Susanne
Neugart
a,
Éva
Hideg
b,
Gyula
Czégény
b,
Monika
Schreiner
c and
Åke
Strid
*d
aDivision of Quality and Sensory of Plant Products, University of Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany
bDepartment of Plant Biology, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary
cDepartment of Plant Quality and Food Security, Leibniz Institute of Vegetable and Ornamental Crops, Großbeeren, Germany
dSchool of Science & Technology, Örebro Life Science Center, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden. E-mail: ake.strid@oru.se
First published on 21st January 2020
Pyridoxine (vitamin B6) and its vitamers are used by living organisms both as enzymatic cofactors and as antioxidants. We used Arabidopsis pyridoxine biosynthesis mutant pdx1.3-1 to study the involvement of the PLP-synthase main polypeptide PDX1 in plant responses to ultraviolet radiation of two different qualities, one containing primarily UV-A (315–400 nm) and the other containing both UV-A and UV-B (280–315 nm). The antioxidant capacity and the flavonoid and glucosinolate (GS) profiles were examined. As an indicator of stress, Fv/Fm of photosystem II reaction centers was used. In pdx1.3-1, UV-A + B exposure led to a significant 5% decrease in Fv/Fm on the last day (day 15), indicating mild stress at this time point. The antioxidant capacity of Col-0 wildtype increased significantly (50–73%) after 1 and 3 days of UV-A + B. Instead, in pdx1.3-1, the antioxidant capacity significantly decreased by 44–52% over the same time period, proving the importance of a full complement of functional PDX1 genes for the detoxification of reactive oxygen species. There were no significant changes in the flavonoid glycoside profile under any light condition. However, the GS profile was significantly altered, both with respect to Arabidopsis accession and exposure to UV. The difference in flavonoid and GS profiles reflects that the GS biosynthesis pathway contains at least one pyridoxine-dependent enzyme, whereas no such enzyme is used in flavonoid biosynthesis. Also, there was strong correlation between the antioxidant capacity and the content of some GS compounds. Our results show that vitamin B6 vitamers, functioning both as antioxidants and co-factors, are of importance for the physiological fitness of plants.
In plants, PLP is synthesized de novo from glutamine, ribose 5-phosphate, and glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate by two interacting proteins, the PDX1 PLP synthase and the PDX2 glutaminase.1,4,11 PDX2 extracts ammonium from glutamine and delivers it to PDX1 which synthesizes the final product. PDX1 is a multifunctional enzyme catalysing at least six different chemical reactions. It has been suggested to be one of the most complicated enzymes that exists,1 with regard to the intricate catalytic processes that are carried out by the polypeptide. The PDX1 PLP synthase exists as a dodecamer in vivo1 and the details of its catalytic function are at present being unveiled.1,12
With regard to the physiological role of VitB6, increasing scientific evidence shows that VitB6 also can act as an antioxidant, in addition to its role as a cofactor.6,13 VitB6 efficiently detoxifies various reactive oxygen species (ROS) such as singlet oxygen, superoxide anion radical, hydroxyl radical, and hydrogen peroxide.6,13–19 Thus, in plants, the relatively newly discovered antioxidant activity of VitB6 has increased the interest of understanding VitB6 function under different types of environmental stresses.5 This includes salt stress,6,7 osmotic stress,6 photoinhibition,7,20 and biotic stress and disease resistance.21,22 Furthermore, VitB6 has been shown to play an important role in plant responses to ultraviolet-B radiation (UV-B; 280–315 nm), which is a naturally occurring part of the solar spectrum. This role is manifested as an increased expression of VitB6 biosynthesis genes and enzymes21,22 and the accumulation of VitB6 in plants exposed to UV-B.22 In fact, it is possible that during plant stress in general, VitB6 could either act as an antioxidant, or as an important cofactor in the stress-protective metabolism, or both. In the A. thaliana VitB6 biosynthesis mutant pdx1.3-1, first characterized by Titiz et al.,7 we have previously shown that H2O2 accumulated to a larger extent than in the Col-0 wild type and that the photosynthetic parameters Fv/Fm (maximal dark-adapted PSII quantum yield) and Y(II) (effective light-acclimated PSII quantum yield) decreased, whereas the non-photochemical quenching due to dissipative processes (Y(NO)) increased.18 Again, this indicated that the pdx1.3-1 mutant, lacking full capacity for VitB6 synthesis, suffered from UV-B-induced oxidative stress. It should be noted that of the three PDX1 genes, only PDX1.1 and PDX1.3 are functional and the PDX1.3 dominates in the wild type plant.7 The pdx1.1pdx1.3 double mutant is embryo lethal.7
In order to further examine the role of VitB6 under conditions of supplementary UV-B radiation at levels that generally are not stressful for plants, we devised the present study. Here we further examined the antioxidant capacity of wild type and pdx1.3-1 plants exposed to supplementary UV-A radiation or UV-A + B radiation, and in plants exposed to photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) only. In addition, we analysed the content and profile of two classes of phytochemicals, flavonoids and glucosinolates (GS). Flavonoids were chosen because their synthesis is a signature UV response in plants23 and since their biosynthesis is independent of enzymes using VitB6 as the cofactor. In the case of GS24–26 they were chosen since one step in the core GS biosynthesis has been confirmed to be dependent on VitB6, i.e. the one catalysed by the SUR1 S-alkyl-thiohydroximate lyase.27 Also, three more enzymes involved in the amino acid interconversion leading up to GS biosynthesis have been inferred to use PLP as the cofactor: the branched-chain-amino-acid aminotransferases 3 (BCAT3;25http://www.uniprot.org/uniprot/Q9M401), 4 (BCAT4;28http://www.uniprot.org/uniprot/Q9LE06), and 6 (BCAT6;29http://www.uniprot.org/uniprot/Q9LPM9), respectively. Thus, with respect to the glucosinolate metabolism, the effects of both the exposure to supplementary UV radiation and the VitB6 deficiency in the core glucosinolate biosynthesis could be detected.
![]() | ||
Fig. 1 (A) Spectral UV irradiance (in W (cm2 nm)−1) of Philips TL40/12 UV tubes used for the irradiation of A. thaliana plants. The UV-A + B light regime (dashed line) was accomplished by filtering the light through cellulose acetate sheets. For the UV-A-enriched light (solid line), Mylar sheets were used as filters. In (B) the corresponding plant-weighted UV (in W (m2 nm)−1)30 during the two types of exposures is shown. |
The composition and content of flavonoid glycosides and hydroxycinnamic acid derivatives were determined from the filtrate using a series 1100 HPLC (Agilent Technologies, Waldbronn, Germany) equipped with a degasser, binary pump, autosampler, column oven, and photodiode array detector. An Ascentis Express F5 column (150 mm × 4.6 mm, 5 μm, Supelco) was used to separate the compounds at 25 °C. Eluent A was 0.5% acetic acid, and eluent B was 100% acetonitrile. The gradient used for eluent B was 5–12% (0–3 min), 12–25% (3–46 min), 25–90% (46–49.5 min), 90% isocratic (49.5–52 min), 90–5% (52–52.7 min), and 5% isocratic (52.7–59 min). The determination was conducted at a flow rate of 0.85 ml min−1 and a wavelength of 280 nm, 320 nm, 330 nm, 370 nm, and 520 nm. The hydroxycinnamic acid derivatives and glycosides of flavonoids were tentatively identified as deprotonated molecular ions and characteristic mass fragment ions according to Schmidt et al.35 and Neugart et al.36 by HPLC-DAD-ESI-MSn using an Bruker amazon SL ion trap mass spectrometer in negative ionisation mode. For the identification of the peaks, the data were compared with the literature of the investigated species and their derivatives. In the mass spectrometer, nitrogen was used as the dry gas (10 L min−1, 325 °C) and the nebulizer gas (40 psi) with a capillary voltage of −3500 V. Helium was used as the collision gas in the ion trap. The mass optimization for the ion optics of the mass spectrometer for quercetin was performed at m/z 301 or arbitrarily at m/z 1000. The MSn experiments were performed in auto up to MS3 in a scan from m/z 200–2000. Standards (chlorogenic acid, quercetin 3-glucoside, kaempferol 3-glucoside and isorhamnetin-3-glucoside; Roth, Karlsruhe, Germany) were used for external calibration curves in a semi-quantitative approach. Results are presented as mg per g dry weight.
Correlations between the amounts of glucosinolate compounds and hydroxyl radical neutralizing antioxidant capacities were analysed by calculating Person's correlation coefficient (r). Probabilities of the null hypothesis that there is no correlation (p-values) are shown together with r-values. A linear connection between hydroxyl radical neutralizing antioxidant capacities and amounts of one of the glucosinolate compounds was studied by calculating a linear fit using the method of least squares. Following this, the probability of the null hypothesis that the slope of a fitting line is equal to zero was examined. The coefficient of determination (R2) was also calculated. These analyses were carried out using PAST software38 and Statistica™ for Windows™ (version 13.0, Statsoft Inc., Tulsa, OK. USA).
Therefore, we devised the present experimental set-up to study the role of VitB6 vitamers in the UV-B-regulation of flavonoid and GS profiles on the one hand, and the antioxidant capacity of leaves of the Col-0 and pdx1.3-1 A. thaliana accessions, on the other. As a proxy for distress,42 we also measured the dark-adapted maximal photosynthetic capacity in the form of the chlorophyll fluorescence parameter Fv/Fm. This parameter has previously been shown to differ between the two Arabidopsis varieties after a short, high dose UV exposure.18 Thus, the use of low dose exposure as in the present study is novel.
![]() | ||
Fig. 2 Maximum quantum yield of PSII photochemistry (Fv/Fm) was measured in A. thaliana plants exposed to control light, UV-A- or UV-A + B-supplemented light, given for 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, or 15 days, six hours per day centered around the solar noon. The bars indicate the standard deviation. Significant changes between pairwise physiologically relevant comparisons of samples are shown in Table 1 and means and standard deviations in Table S1.†N = 6–17 leaves from at least three different plants were measured. |
Day | Genotype | Treatment | Significance | Day | Genotype | Treatment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0 | Col-0 | Control | *** | 1 | Col-0 | Control |
0 | Col-0 | Control | ** | 15 | Col-0 | Control |
3 | pdx1.3-1 | Control | * | 3 | pdx1.3-1 | UV-A + B |
4 | Col-0 | UV-A | * | 4 | Col-0 | UV-A + B |
4 | pdx1.3-1 | Control | * | 4 | pdx1.3-1 | UV-A + B |
4 | pdx1.3-1 | UV-A | * | 4 | pdx1.3-1 | UV-A + B |
8 | Col-0 | Control | * | 8 | Col-0 | UV-A |
8 | Col-0 | Control | * | 15 | Col-0 | Control |
8 | Col-0 | UV-A | **** | 15 | Col-0 | UV-A |
8 | pdx1.3-1 | Control | * | 8 | pdx1.3-1 | UV-A |
8 | pdx1.3-1 | Control | * | 15 | pdx1.3-1 | Control |
8 | pdx1.3-1 | UV-A | * | 8 | pdx1.3-1 | UV-A + B |
15 | Col-0 | Control | ** | 15 | Col-0 | UV-A + B |
15 | Col-0 | Control | **** | 15 | pdx1.3-1 | Control |
15 | Col-0 | UV-A | *** | 15 | Col-0 | UV-A + B |
15 | pdx1.3-1 | Control | **** | 15 | pdx1.3-1 | UV-A + B |
15 | pdx1.3-1 | UV-A | * | 15 | pdx1.3-1 | UV-A + B |
Interestingly, changes in Fv/Fm were seen also after 15 days, although this was not the case for the 8-day exposures. In fact, there was a small but significant difference in Fv/Fm in Col-0 on day 15 between the control and UV-A-treated plants on the one hand, and the UV-A + B-treated plants on the other (by 0.039–0.055 units). Also, there was a significantly lower Fv/Fm in the Col-0 control plants than in the pdx1.3-1 controls after 15 days of exposure (by 0.080 units). Lowering of the Fv/Fm in Col-0 on day 15 may be attributed to the first signs of bolting that had occurred in all nine plants in this accession at that time-point but only in one of the nine pdx1.3-1 plants (not shown). Thus, the pdx1.3-1 mutation may lead to delayed bolting compared with the wild type. This may in turn be due to a lower abundance in pdx1.3-1 of metabolites needed for the transition from the vegetative to the reproductive stage.
However, this finding is in contrast to the case in the A. thaliana pdx3 mutant.43 The pdx3 mutant is deficient in the gene encoding the PDX3 PMP/PNP oxidase of the VitB6 salvage pathway that functions to interconvert the vitamers PMP and PNP to PLP. The pdx3 mutant instead displayed an early flowering phenotype that was linked to the over-accumulation of PMP and a concomitant impaired nitrogen metabolism.43 In addition, bolting in itself may considerably alter the metabolism of Arabidopsis plants, e.g. in the form of increased oxidative pressure as a result of decreased ascorbate peroxidase and catalase activities.44,45
Taken together, these results indicate that the plants had not been subjected to any distress42 caused by the UV treatments. However, eustress may have occurred in the pdx1.3-1 plants exposed to UV-A + B, particularly after 3 days of exposure or longer.
![]() | ||
Fig. 3 Hydroxyl radical antioxidant capacity measurement in A. thaliana Col-0 wildtype and pdx1.3-1 mutant plants 0, 1, and 3 days (6 hours per day around the solar noon) after supplementary UV-A or UV-A + B exposure. The bars indicate the standard deviation. Significant changes between pairwise physiologically relevant comparisons of samples are shown in Table 2. N = 2–6 replicates per sample type. |
Day | Genotype | Treatment | Significance | Day | Genotype | Treatment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0 | Col-0 | Control | * | 0 | pdx1.3-1 | control |
1 | Col-0 | Control | **** | 1 | Col-0 | UV-A + B |
1 | Col-0 | Control | * | 1 | pdx1.3-1 | control |
1 | Col-0 | UV-A | **** | 1 | Col-0 | UV-A + B |
1 | Col-0 | UV-A + B | *** | 3 | Col-0 | UV-A + B |
1 | Col-0 | UV-A + B | **** | 1 | pdx1.3-1 | UV-A + B |
1 | pdx1.3-1 | Control | ** | 1 | pdx1.3-1 | UV-A + B |
1 | pdx1.3-1 | UV-A | ** | 1 | pdx1.3-1 | UV-A + B |
3 | Col-0 | Control | *** | 3 | Col-0 | UV-A + B |
3 | Col-0 | UV-A | **** | 3 | Col-0 | UV-A + B |
3 | Col-0 | UV-A + B | **** | 3 | pdx1.3-1 | UV-A + B |
3 | pdx1.3-1 | Control | *** | 3 | pdx1.3-1 | UV-A + B |
3 | pdx1.3-1 | UV-A | *** | 3 | pdx1.3-1 | UV-A + B |
Interestingly, in the pdx1.3-1 mutant the ˙OH neutralizing antioxidant capacity of the control plants (day 0, day 1, and day 3; Fig. 3), is higher than in the corresponding controls by 15–19%. This is similar to the case in another PDX1 Arabidopsis mutant (rsr4-1) used in UV-B exposure studies.19 The reason for this higher background antioxidant capacity in rsr4-1 was attributed to the contribution of ˙OH scavenging by other non-enzymatic antioxidants. Particularly chlorogenic acid (a plant phenolic compound) and α-tocopherol were considered the main candidates for this.19
Days of exposure | Treatment | Genotype | Q-3-rha-7-glc | K-3-rha-7-rha | K-3-glc-7-rha | K-3-rut-7-glc | Average: total flavonoids | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2 | Control | Col-0 | 5.10 ± 3.84 | 7.49 ± 0.97 | 1.94 ± 2.73 | 5.24 ± 0.19 | B | 22.98 ± 2.89 | B | ||
UV-A | Col-0 | 1.79 ± 1.16 | 5.07 ± 0.13 | 1.84 ± 1.03 | 2.85 ± 0.06 | AB | 15.31 ± 1.45 | AB | |||
UV-A + B | Col-0 | 0.53 ± 0.43 | 4.06 ± 3.14 | 1.97 ± 1.62 | 2.25 ± 1.73 | A | 9.69 ± 7.23 | A | |||
Control | pdx1.3-1 | 3.51 ± 5.01 | 8.50 ± 0.35 | B | 5.18 ± 1.37 | B | 6.34 ± 0.61 | B | 31.20 ± 6.77 | B | |
UV-A | pdx1.3-1 | 0.62 ± 0.24 | 4.73 ± 0.50 | A | 2.66 ± 0.47 | A | 2.45 ± 0.15 | A | 14.16 ± 1.08 | A | |
UV-A + B | pdx1.3-1 | 0.89 ± 0.13 | 4.93 ± 1.60 | A | 1.98 ± 0.82 | A | 2.58 ± 0.60 | A | 12.45 ± 2.17 | A | |
4 | Control | Col-0 | 0.15 ± 0.02 | 8.54 ± 0.83 | AB | 1.26 ± 0.19 | 4.82 ± 0.22 | 18.85 ± 2.43 | AB | ||
UV-A | Col-0 | 0.19 ± 0.05 | 5.69 ± 2.90 | A | 0.94 ± 0.51 | 3.25 ± 1.87 | 13.01 ± 6.33 | A | |||
UV-A + B | Col-0 | 0.28 ± 0.12 | 11.56 ± 0.69 | B | 1.28 ± 1.15 | 7.22 ± 3.32 | 25.55 ± 4.73 | B | |||
Control | pdx1.3-1 | 0.49 ± 0.43 | 4.96 ± 1.00 | A | 1.67 ± 0.82 | A | 2.90 ± 0.13 | A | 12.04 ± 2.23 | A | |
UV-A | pdx1.3-1 | 0.53 ± 0.57 | 4.64 ± 1.49 | A | 0.97 ± 0.72 | A | 2.68 ± 0.63 | A | 11.54 ± 2.69 | A | |
UV-A + B | pdx1.3-1 | 0.35 ± 0.30 | 10.49 ± 0.72 | B | 5.02 ± 1.08 | B | 7.35 ± 0.23 | B | 27.58 ± 1.14 | B | |
8 | Control | Col-0 | 0.13 ± 0.01 | 3.71 ± 1.16 | 2.05 ± 0.47 | 2.25 ± 0.64 | 8.56 ± 2.19 | A | |||
UV-A | Col-0 | 0.33 ± 0.26 | 4.69 ± 2.15 | 1.30 ± 0.44 | 2.61 ± 1.24 | 10.00 ± 3.956 | A | ||||
UV-A + B | Col-0 | 0.12 ± 0.01 | 8.42 ± 2.81 | 4.43 ± 3.38 | 6.56 ± 2.83 | 21.34 ± 4.11 | B | ||||
Control | pdx1.3-1 | 0.13 ± 0.01 | 2.94 ± 0.52 | 1.40 ± 0.33 | 1.66 ± 0.29 | 6.51 ± 1.13 | A | ||||
UV-A | pdx1.3-1 | 0.32 ± 0.04 | 3.42 ± 1.73 | 2.89 ± 1.13 | 1.98 ± 0.93 | 10.60 ± 1.02 | A | ||||
UV-A + B | pdx1.3-1 | 0.43 ± 0.29 | 7.50 ± 4.87 | 1.33 ± 1.36 | 9.47 ± 2.46 | 22.31 ± 3.17 | B | ||||
15 | Control | Col-0 | 0.29 ± 0.03 | 4.53 ± 0.83 | A | 1.93 ± 0.42 | 2.71 ± 0.48 | A | 11.25 ± 1.71 | A | |
UV-A | Col-0 | 0.34 ± 0.27 | 4.69 ± 1.30 | A | 2.12 ± 0.63 | 2.57 ± 1.75 | A | 10.94 ± 3.68 | A | ||
UV-A + B | Col-0 | 0.24 ± 0.11 | 10.99 ± 0.48 | B | 6.15 ± 4.96 | 8.61 ± 2.93 | B | 26.44 ± 8.43 | B | ||
Control | pdx1.3-1 | 0.48 ± 0.31 | 3.81 ± 0.51 | A | 0.90 ± 0.46 | 2.26 ± 0.15 | A | 8.30 ± 0.70 | A | ||
UV-A | pdx1.3-1 | 0.44 ± 0.22 | 4.54 ± 0.68 | A | 1.70 ± 0.18 | 2.66 ± 0.54 | A | 10.78 ± 0.61 | A | ||
UV-A + B | pdx1.3-1 | 0.29 ± 0.07 | 10.72 ± 0.83 | B | 3.64 ± 4.57 | 9.77 ± 0.73 | B | 24.96 ± 6.02 | B |
Days of exposure | Treatment | Genotype | Sinapoyl-glucoside | Sinapoyl-malate | Sinapic acid | Average: total sinapic acid derivatives | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2 | Control | Col-0 | 0.11 ± 0.06 | a | 0.99 ± 0.75 | ab | 0.51 ± 0.04 | b | 1.61 ± 0.72 | b | ||||
UV-A | Col-0 | 0.18 ± 0.03 | 0.74 ± 0.34 | 0.96 ± 0.91 | 1.88 ± 0.64 | |||||||||
UV-A + B | Col-0 | 0.12 ± 0.10 | 0.10 ± 0.03 | 0.30 ± 0.20 | 0.52 ± 0.31 | |||||||||
Control | pdx1.3-1 | 0.12 ± 0.05 | 2.69 ± 1.63 | B | 1.03 ± 1.53 | 3.83 ± 1.39 | B | |||||||
UV-A | pdx1.3-1 | 0.24 ± 0.25 | 0.43 ± 0.09 | AB | 1.18 ± 0.93 | 1.85 ± 0.61 | AB | |||||||
UV-A + B | pdx1.3-1 | 0.08 ± 0.00 | 0.17 ± 0.07 | A | 0.78 ± 0.43 | 1.03 ± 0.50 | A | |||||||
4 | Control | Col-0 | 0.88 ± 0.48 | b | 0.93 ± 0.14 | A | b | 0.23 ± 0.04 | a | 2.04 ± 0.66 | b | |||
UV-A | Col-0 | 0.46 ± 0.47 | 0.60 ± 0.56 | A | 0.41 ± 0.48 | 1.47 ± 0.84 | ||||||||
UV-A + B | Col-0 | 0.32 ± 0.31 | 2.20 ± 0.27 | B | 0.08 ± 0.01 | 2.60 ± 0.12 | ||||||||
Control | pdx1.3-1 | 0.37 ± 0.48 | 0.50 ± 0.23 | 0.14 ± 0.10 | 1.01 ± 0.81 | |||||||||
UV-A | pdx1.3-1 | 0.19 ± 0.19 | 0.60 ± 0.70 | 0.57 ± 0.46 | 1.35 ± 0.36 | |||||||||
UV-A + B | pdx1.3-1 | 0.73 ± 0.57 | 1.34 ± 1.11 | 0.11 ± 0.05 | 2.18 ± 0.82 | |||||||||
8 | Control | Col-0 | 0.06 ± 0.00 | a | 0.06 ± 0.00 | a | 0.09 ± 0.01 | a | 0.21 ± 0.01 | a | ||||
UV-A | Col-0 | 0.11 ± 0.07 | 0.14 ± 0.03 | 0.29 ± 0.29 | 0.54 ± 0.35 | |||||||||
UV-A + B | Col-0 | 0.07 ± 0.05 | 0.77 ± 0.57 | 0.07 ± 0.00 | 0.90 ± 0.56 | |||||||||
Control | pdx1.3-1 | 0.06 ± 0.00 | 0.06 ± 0.00 | 0.07 ± 0.00 | 0.19 ± 0.00 | |||||||||
UV-A | pdx1.3-1 | 0.06 ± 0.00 | 0.29 ± 0.12 | 0.64 ± 0.90 | 0.99 ± 0.94 | |||||||||
UV-A + B | pdx1.3-1 | 0.08 ± 0.03 | 1.07 ± 1.06 | 0.64 ± 0.43 | 1.79 ± 1.23 | |||||||||
15 | Control | Col-0 | 0.34 ± 0.24 | a | 0.21 ± 0.23 | a | 0.35 ± 0.29 | a | 0.90 ± 0.26 | B | a | |||
UV-A | Col-0 | 0.24 ± 0.16 | 0.09 ± 0.01 | 0.29 ± 0.03 | 0.61 ± 0.16 | AB | ||||||||
UV-A + B | Col-0 | 0.07 ± 0.00 | 0.09 ± 0.04 | 0.06 ± 0.00 | 0.22 ± 0.04 | A | ||||||||
Control | pdx1.3-1 | 0.06 ± 0.00 | A | 0.22 ± 0.13 | 0.14 ± 0.06 | AB | 0.42 ± 0.07 | |||||||
UV-A | pdx1.3-1 | 0.06 ± 0.00 | A | 0.17 ± 0.05 | 0.49 ± 0.28 | B | 0.72 ± 0.32 | |||||||
UV-A + B | pdx1.3-1 | 0.07 ± 0.00 | B | 0.13 ± 0.03 | 0.07 ± 0.01 | A | 0.27 ± 0.03 |
The major sinapic acid derivative sinapoyl-malate increased after 4 days of UV-A + B exposure in Col-0 whereas sinapoyl glucoside increased after 15 days of UV-A + B exposure in pdx1.3-1 (Table 4). Thus, our data indicate that sinapic acid derivatives do not contribute to any large extent in Arabidopsis UV defense. In fact, as shown by Heinze et al.,46 these compounds decrease in abundance with plant maturation and only partly vary with UV irradiation during growth. Although an increased content of hydroxycinnamic acid derivatives has been suggested to be an important response to UV exposure in A. thaliana,47 we have generally found these compounds to be less important than flavonoid glycosides.48
For flavonoid glycosides, there was a general shift in total flavonoid content between day 2 and the later days of the study. In the 2-day time point, the total flavonoid levels in both Arabidopsis accessions were higher in the non-UV controls. In the later time-points the UV-A + B-exposed plants always had a higher content of flavonoids in leaves than both the controls and the UV-A-exposed plants (Table 3). This is reminiscent of the situation in kale (Brassica oleracea var. sabellica),49 where the quercetin glycoside content decreased after one day of UV-B treatment and increased in the following days of UV-B treatment, concomitantly with the mRNAs encoding flavonol 3′-hydroxylases. The effect of the additional UV-B in the present study was substantial after 4 days and further on.
The difference in the total flavonoid glycoside content and flavonoid glycoside profile between the Col-0 wild type and the pdx1.3-1 mutant was in principle non-existent at all time-points when the same exposure conditions were compared. This underscores the lack of interaction between flavonoid biosynthesis and VitB6.
With regard to the individual flavonoid glycosides, quercetin-3-rhamnoside-7-glucoside was present to a relatively large extent in both Arabidopsis accessions on day 2 in the non-UV control but to a considerably smaller extent after exposure to both UV-based light regimens (Table 3). While Demkura et al.49 and Götz et al.50 found an increase of quercetin glycosides in Arabidopsis after UV-B exposure, our results are again in line with those obtained with kale.51 From day 4 and onwards, the quercetin-glucoside was hardly detectable in any of the samples.
UV-A and UV-A + B exposure led to an initial (day 2) decrease of kaempferol glycosides in pdx1.3-1. UV-A + B exposure then resulted in an increase of these compounds on day 4 in pdx1.3-1 leaves. Kaempferol-3-rhamnoside-7-rhamnoside and kaempferol-3-rutinoside-7-glucoside contents increased in Col-0 and pdx1.3-1 leaves of UV-exposed plants on day 15. Consequently, pdx1.3-1 shows a more extended and faster response to UV. The results support the hypothesis of VitB6 being an antioxidant that can detoxify various ROS.15,17–19 Indeed, the increased content of kaempferol glycosides has previously been shown to be part of the UV response in several Brassicaceae51–53 and in Arabidospsis.49
The two genotypes could be differentiated by their corresponding individual glucosinolate levels. The pdx1.3-1 mutant (pdx control, in Fig. 4) showed a constitutively higher total glucosinolate content than the Col-0 wild type (col control, in Fig. 4), particularly and significantly with ongoing ontogeny at day 15 (Fig. 4A and Table 5). This significant genotype effect on day 15 was also reflected in the glucosinolate subgroups (aliphatic, methylthioalkyl, methylsulfinylalkyl and indole GS; Fig. 4B–E and Table 5). The higher GS levels in the pdx1.3.-1 mutant were thus present although there was a reduced availability of VitB6 due to the knock-out of one of the two functional PDX1 genes. This may seem surprising since VitB6 is necessary as a cofactor in GS synthesis. PLP is present in BCAT3, BCAT4 and BCAT6 enzymes, and active in the formation of the methionine side-chain elongation as a precursor of aliphatic glucosinolates.29 It is also necessary for the activity of SUR1,27 which is an enzyme synthesizing thiohydroximic acid that in turn is glycosylated and sulfonated to form the core structure of all glucosinolates. However, in our present study, VitB6 is not limiting the glucosinolate formation in pdx1.3-1 and has a higher glucosinolate content than Col-0.
![]() | ||
Fig. 4 Content (in μmol per g dry weight) of total (A), aliphatic (B), methylthioalkyl (C), methylsulfinylalkyl (D) and indole glucosinolates (E) in Arabidopsis thaliana Col-0 wild type and the pdx1.3-1 mutant exposed to control light, or UV-A- or UV-A + B-supplemented light after 2 and 15 d (n = 3); the bars indicate the standard deviation. Significant changes between pairwise physiologically relevant comparisons of samples are shown in Table 5. |
Day | Genotype | Treatment | Significance | Day | Genotype | Treatment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
A | ||||||
Total GS | ||||||
2 | Col-0 | UV-A | * | 15 | Col-0 | UV-A |
2 | pdx1.3-1 | Control | ** | 15 | pdx1.3-1 | Control |
15 | Col-0 | Control | * | 15 | pdx1.3-1 | Control |
15 | Col-0 | UV-A | * | 15 | pdx1.3-1 | UV-A |
15 | pdx1.3-1 | Control | * | 15 | pdx1.3-1 | UV-A |
B | ||||||
Aliphatic GS | ||||||
2 | pdx1.3-1 | Control | * | 15 | pdx1.3-1 | Control |
15 | Col-0 | Control | * | 15 | pdx1.3-1 | Control |
15 | Col-0 | UV-A | ** | 15 | pdx1.3-1 | UV-A |
15 | pdx1.3-1 | Control | * | 15 | pdx1.3-1 | UV-A |
C | ||||||
Methyl thioalkyl GS | ||||||
2 | pdx1.3-1 | UV-A + B | ** | 15 | pdx1.3-1 | UV-A + B |
15 | Col-0 | Control | * | 15 | Col-0 | UV-A + B |
15 | Col-0 | Control | * | 15 | pdx1.3-1 | Control |
15 | Col-0 | UV-A | * | 15 | Col-0 | UV-A + B |
15 | pdx1.3-1 | Control | * | 15 | pdx1.3-1 | UV-A + B |
15 | pdx1.3-1 | UV-A | * | 15 | pdx1.3-1 | UV-A + B |
D | ||||||
Methyl sulfinyl GS | ||||||
2 | Col-0 | UV-A | * | 15 | Col-0 | UV-A |
2 | pdx1.3-1 | Control | * | 15 | pdx1.3-1 | Control |
15 | Col-0 | Control | * | 15 | pdx1.3-1 | Control |
15 | Col-0 | UV-A | * | 15 | pdx1.3-1 | UV-A |
15 | Col-0 | UV-A + B | * | 15 | pdx1.3-1 | UV-A |
E | ||||||
Indole GSs | ||||||
2 | pdx1.3-1 | Control | *** | 15 | pdx1.3-1 | Control |
15 | pdx1.3-1 | Control | ** | 15 | pdx1.3-1 | UV-A |
15 | pdx1.3-1 | Control | * | 15 | pdx1.3-1 | UV-A + B |
In contrast to the case with the flavonoids, the levels of all glucosinolates in the pdx1.3.-1 mutant were significantly reduced under one or both UV treatments, most obvious after extended UV-A treatment on day 15 (Fig. 4B, D, E and Table 5). Although the glucosinolate profile changed differently to UV exposure with respect to plant species,54 Wang et al.55 also reported a decrease in the concentration of total glucosinolates in A. thaliana after 12 h of UV-B treatment (1.55 W m−2). However, in our present study, using considerably lower UV levels (0.7 kJ m−2 d−1 of plant weighted UV-B), nearly all glucosinolates in the Col-0 wild type were unaffected by both UV treatments used (Fig. 4B, D, E and Table 5). Furthermore, Demkura49 showed no effect of UV-B (5.5 kJ m−2 d−1 of plant weighted UV-B) on GS. This lack of UV response indicates that glucosinolates have no primary function in response to UV (especially UV-B) in the way flavonoids have.
Notwithstanding, in both Arabidopsis genotypes, the minor methylthioalkyl glucosinolates were exceptions to the lack of UV response, which is reported here for the first time. On day 15 of exposure, they showed a distinct and statistically significant increase under UV-A + B radiation compared with the corresponding controls and compared with exposures to UV-A only (Fig. 4C and Table 5). This response was primarily determined by the accumulation of the 4-methylthiobutyl glucosinolate, which is a precursor in 4-methylsulfinylbutyl glucosinolate formation. Thus, this effect suggests that under the 15-day UV-A + B exposure, there was a negative impact on the 4-methylthiobutyl to 4-methylsulfinylbutyl side chain oxidation carried out by the flavin monooxgenase FMO GS-OX5 (an enzyme that does not use VitB6 as a co-factor). No such impact was seen after UV-A exposure (Fig. 4C and Table 5). These results were in contrast to a UV study using a shorter UV-A + B exposure at a lower dose.56 In that study, UV-A + B-treated broccoli sprouts (0.3 kJ m−2 d−1 given for 5 days) exhibited an increased methylsulfinylbutyl glucosinolate content. This increase was matched with a corresponding up-regulation of the FMO GS-OX5 gene. Thus, this suggests that there are both UV-related and genetic differences between the two plant species – Arabidopsis vs. broccoli – with regard to the conversion of 4-methylthiobutyl to 4-methylsulfinylbutyl glucosinolate.
Particularly the content of the precursor 4-methylthiobutyl glucosinolate was correlated with a suppression of the antioxidant capacity (Tables 6 & S2†). On the other hand, the content of the more abundant short-chain methylsulfinylalkyl glucosinolates (3-methylsulfinylpropyl, 4-methylsulfinylbutyl) was positively correlated with the hydroxyl radical antioxidant capacity in both Arabidopsis accessions. An increased formation of ROS, e.g. under UV-A + B exposure, can be assumed to result in an increased formation of ROS scavenging metabolites, such as the short-chain methylsulfinylalkyl glucosinolates (Fig. 5), in contrast to the UV-A treatment, which is not expected to lead to ROS formation. However, the decreased conversion of 4-methylthiobutyl to 4-methylsulfinylbutyl glucosinolate prevents the contribution of the latter compound to the antioxidant capacity in both Col-0 and pdx1.3.-1 under UV-A + B treatment. Moreover, in the UV-A-exposed plants there was neither an accumulation of 4-methylthiobutyl glucosinolate nor an increase in 4-methylsulfinylbutyl glucosinolate. This suggests that the antioxidative potential of the short-chain methylsulfinylalkyl glucosinolates is not utilized in these Arabidopsis accessions. Accordingly, Taviano et al.57 proposed that glucosinolates are not directly involved in the primary antioxidant activity. Instead, these authors suggested that the ferrous iron-chelating properties of glucosinolates protect cells from oxidative stress caused by ROS.
![]() | ||
Fig. 5 Significant (p = 0.00702) positive correlation between the leaf 4-methyl-sulfinylbutyl glucosinolate content and the hydroxyl radical antioxidant capacities. Symbols show data for Arabidopsis thaliana Col-0 (circles) or pdx1.3-1 mutant leaves (triangles) exposed to control (open), UV-A-supplemented (grey) or UV-A + B-supplemented (black) light. The solid line shows the linear regression, R2 = 0.373 (see Table 6 for the statistical analysis and Table S3† for ordinary least squares regression fit of data). |
Compound | aox-OHrad | 3-m-spr | 4-m-sbut | 5-m-spe | 3-m-tpr | 4-m-tbut | 7-m-shep | i-3-m | 8-m-soct | 4-m-3-im | 1-m-3-im | 7-m-thep | 8-met-toct | Total GS |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
The following abbreviations were used: aox-OHrad, hydroxyl radical antioxidant capacity; 3-m-spr, 3-methyl-sulfinylpropyl; 4-m-sbut, 4-methyl-sulfinylbutyl; 5-m-spe, 5-methyl-sulfinylpentyl; 3-m-tpr, 3-methyl-thiopropyl; 4-m-tbut, 4-methyl-thiobutyl; 7-m-shep, 7-methyl-sulfinylheptyl; i-3-m, indolyl-3-methyl; 8-m-soct, 8-methyl-sulfinyloctyl; 4-m-3-im, 4-methoxy-3-indolylmethyl; 1-m-3-im, 1-methoxy-3-indolylmethyl; 7-m-thep, 7-methyl-thioheptyl; 8-met-toct total, 8-methyl-thiooctyl; GS, total glucosinolate content. | ||||||||||||||
aox-OHrad | 0.0160 | 0.0070 | 0.7918 | 0.2482 | 0.0350 | 0.0607 | 0.0333 | 0.9498 | 0.0438 | 0.0977 | 0.3394 | 0.5028 | 0.0126 | |
3-m-spr | 0.5583 | 0.0000 | 0.8754 | 0.3779 | 0.0069 | 0.0200 | 0.0000 | 0.6707 | 0.0465 | 0.0106 | 0.5728 | 0.9585 | 0.0000 | |
4-m-sbut | 0.6113 | 0.9539 | 0.3373 | 0.0604 | 0.0311 | 0.0008 | 0.0000 | 0.7051 | 0.0047 | 0.0029 | 0.8367 | 0.6801 | 0.0000 | |
5-m-spe | 0.0669 | −0.0398 | 0.2401 | 0.0001 | 0.1878 | 0.0028 | 0.5662 | 0.0023 | 0.0066 | 0.3173 | 0.1730 | 0.0894 | 0.1653 | |
3-m-tpr | 0.2870 | 0.2211 | 0.4508 | 0.8047 | 0.2728 | 0.0000 | 0.2684 | 0.0001 | 0.0364 | 0.3073 | 0.0751 | 0.0409 | 0.0227 | |
4-m-tbut | −0.4990 | −0.6127 | −0.5087 | 0.3253 | 0.2731 | 0.8328 | 0.0270 | 0.0005 | 0.1070 | 0.1375 | 0.0007 | 0.0072 | 0.1065 | |
7-m-shep | 0.4504 | 0.5426 | 0.7189 | 0.6610 | 0.8895 | 0.0536 | 0.0104 | 0.0025 | 0.0329 | 0.0749 | 0.1425 | 0.0630 | 0.0001 | |
i-3-m | 0.5030 | 0.8812 | 0.8899 | 0.1449 | 0.2756 | −0.5199 | 0.5874 | 0.7859 | 0.0172 | 0.0001 | 0.8171 | 0.3982 | 0.0000 | |
8-m-soct | 0.0160 | −0.1077 | 0.0959 | 0.6714 | 0.7852 | 0.7334 | 0.6662 | −0.0689 | 0.7952 | 0.9362 | 0.0028 | 0.0043 | 0.4114 | |
4-m-3-im | 0.4799 | 0.4747 | 0.6344 | 0.6153 | 0.4959 | −0.3927 | 0.5041 | 0.5532 | 0.0658 | 0.0420 | 0.6343 | 0.8845 | 0.0035 | |
1-m-3-im | 0.4026 | 0.5861 | 0.6597 | 0.2499 | 0.2549 | −0.3641 | 0.4300 | 0.7929 | −0.0203 | 0.4837 | 0.6802 | 0.2308 | 0.0012 | |
7-m-thep | −0.2390 | −0.1425 | −0.0523 | 0.3359 | 0.4297 | 0.7248 | 0.3598 | 0.0587 | 0.6613 | −0.1204 | 0.1044 | 0.0000 | 0.7192 | |
8-met-toct | −0.1689 | −0.0132 | 0.1044 | 0.4119 | 0.4858 | 0.6099 | 0.4469 | 0.2121 | 0.6392 | 0.0369 | 0.2974 | 0.9462 | 0.3251 | |
Total GS | 0.5747 | 0.9119 | 0.9842 | 0.3416 | 0.5333 | −0.3932 | 0.7880 | 0.9141 | 0.2063 | 0.6497 | 0.7007 | 0.0911 | 0.2460 |
1. The use of 15 days of UV-A or UV-A + B exposure with Arabidopsis Col-0 did not lead to any distress, as judged by Fv/Fm chlorophyll fluorescence levels, that were only marginally affected by the exposures. In the pdx1.3-1 mutant, UV-A + B exposure led to a significant 5% decrease in Fv/Fm on day 15 of the experiment, indicating the development of eustress.
2. The antioxidant capacity of Col-0 increased after 1 and 3 days of UV-A + B exposure by at least 50%. In the pdx1.3-1 mutant the antioxidant capacity decreased by at least 40% over the same time period.
3. No significant changes in flavonoid content and profile between Arabidopsis accessions were found. Starting from day 4, UV-A + B treatments led to the highest content of total flavonoid glycosides.
4. The glucosinolate profile was significantly changed, both with regard to the Arabidopsis accession and the UV exposure, during the exposure period. This most likely reflects the presence of at least one VitB6 vitamer cofactor-dependent enzyme in the GS biosynthesis pathway.
5. The antioxidant capacity of the Arabidopsis genotypes and their GS profiles were correlated: short-chain methylsulfinylalkyl GS were positively correlated with the antioxidant capacity in both Col-0 and pdx1.3-1, whereas the content of 4-methylthiobutyl GS was correlated with suppression of the antioxidant capacity.
Our results thus confirm the important and dual role of VitB6 as both an antioxidant and an enzymatic co-factor in plants.
Footnote |
† Electronic supplementary information (ESI) available. See DOI: 10.1039/c9pp00342h |
This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry and Owner Societies 2020 |