Study of the Growth and Nutritional Changes in Four Prunus sp. Rootstocks under Drought Stress

Document Type : scientific research article

Authors

1 Ph.D. Student, Dept. of Horticultural Sciences, Shahrekord University, Shahrekord, Iran

2 Corresponding Author, Assistant Prof., Dept. of Horticultural Sciences, Shahrekord University, Shahrekord, Iran

3 Professor, Dept. of Plant Breeding and Biotechnology, Shahrekord University, Shahrekord, Iran

4 Assistant Prof., Shahrekord Agriculture and Natural Resources Research Center, Shahrekord, Iran.

5 Assistant Prof., Dept. of Plant Breeding and Biotechnology, Shahrekord University, Shahrekord, Iran

Abstract

Background and objectives: Rootstocks can affect the reaction of the grafted trees to water stress by controlling vegetative growth and nutrients uptake and studying morpho-physiological and nutritional mechanisms and responses of the rootstocks submitted to drought stress would make it feasible to select the tolerant rootstocks. For this purpose, to investigate the effects of drought stress on some clonal Prunus sp. rootstocks, an experiment, in completely randomized design was conducted in a greenhouse in Saman (Sharekord) and Shahrekord University laboratories in 2017-2018.
Materials and methods: Rooted cuttings of Cadaman, Myrobalan29c, GF677 and GN15 were planted and maintained under greenhouse conditions employing regular practices including irrigation and nutrients supplementation and pest management for three months. Plants were submitted to drought stress at three levels including 100, 75 and 50% of field capacity for 40 days. Plant height, dry weight, relative water content, water use efficiency, electrolyte leakage and mineral content (P, K+, Ca2+, Mg2+, Fe2+ and Zn2+) in leaves and roots were assessed.
Results: The results showed that the total dry weight was significantly decreased under the influence of drought stress. Leaf moisture content and specific leaf weight (SLW) decreased but leaf area ratio (LAR) and specific leaf area (SLA) increased under water deficit condition. Also, due to the drought stress, the greatest decrease in growth rate occurred in Cadaman and Myrobalan29c rootstocks, but no significant changes were observed for GN15 rootstock. Under drought stress conditions, relative water content (RWC) of the leaves decreased, while electrolyte leakage (EL) increased, with the highest figures observed for Myrobalan29c. With the increasing intensity of drought stress, water use efficiency (WUE) decreased for the Cadaman rootstock, but it was increased for GF677 and GN15 rootstocks. While no significant changes were observed for Myrobalan29c rootstock. Drought stress reduced the mineral contents (P, K+, Ca2+ and Mg2+) in the roots and leaves of the rootstocks. The highest decrease in concentrations of elements such as K+, Ca2+, P and Fe2+ were found for Myrobalan29c and Cadaman rootstocks.
Conclusion: All the tested rootstocks were significantly affected by drought stress, including growth retardation, but they resisted to drought stress at different levels and by varying mechanisms. So that some rootstocks with better use of available water and more nutrients absorption efficiency, showed a greater ability to maintain their biological activities in the face of dehydration. Other rootstocks showed poorer performance against drought stress and underwent damages compared to other rootstocks.

Keywords

References

1.Ashraf, M. and Foolad, M.R. 2007. Roles of glycine betaine and proline in improving plant abiotic stress resistance. Environ. Exp. Bot. 59: 206-216.
2.Bagheri, V., Shamshiri, M.H., Shirani, H. and Roosta, H.R. 2012. Nutrient uptake and distribution in mycorrhizal pistachio seedlings under drought stress. J. Agric. Sci. Technol. 14: 1591-1604.
3.Baker, R.J. 1993. Breeding methods and selection indices for improved tolerance to biotic and abiotic stresses in cool season food legume. Euphytica. 73: 67-72.
4.Bastam, N., Baninasab, B. and Ghobadi, C. 2012. Improving salt tolerance by exogenous application of salicylic acid in seedlings of pistachio. Plant Growth Regul. 51: 156-163.
5.Bayulo, J.S., Debouck, D.G. and Lynch, J.P. 2003. Growth, gas exchange, water relations, and ion composition of Phaseolus species grown under saline condition. Field Crops Res. 80: 207-222.
6.Bolat, I., Dikilitas, M., Ercisli, S., Ikinci, A. and Tonkaz, T. 2014. The effect of water stress on some morphological, physiological, and biochemical characteristics and bud success on apple and quince rootstocks. Sci. World J.8: 1-8.
7.Colla, G., Rouphael, Y., Cardarelli, M., Tullio, M., Rivera, C.M. and Rea, E. 2008. Alleviation of salt stress by arbuscular mycorrhizal in zucchini plants grown at low and high phosphorus concentration. Biol. Fert. Soils. 44: 501-509.
8.Fattahi, M., Shamshiri, M.H. and Esmaeilizade, M. 2014. Evaluation of leaf physio-morphological responses of three pistachio rootstocks inoculated with arbuscular mycorrhizae to salt stress.J. Hort. Sci. Technol. 15: 5. 469-482.(In Persian)
9.Felipe, A.J. 2009. ‘Felinem’, ‘Garnem’, and ‘Monegro’ Almond × Peach hybrid rootstocks. HortScience. 44: 196-197.
10.Gainza, F., Opazo, I., Guajardo, V., Meza, P., Ortiz, M., Pinochet, J. and Munoz, C. 2015. Rootstock breeding in Prunus species: Ongoing efforts and new challenges. Chil J. Agric. Res. 75: 6-16.
11.Ganopoulos, I.V., Kazantzis, K., Chatzicharisis, I., Karayiannis, I. and Tsaftaris, A.S. 2011. Genetic diversity, structure and fruit trait associations in Greek sweet cherry cultivars using microsatellite based (SSR/ISSR) and morpho-physiological markers. Euphytic. 181: 237-251.
12.Garcia, F., Syvertsen, J.P. and Perez, J.G. 2007. Response to flooding and drought stress by two citrus rootstock seedlings with different water use efficiency. Physiol. Plant. 130: 532-542.
13.Getachew, M. 2014. Influence of soil water deficit and phosphorus application on phosphorus uptake and yield of soybean (Glycine max L.) at Dejen, North- West Ethiopia. Amer. J. Plant Sci. 5: 1889-1906.
14.Hojjat Nooghi, F. and Mozafari, V. 2012. Effects of calcium on eliminating the negative effects of salinity in pistachio (Pistacia vera L.) seedlings. Aust. J. Crop Sci. 6: 4. 711-716.
15.Irigoyen, J.J., Emerich, D.W. and Sanchie. M.D. 1992. Water stress induced changes in concentrations of prolin and total soluble sugars in nodulated alfalfa (Medicago sativa) plants. Physiol. Plant. 84: 67-72.
16.Jimenez, S., Dridi, J., Gutierrez, D., Moret, D., Juan, J., Irigoyen, M., Moreno, A. and Gogorcena, Y. 2013. Physiological, biochemical and molecular responses in four Prunus rootstocks submitted to drought stress. Tree Physiol. 33: 1061-1075.
17.Kang, S.M., Khan, A.L., Waqas, M., You, Y.H., Kim, J.H., Kim, J.G., Hamayun, M. and Lee, I.J. 2014. Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria reduce adverse effects of salinity and osmotic stress by regulating phytohormones and antioxidants in Cucumis sativus. J. Plant Interact. 9: 673-682.
18.Karimi, M.M. and Siddique, K.H.M. 1991. Crop growth and relative growth rate of old and modern wheat cultivars. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 42: 13-20.
19.Khoyerdi, F., Shamshiri, M.H. and Estaji, A. 2016. Changes in some physiological and osmotic parameters of several pistachio genotypes under drought stress. Sci. Hort. 198: 44-51.
20.Kumar, D., Al Hassan, M., Naranjo, M.A., Agrawal, V., Boscaiu, M. and Vicente, O. 2017. Effects of salinity and drought on growth, ionic relations, compatible solutes and activation of antioxidant systems in oleander (Nerium oleander L.). PLoS One. 12: 1-9.
21.Lee, S. and Wen, J. 2001. A phylogenetic analysis of Prunus and the Amygdaloideae (Rosaceae) using ITS sequences of nuclear ribosomal DNA. Amer. J. Bot. 88: 150-160.
22.Moreno, M.A. and Cambra, R. 1994. Adarcias: an almond × peach hybrid rootstock. Hort. Sci. 29: 1-8.
23.Nadeem, S.M., Ahmad, M., Zahir, Z.A., Javaid, A. and Ashraf, M. 2014. The role of mycorrhizae and plant growth promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) in improving crop productivity under stressful environments. Biotechnol. Adv. 32: 429-448.
24.Nambiar, E.K.S. 1977. The effects of drying of the topsoil and of micronutrients in the subsoil on micronutrient uptake by an intermittently defoliated ryegrass. Plant Soil, 46: 1. 185-193.
25.Olsen, S.R., Cole, C.V., Watanable, F.S. and Dean, L.A. 1954. Estimation of available phosphorous in soil by extraction with sodium bicarbonate. U.S Depart. of Agric., Washington, No: 939, pp. 1-19.
26.Rahneshan, Z., Nasibi, F. and Ahmadi, M.A. 2018. Effects of salinity stresson some growth, physiological, biochemical parameters and nutrients in two pistachio (Pistacia vera L.) rootstocks. J. Plant Interac. 1: 73-82.
27.Shankar, V., Kumar, D. and Agrawal, V. 2016. Assessment of antioxidant enzyme activity and mineral nutrients in response to NaCl stress and its amelioration through glutathione in chickpea. Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol. 178: 267-284.
28.Tanguilig, V.C., Yambao, E.B., O' Toole, J.C. and De Datta, S.K. 1987. Water stress effects on leaf elongation, leaf water potential transpiration and nutrient uptake of rice, maize and soybean. Plant Soil. 103: 155-168.
29.Torrecillas, A., Alarcon J.J., Domingo, R., Planesa, J. and Sanchez-Blanco, M.J. 1996. Strategies for drought resistance in leaves of two almond cultivars. Plant Sci. 118: 135-143.
30.Vafabakhsh, J., Nassiri Mahallati, M., Koocheki, A. and Azizi, M. 2009. Effects of water deficit on water use efficiency and yield of canola cultivars (Brassica napus L.). Field Crops Res.7: 1. 280-292. (In Persian)
31.Valverdi, N.A.; Cheng, L. and Kalcsits, L. 2019. Apple scion and rootstock contribute to nutrient uptake and partitioning under different belowground environments. Agron. 9: 8. 415-433.
32.Vile, D., Garnier, E., Shipley, B. and Laurent, G. 2005. Specific leaf area and dry matter content estimate thickness in laminar leaves. Ann. Bot. 96: 1129-1136.
33.Wang, X., Ca, X., Xu, C., Wang, Q. and Dai, S. 2016. Drought-responsive mechanisms in plant leaves revealed by proteomics. Int. J. Mol. Sci.17: 1706.
34.Zeinalabedini, M., Majidian, P., Dezhampour, J., Khakzad, M. and Farsi, M. 2016. First report of a set of genetic identities in Prunus rootstocks by SSR markers. J. Plant Sci. Mol. Breed.4: 17-25.
Journal of Plant Production Research
Volume 28, Issue 4
February 2022
Pages 141-157

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics