Search

Main conclusion In maize, leaf proteome responses evoked by soil drought applied separately differ from those evoked by mite feeding or both types of stresses occurring simultaneously. This study focuses on the involvement of proteomic changes in defence responses of a conventional maize cultivar (Bosman) to the two-spotted spider mite infestation, soil drought and both stresses coexisting for 6 days. Under watering cessation or mite feeding applied separately, the protein carbonylation was not directly linked to the antioxidant enzymes’ activities. Protein carbonylation increased at higher and lower SOD, APX, GR, POX, PPO activities following soil drought and mite feeding, respectively. Combination of these stresses resulted in protein carbonylation decrease despite the increased activity of all antioxidant enzymes (except the CAT). However, maize protein network modification remains unknown upon biotic/abiotic stresses overlapping. Here, using multivariate chemometric methods, 94 leaf protein spots (out of 358 considered; 2-DE) were identified (LC–MS/MS) as differentiating the studied treatments. Only 43 of them had individual discrimination power. The soil drought increased abundance of leaf proteins related mainly to photosynthesis, carbohydrate metabolism, defence (molecular chaperons) and protection. On the contrary, mite feeding decreased the abundance of photosynthesis related proteins and enhanced the abundance of proteins protecting the mite-infested leaf against photoinhibition. The drought and mites occurring simultaneously increased abundance of proteins that may improve the efficiency of carbon fixation, as well as carbohydrate and amino acid metabolism. Furthermore, increased abundance of the Rubisco large subunit-binding protein (subunit β), fructose-bisphosphate aldolase and mitochondrial precursor of Mn-SOD and decreased abundance of the glycolysis-related enzymes in the mite-free leaf (in the vicinity of mite-infested leaf) illustrate the involvement of these proteins in systemic maize response to mite feeding. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00425-016-2559-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.