Evaluation of Drought Tolerance in Some Almond Commercial Cultivars (Prunus dulcis Mill.) on GN Vegetative Rootstock

علوم باغبانی

Article 10, Volume 39, Issue 2 - Serial Number 66, June 2025, Pages 329-315   

Document Type: Research Article

DOI: 10.22067/jhs.2024.89582.1375

Authors

S.A. Mousavi^{* 1}; M. Tatari²

¹Horticulture Crops Research Department, Chaharmahal and Bakhtiari Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center, Agricultural Research, Education and Extension organization (AREEO), Shahrekord, Iran

²Horticulture Crops Research Department, Isfahan Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center, Agricultural Research, Education and Extension organization (AREEO), Isfahan, Iran

Abstract

Introduction
Peach×almond (GN) hybrid rootstocks have favorable characteristics such as ease of rooting, favorable growth vigour, resistance to nematodes, calcareous and dry soil (Babadaei et al., 2018). Currently, water deficiency caused by reduced rainfall is a major concern and a critical limitation for agricultural production (Hass et al., 2021). Under drought stress, plant cell membranes become more susceptible to electrolyte leakage. Membrane leakage is caused by uncontrolled free radicals and leads to lipid peroxidation (Cheng et al., 2018). Since tolerance to drought stress is the result of the interaction of morphological and physiological traits of plant, therefore, a combination of different traits that have a direct relationship with drought tolerance can be used as selection criteria to screen the ideal cultivar (Karimi et al., 2015).
 
Materials and Methods
This research carried out during the years 2020 and 2021 at the Chahartakhteh station affiliated to the Center for Research and Education of Agriculture and Natural Resources in Chaharmahal and Bakhtiari Province. The almond seedlings included Shahroud 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 13 and 21, that all of them grafted on the GN rootstock, along with GN rootstock, subjected to different drought stress treatments in June for four months. Drought stress treatments included 70% of field capacity (control or no drought stress), 50% field capacity (mild stress), 30% field capacity (moderate stress) and 10% field capacity (severe stress). A counter determined the amount of irrigation in each treatment, and a Time-Domain Reflectometry (TDR) used to measure the soil moisture. Before the experiment, the physicochemical properties of the soil measured. The measured morphological traits included leaf area, percentage of leaf abscission, and shoot fresh and dry weight. These traits measured four months after subjecting to water stress. The evaluated physiological traits included electrolyte leakage (EL), relative leaf water content (RWC), leaf chlorophyll, proline and malondialdehyde (MDA). These traits also measured four months after subjecting to water stress. The experiment conducted in split plots based on a randomized complete block design in three replications and four seedlings in each experimental unit. The main plot included water drought treatments and the sub plot included almond cultivars. Data analysis carried out using SAS software version 9.2 and comparison of mean data conducted based on LSD test at a five percent probability level.
 
Results and Discussion
As the intensity of drought stress increased, the fresh and dry weight of shoot decreased in almond cultivars and GN rootstock. At soil humidity of 10% field capacity, Shahroud 8 showed higher amounts of shoot fresh weight (785 g). The lowest fresh and dry weight of the shoot and the highest leaf abscission were observed under severe drought stress (10% of the field capacity) in Shahroud 13. The increase in drought levels led to a decrease in the leaf area in the studied cultivars and rootstock of almond. Shahroud 8 had more chlorophyll content than other cultivars at the most severe stress level, and Shahroud 13 showed the lowest chlorophyll b content at 10% humidity of field capacity. A significant decrease in leaf chlorophyll concentration under drought stress has also been reported in previous research (Schlemmer et al., 2005; Gohari et al., 2023). A further decrease in chlorophyll could be due to a drastic decrease in RWC under severe stress conditions. According to Ranjbar et al. (2022), the amount of RWC decreased by 32 to 44% under stress conditions in the K13-40 grafted cultivar on the rootstock of bitter almond No. 32. In the current research, the biggest decrease in RWC was in Shahroud 13 with a decrease of 36.85%. The lowest decrease in RWC was also observed in the GN rootstock with a decrease of 20.94%. Shahroud 13 and GN rootstock showed the highest and lowest electrolyte leakage at the highest stress level, respectively. Karimi et al. (2013) also found a significant increase in EL in White, Mamai and Ferragnes cultivars due to the higher sensitivity of these cultivars to water loss. The most difference in MDA value was observed in Shahroud 13 with an increase of 186.35% and the lowest difference was found in Shahroud 10 with an increase of 84.58%. Shahroud 6 produced the highest content of proline under severe water stress. According to the results, Shahroud 13 and then Shahroud 6 were recognized as the most sensitive cultivars. Shahroud 8 and 12 were among the tolerant cultivars. Other cultivars were also between these two groups.
 
Conclusions
Shahroud 13 was recognized as the most sensitive cultivar with the lowest fresh and dry weight, RWC and the highest ion leakage and MDA at the most severe stress level. After that, Shahroud 6 had high sensitivity. Shahroud 8 was recognized as the most drought tolerant cultivar due to its lowest MDA content, the highest chlorophyll a and b and RWC in the most level of drought. After Shahroud 8, Shahroud 12 was including the tolerant cultivars. Tolerant cultivars can be used in future studies to evaluate the possibility of planting these cultivars in areas with water shortage problems.
 

Keywords

Electrolyte leakage; Field capacity; Malondialdehyde; Proline; Water stress

References

1. Aazami, M.A., Rasouli, F., & Panahi Tajaragh, R. (2022). Evaluation of almond cultivars for the morphological, physiological and nutritional traits under water deficit conditions. Journal of Elementology, 27, 423-436. https://doi.org/10.5601/jelem.2022.26.4.2189
2. Alimohammadi, A., Shiran, B., Martínez-Gómez, P., & Ebrahimie, E. (2013). Identification of water-deficit resistance genes in wild almond Prunus scoparia using cDNA-AFLP. Scientia Horticulturae, 159, 19-28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2013.04.023
3. Alizadeh, A. (1995). Principles of Applied Hydrology. Publication of Imam Reza International University, Mashhad, Iran, 963 pp. (in Persian)
4. Aspinall, D., & Paleg, L.G. (1981). Proline Accumulation: Physiological Aspects. p. 205-241. In: L.G. Paleg & D. Aspinall (eds.), The physiology and biochemistry of drought resistance in plants. Academic Press, Sydney, New York, London.
5. Arzani, K., Yadollahi, A., A Ebadi., & Wirthensohn, M. (2010). The relationship between bitterness and drought resistance of almond (Prunus dulcis ). African Journal of Agricultural Research, 5(9), 861-866.
6. Babadaei, R., Mousavi, A., & Jafarpour, M. (2018). Guide to Almond Production. Publication of Khorasgan Azad University,Isfahan, Iran, 280 p. (in Persian)
7. Barzegar, K., Yadollahi, A., Imani, A., & Ahmadi, N. (2012). Response to drought stress of almond cultivars and genotypes grown under field conditions. International Journal of Agriculture: Research and Review, 2(3), 205-210.
8. Bates, L.S., Waldren, R.P., & Teare, I.D. (1973). Rapid determination of free proline for water stress studies. Plant and Soil, 39, 205-207. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00018060
9. Blum, A., & Ebercon, A. (1981). Cell membrane stability as a measure of drought and heat tolerance in wheat. Crop Science, 21, 43-47. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci1981.0011183X002100010013x
10. Cheng, L., Han, M., Yang, L.M., Yang, L., Sun, Z., & Zhang, T. (2018). Changes in the physiological characteristics and baicalin biosynthesis metabolism of Scutellaria baicalensis Georgi under drought stress. Industrial Crops and Products, 122, 473-482. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2018.06.030
11. De Herralde, F. (2000). Integral study of the eco physiological responses to water stress: Characterization of almond varieties. Nucis-Newsletter, 9, 20-21.
12. Elfeel, A.A., & Al-Namo, M.L. (2011). Effect of imposed drought on seedlings growth, water use efficiency and survival of three arid zone species (Acacia tortilis subsp raddiana, Salvadora persica and Leptadenia pyrotechnica). Agriculture and Biology Journal of North America, 2, 493-498. http://doi.org/10.5251/abjna.2011.2.3.493.498
13. Fathi, H., Amiri, M., Imani, A., Nikbakht, J., & Hajilou, J. (2019). Investigation on the changes of some biochemical traits of almond genotypes leaves under drought stress on the GN15 rootstock. Journal of Plant Process and Function, 8(29), 15-30.
14. Gholami, A., Sharafi, S., & Abbasdokht, H. (2010). Effects of salinity and drought levels in seed germination of five crop species. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, 68, 935-938.
15. Gispert, J.R., & Vargas, F.J. (2011). Assessment of drought tolerance in almond varieties. Acta Horticulture, 912, 121-127. https://doi.org/10.17660/ActaHortic.2011.912.17
16. Gohari, S., Imani, A., Talaei, A.R., Abdossi, V., & Asghari, M.R. (2023). Physiological responses of almond genotypes to drought stress. Russian Journal of Plant Physiology, 70, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1134/S1021443723601751.
17. Heath, R.L., & Packer, L. (1968). Photoperoxidation in isolated chloroplasts. I. Kinetics and stoichiometry of fatty acid peroxidation. Archives of Biochemistry and Biophysics, 125, 189-198. https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-9861(68)90654-1
18. Isaakidis, A., Sotiropoulos, T., Almaliotis, D., Therios, I., & Stylianidis, D. (2004). Response to severe water stress of the almond Prunus amygdalus. ‘Ferragnes’ grafted on eight rootstocks. New Zealand Journal Crop and Horticultural Science, 32, 355-362. https://doi.org/10.1080/01140671.2004.9514316
19. Jaafar, H.Z.E., Ibrahim, M.H., & Karimi, E. (2012). Phenolics and flavonoids compounds, phenylanine ammonia lyase and antioxidant activity responses to elevated CO₂ in Labisia pumila (Myrisinaceae). Molecules, 17, 6331-6347. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules17066331
20. Jamalluddin, N., Massawe, F.J., Mayes, S., Ho, W.K., Singh, A., & Symonds, R.C. (2021). Physiological screening for drought tolerance traits in vegetable amaranth (Amaranthus tricolor) germplasm. Agriculture, 11, 994. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture11100994
21. Javadi, T., Rohollahi, D., Ghaderi, N., & Nazari, F. (2017). Mitigating the adverse effects of drought stress on the morpho-physiological traits and anti-oxidative enzyme activities of Prunus avium through β-amino butyric acid drenching. Scientia Horticulturae, 218, 156-163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2017.02.019
22. Karimi, S., Yadollahi, A., & Arzani, K. (2013). Responses of almond genotypes to osmotic stress induced in vitro. Journal of Nuts, 4(4), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.22034/jon.2013.515700
23. Karimi, S., Yadollahi, A., Arzani, K., Imani, A., & Aghaalikhani, M. (2015). Gas-exchange response of almond genotypes to water stress. Photosynthetica, 53, 29-34. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11099-015-0070-0
24. Kovalikova, Z., Jiroutova, P., Toman, J., DobroVolna, D., & Drbohlavova, L. (2020). Physiological responses of apple and cherry in vitro culture under different levels of drought Agronomy, 10, 1689. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy10111689
25. Lichtenthaler, H.K., & Wellburn, A.R. (1983). Determinations of total carotenoids and chlorophylls a and b of leaf extracts in different solvents. Biochemical Society Transactions, 11, 591.
26. Liu, C., Liu, Y., Guo, K., Fan, D., Li, G., Zheng, Y., Yu, L., & Yang, R. (2011). Effect of drought on pigments, osmotic adjustment and antioxidant enzymes in six woody plant species in Karst habitats of southwestern China. Environmental and Experimental Botany, 71, 174-183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envexpbot.2010.11.012
27. López-López, M., Espadador, M., Testi, L., Lorite, I.J., Orgaz, F., & Fereres, E. (2018). Water use of irrigated almond trees when subjected to water deficits. Agricultural Water Management, 195, 84-93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2017.10.001
28. Mansourmoghaddam, M., Rousta, I., Zamani, M., Mokhtari, M.H., Karimi Firozjaei, M., & Alavipanah, S.K. (2021). Study and prediction of land surface temperature changes of Yazd city: Assessing the proximity and changes of land cover. Journal of Remote Sensing and GIS for Natural Resources, 12, 127.
29. Moradi, H., Esna-Ashari, M., & Ershadi, A. (2019). Evaluation of some physiological responses to drought stress in grafted and ungrafted almond rootstocks. Iranian Journal of Horticultural Science, 50(2), 311-323.(in Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/10.22059/ijhs.2018.246776.1356
30. Mousavi, A., Tatari, M., Mehnatkesh, A.M., & Haghighati, B. (2009). Vegetative growth response of young seedlings of five almonds cultivars to water deficit. Seed and Plant Improvement Journal, 25, 551-567. (in Persian with English abstract)
31. Nie, W., Gong, B., Chen, Y., Wang, J., Wei, M., & Shi, Q. (2018). Photosynthetic capacity, ion homeostasis and reactive oxygen metabolism were involved in exogenous salicylic acid increasing cucumber seedlings tolerance to alkaline stress. Scientia Horticulturae, 235, 413-423. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2018.03.011
32. Okunlola, G.O., Olatunji, O.A., Akinwale, R.O., Tariq, A., & Adelusi, A.A. (2017). Physiological response of the three most cultivated pepper species (Capsicum spp.) in Africa to drought stress imposed at three stages of growth and development. Scientia Horticulturae, 224, 198-205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2017.06.020
33. Osakabe, Y., Osakabe, K., Shinozaki, K., & Tran, L.S.P. (2014). Response of plants to water stress. Frontiers in Plant Science, 5, 1-7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2014.00086
34. Ranjbar, A., Imani, A., Piri, S., & Abdoosi, V. (2022). Grafting commercial cultivars of almonds on accurate rootstocks mitigates adverse effects of drought stress. Scientia Horticulturae, 293, 110725. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2021.110725
35. Rao, P.B., Kaur, A., & Tewari, A. (2008). Drought resistance in seedlings of five important tree species in Tarai region of uttarakhand. Tropical Ecology, 49, 43-49.
36. Safavi, E. Yadegari, M., Mousavi, S.A., & Haghighati, B. (2023). Investigation the different levels of drought stress on almond cultivars. Journal of Horticultural Science, 37(2), 523-540. https://doi.org/10.22067/jhs.2022.77478.1184
37. Sarker, U., & Oba, S. (2018). Drought stress effects on growth, ROS markers, compatible solutes, phenolics, flavonoids, and antioxidant activity in Amaranthus tricolor. Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology, 186, 999-1016. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12010-018-2784-5
38. Schlemmer, M.R., Francis, D.D., Shanahan, J., & Schepers, J.S. (2005). Remotely measuring chlorophyll content in corn leaves with differing nitrogen levels and relative water content. Agronomy Journal, 97, 106-112. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj2005.0106
39. Sinha, R., Zandalinas, S.I., Fichman, Y., Sen, S., Zeng, S., Gómez-Cadenas, A., Joshi, T., Fritschi, F.B., & Mittler, R. (2022). Differential regulation of flower transpiration during abiotic stress in annual plants, New Phytologist, 235, 611. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.18162
40. Zhang, C., Shi,, Liu, Z., Yang, F., & Yin, G. (2019). Drought tolerance in alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) varieties is associated with enhanced anti-oxidative protection and declined lipid peroxidation. Journal of Plant Physiology, 232, 226-240. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jplph.2018.10.023