Advertisement

Protoplasma

, Volume 255, Issue 6, pp 1725–1740 | Cite as

Effects of heat stress in the leaf mitotic cell cycle and chromosomes of four wine-producing grapevine varieties

  • Ana Carvalho
  • Fernanda Leal
  • Manuela Matos
  • José Lima-Brito
Original Article

Abstract

Grapevine varieties respond differentially to heat stress (HS). HS ultimately reduces the photosynthesis and respiratory performance. However, the HS effects in the leaf nuclei and mitotic cells of grapevine are barely known. This work intends to evaluate the HS effects in the leaf mitotic cell cycle and chromosomes of four wine-producing varieties: Touriga Franca (TF), Touriga Nacional (TN), Rabigato, and Viosinho. In vitro plants with 11 months were used in a stepwise acclimation and recovery (SAR) experimental setup comprising different phases: heat acclimation period (3 h—32 °C), extreme HS (1 h—42 °C), and two recovery periods (3 h—32 °C and 24 h—25 °C), and compared to control plants (maintained in vitro at 25 °C). At the end of each SAR phase, leaves were collected, fixed, and used for cell suspensions and chromosome preparations. Normal and abnormal interphase and mitotic cells were observed, scored, and statistically analyzed in all varieties and treatments (control and SAR phases). Different types of chromosomal anomalies in all mitotic phases, treatments, and varieties were found. In all varieties, the percentage of dividing cells with anomalies (%DCA) after extreme HS increased relative to control. TF and Viosinho were considered the most tolerant to HS. TF showed a gradual MI reduction from heat acclimation to HS and the lowest %DCA after HS and 24 h of recovery. Only Viosinho reached the control values after the long recovery period. Extrapolating these data to the field, we hypothesize that during consecutive hot summer days, the grapevine plants will not have time or capacity to recover from the mitotic anomalies caused by high temperatures.

Keywords

Chromosomal anomalies Interphase Mitosis Nucleoli Silver nitrate staining Vitis vinifera L. 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The author AC acknowledges her postdoctoral fellowship (BPD/UTAD/INNOVINE&WINE/593/2016) attributed under the scope of the project INNOVINE&WINE (NORTE-01-0145-FEDER-000038, research line “Viticulture”). The authors AC and JLB thank the projects UID/AGR/04033/2013 (financed by the FCT - Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology) and POCI-01-0145-FEDER-006958 (supported by FEDER/COMPETE/POCI – Operacional Competitiveness and Internacionalization Programme).

Funding

This study was supported by the project INNOVINE&WINE—“Innovation of the Vine and Wine Platform” (research line Viticulture) (NORTE-01-0145-FEDER-000038); by the postdoctoral grant BPD/UTAD/INNOVINE&WINE/593/2016); by the project INTERACT—Integrative Research in Environment, Agro-Chains and Technology (NORTE-01-0145-FEDER-000017—Fostering viticulture sustainability for Douro Valley: multidisciplinary efforts from field to wine (research line VitalityWine); and by the COST Action CA16212 INDEPTH—Impact of nuclear domains on gene expression and plant traits, European Cooperation in Science & Technology.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Ahmed M, Grant WF (1972) Cytological effects of the mercurial fungicide, Panogen 15 on Tradescantia and Vicia faba root tips. Mutat Res 14:391–396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alves F, Costa J, Costa P, Correia CM, Gonçalves BM, Soares R, Moutinho-Pereira J (2012a) Influence of climate and deficit irrigation on grapevine physiology, yield and quality attributes, of the cv. Touriga Nacional at Douro Region. Proceedings of the IX iInternational terroirs Terroirs congressCongress;, 25–29 June 2012;, Dijon-Reims, France (International Terroirs Congress: Dijon-Reims, France)Google Scholar
  3. Alves F, Edlmann M, Costa J, Costa P, Costa PL, Symington C (2012b) Effects of rootstock and environment on the behaviour of autochthone grapevine varieties in the Douro region. Proceedings of the IX International Terroirs Congress, 25–29 June 2012, Dijon-Reims, FranceGoogle Scholar
  4. Badr A, Ibrahim AG (1987) Effect of herbicide glean on mitosis, chromosomes and nucleic acids in Alium cepa and Vicia faba root meristems. Cytol 52:293–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Balcerzak L, Glińska S, Godlewski M (2011) The reaction of Lupinus angustifolius L root Meristematic Cell Nucleoli to lead. Protoplasma 248:353–361CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Banilas G, Korkas E, Englezos V, Nisiotou AA, Hatzopoulos P (2012) Genome-wide analysis of the heat shock protein 90 gene family in grapevine (Vitis vinifera L.). Aust J Grape Wine Res 18:29–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bita CA, Gerats T (2013) Plant tolerance to high temperature in a changing environment: scientific fundamentals and production of heat stress-tolerant crops. Front Plant Sci 4:1–18.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2013.00273 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bonada M, Sadras VO (2015) Review: critical appraisal of methods to investigate the effect of temperature on grapevine berry composition. Aust J Grape Wine Res 21:1–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bonnefoy C, Quenol H, Bonnardot V, Barbeau G, Madelin M, Planchon O, Neethling E (2013) Temporal and spatial analyses of temperature in a French wine-producing area: the Loire Valley. Int J Climatol 33:1849–1862CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Boulon S, Westman BJ, Hutten S, Boisvert F-M, Lamond AI (2010) The nucleolus under stress. Mol Cell 40(2):216–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Carvalho A, Pavia I, Fernandes C, Pires J, Correia C, Bacelar E, Moutinho-Pereira J, Gaspar MJ, Bento J, Silva ME, Lousada JL, Lima-Brito J (2017a) Differential physiological and genetic responses of five European Scots pine provenances to induced water stress. J Plant Physiol 215:100–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Carvalho LC, Coito JL, Colaço S, Sangiogo M, Amâncio S (2015) Heat stress in grapevine: the pros and cons of acclimation. Plant Cell Environ 38:777–789CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Carvalho LC, Coito JL, Gonc EF, Chaves MM (2016) Differential physiological response of the grapevine varieties Touriga Nacional and Trincadeira to combined heat, drought and light stresses. Plant Biol 18:101–111.  https://doi.org/10.1111/plb.12410 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Carvalho LC, Silva M, Coito JL, Rocheta MP, Amâncio S (2017b) Design of a custom RT-qPCR array for assignment of abiotic stress tolerance in traditional Portuguese grapevine varieties. Front Plant Sci 8:1835.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2017.01835 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. Castro C, Carvalho A, Pavia I, Leal F, Moutinho-Pereira J, Lima-Brito J (2018) Nucleolar activity and physical location of ribosomal DNA loci in Vitis vinifera L. by silver staining and sequential FISH. Sci Hortic 232:57–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Chaves MM, Pereira JS, Maroco J, Rodrigues ML, Ricardo CP, Osório ML, Carvalho I, Faria T, Pinheiro C (2002) How plants cope with water stress in the field. Photosynthesis and growth. Ann Bot 89:907–916CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Conde A, Pimentel D, Neves A, Dinis L-T, Bernardo S, Correia CM, Gerós H, Moutinho-Pereira J (2016) Kaolin foliar application has a stimulatory effect on phenylpropanoid and flavonoid pathways in grape berries. Front Plant Sci 7:1150.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2016.01150 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. Cramer GR (2010) Abiotic stress and plant responses from the whole vine to the genes. Aust J Grape Wine Res 16:86–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dalla Marta A, Grifoni D, Mancini M, Storchi P, Zipoli G, Orlandini S (2010) Analysis of the relationships between climate variability and grapevine phenology in the Nobile di Montepulciano wine production area. J Agric Sci 148:657–666CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Darlington CD (1942) Chromosome chemistry and gene action. Nature 149:66–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Dinis L-T, Ferreira H, Pinto G, Bernardo S, Correia CM, Moutinho-Pereira J (2016) Kaolin-based, foliar reflective film protects photosytem II structure and function in grapevine leaves exposed to heat and high solar radiation. Photosynthetica 54(1):47–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Duchêne É (2016) How can grapevine genetics contribute to the adaptation to climate change? OENO One 50(3):113–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fiskesjö G (1997) Allium test for screening chemicals; evaluation of cytological parameters. In: Wang W, Gorsuch JW, Hughes JS (eds) Plants for environmental studies. Lewis, New York, pp 308–333Google Scholar
  24. Fraga H, Santos JA, Moutinho-Pereira J, Carlos C, Silvestre J, Eiras-Dias J, Mota T, Malheiro AC (2016) Statistical modelling of grapevine phenology in Portuguese wine regions: observed trends and climate change projections. J Agric Sci 154(5):795–811CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Frantzios G, Galatis B, Apostolakos P (2000) Aluminium effects on microtubule organization in dividing root-tip cells of Triticum turgidum. I mitotic cells. New Phytol 145:211–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Giménez-Abián MI, Utrilla L, Cánovas JL, Giménez-Martin G, Navarrete MH, De la Torre C (1998) The positional control of mitosis and cytokinesis in higher-plant cells. Planta 204(1):37–43PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. González-Camacho F, Medina FJ (2006) The nucleolar structure and the activity of NopA100, a nucleolin-like protein, during the cell cycle in proliferating plant cells. Histochem Cell Biol 125:139–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Heckenberger U, Roggatz U, Schurr U (1998) Effect of drought stress on the cytological status in Ricinus communis. J Exp Bot 49(319):181–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Ichihashi Y, Tsukaya H (2015) Behavior of leaf meristems and their modification. Front Plant Sci 6:1060.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2015.01060 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. IPCC (2014) Climate change 2014: synthesis report. Contribution of working groups I, II and III to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change [Core writing team, R.K. Pachauri and L.a. Meyer (eds.)]. IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland, pp. 151. ISBN 978-92-9169-143-2Google Scholar
  31. IVV (2011) Catálogo das Castas Para Vinho Cultivadas em Portugal, Vol. 1. Lisboa: Instituto da Vinha e do Vinho, I.PGoogle Scholar
  32. Jiang Z, Zhang H, Qin R, Zou J, Wang J, Sgi Q, Jiang W, Liu D (2014) Effects of lead on the morphology and structure of the nucleolus in the root tip meristematic cells of Allium cepa L. Int J Mol Sci 15:13406–13423CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Jordan EG, Martini G, Bennett MD, Flavell RB (1982) Nucleolar fusion in wheat. J Cell Sci 56:485–495Google Scholar
  34. Kaufman BP (1955) Cytochemical studies of changes induced in cellular materials by ionizing radiations. Ann N Y Acad Sci 59:553–566CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kitsios G, Doonan JH (2011) Cyclin dependent protein kinases and stress responses in plants. Plant Signal Behav 6(2):204–209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Levan A (1938) The effect of colchicine on root mitoses in Allium. Hereditas 24:471–486CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Liu GT, Wang JF, Cramer G, Dai ZW, Duan W, Xu HG, Wu BH, Fan PG, Wang LJ, Li SH (2012) Transcriptomic analysis of grape (Vitis vinifera L.) leaves during and after recovery from heat stress. BMC Plant Biol 12:174–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lorenz DH, Eichhorn KW, Bleiholder H, Klose R, Meier U, Weber E (1995) Growth stages of the grapevine: phenological growth stages of the grapevine (Vitis vinifera L. ssp. vinifera)—codes and descriptions according to the extended BBCH scale. Aust J Grape Wine Res 1:100–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Mahajan S, Tuteja N (2005) Cold, salinity and drought stresses: an overview. Arch Biochem Biophys 444:139–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Meier I, Richards EJ, Evans DE (2017) Cell biology of the plant nucleus. Annu Rev Plant Biol 68:139–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Moutinho-Pereira JM, Correia CM, Gonçalves BM, Bacelar EA, Torres-Pereira JM (2004) Leaf gas exchange and water relations of grapevines grown in three different conditions. Photosynthetica 42(1):81–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Murashige T, Skoog F (1962) A revised medium for rapid growth and bioassays with tobacco tissue cultures. Physiol Plant 15:473–497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Nefic H, Musanovic J, Metovic A, Kurteshi K (2013) Chromosomal and nuclear alterations in root tip cells of Allium cepa L. induced by alprazolam. Med Arh 67(6):388–392CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Neumann PA, Matzarakis A (2014) Estimation of wine characteristics using a modified Heliothermal index in Baden-Wurttemberg, SW Germany. Int J Biometeorol 58:407–415CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Ochoa JGD, Wulkow M (2012) DNA damages as a depolymerization process. Int J Mod Phys C 23(3):1250018.  https://doi.org/10.1142/S0129183112500180 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Olson MO, Dundr M (2005) The moving parts of the nucleolus. Histochem Cell Biol 123:203–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Pekol S, Baloglu MC, Celik Altunoglu Y (2016) Evaluation of genotoxic and cytotoxic effects of environmental stress in wheat species with different ploidy levels. Turk J Biol 40:580–588CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Pereira HS, Delgado M, Avó AP, Barão A, Serrano I, Viegas W (2014) Pollen grain development is highly sensitive to temperature stress in Vitis vinifera. Aust J Grape Wine Res 20:474–484CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Pontvianne F, Matía I, Douet J, Tourmente S, Medina FJ, Echeverria M, Sáez-Vásquez J (2007) Characterization of AtNUC-L1 reveals a central role of nucleolin in nucleolus organization and silencing of AtNUC-L2 gene in Arabidopsis. Mol Biol Cell 18:369–379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Portaria n°. 383/. 2017, Diário da República, 1.ª série — N.° 243 — 20 de dezembro de 2017, Agricultura, Florestas e Desenvolvimento Rural, pp 6659–6660 (In Portuguese)Google Scholar
  51. Renák D, Gibalová A, Šolcová K, Honys D (2014) A new link between stress response and nucleolar function during pollen development in Arabidopsis mediated by AtREN1 protein. Plant Cell Environ 37:670–683CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Schuppler U, He P-H, John PCL, Munns R (1998) Effect of water stress on cell division and cell-division-cycle 2-like cell-cycle kinase activity in wheat leaves. Plant Physiol 117:667–678CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Sharkey TD, Zhang R (2010) High temperature effects on electron and proton circuits of photosynthesis. J Integr Plant Biol 52:712–722CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Skirycz A, Claeys H, De Bodt S, Oikawa A, Shinoda S, Andriankaja M, Maleux K, Eloy NB, Coppens F, Yoo S-D, Saito K, Inzé D (2011) Pause-and-stop: the effects of osmotic stress on cell proliferation during early leaf development in Arabidopsis and a role for ethylene signalling in cell cycle arrest. Plant Cell 23:1876–1888CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Smertenko A, Dráber P, Viklický V, Opatrný Z (1997) Heat stress affects the organization of microtubules and cell division in Nicotiana tabacum cells. Plant Cell Environ 20:1534–1542CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Stack S, Herikhoff L, Sherman J, Anderson L (1991) Staining plant cells with silver. I. The salt nylon technique. Biotech Histochem 1:69–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Stępiński D (2014) Functional ultrastructure of the plant nucleolus. Protoplasma 251:1285–1306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Tajrishi MM, Tuteja R, Tuteja N (2011) Nucleolin. The most abundant multifunctional phosphoprotein of nucleolus. Commun Integr Biol 4(3):267–275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Todorov D, Karanov E, Smith AR, Hall MA (2003) Chlorophyllase activity and chlorophyll content in wild and mutant plants of Arabidopsis thaliana. Biol Plant 46:125–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Torregrosa L, Bigard A, Doligez A, Lecourieux D, Rienth M, Luchaire N, Pieri P, Chatbanyong R, Shahood R, Farnos M, Roux C, Adiveze A, Pillet J, Sire Y, Zumstein E, Veyret M, le Cunff L, Lecourieux F, Saurin N, Muller B, Ojeda H, Houel C, Péros JP, This P, Pellegrino A, Romieu C (2017) Developmental, molecular and genetic studies on grapevine response to temperature open breeding strategies for adaptation to warming. OENO One 51(2):155–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Wahid A, Gelani S, Ashraf M, Foolad M (2007) Heat tolerance in plants: an overview. Environ Exp Bot 61:199–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Wang W, Vinocur B, Altman A (2003) Plant responses to drought, salinity and extreme temperatures: towards genetic engineering for stress tolerance. Planta 218:1–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Zhang H, Jiang Z, Qin R, Zhang H, Zou J, Jiang W, Liu D (2014) Accumulation and cellular toxicity of aluminum in seedling of Pinus massoniana. BMC Plant Biol 14:264.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s12870-014-0264-9 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Austria, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Biosystems & Integrative Sciences InstituteUniversity of Tras-os-Montes and Alto Douro (BioISI-UTAD)Vila RealPortugal
  2. 2.Centre for the Research and Technology of Agro-Environmental and Biological Sciences (CITAB)University of Tras-os-Montes and Alto DouroVila RealPortugal
  3. 3.Department of Genetics and BiotechnologyUniversity of Tras-os-Montes and Alto DouroVila RealPortugal

Personalised recommendations