1. Introduction
Salinity stress is an environmental constraint that produces substantial limitations on crop productivity and quality worldwide [
1], especially in those crops which are sensitive to this stress such as common bean (
Phaseolus vulgaris L.) [
2]. Common bean is a vital source of proteins and essential nutrients for millions of people worldwide. However, plant growth and productivity can be significantly affected by environmental stressors, with salt stress being a major concern [
3]. Excessive salt concentration produces damage in plants by disrupting water uptake, producing ion toxicity and interfering with nutrient uptake [
4]. For instance, excessive salts in the soil can replace essential nutrients like potassium (K
+) and calcium (Ca
2+), affecting vital cellular processes [
5]. Ion toxicity results from the buildup of toxic amounts of Na
+ in plant tissues and cells, which negatively impacts the plant's ability to grow and develop. Na+ is not necessary for plants, in contrast to animals (except in some C4 plants) [
6,
7] and Its overabundance will be extremely harmful to plants, causing cytosolic K+ efflux, which will disrupt cellular homeostasis, oxidative stress, interfere with K
+ and Ca
2+ functions, nutrient shortage, stunted growth, and even cell death [
8,
9].
During the emergence and development of saline stress inside the plant, all major processes such as photosynthesis, protein synthesis, energy metabolism are affected. The first response is the reduction in the speed of extension of the leaf surface, followed by stopping the extension with the intensification of stress [
10]. The oxidative stress caused by salinity increases the formation of reactive oxygen species (ROS), such as superoxide anion (O
2−) and hydrogen peroxide (H
2O
2), which can perturbate the structure of cells, leading to DNA mutation, protein denaturation and lipid peroxidation [
11]. Maintaining vital processes in these conditions of high salinity therefore requires a resistance of the plant to dehydration, by an adaptation of its osmotic potential to restore water relations and ensure a suitable water supply, also by means of an effective control of intracellular ion fluxes [
12]. To prevent ROS-induced damage and lessen its negative effects, plant cells are outfitted with highly developed antioxidant defense systems, both enzymatic and non-enzymatic. Within each organelle of cells, there are one or more antioxidants that work to detoxify a specific ROS [
13], therefore, plants exposed to salinity and water stressors have adopted the important strategy of enhanced synthesis and accumulation of low molecular weight compounds. To survive under stressful circumstances, plants often store free amino acids, non-structural carbohydrates, and quaternary ammonium compounds [
14].
In recent years, natural biostimulant exploration has emerged as a promising avenue for improving crop resilience against salt stress [
15].
Saccorhiza polyschides (SP) is a large and bulky brown macroalgae species belonging to Phyllariaceae family, whose size varies from 1.5 to more than 5 m in length with up to 3.5 m width. Usually found on the lowest shore part, it is widely distributed on west European, Mediterranean and north-west African coasts. Samples of SP were taken from natural algae fields located in Sidi Rahal marine coast, in the south of Casablanca, Morocco. This alga possesses a unique bioactive composition with significant amounts of relevant macrominerals, and trace elements essential for plant growth [
16]. Apart from this, this edible seaweed has the potential of ensuring the production of large amounts of biomass for feed and food [
17]. The appeal of such a natural solution lies in its potential to mitigate environmental and ecological impacts of traditional agricultural interventions [
18]. As a potential biostimulant source, SP could provide a natural and sustainable solution to mitigate adverse effects of salt stress on crops like common beans, and other salt-sensitive plants, enhancing their resilience in saline environments. Mamede et al. [
19] reported that the application of the
S. polyschides extract (SPE) increased soil fertility and hence, turnip green plants enhanced their root system, photosynthetic activity and the essential nutrient uptake.
The current investigation focuses on the exploration of the role of SPE at different concentrations (1%, 2%, and 5%) in the mitigation of salt stress (68.4 mM NaCl) in common bean plants. The biostimulant effect is analysed testing physiological and biochemical processes on the plant such as growth parameters, indole acetic acid, sugars and amino acids, chlorophyll content, antioxidant enzyme activities and carbon-nitrogen enzyme activities. The objective was not only to scientifically understand the biostimulant phenomenon, but also to provide practical insights of applications in agriculture to alleviate salt-induced stress in common beans crops.
4. Discussion
The main objective of this work is to evaluate the putative biostimulant effect of
Saccorhiza polyschides extracts (SPE) on common bean plants under salt stress condition (68.4 mM NaCl), testing two types of SPE application: by spraying the aerial part of the plant or by irrigation. Salt stress has one of the most inhibitory impacts on several glycophytic crops such as Solanum, Capsicum, or Triticum plants, causing reduced growth, development, and productivity [
33,
34] The application of algae biostimulants has been described as a useful tool for improving crop protection against several stresses [
35,
36], and brown seaweeds have been largely employed mostly due to their year-round availability and large size. Most of the experiments in this sense have been developed using
Ascophyllum nodosum extracts, which used as fertilizers enhance the growth, the quality and resilience under salt stress conditions in
Lactuca sativa,
Arabidopsis thaliana, and
Solanum lycoperssicum among others [
37,
38,
39]. However, as far as we know, no experiments were made using SPE to improve the resilience and productivity of common bean plants under salt stress conditions.
The biostimulant action of algae extracts was attributed to high amounts of macro- and micronutrients, hormones, phenolics, amino acids, carotenoids, vitamins and polyamines [
40,
41]. SPE contained significant levels of free amino acids, and auxins (
Table 1), which could provide insight into why its application positively impacts on the growth of plants and their ability to withstand salt stress conditions. Similarly, a study done by Hussein et al. [
43] on the effects of seaweed liquid extracts (SLEs) prepared from three Egyptian seaweeds (
Ulva fasciata,
Cystoseira compressa, and
Laurencia obtusa) on seed priming, growth, and salinity stress mitigation on
Vigna sinensis and
Zea mays revealed that the physiologic stimulant effect of the micronutrient content of these SLEs and the presence of plant growth regulating substances could be used to understand the stimulating effects of SLEs on the growth of these plants.
The increment of salt in the substrate modifies the electrical conductivity of the soil, limiting the uptake of water by most of the glycophytic plants [
44] such as common bean. The reduction in water content impairs the transpiration and stomal conductance, affecting the expansion of old leaves and the emergence of new ones [
45]. This effect reduces plant growth, as we observed in common bean plants under salt stress, which reduced their shoot length, fresh weight and leaf diameter (
Figure 2). Salt stress also affected photosynthetic parameters negatively, producing pigment degradation (
Figure 3) and reducing the carbon fixation capacity of the plant, which lead to accumulation of less soluble sugars and amino acids (
Figure 4). However, the application of algae extracts increased growth parameters, chlorophyll content and photosynthesis in
Cucurbita pepo [
46] and
Triticcum aestivum [
47] under salt stress. In accordance with this, 5% SPE application by spraying significantly increased growth parameters (
Figure 2) and chlorophyll content (
Figure 3) in common bean plants under salt stress compared to plants without biostimulation. The irrigation method only had significant effect at 2% and 5% SPE on leaf diameter and chlorophyll content (
Figure 2 and
Figure 3), suggesting an effect of SPE on cytokinin synthesis and/or mobilization from the root to the leaves [
48].
The accumulation of osmolytes into the cells is a well-known strategy of halophyte plants to facilitate water entrance and protect cells and subcellular structures upon salt stress [
45]. However, common bean plants reduced soluble sugar and amino acid content under salt stress (
Figure 4). Similarly, HM et al. [
49] reported a progressive decrease in amino acid content in maize and broad bean plants with increasing salt stress, as well as a decrease in soluble sugar content. Although, the SPE application increased their content to the levels of those found in non-stressed plants (
Figure 4). This result has also been noted in tomato plants treated with
A. nodosum extract [
38], and the exogenous application of other algal extracts significantly increased osmolytes accumulation in plants exposed to various types of stress [
50]. In this regard, a variety of organic compounds found in algal extracts have been described, including amino acids (such as proline, glycine, glutamine) and soluble sugars (such as glucose, sucrose, mannitol) that regulate osmotic balance and mitigate stress in plants.
When subject to salt stress, plants suffer an accumulation of reactive oxidizing species (ROS), such as superoxide anion (O
2-) radicals and hydrogen peroxide (H
2O
2) [
51], which could cause adverse effects such as increased lipid peroxidation as evidenced by elevated malondialdehyde (MDA) levels [
51].
Recorded results of the current investigation revealed a noteworthy rise in lipid peroxidation damage, and a high O
2- and H
2O
2 content in common bean plants under salt stress conditions (
Figure 5). However, the application of 2% or 5% SPE significantly reduced the ROS content in salt-stressed plants to that level found in control plants or even less, resulting in a drastic reduction in the lipid peroxidation levels. This could be attributed to SPE boosting non-enzymatic antioxidant activity pathways as well as enzymatic ones [
36]. The content of natural antioxidants in SPE (
Table 1), including polyphenols, plays an important role in reducing lipid peroxidation. Compounds recognized as excellent anti-oxidants are found in algae comprising certain pigments such as carotenoids, astaxanthin, fucoxanthin, and polyphenols such as phenolic acids, flavonoids, and tannins [
52].
Apart from antioxidant compounds, plants use enzymatic systems in order to deal with oxidative stress. Superoxide dismutase (SOD), glutathione peroxidase (GPx), glutathione-S-transferase (GST) and glutathione reductase (GR) create an intricate network to reduce, absorb, and scavenge ROS detoxification, allowing cellular survival [
53]. It is well-known that SOD is the first line of defense against damage caused by ROS because it catalyzes the dismutation of O
2− into oxygen and H
2O
2 [
54]. A noteworthy rise in SOD activity was observed in the present research in reaction to salt stress. Nevertheless, it was overcome by plants treated with sprayed SPE mainly at 5%, which, in addition to neutralizing the harmful salt stress effect, further increased SOD activity. As expected, in SPE-treated plants under stress, the increase in SOD activity was accompanied by a decrease in O2- content (
Figure 5 and
Figure 6). Hence, the H
2O
2 generated by SOD could be used for other types of procedures like cell wall reinforcement [
55] as well as a signaling molecule that activates plant defense systems and get detoxified by other antioxidant enzymes such as peroxidases and catalases. These results suggest that SPE could help common bean plants to defend themselves against salinity-induced oxidative stress.
In the present study, common bean leaves exposed to salt stress presented an increase in GPx and GR activities, especially when plants were sprayed with SPE rather than irrigated (
Figure 4). GPx catalyzes the reduction of the generated H
2O
2 by SOD to water and oxygen, using GSH directly as a reducing agent [
53]. GSSG reduction through glutathione reductase (GR) facilitates the regeneration of GSH. By employing NADPH as a reducing agent, the GR enzyme maintains a balanced ratio of GSSG/GSH, which is essential for preserving the oxidative balance in plant cells [
56].
GST activity also plays an essential role for ROS detoxification [
57]. Plants under salinity have higher GSH content which is linked to higher GST and GPx activities (
Figure 6; [
57]). Additionally, SPE treatments have been shown to reduce the oxidative stress response in common bean plants, especially at 5% of SPE (
Figure 4c), suggesting it provides tolerance to salt toxicity. In sum, SPE reduced the production of ROS and minimized oxidative damage caused by salinity by modulating the antioxidant defense system, allowing common beans to develop normally even in salt stressed environments. In line with these results, Latique et al. [
58] examined liquid seaweed extract effects on mitigating salt stress on wheat plants, resulting in increased growth, antioxidant enzymes, and boosting the overall health of crops subject to salt stress.
The present investigation highlighted how salt stress influences carbon and nitrogen metabolism in common bean plant leaves with and without SPE treatment. Salt stress caused a striking drop in PEPC activity (
Figure 7), which is known as a key enzyme in carbon metabolism. Considering that there is plenty of evidence showing adverse salt toxicity effects on PEPC performance [
59], this enzyme plays diverse functions in plant cells, by exchanging phosphoenolpyruvate (PEP) into oxaloacetate and inorganic phosphate (Pi) in the presence of HCO3 [
60]. This enzyme has the potential to support the replenishment of intermediates necessary for nitrogen assimilation and biosynthesis in the tricarboxylic acid cycle (TCA). This is necessary not only for amino acids synthesis, but also for carbohydrates and nucleic acid production [
59,
28]. Furthermore, PEPC activity showed a significant increase in SPE treatment, particularly by spraying application (
Figure 7a), suggesting a potential alleviating effect on demand for carbon skeletons required for nitrogen assimilation in common bean plants under salt stress conditions.
GDH activity rose while GS activity was significantly suppressed under salt stress (
Figure 7b and c). As an essential enzyme for the metabolism of nitrogen, GS produces glutamine by condensing glutamate and ammonia [
61]. Moreover, GDH primarily functions as a bidirectional enzyme reaction, catalyzing the assimilation of ammonium to glutamate and the deamination of glutamate to 2-oxoglutarate and ammonium [
31]. The increasing GDH activity and GS/GOGAT cycle decreasing capacity under salt stress have been previously reported by various studies [
61,
62,
63]. The results presented here may indicate that ammonium assimilation under salinity stress might largely depend on GDH pathway. As reported, SPE increased GDH and GS activities, much more by spraying than by irrigation, highlighting the ability of SPE to stimulate ammonium assimilation in common bean plants. AAT activity plays a crucial role in the synthesis of amino acids from glutamate, making it a necessary enzyme for nitrogen metabolism in plants [
65]. Salt stress markedly increased AAT activity, compared to control plants (
Figure 7d); however, when stressed plants were treated with SPE by irrigation, AAT activity was reduced compared to SPE-sprayed plants, which showed a significant increase. AAT is an aminotransferase, oxaloacetate and glutamate are produced when AAT facilitates the reversible transfer the amino group of aspartate to α-ketoglutarate [
65]. AATs have been shown to be crucial in several physiological functions in plants, involving the carbon skeleton recycling that occurs when roots absorb ammonia. The current observations of elevated AAT activity in SPE-treated plants is consistent with the rise in the amino acid pool. The ammonia that tends to build up in salty environments is detoxified in large part by the keto acids and certain amino acids [
66]. Considering all these results SPE treatment could be assessed as an excellent potential to induce resistance in common bean plants against salt stress toxicity due to its potential for modulating carbon and nitrogen metabolism, antioxidant system, morphological parameters and content in osmolytes.
Overall, the PCA results reveal that the treatments applied have a significant effect on the morpho-physiological biochemical (
Figure 8) and enzymatical traits (
Figure 9) in common bean plants. The positive association between the SSPE2% and SSPE5% treatments and the measured parameters under salt stress suggests that these treatments are effective in mitigating the negative effects of salt stress. In contrast, the relationship between SSPE1% and the measured parameters under salt stress indicates that this treatment may not be as effective as the SSPE2% and SSPE5% in these conditions.
Therefore, our findings highlight the need for a precise selection of SPE concentrations and an effective application method for agricultural use.
Figure 1.
Overview of experimental design used to test the effect of different SPE applications (1%, 2% and 5%) in common bean plants after 2 months growing under non salinity stress (NSS; water) and salinity stress (SS; 68.4 mM of NaCl) culture conditions. Two different SPE applications were used: by spraying or mixed in the irrigation water. A summary of main affected parameters under these different conditions is also shown in the lower part (Illustration made using Biorender).
Figure 1.
Overview of experimental design used to test the effect of different SPE applications (1%, 2% and 5%) in common bean plants after 2 months growing under non salinity stress (NSS; water) and salinity stress (SS; 68.4 mM of NaCl) culture conditions. Two different SPE applications were used: by spraying or mixed in the irrigation water. A summary of main affected parameters under these different conditions is also shown in the lower part (Illustration made using Biorender).
Figure 2.
Biostimulant effect of 1%, 2% and 5% SPE applied by irrigation method (SPE Irrigation + SS), or spraying method (SPE Spraying + SS) on common bean plants growth parameters: shoot length (a), fresh weight (b) and leaf diameter (c), under salt stress (68.4 mM of NaCl). Results of control plants neither with biostimulation nor salt stress (NSS), and under salt stress without biostimulation (SS) were also included for comparison. The value is the average ± standard deviation (SD) of three or four independent observations. Different letters indicate significant differences by Tukey’s test (p < 0.05).
Figure 2.
Biostimulant effect of 1%, 2% and 5% SPE applied by irrigation method (SPE Irrigation + SS), or spraying method (SPE Spraying + SS) on common bean plants growth parameters: shoot length (a), fresh weight (b) and leaf diameter (c), under salt stress (68.4 mM of NaCl). Results of control plants neither with biostimulation nor salt stress (NSS), and under salt stress without biostimulation (SS) were also included for comparison. The value is the average ± standard deviation (SD) of three or four independent observations. Different letters indicate significant differences by Tukey’s test (p < 0.05).
Figure 3.
Biostimulant effect of 1%, 2% and 5% SPE applied by irrigation method (SPE Irrigation + SS), or spraying method (SPE Spraying + SS) on total chlorophyll content of common bean plants under salt stress (68.4 mM of NaCl). Results of control plants neither with biostimulation nor salt stress (NSS), and under salt stress without biostimulation (SS) were also included for comparison. The value is the average ± standard deviation (SD) of three or four independent observations. Different letters indicate significant differences by Tukey’s test (p < 0.05).
Figure 3.
Biostimulant effect of 1%, 2% and 5% SPE applied by irrigation method (SPE Irrigation + SS), or spraying method (SPE Spraying + SS) on total chlorophyll content of common bean plants under salt stress (68.4 mM of NaCl). Results of control plants neither with biostimulation nor salt stress (NSS), and under salt stress without biostimulation (SS) were also included for comparison. The value is the average ± standard deviation (SD) of three or four independent observations. Different letters indicate significant differences by Tukey’s test (p < 0.05).
Figure 4.
Biostimulant effect of 1%, 2% and 5% SPE applied by irrigation method (SPE Irrigation + SS), or spraying method (SPE Spraying + SS) on common bean content of IAA (a), soluble sugars (b) and amino acid (AA) (c), under salt stress (68.4 mM of NaCl). Results of control plants neither with biostimulation nor salt stress (NSS), and under salt stress without biostimulation (SS) were also included for comparison. The value is the average ± standard deviation (SD) of three or four independent observations. Different letters indicate significant differences by Tukey’s test (p < 0.05).
Figure 4.
Biostimulant effect of 1%, 2% and 5% SPE applied by irrigation method (SPE Irrigation + SS), or spraying method (SPE Spraying + SS) on common bean content of IAA (a), soluble sugars (b) and amino acid (AA) (c), under salt stress (68.4 mM of NaCl). Results of control plants neither with biostimulation nor salt stress (NSS), and under salt stress without biostimulation (SS) were also included for comparison. The value is the average ± standard deviation (SD) of three or four independent observations. Different letters indicate significant differences by Tukey’s test (p < 0.05).
Figure 5.
Biostimulant effect of 1%, 2% and 5% SPE applied by irrigation method (SPE Irrigation + SS), or spraying method (SPE Spraying + SS) on common bean lipid peroxidation (MDA) (a), superoxide O2- (b) and hydrogen peroxide H2O2 (c), under salt stress (68.4 mM of NaCl). Results of control plants neither with biostimulation nor salt stress (NSS), and under salt stress without biostimulation (SS) were also included for comparison. The value is the average ± standard deviation (SD) of three or four independent observations. Different letters indicate significant differences by Tukey’s test (p < 0.05).
Figure 5.
Biostimulant effect of 1%, 2% and 5% SPE applied by irrigation method (SPE Irrigation + SS), or spraying method (SPE Spraying + SS) on common bean lipid peroxidation (MDA) (a), superoxide O2- (b) and hydrogen peroxide H2O2 (c), under salt stress (68.4 mM of NaCl). Results of control plants neither with biostimulation nor salt stress (NSS), and under salt stress without biostimulation (SS) were also included for comparison. The value is the average ± standard deviation (SD) of three or four independent observations. Different letters indicate significant differences by Tukey’s test (p < 0.05).
Figure 6.
Biostimulant effect of 1%, 2% and 5% SPE applied by irrigation method (SPE Irrigation + SS), or spraying method (SPE Spraying + SS) on common bean antioxidant enzyme activities; superoxide dismutase (SOD) (a), glutathione peroxidase (GPx) (b), glutathione-S-transferase (GST) (c), and glutathione reductase (GR) (d), under salt stress (68.4 mM of NaCl). Results of control plants neither with biostimulation nor salt stress (NSS), and under salt stress without biostimulation (SS) were also included for comparison. The value is the average ± standard deviation (SD) of three or four independent observations. Different letters indicate significant differences by Tukey’s test (p < 0.05).
Figure 6.
Biostimulant effect of 1%, 2% and 5% SPE applied by irrigation method (SPE Irrigation + SS), or spraying method (SPE Spraying + SS) on common bean antioxidant enzyme activities; superoxide dismutase (SOD) (a), glutathione peroxidase (GPx) (b), glutathione-S-transferase (GST) (c), and glutathione reductase (GR) (d), under salt stress (68.4 mM of NaCl). Results of control plants neither with biostimulation nor salt stress (NSS), and under salt stress without biostimulation (SS) were also included for comparison. The value is the average ± standard deviation (SD) of three or four independent observations. Different letters indicate significant differences by Tukey’s test (p < 0.05).
Figure 7.
Biostimulant effect of 1%, 2% and 5% SPE applied by irrigation method (SPE Irrigation + SS), or spraying method (SPE Spraying + SS) on common bean carbon-nitrogen enzyme activities: phosphoenolpyruvate carboxylase (PEPC) (a); glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH) (b), Glutamine synthase (GS) (c) and Aspartate Aminotransferase (AAT) (d), under salt stress (68.4 mM of NaCl). Results of control plants neither with biostimulation nor salt stress (NSS), and under salt stress without biostimulation (SS) were also included for comparison. The value is the average ± standard deviation (SD) of three or four independent observations. Different letters indicate significant differences by Tukey’s test (p < 0.05).
Figure 7.
Biostimulant effect of 1%, 2% and 5% SPE applied by irrigation method (SPE Irrigation + SS), or spraying method (SPE Spraying + SS) on common bean carbon-nitrogen enzyme activities: phosphoenolpyruvate carboxylase (PEPC) (a); glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH) (b), Glutamine synthase (GS) (c) and Aspartate Aminotransferase (AAT) (d), under salt stress (68.4 mM of NaCl). Results of control plants neither with biostimulation nor salt stress (NSS), and under salt stress without biostimulation (SS) were also included for comparison. The value is the average ± standard deviation (SD) of three or four independent observations. Different letters indicate significant differences by Tukey’s test (p < 0.05).
Figure 8.
Principal component analysis (PCA) of morpho-physiological and biochemical traits observed in common bean plants (A) and scatter plot of treatment (B). The variables included were: shoot length (SL), fresh weight (FW), leaf diameter (LD), total chlorophyll content. The total treatments (TT) included were: control (NSS: irrigation only with water), NaCl application (SS: irrigation only with 68.4 mM of NaCl), Saccorhiza polyschides extract (SPE) at different concentration (SPC): SPE 1%, SPE2% or SPE5% and 68.4 mM of NaCl applied through two application methods (AM): irrigation (I) and spraying (S).
Figure 8.
Principal component analysis (PCA) of morpho-physiological and biochemical traits observed in common bean plants (A) and scatter plot of treatment (B). The variables included were: shoot length (SL), fresh weight (FW), leaf diameter (LD), total chlorophyll content. The total treatments (TT) included were: control (NSS: irrigation only with water), NaCl application (SS: irrigation only with 68.4 mM of NaCl), Saccorhiza polyschides extract (SPE) at different concentration (SPC): SPE 1%, SPE2% or SPE5% and 68.4 mM of NaCl applied through two application methods (AM): irrigation (I) and spraying (S).
Figure 9.
Principal component analysis (PCA) of enzyme activities and some biochemical traits observed in common bean plants (A) and scatter plot of treatment (B). The enzymatic activities included were: superoxide dismutase (SOD), glutathione-s-transferase (GST), glutathione-peroxidase (GPx), phosphoenolpyruvate carboxylase (PEPC), aspartate aminotransferase (AAT), glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH), glutamine synthetase (GS). The content of indolacetic acid (IAA), amino acids, soluble sugars, malonaldehyde acid (MDA), H2O2 and O2- was also included. The treatments (TT) included were: control (NSS: irrigation only with water), NaCl (SS: irrigation only with 68.4 mM of NaCl), Saccorhiza polyschides extract (SPE) at different concentration (SPC): SPE 1%, SPE2% or SPE5% and 68.4 mM of NaCl applied through two methods (AM): irrigation (I) and spraying (S).
Figure 9.
Principal component analysis (PCA) of enzyme activities and some biochemical traits observed in common bean plants (A) and scatter plot of treatment (B). The enzymatic activities included were: superoxide dismutase (SOD), glutathione-s-transferase (GST), glutathione-peroxidase (GPx), phosphoenolpyruvate carboxylase (PEPC), aspartate aminotransferase (AAT), glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH), glutamine synthetase (GS). The content of indolacetic acid (IAA), amino acids, soluble sugars, malonaldehyde acid (MDA), H2O2 and O2- was also included. The treatments (TT) included were: control (NSS: irrigation only with water), NaCl (SS: irrigation only with 68.4 mM of NaCl), Saccorhiza polyschides extract (SPE) at different concentration (SPC): SPE 1%, SPE2% or SPE5% and 68.4 mM of NaCl applied through two methods (AM): irrigation (I) and spraying (S).
Table 1.
Polyphenol, flavonoid, indole acetic acid (IAA) and amino acid (AA) content of Saccorhiza polyschides water extract (SPE) at 100%. Values represent the mean of four replicates ± standard deviation (SD).
Table 1.
Polyphenol, flavonoid, indole acetic acid (IAA) and amino acid (AA) content of Saccorhiza polyschides water extract (SPE) at 100%. Values represent the mean of four replicates ± standard deviation (SD).
Saccorhiza polyschides |
Polyphenols |
Flavonoids |
IAA |
AA |
|
(mg/g DW) |
|
5.494 ± 0.026 |
1.327 ± 0.012 |
0.264 ± 0.004 |
0.353 ± 0.009 |