Modulation of Morphological and Several Physiological Parameters in Sedum under Waterlogging and Subsequent Drainage
- 9 Downloads
A comparative study was undertaken to investigate the morphological and physiological differences between tolerant Sedum spectabile Boreau “Carl” and susceptible S. spectabile “Rosenteller” in response to simulated waterlogging for 36 days and subsequent drainage for 12 days. Although the stress induced visible leaf stress symptoms in both cultivars, symptoms occurred earlier and severe in the susceptible cultivar. In the S. spectabile “Carl”, adventitious roots emerged earlier from leaf scar. Waterlogging induced more acute decrease of plant height, canopy, leaf area, root length, shoot/root biomass in S. spectabile “Rosenteller”. Leaf chlorophyll, relative water content and water soluble carbohydrate concentration were comparatively more salient in S. spectabile “Carl”. The activities of SOD (superoxide dismutase), CAT (catalase), APX (ascorbate peroxidase) increased in both accessions after suffering of the stress, and all activities of them were more pronounced in S. spectabile “Carl”. In addition, the lower MDA content of S. spectabile “Carl” was lower than that of S. spectabile “Rosenteller” demonstrated that less oxidative damage was induced by waterlogging and drainage. All these results suggest that the greater relative waterlogging tolerance to withstand waterlogging stress up to 36 days and better recovery capacity after soil drainage of S. spectabile “Carl” appears to depend on the combination of morphological and metabolic responses.
Keywords:Sedum spectabile waterlogging drainage lipid peroxidation antioxidant enzyme
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS COMPLIANCE WITH ETHICAL STANDARDS
We thank the project, funded by the State Forestry Administration (Propagation, application demonstration and generalization of high resistant perennials (project no. 2016 (31)) and Shenzhen Techand Ecology & Environment Co., LTD (Development and application of cold-tolerant and drought-tolerant sedum spp. (THRD010)). We also thank Jianhua Hao for helping to provide site space. Jie Zhang and Dr. Li Dong designed and contributed to the bench experiments. Jie Zhang wrote the manuscript. Dejie Yin, Rui Jing, Haiyan Guan and Qiqi Qu assisted in the measurement of experiments. All authors read and approved the manuscript.
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest. This article does not contain any studies involving animals or human participants performed by any of the authors.
- 1.Balakhnina, T.I., Plant responses to soil flooding, in Stress Responses in Plants, Tripathi, B.N. and Müller, M., Eds., Berlin: Springer, 2015, pp. 115–142.Google Scholar
- 4.Evans, D.E. and Gladish, D.K., Plant responses to waterlogging, in Encyclopedia of Applied Plant Sciences, 2017, vol. 1, pp. 36–39.Google Scholar
- 9.Le Provost, G., Lesur, I., Lalanne, C., da Silva, C., Labadie, K., Aury, J.M., Leple, J.C., and Plomion, C., Implication of the suberin pathway in adaptation to waterlogging and hypertrophied lenticels formation in pedunculate oak (Quercus robur L.), Tree Physiol., 2016, vol. 36, pp. 1330–1342.Google Scholar
- 17.Durhman, A.K., Rowe, D.B., and Rugh, C.L., Effect of watering regimen on chlorophyll fluorescence and growth of selected green roof plant taxa, Hortscience, 2006, vol. 41, pp. 1623–1628.Google Scholar
- 22.Wang, X., Chang, L., Wang, B., Wang, D., Li, P., Wang, L., Yi, X., Huang, Q., Peng, M., and Guo, A., Comparative proteomics of Thellungiella halophila leaves under different salinity revealed chloroplast starch and soluble sugar accumulation played important roles in halophyte salt tolerance, Mol. Cell. Pro-teomics, 2013, vol. 12, no. 8, pp. 2174–2195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 23.Nakano, Y. and Asada, K., Hydrogen peroxide is scavenged by ascorbate-specific peroxidase in spinach chloroplasts, Plant Cell Physiol., 1981, vol. 22, pp. 867–880.Google Scholar
- 25.Yang, L., Zeng, H., Zhu, X., and Liao, F., Research of water stress on four kinds of plants such as Sedum yvesii, etc., Hunan For. Sci. Technol., 2016, vol. 43, pp. 1–5.Google Scholar