DOCSLIB.ORG

Biostimulants

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Biostimulants Microorganisms between Plant Protection and Biostimulation Joerg Geistlinger Hochschule Anhalt Anhalt University of Applied Sciences Institute of Bioanalytical Sciences Focus of the TlkTalk: Vital Microbial Inoculants Applied in Agricultural Practice Plant beneficial bacteria and fungi Definition Biostimulant: Plant biostimulants are any (substances or) microorganisms applied to plants with the aim to enhance nutrition efficiency, abiotic stress tolerance and/or crop quality traits, regardless of its nutrients content. Plant biostimulants stimulate natural processes in planta! Biostimulation Features • Growth promotion, incl. root growth (lateral root development) Enhanced nutrition efficiency Hormonal effects, hormone‐like (bioactive) compounds • Abiotic stress tolerance (droug ht/floo d, salt/osmo tic, ht/ldheat/cold, heavy metltal, phthoto, oxida tive ) • Enhanced crop resilience/vigor • Early flowering, enhdhanced flowering • Crop quality maximization (value‐adding ingredients) • Post‐harvest traits (extended shelf‐life, decay delay, foraging capacity) Definition Biocontrol Agents The control of one organism by another. Biocontrol agents are living ()(micro)organisms protecting plants against their enemies, i.e. reducing the population of pests or diseases to acceptable levels. Biocontrol Features • AtibiiAntibiosis –anti‐mibilicrobial meta bo lites (t(antagon ism ) • Competition –for space (occupying ecological niches) for macro/micro nutrients for Iron (chelators, siderophores) • Parasitism –myco‐parasitism (antagonism) bacterial (Actinomycetes) fungal (Trichoderma spp.) • Induced Systemic Resistance (ISR) –cell walls (callose, lignin, phenolics) enzymes (chitinase, peroxidase, polyphenoloxidase, PAL) small molecules (phytoalexines) Conflicting Contents Biostimulation • Abiotic stress tolerance (mediated by plant signaling cascades) via perception of bioactive substances induction/release of signaling compounds Biocontrol • Induced Systemic Resistance (mediated by plant sigggnaling cascades) via perception of bioactive substances induction/release of signaling compounds Overlap Term: Broad‐spectrum resistance pathogens, insects and/or nematodes but also against abiotic stresses • Multiple‐stress responsive genes • Shared responses in major biotic and abiotic stress pathways • Biotic and abiotic crosstalk in several gene networks Plant signaling pathways consist of complex networks with frequent crosstalk, allowing plants to regulate both abiotic stress tolerance AND disease resistance. Convergence Points Abscisic Acid (ABA) – abiotic stress response Jasmonic Acid (JA), Salicylic Acid (SA), Ethylene (ET), Hypersensitive Reaction (HR) Reactive Oxigen Species (ROS) –biotic stress response Respiratory burst oxidase homolog (rboh), required for ROS production induces ABA and HR crosstalk point Enhanced response to ABA 3 (era3) allelic to ethylene insensitive 2 (ein2) intersection in ABA and ET signaling crosstalk point Jasmonate insensitive 1 (jin1) allelic to MYC2 transcription factor (tf) Low MYC2 enhances JA/ET pathogen responses crosstalk point MYB2 (tf) highly homolog to Botrytis susceptible 1 (bos1), mediated by JA bos1 mediates biotic and abiotic stress sigggnaling via ROS crosstalk point NAC RD26 (tf) induced by JA, H2O2, pathogens, also by drought, salt, ABA functions in pathogen defense, senescence, ABA signaling crosstalk point Convergence Points MAPK (mitogen‐activated protein kinase) cascades include multiple stress responses MKK2 –MPK4/6 cascade involved in cold and salt stress signaling MKK4/5 –MPK3/6 cascade regulates pathogen defense via WRKY22/29 (tf) MPK3/6 also induced by abiotic stress (via ABA) crosstalk point MPK6 – induces ET production via ACC (aminocyclopropan 1 carbocylic acid) synthase induces JA‐dependent root growth and MYC2 expression crosstalk point activates ROS sigggnaling via serine/threonine kinases crosstalk point inducible by H2O2 and ABA crosstalk point OsMPK5 ortholog to AtMPK3, induced by ABA and infection in rice crosstalk point Total: 417 genes Venn Diagram Transcriptomics in Cicer arietinum Why should microbial biostimulants that activate multiple biotic and abiotic stress pathways for enhanced broad‐spectrum crop resistance be classified as (bio)pesticides ? Biocontrol What we got….. Bacterial Biocontrol Agents Genera: Bacillus, Pseudomonas, Burkholderia, Serratia, Streppytomyces, Actinoplanes, Stenotrophomonas, Paenibacillus, Klebsiella, Alcaligenes, Pantoea, Ralstonia… Competition for nutrients and space (root niches, root adhesion) motility, chemotaxis, detox. antimicrobial root compounds root exudates and mucilage (sugars, organic acids, amino acids) Alleloppyathy/Allelochemicals: Iron‐chelating siderophores, antibiotics, biocidal volatiles, antifungals Antibiosis: amphisin, oomycin, phenanzine, oligomycin, zwittermicin, tensin….. Lytic enzymes, cell wall hydrolases Detox/degradation: antibiotics, phytotoxine produced by pathogens ISR/Priming: flagellin, siderophores, lipopolysaccharide, volatiles induce plant defense chemicals (callose, phenolics, lignin, phytoalexins, lytic enzymes, PR‐proteins) Bacteria for Biostimulation Genera: Rhizobium, Pseudomonas, Bacillus, Paenibacillus, Bredybacillus, Rhanella, AbAzotobacter, Azospi r illum, Kle bs ie lla, AiAcineto bacter, ShStenotrophomonas, SiSerratia… Growth promo: N2‐fixation, nutrient solubilization (P), auxin and IAA production, ACC deaminase production, ammonia, HCN, siderophores, mycorrhiza helper functions Abiotic stress tolerance: Bacterial auxin, IAA and SA production Decreased heavy metal toxicity Micro‐nutrient mobilization Fungal Biocontrol Agents Genera: Trichoderma, Talaromyces, Cladorrhinum, Idriella, Penicillium, Chaetomium, Minimedusa, Coniothyrium… avirulent Fusarium, Rhizoctonia and Phialophora strains Competition for nutrients and space (infection sites) Antibiosis: Gliovirin, Gliotoxin, Glucose‐Oxidase (H2O2 production) Mycoparasites: Trichoderma, Leucosporidiella, Platygloea, Rhodotorula, Sporidiobolus ISR: avilirulen tstitrains, TihTricho derma, Peni c illium Effector molecules (elicitors): xylanase, oligogalacturonide, chitosan Fungi for Biostimulation Genera: Trichoderma, Glomus (AMF), endo/ekto‐mycorrhizal fungi, endophytes... Abiotic stress tolerance: Sebacina, Piriformospora, Neotyphodium, Trichoderma, Curvularia, Acremonium mainly salt, drought and cold stress ‐ titrigger ing stress response systems in pltlants ‐ produce anti‐stress chemicals (osmolyte, loline, sugar/alcohols) oxidative stress: ROS / RNS detox., antioxidants Plant growth promotion: Neotyphodium positively influences photosynthetic CO2 fixing in host plants Piriformospora produces cytokinine Paecilomyces produces IAA and gibberelline Overlaps again Bacteria in biocontrol and biostimulation Bacillus , Pseudom on as, Paenibac illus , Klebsie lla , Serra tia , SSeteno trop opohom on as Fungi in biocontrol and biostimulation Trichoderma, Penicillium – mycorrhiza and endophytes Should competition really be a biocontrol trait ? Regulation, Legislation Microorgan isms shldhould be iden tifie d at the stitrain lllevel (not always easily d!done!) postulating that most biological activities are strain‐specific (right or wrong?) Biostimulants should be defined according to the intended agricultural outputs nutrient efficiency may cover nutrient mobilization, uptake, transport, storage, assimilation but also root development abiotic stress tolerance physical or chemical stressors of non‐biological origin quality ttatsraits may be veeyry ddeseiverse ((ofrom nutri ti on al vauealue to seshelf‐life) Registration is possible under national fertilizer legislations or EU PPP regulation Why not register under the EU fertilizer laws ? Impossible, BIOSTIMULANTS cannot be fertilizers under EU legislation ! Here, fertilizers are clearly defined: • Provide nutrients for plants • Primary nutrients: NPK • Secondary nutrients: Ca, Mg, Na, S • Micro‐nutitrient s: boron, cobltbalt, copper, iron, manganese, molbdlybdenum, zinc excl. inorganic materials (exception: chelating or complexing agents) All microorganisms that interact with plant physiology must be registered under the PPP regulation, even if they do not protect plants from pests or diseases. Currently no harmonized frameworks are existing neither in the EU, nor in the US EC regulation No 1107/2009 on plant protection products (()‘PPPs’) is applicable to all categories of biostimulants and biocontrol agents, considering a very broad definition of PPPs. Lengthy and costly procedure to place a PPP on the European market. Alternative: The national fertilizer legislations ! BCA Market Top Players BASF Syngenta Bayer CropScience Biologics DuPont Novozymes Koppert Biological Systems Monsanto Company Marrone Bio Innovations Biobest Certis USA Andermatt Biocontrol The BCA market is expected to reach 3 billion USD by 2020 (1. 7 b. USD in 2015) growth rate > 10%, approx. 4% of the global pest control market Comparable to BCA market: 1.7 to 3.0 billion USD Due to the lack of acceptance of biostimulant concepts, market data are of limited reliability. The regulatory status of biostimulants is diverse, depending on registration as fertilizer or pesticide, authorized or not in organic production. Biostimulants may be spread over many regulations, without being named as such. Conclusions • Overlaps exist between Biostimulation and Biocontrol biotic/abiotic stress responses, ISR microbial genera/species/strains applied • Traditional definition of Biocontrol is narrow and precise (implies direct interaction) definition
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Unraveling the Role of Fungal Symbionts in Plant Abiotic Stress Tolerance
    REVIEW Plant Signaling & Behavior 6:2, 175-191; February 2011; ©2011 Landes Bioscience Unraveling the role of fungal symbionts in plant abiotic stress tolerance Lamabam Peter Singh,1 Sarvajeet Singh Gill2,3,* and Narendra Tuteja2,* 1Department of Botany; Aligarh Muslim University; Aligarh, Uttar Pradesh; 2Plant Molecular Biology Group; International Centre for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology; Aruna Asaf Ali Marg; New Delhi, India; 3Stress Physiology and Molecular Biology Lab; Centre for Biotechnology; MD University; Rohtak, Haryana India Key words: abiotic stress, endophytes, fungal symbiont, mycorrhizal fungus, Piriformospora indica, stress tolerance, symbiosis rhizosphere and internal tissues that influence their perfor- Fungal symbionts have been found to be associated with mance.6,7 It was suggested in the late 1800’s and now confirmed every plant studied in the natural ecosystem, where they by DNA based detection technology that plastids and mitochon- colonize and reside entirely or partially in the internal tissues of their host plant. Fungal endophytes can express/form a dria of the eukaryotic cell were derived from a consortium of 5,8,9 range of different lifestyle/relationships with different host primitive microbes. The continuity of microbial associations including symbiotic, mutualistic, commensalistic and parasitic with plants from their origin suggests that plants have not func- in response to host genotype and environmental factors. In tioned as autonomous individuals, but their internal tissues pro- mutualistic association fungal endophyte can enhance growth, vide a unique ecological environment for diverse communities of increase reproductive success and confer biotic and abiotic symbiotic microbes, which have had a major influence on plant stress tolerance to its host plant.
    [Show full text]
  • Positive Biotic Interactions in Freshwaters: a Review and Research Directive
    Received: 2 July 2019 | Revised: 3 December 2019 | Accepted: 18 December 2019 DOI: 10.1111/fwb.13476 REVIEW ARTICLE Positive biotic interactions in freshwaters: A review and research directive Samuel Silknetter1,2 | Robert P. Creed2 | Bryan L. Brown3 | Emmanuel A. Frimpong4 | James Skelton5 | Brandon K. Peoples1 1Department of Forestry and Environmental Conservation, Clemson University, Clemson, Abstract SC, USA 1. Positive interspecific interactions such as mutualism, commensalism, and facilita- 2 Department of Biology, Appalachian State tion are globally ubiquitous. Although research on positive interactions in terres- University, Boone, NC, USA 3Department of Biological Sciences, Virginia trial and marine systems has progressed over the past few decades, comparatively Polytechnic Institute and State University, little is known about them in freshwater ecosystems. However, recent advances Blacksburg, VA, USA have brought the study of positive interactions in freshwater systems to a point 4Department of Fish and Wildlife Conservation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute where synthesis is warranted. and State University, Blacksburg, VA, USA 2. In this review, we catalogue the variety of direct positive interactions described 5School of Forest Resources and to date in freshwater ecosystems, discuss factors that could influence prevalence Conservation, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA and impact of these interactions, and provide a framework for future research. 3. In positive interactions, organisms exchange key resources such as nutrients, pro- Correspondence Brandon K. Peoples, Department of Forestry tection, transportation, or habitat to a net benefit for at least one participant. and Environmental Conservation, Clemson A few mutualistic relationships have received research attention to date, namely University, Clemson, SC 29634, USA. Email: [email protected] seed-dispersing fishes, crayfishes and their ectosymbiotic cleaners, and commu- nal-spawning stream fishes.
    [Show full text]
  • Effects of Climate Change on Invasive Species 4
    This work was supported in part by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. The findings and conclusions in this publication are those of the authors and should not be construed to represent any official USDA or U.S. Government determination or policy. Effects of Climate Change on Invasive Species 4 Deborah M. Finch, Jack L. Butler, Justin B. Runyon, Christopher J. Fettig, Francis F. Kilkenny, Shibu Jose, Susan J. Frankel, Samuel A. Cushman, Richard C. Cobb, Jefrey S. Dukes, Jefrey A. Hicke, and Sybill K. Amelon over the next century combined with reductions in summer 4.1 Introduction precipitation in certain areas (Walsh et al. 2014). These changes will affect invasive species in several ways. Mean surface temperatures have increased globally by Furthermore, climate change may challenge the way we per- ~0.7 °C per century since 1900 and 0.16 °C per decade since ceive and consider nonnative invasive species, as impacts to 1970 (Levinson and Fettig 2014). Most of this warming is some will change and others will remain unaffected; other believed to result from increases in atmospheric concentra- nonnative species are likely to become invasive; and native tions of greenhouse gases produced by human activity. species are likely to shift their geographic ranges into novel Temperature increases have been greater in winter than in habitats. summer, and there is a tendency for these increases to be The ability to predict accurately how invasive species dis- manifested mainly by changes in minimum (nighttime low) tributions and their impacts will change under projected cli- temperatures (Kukla and Karl 1993).
    [Show full text]
  • Biotic and Abiotic Stresses
    Biotic and Abiotic Stresses Plants relentlessly encounter a wide range of environmental stresses which limits the agricultural productivity. The environmental stresses conferred to plants can be categorized as 1) Abiotic stress 2) Biotic stress Abiotic stresses include salinity, drought, flood, extremes in temperature, heavy metals, radiation etc. It is a foremost factor that causes the loss of major crop plants worldwide. This situation is going to be more rigorous due to increasing desertification of world’s terrestrial area, increasing salinization of soil and water, shortage of water resources and environmental pollution. Biotic stress includes attack by various pathogens such as fungi, bacteria, oomycetes, nematodes and herbivores. Diseases caused by these pathogens accounts for major yield loss worldwide. Being sessile plants have no choice to escape from these environmental cues. Expertise in tolerating these stresses is crucial for completing the lifecycle successfully. Therefore, to combat these threats plants have developed various mechanisms for getting adapted to such conditions for survival. They sense the external stress environment, get stimulated and then generate appropriate cellular responses. These cellular responses work by relaying the stimuli from sensors, located on the cell surface or cytoplasm to the transcriptional machinery which is situated in the nucleus, with the help of various signal transduction pathways. This leads to differential transcriptional changes making the plant tolerant against the stress. The signaling pathways play an indispensable role and acts as a connecting link between sensing the stress environment and generating an appropriate physiological and biochemi cal response (Zhu 2002). Recent studies using genomics and proteomics approach . Stresses Plants are constantly exposed to a variety of potential microbial pathogens such as fungi, bacteria, oomycetes, nematodes and herbivores.
    [Show full text]
  • Thermal Stress and Predation Risk Trigger Distinct Transcriptomic Responses in the Intertidal Snail Nucella Lapillus
    San Jose State University SJSU ScholarWorks Faculty Publications, Biological Sciences Biological Sciences December 2014 Thermal Stress and Predation Risk Trigger Distinct Transcriptomic Responses in the Intertidal Snail Nucella lapillus Nathaniel D. Chu Northeastern University Luke P. Miller Northeastern University, [email protected] Stefan T. Kaluziak Northeastern University Geoffrey C. Trussell Northeastern University Steven V. Vollmer Northeastern University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.sjsu.edu/biol_pub Part of the Biology Commons Recommended Citation Nathaniel D. Chu, Luke P. Miller, Stefan T. Kaluziak, Geoffrey C. Trussell, and Steven V. Vollmer. "Thermal Stress and Predation Risk Trigger Distinct Transcriptomic Responses in the Intertidal Snail Nucella lapillus" Molecular Ecology (2014): 6104-6113. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Biological Sciences at SJSU ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Publications, Biological Sciences by an authorized administrator of SJSU ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. 1 2 Thermal stress and predation risk trigger distinct transcriptomic responses in the intertidal snail 3 Nucella lapillus 4 5 6 Nathaniel D. Chu1, 3*, Luke P. Miller1, 2, Stefan T. Kaluziak1, Geoffrey C. Trussell1, and Steven 7 V. Vollmer1 8 9 1: Northeastern University, Marine Science Center, 430 Nahant Road, Nahant, MA 01908, USA 10 2: Stanford University, Hopkins Marine Station, Pacific Grove, CA 93950, USA 11 3: Current address: Microbiology Graduate Program, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 12 Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139, USA 13 14 Keywords: thermal stress, nonconsumptive effects, Nucella lapillus, predation risk, RNA-seq, 15 transcriptomics 16 17 * Corresponding author: Nathaniel D.
    [Show full text]
  • Light, Stress and Herbivory from Photoprotection to Trophic Interactions Using Arabidopsis Thaliana As a Model Organism
    Light, stress and herbivory from photoprotection to trophic interactions using Arabidopsis thaliana as a model organism Av Martin Frenkel Akademisk avhandling som med vederbörligt tillstånd av Rektorsämbetet vid Umeå universitet för avläggande av doktorsexamen i filosofi doktorsexamen i ekologi kommer att offentligen försvaras i lilla hörsalen, KBC-huset, Umeå universitet. Onsdagen den 4 juni 2008, kl. 10.00. Avhandlingen kommer att försvaras på engelska. Examinator: Prof. Lars Ericson, Umeå universitet. Fakultetsopponent: Dr. Don Cipollini, Wright State University, USA Department of Ecology and Environmental Science Umeå University 901 87 Umeå Sweden Organisation Document name Umeå University Doctoral Dissertation Department of Ecology and Date of issue Environmental Science 2008-05-14 SE-901 87 Umeå, Sweden Author Martin Frenkel Title Light, stress and herbivory – from photoprotection to trophic interactions using Arabidopsis thaliana as a model organism Abstract Photosynthesis is the most important process for nearly all life on earth. Photosynthetic organisms capture and transfer light energy from the sun into chemical energy which in turn provides a resource base for heterotrophic organisms. Natural light regimes are irregular and vary over magnitudes. At a certain light intensity, metabolic processes cannot keep up with the electron flow produced by the primary photoreactions, and thus reactive oxygen species (ROS) are produced. ROS are highly reactive and can damage the photosynthesis apparatus and hence plants have evolved several photoprotection mechanisms to avoid the formation of ROS. The aim of this thesis was to examine the ecological effects of variations in photoprotection in plants. In particular I wanted to study the effect on fitness and the interaction with herbivorous insects of plants with different ability in photoprotection.
    [Show full text]
  • The Role of Heavy Metals in Plant Response to Biotic Stress
    molecules Review The Role of Heavy Metals in Plant Response to Biotic Stress Iwona Morkunas 1,*, Agnieszka Wo´zniak 1, Van Chung Mai 1,2, Renata Ruci ´nska-Sobkowiak 3 and Philippe Jeandet 4 1 Department of Plant Physiology, Pozna´nUniversity of Life Sciences, Woły´nska35, 60-637 Pozna´n,Poland; [email protected] (A.W.); [email protected] (V.C.M.) 2 Department of Plant Physiology, Vinh University, Le Duan 182, Vinh City, Vietnam 3 Department of Plant Ecophysiology, Adam Mickiewicz University, Umultowska 89, 61-614 Pozna´n,Poland; [email protected] 4 Research Unit “Induced Resistance and Plant Bioprotection”, UPRES EA 4707, Department of Biology and Biochemistry, Faculty of Sciences, University of Reims, P.O. Box 1039, 02 51687 Reims CEDEX, France; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] or [email protected]; Tel.: +48-61-846-6040; Fax: +48-61-848-7179 Received: 25 August 2018; Accepted: 8 September 2018; Published: 11 September 2018 Abstract: The present review discusses the impact of heavy metals on the growth of plants at different concentrations, paying particular attention to the hormesis effect. Within the past decade, study of the hormesis phenomenon has generated considerable interest because it was considered not only in the framework of plant growth stimulation but also as an adaptive response of plants to a low level of stress which in turn can play an important role in their responses to other stress factors. In this review, we focused on the defence mechanisms of plants as a response to different metal ion doses and during the crosstalk between metal ions and biotic stressors such as insects and pathogenic fungi.
    [Show full text]
  • Abiotic and Biotic Stress Combinations
    Review Tansley review Abiotic and biotic stress combinations Author for correspondence: Nobuhiro Suzuki1, Rosa M. Rivero2, Vladimir Shulaev1, Eduardo Blumwald3 Ron Mittler and Ron Mittler1 Tel: +1 940 369 5367 Email: [email protected] 1Department of Biological Sciences, College of Arts and Sciences, University of North Texas, 1155 Union Circle #305220, Denton, TX Received: 19 December 2013 76203-5017, USA; 2Centro de Edafologıa y Biologıa Aplicada del Segura, Campus Universitario de Espinardo, Espinardo, Murcia Accepted: 25 February 2014 30100, Spain; 3Department of Plant Sciences, Mail Stop 5, University of California, 1 Shields Avenue, Davis, CA 95616, USA Contents Summary 32 IV. Conclusions 39 I. Introduction 32 Acknowledgements 41 II. Effects of stress combination on growth, yield and References 41 physiological traits in plants and crops 34 III. The complexity of stress response signaling during stress combination 38 Summary New Phytologist (2014) 203: 32–43 Environmental stress conditions such as drought, heat, salinity, cold, or pathogen infection can doi: 10.1111/nph.12797 have a devastating impact on plant growth and yield under field conditions. Nevertheless, the effects of these stresses on plants are typically being studied under controlled growth conditions Key words: antioxidant mechanisms, in the laboratory. The field environment is very different from the controlled conditions used in photosynthesis, signaling pathways, stress laboratory studies, and often involves the simultaneous exposure of plants to more than one combinations, yield. abiotic and/or biotic stress condition, such as a combination of drought and heat, drought and cold, salinity and heat, or any of the major abiotic stresses combined with pathogen infection.
    [Show full text]
  • Calcium Signalling in Plant Biotic Interactions
    International Journal of Molecular Sciences Review Calcium Signalling in Plant Biotic Interactions Didier Aldon, Malick Mbengue ID , Christian Mazars and Jean-Philippe Galaud * Laboratoire de Recherche en Sciences Vegetales, Universite de Toulouse, CNRS, UPS, 24, Chemin de Borde-Rouge, Auzeville, BP 42617, 31326 Castanet-Tolosan, France; [email protected] (D.A.); [email protected] (M.M.); [email protected] (C.M.) * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +33-534-323-828; Fax: +33-534-323-802 Received: 26 January 2018; Accepted: 22 February 2018; Published: 27 February 2018 Abstract: Calcium (Ca2+) is a universal second messenger involved in various cellular processes, leading to plant development and to biotic and abiotic stress responses. Intracellular variation in free Ca2+ concentration is among the earliest events following the plant perception of environmental change. These Ca2+ variations differ in their spatio-temporal properties according to the nature, strength and duration of the stimulus. However, their conversion into biological responses requires Ca2+ sensors for decoding and relaying. The occurrence in plants of calmodulin (CaM) but also of other sets of plant-specific Ca2+ sensors such as calmodulin-like proteins (CMLs), Ca2+-dependent protein kinases (CDPKs) and calcineurin B-like proteins (CBLs) indicate that plants possess specific tools and machineries to convert Ca2+ signals into appropriate responses. Here, we focus on recent progress made in monitoring the generation of Ca2+ signals at the whole plant or cell level and their long distance propagation during biotic interactions. The contribution of CaM/CMLs and CDPKs in plant immune responses mounted against bacteria, fungi, viruses and insects are also presented.
    [Show full text]
  • Metabolic Stimulation of Plant Phenolics for Food Preservation and Health
    FO05CH19-Shetty ARI 30 January 2014 15:55 Metabolic Stimulation of Plant Phenolics for Food Preservation and Health Dipayan Sarkar and Kalidas Shetty Department of Plant Sciences, North Dakota State University, Fargo, North Dakota 58108-6050; email: [email protected], [email protected] Annu. Rev. Food Sci. Technol. 2014. 5:395–413 Keywords First published online as a Review in Advance on antioxidants, pentose phosphate pathway, phenolic phytochemicals, food January 9, 2014 preservation, postharvest preservation, noncommunicable chronic diseases The Annual Review of Food Science and Technology is online at http://food.annualreviews.org Abstract by North Dakota INBRE on 03/04/14. For personal use only. This article’s doi: Plant phenolics as secondary metabolites are key to a plant’s defense response 10.1146/annurev-food-030713-092418 against biotic and abiotic stresses. These phytochemicals are also increasingly Copyright c 2014 by Annual Reviews. relevant to food preservation and human health in terms of chronic disease All rights reserved Annu. Rev. Food Sci. Technol. 2014.5:395-413. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org management. Phenolic compounds from different food crops with differ- ent chemical structures and biological functions have the potential to act as natural antioxidants. Plant-based human foods are rich with these phenolic phytochemicals and can be used effectively for food preservation and bioac- tive enrichments through metabolic stimulation of key pathways. Phenolic metabolites protect against microbial degradation of plant-based foods dur- ing postharvest storage. Phenolics not only provide biotic protection but also help to counter biochemical and physical food deteriorations and to enhance shelf life and nutritional quality.
    [Show full text]
  • Physiological Responses to Abiotic and Biotic Stress in Forest Trees
    Editorial Physiological Responses to Abiotic and Biotic Stress in Forest Trees Andrea Polle 1,* and Heinz Rennenberg 2,* 1 Forstbotanik und Baumphysiologie, Büsgen-Institut, Georg-August Universität Göttingen, Büsgenweg 2, 37077 Göttingen, Germany 2 University of Freiburg, Institute of Forest Sciences, Chair of Tree Physiology, Georges-Köhler Allee, Geb. 53/54, 79085 Freiburg, Germany * Correspondence: [email protected] (A.P.); [email protected] (H.R.) Received: 15 August 2019; Accepted: 19 August 2019; Published: 21 August 2019 Abstract: Forests fulfill important ecological functions by sustaining nutrient cycles and providing habitats for a multitude of organisms. They further deliver ecosystem services such as carbon storage, protection from erosion, and wood as an important commodity. Trees have to cope in their environment with a multitude of natural and anthropogenic forms of stress. Resilience and resistance mechanisms to biotic and abiotic stresses are of special importance for long-lived tree species. Since trees exist for many decades or even centuries on the same spot, they have to acclimate their growth and reproduction to constantly changing atmospheric and pedospheric conditions. In this special issue, we invited contributions addressing the physiological responses of forest trees to a wide array of different stress factors. Among the eighteen papers published, seventeen covered drought or salt stress as major environmental cues, highlighting the relevance of this topic in times of climate change. Only one paper studied cold stress [1]. The dominance of drought and salt stress studies underpins the need to understand tree responses to these environmental threats from the molecular to the ecophysiological level.
    [Show full text]
  • A New Modeling Approach for Estimating Abiotic and Biotic Stress-Induced De Novo Emissions of Biogenic Volatile Organic Compounds from Plants
    ORIGINAL RESEARCH published: 25 June 2019 doi: 10.3389/ffgc.2019.00026 A New Modeling Approach for Estimating Abiotic and Biotic Stress-Induced de novo Emissions of Biogenic Volatile Organic Compounds From Plants Rüdiger Grote 1*, Monica Sharma 2,3, Andrea Ghirardo 3 and Jörg-Peter Schnitzler 3 1 Institute of Meteorology and Climate Research - Atmospheric Environmental Research, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Germany, 2 Faculty of Geosciences, Geoengineering and Mining, Technische Universität Bergakademie Freiberg, Freiberg, Germany, 3 Research Unit Environmental Simulation (EUS), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Munich, Germany The emission of biogenic volatile organic compounds (BVOCs) is usually thought to depend on species-specific emission capacities that vary with seasonal and phenological conditions. Actual—so called constitutive—emissions are then calculated from prevailing temperature and radiation. However, various abiotic and biotic stressors such as ozone, Edited by: extreme radiation and temperature conditions, as well as wounding e.g., from insect Silvano Fares, Council for Agricultural and feeding, can lead to de-novo emissions of stress-induced BVOCs (sBVOCs) that may Economics Research, Italy excel constitutive emissions by more than an order of magnitude. These emissions Reviewed by: often have a considerable different compound composition and are short-lived but can Steffen M. Noe, Estonian University of Life prolong under continuous stress for quite some time. Thus, they may easily have a Sciences,
    [Show full text]