Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Response of sun- and shade-adapted plants of Haberlea rhodopensis to desiccation

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Plant Growth Regulation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The differences in some morphological and physiological characteristics of sun- and shade-adapted Haberlea rhodopensis plants were compared. Changes in the photosynthetic activity, electrolyte leakage from leaf tissues, malondialdehyde content (MDA) and leaf anatomy were studied at different degrees of desiccation as well as after rehydration of plants. The MDA content in well-watered sun Haberlea plants was higher compared to shade plants suggesting higher lipid peroxidation, which is commonly regarded as an indicator of oxidative stress, but desiccation of plants at high light did not cause additional oxidative damage as judged by the unaffected MDA content. The electrolyte leakage from dried leaves (8% RWC) from both shade and sun plants increased fourfold indicating similar membrane damage. However, the recovery after rehydration showed that this damage was reversible. Well-watered sun plants had higher photosynthetic activity probably due to the larger thickness of the mesophyll layer in such plants. On the other hand, desiccation at high light reduced CO2 assimilation which was in accordance with the stronger reduction of stomatal conductance. Stomata were visible only on the abaxial side of sun leaves having also higher abundance of non-glandular trichomes. Increased trichomes density and epicuticular waxes and filaments upon desiccation could help plants to increase reflection, reduce net radiation income, slow down the rate of water loss and survive adverse conditions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Cooper K, Farrant JM (2002) Recovery of the resurrection plant Craterostigma wilmsii from desiccation: protection vs. repair. J Exp Bot 53:1805–1813

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Demmig-Adams B, Adams WW (1996) The role of xanthophylls cycle carotenoids in the protection of photosynthesis. Trends Plant Sci 1:21–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Esterbauer H, Cheeseman KH (1990) Determination of aldehydic lipid peroxidation products: malonaldehyde and 4-hydroxynonenal. Methods Enzymol 186:407–421

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Evans JR, Kaldenhoff R, Genty B, Terashima I (2009) Resistances along the CO2 diffusion pathway inside leaves. J Exp Bot 60:2235–2248

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Farrant JM (2000) A comparison of mechanisms of desiccation tolerance among three angiosperm resurrection plant species. Plant Ecol 151:29–39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farrant GM, Willingen CV, Loffell DA, Bartsch S, Whittaker A (2003) An investigation into the role of light during desiccation of three angiosperm resurrection plants. Plant Cell Environ 26:1275–1286

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Farrant JM, Brandt W, Lindsey GG (2007) An overview of mechanisms of desiccation tolerance in selected angiosperm resurrection plants. Plant Stress J 1:72–84

    Google Scholar 

  • Flexas J, Bota J, Escalona JM, Sampol B, Medrano H (2002) Effects of drought on photosynthesis in grapevines under field conditions: an evaluation of stomatal and mesophyll limitations. Funct Plant Biol 29:461–471

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Georgieva K, Maslenkova L (2006) Thermostability and photostability of photosystem II of the resurrection plant Haberlea rhodopensis studied by chlorophyll fluorescence. Z Naturforsh C 61:234–240

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Georgieva K, Maslenkova L, Peeva P, Markovska Y, Stefanov D, Tuba Z (2005) Comparative study on the changes in photosynthetic activity of the homoiochlorophyllous desiccation-tolerant Haberlea rhodopensis and desiccation-sensitive spinach leaves during desiccation and rehydration. Photosynth Res 85:191–203

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Georgieva K, Szigeti Z, Sarvari E, Gaspar L, Maslenkova L, Peva V, Peli E, Tuba Z (2007) Photosynthetic activity of homoiochlorophyllous desiccation tolerant plant Haberlea rhodopensis during desiccation and rehydration. Planta 225:955–964

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Georgieva K, Lenk S, Buschmann C (2008) Responses of the resurrection plant Haberlea rhodopensis to high irradiance. Photosynthetica 46:208–215

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Havaux M, Tardy F (1999) Loss of chlorophyll with limited reduction of photosynthesis as an adaptive response of Syrian barley landraces to high-light and heat stress. Aust J Plant Physiol 26:569–578

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lawlor DW, Cornic G (2002) Photosynthetic carbon assimilation and associated metabolism in relation to water deficits in higher plants. Plant Cell Environ 25:275–294

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lichtenthaler KH (1987) Chlorophylls and carotenoids: pigments of photosynthetic biomembranes. Methods Enzymol 148:350–382

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Moore JP, Vicre M, Farrant JM, Driouich A (2008) Adaptations of higher plant cell walls to water loss: drought versus desiccation. Physiol Plant 134:237–245

    Google Scholar 

  • Oliver MJ (1996) Desiccation tolerance in vegetative plant cells. Physiol Plant 97:779–787

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Oliver MJ, Velten J, Mischler BD (2005) Desiccation tolerance in bryophytes: a reflection of a primitive strategy for plant survival in dehydrating habitats. Integr Comp Biol 45:788–799

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Peeva V, Cornic G (2009) Leaf photosynthesis of Haberlea rhodopensis before and during drought. Environ Exp Bot 65:310–318

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Proctor MCF, Pence VC (2002) Vegetative tissues: bryophytes, vascular resurrection plants and vegetative propagules. In: Black M, Pritchard HW (eds) Desiccation and plant survival: drying without dying. CABI Publishing, Wallingford, pp 207–237

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Proctor MCF, Smirnoff N (2000) Rapid recovery of photosystems on rewetting desiccation-tolerant mosses: chlorophyll fluorescence and inhibitor experiments. J Exp Bot 51:1695–1704

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Proctor MCF, Ligrone R, Duckett JG (2007) Desiccation tolerance in the moss Polytrichum formosum: physiological and fine-structural changes during desiccation and recovery. Ann Bot 99:75–93

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ramanjulu S, Bartels D (2002) Drought- and desiccation induced modulation of gene expression in plants. Plant Cell Environ 25:141–151

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson S, Lovelock CE, Osmond CB (1993) Wax as a mechanism for protection against photoinhibition. A study of Cotyledon orbiculata. Bot Acta 106:307–312

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Schwab KB, Schreiber U, Heber U (1989) Response of photosynthesis and respiration of resurrection plants to desiccation and rehydration. Planta 177:217–227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smirnoff N (1993) The role of active oxygen in the response of plants to water deficit and desiccation. New Phytol 125:27–58

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Terashima I, Hanba YT, Tazoe Y, Vyas P, Yano S (2006) Irradiance and phenotype: comparative eco-development of sun and shade leaves in relation to photosynthetic CO2 diffusion. J Exp Bot 57:343–354

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Vecchia FD, Asmar TE, Calamassi R, Rascio N, Vazzana C (1998) Morphological and ultrastructural aspects of dehydration and rehydration in leaves of Sporobolus stapfianus. Plant Growth Reg 24:219–228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vicré M, Sherwin HW, Driouich A, Jaffer M, Jauneau A, Farrant JM (1999) Cell wall properties of hydrated and dry leaves of the resurrection plant Craterostigma wilmsii. J Plant Physiol 155:719–726

    Google Scholar 

  • Vicré M, Farrant JM, Driouich A (2004) Insights into the cellular mechanisms of desiccation tolerance among angiosperm resurrection plant species. Plant Cell Environ 27:1329–1340

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • von Caemmerer S, Farquhar GD (1981) Some relationships between the biochemistry of photosynthesis and the gas exchange of leaves. Planta 153:376–387

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walters RG (2005) Towards an understanding of photosynthetic acclimation. J Exp Bot 56:435–447

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the National Science Fund under research project DO02-208/2008.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Plant Physiology and Genetics, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Acad. G. Bonchev Str., Bl. 21, 1113, Sofia, Bulgaria

    Katya Georgieva, Snejana Doncheva, Gergana Mihailova & Snejana Petkova

Authors
  1. Katya Georgieva
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Snejana Doncheva
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Gergana Mihailova
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Snejana Petkova
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Katya Georgieva.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Georgieva, K., Doncheva, S., Mihailova, G. et al. Response of sun- and shade-adapted plants of Haberlea rhodopensis to desiccation. Plant Growth Regul 67, 121–132 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10725-012-9669-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10725-012-9669-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation