Next Article in Journal
Seed Transmission of Tomato Leaf Curl New Delhi Virus from Zucchini Squash in Italy
Next Article in Special Issue
Ecological and Geochemical Conditions for the Accumulation of Antioxidants in the Leaves of Lathyrus maritimus (L.) Bigel
Previous Article in Journal
Zinc Hyperaccumulation in Plants: A Review
Previous Article in Special Issue
The Influence of Local Habitat and Microclimate on the Levels of Secondary Metabolites in Slovak Bilberry (Vaccinium myrtillus L.) Fruits
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Chromium Morpho-Phytotoxicity

Key Laboratory of Geospatial Technology for the Middle and Lower Yellow River Regions, College of Environment and Planning, Henan University, Kaifeng 475004, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Plants 2020, 9(5), 564; https://doi.org/10.3390/plants9050564
Submission received: 27 March 2020 / Revised: 22 April 2020 / Accepted: 24 April 2020 / Published: 29 April 2020
(This article belongs to the Special Issue The Impacts of Abiotic Stresses on Plant Development)

Abstract

:
Chromium (Cr) is considered as one of the chronic pollutants that cause damage to all living forms, including plants. Various industries release an excessive amount of Cr into the environment. The increasing accumulation of Cr in agricultural land causes a significant decrease in the yield and quality of economically important crops. The Cr-induced biochemical, molecule, cytotoxic, genotoxic, and hormonal impairments cause the inhibition of plant growth and development. In the current study, we reviewed Cr morpho-phytotoxicity related scientific reports published between 2009 to 2019. We mainly focused on the Cr-induced inhibition of seed germination and total biomass production. Furthermore, Cr-mediated reduction in the root, branches, and leave growth and development were separately discussed. The Cr uptake mechanism and interference with the macro and micro-nutrient uptake were also discussed and visualized via a functional model. Moreover, a comprehensive functional model has been presented for the Cr release from the industries, its accumulation in the agricultural land, and ultimate morpho-phytotoxicity. It is concluded that Cr-reduces plant growth and development via its excess accumulation in the plant different parts and/or disruption of nutrient uptake.

1. Introduction

Chromium (Cr) is considered one of the major carcinogens, and is categorized 7th among the top 20 hazardous pollutants by the Environmental Protection Agency, United States of America (EPA, US) [1,2,3]. Cr(VI) and Cr(III) are the most stable form of Cr in the environment. On the bases of bioavailability in soil and translocation to different plant parts, Cr(VI) is reported to be more toxic than Cr(III) [3,4,5]. The industrial process coupled with anthropogenic and natural processes have resulted in increased accumulation of Cr in both terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems [3,4,6]. Chromium in soil and water directly affects human, animal, and plant physiology, and may accumulate within food chains, which can be a serious health threat to the secondary (herbivores) and tertiary (carnivores and omnivores) consumers [3,7,8].
Various physiological factors including plant species, rate and types of root secretion, the surface area of the root, and transpiration rate regulate the absorption, translocation, and accumulation of the Cr in plants [9,10]. Chromium mainly accumulates in the plant roots that triggers the uptake and translocation of Cr to the aerial plant parts [11,12,13]. The toxic Cr level can provoke various morphological, physiological, biochemical, and molecular alterations in plants [14,15].
The toxic level of Cr inhibits plant growth and development, induces ultrastructural changes in subcellular compartments (cell wall, cell membrane, plastids, chloroplast, mitochondria, Golgi bodies, endoplasmic reticulum, vacuole, nuclei, and microtubules), persuades leaves chlorosis, root cell damage, reduces total pigment contents, disturbs water and mineral nutrition balance, alters enzymatic activities, and modulates cell division and cell cycle [3,16,17,18,19,20].
The process of increasing Cr accumulation in soil, its uptake/translocation in plants, Cr-induced morpho-physiological, biochemical, molecular, ultrastructural, and hormonal changes in plants are summarized and visualized in (Figure 1). In the current study, we reviewed the most recent studies regarding Cr-induced inhibition in seed germination and growth retardation in roots, branches, leaves, and total biomass in various plant species.

2. Chromium-Mediated Control of Seed Germination

The first phenotypic and physiological change mediated by Cr in plants is seed germination, which is very important for the continuity of the plant life cycle [21]. Endogenous and exogenous stimuli mediated genetic and epigenetic changes were reported to be involved in the regulation of seed germination, and plant biochemical, molecular and ultrastructural changes [21,22,23]. Chromium-induced inhibition of seed germination in various plant species have been reported, and the germination rate depends on Cr(VI) concentration and type of plant species as shown in (Table 1). Chromium stress affects the activities of both alpha and beta-amylase, which are the sources of energy provided to the emerging embryos. In summary, Cr reduces the activity of amylase, leading to the reduced sugar availability for energy production, and inhibits the rate of plant seed germination [24].

3. Chromium-Induced Modulation of the Root Growth and Development

The plant root is the first organ that encounters soil pollutants, Cr is one of the most important soil pollutants, which affects root growth and development [14,23]. Chromium-induced reduction in the root growth mainly depends on the plant species, Cr-type and its concentration as shown in the (Table 2) Chromium is also involved in the regulations of secondary root growth and number, lateral root development, root hair, and formation of adventitious roots [20,24,33]. The reduced root length with a brownish appearance and reduced root hair number have been observed in Zea mays, exposed to high Cr(VI) levels [33]. The root growth inhibition mediated by Cr(VI), maybe due to the inhibition of cell division and reduction in the cell size of the elongation zone [14]. The reductions of mitotic cell division in Amaranthus viridis and Arabidopsis thaliana, have been reported, which is associated with the reduction in cell cycle-related genes and alterations in the cellular ultrastructure [3,14].

4. Chromium-Induced Alteration in the Shoot Growth and Development

The growth and development of the plants’ shoots are greatly compromised by the exposure to high Cr-concentrations and the degree of toxicity depends on the plant species, Cr-type, and concentration [3,4]. The Cr-induced alterations in various plant species are shown in the (Table 3). In a recent study, 32 plant species were exposed to 1000 mg/kg Cr(VI), they found that Cr(VI)-reduced the stem growth of 94% species [39]. Chromium-induced stem growth inhibition maybe due to the Cr-induced damages in the roots, which make it incapable of sufficient nutrients and water uptake [3,4]. Furthermore, the transport and accumulation of toxic Cr-level may have a direct inhibitory as well as structural and ultrastructural damaging effects on the shoot growth, development, and the capability of performing certain physiological, biochemical, molecular, and metabolic activities [3].

5. Chromium Mediated Changes in Leaf Growth and Morphology

Leaf structure and growth have been intensely investigated as an important indicator under various abiotic stresses [42]. Chromium-induced various biochemical, ultrastructural, and physiological changes have also been reported [19]. The leaf morphological changes in Cr-treated seedlings indicated that the appearance of the leaf was significantly changed in the size, and it was chlorotic and wilted as compared to those plants exposed to control condition [39,43]. The prolonged Cr exposure caused permanent necrosis, turned wilted and dry, and finally shed of leaves has been reported in the Cr-treated plants [44]. The reduction in leaf size of Arabidopsis thaliana upon Cr exposure is also reported, which can be due to the inhibition in cell division [15]. The watermelon plants exposed to Cr toxicity showed a phenotype of reduced number and size of leaves with a yellow appearance, wilted and turgor loss due to low water contents in the leaves [45]. Chromium-induced phenotypic alteration and growth inhibition in the leaf of various plant species have been summarized in the current review as shown in (Table 4).

6. Chromium-Mediated Changes in Total Biomass Production in Plants

The biomass production is considered proportional to yield, which is greatly compromised in the plants exposed to Cr, indicating that Cr is reducing plant biomass as well as the yield of the important crops worldwide [15,19,47,48]. Numerous, species were investigated and reported to exhibit reduced biomass production under high Cr(VI) levels, and the toxicity varies based on the different plant species, and concentration and type of Cr(VI) used as shown in (Table 5). Several factors such as reduction/imbalance in the uptake/translocation of water and nutrients, cell division and division rate inhibition, selective inorganic nutrient uptake inefficiency, increased ROS accumulation, essential nutrient substitution from ligand and plant key molecules, and Cr-induced ROS mediated alteration and damages to plastids, pigment contents, mitochondria, lipids, RNA, and DNA are involved in the Cr-decreased growth, development, and yield in plants at molecular, cellular, tissue, and organ levels are involved in the alteration in the plant biomass production [3,15,16,17,19,47,49,50]. The degree of severity of these factors depends on the type of Cr and plant species [3]. The hyper heavy metal accumulator plants such as Brassica juncea and Alyssum maritime are were reported to be potentially more tolerant and can survive a range of high Cr concentrations [4,9].

7. Chromium Interferes with the Uptake and Translocation of Macro and Micronutrients

Chromium interferes with the nutrients uptake and translocation mechanisms of plants due to the structural similarity with the various essential ions [58,59]. The interference of Cr with the uptake and translocation of macro and micronutrients depends on the type of plant species and Cr-type. The decrease in the common nutrient uptake/translocation could be because of the competitive binding potential of Cr with carrier channels and reduced plasma membrane H+ATPase activity [3]. Chromium exposure may displace the nutrients from the binding sites both in the soil and inside the plant body. Mostly, Cr is reported for playing an antagonistic role in the uptake and translocation of essential nutrients, it also interacts synergistically with some essential nutrients such as Cu, Ca, Mg, and Mn [60,61]. The Cr-induced interruptions and variations in the nutrients uptake and translocation have been reviewed in (Table 6).

8. Conclusions

Based on the available literature reviewed in the current study, we can conclude that increasing Cr concentration reduces plant biomass accumulation. The plants have no specialized intake channels for the Cr uptake. Cr competes with essential elements (macro and micro) for access to plant uptake machinery. High Cr concentration reduces the uptake of essential elements and increases its accumulation in the plant in different parts, which causes various phenotypic, ultrastructural, and biochemical changes in plants. Cr-induces endogenous plant stress molecules that may cause a reduction in plant growth and biomass accumulation. The reduction in the essential element may also participate in the retardation of plant growth and biomass production (Figure 2).

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, A.W. and M.X.; methodology, A.W; software, A.W; validation, A.W. and M.X.; formal analysis, A.W.; investigation, A.W.; resources, A.W.; data curation, A.W.; writing—original draft preparation, A.W.; writing—review and editing, A.W.; visualization, A.W.; supervision, A.W.; project administration, A.W.; funding acquisition, M.X. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by National Key Research and Development Program of China, grant number 2018YFA0606500, 2017YFA0604300” and “The APC was funded by 2018YFA0606500, 2017YFA0604300”.

Acknowledgments

We are thankful to the National Key Research and Development Program of China (2018YFA0606500, 2017YFA0604300), for supporting this study.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Oh, Y.J.; Song, H.; Shin, W.S.; Choi, S.J.; Kim, Y.-H. Effect of amorphous silica and silica sand on removal of chromium(VI) by zero-valent iron. Chemosphere 2007, 66, 858–865. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Guo, J.; Li, Y.; Dai, R.; Lan, Y. Rapid reduction of Cr(VI) coupling with efficient removal of total chromium in the coexistence of Zn(0) and silica gel. J. Hazard. Mater. 2012, 243, 265–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Shahid, M.; Shamshad, S.; Rafiq, M.; Khalid, S.; Bibi, I.; Niazi, N.K.; Dumat, C.; Rashid, M.I. Chromium speciation, bioavailability, uptake, toxicity and detoxification in soil-plant system: A review. Chemosphere 2017, 178, 513–533. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Ashraf, A.; Bibi, I.; Niazi, N.K.; Ok, Y.S.; Murtaza, G.; Shahid, M.; Kunhikrishnan, A.; Li, D.; Mahmood, T. Chromium(VI) sorption efficiency of acid-activated banana peel over organo-montmorillonite in aqueous solutions. Int. J. Phytoremediat. 2017, 19, 605–613. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Choppala, G.; Kunhikrishnan, A.; Seshadri, B.; Park, J.H.; Bush, R.; Bolan, N. Comparative sorption of chromium species as influenced by pH, surface charge and organic matter content in contaminated soils. J. Geochem. Explor. 2018, 184, 255–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Pinter, I.F.; Salomon, M.V.; Gil, R.; Mastrantonio, L.; Bottini, R.; Piccoli, P. Arsenic and trace elements in soil, water, grapevine and onion in Jachal, Argentina. Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 615, 1485–1498. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Huda, A.K.M.N.; Haque, M.A.; Zaman, R.; Swaraz, A.M.; Kabir, A.H. Silicon ameliorates chromium toxicity through phytochelatin-mediated vacuolar sequestration in the roots of Oryza sativa (L.). Int. J. Phytoremediat. 2017, 19, 246–253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Huda, A.K.M.N.; Swaraz, A.M.; Reza, M.A.; Haque, M.A.; Kabir, A.H. Remediation of Chromium Toxicity Through Exogenous Salicylic Acid in Rice (Oryza sativa L.). Water Air Soil Pollut. 2016, 227, 278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Ertani, A.; Mietto, A.; Borin, M.; Nardi, S. Chromium in Agricultural Soils and Crops: A Review. Water Air Soil Pollut. 2017, 228, 190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Herrero-Latorre, C.; Barciela-Garcia, J.; Garcia-Martin, S.; Pena-Crecente, R.M. Graphene and carbon nanotubes as solid phase extraction sorbents for the speciation of chromium: A review. Anal. Chim. Acta 2018, 1002, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Jaison, S.; Muthukumar, T. Chromium Accumulation in Medicinal Plants Growing Naturally on Tannery Contaminated and Non-contaminated Soils. Biol. Trace Elem. Res. 2017, 175, 223–235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Rani, P.; Kumar, A.; Arya, R.C. Stabilization of tannery sludge amended soil using Ricinus communis, Brassica juncea and Nerium oleander. J. Soils Sediments 2017, 17, 1449–1458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Shen, Z.J.; Xu, D.C.; Chen, Y.S.; Zhang, Z. Heavy metals translocation and accumulation from the rhizosphere soils to the edible parts of the medicinal plant Fengdan (Paeonia ostii) grown on a metal mining area, China. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2017, 143, 19–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Wakeel, A.; Ali, I.; Upreti, S.; Azizullah, A.; Liu, B.; Khan, A.R.; Huang, L.; Wu, M.; Gan, Y. Ethylene mediates dichromate-induced inhibition of primary root growth by altering AUX1 expression and auxin accumulation in Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant Cell Environ. 2018, 41, 1453–1467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Wakeel, A.; Ali, I.; Wu, M.; Kkan, A.R.; Jan, M.; Ali, A.; Liu, Y.; Ge, S.; Wu, J.; Gan, Y. Ethylene mediates dichromate-induced oxidative stress and regulation of the enzymatic antioxidant system-related transcriptome in Arabidopsis thaliana. Environ. Exp. Bot. 2019, 161, 166–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Castro, R.O.; Trujillo, M.M.; Bucio, J.L.; Cervantes, C. Effects of dichromate on growth and root system architecture of Arabidopsis thaliana seedlings. Plant Sci. 2007, 173, 71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Lopez-Bucio, J.; Hernandez-Madrigal, F.; Cervantes, C.; Ortiz-Castro, R.; Carreon-Abud, Y.; Martinez-Trujillo, M. Phosphate relieves chromium toxicity in Arabidopsis thaliana plants by interfering with chromate uptake. Biometals 2014, 27, 363–370. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Martinez-Trujillo, M.; Mendez-Bravo, A.; Ortiz-Castro, R.; Hernandez-Madrigal, F.; Ibarra-Laclette, E.; Ruiz-Herrera, L.F.; Long, T.A.; Cervantes, C.; Herrera-Estrella, L.; Lopez-Bucio, J. Chromate alters root system architecture and activates expression of genes involved in iron homeostasis and signaling in Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant Mol. Biol. 2014, 86, 35–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Eleftheriou, E.P.; Adamakis, I.-D.S.; Panteris, E.; Fatsiou, M. Chromium-Induced Ultrastructural Changes and Oxidative Stress in Roots of Arabidopsis thaliana. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2015, 16, 15852–15871. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  20. Lopez-Bucio, J.; Ortiz-Castro, R.; Ruiz-Herrera, L.F.; Juarez, C.V.; Hernandez-Madrigal, F.; Carreon-Abud, Y.; Martinez-Trujillo, M. Chromate induces adventitious root formation via auxin signalling and SOLITARY-ROOT/IAA14 gene function in Arabidopsis thaliana. Biometals 2015, 28, 353–365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Xu, W.; Wang, Q.; Yang, W.; Sun, J.; Dai, T. Effect of Chromium (Cr~(6+)) Stress on Seed Germination, Anti-oxidation and Osmotic Adjustment in Seedling of Different Genotypes of Wheat. J. Triticeae Crop. 2017, 37, 1112–1119. [Google Scholar]
  22. Ali, I.; Wakeel, A.; Upreti, S.; Liu, D.; Azizullah, A.; Jan, M.; Ullah, W.; Liu, B.; Ali, A.; Daud, M. Effect of Bisphenol A-induced Oxidative Stress on the Ultra Structure and Antioxidant Defence System of Arabidopsis thialiana Leaves. Pol. J. Environ. Stud. 2018, 27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Wakeel, A.; Ali, I.; Khan, A.R.; Wu, M.; Upreti, S.; Liu, D.; Liu, B.; Gan, Y. Involvement of histone acetylation and deacetylation in regulating auxin responses and associated phenotypic changes in plants. Plant Cell Rep. 2018, 37, 51–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Zeid, I.M. Responses of Phaseolus vulgaris to chromium and cobalt treatments. Biol. Plant. 2001, 44, 111–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Lopez-Luna, J.; Gonzalez-Chavez, M.C.; Esparza-Garcia, F.J.; Rodriguez-Vazquez, R. Toxicity assessment of soil amended with tannery sludge, trivalent chromium and hexavalent chromium, using wheat, oat and sorghum plants. J. Hazard. Mater. 2009, 163, 829–834. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Bautista, O.V.; Fischer, G.; Cárdenas, J.F. Cadmium and chromium effects on seed germination and root elongation in lettuce, spinach and Swiss chard. Agronomía Colombiana 2013, 31, 48–57. [Google Scholar]
  27. Handa, N.; Kohli, S.K.; Thukral, A.K.; Bhardwaj, R.; Alyemeni, M.N.; Wijaya, L.; Ahmad, P. Protective role of selenium against chromium stress involving metabolites and essential elements in Brassica juncea L. seedlings. 3 Biotech 2018, 8, 66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Hou, J.; Liu, G.-N.; Xue, W.; Fu, W.-J.; Liang, B.-C.; Liu, X.-H. Seed germination, root elongation, root-tip mitosis, and micronucleus induction of five crop plants exposed to chromium in fluvo-aquic soil. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 2014, 33, 671–676. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Dotaniya, M.L.; Meena, V.D.; Das, H. Chromium toxicity on seed germination, root elongation and coleoptile growth of pigeon pea (Cajanus cajan). Legume Res. 2014, 37, 227–229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Xu, F.; Deng, J. Effects of Salicylic Acid on Germination of Soybean Seed under Chromium Stress. Soybean Sci. 2012, 31, 852–854. [Google Scholar]
  31. Shinwari, K.I.; Jan, M.; Shah, G.; Khattak, S.R.; Urehman, S.; Daud, M.K.; Naeem, R.; Jamil, M. Seed priming with salicylic acid induces tolerance against chromium (VI) toxicity in rice (Oryza sativa L.). Pak. J. Bot. 2015, 47, 161–170. [Google Scholar]
  32. Dotaniya, M.L.; Das, H.; Meena, V.D. Assessment of chromium efficacy on germination, root elongation, and coleoptile growth of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) at different growth periods. Environ. Monit. Assess. 2014, 186, 2957–2963. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Mallick, S.; Sinam, G.; Mishra, R.K.; Sinha, S. Interactive effects of Cr and Fe treatments on plants growth, nutrition and oxidative status in Zea mays L. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2010, 73, 987–995. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Qing, X.; Zhao, X.; Hu, C.; Wang, P.; Zhang, Y.; Zhang, X.; Wang, P.; Shi, H.; Jia, F.; Qu, C. Selenium alleviates chromium toxicity by preventing oxidative stress in cabbage (Brassica campestris L. ssp Pekinensis) leaves. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2015, 114, 179–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Gill, R.A.; Zhang, N.; Ali, B.; Farooq, M.A.; Xu, J.; Gill, M.B.; Mao, B.; Zhou, W. Role of exogenous salicylic acid in regulating physio-morphic and molecular changes under chromium toxicity in black- and yellow- seeded Brassica napus L. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2016, 23, 20483–20496. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Chen, Q.; Zhang, X.; Liu, Y.; Wei, J.; Shen, W.; Shen, Z.; Cui, J. Hemin-mediated alleviation of zinc, lead and chromium toxicity is associated with elevated photosynthesis, antioxidative capacity; suppressed metal uptake and oxidative stress in rice seedlings. Plant Growth Regul. 2017, 81, 253–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Adrees, M.; Ali, S.; Iqbal, M.; Bharwana, S.A.; Siddiqi, Z.; Farid, M.; Ali, Q.; Saeed, R.; Rizwan, M. Mannitol alleviates chromium toxicity in wheat plants in relation to growth, yield, stimulation of anti-oxidative enzymes, oxidative stress and Cr uptake in sand and soil media. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2015, 122, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Lopez-Luna, J.; Silva-Silva, M.J.; Martinez-Vargas, S.; Mijangos-Ricardez, O.F.; Gonzalez-Chavez, M.C.; Solis-Dominguez, F.A.; Cuevas-Diaz, M.C. Magnetite nanoparticle (NP) uptake by wheat plants and its effect on cadmium and chromium toxicological behavior. Sci. Total Environ. 2016, 565, 941–950. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Lukina, A.O.; Boutin, C.; Rowland, O.; Carpenter, D.J. Evaluating trivalent chromium toxicity on wild terrestrial and wetland plants. Chemosphere 2016, 162, 355–364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Ali, S.; Zeng, F.; Qiu, B.; Cai, S.; Qiu, L.; Wu, F.; Zhang, G. Interactive effects of aluminum and chromium stresses on the uptake of nutrients and the metals in barley. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 2011, 57, 68–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. UdDin, I.; Bano, A.; Masood, S. Chromium toxicity tolerance of Solanum nigrum L. and Parthenium hysterophorus L. plants with reference to ion pattern, antioxidation activity and root exudation. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2015, 113, 271–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Ali, I.; Jan, M.; Wakeel, A.; Azizullah, A.; Liu, B.; Islam, F.; Ali, A.; Daud, M.K.; Liu, Y.; Gan, Y. Biochemical responses and ultrastructural changes in ethylene insensitive mutants of Arabidopsis thialiana subjected to bisphenol A exposure. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2017, 144, 62–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Chatterjee, J.; Chatterjee, C. Phytotoxicity of cobalt, chromium and copper in cauliflower. Environ. Pollut. 2000, 109, 69–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Dubey, S.; Misra, P.; Dwivedi, S.; Chatterjee, S.; Bag, S.K.; Mantri, S.; Asif, M.H.; Rai, A.; Kumar, S.; Shri, M.; et al. Transcriptomic and metabolomic shifts in rice roots in response to Cr (VI) stress. BMC Genom. 2010, 11, 648. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  45. Dube, B.K.; Tewari, K.; Chatterjee, J.; Chatterjee, C. Excess chromium alters uptake and translocation of certain nutrients in citrullus. Chemosphere 2003, 53, 1147–1153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Mahmud, J.A.L.; Hasanuzzaman, M.; Nahar, K.; Rahman, A.; Hossain, M.S.; Fujita, M. gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) confers chromium stress tolerance in Brassica juncea L. by modulating the antioxidant defense and glyoxalase systems. Ecotoxicology 2017, 26, 675–690. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Shanker, A.K.; Cervantes, C.; Loza-Tavera, H.; Avudainayagam, S. Chromium toxicity in plants. Environ. Int. 2005, 31, 739–753. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Singh, M.; Kushwaha, B.K.; Singh, S.; Kumar, V.; Singh, V.P.; Prasad, S.M. Sulphur alters chromium (VI) toxicity in Solarium melongena seedlings: Role of sulphur assimilation and sulphur-containing antioxidants. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 2017, 112, 183–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Cervantes, C.; Campos-Garcia, J.; Devars, S.; Gutierrez-Corona, F.; Loza-Tavera, H.; Torres-Guzman, J.C.; Moreno-Sanchez, R. Interactions of chromium with microorganisms and plants. Fems Microbiol. Rev. 2001, 25, 335–347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Singh, H.P.; Mahajan, P.; Kaur, S.; Batish, D.R.; Kohli, R.K. Chromium toxicity and tolerance in plants. Environ. Chem. Lett. 2013, 11, 229–254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Bashri, G.; Parihar, P.; Singh, R.; Singh, S.; Singh, V.P.; Prasad, S.M. Physiological and biochemical characterization of two Amaranthus species under Cr(VI) stress differing in Cr(VI) tolerance. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 2016, 108, 12–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Ashfaque, F.; Inam, A.; Inam, A.; Iqbal, S.; Sahay, S. Response of silicon on metal accumulation, photosynthetic inhibition and oxidative stress in chromium-induced mustard (Brassica juncea L.). S. Afr. J. Bot. 2017, 111, 153–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Afshan, S.; Ali, S.; Bharwana, S.A.; Rizwan, M.; Farid, M.; Abbas, F.; Ibrahim, M.; Mehmood, M.A.; Abbasi, G.H. Citric acid enhances the phytoextraction of chromium, plant growth, and photosynthesis by alleviating the oxidative damages in Brassica napus L. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2015, 22, 11679–11689. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Balal, R.M.; Shahid, M.A.; Vincent, C.; Zotarelli, L.; Liu, G.; Mattson, N.S.; Rathinasabapathi, B.; Martinez-Nicolas, J.J.; Garcia-Sanchez, F. Kinnow mandarin plants grafted on tetraploid rootstocks are more tolerant to Cr-toxicity than those grafted on its diploids one. Environ. Exp. Bot. 2017, 140, 8–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Li, S.; Huang, H.; Li, Z.; Li, Z.; He, Z.; Liang, H. Chromium removal capability and photosynthetic characteristics of Cyperus alternifolius and Coix lacryma-jobi L. in vertical flow constructed wetland treated with hexavalent chromium bearing domestic sewage. Water Sci. Technol. 2017, 76, 2203–2212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Ali, S.; Farooq, M.A.; Yasmeen, T.; Hussain, S.; Arif, M.S.; Abbas, F.; Bharwana, S.A.; Zhang, G. The influence of silicon on barley growth, photosynthesis and ultra-structure under chromium stress. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2013, 89, 66–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Reale, L.; Ferranti, F.; Mantilacci, S.; Corboli, M.; Aversa, S.; Landucci, F.; Baldisserotto, C.; Ferroni, L.; Pancaldi, S.; Venanzoni, R. Cyto-histological and morpho-physiological responses of common duckweed (Lemna minor L.) to chromium. Chemosphere 2016, 145, 98–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Tiwari, K.K.; Dwivedi, S.; Singh, N.K.; Rai, U.N.; Tripathi, R.D. Chromium (VI) induced phytotoxicity and oxidative stress in pea (Pisum sativum L.): Biochemical changes and translocation of essential nutrients. J. Environ. Biol. 2009, 30, 389–394. [Google Scholar]
  59. Tiwari, K.K.; Singh, N.K.; Rai, U.N. Chromium Phytotoxicity in Radish (Raphanus sativus): Effects on Metabolism and Nutrient Uptake. Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 2013, 91, 339–344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Dong, J.; Wu, F.; Huang, R.; Zang, G. A chromium-tolerant plant growing in Cr-contaminated land. Int. J. Phytoremediat. 2007, 9, 167–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Vernay, P.; Gauthier-Moussard, C.; Hitmi, A. Interaction of bioaccumulation of heavy metal chromium with water relation, mineral nutrition and photosynthesis in developed leaves of Lolium perenne L. Chemosphere 2007, 68, 1563–1575. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  62. Dias, M.C.; Moutinho-Pereira, J.; Correia, C.; Monteiro, C.; Araujo, M.; Brueggemann, W.; Santos, C. Physiological mechanisms to cope with Cr(VI) toxicity in lettuce: Can lettuce be used in Cr phytoremediation? Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2016, 23, 15627–15637. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Sundaramoorthy, P.; Chidambaram, A.; Ganesh, K.S.; Unnikannan, P.; Baskaran, L. Chromium stress in paddy: (i) Nutrient status of paddy under chromium stress; (ii) Phytoremediation of chromium by aquatic and terrestrial weeds. Comptes Rendus Biol. 2010, 333, 597–607. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  64. Zeng, F.; Qiu, B.; Ali, S.; Zhang, G. Genotypic differences in nutrient uptake and accumulation in rice under chromium stress. J. Plant Nutr. 2010, 33, 518–528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Tripathi, D.K.; Singh, V.P.; Prasad, S.M.; Chauhan, D.K.; Dubey, N.K. Silicon nanoparticles (SiNp) alleviate chromium (VI) phytotoxicity in Pisum sativum (L.) seedlings. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 2015, 96, 189–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Gautam, M.; Singh, A.K.; Johri, R.M. Effect of chromium toxicity on growth, chlorophyll and some macronutrients of Solanum lycopersicum and Solanum melongena. Indian J. Agric. Sci. 2014, 84, 1115–1123. [Google Scholar]
Figure 1. A functional model for the release, accumulation, and toxicity in plants. Cr is released from/through the industrial processes and anthropogenic activities in the soil. The model also visualizes the uptake of Cr by the plant roots, translocation to the shoots. The Cr-induced morphological, physiological, biochemical, molecular, hormonal, and ultrastructural changes in plants are also summarized in the model.
Figure 1. A functional model for the release, accumulation, and toxicity in plants. Cr is released from/through the industrial processes and anthropogenic activities in the soil. The model also visualizes the uptake of Cr by the plant roots, translocation to the shoots. The Cr-induced morphological, physiological, biochemical, molecular, hormonal, and ultrastructural changes in plants are also summarized in the model.
Plants 09 00564 g001
Figure 2. Functional model for the Cr-induced nutrient uptake inhibition and plant growth retardation. Increasing concentration of Cr in soil/water compete with the nutrients uptake that is leading in the increasing Cr accumulation in plant and reduction of nutrients. So, in the presence of high Cr concentration plant faces two stress simultaneously: 1. High Cr accumulation-mediated phytotoxicity. 2. Nutrient deficiency-mediated metabolic abnormality.
Figure 2. Functional model for the Cr-induced nutrient uptake inhibition and plant growth retardation. Increasing concentration of Cr in soil/water compete with the nutrients uptake that is leading in the increasing Cr accumulation in plant and reduction of nutrients. So, in the presence of high Cr concentration plant faces two stress simultaneously: 1. High Cr accumulation-mediated phytotoxicity. 2. Nutrient deficiency-mediated metabolic abnormality.
Plants 09 00564 g002
Table 1. Chromium-induced seed germination inhibition in various plant species.
Table 1. Chromium-induced seed germination inhibition in various plant species.
Plant SpeciesCommon NameChromium ConcentrationMediumTime of Exposure (Days)Seed Germination (%)References
Avena sativaOat500 mg/kg Cr(VI)
2000 mg/kg Cr(III)
Soil7≈82
≈95
[25]
Beta vulgarisSwiss chard50 µM Cr(III)Distilled water1271[26]
Brassica junceaMustard300 µM Cr(VI)½-strength Hoagland380.8[27]
Brassica oleraceaCabbage300 mg/kg Cr(VI)Distilled water3≈65[28]
Cajanus cajanPigeon Pea100 ppmDistilled water393[29]
Cucumis sativusCucumber300 mg/kg Cr(VI)Distilled water3≈96[28]
Glycine maxSoybean200 mg/L Cr(VI)Hydroponic-72.6[30]
Lactuca sativaLettuce300 mg/kg Cr(VI)Distilled water3≈50[28]
Lactuca sativaLettuce50 µM Cr(III)Distilled water1294[26]
Oryza sativaRice100 µM Cr(VI)Distilled water4≈50[31]
Sorghum bicolorSorghum500 mg/kg Cr(VI)
2000 mg/kg Cr(III)
Soil7≈60
≈10
[25]
Spinacia oleraceaSpinach50 µM Cr(III)Distilled water1564[26]
Triticum aestivumWheat100 ppm
300 mg/kg Cr(VI)
500 mg/kg Cr(VI)
2000 mg/kg Cr(III)
Distilled water
Distilled water
Soil
0.17
3
7
63
≈90
≈70
≈25
[32]
[28]
[25]
Zea maysCorn300 mg/kg Cr(VI)Distilled water3≈99[28]
Table 2. Chromium-induced reduction in root growth as compared to control of various plant species.
Table 2. Chromium-induced reduction in root growth as compared to control of various plant species.
Plant SpeciesCommon NameChromium ConcentrationMediumTime of Exposure (Days)Root Growth (%)References
Arabidopsis thalianaArabidopsis 200 µM Cr(VI) ½ MS192.8[14]
Avena sativaOat500 mg/kg Cr(VI)
2000 mg/kg Cr(III)
Soil7≈40
≈55
[25]
Brassica campestrisCabbage1 mg/L Cr(VI)½-strength Hoagland21≈35 FW[34]
Brassica junceaMustard300 µM Cr(VI)½-strength Hoagland1543.7[27]
Brassica napusOilseed Rape400 μM Cr(VI)Hoagland’s6≈50[35]
Brassica oleraceaCabbage300 mg/kg Cr(VI)Distilled water3≈25[28]
Cajanus cajanPigeon Pea100 ppmDistilled water1032[29]
Cucumis sativusCucumber300 mg/kg Cr(VI)Distilled water3≈15[28]
Lactuca sativaLettuce300 mg/kg Cr(VI)Distilled water3<10[28]
Oryza sativaRice80 µM Cr(VI)¼ -strength Kimura B778[36]
Sorghum bicolorSorghum500 mg/kg Cr(VI)
2000 mg/kg Cr(III)
Soil7≈10
≈30
[25]
Triticum aestivumWheat500 µM Cr(VI)
10 mg/kg Cr(VI)
300 mg/kg Cr(VI)
500 mg/kg Cr(VI)
2000 mg/kg Cr(III)
Sand
Quartz sand
Distilled water
Soil
-
7
3
7
≈57
≈20
< 10
≈10
≈45
[37]
[38]
[28]
[25]
Zea maysCorn300 mg/kg Cr(VI)
173 µM Cr(VI)
Distilled water
Hydroponic
3
7
≈43%
≈70%
[28]
[33]
Table 3. Chromium-reduced shoot growth as compared to control in various plant species.
Table 3. Chromium-reduced shoot growth as compared to control in various plant species.
Plant SpeciesCommon NameChromium ConcentrationMediumTime of Exposure (Days)Shoot Growth (%)References
Arabidopsis thalianaArabidopsis800 µM Cr(VI)½-strength MS2≈50 FW[15]
Avena sativaOat500 mg/kg Cr(VI)
2000 mg/kg Cr(III)
Soil7Reduced[25]
Brassica campestrisCabbage1 mg/L Cr(VI)½-strength Hoagland21≈70 FW[34]
Brassica junceaMustard300 µM Cr(VI)½-strength Hoagland1589.1[27]
Brassica napusOilseed Rape400 μM Cr(VI)Hoagland658–67[35]
Cajanus cajanPigeon Pea100 ppmDistilled water10Reduced[29]
Hordeum vulgareBarley100 μM Cr(VI)Nutrient solution50≈7–20 DW[40]
Oryza sativaRice80 µM Cr(VI)Hydroponic777[36]
Parthenium hysterophorus Solanum nigrumSanta Maria
Black Nightshade
500 µM Cr(VI)Soil2143 FW
65 DW
110 FW
115 DW
[41]
Sorghum bicolorSorghum500 mg/kg Cr(VI)
2000 mg/kg Cr(III)
Soil7Reduced[25]
Triticum aestivumWheat500 µM Cr(VI)
10 mg/kg Cr(VI)
Sand
Quartz sand
7≈80%
≈80%
[37]
[38]
Zea maysCorn173 µM Cr(VI)Hydroponic7≈80%[33]
Table 4. Chromium-altered leaf morphology and growth as compared to control in various plant species.
Table 4. Chromium-altered leaf morphology and growth as compared to control in various plant species.
Plant SpeciesCommon NameChromium ConcentrationMediumTime of Exposure (Days)Induced Changes in Leaf Growth and Morphology References
Arabidopsis thalianaArabidopsis800 μM Cr(VI) ½-strength MS2Reduced: growth, water content (RWC), chlorophyll (chl), cell and tissue viability[15]
Brassica junceaMustard300 μM Cr(VI)Semi-hydroponic medium5Reduced: growth, RWC, and chl content[46]
Brassica napusOilseed Rape400 μM Cr(VI)Hoagland661%–71% Reduced biomass[35]
Hordeum vulgareBarley100 μM Cr(VI)Nutrient solution50≈62%–67% Reduced DW[40]
Oryza sativaRice80 µM Cr(VI)Hydroponic7Chlorosis[36]
Zea maysCorn173 µM Cr(VI)Hydroponic7Reduced leaf number[33]
Table 5. Chromium-meditated reduction in the total plant biomass as compared to control in various plant species.
Table 5. Chromium-meditated reduction in the total plant biomass as compared to control in various plant species.
Plant SpeciesCommon NameChromium ConcentrationMediumTime of Exposure (Days)Total Biomass Production (%)References
Amaranthus viridis and Amaranthus cruentusGreen and Blood Amaranth50 μM½-strength Hoagland7> 50 FW
≈80 FW
[51]
Arabidopsis thalianaArabidopsis800 μM Cr(VI)½-strength MS250 FW
75 DW
[15]
Brassica junceaMustard300 μM Cr(VI)Semi-hydroponic medium580–89 growth[46]
Brassica junceaMustard100 µM Cr(VI)Soil20> 50 FW and DW[52]
Brassica napusOilseed Rape400 μM Cr(VI)Hoagland667 DW[35]
Brassica napusRapeseed500 μM CrSoil5630.6 FW
28 DW
[53]
Citrus reticulataKinnow Mandarin750 μM Cr(VI)Soil12063 DW[54]
Cyperus alternifolius and Coix lacryma-jobiUmbrella Palm and Adlay Millet40 mg/L Cr(VI)Soil12077 DW
44 DW
[55]
Hordeum vulgareBarley100 μM Cr(VI)Quartz sand60≈23.7DW[56]
Lemna minorDuckweed500 μM Cr(VI)SIS growth medium760[57]
Oryza sativaRice80 µM Cr(VI)Hydroponic758[36]
Parthenium hysterophorus Solanum nigrumSanta Maria
Black Nightshade
500 µM Cr(VI)Soil2165.5 FW
64.DW
110 FW
106 DW
[41]
Solanum melongenaEggplant25 µM Cr(VI)½-strength Hoagland787 FW
83 DW
[48]
Triticum aestivumWheat500 µM Cr(VI)Sand
Quartz sand
7≈65%[37]
Zea maysCorn173 µM Cr(VI)Hydroponic7≈85 FW[33]
Table 6. Chromium-induced alteration in the uptake and translocation of the essential nutrients in various plant species.
Table 6. Chromium-induced alteration in the uptake and translocation of the essential nutrients in various plant species.
Plant Species Common Name NutrientsAlteration in Uptake/Translocation Reference
Brassica junceaBrown MustardNa, K, Ca, Mg, C, H, and NReduced both [27]
Cocos muciferaCoconut PalmFe, K, Cu, Zn, Mn, and MgUptake [3]
Hordeum vulgareBarley P, K, Mg, S, Fe, Zn, Mn, and Ca Uptake and Translocation[40]
Lactuca sativaLettuce K, Mg, Fe, and ZnUptake/translocation[62]
Oryza sativaRice N, P, K, Ca, Mg, Mn, Zn, Fe, and CuUptake/translocation [63,64]
Pisum sativumPea Decreased micro and macronutrients (except S)Uptake/translocation[65]
Raphanus sativusRadishFe, S, P, Zn, Mn, Cu, and BTranslocation [59]
Solanum lycopersicum and Solanum melongenaTomato and EggplantAffected N, P and K contentTranslocation [66]

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Wakeel, A.; Xu, M. Chromium Morpho-Phytotoxicity. Plants 2020, 9, 564. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants9050564

AMA Style

Wakeel A, Xu M. Chromium Morpho-Phytotoxicity. Plants. 2020; 9(5):564. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants9050564

Chicago/Turabian Style

Wakeel, Abdul, and Ming Xu. 2020. "Chromium Morpho-Phytotoxicity" Plants 9, no. 5: 564. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants9050564

APA Style

Wakeel, A., & Xu, M. (2020). Chromium Morpho-Phytotoxicity. Plants, 9(5), 564. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants9050564

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop