Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Unexpected Behavior of Some Nitric Oxide Modulators under Cadmium Excess in Plant Tissue
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Unexpected Behavior of Some Nitric Oxide Modulators under Cadmium Excess in Plant Tissue
Do you wish to request the book?
Unexpected Behavior of Some Nitric Oxide Modulators under Cadmium Excess in Plant Tissue
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Unexpected Behavior of Some Nitric Oxide Modulators under Cadmium Excess in Plant Tissue
2014
Overview
Various nitric oxide modulators (NO donors--SNP, GSNO, DEA NONOate and scavengers--PTIO, cPTIO) were tested to highlight the role of NO under Cd excess in various ontogenetic stages of chamomile (Matricaria chamomilla). Surprisingly, compared to Cd alone, SNP and PTIO elevated Cd uptake (confirmed also by PhenGreen staining) but depleted glutathione (partially ascorbic acid) and phytochelatins PC2 and PC3 in both older plants (cultured hydroponically) and seedlings (cultured in deionised water). Despite these anomalous impacts, fluorescence staining of NO and ROS confirmed predictable assumptions and revealed reciprocal changes (decrease in NO but increase in ROS after PTIO addition and the opposite after SNP application). Subsequent tests using alternative modulators and seedlings confirmed changes to NO and ROS after application of GSNO and DEA NONOate as mentioned above for SNP while cPTIO altered only NO level (depletion). On the contrary to SNP and PTIO, GSNO, DEA NONOate and cPTIO did not elevate Cd content and phytochelatins (PC2, PC3) were rather elevated. These data provide evidence that various NO modulators are useful in terms of NO and ROS manipulation but interactions with intact plants affect metal uptake and must therefore be used with caution. In this view, cPTIO and DEA NONOate revealed the less pronounced side impacts and are recommended as suitable NO scavenger/donor in plant physiological studies under Cd excess.
Publisher
Public Library of Science,Public Library of Science (PLoS)
