EurekaMag.com logo
+ Site Statistics
References:
52,725,316
Abstracts:
28,411,598
+ Search Articles
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
EurekaMag Most Shared ContentMost Shared
EurekaMag PDF Full Text ContentPDF Full Text
+ PDF Full Text
Request PDF Full TextRequest PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on FacebookFollow on Facebook
Follow on TwitterFollow on Twitter
Follow on Google+Follow on Google+
Follow on LinkedInFollow on LinkedIn

+ Translate

Characterization of Chloroplasts Isolated from Triazine-Susceptible and Triazine-Resistant Biotypes of Brassica campestris L






Plant Physiology 70(1): 24-29

Characterization of Chloroplasts Isolated from Triazine-Susceptible and Triazine-Resistant Biotypes of Brassica campestris L

Chloroplasts isolated from triazine-susceptible and triazine-resistant biotypes of B. campestris L. were analyzed for lipid composition, ultrastructure and relative quantum requirements of photosynthesis. In general, phospholipids, but not glycolipids, in chloroplasts from the triazine-resistant biotype had a higher linolenic acid concentration and lower levels of oleic and linoleic fatty acids, than chloroplasts from triazine-susceptible plants. Chloroplasts from the triazine-resistant biotype had a 1.6-fold higher concentration of t-.DELTA.3-hexadecenoic acid with a concomitantly lower palmitic acid concentration in phosphatidylglycerol. Phosphatidylglycerol previously has been hypothesized to be a boundary lipid for photosystem II. Chloroplasts from the triazine-resistant biotype had a lower chlorophyll [Chl] a/b ratio and exhibited increased grana stacking. Light-saturation curves revealed that the relative requirement for whole chain electron transport at limiting light intensities was lower for the susceptible biotype than for the triazine-resistant biotype. Although the level of the Chl a/b light-harvesting complex associated with photosystem II was greater in resistant biotypes, the increased levels of the light-harvesting complex did not increase the photosynthetic efficiency enough to overcome the rate limitation that is inherited concomitantly with the modification of the S-triazine binding site.


Accession: 001053375

PMID: 16662454

DOI: 10.1104/pp.70.1.24



Related references

Characterization of triazine susceptible and resistant chloroplasts from Brassica campestris L. Plant physiology 67(4): 88, 1981

Difference in oscillatory pattern of thermoluminescence in chloroplasts isolated from triazine susceptible and triazine resistant biotypes of erigeron canadensis. Chittagong University Studies Part II Science 9(1): 79-84, 1985

Effects of atrazine concentrations on the Hill reaction in isolated chloroplasts of triazine-resistant and susceptible oilseed rape (Brassica napus and B. campestris) genotypes. Canadian Journal of Plant Science 61(3): 723-726, 1981

Effects of atrazine concentrations on the hill reaction in isolated chloroplasts of triazine resistant and susceptible oilseed rape brassica napus cultivar tower and brassica campestris cultivar torch genotypes. Canadian Journal of Plant Science 61(3): 723-726, 1981

Comparison of inhibitory activity amide derivatives in triazine resistant and susceptible chloroplasts from chenopodium album and brassica campestris. Pesticide Biochemistry & Physiology 18(2): 253-261, 1982

Differential temperature-dependence of the Hill activity of isolated chloroplasts from triazine resistant and susceptible biotypes of Polygonum lapathifolium L. Plant Science Letters 24(1): 39-44, 1982

Reduced fitness of resistant f 1 hybrids of triazine resistant and triazine susceptible senecio vulgaris biotypes. Plant Physiology (Rockville) 80(4 SUPPL): 61, 1986

Differential growth between and within triazine-resistant and triazine-susceptible biotypes of Senecio vulgaris L. Weed Research 20(5): 299-303, 1980

Comparative fitness of triazine resistant and triazine susceptible Senecio vulgaris biotypes. Dissertation Abstracts International, B 43(4): 965, 1982

Comparison of triazine resistant and triazine susceptible biotypes of senecio vulgaris and their f 1 hybrids. Plant Physiology (Rockville) 87(1): 183-189, 1988