Physiological and biochemical changes in potato under water stress condition (original) (raw)

Abstract

Four CIP potato clones with one check variety Asterix were planted in the 3rd week of November 2011 at horticulture research farm of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman Agricultural University to observe physiological and biochemical changes under water stress. CIP 396244.12 and CIP 393371.58 showed higher membrane stability index (lowest injury) after 10 and 20 days of drought treatment. These two genotypes also accumulated more proline and total soluble sugar in leaves with less destruction in total chlorophyll under water stress condition than control. An increase in chlorophyll a/b ratio was found in CIP 396244.12, followed by CIP 393371.58 under water stress condition. The highest catalase activity was observed in CIP 396244.12, followed by CIP 393371.58 under water stress condition. Our results revealed that CIP 393371.58 and CIP 396244.12 showed greater adaptability in changing environment.

Key takeaways

sparkles

AI

  1. CIP 393371.58 and CIP 396244.12 exhibit superior drought tolerance and adaptability under water stress conditions.
  2. These genotypes accumulated higher proline and soluble sugars, contributing to osmotic adjustment mechanisms.
  3. Catalase activity increased significantly in CIP 396244.12, aiding in oxidative stress management during drought.
  4. Tuber yield reduction was highest in CIP 391004.18 (70.05%) under water stress conditions.
  5. The study aims to analyze physiological and biochemical changes in potato genotypes under water stress.

Figures (7)

Proline content was estimated from the top 3rd fully emerged young leaf at 50 DAP was determined following the ninhydrin method (Troll and Lindsley 1955). The absorbance of layer was measured through spectropho- tometer at 520 nm with pure toluene as a blank. Proline content was expressed on a fresh weight basis from the standard curve, using standard L-proline.

Proline content was estimated from the top 3rd fully emerged young leaf at 50 DAP was determined following the ninhydrin method (Troll and Lindsley 1955). The absorbance of layer was measured through spectropho- tometer at 520 nm with pure toluene as a blank. Proline content was expressed on a fresh weight basis from the standard curve, using standard L-proline.

Table 2 Membrane stability index in potato leaves before and after stress After 10 days of water stress treatments, differences in MSI index between genotypes and water stress treatments were found statistically significant (Table 2). The highest MSI decline (42.43 %) was found in Asterix, with 52.93 % MSI decline in non-stress and 30.47 % in stress conditions, followed by CIP391004.18, with 42.18 % decline. At the same time CIP 396244.12 showed the lowest decline in Variation in proline accumulation was observed at 50 and 60 DAP in five potato genotypes both under stress and non- stress conditions (Fig. 1A). Proline accumulation was higher in stress condition than non-stress in all the geno- types. The highest accumulation of proline under water stress was observed in CIP 396244.12, followed by CIP 393371.58 and CIP 396031.119, and the lowest was in CIP 391004.18 at 50 DAP. Under non stress condition, proline content was the lowest in CIP 391004.18 and the highest in CIP 396244.12. At 60 DAP, the highest proline accumu- lation was also observed under water stress in CIP 396244.12, followed by CIP 393371.58 and CIP 396031.119, whereas lowest content was observed in CIP 391004.18. Similar findings have also been reported by Farhad et al. (2011) and Mohamed et al. (2010). The results indicated that CIP 396244.12 and CIP 393371.58 accu- mulated more proline under stress condition than the others which is the defense mechanism of these genotypes to thrive better under water stress condition.

Table 2 Membrane stability index in potato leaves before and after stress After 10 days of water stress treatments, differences in MSI index between genotypes and water stress treatments were found statistically significant (Table 2). The highest MSI decline (42.43 %) was found in Asterix, with 52.93 % MSI decline in non-stress and 30.47 % in stress conditions, followed by CIP391004.18, with 42.18 % decline. At the same time CIP 396244.12 showed the lowest decline in Variation in proline accumulation was observed at 50 and 60 DAP in five potato genotypes both under stress and non- stress conditions (Fig. 1A). Proline accumulation was higher in stress condition than non-stress in all the geno- types. The highest accumulation of proline under water stress was observed in CIP 396244.12, followed by CIP 393371.58 and CIP 396031.119, and the lowest was in CIP 391004.18 at 50 DAP. Under non stress condition, proline content was the lowest in CIP 391004.18 and the highest in CIP 396244.12. At 60 DAP, the highest proline accumu- lation was also observed under water stress in CIP 396244.12, followed by CIP 393371.58 and CIP 396031.119, whereas lowest content was observed in CIP 391004.18. Similar findings have also been reported by Farhad et al. (2011) and Mohamed et al. (2010). The results indicated that CIP 396244.12 and CIP 393371.58 accu- mulated more proline under stress condition than the others which is the defense mechanism of these genotypes to thrive better under water stress condition.

Fig. 1 Effect of water stress on the contents of proline A and soluble sugars B in potato leaves. Bar represent mean + SE of four replications. (Color figure online) Variation in soluble sugar accumulation were observed at 50 and 60 DAP in five potato genotypes both under stress and non-stress conditions (Fig. 1B). Total soluble sugar contents in all the genotypes were significantly higher under water stress condition than non-stress condition. The highest accumulation of soluble sugar under water stress was observed in CIP 396244.12, followed by CIP 393371.58 and CIP 391004.18, and the lowest was observed in CIP 396031.119 at 50 DAP, whereas under non stress condition sugar content was lowest in Asterix and the highest in CIP 396244.12. Similar trend in sugar accumulation was also observed under stress and non-stress conditions at 60 DAP. The results indicated that higher accumulation of soluble sugar under water stress condition act as a mechanism of drought tolerance in the genotypes CIP 396244.12 and CIP 393371.58. The accumulation of sugars in response to drought has been well documented (Watanabe et al. 2000; Izanloo et al. 2008; Farhad et al. 2011). Soluble sugars may function as osmo-protectant, stabilizing cellular membranes and maintaining turgor pressure. As osmo-protectants, sugars stabilize proteins and membranes, most likely

Fig. 1 Effect of water stress on the contents of proline A and soluble sugars B in potato leaves. Bar represent mean + SE of four replications. (Color figure online) Variation in soluble sugar accumulation were observed at 50 and 60 DAP in five potato genotypes both under stress and non-stress conditions (Fig. 1B). Total soluble sugar contents in all the genotypes were significantly higher under water stress condition than non-stress condition. The highest accumulation of soluble sugar under water stress was observed in CIP 396244.12, followed by CIP 393371.58 and CIP 391004.18, and the lowest was observed in CIP 396031.119 at 50 DAP, whereas under non stress condition sugar content was lowest in Asterix and the highest in CIP 396244.12. Similar trend in sugar accumulation was also observed under stress and non-stress conditions at 60 DAP. The results indicated that higher accumulation of soluble sugar under water stress condition act as a mechanism of drought tolerance in the genotypes CIP 396244.12 and CIP 393371.58. The accumulation of sugars in response to drought has been well documented (Watanabe et al. 2000; Izanloo et al. 2008; Farhad et al. 2011). Soluble sugars may function as osmo-protectant, stabilizing cellular membranes and maintaining turgor pressure. As osmo-protectants, sugars stabilize proteins and membranes, most likely

Fig. 2 Effect of water stress on the chlorophyll content A and chlorophyll a/b ratio B in potato leaves. Bar represent mean + SE of four replications. (Color figure online)

Fig. 2 Effect of water stress on the chlorophyll content A and chlorophyll a/b ratio B in potato leaves. Bar represent mean + SE of four replications. (Color figure online)

Fig. 4 Effect of water stress on tuber yield per plant of five potato genotypes. Bar represent mean + SE of 4 replications. (Color figure online) tuber yield (359.6 g), followed by Astetix (359.0 g) and CIP 396244.12 (339.8 g). The lowest yield CIP 391004.18 (311.2 g per plant), whic CIP 396031.119 (323.5 g). Under water was recorded in h was similar to stress condition, CIP 393371.58 exhibited highest yield per plant with the lowest yield reduction (44.6 %), fol 396244.12 (45.0 %). The highest yield owed by CIP reduction was observed in CIP 391004.18 (70.05 %), fol (64.0 %). Similar findings were reported b owed by Asterix y Alsharari et al.

Fig. 4 Effect of water stress on tuber yield per plant of five potato genotypes. Bar represent mean + SE of 4 replications. (Color figure online) tuber yield (359.6 g), followed by Astetix (359.0 g) and CIP 396244.12 (339.8 g). The lowest yield CIP 391004.18 (311.2 g per plant), whic CIP 396031.119 (323.5 g). Under water was recorded in h was similar to stress condition, CIP 393371.58 exhibited highest yield per plant with the lowest yield reduction (44.6 %), fol 396244.12 (45.0 %). The highest yield owed by CIP reduction was observed in CIP 391004.18 (70.05 %), fol (64.0 %). Similar findings were reported b owed by Asterix y Alsharari et al.

Fig. 3. Effect of water stress on catalase activity in potato leaves at 50 DAP. Bar represent mean + SE of 4 replications. (Color figure online)

Fig. 3. Effect of water stress on catalase activity in potato leaves at 50 DAP. Bar represent mean + SE of 4 replications. (Color figure online)

Loading...

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

References (37)

  1. Adam, A. L., Gala, A. A., Manninger, K., & Bama, B. (2000). Inhibition of the development of leaf rust (Puccinia recondita) by treatment of wheat with allopurinol production of a hyper- sensitive like reaction in a compatible host. Plant Pathology, 49, 317-323.
  2. Agarwal, S., & Pandey, V. (2003). Stimulation of stress-related antioxidative enzymes in combating oxidative stress in Cassia seedlings. Indian Journal of Plant Physiology, 8, 264-269.
  3. Alsharari, S. F., Alsadon, A .A., & Alharbi, A. R. (2007). Evaluation of drought tolerance of potato cultivars under greenhouse conditions. In: Proceeding of the VIIIth IS on protected cultivation in mild winter climates. Acta Horticulture, vol. 747, pp. 67-74.
  4. Arvin, M. J., & Donnelly, D. J. (2008). Screening potato cultivars and wild species to abiotic stresses using an electrolyte leakage bioassay. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 10, 33-42.
  5. Benavides, M. P., Marconi, P. L., Gallego, S. M., Comba, M. E., & Tomaro, M. L. (2000). Relationship between antioxidant defense system and salt tolerance in Solanum tuberosum L. Australian Journal of Plant Physiology, 27, 273-278.
  6. Blum, A., & Ebercon, A. (1981). Cell membrane stability as a measure of drought and heat tolerance in wheat. Crop Science, 21, 43-47.
  7. Chance, B., & Maehly, A. C. (1959). The assay of catalase and peroxidase. In D. Click (Ed.), Methods of biochemical analysis (Vol. 1). New York: Inter science Publishers.
  8. Chen, Q., Zhang, W. H., & Liu, Y. L. (1999). Effect of NaCl, glutathione and ascorbic acid on function of tonoplast vesicles isolated from barley leaf. Journal of Plant Physiology, 155, 685-690.
  9. Choudhury, A. K. (2009). Water stress tolerance of French bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.), Ph.D. Dissertation. Department of Agronomy. Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahaman Agricultural University, Salna, Gazipur-1703. Bangladesh.
  10. Da, G. T., Gong, S. F., Ping, B. L., Yan, L. Y., & Sheng, Z. G. (2005). Effects of water stress on the protective enzyme activities and lipid peroxidation in roots and leaves of summer maize. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 38, 922-928.
  11. De, B., & Mukherjee, A. K. (1996). Mercuric chloride induced membrane damage in tomato cultured cells. Biologia Plantarum, 38, 469-473.
  12. Fabeiro, C., De Santa Martin, O. F., & De Juan, J. A. (2001). Yield and size of deficit irrigated potatoes. Agricultural Water Management, 48, 255-266.
  13. Farhad, M. S., Babak, A. M., Reza, Z. M., Hassan, R. S. M., & Afshin, T. (2011). Response of proline, soluble sugar, photo- synthetic pigments and antioxidant enzymes in potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) to different irrigation regimes in greenhouse condition. Australian Journal of Crop Science, 5(1), 55-60.
  14. Garty, J., Weissman, L., Tamir, Q., Beer, S., Cohen, Y., & Karnieli, A. (2000). Comparison of five physiological parameters to assess the validity of the lichen Ramalina lacera exposed to air pollution. Plant Physiology, 109, 410-418.
  15. Izanloo, A., Condon, A. G., Langridge, P., Tester, M., & Schnur- busch, T. (2008). Different mechanisms of adaptation to cyclic water stress in two South Australian bread wheat cultivars. Journal of Experimental Botany, 59, 3327-3346.
  16. Jaleel, C. A., Manivannan, P., Sankar, B., Kishorekumar, A., Gopi, R., Somasundaram, R., et al. (2007). Water deficit stress mitigation by calcium chloride in Catharanthus roseus; effects on oxidative stress, proline metabolism and indole alkaloid accumulation. Colloids and Surfaces B: Biointerfaces, 60, 110-116.
  17. Kiani, S. P., Maury, P., Sarrafi, A., & Grieu, P. (2008). QTL analysis of chlorophyll fluorescence parameters in sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.) under well-watered and water-stressed conditions. Plant Science, 175, 565-573.
  18. Lizana, C., Wentworth, M., Mart ´y ´nez, J. P., Villegas, D., Meneses, R., Murchie, E. H., et al. (2006). Differential adaptation of two varieties of common bean to abiotic stress. I. Effects of drought on yield and photosynthesis. Journal of Experimental Botany, 57, 685-697.
  19. Mahmud, A. A. (2012). Improvement of drought tolerant potato variety. A Ph.D. Dissertation. Dept. of Horticulture, Bannga- bandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman Agricultural University, Gazipur, Bangladesh.
  20. Mohamed, A. A., Matter, M. A., & Saker, M. M. (2010). Effect of salt stress on some defense mechanisms of transgenic and wild potato clones (Solanum tuberosum L.) grown in vitro. Nature and Science, 8(12), 181-193.
  21. Noctor, G., Veljovic-Jovanovic, S. D., Driscoll, S., Novitskaya, L., & Foyer, C. H. (2002). Drought and oxidative load in wheat leaves. A predominant role for photorespiration. Annals of Botany, 89, 841-850.
  22. Onder, S., Caliskan, M. E., Onder, D. & Caliskan, S. (2005). Different irrigation methods and water stress effects on potato yield and yield components. Agricultural water management, 73, 73-86. (available on http://www.elsevier.com/locate/agwat)
  23. Opena, G. B., & Porter, G. A. (1999). Soil management and supplemental irrigation effects on potato. II. Root growth. Agronomy Journal, 91, 426-431.
  24. Passioura, J. B. (2007). The drought environment: Physical, biolog- ical and agricultural perspectives. Journal of Experimental Botany, 58(2), 113-117.
  25. Pei, Z. M., Murata, Y., Benning, G., Thomine, S., Klu ¨sener, B., Allen, G. et al. (2000). Calcium channel activated by hydrogen peroxide mediate abscisic acid signaling in guard cells. Nature, 406, 731-734.
  26. Poljakoff, M., & Gale, J. (1975). Plants in saline environments. Belin: Springer.
  27. Rahman, H. U., Maalik, S. A., & Saleem, M. (2003). Heat tolerance of upland cotton during the fruiting stage using cellular thermostability. Field Crop Research, 85(2-3), 149-158.
  28. Schafleitner, R., Guitierrez, R., Espino, R., Guadin, A., Perez, J., Martinez, M., et al. (2007). Field screening for variation of drought tolerance in Solanum tuberosum L. by agronomical. Physiological and genetic analysis. Potato Research, 50, 71-85.
  29. Srirma, S., Raguchander, T., Babu, S., Nandarkumar, R., Shan- mugamm, V., & Vidhyasekaran, P. (2000). Inactivation of phytotoxin produced by the rice sheath blight pathogen Rhizoc- tonia solani. Canadian Journal of Microbiology, 46, 520-524.
  30. Strauss, G., & Hauser, H. (1986). Stabilization of lipid bilayer vesicles by sucrose during freezing. Proceedings of National Academy of Sciences USA, 83, 2422-2426.
  31. Sullivan, C. Y., & Ross, W. M. (1979). Selecting for drought and heat resistance in grain sorghum. In H. Mussel & R. C. Staples (Eds.), Stress physiology in crop plants. New York: John Wiley.
  32. Teixeira, J., & Pereira, S. (2006). High salinity and drought act on an organ-dependent manner on potato glutamine synthetase expres- sion and accumulation. Journal of Experimental Botany, 60, 121-126.
  33. Thornton, M. K. (2002). Effects of heat and water stress on the physiology of potatoes. Idaho Potato Conference, Idaho.
  34. Troll, W., & Lindsley, J. (1955). A photometric method for the determination of proline. Journal of Biological Chemistry, 215, 655-660.
  35. Watanabe, S., Kojima, K., Ide, Y., & Satohiko, S. (2000). Effects of saline and osmotic stress on proline and sugar accumulation in Populus euphratica in vitro. Plant Cell Tissue and Organ Culture, 63, 199-206.
  36. Yanqiong, L., Xingliang, L., Shaowei, Z., Hong, C., Yongjie, Y., Changlong, M., et al. (2007). Drought-resistant physiological characteristics of four shrub species in arid valley of Minjiang River, China. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 27, 870-877.
  37. Yoshida, S., Forno, D. A., Cock, J. H., & Gomez, K. A. (1976). Laboratory manual for physiological studies of rice (third edition) (pp. 46-49). Los Banos: The International Rice Research Institute.