Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2019 Nov 28;9(1):17842.
doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-54428-z.

Contrasting growth, physiological and gene expression responses of Clematis crassifolia and Clematis cadmia to different irradiance conditions

Xiaohua Ma  1 , Renjuan Qian  1 , Xule Zhang  1 , Qingdi Hu  1 , Hongjian Liu  1 , Jian Zheng  2
Affiliations

Contrasting growth, physiological and gene expression responses of Clematis crassifolia and Clematis cadmia to different irradiance conditions

Xiaohua Ma et al. Sci Rep. .

Abstract

Clematis crassifolia and Clematis cadmia Buch.-Ham. ex Hook.f. & Thomson are herbaceous vine plants native to China. C. crassifolia is distributed in shaded areas, while C. cadmia mostly grows in bright, sunny conditions in mountainous and hilly landscapes. To understand the potential mechanisms involved in the irradiance responses of C. crassifolia and C. cadmia, we conducted a pot experiment under three irradiance treatments with natural irradiation and two different levels of shading. Various growth, photosynthetic, oxidative and antioxidative parameters and the relative expression of irradiance-related genes were examined. In total, 15 unigenes were selected for the analysis of gene expression. The exposure of C. crassifolia to high irradiance resulted in growth inhibition coupled with increased levels of chlorophyll, increased catalase, peroxidase, and superoxide dismutase activity and increased expression of c144262_g2, c138393_g1 and c131300_g2. In contrast, under high irradiance conditions, C. cadmia showed an increase in growth and soluble protein content accompanied by a decrease in the expression of c144262_g2, c133872_g1, and c142530_g1, suggesting their role in the acclimation of C. cadmia to a high-irradiance environment. The 15 unigenes were differentially expressed in C. crassifolia and C. cadmia under different irradiance conditions. Thus, our study revealed that there are essential differences in the irradiance adaptations of C. crassifolia and C. cadmia due to the differential physiological and molecular mechanisms underlying their irradiance responses, which result from their long-term evolution in contrasting habitats.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Diurnal variation of photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) under natural irradiance (T1), moderate shade (T2); and heavy shade (T3) conditions. The values are means ± SE of the PAR over the growing period.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Growth phenotypes of in C. cadmia plants and C. crassifolia plants under three levels of irradiance levels including natural irradiance (T1), moderate shade (T2); and heavy shade (T3) condition.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Chlorophyll a (chla), chlorophyll b (chlb), carotenoid (car) and chlorophyll a/b ratio in C. cadmia and C. crassifolia leaves (means ± SD) grown under three different irradiances including natural irradiance (T1), moderate shade (T2); and heavy shade (T3). Different uppercase letters indicate significant difference between different Clematis species under same irradiance treatment at 0.05 levels; lowercase letters indicate significant difference within the same Clematis species under different irradiance treatments at 0.05. The values presented are the means ± SE.
Figure 4
Figure 4
MDA content and relative electrical conductivity (REC) in C. cadmia and C. crassifolia leaves grown under different irradiance conditions. Different uppercase letters indicate significant difference between different Clematis species under same irradiance treatment at 0.05 levels; lowercase letters indicate significant difference within the same Clematis species under different irradiance treatments at 0.05. The values presented are the means ± SE.
Figure 5
Figure 5
The O2− production rate and H2O2 content in C. cadmia and C. crassifolia leaves grown under different irradiance conditions. Different uppercase letters indicate significant difference between different Clematis species under same irradiance treatment at 0.05 levels; lowercase letters indicate significant difference within the same Clematis species under different irradiance treatments at 0.05. The values presented are the means ± SE.
Figure 6
Figure 6
Peroxidase (POD), catalase (CAT) and superoxide dismutase (SOD) activity in Clematis leaves grown under three different irradiance conditions. Different uppercase letters indicate significant difference between different Clematis species under same irradiance treatment at 0.05 levels; lowercase letters indicate significant difference within the same Clematis species under different irradiance treatments at 0.05. The values presented are the means ± SE.
Figure 7
Figure 7
Soluble protein content (means ± SE) in Clematis leaves grown under three different irradiance conditions.
Figure 8
Figure 8
Variation in relative gene expression in C. crassifolia (C1) and C. Cadmia (C2) leaves developed under different three irradiance treatments including natural irradiance (T1), moderate shade (T2); and heavy shade (T3). The values presented are the means ± SE. Different uppercase letters indicate significant difference between different Clematis species under same irradiance treatment at 0.05 levels; lowercase letters indicate significant difference within the same Clematis species under different irradiance treatments at 0.05.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Wang, W. T. & Bartholomew, B. Clematis Linnaeus. In: Flora of China (eds ZY Wu, PH Raven, DY Hong). Beijing Science Press & St. Louis Botanical Garden Press, 6, 333–386 (2001).
    1. Snoeijer, W. A suggested classification for the genus Clematis. Clematis, 7–20 (1992).
    1. Kizu H, Tommori T. Studies on the constituents of Clematis species. V. On the saponins of the root of Clematis chinensis OSBECK.(5) Chemical and Pharmaceutical Bulletin. 1982;30(9):3340–3346. doi: 10.1248/cpb.30.3340. - DOI
    1. Chawla R, Kumar S, Sharma A. The genus Clematis (Ranunculaceae): chemical and pharmacological perspectives. Journal of ethnopharmacology. 2012;143(143(1)):116–150. doi: 10.1016/j.jep.2012.06.014. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Bolnick D. I. et al. Ecological release from interspecific competition leads to decoupled changes in population and individual niche width. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. 2010;277(1689):1789–1797. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2010.0018. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types