Table 1.
Genotype a | Sulfiteb | Sulfatec | Total glutathioned | Total Sulfure | Total thiolf | Organic Sg |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
μmol g−1 fresh weight | ||||||
WT | 0.32 ± 0.04b | 6.72 ± 0.32b | 0.46 ± 0.003a | 24.9 ± 0.1b | 2.42 ± 0.04b | 17.8 ± 0.03b |
SO Ri | 0.4 ± 0.02a | 7.98 ± 0.54ab | 0.42 ± 0.002b | 24.08 ± 0.6b | 2.73 ± 0.02a | 15.7 ± 0.02c |
SiR KD | 0.31 ± 0.01b | 8.36 ± 0.77a | 0.42 ± 0.003b | 28.33 ± 0.2a | 2.01 ± 0.04c | 20.2 ± 0.01a |
Different lowercase letters show significant differences between the genotypes within treatment, as calculated using Tukey–Kramer HSD test JMP8.0 software (http://www.jmp.com/).
The detected metabolite concentrations data are means of n = 3 SE for WT, SO Ri, and SiR KD. The values were normalized by the dry weight content of WT grown under the same 3% sucrose condition and expressed in fresh weight.
Sulfite was detected by a specific sulfite detection assay using chicken SO (Brychkova et al., 2012a).
Sulfate was detected by Ion chromatography, as described in material and methods.
Total glutathione was determined according to Griffith (1980) as described in material and methods.
Total sulfur was measured by inductively coupled plasma emission spectrometry (ICP-AES), as described in material methods.
Total thiol was detected using DTNB as described by De Kok et al. (1997).
The organic S was calculated as the difference between total S to the inorganic S (sulfate + sulfite).