Effect of different arsenic-treatments on the dry weight of vegetative plant parts of green pea in the different phenophase of the plant development

Annals o he Academy o Romanian Scien is s Se ies on Science and Technology o In o ma ion ISSN 1234-567X Volume x, Numbe x/20xx 1 EFFECT OF DIFFERENT ARSENIC-TREATMENTS ON THE DRY WEIGHT OF VEGETATIVE PLANT PARTS OF GREEN PEA IN THE DIFFERENT PHENOPHASE OF THE PLANT DEVELOPMENT Szil ia VÁRALLYAY 1 And ea BALLÁNÉ KOVÁCS 2 , Á on SOÓS 3 , Béla KOVÁCS 4 , Abs ac . The objec i e o ou s udy was o in es iga e he e ec o a sena e and a seni e on d y weigh o oo , s em and lea es o g een pea in he ou di e en g ow h phases ( ou -node condi ion, he beginning o lowe ing, g een ipening, and comple e ma u i y) o he plan de elopemen . As a esul s o ou expe imen shows, in some cases he e we e signi ican di e ences bee wen he e ec o As(III)- and As(V)- ea mne s. Based on he da a, in he case o he all phenophase, As(III)- ea men s has a nega i e e ec on he d y mass o ege a i e plan pa s. Acco ding o he esul s, in he case o he i s phenopase he 3 mg kg-1 As(V)- ea men s, in he case o he u he phenophase he 3 and 10 mg kg-1 As(V)- ea men inc eased, bu he highe concen a ion o As(V) dec eased he d y mass o lea es and s em. Ho ewe , he d y weig h o oo was sigh ly inc eased in he i s and second phenophase o he plan de elompen as a esul o he 3 mg kg-1 As(V)- ea mne , he d y mass o oo was nega i ely e ec ed by he As(V)- ea men s. Keywo ds: a seni e, a sena e, g een pea, d y weigh , po expe imen 1. In oduc ion A senic (As) is a oxic elemen ha is ound na u ally in soils all o e he wo ld [1]. Mos en i onmen al a senic p oblems a e he esul in mining ac i i ies, use o a senical he bicides and insec icides, i iga ion wi h a senic con amina ed g oundwa e and some o he ag icul u al and an h opogenic ac o s [2, 3, 4, 5]. The pollu ion o soil and g oundwa e wi h a senic is a se ious en i onmen al 1 Junio Resea che , Ins i u e o Food Science, Facul y o Ag icul u al and Food Sciences and En i onmen al Managemen , Uni e si y o Deb ecen, Deb ecen, Hunga y ( a allyay.szil ia@ag .unideb.hu). 2 Associa e p o esso , PhD, Depa men o Ag icul u al Chemis y and Soil Sciences, Facul y o Ag icul u al and Food Sciences and En i onmen al Managemen , Uni e si y o Deb ecen, Deb ecen, Hunga y (ko acsa@ag .unideb.hu). 3 Junio Resea che , Ins i u e o Food Science, Facul y o Ag icul u al and Food Sciences and En i onmen al Managemen , Uni e si y o Deb ecen, Deb ecen, Hunga y (soos.a on@ag .unideb.hu). 4 P o . PhD, Ins i u e o Food Science, Facul y o Ag icul u al and Food Sciences and En i onmen al Managemen , Uni e si y o Deb ecen, Deb ecen, Hunga y (ko acsb@ag .unideb.hu). 2 Szil ia Vá allyay, And ea Balláné Ko ács, Á on Soós, Béla Ko ács p oblem all o e he wo ld [4, 6]. A senic is non-essen ial mo eo e oxic o plan s [5, 7]. The phy o oxici y o a senic depends on he o m o he a senic specia ion and jus only seconda ily depends on he o al concen a ion [8]. Ino ganic a senic o ms a e usually mo e oxic o plan s, han o ganic compounds [9]. A senic in soil mos ly ound as ino ganic o m, namely a sena e [As(V)] and a seni e [As(III)]. Bo h a e easily aken up by he cells o he plan oo [10, 11]. Excessi e up ake o a senic by plan s ha e led o physiological changes [12, 13]. A senic could inhibi he no mal g ow h o he plan s wi h oxici y symp oms such as mo phological changes [14, 15] educ ion o he plan s p oduc i i y [16, 17] and loss o biomass [18]. The objec i e o his s udy was o in es iga e he physiological esponse o g een peas o di e en As- ea men s, e alua ed by he pa ame e s o d y mass o shoo , oo , lea es, peas and pods in he ou di e en phase o plan de elopmen . 2. Ma e ials and me hods The po expe imen was ca ied ou in calca eous che nozem soil was collec ed om he Lá ókép Expe imen al S a ion o he Uni e si y o Deb ecen. The pa ame e s o he expe imen al soil we e published p e iously by Ko ács e al. (2015) [19]. 11 kg soil was weighed in o each po . The soil was ai d ied, sie ed and addi ional NPK e iliza ion was applied (Table 1). Table 1) Doses o NPK- e ilize was applied in he g eenhouse expe imen Doses o NPK- e ilize N P K NH4NO3 (g po -1) KH2PO4 (g po -1) KH2PO4 (g po -1) K2SO4 (g po -1) 0.568 0.229 0.079 0.148 A senic was applied in he o m o a seni e (NaAsO2) and a sena e (KH2AsO4), sepa a ely in se en di e en le els espec i ely as ollows: 0 (con ol), 1, 3, 10, 30, 90 and 270 mg kg-1. The NPK e ilize and he a sena e as well as a seni e was supplemen ed o he soil as an aqueous solu ion. G een pea (Pisum sa i um L.) was chosen o ou esea ch o s udy he e ec o di e en a senic ea men s on he d y weigh o plan since i is one o he ege ables g own in he la ges a ea in Hunga y. Twen y- i e seeds we e plan ed in each po s and a e he ge mina ion he numbe o he plan s was slowed o six een. The s udy was conduc ed in andomized comple e block design wi h h ee eplica ions. Po s we e weighed daily and he wa e losses we e e illed by applica ions o de-ionized wa e . Plan s samples ( ou plan in each phenophase) we e collec ed in he ou di e en phase o he plan de elopmen ( ou -node condi ion, he beginning o lowe ing, g een ipening, and comple e ma u i y). E ec o di e en a senic- ea men s on he d y weigh o ege a i e plan pa ’s o g een pea in he di e en phenophase o he plan de elopmen 3 The oo s o he plan s we e washed o elimina e he soil by dis illed wa e . The d y weigh s we e eco ded a e d ying he oo , s em, lea es, peas and pods a 65°C un il a cons an weigh was achie ed. All da a ob ained om expe imen we e subjec ed o one-way analysis o a iance (ANOVA) and Duncan's es a 0.05 signi icance le el o compa e popula ions and a senic ea men s, used by SPSS s a is ics so wa e e sion 22.0. Independen Sample T- es was used o de e mine he s a is ically signi ican di e ences a 0.05, 0.01 and 0.001 signi icance le els be ween he e ec o a sena e and a seni e a he same le el. 3. Resul s 3.1. E ec o As(III)- and As(V)- ea men s on he d y weigh o g een pea in he i s phenophase o he plan de elopmen The e ec o As(III)- and As(V)- ea men s on he d y weigh o indi idual 0plan ’s pa o g een pea plan s which we e in ou -node condi ion is demons a e in he Table 3. Table 2) D y weigh (g plan -1) o indi idual plan ’s pa o g een pea plan s which we e in ou -node condi ion g own in he calca eous che nozem soil o Lá ókép depending on a senic- ea men s (0, 3, 10, 30, 90, 270 mg kg-1) As- ea men s (mg kg-1) D y weigh (g plan -1) Lea es S em Roo As(III) 0 0.162±0.042a 0.123±0.039a 0.0223±0.0055a 3 0.135±0.01b 0.0817±0.0087b 0.0210±0.0046a 10 0.123±0.01b 0.0813±0.0069b 0.0178±0.0058a 30 0.117±0.007b 0.0785±0.0053b 0.0176±0.0059a 90 0.114±0.013b 0.0711±0.0083b 0.0107±0.0007b 270 0.0198±0.0056c 0.0207±0.0058c 0.0101±0.0034b As(V) 0 0.162±0.042a 0.123±0.039ab 0.0223±0.0055a 3 0.175±0.026a* 0.151±0.051b* 0.0312±0.0069b* 10 0.160±0.038a* 0.111±0.014ab 0.0215±0.0048a 30 0.121±0.028b 0.0837±0.0154a 0.0181±0.0051a 90 0.109±0.024b 0.0740±0.0119ac 0.0164±0.0016a* 270 0.0215±0.0052c 0.0287±0.0071c 0.0157±0.0053a Means ollowed by he same le e wi hin columns, sepa a ely in he case o As(III) and As(V), we e no signi ican ly di e en acco ding o Ducan’s mul iple ange es (P≤ 0.05). Means ollowed by *(p<0.05), **(p<0.01), ***(p<0.001) wi hin columns we e signi ican ly di e en be ween he e ec o As(III) and As(V) a he same le el acco ding o independen sample T- es . This alues show ha inc easing amoun o As(III)- ea men esul ed s a is ically lowe d y weigh o he lea es and s em o expe imen al plan s. Based on he da a, 4 Szil ia Vá allyay, And ea Balláné Ko ács, Á on Soós, Béla Ko ács in he case o he oo he 90 and 270 mg kg-1 As(III)- ea men s also signi ican ly educed he d y weigh . Acco ding o he da a he 3 mg kg-1 As(V)- ea men s a is ically inc eased he d y weigh o oo . When he plan s we e ea ed wi h mo e han 10 mg kg-1 As(V), he d y weigh o lea es we e educed, mo eo e he d y biomass o s em was also educed when he pla s we e ea ed wi h 270 mg kg-1 As(V). Ne e heless, he 3 mg kg-1 As(V)- ea men signi ican ly inc eased he d y mass o s em and oo . 3.2. E ec o As(III)- and As(V)- ea men s on he d y weigh o g een pea in he second phenophase o he plan de elopmen As a esul o ou expe imen s shows, he ea men s o g een pea wi h As(III) had a nega i e e ec on he d y mass o s em. The d y weigh o oo and lea es we e also educed when he plan s we e ea ed wi h a leas 30 mg kg-1 As(III). In addi ion i was obse ed ha he d y mass o oo , s em and lea es we e dec eased when he plan s we e ea ed wi h 90 and 270 mg kg-1 As(V). Ne e heless, he 10 mg kg-1 As(V)- ea men inc eased he d y mass o lea es (Table 3). Table 3) D y weigh (g plan -1) o indi idual plan ’s pa o g een pea plan s which we e in he beginning o lowe ing g own in he calca eous che nozem soil o Lá ókép depending on a senic- ea men s (0, 3, 10, 30, 90, 270 mg kg-1) As- ea men s (mg kg-1) D y weigh (g plan -1) Lea es S em Roo As(III) 0 0.192±0.048a 0.255±0.085a 0.0304±0.0077a 3 0.165±0.014ab 0.170±0.027b 0.0287±0.0095a 10 0.145±0.046ab 0.156±0.037b 0.0255±0.0053ab 30 0.133±0.041b 0.141±0.036b 0.0200±0.0059bc 90 0.128±0.030b 0.126±0.037b 0.0159±0.0051c 270 0.0298±0.0106c 0.0238±0.0046c 0.0130±0.0044c As(V) 0 0.192±0.048a 0.255±0.085a 0.0304±0.0077a 3 0.218±0.06a 0.266±0.07a 0.0335±0.0068a 10 0.311±0.078b** 0.345±0.081a** 0.0299±0.0079ab 30 0.208±0.056a* 0.276±0.07a 0.0267±0.0077abc 90 0.112±0.039c 0.122±0.025b 0.0202±0.0069bc 270 0.0294±0.0098d 0.0323±0.0079c 0.0189±0.0057c Means ollowed by he same le e wi hin columns, sepa a ely in he case o As(III) and As(V), we e no signi ican ly di e en acco ding o Ducan’s mul iple ange es (P≤ 0.05). Means ollowed by *(p<0.05), **(p<0.01), ***(p<0.001) wi hin columns we e signi ican ly di e en be ween he e ec o As(III) and As(V) a he same le el acco ding o independen sample T- es . E ec o di e en a senic- ea men s on he d y weigh o ege a i e plan pa ’s o g een pea in he di e en phenophase o he plan de elopmen 5 3.3. E ec o As(III)- and As(V)- ea men s on he d y weigh o g een pea in he hi d phenophase o he plan de elopmen In he case o he hi d phase o he plan de elopmen , d y weigh o each plan pa we e dec eased when he plan we e exposed o 90 and 270 mg kg-1 As(V)- ea men s. Ne e heless, he 30 mg kg-1 As(V)- ea men s signi ican ly inc eased he d y weigh o lea es and s em. In he case i he lea es simila endency was obse ed when he plan s we e ea ed wi h As(III). The 90 and 270 mg kg-1 As(III)- ea men signi ican ly dec eased he d y weigh o lea es. The d y mass o oo was no a y signi ican ly unde he As(III)-s ess, howe e he biomass o s em was nega i ely a ec ed by all As(III)- ea men s (Table 4.). Table 4) D y weigh (g plan -1) o indi idual plan ’s pa o g een pea plan s which we e in g een ipening g own in he calca eous che nozem soil o Lá ókép depending on a senic- ea men s (0, 3, 10, 30, 90, 270 mg kg-1) As- ea men s (mg kg-1) D y weigh (g plan -1) Lea es S em Roo As(III) 0 0.226±0.072a 0.299±0.087a 0.0463±0.0127ab 3 0.176±0.038ab 0.194±0.066b 0.0460±0.0149b 10 0.174±0.049ab 0.192±0.061b 0.0394±0.0087ab 30 0.173±0.059ab 0.185±0.041b 0.0341±0.0033ab 90 0.159±0.046b 0.176±0.057b 0.0323±0.0104ab 270 0.0379±0.0126c 0.0270±0.0074c 0.0293±0.0061b As(V) 0 0.226±0.072a 0.299±0.087a 0.0463±0.0127a 3 0.240±0.078a 0.306±0.068a* 0.0455±0.0035a 10 0.356±0.049b** 0.391±0.113b** 0.0452±0.0067a 30 0.248±0.055a* 0.299±0.046a*** 0.0415±0.0105ab 90 0.116±0.028c 0.133±0.028c 0.0300±0.0071bc 270 0.0340±0.0106c 0.0399±0.0124d* 0.0238±0.0072c Means ollowed by he same le e wi hin columns, sepa a ely in he case o As(III) and As(V), we e no signi ican ly di e en acco ding o Ducan’s mul iple ange es (P≤ 0.05). Means ollowed by *(p<0.05), **(p<0.01), ***(p<0.001) wi hin columns we e signi ican ly di e en be ween he e ec o As(III) and As(V) a he same le el acco ding o independen sample T- es . 3.4. E ec o As(III)- and As(V)- ea men s on he d y weigh o g een pea in he ou h phenophase o he plan de elopmen The e ec o As(III)- and As(V)- ea men s was also e iden on he ege a i e plan ’s pa o g een pea. The As(V)- ea men s caused a simila endency in he d y weigh o lea es, s em and oo as p e iously men ioned in he case o he hi d phenophase o he plan de elopmen . The 90 and 270 mg kg-1 As(V)- 6 Szil ia Vá allyay, And ea Balláné Ko ács, Á on Soós, Béla Ko ács ea men s dec eased he d y mass o he ege a i e plan pa s, howe e he 10 mg kg-1 As(V)- ea men inc eased he d y weigh o lea es and s em. In he case o he lea es he d y mass was also posi i ely a ec ed by he 3 mg kg-1 As(III)- ea men . As in he case o he hi d phenophase o he plan de elopmen , he highes As(III)- ea men (270 mg kg-1) also signi ican ly dec eased he d y weigh o he ege a i e pa s o he g een pea, mo eo e he 90 mg kg-1 As(III)- ea men also dec eased he d y mass o he oo compa ed o he con ol as demons a ed in he Table 5. Table 5) D y weigh (g plan -1) o ege a i e plan ’s pa o g een pea plan s which we e in comple e ma u i y g own in he calca eous che nozem soil o Lá ókép depending on a senic- ea men s (0, 3, 10, 30, 90, 270 mg kg-1) As- ea men s (mg kg-1) D y weigh (g plan -1) Lea es S em Roo As(III) 0 0.24±0.061ab 0.305±0.064ab 0.0607±0.0119a 3 0.368±0.072c 0.374±0.129b 0.0565±0.0194ab 10 0.301±0.039bc 0.322±0.036ab 0.0527±0.0110ab 30 0.238±0.074ab 0.263±0.032ab 0.0450±0.0150ab 90 0.197±0.059a 0.209±0.028a 0.0430±0.0120b 270 0.0554±0.0182d 0.065±0.0107c 0.0249±0.0081c As(V) 0 0.24±0.061a 0.305±0.064a 0.0607±0.0119a 3 0.246±0.056a* 0.316±0.085a 0.0505±0.0097ab 10 0.379±0.052b* 0.465±0.108b* 0.0471±0.0092bc 30 0.262±0.037a 0.307±0.048a 0.0463±0.0119bc 90 0.127±0.036c 0.153±0.043c 0.0342±0.0074c 270 0.0435±0.0119d 0.0525±0.0154d 0.0341±0.0089c Means ollowed by he same le e wi hin columns, sepa a ely in he case o As(III) and As(V), we e no signi ican ly di e en acco ding o Ducan’s mul iple ange es (P≤ 0.05). Means ollowed by *(p<0.05), **(p<0.01), ***(p<0.001) wi hin columns we e signi ican ly di e en be ween he e ec o As(III) and As(V) a he same le el acco ding o independen sample T- es . Conclusion This s udy p o ides impo an in o ma ion conce ning he ela ionship be ween he le els o As in he soil and i s impac on d y weigh o he o indi idual plan ’s pa o g een pea plan s. Acco ding o he esul s, in he case o he all phenophase As(III)- ea men s has a nega i e impac on he d y weigh o he ege a i e plan ’s pa s, howe e is s a is ically no suppo able in all cases. Based on he da a in he case o he i s phenophase he lowe concen a ion o As(V)- ea men (3 mg kg-1) inc eased, bu he highe As(V)- ea men s (10, 30, 90 and 270 mg kg-1) inhibi ed he d y mass accumula ion, howe e is s a is ically also no suppo able in all cases. In he case o he second, hi d and ou h phenophase o he plan de elopmen , inc easing E ec o di e en a senic- ea men s on he d y weigh o ege a i e plan pa ’s o g een pea in he di e en phenophase o he plan de elopmen 7 endency was obse ed in he d y weigh o lea es and s em un il he 10 mg kg-1 As(V)- ea men , ne e heless dec easing endency was obse ed in he case o he highe As(V)- ea men s (30, 90 and 270 mg kg-1). Howe e , in he case o he i s phenophase as a esul o he 3 mg kg-1 As(V)- ea men he d y weigh o oo was sligh ly inc eased and in he second phase also was sligh ly inc eased. Ne e heless, he d y mass o oo was nega i ely a ec ed by he As(V)- ea men s in case o he o he ea men s and o he phenophase o he g een pea de elopmen . As a esul s o ou expe imen shows in some cases he e we e signi ican di e ences be ween he e ec o As(III)- and As(V)- ea men s. Some au ho s epo ed ha he a senic is oxic, o plan , howe e a e y low concen a ion As(V) may be bene icial o plan s [11, 18]. Ou s udy con i ms ha he low concen a ion o As(V) has a posi i e e ec on he d y biomass o plan s. The eason o ha is he nex : As(V) chemically simila o he phospha e, which elemen is necessa y o he plan g ow h. As(V) is able o eplace he phospha e on he su ace o he mine als in he soil, which mechanism inc eased he plan - a ailable amoun o phospha e. R E F E R E N C E S [1] P. L. Smedley and D. G. Kinnibu gh, Appl. Geochem. 17, 517 (2002). [2] P. N. Williams e al., En i on. Sci. Technol. 41, 6854 (2007). [3] Y. G. Zhu e al., En i on. Pollu . 154, 169 (2008). [4] N. S oe a e al., Biol. Plan . 47, 449 (2004). [5] F. J. Zhao e al., New Phy ol. 181, 777 (2009). [6] J. M. Shao en Wang and C. Wai, J. Chem. Educ. 81, 207 (2004). [7] D. J. Kim e al., Chemosphe e. 75, 505 (2009). [8] A. A. Meha g and J. Ha ley-Whi ake , New Phy ol. 154, 29 (2002). [9] C. I. Ull ich-Ebe ius e al., J. Exp. Bo . 40, 119 (1989). [10] P. M. Finnegan and W. Chen, F on Physiol. 3, 182 (2012). [11] J. Y. Xu e al., En i on Pollu . 194, 105 (2014). [12] B. R. Wells and J. T. Gilmo , Ag on. J. 69, 451 (1977). [13] S. E. Smi h e al., Plan Soil. 327, 1 (2010). [14] N. S. Mokgalaka-Ma lala e al., In . J. Phy o emedia . 10, 47 (2008). [15] C. Tu and L. Q. Ma, J. En i on. Qual. 31, 641 (2002). [16] M. R. Shaibu e al., Wa e Ai Soil Pollu . 191, 279 (2008). [17] S. S i as a a e al., J. Exp. Bo . 60, 3419 (2009). 8 Szil ia Vá allyay, And ea Balláné Ko ács, Á on Soós, Béla Ko ács [18] A. A. Ca bonell-Ba achina e al., Sci. Ho ic. 71, 167 (1997). [19] B. Ko ács e al., Plan Physiol. Biochem. 96, 38 (2015).