ویژگی های مورفو ـ فیزیولوژیک برگ ژن‌نمون‌های لوبیا در شرایط آبیاری معمولی و تنش کمبود آب

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 استادیار، مؤسسۀ تحقیقات اصلاح و تهیۀ نهال و بذر، کرج

2 محقق، مؤسسۀ تحقیقات اصلاح و تهیۀ نهال و بذر، کرج

3 محقق، مؤسسۀ تحقیقات ثبت و گواهی بذر و نهال، کرج

چکیده

این بررسی برای ارزیابی ویژگی­های برگ ژن‌نمون­های لوبیا در مؤسسۀ تحقیقات اصلاح و تهیۀ نهال و بذر (کرج) اجرا شد. آزمایش به صورت کرت­های خردشده در قالب طرح بلوک­های کامل تصادفی با چهار تکرار و با هشت ژن‌نمون لوبیا انجام شد. برخی ویژگی­های مهم مرتبط با برگ در بوتۀ لوبیا، در دو شرایط (رژیم) آبیاری (معمول و کمبود آب) ارزیابی شد. نتایج مقایسۀ میانگین صفات نشان داد که کمبود آب باعث کاهش شمار برگ‌های سه‌برگچه‌ای شد و این کاهش در مرحلۀ رویشی بیشتر از مرحلۀ گل‌دهی بود. رگۀ MCD4011 در هر دو مرحله کمترین کاهش شمار برگ متأثر از تنش را داشت. در این مراحل، رگۀ COS16 به‌طور معنی‌دار شمار برگ خود را کاهش داد. زاویۀ برگ تحت تأثیر آبیاری قرار گرفت و بر اثر تنش کمبود آب افزایش نشان داد. لوبیاهای سفید دارای میانگین افزایش زاویۀ برگ بیشتری بودند. کمبود آب کاهش محسوس شاخص سطح برگ ‌‌‌(Lift Area Index=LAI) در همۀ ژن‌نمون‌ها را موجب شد. در این شرایط، لوبیا قرمز AND1007 دارای شاخص سطح برگ بیشتری نسبت به دیگر ژن‌نمون‌ها بود. تنش دمای برگ را افزایش داد و واکنش ژن‌نمون‌ها از این نظر متفاوت بود. رگه‌های WA4531-17 و KS21486 به ترتیب بیشترین وزن ویژۀ برگ و شاخص شادابی برگ را در هر دو شرایط به خود اختصاص دادند. همۀ ژن‌نمون‌ها دارای محتوای نسبی آب (Relative Water Content=RWC) برگ کمتری در شرایط تنش بودند. میانگین RWC رگه‌های سفید بیشتر از دو گروه دیگر بود. درصد کاهش RWC ژن‌نمون­ها بین 3-10 درصد بود. بیشینه عملکرد کوانتومی (Fv/Fm) تحت تأثیر تنش کاهش پیدا کرد و کمترین کاهش آن مربوط به رگۀ MCD4011 بود. در حالی که لوبیاهای سفید در شرایط معمول (نرمال) دارای بیشترین میزان پرولین بودند، ولی در شرایط تنش کمترین میزان پرولین را داشتند. به‌طورکلی، بیشتر صفات برگ در اثر کمبود آب کاهش و میزان دمای برگ، زاویۀ برگ و میزان پرولین برگ به ترتیب 2 درجۀ سلسیوس، 59درصد (α=24°) و 105درصد افزایش نشان داد.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Leaf Morpho-Physiological Characteristics of Common Bean under Contrasting Moisture Regimes

نویسندگان [English]

  • Ali Akbar Ghanbari 1
  • Seyyed Hassan Mousavi 2
  • Ashkan Abbasian 3
  • Sasan Keshavarz 2
1 Assistant Professor, Seed and Plant Improvement Institute (SPII), Mahdasht Road, Karaj, Iran
2 Researcher, Seed and Plant Improvement Institute (SPII), Mahdasht Road, Karaj, Iran
3 Researcher, Seed and Plant Certification and Registration Institute (SPCRI), Nabovvat Blvd, Karaj, Iran
چکیده [English]

Some of the morpho-physiological characteristics related to the leaf growth and development of Phaseolus vulgaris L. genotypes have been studied in the field conditions at the Seed and Plant Improvement Institute (SPII). The study was performed as split plot experiment in a randomized complete block design with four replications in well-watered and water deficit conditions with eight genotypes of white, red and Chitti beans. Results indicated that water deficit reduced the number of trifoliate leaves and the reduction in the vegetative stage was greater than the flowering stage. Due to water stress, MCD4011 had the least reduction and COS16 showed significant reduction in leaf numbers in both stages. Leaf angle was affected by irrigation regimes and increased under water deficit condition. White beans showed more than the average in leaf angle. Drought also increased leaf temperature of all genotypes. Genotypes WA4531-17 and KS21486 had the highest specific leaf weight (SLW) and succulence index (SucI) in both irrigation conditions, respectively. Water shortage caused significant decreases in leaf area index (LAI) and relative water content (RWC) in all genotypes. In this condition, AND1007 had higher LAI than other genotypes. The white lines had mean RWC higher than other two groups. Reduction percentages of RWC in genotypes were between 3-10%. Drought stress reduced quantum yield (Fv/Fm) of PSII photochemistry, the lowest decrease was observed in MCD4011 line. Whereas the white lines had the greatest mean proline content in well-watered treatments, but showed the least values of it under stress conditions. Overall, water deficit caused reductions in the most evaluated traits, and increased leaf temperature, leaf angle and proline content of all genotypes up to 2°C, 59% (α=24°) and 105%, respectively.
 

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Drought
  • leaf angle
  • Quantum yield
  • relative water content
  • succulence index
Acosta-Gallegos, J. A. (1988). Selection of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) genotypes with enhanced drought tolerance and biological nitrogen fixation. Ph. D. dissertation, Michigan State University, East Lansing.
Ashraf, M. & Iram, A. (2005). Drought stress induced changes in some organic substances in nodules and other plant parts of two potential legumes differing in salt tolerance. Flora, 200, 535-546.
Baker, N. R. & Rosenqvist, E. (2004). Applications of chlorophyll fluorescence can improve crop production strategies: an examination of future possibilities. Journal of Experimental Botany, 55, 1607-1621.
Bates, L., Waldren, R. & Teare, J. (1973). Rapid determination of proline for water stress studies. Plant and Soil, 39, 205-207.
Bayoumi, T. Y., Eid, M. H. & Metwali, E. M. (2008). Application of physiological and biochemical indices as a screening technique for drought tolerance in wheat genotypes. African Journal Biotechnology, 7, 2341-2352.
Berg, V. S. & Hsiao, T. C. (1986). Solar tracking: light avoidance induced by water stress in leaves of kidney bean seedlings in the field. Crop Science, 26, 980-986.
Boutraa, T. & Sanders, F. E. (2001). Influence of water stress on grain yield and vegetative growth of two cultivars of bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science, 187, 251-257.
Chakir, S. & Jensen, M. (1999). How does Lobaria pulmoria regulate Photosystem II during progressive dessication and osmotic water stress? A chlorophyll fluorescence study at room temperature and at 77 K. Physiologia Plantarum, 105, 257-265.
Choudhury A. K., Karim A., Haque M., Abdul Khaliq Q., Ahmed J. U. & Hossain M. (2011). Genotypic variability in plant water status of French bean under drought stress. Journal of Crop Science and Biotechnology, 14, 17-24.
10. Cornic, G. & Briantais, J. M. (1991). Partitioning of photosynthetic electron flow between CO2 and O2 reduction in a C3 leaf (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) at different CO2 concentration and during drought stress. Planta, 185, 178-84.
11. de Souza, P. I., Egli, D. B. & Brucening, W. P. (1997). Water stress during seed filling and leaf senescence in soybean. Agronomy Journal, 98, 807-812.
12. Ehleringer, J. R., Klassen, S., Clayton, C., Sherrill, D., FullerHolbrook, M., Fu, Q. & Cooper, T. A. (1991). Carbon isotope discrimination and transpiration efficiency in common bean. Crop Science, 31, 1611-1615.
13. Endres, L., de Souza, J. L., Teodoro, I., Marroquim, P. M. G., dos Santos, C. M. & de Brito, J. E. D. (2010). Gas exchange alteration caused by water deficit during the bean reproductive stage. Revista Brasileira de Engineering Agriculturae Ambiental, 14, 11-16.
14. Farooq, M., Wahid, A., Kobayashi, N., Fujita, D. & Basra, S. M. A. (2009). Plant drought stress: effects, mechanisms and management. Agronomy for Sustainable Development, 29, 185-212.
15. Fu, Q. A. & Ehleringer, J. R. (1991). Modification of paraheliotropic leaf movement in Phaseolus vulgaris by photon flux density. Plant Cell and Environment, 14, 339-343.
16. Hopkins, R., Schmitt, J. & Stinchcombe, J. R. (2008).  A latitudinal cline and response to vernalization in leaf angle and morphology in Arabidopsis thaliana (Brassicaceae). New Phytologist, 179, 155-164.
17. Kao, W. Y., Comstock, J. P. & Ehleringer, R. (1994). Variation in leaf movements among common bean cultivars. Crop Science, 34, 1273-1278.
18. Karamanos, A., Drossopoulos, J. B. & Niavis, C. A. (1983). Free proline accumulation during development of two wheat cultivars with water stress. Journal of Agricultural Science, 100, 429-439.
19. Korir, P. C., Nyabundi, J. O. & Kimurto, P. K. (2006). Genotypic responses of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) to moisture stress conditions in Kenya. Asian Journal of Plant Science, 5, 24-32.
20. Kumar, A., Omae, H., Egawa, Y., Kashiwaba, K. & Shono M. (2006). Adaptation to heat and drought stresses in snap bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) during the reproductive Stage of development. JARQ, 40, 213-216.
21. Kumar A., Sharma K. D. & Kumar D. (2008). Traits for screening and selection of cowpea genotypes for drought tolerance at early stages of breeding. Journal of Agriculture and Rural Development in the Tropics and Subtropics, 109, 191-199.
22. Lawlor, D. W. (2002). Limitation to photosynthesis in water-stressed leaves: stomatal metabolism and the role of ATP. Annals of Horticulture, 89, 871-885.
23. Lawlor, D. W. & Cornic, G. (2002). Photosynthetic carbon assimilation and associated metabolism in relation to water deficits in higher plants. Plant Cell and Environment, 25, 275-294.
24. Lizana, C., Wentworth, M., Martinez, J. P., Villegas, D., Meneses, R., Murchie, E. H., Pastenes, C., Lercari, B., Vernieri, P., Horton, P. & Pinto, M. (2006). Differential adaptation of two varieties of common bean to abiotic stress. I. Effect of drought on yield and photosynthesis. Journal of Experimental Botany, 57, 685-697.
25. Mayek-Perez, N., Garcia-Espinosa, R., Lopez-Castaneda, C., Acosta-Gallegos, J. A. & Simpson, J. (2002). Water relations, histopathology and growth of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) during pathogenesis of Macrophomina phaseolina under drought stress. Physiological and Molecular Plant Pathology, 60, 185-195.
26. Mohamed, F. M., Keutgen, N., Tawfik, A. A. & Noga, G. (2002). Dehydration-avoidance responses of tepary bean lines differing in drought resistance. Journal of Plant Physiology, 159, 31-38.
27. Nemeskeri, E., Sardi, E., Remenyik, J., Koszegi, B. & Nagy, P. (2010). Study of the defensive mechanism against drought in French bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) varieties. ActaPhysiologiae Plantarum, 10, 1007-1016.
28. Nielsen‚ D. C. & Nelson, N. O. (1998). Black bean sensitivity to water stress at various growth stages. Crop Science, 38, 422-427.
29. O’Neill, P. M., Shanahan, J. F. & Schepers, J. S. (2006). Use of chlorophyll fluorescence assessments to differentiate corn hybrid response to variable water conditions. Crop Science, 46, 681-687.
30. Omae‚ H. (2005). Effect of temperature shift on flowering‚ pod setting and pollen fertility in snap bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Kyushu Agricultural Research, 67, 41-42.
31. Pastenes, C., Pimentel, P. & Lillo, J. (2005). Leaf movements and photoinhibition in relation to water stress in field-grown beans. Journal of Experimental Botany, 56, 425-433.
32. Raeini-Sarjaz, M., Barthakur, N. N. & Arnold, N. P. (1997). Leaf movement of bush bean: a biometeorological perspective. International Journal of Biometeorology, 40, 81-85.
33. Rosales-Serna, R., Kohashi-Shibata, J., Acosta-Gallegos, J. A., Trejo-Lopez, C., Ortiz-Cereceres, J. & Kelly, J. D. (2004). Biomass distribution, maturity acceleration and yield in drought-stressed common bean cultivars. Field Crops Research, 85, 203-211.
34. Santos, M. G., Ribeiro, R. V., de Oliveira, R. F., Machado, E. C. & Pimentel, C. (2006). The role of inorganic phosphate on photosynthesis recovery of common bean after a mild water deficit. Plant Science,170, 659-664.
35. Santos, M. G., Ribeiro, R. V., Machado, E. C. & Pimentel, C. (2009). Photosynthetic parameters and leaf water potential of five common bean genotypes under mild water deficit. Biologia Plantarum, 53, 229-236.
36. Schurr, U., Heckenberger, U., Herdel, K., Walter, A. & Feil, R. (2000). Leaf development in Ricinus communis during drought stress: dynamics of growth processes, of cellular structure and of sink-source transition. Journal of Experimental Botany, 51, 1515-1529.
37. Sinclair, T. & Ludlow, M. (1985). Who taught plants thermodynamics? The unfulfilled potential of plant water potential. Australian Journal of Plant Physiology, 12, 213-217.
38. Stoyanov, Z. Z. (2005). Effects of water stress on leaf water relations of young bean plants. Journal of Central European Agriculture, 6, 5-14.
39. Tang, A. C., Kawamitsa, Y., Kanechi, M. & Boyr, J. S. (2002). Photosynthetic oxygen evolution at low water potential in leaf discs lacking an epidermis. Annals of Botany, 89, 861-870.
40. Terzi, R., Saglam, A., Kutlu, N., Nar, H. & Kadioglu, A. (2010). Impact of soil drought stress on photochemical efficiency of photosystem II and antioxidant enzyme activities of Phaseolus vulgaris cultivars. Turkish Journal of Botany, 34, 1-10.
41. Tezara, W., Mitchell, V. J., Driscoll, S. D. & Lawlor, D. W. (1999). Water stress inhibits plant photosynthesis by decreasing coupling factor and ATP. Nature, 401, 914-917.
42. Travis, R. L. & Reed, R. (1983). The solar tracking pattern in a closed alfalfa canopy. Crop Science, 23, 664-668.
43. Wang, G., Kang, M. S. & Moreno, O. (1999). Genetic analyses of grain-filling rate and duration in maize. Field Crops Research, 61, 211-222.
44. Wentworth, M., Murchie, E. H., Gray, J. E., Villegas, D., Pastenes, C., Pinto, M. & Horton, P. (2006). Differential adaptation of two varieties of common bean to abiotic stress. II: Acclimation of photosynthesis. Journal of Experimental Botany, 57, 699-709.
45. White‚ J. W. & Izquierdo, J. (1991). Physiology of yield potential and stress tolerance. In Schoonhoven, A. & Voysest, O. (Eds.). Common Beans: Research for crop improvement, (pp. 287-382). CAB International, CIAT, Colombia.
46. Yadav, V. K., Gupta, V. & Nyflam, Y. (1999). Hormonal regulation of nitrate in gram (Cicer arietinum) genotypes under drought. Indian Journal of Agricultural Science, 69, 592-595.
47. Yokota, A., Takahara, K. & Akashi, K. (2006). Water stress. In Madhava Rao, K. V., Raghavendra, A. S., and Reddy, J. K. (Eds.). Physiology and molecular biology of stress tolerance in plants, (pp. 15-40). Springer, Netherland.
46. Zlatev, Z. S. & Yordanov, I. T. (2004). Effects of soil drought on photosynthesis and chlorophyll fluorescence in bean plants. Bulgarian Journal of Plant Physiology, 30, 3-18.