schwarz, N.; Jahns, P. The Zeaxanthin Epoxidase Is Degraded along with the D1 Protein during Photoinhibition of Photosystem II. Plant Direct 2019, 3, e00185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  146. Hoang, M.H.; Kim, H.-S.; Zulfugarov, I.S.; Lee, C.-H. Down-Regulation of Zeaxanthin Epoxidation in Vascular Plant Leaves under Normal and Photooxidative Stress Conditions. J. Plant Biol. 2020, 63, 331–336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  147. Reinhold, C.; Niczyporuk, S.; Beran, K.C.; Jahns, P. Short-Term down-Regulation of Zeaxanthin Epoxidation in Arabidopsis thaliana in Response to Photo-Oxidative Stress Conditions. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 2008, 1777, 462–469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
Figure 1. A schematic flowchart of how galactic cosmic radiation can lead to the production of ROS and DNA damage. Both ROS and DNA damage can either encourage (pink arrows) or prevent (pink T-shaped lines) multiple gene regulation events, including those that support (blue arrow) or prevent (pink T-shaped line) DNA repair.
Figure 1. A schematic flowchart of how galactic cosmic radiation can lead to the production of ROS and DNA damage. Both ROS and DNA damage can either encourage (pink arrows) or prevent (pink T-shaped lines) multiple gene regulation events, including those that support (blue arrow) or prevent (pink T-shaped line) DNA repair.
Oxygen 02 00016 g001
Figure 2. Flowchart depicting the causes (top boxes) and effects (bottom boxes) of reactive oxygen species (middle box) in plants (green; left) and humans (red; right).
Figure 2. Flowchart depicting the causes (top boxes) and effects (bottom boxes) of reactive oxygen species (middle box) in plants (green; left) and humans (red; right).
Oxygen 02 00016 g002
Figure 3. Images of whole food sources that contain high levels of zeaxanthin and lutein including, duckweed (see below), eggs (see above), orange peppers (see below), and corn (see above).
Figure 3. Images of whole food sources that contain high levels of zeaxanthin and lutein including, duckweed (see below), eggs (see above), orange peppers (see below), and corn (see above).
Oxygen 02 00016 g003
Figure 4. A schematic depiction of the interconnectedness of duckweed (left) and astronauts (right). In the center is a schematic depiction of the intertwined cycle of detoxification of ROS and the recycling of vitamin E and zeaxanthin by water-soluble antioxidants. A mother frond (leaf-like structure) is the initial source for photosynthetically produced sugars and its daughter fronds and rootlets are sinks for the sugars until the synthesis of sugars by daughter fronds exceeds the import of sugars and they, in turn, become source tissues.
Figure 4. A schematic depiction of the interconnectedness of duckweed (left) and astronauts (right). In the center is a schematic depiction of the intertwined cycle of detoxification of ROS and the recycling of vitamin E and zeaxanthin by water-soluble antioxidants. A mother frond (leaf-like structure) is the initial source for photosynthetically produced sugars and its daughter fronds and rootlets are sinks for the sugars until the synthesis of sugars by daughter fronds exceeds the import of sugars and they, in turn, become source tissues.
Oxygen 02 00016 g004
Figure 5. Summary of Lemnaceae features suitable for spaceflight environments (light orange text boxes) and brief explanations (white text boxes) below each point. See text for additional details.
Figure 5. Summary of Lemnaceae features suitable for spaceflight environments (light orange text boxes) and brief explanations (white text boxes) below each point. See text for additional details.
Oxygen 02 00016 g005
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Polutchko, S.K.; Adams, W.W., III; Escobar, C.M.; Demmig-Adams, B. Conquering Space with Crops That Produce Ample Oxygen and Antioxidants. Oxygen 2022, 2, 211-226. https://doi.org/10.3390/oxygen2020016

AMA Style

Polutchko SK, Adams WW III, Escobar CM, Demmig-Adams B. Conquering Space with Crops That Produce Ample Oxygen and Antioxidants. Oxygen. 2022; 2(2):211-226. https://doi.org/10.3390/oxygen2020016

Chicago/Turabian Style

Polutchko, Stephanie K., William W. Adams, III, Christine M. Escobar, and Barbara Demmig-Adams. 2022. "Conquering Space with Crops That Produce Ample Oxygen and Antioxidants" Oxygen 2, no. 2: 211-226. https://doi.org/10.3390/oxygen2020016

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop