Study of the Biochemical Responses and Enzymatic Activity of GF677 (Peach and Almond Hybrid) Rootstock to In Vitro Salinity Stress

علوم باغبانی

Article 5, Volume 29, Issue 2, April 2015, Pages 207-2015   

Document Type: Research Article

DOI: 10.22067/jhorts4.v0i0.30366

Authors

Mehri Mashayekhi^* ; Mohammad Esmaeil Amiri; Fariborz Habibi

University of Zanjan

Abstract

Introduction: Salinity is the most significant abiotic factor limiting crop productivity and several physiological responses, including modification of ion balance, water status, mineral nutrition, stomatal behavior, photosynthetic efficiency and so on. The GF677 (Prunuspersica×Prunusamygdalus) is widelyusedas rootstock for peach and almond. It is mainly used as a rootstock because of its resistance to drought, calcic soil and Fe deficiency. Nowadays, using tissue culture techniques is very popular for the selection of plant resistant to abiotic stress (in vitro salinity); because in vitro conditions are more controllable than in vivo conditions and the large number of genotypes can be evaluated in a limited space. For example, in the field, plants are exposed to variable biological and climatic conditions which result in some interaction effects. In other words, the nutrition and climatic effects are easily controllable in the in vitro conditions all over the year. The objective of this study is to identify biochemical markers of salinity stress of GF677 rootstock under in vitro conditions.
Materials and Methods: Plantlets of GF677 rootstock were subcultured into the Murashige and Skoog (MS) proliferation medium containing1 mg/l BA (6-Benzyladenine)and 0.1 mg/l NAA (naphthaline acetic acid) with different concentrations (0, 40, 80 and 120 mM) of sodium chloride (NaCl) with four replicates. Cultures were transferred to the growth chamber with temperature of 25±2°C, relative humidity of 70%, under a 16/8 h (day/night) photoperiod. Data were collected at the end of the experiment (6th weeks). Antioxidant enzymes activity (catalase and peroxidase),total protein content, proline content, soluble sugars, and Na and Cl were measured. The experiments were set up in a completely randomized design (CRD) with four replicates (a vessel in each replicate) and statistical analysis was performed using MSTAT-C program. Means were separated according to the Duncan’s multiple range test (DNMRT) at 0.05 level of probability.
Results and Discussion: After six weeks, the results showed that by increasing salinity levelsin the culture medium, antioxidant enzymes activity (catalase and peroxidase),total protein content, proline content and soluble sugars increased significantly. The antioxidant enzyme activities (catalase and peroxidase) were increased significantly in the GF677 rootstock by increasing salinity levels. Catalase activity increased with increasing salinity levels, such that the maximum value (0.61 [abs/min /mg protein (f.m)]) was observed in 80 mM sodium chloride treatment. The lowest catalase activity (0.11 mg [abs/min /mg protein (f.m)]) was observed in 120 mM. The highest of peroxidase enzyme activity (0.109 and 0.105 [abs/min /mg protein (f.m)]), was obtained in 80 and 40 mM, respectively. Also, by increasing the salinity level, total protein content increased significantly in GF677 plantlets. The highest total protein was observed in 80 mM sodium chloride. By increasing salinity levels, proline content increased compared to the control at the GF677 rootstock, but no significant difference was observed between salinity levels. The highest accumulation of proline was obtained in 80 and 120 mM, respectively, while the lowest proline was obtained in control. By increasing salinity levels, soluble sugars increased in GF677 rootstock. The highest accumulation of soluble sugars was obtained in 80 mM. By increasing salinity levels in the cultural medium, the uptakeof sodium (Na+) and chlorine (Cl-) significantly increased in GF677 rootstocks over the six-week culture period. The highest uptake of Na and Cl ions in plant tissue was observed in 4th week. The results showed that with increasing salinity levels (80 to 120 mM), leaf chlorophyll index (SPAD unit) decreased in GF677 rootstock. The lowest chlorophyll index was observed in 120 mM treatment, while the highest leaf chlorophyll index was obtained in the control treatment.
Conclusion: According to the results and analysis of biochemical and enzymatic responses,it can be concluded that GF677 is a concentration tolerant to salinity up to 120 mM. The highest amount of biochemical responses and enzymatic activity was observed at 80 mM, where the continued growth of the plant was in terms of salinity. The rootstock was due to antioxidant defense mechanisms such as antioxidant systems, osmotic adjustment by proline and soluble sugars and increasing protein synthesis can sustain growth even under salinity conditions, as a tolerant rootstock was used for peach and almond cultivars.

Keywords

Antioxidant enzymes; GF677 rootstock; oxidative stress; Proline; Salt stress

References

1- Alizadeh M., Singh S.K, Patel V.B., Bhattacharya R.C., and Yadav B.P .2010. In vitro responses of grape rootstocks to NaCl. Biologia Plantarum, 54: 381-385.

2- Antonopoulou C., Dimassi K., Therios I., Chatzissavvidis C., and Tsirakoglou V. 2005. Inhibitory effects of riboflavin on in vitro rooting and nutrient concentration of explants of peach rootstock GF677. Scientia Horticulturae, 106: 268-272.

3- Asada K. 2006. Production and scavenging of reactive oxygen species in chloroplasts and their functions. Plant Physiology, 141:391-396.

4- Ashraf M., and Foolad M.R. 2007. Roles of glycine betaine and proline in improving plant abiotic stress resistance. Environmental and Experimental Botany. 59: 206-216.

5- Bates L.S., Waldren R.P., and Teare L.D. 1973. Rapid determination of free proline for water stress studies. Plant and Soil, 39:205-208.

6- Bradford M.M. 1976. A rapid and sensitive method for the quantitation of microgram quantities of protein utilizing the principle of protein-dye binding. Annual Review of Biochemistry, 72:248-254.

7- Chance B., and Maehly A.C. 1995. Assay of catalas and peroxidase. Methods in Enzymology, 2:764-775.

8- Chelli-Chaabounia A., Ben Mosbah A., Maalej M., Gargouric K., Gargouri-Bouzid R., and Drira N. 2010. In vitro salinity tolerance of two pistachio rootstocks: Pistacia vera L. and P. atlantica Desf. Environmental and Experimental Botany, 69:302-312.

9- Djibril S. 2005. Growth and development of data palm seedlings under drought and salinity stresses. African Journal of Biotechnology, 4:968-972.

10- Doganlar Z.B., Demir K., Basak H., and Gul I. 2010. Effects of salt stress on pigment and total soluble protein contents of three different tomato cultivars. African Journal Agriculture Research, 5:2056-2065.

11- Dubious M.K., Gilles A., Hamilton J.K., Roberts P.A., and Smith F. 1956. Colorimetrik method for determination in sugars and related. Annual Chemistry, 28:350-356.

12- Erturk U., Sivritepe N., Yerlikaya C., Bor M., Ozdemir F., and Turkan I. 2007. Responses of the cherry rootstock to salinity in vitro. Biologia Plantarum, 51:597-600.

13- Garcia-Sanchez F., and Syvertsen J.P. 2009. Substrate type and salinity affect growth allocation, tissue ion concentration, and physiological responses of Carrizo citrange seedlings. Hort Science, 44:1432-1437.

14- Ghaleb W.Sh., Sawwan J.S., Akash M.W., and Al-Abdallat A.M. 2010. In Vitro response of two citrus rootstocks to salt stress. International Journal of Fruit Science, 10:40-53.

15- Gill S.S., and Tuteja N. 2010. Reactive oxygen species and antioxidant machinary in abiotic stress tolerant in crop plants. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry. 48: 909-930.

16- Hasegawa P.M., Bressan R.A., Zhu J.K., and Bohnert H.J. 2000 Plant cellular and molecular responses to high salinity. Annual Review of Plant Biology, 51:463-499.

17- Jebera S., Jebera M., Liman F., and Aouani M.E. 2005. Changes in ascorbat peroxidase, catalas, guaiacol peroxidase and superoxide dismutase activities in common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) nodules salt stress. Plant Physiology, 162:929-936.

18- Jithesh M.N., Prashanth S.R., Sivaprakash K.R., and Parida A.K. 2006. Antioxidative response mechanisms in halophytes: their role in stress defence. Indian Academy of Sciences, 85:237-254.

19- Mahajan SH., and Tuteja N. 2005. Cold, salinity and drought stresses: An overview. Archives of Biochemistry and Biophysics, 444:139-158.

20- Michalak A. 2006. Phenolic compounds and their antioxidant activity in plants growing under heavy metal stress. Polish Journal of Environmental Studies, 15:523-530.

21- Molassiotis A.N., Sotiropoulos T., Tanou G., Kofidis G., Diamantidis C., and Therios I. 2006. Antioxidant and anatomical responses in shoot culture of the apple rootstock MM106 treated with NaCl, KCI, manitol or sorbitol. Biologia Plantarum, 50:331-338.

22- Montoliu A., Lopez-Climent M.F. Arbona V., Perez-Clemente R.M., and Gomez-Cadenas A. 2009. A novel in vitro tissue culture approach to study salt stress responses in citrus. Plant Growth Regulation‏, 59:179-187.

23- Munns R., and Tester R. 2008. Mechanisms of salinity tolerance. Annual Review of Plant Physiology, 59: 651-681.

24- Murashige T., and Skoog F. 1962. A revised medium for rapid growth and bioassay with tobacco tissue culture. Plant Physiology, 15:473-497.

25- Murkute A.A., Satyawati Sh., and Singh. S.K. 2010. Biochemical alterations in foliar tissues of citrus genotypes screened in vitro for salinity tolerance. Journal of Plant Biochemistry and Biotechnology, 19:203-208.

26- Paridaa A.K., and Dasa A.B. 2005. Salt tolerance and salinity effects on plants: a review. Ecotoxicology Environment Safety, 60:354-349.

27- Sairam R.K., and Tyagi A. 2004. Physiology and molecular biology of salinity stress tolerance in plants. Current Science, 86:407-421.

28- Satyvathi V.V., Juhar P., Elias E.M., and Rao M.B. 2004. Effects of growth regulators on in vitro plant regeneration in durum wheat. Crop Science, 44:1839-1846.

29- Shibli R., Mohammad M., Abu-Ein A., and Shatnawi M. 2000. Growth and micronutrient acquisition of some apple varieties in response to gradual in vitro induced salinity. Journal of Plant Nutrition‏, 23:1209-1215.

30- Shiyab M.S., Shibli R.A., and Mohammad M.M. 2003. Influence of sodium chloride salt stress on growth and nutrient acquisition of sour orange in vitro. Journal of Plant Nutrition‏, 26:985-996.

31- Sotiropoulos T.E. 2007. Effect of NaCl and CaCl2 on growth and contents of minerals, chlorophyll, proline and sugars in the apple rootstock M4 cultured in vitro. Biologia Plantarum, 51:177-180.

32- Sotiropoulos T.E., and Dimassi K. 2004. Response to increasing rates of boron and NaCl on shoot proliferation and chemical composition of in vitro kiwifruit shoot tip cultures. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Culture, 79:285-289.

33- Sotiropoulos T.E., Fotopoulos S., Dimassi K.N., Tsirakoglou V., and Therios I.N. 2006. Response of the pear rootstock to boron and salinity in vitro. Biologia Plantarum, 50:779-781.

34- Taylor N.L., Day D.A., and Harvey Millar A. 2004. Targets of stress-induced oxidative damage in plant mitochondria and their impact on cell carbon/ nitrogen metabolism. Journal of Experimental Botany, 55:1-10.