Paper · 2012 · Biologia Plantarum

Sodium nitroprusside modulates gene expression involved in glutathione synthesis in Zea mays leaves

C. Souza Mello; V. S. Hermes; M. P. Guerra; et al.

8
claims
12
verbatim quotes
10
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

To investigate a possible involvement of nitric oxide in gene regulation of glutathione and flavonoid synthesis pathways, maize seedlings were treated with sodium nitroprusside (SNP), a NO donor, and apocynin (APO), an inducer of NO production. After 12-h treatment, the transcripts of γ-glutamylcysteine synthetase (γ-ecs), glutathione synthetase (gsh-s), chalcone synthase (chs), phenylalanine ammonia lyase (pal.1), myb-related protein P (P1) and actin 1 (act) genes were quantified in maize leaves by real time PCR, using α-tubulin as standard transcript. The level of γ-ecs and gsh-s transcripts in maize leaves were increased 9-fold and 12-fold, respectively, following SNP treatment, while after APO treatment, those transcripts were not significantly different from control plants. SNP-treated maize leaves did not show significant changes in pal.1 and chs expression. NO content in maize leaves was increased in SNP and APO treated plants in comparison to control plants. In conclusion, our experiments suggested that genes involved in glutathione synthesis could be modulated by SNP in maize leaves. On the other hand, APO had no effect on γ-ecs and gshs gene expression.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 8

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

SNP increased γ-ecs transcripts ninefold in maize leaves.

Taxon
maizeZea mayse0
Treatment
SNP treatmente0
Gene
γ-ecse0
Outcome
γ-ecse0
Direction
increasede0
Value
9-folde0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The level of γ-ecs and gsh-s transcripts in maize leaves were increased 9-fold and 12-fold, respectively, following SNP treatment”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 560–689 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

SNP increased gsh-s transcripts twelvefold in maize leaves.

Taxon
maizeZea mayse0
Treatment
SNP treatmente0
Gene
gsh-se0
Outcome
gsh-s transcriptse0
Direction
increasede0
Value
12-folde0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The level of γ-ecs and gsh-s transcripts in maize leaves were increased 9-fold and 12-fold, respectively, following SNP treatment”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 560–689 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

APO did not significantly alter γ-ecs transcripts relative to controls.

Taxon
maizeZea mayst1
Treatment
APO treatmente0
Gene
γ-ecst1
Outcome
those transcriptse0
Direction
not significantly differente0
Comparator
control plantse0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“after APO treatment, those transcripts were not significantly different from control plants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 697–788 · show in text ↑
t0

“Zea mays leaves”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 84–99 · show in text ↑
t1

“The level of γ-ecs and gsh-s transcripts in maize leaves”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 560–616 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

APO did not significantly alter gsh-s transcripts relative to controls.

Taxon
maizeZea mayst1
Treatment
APO treatmente0
Gene
gsh-st1
Outcome
those transcriptse0
Direction
not significantly differente0
Comparator
control plantse0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“after APO treatment, those transcripts were not significantly different from control plants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 697–788 · show in text ↑
t0

“Zea mays leaves”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 84–99 · show in text ↑
t1

“The level of γ-ecs and gsh-s transcripts in maize leaves”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 560–616 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

SNP did not significantly change pal.1 expression.

Taxon
maizeZea mayse0
Treatment
SNP-treatede0
Gene
pal.1e0
Outcome
pal.1e0
Direction
did not show significant changese0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“SNP-treated maize leaves did not show significant changes in pal.1 and chs expression”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 790–875 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

SNP did not significantly change chs expression.

Taxon
maizeZea mayse0
Treatment
SNP-treatede0
Gene
chse0
Outcome
chs expressione0
Direction
did not show significant changese0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“SNP-treated maize leaves did not show significant changes in pal.1 and chs expression”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 790–875 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

SNP increased nitric oxide content in maize leaves compared with controls.

Taxon
maizeZea mayse0
Treatment
SNPe0
Outcome
NO contente0
Direction
increasede0
Comparator
control plantse0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“NO content in maize leaves was increased in SNP and APO treated plants in comparison to control plants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 877–979 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

APO increased nitric oxide content in maize leaves compared with controls.

Taxon
maizeZea mayse0
Treatment
APOe0
Outcome
NO contente0
Direction
increasede0
Comparator
control plantse0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“NO content in maize leaves was increased in SNP and APO treated plants in comparison to control plants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 877–979 · show in text ↑

sodium nitroprusside · molecular: expression · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

5 papers: 4 positive, 1 negative or no effect

4 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

1 paper more in this group

See all 5 papers →

apocynin · molecular: expression · Zea mays (maize)Results agree

2 papers: 0 positive, 2 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper

  1. no effect
See all 2 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.