بررسی برخی ویژگی‌های ریخت‌شناختی و فیزیولوژیک چهار رقم انگور (Vitis vinifera L.) در شرایط تنش خشکی

نوع مقاله: مقاله کامل

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری پژوهشکدۀ ملی انگور و کشمش دانشگاه ملایر

2 استادیار، گروه فضای سبز، دانشکدۀ کشاورزی دانشگاه ملایر

3 استاد، گروه باغبانی، دانشکدۀ کشاورزی دانشگاه بوعلی، همدان

4 استادیار، گروه زیست‌شناسی، دانشکدۀ علوم دانشگاه ملایر

چکیده

تنش کم‌آبی از مهم­ترین محدودیت­های تولید محصولات کشاورزی در جهان و کشور  ایران است.  آگاهی از سازوکار واکنش رقم‌های انگور در تنش خشکی می­تواند تاکداران و پژوهشگران را در انتخاب رقم مناسب برای کشت و تعیین نژادگان (ژنوتیپ)­های انتخابی برای برنامه­های بهنژادی یاری کند. به همین منظور پژوهشی به‌صورت آزمایش فاکتوریل بر پایۀ طرح کامل تصادفی با سه تکرار در سال­های 1395-1394 در شرایط گلخانه­ای برای بررسی تأثیر تغییرپذیری پتانسیل آب خاک بر صفات فیزیولوژیکی و ریخت‌شناختی (مورفولوژیکی) چهار رقم انگور بومی و غیربومی انجام شد. تیمار­­ها شامل چهار رقم انگور (عسکری، خلیلی، چفته و پرلت) و سه سطح تنش خشکی شامل پتانسیل آب خاک در محدودۀ 2/0- (شاهد)، 7/0- و 2/1- مگاپاسکال بودند. صفات اندازه­گیری‌شده شامل نسبت وزن خشک به سطح برگ (LMA)، میزان پایداری غشای یاخته‌ای، سبزینه (کلروفیل)، پرولین، پروتئین کل، کربوهیدرات­های محلول، محتوای نسبی آب برگ (RWC)، میزان مالون دی آلدئید (MDA)، فعالیت آنزیم کاتالاز (CAT) و پراکسیداز (POX) بود. بنا بر نتایج این پژوهش همۀ سطوح تنش و نوع رقم در سطح 1 درصد تأثیر معنی­داری بر صفات اندازه­گیری‌شده داشتند. با افزایش سطح تنش، پرولین (21 تا 38 درصد)، مالون دی آلدئید (50 تا 70 درصد)، کربوهیدرات­های محلول (55 درصد)، فعالیت آنزیم کاتالاز (37 تا 54 درصد) و پراکسیداز (13 تا 17 درصد) افزایش یافت و محتوای آب نسبی برگ (6/5 درصد) و پروتئین­های محلول کل (19 تا 39 درصد) کاهش پیدا کرد. به‌طورکلی نتایج نشان داد، رقم‌های چفته و خلیلی پتانسیل بالاتری برای تحمل شرایط تنش خشکی را نسبت به رقم‌های پرلت و عسکری داشتند.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Study of some morphological and physiological traits of four varieties grapes (Vitis vinifera L.) under water stress

نویسندگان [English]

  • Wahab Asadi 1
  • Mousa Rasouli 2
  • Mansour Gholami 3
  • Masoumeh Maleki 4
1 Ph. D. Candidate, Iranian Research Institute in Grape and Raisin, Malayer University, Malayer, Iran
2 Assistant Professor, Department of Horticultural Science, Malayer University, Malayer, Iran
3 Professor, Depatment of Horticultural Science, Bu-Ali Sina University, Hamedan, Iran
4 Assistant Professor, Department of Biology Science, Malayer University, Malayer, Iran
چکیده [English]

Drought stress is one of the major limits of agricultural production in the world as well as Iran. Knowledge of the mechanism of action in different varieties and genotypes of grape in drought stress can help farmers in the selection of suitable varieties for cultivation and researchers to determine the candidate genotypes for breeding programs. For this purpose, research by factorial arrangement in completely randomized design (CRD) with three replications in greenhouse conditions in 2015-2016 were carried out to study the effect of soil water potential changes in some physiological and morphological traits of four varieties of domestic and foreign grapes. The treatments includes four varieties of grapes (Askari, Khalili, Chafteh and Perlette) and three levels of drought stress (-0.2, -0.7 and -1.2 M Pa). In this experiment effect of water potential changes in some physiological and morphological traits of four varieties of domestic and foreign grapes were studied. Measured traits were LMA (Leaf Mass Area), cell membrane stability index, chlorophyll, proline, total protein, soluble carbohydrates, RWC (Relative Water Content), malondialdehyde levels, activity of catalase (CAT) and peroxidase (POX). Base on the results of this study, all drought stress levels and varieties have significant effect on measured traits at 1% level. By increasing drought stress, proline (21- 38%), MDA (50-70%), soluble carbohydrates (55%), activity of CAT (37-54%), and POX (13-17%) increased, but RWC (5.6%) and total soluble protein (19-39%) decreased. In general, the results showed that the varieties of Chafteh and Khalili have the higher potential to tolerate drought stress conditions compared with Askari and Perlette.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Antioxidant Enzymes
  • Drought stress
  • leaf mass area malondialdehyde
  • Membrane stability index
  1. Ahmadi, K., Gholizadeh, H., Ebadzadeh, H. R., Hatami, F., Hosseinpour, R., Kazemifard, R. & Abdoshah, H. (2016). Agricultural statistics 2015. Volume 3. Publications Center of Information and Communication Technology in Ministry of Agriculture. Tehran. 253 pages.
  2. Anjum, M. A. (2011). Effect of exogenously applied spermidine on growth and physiology of citrus rootstock Troyer citrange under saline conditions. Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry, 35(1), 43-53.
  3. Arbona, V., Flors, V., Jacas, J., Garcia-Agustin, P. & Gomez-Cadenas, A. (2003). Enzymatic and non-enzymatic antioxidant responses of Carrizo citrange, a salt-sensitive citrus rootstock, to different levels of salinity. Plant and Cell Physiology, 44(4), 388-394.
  4. Ashraf, M. & Foolad, M. (2007). Roles of glycine betaine and proline in improving plant abiotic stress resistance. Environmental and Experimental Botany, 59(2), 206-216.
  5. Bascunan-Godoy, L., Franck, N., Zamorano, D., Sanhueza, C., Carvajal, D. E. & Ibacache, A. (2017). Rootstock effect on irrigated grapevine yield under arid climate conditions are explained by changes in traits related to light absorption of the scion. Scientia Horticulturae, 218, 284-292.
  6. Bertamini, M., Zulini, L., Muthuchelian, K. & Nedunchezhian, N. (2006). Effect of water deficit on photosynthetic and other physiological responses in grapevine (Vitis vinifera L. cv. Riesling) plants. Photosynthetica, 44, 151-154.
  7. Bota, J., Stasyk, O., Flexas, J. & Medrano, H. (2004) Effect of water stress on partitioning of 14C-labelled photosynthates in Vitis vinifera. Functional Plant Biology, 31(7), 697-708.
  8. Chaves, M. M. & Oliveira, M. M. (2004). Mechanisms underlying plant resilience to water deficits: Prospects for water-saving agriculture. Experimental Botany, 55, 2365-2384.
  9. Ekhvaia, J. & Akhalkatsi, M. (2010). Morphological variation and relationships of Georgian populations of Vitis vinifera L. subsp. sylvestris (CC Gmel) Hegi. Flora-Morphology, Distribution, Functional Ecology of Plants, 205(9), 608-617.
  10. Food and Agriculture Organization. (2015). FAOSTAT. Retrieved May 1, 2012, from http://www.fao.org/statistics/en.
  11. Galmes, J., Flexas, J., Save, R. & Medrano, H. (2007). Water relations and stomatal characteristics of Mediterranean plants with different growth forms and leaf habits: responses to water stress and recovery. Plant and Soil, 290(1-2), 139-155.
  12. Ghaderi, N., Talaei, A. R., Ebadi, A. & Lesani, H. (2010). Study of some physiological characteristics in ‘Sahani’, ‘Bidane-sefid’ and ‎‘Farkhii’ grapes during drought stress and their subsequent recovery. Tehran University, Department of Horticulture, Ph.D. Studies Dissertation. (in Farsi)
  13. Gill, S. S. & Tuteja, N. (2010). Reactive oxygen species and antioxidant machinery in abiotic stress tolerance in crop plants. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry, 48(12), 909-930.
  14. Hadadinejad, M., Ebadi, A., Fatahi, R., and Nejatian, M. A. (2013). Primary morphological screening of 698 grapevine genotypes to select drought tolerant rootstocks. Iranian Journal of Horticultural Science, 44, 193-207. (in Farsi)
  15. Hemeda, H. M. & Klein, B. P. (1990). Effects of naturally occurring antioxidants on peroxidase activity of vegetables extracts. Journal of Food Science, 55(1), 184-185.
  16. Hura, T., Hura, K., Grzesiak, M. & Rzepka, A. (2007). Effect of long-term drought stress on leaf gas exchange and fluorescence parameters in C3 and C4 plants. Acta Physiologiae Plantarum, 29(2), 103-113.
  17. Irigoyen, J. J., Einerich, D. W. & Sanchez-Diaz, M. (1992). Water stress induced changes in concentrations of proline and total soluble sugars in nodulated alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) plants. Physiologia Plantarum, 84(1), 55-60.
  18. Jacobs, S. D. (2010). Effect of rootstock and water stress on gas exchange, water relations, and water-use efficiency in petite sirah grapevines. Ph.D. Dissertation. California State University, USA.
  19. Jalili marandi, R., Hassani, A., Dolati baneh, H., Azizi, H. & Haji taghiloo, R. (2011). Effect of different levels of soil Moisture on the morphological and physiological characteristics of three grape cultivars (Vitis vinifera L.). Iranian Journal of Horticultural Science, 42, 31-40. (in Farsi)
  20. Kantar, M., Lucas, S. J. & Budak, H. (2011). Drought Stress: molecular genetics and genomics approaches. Advances in Botanical Research, 57, 445-493.
  21. Kavi Kishore, P. B., Sangam, S., Amrutha, R. N., Laxmi, P. S., Naidu, K. R., Rao, K. R., Rao, S., Reddy, K. J., Theriappan, P. & Sreenivasulu, N. (2005). Regulation of proline biosynthesis, degradation, uptake and transport in higher plants: its implications in plant growth and abiotic stress tolerance. Current. Science, 88(3), 424-438.
  22. Kennedy, J. A. (2008). Grape and wine phenolics: Observations and recent findings. Ciencia e Investigacion Agraria, 35(2), 107-120.
  23. Khochert, G. (1987). Carbohydrate determination by phenol- solphoric acid methods. In: Hellebust JA and Garigie JS (Eds.) handbook of physiological methods, Cambridge University Press. pp. 95-97.
  24. Koundouras, S., Tsialtas, I. T., Zioziou, E. & Nikolaou, N. (2008). Rootstock effects on the adaptive strategies of grapevine (Vitis vinifera L. cv. Cabernet–Sauvignon) under contrasting water status: Leaf physiological and structural responses. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 128(1), 86-96.
  25. Lawlor, D. W. (2002). Limitation to photosynthesis in water stressed leaves: stomata vs. metabolism and the role of ATP. Annals of Botany, 89(7), 871-885.
  26. Lichtenthaler, H. K. & Buschmann, C. (2001). Extraction of photosynthetic tissues: chlorophylls and carotenoids. Food Analytical Chemistry Protocoles. F4.3.1-F4.3.8.
  27. Lovisolo, C., Perrone, I., Carra, A., Ferrandino, A., Flexas, J., Medrano, H. & Schubert, A. (2010). Drought-induced changes in development and function of grapevine (Vitis spp.) organs and in their hydraulic and non-hydraulic interactions at the whole-plant level a physiological and molecular update. Functional Plant Biology, 37, 98-116.
  28. Lovisolo, C., Tramontini, S., Flexas, J. & Schubert, A. (2008). Mercurial inhibition of root hydraulic conductance in Vitis spp. rootstocks under water stress. Environmental and Experimental Botany, 63, 178-182.
  29. Mahmood, M., Shirani-Bidabadi, S., Ghobadi, C. & Gray, D. J. (2012). Effect of methyl jasmonate treatments on alleviation of polyethylene glycol - mediated water stress in banana (Musa acuminate cv. ‘Berangan’, AAA) shoot tip cultures. Plant Growth Regulation, 68(2), 161-169.
  30. Manivannan, P., Abdul Jaleel, C., Sankar, B., Kishorekumar, A., Somasundaram, R., Lakshmanan, G. A. & Panneerselvam, R. (2007). Growth, biochemical modifications and proline metabolism in Helianthus annuus L. as induced by drought stress. Colloids and Surfaces B: Biointerfaces, 59(2), 141-149.
  31. Medrano, H., Escalona, J. M., Cifre, J., Bota, J. & Flexas, J. (2003). A ten-year study on the physiology of two Spanish grapevine cultivars under field conditions: effects of water availability from leaf photosynthesis to grape yield and quality. Functional Plant Biology, 30(6), 607-619.
  32. Mhamdi, A., Queval, G., Chaouch, S., Vanderauwera, S., Breusegem, F. & Noctor, G. (2010). Catalase function in plants: a focus on Arabidopsis mutants as stress-mimic models. Journal of Experimental Botany, 61(15), 4179-4220.
  33. Nasir khan, M., Siddiqui, M. H., Mohammad, F., Masroor, M., Khan, A. & Naeem, M. (2007). Salinity induced changes in growth, enzyme activities, photosynthesis, proline accumulation and yield in Linseed genotypes. World Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 3(5), 685-695.
  34. Rasuli, V. & Golmohamadi, M. (2009). Evaluation of drought stress tolerance in grapevine cultivars of Qazvin province. Seed and Seedling Breeding, 25(2), 349-359. (in Farsi)
  35. Rezaee, T., Gholami, M., Ershadi, A. & Mosaddeghi, M. R. (2007). The effect of water deficit stress on some growth and physiological characteristics of five grapevine cultivars (Vitis vinifera L.). Water, Soil and Plants in Agriculture, 7(4), 199-210. (in Farsi)
  36. Sairam, R. K., Chandrasekhar, V. & Srivastava, G. C. (2001). Comparison of hexaploid and tetraploid wheat cultivars in their responses to water stress. Biologia Plantarum, 44(1), 89-94.
  37. Sheng, C. X., Yong, P. L., Jin, H., Ya, J. G., Wen, G. M., Yun, Y. Z. & Shui, J. Z. (2010). Responses of Antioxidant enzymes to chilling stress in tobacco seedlings, Agricultural Sciences in China, 9(11), 1594-1601.
  38. Sivritepe, N., Erturk, U., Yerlikaya, C., Turkan, I., Bor, M. & Ozdemir, F. (2008). Response of the cherry rootstock to water stress induced in vitro. Biologia Plantarum, 52(3), 573-576.
  39. Sofo, A., Dichio, B., Xiloyannis, C. & Masia, A. (2005). Antioxidant defenses in olive trees during drought stress: changes in activity of some antioxidant enzymes. Functional Plant Biology, 32(1), 45-53.
  40. Talaei, A. R., Ghaderi, N., Ebadi, A. & Lesani, H. (2012). Biochemical responses of grape cvs Sahani and Bidane-Sefid, subjected to progressive drought. Iranian journal of Horticultural Science, 42, 301-308. (in Farsi)
  41. Teixeira, A. H. C., Bastiaanssen, W. G. M. & Bassoi, L. H. (2007). Crop water parameters of irrigated wine and table grapes to support water productivity analysis in the Sao Francisco river basin. Agricultural Water Management, 94(1), 31-42.
  42. Wangm, F., Zeng, B., Sun, Z. & Zhu, C. (2009). Relationship between proline and Hg2+ induced oxidative stress in a tolerant rice mutant. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, 56(4), 723.
  43. Winkler, A., Kliewer, W. & Lider, L. (1962). General viticulture. (2nd Ed.). University of California Press, Berkeley, 710 p.
  44. Yong, Z., Hao-Ru, T. & Ya, L. (2008). Variation in antioxidant enzyme activities of two straw berry cultivars with short-term low temperature stress. Agricultural Sciences, 4(4), 456-462.
  45. Yanbao, L., Chunying, Y. & Chunyang, L. (2006). Differences in some morphological, physiological and biochemical responses to drought stress in two contrasting populations of Populus przewalskii. Physiologia Plantarum, 127(2), 182-191.
  46. Yordanov, I., Velikova, V. & Tsonev, T. 2000. Plant responses to drought, acclimation, and stress tolerance. Photosynthetica, 38(2), 171-186.