Cell wall-associated defence against zinc oxide nanoparticles (ZnO NPs) as well as nitro-oxidative signalling and its consequences in plants are poorly examined. Therefore, this study compares the effect of chemically synthetized ZnO NPs (~45 nm, 25 or 100 mg/L) on Brassica napus and Brassica juncea seedlings. The effects on root biomass and viability suggest that B. napus is more tolerant to ZnO NP exposure relative to B. juncea. This may be due to the lack of Zn ion accumulation in the roots, which is related to the increase in the amount of lignin, suberin, pectin and in peroxidase activity in the roots of B. napus. TEM results indicate that root cell walls of 25 mg/L ZnO NP-treated B. napus may bind Zn ions. Additionally, callose accumulation possibly contribute to root shortening in both Brassica species as the effect of 100 mg/L ZnO NPs. Further results suggest that in the roots of the relatively sensitive B. juncea the levels of superoxide radical, hydrogen peroxide, hydrogen sulfide, nitric oxide, peroxinitrite and S-nitrosoglutathione increased as the effect of high ZnO NP concentration meaning that ZnO NP intensifies nitro-oxidative signalling. In B. napus; however, reactive oxygen species signalling was intensified, but reactive nitrogen species signalling wasn't activated by ZnO NPs. Collectively, these results indicate that ZnO NPs induce cell wall remodeling which may be associated with ZnO NP tolerance. Furthermore, plant tolerance against ZnO NPs is associated rather with nitrosative signalling than oxidative modifications.

Different abiotic and biotic stresses lead to the accumulation of unfolded and misfolded proteins in the endoplasmic reticulum (ER), resulting in ER stress. In response to ER stress, cells activate various cytoprotective responses, enhancing chaperon synthesis, protein folding capacity, and degradation of misfolded proteins. These responses of plants are called the unfolded protein response (UPR). ER stress signaling and UPR can be regulated by salicylic acid (SA), but the mode of its action is not known in full detail. In this review, the current knowledge on the multifaceted role of SA in ER stress and UPR is summarized in model plants and crops to gain a better understanding of SA-regulated processes at the physiological, biochemical, and molecular levels.

Selenium (Se) enrichment of Stevia rebaudiana Bertoni can serve a dual purpose, on the one hand to increase plant biomass and stress tolerance and on the other hand to produce Se fortified plant-based food. Foliar Se spraying (0, 6, 8, 10 mg/L selenate, 14 days) of Stevia plantlets resulted in slightly decreased stevioside and rebaudioside A concentrations, and it also caused significant increment in stem elongation, leaf number, and Se content, suggesting that foliar Se supplementation can be used as a biofortifying approach. Furthermore, Se slightly limited photosynthetic CO₂ assimilation (A_N, g_sw, C_i/C_a), but exerted no significant effect on chlorophyll, carotenoid contents and on parameters associated with photosystem II (PSII) activity (F_V/F_M, F₀, Y(NO)), indicating that Se causes no photodamage in PSII. Further results indicate that Se is able to activate PSI-cyclic electron flow independent protection mechanisms of the photosynthetic apparatus of Stevia plants. The applied Se activated superoxide dismutase (SOD) isoenzymes (MnSOD1, FeSOD1, FeSOD2, Cu/ZnSOD1, Cu/ZnSOD2) and down-regulated NADPH oxidase suggesting the Se-induced limitation of superoxide anion levels and consequent oxidative signalling in Stevia leaves. Additionally, the decrease in S-nitrosoglutathione reductase protein abundance and the intensification of protein tyrosine nitration indicate Se-triggered nitrosative signalling. Collectively, these results suggest that Se supplementation alters Stevia shoot morphology without significantly affecting biomass yield and photosynthesis, but increasing Se content and performing antioxidant effects, which indicates that foliar application of Se may be a promising method in Stevia cultivation.

Plant defence responses can be triggered by the application of elicitors for example chitosan (β-1,4-linked glucosamine; CHT). It is well-known that CHT induces rapid, local production of reactive oxygen species (ROS) and nitric oxide (NO) resulting in fast stomatal closure. Systemic defence responses are based primarily on phytohormones such as ethylene (ET) and salicylic acid (SA), moreover on the expression of hormone-mediated defence genes and proteins. At the same time, these responses can be dependent also on external factors, such as light but its role was less-investigated. Based on our result in intact tomato plants (Solanum lycopersicum L.), CHT treatment not only induced significant ET emission and stomatal closure locally but also promoted significant production of superoxide which was also detectable in the distal, systemic leaves. However, these changes in ET and superoxide accumulation were detected only in wild type (WT) plants kept in light and were inhibited under darkness as well as in ET receptor Never ripe (Nr) mutants suggesting pivotal importance of ET and light in inducing resistance both locally and systemically upon CHT. Interestingly, CHT-induced NO production was mostly independent of ET or light. At the same time, expression of Pathogenesis-related 3 (PR3) was increased locally in both genotypes in the light and in WT leaves under darkness. This was also observed in distal leaves of WT plants. The CHT-induced endoplasmic reticulum (ER) stress, as well as unfolded protein response (UPR) were examined for the first time, via analysis of the lumenal binding protein (BiP). Whereas local expression of BiP was not dependent on the availability of light or ET, systemically it was mediated by ET.

The first line of plant defence responses against pathogens can be induced by the bacterial flg22 and can be dependent on various external and internal factors. Here, we firstly studied the effects of daytime and ethylene (ET) using Never ripe (Nr) mutants in the local and systemic defence responses of intact tomato plants after flg22 treatments. Flg22 was applied in the afternoon and at night and rapid reactions were detected. The production of hydrogen peroxide and nitric oxide was induced by flg22 locally, while superoxide was induced systemically, in wild type plants in the light period, but all remained lower at night and in Nr leaves. Flg22 elevated, locally, the ET, jasmonic acid (JA) and salicylic acid (SA) levels in the light period; these levels did not change significantly at night. Expression of Pathogenesis-related 1 (PR1), Ethylene response factor 1 (ERF1) and Defensin (DEF) showed also daytime- and ET-dependent changes. Enhanced ERF1 and DEF expression and stomatal closure were also observable in systemic leaves of wild type plants in the light. These data demonstrate that early biotic signalling in flg22-treated leaves and distal ones is an ET-dependent process and it is also determined by the time of day and inhibited in the early night phase.