Improved drought tolerance in soybean by protein elicitor AMEP412 induced ROS accumulation and scavenging

Figures & data

Figure 1. Phenotypic appearance of soybean plants under different treatments. (A) The phenotypes at 5 days after drought (DAD). (B) The phenotypes at 5 days after resupplying water (DRW). CK, water control; DS, drought stress; ACK, water control treated with AMEP412; ADS, drought stress pre-treated with AMEP412. Same below.

Figure 2. Alterations in the physiological indexes of different treatments throughout the experimental period. (A) RWC; (B) RC; (C) free proline; (D) soluble sugar; (E) soluble protein. Means denoted by the same letters did not differ significantly at p ≤ 0.05 according to Duncan’s multiple range test. Error bars show ± SEM. Same below.

Figure 3. DAB and NBT staining to assess H₂O₂ (A) and O₂$\overline{·}\mathrm{}(\mathrm{B})$ (B) production in soybean leaves in the different treatments.

Figure 4. Alterations in the H₂O₂ (A) and O₂$\overline{·}$ (B) of different treatments throughout the experimental period.

Figure 5. Alterations in the antioxidant enzyme activities of different treatments throughout the experimental period: (A) SOD; (B) POD; (C) CAT; (D)APX; (E) MDHAR; (F) DHAR; (G) GR; (H) GPX.

Figure 6. Alterations in the antioxidants and MDA of different treatments throughout the experimental period: (A) AsA; (B) GSH; (C) MDA.

Data availability statement

All data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.