Fig 1.
Synthesis of glyceollins in soybean cotyledons treated with different concentrations of R. guttatus and R. marina (0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, and 0.5 mg/mL), sterile water (0), and S. cerevisiae (SC).
Cultivars treated with R. guttatus cutaneous secretions (species 1): (A) ‘Monsoy 8372 IPRO’; (B) ‘TMG 132 RR’; and (C) nontransgenic ‘TMG 4182’. Cultivars treated with R. marina cutaneous secretions (species 2): (D) ‘Monsoy 8372 IPRO’; (E) ‘TMG 132 RR’; and (F) nontransgenic ‘TMG 4182’. The experiments were performed three times for each treatment. The same letters indicate absence of significant differences by the Scott–Knott test at P ≤ 0.05. Metric bars indicate the standard error of the mean (SE). Data were transformed as follows: (x+1)0.5.
Fig 2.
Synthesis of phaseolins in bean hypocotyls and deoxyanthocyanidins in sorghum mesocotyls treated with different concentrations of R. guttatus and R. marina (0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, and 0.5 mg/mL), sterile water (0), and S. cerevisiae (SC).
(A) Bean hypocotyls treated with R. guttatus cutaneous secretions; (B) Bean hypocotyls treated with R. marina cutaneous secretions; (C) Sorghum mesocotyls treated with R. guttatus cutaneous secretions; and (D) Sorghum mesocotyls treated with R. marina cutaneous secretions. The experiments were performed three times for each treatment. The same letters indicate absence of significant differences by the Scott–Knott test at P ≤ 0.05. Metric bars indicate the standard error of the mean (SE). Data were transformed as follows: (x+1)0.5.
Fig 3.
Specific activity of peroxidases in ‘Monsoy 8372 IPRO,’ ‘TMG 132 RR,’ and nontransgenic ‘TMG 4182’ treated with different concentrations of R. guttatus and R. marina (0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, and 0.5 mg/mL), sterile water (0), and S. cerevisiae (SC).
Cultivars treated with R. guttatus cutaneous secretions (species 1): (A) ‘Monsoy 8372 IPRO’; (B) ‘TMG 132 RR’; and (C) nontransgenic ‘TMG 4182’. Cultivars treated with R. marina cutaneous secretions (species 2): (D) ‘Monsoy 8372 IPRO’; (E) ‘TMG 132 RR’; and (F) nontransgenic ‘TMG 4182’. Data are the mean of the three independent experiments. Data when significant were subjected to regression analysis (P ≤ 0.05), adjusting the regression equations (R2). Treatment with S. cerevisiae was used as an additional control. Metric bars indicate the standard error of the mean (SE).
Fig 4.
Specific activity of polyphenol oxidases in ‘Monsoy 8372 IPRO,’ ‘TMG 132 RR,’ and nontransgenic ‘TMG 4182’ treated with different concentrations of R. guttatus and R. marina (0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, and 0.5 mg/mL), sterile water (0), and S. cerevisiae (SC).
Cultivars treated with R. guttatus cutaneous secretions (species 1): (A) ‘Monsoy 8372 IPRO’; (B) ‘TMG 132 RR’; and (C) nontransgenic ‘TMG 4182’. Cultivars treated with R. marina cutaneous secretions (species 2): (D) ‘Monsoy 8372 IPRO’; (E) ‘TMG 132 RR’; and (F) nontransgenic ‘TMG 4182’. Data were the mean of three independent experiments. Data when significant were subjected to regression analysis (P ≤ 0.05), adjusting the regression equations (R2). Treatment with S. cerevisiae was used as an additional control. Metric bars indicate the standard error of the mean (SE).
Fig 5.
Specific activity of β-1,3-glucanases in ‘Monsoy 8372 IPRO,’ ‘TMG 132 RR,’ and conventional ‘TMG 4182’ exposed to different concentrations of R. guttatus and R. marina (0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, and 0.5 mg/mL), sterile water (0), and S. cerevisiae (SC).
Cultivars treated with the extract of R. guttatus cutaneous secretions (species 1): (A) ‘Monsoy 8372 IPRO’; (B) ‘TMG 132 RR’; and (C) nontransgenic ‘TMG 4182’. Cultivars treated with the extract of R. marina cutaneous secretions (species 2): (D) ‘Monsoy 8372 IPRO’; (E) ‘TMG 132 RR’; and (F) nontransgenic ‘TMG 4182’. Data are the mean of three independent experiments. Data when significant were subjected to regression analysis (P ≤ 0.05), adjusting the regression equations (R2). Treatment with S. cerevisiae was used as an additional control. Metric bars indicate the standard error of the mean (SE).
Fig 6.
Total protein content in ‘Monsoy 8372 IPRO,’ ‘TMG 132 RR,’ and nontransgenic ‘TMG 4182’ treated with different concentrations of R. guttatus and R. marina (0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, and 0.5 mg/mL), sterile water (0), and S. cerevisiae (SC).
Cultivars treated with R. guttatus cutaneous secretions (species 1): (A) ‘Monsoy 8372 IPRO’; (B) ‘TMG 132 RR’; and (C) nontransgenic ‘TMG 4182’. Cultivars treated with R. marina cutaneous secretions (species 2): (D) ‘Monsoy 8372 IPRO’; (E) ‘TMG 132 RR’; and (F) nontransgenic ‘TMG 4182’. Data are the mean of three independent experiments. Data when significant were subjected to regression analysis (P ≤ 0.05), adjusting the regression equations (R2). Treatment with S. cerevisiae was used as an additional control. Metric bars indicate the standard error of the mean (SE).