Selective membrane permeability and peroxidase activity response of lettuce and arugula irrigated with cyanobacterial-contaminated water
- 246 Downloads
Irrigation with microcystins-contaminated water has been shown to cause oxidative stress and negatively affect the development of vegetables. However, the effect of non-microcystins producing cyanobacteria on vegetables is yet to be investigated. In this study, the effects of microcystin-producing (MC+) and non-microcystin-producing (MC−) cyanobacterial (Microcystis aeruginosa) extracts on lettuce (Lactuca sativa L.) and arugula (Eruca sativa Mill.) were investigated. Chlorophyll production, peroxidase (POD) activity and selective membrane permeability of the vegetables were monitored after exposure to 0.6–12.5 µg L−1 MC+ for 15 days. For MC− extracts, an equivalent biomass of each MC+ extract concentration per total MCs concentration was also applied to the vegetables for 15 days. In arugula, exposure to both toxic and non-toxic cyanobacterial extracts resulted in higher POD activity than the control. However, in lettuce plants, significantly lower POD activities were recorded in the presence of MC+ and MC− extracts. Although both crude (MC+ and MC−) extracts increased plasma membrane electrical conductivity of the vegetables, the effect of MC+ extract was higher. Chlorophyll content of both vegetables was not significantly influenced by MC+ and MC− extracts. The results of the present study show that vegetables have variable responses to MC+ and MC− extracts of M. aeruginosa. Therefore, care must be taken to avoid the excessive use of M. aeruginosa contaminated water to irrigate vegetables, regardless of their MCs production potential.
KeywordsVegetables Contaminated water Enzyme activity Plasma membranes Cyanotoxins
This research was supported by grants from FAPESP (2014/01934-0, 2013/11306-3), CNPq (470198/2011-7), FACEPE (AMD-0186-2.00/13) and CAPES.
- Bittencourt-Oliveira MC, Kujbida P, Cardozo KHM, Carvalho VM, Moura AN, Colepicolo P, Pinto E (2005) A novel rhythm of microcystin biosynthesis is described in the cyanobacterium Microcystis panniformis Komárek et al. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 326:687–694. doi: 10.1016/j.bbrc.2004.11.091 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Bittencourt-Oliveira MC, Chia MA, Oliveira HSB, Cordeiro-Araújo MK, Molica RJR, Dias CTS (2015) Allelopathic interactions between microcystin-producing and non-microcystin-producing cyanobacteria and green microalgae: implications for microcystins production. J Appl Phycol 27:275–284. doi: 10.1007/s10811-014-0326-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Engene N, Rottacker EC, Kastovsky J, Byrum T, Choi H, Ellisman MH, Komárek J, Gerwick WH (2012) Moorea producens gen. nov., sp. nov. and Moorea bouillonii comb. nov., tropical marine cyanobacteria rich in bioactive secondary metabolites. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 62:1171–1178. doi: 10.1099/ijs.0.033761-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Gorham PR, Mclachlan J, Hammer UT, Kim WK (1964) Isolation and culture of toxic strains of Anabaena flos-aquae (Lyngb.) de Bréb. Verh Int Verein Theor Angew Limnol 15:796–804Google Scholar
- Lichtenthaler HK (1987) Chlorophylls and carotenoids: pigments of photosynthetic biomembranes. In: Packer L, Douce R (eds) Methods in enzimology. Academic Press, London, pp 350–381Google Scholar
- Peuthert A, Chakrabarti S, Pflugmacher S (2007) Uptake of Microcystins-LR and -LF (Cyanobacterial toxins) in seedlings of several important agricultural plant species and the correlation with cellular damage (lipid peroxidation). Environ Toxicol 22:436–442. doi: 10.1002/tox.20266 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Saqrane S, Ouahid Y, Ghazali Y, Oudra B, Bouarab L, Campo FF (2009) Physiological changes in Triticum durum, Zea mays, Pisum sativum and Lens esculenta cultivars, caused by irrigation with water contaminated with microcystins: a laboratory experimental approach. Toxicon 53:786–796. doi: 10.1016/j.toxicon.2009.01.028 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Sivonen K, Jones G (1999) Cyanobacterial toxins. In: Chorus I, Bartram J (eds). Toxic cyanobacteria in water: a guide to the public health consequences, monitoring and management. J.E and FN Spon, London, pp 41–111Google Scholar