Plant and Soil

, Volume 283, Issue 1–2, pp 175–185 | Cite as

Stomatal Responses to Humic Substances and Auxin are Sensitive to Inhibitors of Phospholipase A2

  • Laurel Russell
  • Angela R Stokes
  • Heather Macdonald
  • Adele Muscolo
  • Serenella Nardi


Two fractions of earthworm humic substances, differing in nominal molecular weight, containing a very low amount of free IAA, and exhibiting auxin-like properties, were prepared and characterised by infrared and 1H-NMR spectroscopy. In this study we investigate their effects on stomatal opening, as influenced by phospholipase A2, in leaf of the Argenteum mutant of pea (Pisum sativum L.) Both of the humic fractions caused stomatal opening in the epidermal peels. The response showed a broad biphasic dose dependence and the effective concentrations were similar for the two fractions. The maximal stomatal apertures in response to both humic substances were similar to that caused by IAA and somewhat less than the response to white light or fusicoccin. Two inhibitors of phospholipase A2 selectively blocked the response of stomata to both IAA and humic substances, without affecting the response to light or fusicoccin. We conclude that stomatal opening in response to auxin and humic substances involves activation of a phospholipase A2 that is not involved in signalling the response to light or fusicoccin.


auxin fusicoccin humic substances light phospholipase A2 stomata 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Aldrich Library 1993 Aldrich library of 13C and 1H FT NMR spectra, Vol. III. Eds. C J Pouchert and J BehnkeGoogle Scholar
  2. Assmann, S M, Shimizaki, K 1999The multisensory guard cell. Stomatal responses to blue light and abscisic acidPlant Physiol.119809815PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barbier-Brygoo, H 1995Tracking auxin receptors using functional approachesCritical Reviews in Plant Sci.14125Google Scholar
  4. Bellamy, J 1975The Infrared Spectra of Complex MoleculesChapman and HallLondonGoogle Scholar
  5. Canellas, L P, Olivares, F L, Okorokova-Facanha, A L, Facanha, A R 2002Humic acids isolated from earthworm compost enhance root elongation, lateral root emergence and plasma membrane H+-ATPase activity in maize rootsPlant Physiol.130334340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chen, Y, Aviad, T 1990Effects of humic substances on plant growthMacCarthy, PClapp, C EMalcolm, R LBloom, P R eds. Humic Substances in Soils and Crop Science: Selected ReadingsSoil Science Society of AmericaMadison, WI161186Google Scholar
  7. Clapp, C, Chen, Y, Hayes, M H B, Cheng, H H 2001Plant growth promoting activity of humic substancesSwift, R SSparks, K M eds. Understanding and Managing Organic Matter in Soils, Sediments and WatersInternational Humic Science SocietyMadison, WI243255Google Scholar
  8. Conte, P, Piccolo, A 1999aHigh pressure size exclusion chromatography (HPSEC) of humic substances: molecular sizes, analytical parameters and column performanceChemosphere.38517528CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Conte, P, Piccolo, A 1999bConformational arrangement of dissolved humic substances. Influence of solution composition on association of humic moleculesEnviron. Sci. Techn.3316821690CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dell’Agnola, G, Ferrari, G, Nardi, S 1981Antidote action of humic substances on atrazine inhibition of sulphate uptake in barley rootsPesticide Biochem. Physiol.15101104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dell’Agnola, G, Nardi, S 1987An overview of earthworm activity in the soilBonvicini Pagliai, A M.Omodeo, P. eds. On EarthwormsMucchiModena103112Google Scholar
  12. Fan, T W M 1996Metabolite profiling by one- and two-dimensional NMR analysis of complex mixturesProg. Nucl. Magn. Reson. Spectrosc.28161219Google Scholar
  13. Francioso, O, Ciavatta, C, Sánchez-Cortés, S, Tugnoli, V, Sitti, L, Gessa, C 2000Spectroscopic characterization of soil organic matter in long-term amendment trialsSoil Sci.165495504CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Frías, I, Caldeira, M T, PérezCastiñeria, J R, NavarroAviñó, J P, Culianez-Maciá, F A, Kuppinger, O, Stransky, H, Pagés, M, Hager, A, Serrano, R 1996A major isoform of the maize plasma membrane H+-ATPase: Characterization and induction by auxin in coleoptilesPlant Cell815331544PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hayes, M H B 1997Emerging concepts of the compositions and structure of humic substancesHayes, M H BWilson, W S eds. Humic Substances in Soils, Peats and Waters-Health and Environmental AspectsThe Royal Society of ChemistryCambridge330Google Scholar
  16. Holk, A, Reitz, S, Zahn, M, Quader, H, Scherer, G F E 2002Molecular identification of cytosolic, patatin-related phospholipase A from Arabidopsis with potential functions in plant signal transductionPlant Physiol.13090101PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Jewer, P C, Incoll, L D, Shaw, J 1982Stomatal responses of Argenteum - a mutant of Pisum sativum L. with readily detachable leaf epidermisPlanta155146153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Macdonald, H 1997Auxin perception and signal transductionPhysiol. Plantarum100423430CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Malcolm, R L 1990The uniqueness of humic substances in each of soil, stream and marine environmentsAnal. Chim. Acta2321930CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Minelli, A, Omodeo, P, Rota, E, Sambugar, B 1995Anellida Clitellata, AphanomeuraMinelli, ARufo, SLa Posta, S eds. Checklist delle Specie della Fauna ItalianaCalderoniBologna1213Google Scholar
  21. Muscolo, A, Bovalo, F, Gionfriddo, F, Nardi, S 1999Earthworm humic matter produces auxin-like effects on Daucus carota cell growth and nitrate metabolismSoil Biol. Biochem.3113031311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Muscolo, A, Cutrupi, S, Nardi, S 1998IAA detection in humic matterSoil Biol. Biochem.3011991201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Muscolo, A, Felici, M, Cancheri, G, Nardi, S 1993Effect of earthworm humic substances on peroxidase and esterase activity during growth of leaf explants of Nicotiana plumbaginifolia Biol. Fertil. Soils15127131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Muscolo A and Nardi S 1999 Effetti di due frazioni umiche sul metabolismo azotato di cellule di Daucus carota. In Le Ricerche di Base e le Applicazioni delle Sostanze Umiche alle Soglie del 2000. pp. 103–106. IV Congresso Nazionale IHSS. AlgheroGoogle Scholar
  25. Muscolo, A, Panuccio, M R, Abenavoli, M R, Concheri, G, Nardi, S 1996Effect of molecular complexity and acidity of earthworm faeces humic fractions on glutamate dehydrogenase, glutamine synthetase, and phosphoenolpyruvate carboxylase in Daucus Carota a II cellsBiol. Fertil. Soils228388Google Scholar
  26. Nardi, S, Pizzighello, D, Muscolo, A, Vianello, A 2002Physiological effects of humic substances in higher plantsSoil Biol. Biochem.3415271537CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Nardi, S, Concheri, G, Dell’Agnola, G 1996Biological activity of humic substancesPiccolo, A. eds. Humic Substances in Terrestrial EcosystemsElsevierAmsterdam361406Google Scholar
  28. Nardi, S, Concheri, G, Dell’Agnola, G, Scrimin, P 1991Nitrate uptake and ATPase activity in oat seedlings in the presence of two humic fractionsSoil Biol. Biochem.23833836CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Nardi, S, Panuccio, M R, Abenavoli, M R, Muscolo, A 1994Auxin-like effect of humic substances extracted from faeces of Allolobophora Caliginosa and Allolobophora Rosea Soil Biol. Biochem.2613411346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Niemeyer, J, Chen, Y, Bollag, J M 1992Characterization of humic acids, composts, and peat by diffuse reflectance Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopySoil Sci. Soc. Am. J.56135140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Palmgren, M G, Sommarin, M, Ulvskov, P, Jorgensen, P L 1988Modulation of plasma-membrane H+-ATPase from oat roots by lysophosphatidylcholine, free fatty-acids and phospholipase A2 Physiol. Plantarum741119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Paul, R U, Holk, A, Scherer, G 1998Fatty acids and lysophospholipids as potential second messengers in auxin action. Rapid activation of phospholipase A2 activity by auxin in suspension-cultured parsley and soybean cellsPlant J.16601611CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Piccolo, A, Nardi, S, Concheri, G 1996aMacromolecular changes of humic substances induced by interaction with organicEur. J. Soil Sci.47319328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Piccolo, A, Nardi, S, Concheri, G 1996bMicelle-like conformation of humic substances as revealed by size exclusion chromatographyChemosphere33595602CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Piccolo, A, Conte, P 1998Advances in nuclear magnetic resonances and infrared spectroscopies of soil organic particlesHuang, P MSenesi, NBuffle, J eds. Structure and Surface Reactions of Soil ParticlesWiley & Sons LtdSussex183250Google Scholar
  36. Piccolo, A, Nardi, S, Concheri, G 1992Structural characteristics of humic substances as related to nitrate uptake and growth regulation in plant systemsSoil Biol. Biochem.24373380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Pinton, R, Cesco, S, Iacoletti, G, Astolfi, S, Varanini, Z 1999Modulation of NO 3 - uptake by water-extractable humic substances: involvement of root plasma H+ ATPasePlant Soil215155161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Preston, C M 1996Applications of NMR to soil organic matter analysis: history and prospectsSoil Sci.16144166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Quagiotti, S, Ruperti, B, Pizzighello, D, Francioso, O, Tugnoli, V, Nardi, S 2004Effect of low molecular size humic substances on nitrate uptake and expression of genes involved in nitrate transport in maize (Zea Mays L)J. Exp. Bot.55111Google Scholar
  40. Rao, C N R 1963Chemical Applications of Infrared SpectroscopyAcademic PressLondon132 Google Scholar
  41. Rietz, S, Holk, A, Scherer, G F E 2004Expression of the patatin-related phospholipase A gene AtPLA IIA in Arabidopsis thaliana is up-regulated by salicylic acid, wouding, ethylene, and iron and phosphate deficiencyPlanta219743753PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Scherer, G F E 2002Second messengers and phospholipase A2 in auxin signal transductionPlant Mol. Biol.49357372PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Scherer, G F E, André, B 1989A rapid response to a plant hormone: auxin stimulates phospholipase A2 in vivo and in vitroBiochem. Biophys. Res. Commun.163111117PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Scherer, G F E, André, B 1993Stimulation of phospholipase A2 by auxin in microsomes from suspension-cultured soybean cells is receptor-mediated and influenced by nucleotidesPlanta191515523CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Scherer, G F E, Arnold, B 1997Inhibitors of animal phospholipase A2 enzymes are selective inhibitors of auxin-dependent growth. Implications for auxin-induced signal transductionPlanta202462469CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Schroeder, J I, Allen, G J, Hugouvieux, V, Kwak, J M, Waner, D 2001Guard cell signal transductionAnn. Rev. Plant Physiol. Plant Mol. Biol.52627658CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Six, D A, Dennis, E A 2000The expanding superfamily of phospholipase A2 enzymes: classification and characterizationBiochim. Biophys. Acta1488119PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Stevenson, F J 1994Humus Chemistry: Genesis, Composition, Reactions2Wiley & SonsNew York496Google Scholar
  49. Sze, H, Li, X, Palmgren, M G 1999Energization of plant cell membranes by H+-pumping ATPases: regulation and biosynthesisPlant Cell11677689PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Tan, K H 1998Colloidal chemistry of organic soil constituentsTan, K H eds. Principles of Soil ChemistryMarcell DekkerNew York177258Google Scholar
  51. Varanini, Z, Pinton, R 2001Direct versus in direct effects of soil humic substances on plant growth and nutritionBasel, DPinton, RVaranini, ZNannipieri, P eds. The RhizosphereMarcel DekkerSwitzerland141158Google Scholar
  52. Vaughan, D 1986Effetto delle sostanze umiche sui processi metabolici delle pianteBurns, R GDell’Agnola, GMiele, SNardi,  SSavoini, GSchnitzer, MSequi, PVaughan, DVisser, S A eds. Sostanze umiche effetti sul terreno e sulle pianteRamo Editoriale degli AgricoltoriRoma5981Google Scholar
  53. Vaughan, D, Macdonald, I R 1971Effects of humic acid on protein synthesis and ion uptake in beet discsJ. Exp. Bot.22400410Google Scholar
  54. Vaughan, D, Malcolm, R E 1985Influence of humic substances on growth and physiological processesVaughan, DMalcolm, R E eds. Soil Organic Matter and Biological ActivityMartinus-NijhoffBoston3775Google Scholar
  55. Wershaw, R L 1985Application of Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy for determining functionality in humic substancesAiken, G RMcKnight, D MWershaw, R LMacCarthey, P eds. Humic Substances in Soil, Water and Sediment: Geochemistry, Isolation and CharacterizationWiley InternationalNew York561570Google Scholar
  56. Wilson, M A, Collin, P J, Malcolm, R L, Perdue, E M, Cresswell, P 1988Low molecular weight species in humic and fulvic fractionsOrg. Geochem.12712CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Wilson, M A, Collin, P J, Tate, K R 19831H NMR nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy of soil humic acidJ. Soil Sci.34297304Google Scholar
  58. Winstead, M V, Balsinde, J, Dennis, E A 2000Calcium-independent phospholipase A2: structure and functionBiochim. Biophys. Acta14882839PubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. Yi, H, Park, D, Lee, Y 1996In vivo evidence for the involvement of phospholipase A and protein kinase in the signal transduction pathway for auxin-induced corn coleoptile elongationPhysiol. Plantarum96359368CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Laurel Russell
    • 1
  • Angela R Stokes
    • 1
    • 4
  • Heather Macdonald
    • 1
  • Adele Muscolo
    • 2
  • Serenella Nardi
    • 3
  1. 1.Centre for Research in Plant ScienceUniversity of the West of EnglandBristolUK
  2. 2.Dipartimento di Gestione dei Sistemi Agricoli e Forestali, Facoltà di AgrariaUniversità degli Studi “Mediterranea” di Reggio CalabriaReggio CalabriaItaly
  3. 3.Dipartimento di Biotecnologie Agrarie, AgripolisUniversità di PadovaLegnaro PadovaItaly
  4. 4.School of Biological SciencesUniversity of East AngliaNorwichUK

Personalised recommendations