Effects of Some Stress Modulators (Methanol, Nano silicon, and Humic acid) on Yield, Activity of Some Antioxidant Enzymes and Biochemical Traits of Wheat in Different Irrigation Regimes

پژوهشهای زراعی ایران

Article 6, Volume 22, Issue 3 - Serial Number 75, October 2024, Pages 327-342   

Document Type: Research Article

DOI: 10.22067/jcesc.2024.86431.1299

Authors

R Seyedsharifi^{* 1}; M Gasemi Kalkhoran²; H Narimani¹

¹Department of Plant Production and Genetics, Faculty of Agriculture and Natural Resources, University of Mohaghegh Ardabili, Ardabil, Iran

²Horticulture Crops Research Department, Ardabil Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center, AREEO, Ardabil. Iran

Abstract

Introduction
Drought stress is one of the most common limiting factors for crop production. Due to its detrimental effects on numerous physiological and biochemical processes, this stress restricts the growth and development of plants. In this regard, the application of stress modulators (methanol, silicon and humic acid) has been found to enhance plant growth and grain yield while also increasing its resistance to abiotic stresses. On the other hand, stress modulators can lessen the effects of stress toxic by reducing malondialdehyde and hydrogen ‎peroxide accumulation and keeping the effectiveness of the photosynthetic apparatus‎. Therefore, measurement of traits of such as antioxidant enzymes activity, chlorophyll content, proline and soluble sugars content, malondialdehyde content, electrical conductivity are as indicators of plant response to environmental stress. Although, several strategies have been developed to decrease the effects caused by drought stress on plant growth. But, among them, the application of stress modulators (methanol, nano silicon, and humic acid) plays a very important role in yield improvement. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of foliar application of stress modulators (methanol, nano silicon and humic acid) on the activity of antioxidant enzymes, compatible osmolytes, photosynthetic pigments content and grain yield of wheat in different irrigation regimes.
Materials and Methods
an experiment as factorial was conducted based on randomized complete block design with three replications in Agricultural and Natural Resources Research Station of Ardabil, Ardabil, Iran, in 2022-2023 growth season. The treatments were different irrigation regimes (normal irrigation as control; irrigation withholding at 50% of booting and heading stages) and foliar spraying of stress modulators (foliar spraying with water, foliar spraying of methanol (25% volume), nano silicon (50 mg.L^-1), humic acid (300 mg.L^-1), foliar spraying of methanol and silicon, methanol and humic acid, nano silicon and humic, methanol with nano silicon and humic acid). In each plot, there were six rows with two m long. In this experiment, the wheat cultivar ‘Hiran’ was employed. For this cultivar, 400 seeds.m^-2 is the optimum density. The used nano silicon had an average particle size of less than 30 nm and the special surface of particles was more than 30 m².g^-1. They were product of Nanomaterial US Research which was provided by Pishgaman Nanomaterials Company of Iran. For a better solution, deionized water was mixed with nano Si powder and placed on a shaker with ultrasonic equipment (100 W and 40 kHz). Two phases of period growth, BBCH 21 and 30 were used for the foliar application of nano silicon.  In this study, the activity of antioxidant enzymes (Catalase, peroxidase, and Polyphenol oxidase), compatible osmolytes (Proline and soluble sugars), photosynthetic pigments content (Chlorophyll a, Chlorophyll b, total chlorophyll, and carotenoid), H₂O₂, MDA, protein content and grain yield of wheat were investigated.
Results and Discussion
The result indicated that both application stress modulators (methanol, silicon and humic acid) at irrigation withholding in booting stage decreased malondialdehyde content (39.79%) and electrical conductivity (31.25%), but increased activity of peroxidase (4.89%), polyphenol oxidase (7.73%) enzymes, soluble sugars (22.15%), chlorophyll a (33.48%), chlorophyll b (24.96%), leaf protein content (25.09%) and grain yield (36.21%) in compared to the no application of stress modulators under irrigation withholding in booting stage.
Conclusion
According to our findings, applying stress modulators (methanol, silicon and humic acid) under water limitation often reduced this damage by strengthening the defensive mechanisms, particularly antioxidant enzymes and compatible osmolytes (Proline and soluble sugars). In summary, our results indicated that application of stress modulators upgrade plant physiology and trigger the cellular defense of wheat plants against severe water limitation. Therefore, in can be suggested that applying stress modulators as individual and integrated could enhance grain yield of wheat under water limitation conditions due to improving of physiological and biochemical characteristics.

Keywords

Catalase; Drought; Malondialdehyde; Proline; Soluble sugars

References

1. Abdel Mawgoud, A. M. R., El Greadly, N. H. M., Helmy, Y. I., & Singer, S. M. (2007). Responses of tomato plants to different rates of humic based fertilizer and NPK fertilization. Journal of Applied Sciences Research, 3(2), 169-174.
2. Abu-Ria, M., Shukry, W., Abo-Hamed, S., Albaqami, M., Almuqadam, L., & Ibraheem, F. (2023). Humic acid modulates ionic homeostasis, osmolytes content, and antioxidant defense to improve salt tolerance in rice. Plants, 12(9), 1834. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants12091834
3. Aggag, A. M., Alzoheiry, A. M., & Abdallah, A. E. (2015). Effect of kaolin and fulvic acid anti-transpirants on tomato plants grown under different water regimes. Alexandria Science Exchange Journal, 36(2), 2-15. https://doi.org/10.21608/asejaiqjsae.2015.2875
4. Aghaei, F., Seyed Sharifi, R., Khomari, S., & Narimani, H. (2021). Effects of methanol on grain yield, chlorophyll fluorescence indices and some physiological traits of wheat (Triticum aestivum) under irrigation withholding conditions. Journal of Crop Production, 3(4), 151-172. https://doi.org/10.22069/EJCP.2021.18631.2382
5. Ahluwalia, O., Singh, P. C., & Bhatia, R. (2021). A review on drought stress in plants: Implications, mitigation and the role of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria. Resources, Environment and Sustainability, 5, 100032. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resenv.2021.100032
6. Ahmadi‑Nouraldinvand, F., Seyed Sharif, R., Siadat, S. A., & Khalilzadeh, R. (2023). Reduction of salinity stress in wheat through seed bio‑priming with mycorrhiza and growth‑promoting bacteria and its effect on physiological traits and plant antioxidant activity with silicon nanoparticles application. Silicon, 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12633-023-02552-x
7. Ahmed, S. F., Biswas, A., Ullah, H., Himanshu, S. K., Tisarum, R., Cha-um, S., & Datta, A. (2023). Interactive effects of silicon and potassium on photosynthesis and physio-biochemical traits of rice (Oryza sativa) leaf mesophyll under ferrous iron toxicity. Plant Stress, 10, 100203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stress.2023.100203
8. Aldesuquy, H., & Ghanem, H. (2015). Exogenous salicylic acid and trehalose ameliorate short-term drought stress in wheat cultivars by up-regulating membrane characteristics and antioxidant defense system. Journal of Horticulture, 2(2), 139. https://doi.org/10.4172/2376-0354.1000139
9. Alexieva, V., Sergiev, I., Mapelli, S., & Karanov, E. (2001). The effect of drought and ultraviolet radiation on growth and stress markers in pea and wheat. Plant, Cell & Environment, 24(12), 1337-1344. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-3040.2001.00778.x
10. Altaf, M. A., Shahid, R., Ren, M. X., Naz, S., Altaf, M. M., Khan, L. U., Tiwari, P. K., Lal, M. K., Shahid, M. A., Kumar, R., Nawaz, M. A., Jahan, M. S., Jan, B. L., & Ahmad, P. (2022). Melatonin improves drought stress tolerance of tomato by modulating plant growth, root architecture, photosynthesis, and antioxidant defense system. Antioxidants, 11(2), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox11020309
11. Arnon, D. I. (1949). Copper enzymes in isolated chloroplast polyphenol oxidase in Beta vulgaris. Plant Physiology, 24(1), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.24.1.1
12. Ayman, M., Kamar, M., & Khalid, M. (2009). Amino and humic acids promote growth, yield and disease resistance of faba bean cultivated in clay soil. Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 3(2), 731-739.
13. Bates, L. S., Walderen, R. D., & Taere, I. D. (1973). Rapid determination of free proline for water stress studies. Plant and Soil, 39, 205-207. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00018060
14. Bradford, M. M. (1976). A rapid and sensitive for the quantitation of microgram quantities of protein utilizing the principle of protein-dye binding. Analytical Biochemistry, 72(1-2), 248-254. https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-2697(76)90527-3
15. Bukhari, M. A., Ahmad, Z., Ashraf, M. Y., Afzal, M., Nawaz, F., Nafees, M., Jatoi1, W. N., Malghani, N. A., Shah, A. N., & Manan, A. (2021). Silicon mitigates drought stress in wheat (Triticum aestivum) through improving photosynthetic pigments, biochemical and yield characters. Silicon, 13, 4757-4772. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12633-020-00797-4
16. Chen, Q., Qu, Z., Ma, G., Wang, W., Dai, J., Zhang, M., Wei, Z., & Liu, Z. (2022). Humic acid modulates growth, photosynthesis, hormone and osmolytes system of maize under drought conditions. Agricultural Water Management, 263, 107447. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2021.107447
17. Cordeiro, F. C., Santa-Catarina, C., Silveira, V., & de Souza, S. R. (2011). Humic acid effect on catalase activity and the generation of reactive oxygen species in corn (Zea mays). Bioscience, Biotechnology, and Biochemistry, 75(1), 70-74. https://doi.org/10.1271/bbb.100553
18. Dordas, C., & Sioulas, S. (2008). Safflower yield, chlorophyll content, photosynthesis and water efficiency response to nitrogen fertilization under rainfed conditions. Industrial Crops and Products, 27(1), 78-85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2007.07.020
19. Dorokhov, Y. L., Sheshukova, E. V., & Komarova, T. V. (2018). Methanol in plant life. Frontiers in Plant Science, 9, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2018.01623
20. Dubios, M., Gilles, K. A., Hamilton, J. K., Roberts, P. A., & Smith, F. (1956). Colorimetric method for determination of sugars and related substances. Justus Liebigs Annalen der Chemie, 28(3), 350-356. https://doi.org/1021/ac60111a017
21. Galbally, I. E., & Kirstine, W. (2002). The production of methanol by flowering plants and the global cycle of methanol. Journal of Atmosphere Chemistry, 43(3), 195-229. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020684815474
22. García, A. C., Olaetxea, M., Santos, L. A., Mora, V., Baigorri, R., Fuentes, M., & Garcia-Mina, J. M. (2016). Involvement of hormone-and ROS-signaling pathways in the beneficial action of humic substances on plants growing under normal and stressing conditions. BioMed Research International, 37, 1-13. https://doi.org/1155/2016/3747501
23. Hadi, H., Seyed Sharifi, R., & Namvar, A. (2016). Phytoprotectants & abiotic stresses. Urmia University. 252 pp.
24. Haghighi, M., Kafi, M., & Fang, P. (2012). Photosynthetic activity and N metabolism of lettuce as affected by humic acid. International Journal of Vegetable Science, 18(2): 182-189. https://doi.org/10.1080/19315260.2011.605826
25. Hasanuzzaman, M. (2020). Agronomic crops: stress responses and tolerance. Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
26. Hossinzadeh, S. R., Salimi, A., Ganjali, A., & Ahmadpour, R. (2015). Effects of foliar application of methanol on biochemical characteristics and antioxidant enzyme activity of chickpea (Cicer arietinum) under drought stress. Iranian Journal of Plant Physiology and Biochemistry, 1(1), 17-30. (in Persian with English abstract).
27. Jalil, S., Nazir, M. M., Al-Huqail, A. A., Ali, B., Al-Qthanin, R. N., Asad, M. A. U., Ewwda, M. A., Zulfiqar, F., Onuesal, N., Masood, H. A., Yong, J. W., & Jin, X. (2023). Silicon nanoparticles alleviate cadmium toxicity in rice (Oryza sativa) by modulating the nutritional profile and triggering stress-responsive genetic mechanisms. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety, 268, 115699. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoenv.2023.115699
28. Kaya, C., Senbayram, M., Akram, N. A., Ashraf, M., Alyemeni, M. N., & Ahmad, P. (2020). Sulfur-enriched leonardite and humic acid soil amendments enhance tolerance to drought and phosphorus deficiency stress in maize (Zea mays). Scientific Reports, 10(1): 6432. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-62669-6
29. Korgaonkar, S., & Bhandari, R. (2023). Drought stress in plants: Effects and tolerance. Journal of Stress Physiology & Biochemistry, 19(1), 5-17.
30. Liu, M., Zhao, G., Huang, X., Pan, T., Chen, W., Qu, M., Ouyang, B., Yu, M., & Shabala, S. (2023). Candidate regulators of drought stress in tomato revealed by comparative transcriptomic and proteomic analyses. Frontiers in Plant Science, 14, 1282718. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2023.1282718
31. Ma, D., Sun, D., Wang, Ch., Qin, H., Ding, H., Li, Y., & Gou, T. (2015). Silicon application alleviates drought stress in wheat through transcriptional regulation of multiple antioxidant defense pathways. Journal of Plant Growth Regulation, 35(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00344-015-9500-2
32. Madhaiyan, M., Poonguzhali, S., Sundaram, S. P., & Sa, T. A. (2006). New insight into foliar applied methanol influencing phylloplane methylotrophic dynamics and growth promotion of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) and sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum L.). Environmental and Experimental Botany, 57(1-2), 168-176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envexpbot.2005.05.010
33. Mafakheri, A., Siosemardeh, A., Bahramnejad, B., Struik, P. C., & Sohrabi, Y. (2010). Effect of drought stress on yield, proline and chlorophyll contents in three chickpea cultivars. Australian Journal of Crop Science, 4(8), 580-585.
34. Manal, F. M., Thalooth, A. T., Amal, A. G., Magda, H. M., & Elewa, T. A. (2016). Evaluation of the effect of chemical fertilizer and humic acid on yield and yield components of wheat plants (Triticum aestivum) grown under newly reclaimed sandy soil. International Journal of ChemTech Research, 9(8), 154-161.
35. Mohammadi Kale Sarlou, S., Seyed Sharifi, R., & Narimani, H. (2022). Effects of Flavobacterim, vermicompost and humic acid on antioxidant enzymes activity and some biochemical traits of triticale under salinity conditions. Crop Production Journal, 15(2), 183-202. (in Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/22069/EJCP.2022.19669.2469
36. Narimani, H., Seyed Sharifi, R., & Aghaei, F. (2020). Effect of methanol on antioxidant enzymes activity, some compatible osmolytes and biochemical traits of wheat (Triticum aestivum) under irrigation withholding conditions. Journal of Crop Physiology, 12(47), 99-114. (in Persian with English abstract).
37. Nazari, Z., Seyed Sharifi, R., Narimani, H., & Mohammadi Kale Sarlou, S. (2022). Effect of water limitation, biofertilizers, and nano silicon on compatible osmolytes and biochemical traits of X Triticosecale. Journal of Crops Improvement, 24(4), 1199-1215. (in Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/10.22059/jci.2022.333768.2639
38. Ning, D., Zhang, Y., Li, X., Qin, A., Huang, C., Fu, Y., Gao, Y., & Duan, A. (2023). The effects of foliar supplementation of silicon on physiological and biochemical responses of winter wheat to drought stress during different growth stages. Plants, 12(12), 2386. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants12122386
39. Nonomura, A. M., & Benson, A. A. (1992). The path of carbon in photosynthesis: Improved crop yields with methanol. National Academic Science, 89, 9794-9798. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.89.20.9794
40. Okeke, E. S., Nweze, E. J., Ezike, T. C., Nwuche, C. O., Ezeorba, T. P. C., & Nwankwo, C. E. I. (2023). Silicon-based nanoparticles for mitigating the effect of potentially toxic elements and plant stress in agro ecosystems: A sustainable pathway towards food security. Science of the Total Environment, 898, 165446. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.165446
41. Rahbarian, R., Khavari-Nejad, R., Ganjeali, A., Bagheri, A. R., & Najafi, F. (2011). Drought stress effects on photosynthesis, chlorophyll fluorescence and water relations in tolerant and susceptible chickpea (Cicer arietinum) genotypes. Acta Biologica Cracoviensia, 53(1), 47-56. https://doi.org/10.2478/v10182-011-0007-2
42. Rambery, H. A., Bradley, J. S. C., Olson, J. N., Nishio, J., Markwell, J., & Dstermen, J. C. (2002). The role of methanol in promoting plant growth: An update. Journal of Plant Biochemistry and Biocenology, 1, 113-126.
43. Sachdev, S., Ansari, S. A., Ansari, M. I., Fujita, M., & Hasanuzzaman, M. (2021). Abiotic stress and reactive oxygen species: Generation, signaling, and defense mechanisms. Antioxidants, 10(2), 277. https://doi.org/3390/antiox10020277
44. Sakr, M. T., Ibrahim, H. M., ElAwady, A. E., & Abo ElMakarem, A. A. (2019). Effect of humic acid, seaweed extract and essential oils as antioxidants on pre-and post-harvest quality of red radish plants. Horticulture International Journal, 3(3), 129-138. https://doi.org/10.15406/hij.2019.03.00120
45. Sales, E., Cañizares, E., Pereira, C., Pérez-Oliver, M. A., Nebauer, S. G., Pavlović, I., Novák, O., Segura, J., & Arrillaga, I. (2022). Changing temperature conditions during somatic embryo maturation result in Pinus pinaster plants with altered response to heat stress. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 23(3), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms23031318
46. Saneinejad, A. A., Tohidi, M., Habibi Khaniani, B., Sadeghi, M., & Khoramian, M. (2019). The effect of methanol foliar application on some physiological traits of cowpea bean (Vigna unguiculata) under drought stress conditions. Journal of Agronomy and Plant Breeding, 15(1), 45-61. (in Persian with English abstract).
47. Seyed Sharifi, R., & Khalilzadeh, R. (2018). Cereal Crops Production. University of Mohaghegh Ardabili (UMA). 508 pp.
48. Shahmarzadeh, Sh., Seyed Sharifi, R., & Sedghi, M. (2022). The effect of mycorrhiza and humic acid on chlorophyll content and grain filling components of wheat (Triticum aestivum) in various irrigation levels. Plant Echophysiology Journal, 14, 47-59.
49. Shaltout, K., Motawee, M., Ahmed, D., & EL-Etreby, M. (2022). Effect of foliar spray with K and Mn on the growth of Swietenia mahagoni (L.) Jacq. under different drought levels. Journal of Basic Environmental Science, 9(1), 1-11.
50. Shen, Z., Pu, X., Wang, S., Dong, X., Chen, X., & Cheng, M. (2022). Silicon improves ion homeostasis and growth of liquorice under salt stress by reducing plant Na⁺ Scientific Reports, 12(1), 5089. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-09061-8
51. Stewart, R. C., & Beweley, J. D. (1980). Lipid peroxidation associated with accelerated aging of soybean axes. Plant Physiology, 65(2), 245-248. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.65.2.245
52. Sudhakar, C., Lakshmi, A., & Giridara Kumar, S. (2001). Changes in the antioxidant enzyme efficacy in two high yielding genotypes of mulberry (Morus alba) under NaCl salinity. Plant Science, 167(3), 613-619. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-9452(01)00450-2
53. Teixeira, G. C. M., de Prado, R. M., Rocha, A. M. S., Filho, A. S. B. O., Junior, G. S. S., & Gratão, P. L. (2022). Action of silicon on the activity of antioxidant enzymes and on physiological mechanisms mitigates water defcit in sugarcane and energy cane plants. Scientific Reports, 12(1), 17487. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-21680-9
54. Turan, M., Ekinci, M., Argin, S., Brinza, M., & Yildirim, E. (2023). Drought stress amelioration in tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) seedlings by biostimulant as regenerative agent. Frontiers in Plant Science, 14(15), 121-131. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2023.1211210
55. Wang, M., Wang, R., Jose Mur, L. A., Ruan, J., Shen, Q., & Shiwei Guo, Sh. (2021). Functions of silicon in plant drought stress responses. Horticulture Research, 8, 254. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41438-021-00681-1
56. Xu, R., Huang, J., Guo, H., Wang, C., & Zhan, H. (2023). Functions of silicon and phytolith in higher plants. Plant Signaling & Behavior, 18(1), e2198848. https://doi.org/10.1080/15592324.2023.2198848
57. Yuan, T., Wang, J., Sun, X., Yan, J., Wang, Z., & Niu, J. (2017). Effect of combined application of humic acid and nitrogen fertilizer on nitrogen uptake, utilization and yield of winter wheat. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture, 25(3), 74-82. https://doi.org/10.13930/j.cnki.cjea.160700
58. Zbiec, L., Karczmarczyk, S., & Podsiadlo, C. (2003). Response of some cultivated plants to methanol as compared to supplemental irrigation. Electronic Journal of Polish Agricultural Universities Agronomy, 6(1), 1-7.