Cited by 837Plant Stress Responses and ToleranceRedox biology and oxidative stressGlutathione Transferases and Polymorphisms

Tolerance of pea (Pisum sativum L.) to long‐term salt stress is associated with induction of antioxidant defences

Open access
Hernández, J. A., Jiménez, A., Mullineaux, P., Sevilia, F.·2000·Plant, Cell & Environment

Abstract

ABSTRACT Using two cultivars of Pisum sativum L. with different sensitivity to NaCl, the effect of long‐term (15 d) NaCl (70 m M) treatments on the activity and expression of the foliar ascorbate–glutathione cycle enzymes, superoxide dismutase isozymes and their mRNAs was evaluated and related to their ascorbate and glutathione contents. High‐speed supernatant (soluble) fractions, enriched for cytosolic components of the antioxidant system, were used. In this fraction from the NaCl‐tolerant variety (cv Granada), the activities of ascorbate peroxidase (APX), glutathione reductase (GR), monodehydroascorbate reductase (MDHAR), Mn‐superoxide dismutase (Mn‐SOD) and dehydroascorbate reductase (DHAR) increased, while CuZn‐SOD activity remained constant. In the NaCl‐sensitive plants (cv Challis), salinity did not produce significant changes in APX, MDHAR and GR activities. Only DHAR activity was induced in cv Challis, whereas soluble CuZn‐SOD activity decreased by about 35%. Total ascorbate and glutathione contents decreased in both cultivars, but the decline was greater in NaCl‐sensitive plants. This difference between the two cultivars was more pronounced when the transcript levels of some these enzymes were examined. Transcript levels for mitochondrial Mn‐SOD, chloroplastic CuZn‐SOD and phospholipid hydroperoxide glutathione peroxidase (PHGPX), cytosolic GR and APX were strongly induced in the NaCl‐tolerant variety but not in the NaCl‐sensitive variety. These data strongly suggest that induction of antioxidant defences is at least one component of the tolerance mechanism of peas to long‐term salt‐stress.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1046/j.1365-3040.2000.00602.x

Cites

73 of 73 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Studies on the effects of adverse environmental conditions on pea have only been done at the plant level.

    “However, studies on the effects of adverse environmental conditions on this plant species have only been done at the plant level (Hernandez et al., 2000; Allen and Ort, 2001).”

    From Exploring the Applicability of Calorespirometry to Assess Seed Metabolic Stability Upon Temperature Stress Conditions—Pisum sativum L. Used as a Case Study (2022) · cites this paper as Hernandez et al., 2000

    The Introduction says this study examines antioxidant activity in cytosol-enriched fractions and mRNA levels in salt-stressed pea. The Results and discussion (p. 859) report responses in those fractions and in transcripts, so the work was not limited to plant-level measurements. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 74 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Halliwell B. (1982) The toxic effects of oxygen on plant tissues. In: Superoxide Dismutase,Vol 1 (ed. L.W. Oberley), pp. 89-124, CRC Press Inc., Boca Raton, Florida.
  2. Löhr G.W. & Waller H.D. (1974) Glucose-6-phosphate dehydroge- nase. In: Methods of Enzymatic Analysis, Vol 2 (ed. H.U. Bergmeyer), pp. 636-643, Academic Press, New York.
  3. Mullineaux P.M., Karpinski S., Jiménez A., Cleary S., Robinson C. & Creissen G. (1998) Plastid-targeted glutathione peroxidase provides evidence for an ascorbate-independent glutathione redox cycle in plant chloroplast. Plant Journal 13, 375-379.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hernández, J. A., Jiménez, A., Mullineaux, P., & Sevilia, F.
Affiliations
  • Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (ES)
  • John Innes Centre (GB)
Venue
Plant, Cell & Environment
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2000-08
Volume
23
Issue
8
Pages
853-862
ISSN
  • 0140-7791 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-3040
OpenAlex
W2125614572
Cited by
837
References
74
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 23 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 32 · 2022: 33 · 2021: 45 · 2020: 43 · 2019: 39 · 2018: 36 · 2017: 46 · 2016: 34 · 2015: 44 · 2014: 50 · 2013: 54 · 2012: 44
FWCI
12.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Plant Cell & Environment (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Royal Society
  • Universidad de Murcia
  • Directorate for Biological Sciences
  • Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Plant Stress Responses and Tolerance
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Redox biology and oxidative stress
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Glutathione Transferases and Polymorphisms
Keywords
pea, Pisum sativum, salt stress, NaCl tolerance, antioxidant defense, ascorbate-glutathione cycle, superoxide dismutase, ascorbate peroxidase, glutathione reductase, monodehydroascorbate reductase, dehydroascorbate reductase, cultivar differences

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review