Investigation of the Mechanism of Physiological Tolerance in Lentil (Lens culinaris Medik.) Cultivars under Drought Stress Conditions

Year 2017, Volume: 76 Issue: 1, 31 - 35, 27.12.2017

Hande Morgil Yusuf Can Gercek Mahmut Caliskan Gul Cevahir Oz

https://doi.org/10.5152/EurJBiol.2017.1706

Abstract

Lentil
(Lens culinaris Medik.) is valued throughout the world for human and animal
nutrition because of its high protein, vitamin, and mineral contents. Lentil
production has decreased worldwide due to global warming. Although the
physiological parameters of lentil plants have been examined under drought
conditions, its tolerance mechanism has not been fully elucidated yet. In this
study, lentil seedlings following germination were exposed to drought stress
using 15% polyethylene glycol (PEG) application for 7 days. The untreated
control plants were allowed to grow under conditions similar to that of
germination. Oxidative stress responses (relative water content, chlorophyll
content, H2O2 formation, lipid peroxidation, and proline accumulation) were
compared in leaf samples of experimental and control group plants grown for 7
days under drought stress. Although the physiological and biochemical responses
of the cultivars Fırat 87 and Çiftçi were close to each other, proline
accumulation, malondialdehyde, and H2O2 levels were found to increase in the
Sultan cultivar. Thus, it can be concluded that Fırat 87 and Çiftçi cultivars
are more resistant to drought than the Sultan cultivar.

Keywords

Lentil, drought stress, oxidative stress, drought-tolerant, drought-sensitive, physiological tolerance mechanism

References

• 1. Coskuner Y, Karababa E. Production Potential and Processing Technology of Lentil in Turkey. Gıda 1998; 3: 201-9. 2. Kumar S, Rajendran K, Kumar J, Hamwieh A, Baum M. Current knowledge in lentil genomics and its application for crop improvement. Front Plant Sci 2015; 6: 78. 3. Srivastava RP. Vasishtha H. Saponins and lectins of Indian chickpeas (Cicer arietinum) and lentils (Lens culinaris). Indian J Agric Biochem 2012; 25(2): 44-7. 4. Lawlor DW, Cornic G. Photosynthetic carbon assimilation and associated metabolism in relation to water deficits in higher plants. Plant Cell Environ 2002; 25(2): 275-94. 5. Foyer CH, Noctor G. Tansley Review No. 112. Oxygen processing in photosynthesis: regulation and signalling. New Phytologist 2012; 112: 359-88. 6. Peltzer DE, Dreyer E, Polle A. Differential temperature dependencies of antioxidative enzymes in two contrasting species: Fagus sylvatica and Coleus blumei. Plant Physiol Biochem 2002; 40(2): 141-50. 7. Sairam RK, Deshmukh PS, Saxena DC. Role of antioxidant systems in wheat genotypes tolerance to water stress. Biol Plantarum 1998; 41: 387-94. 8. Khan AJ, Hassan S, Tariq M, Khan T. Haploidy breeding and mutagenesis for drought tolerance in wheat. Euphytica 2001; 120(3): 409-14. 9. Singh D, Singh CK, Tomar RS, Taunk J, Singh R, Maurya S, et al. Molecular assortment of Lens species with different adaptations to drought conditions using SSR markers. PLoS One 2016; 11(1): e0147213. 10. Steward CR, Hanson AD. Proline Accumulation as a Metabolic Response to Water Stress. In Adaptation of Plant to Water and High Temperatures Stress’ Wiley. 1980; 173-89. 11. Tan BH, Halloran GM. Variation and correlations of proline accumulation in spring wheat cultivars. Crop Sci 1980; 22(3): 459-63. 12. Hoagland DR, Arnon DI. Growing plants without soil by the water-culture method. Circ. Calif Agric Exp Stn 1938. 13. Dhanda SS, Sethi GS. Inheritance of excised-leaf water loss and relative water content in bread wheat (Triticumastivum). Euphytica 1998; 104: 39-47. 14. Arnon DI. Copper enzymes in isolated chloroplasts. Polyphenoloxidase in Beta vulgaris, Plant Physiol 1989; 24(1): 1-15. 15. Sairam R. K, Saxena, D. C. Oxidative stress and antioxidants in wheat genotypes: possible mechanism of water stress tolerance. J Agron Crop Sci 2000; 184(1): 55-61. 16. Bates L. S, Waldren R. P, Teare I. D. Rapid determination of free proline for water-stress studies. Plant Soil 1973; 39(1): 205-7. 17. Teranashi Y, Tanaka A, Osumi M, Fukui S. Catalase activity of hydrocarbon utilizing candida yeast. Agric Biol Chem 1974; 38: 1213-6. 18. Allen RD. Dissection of oxidative stress tolerance using transgenic plants. Plant Physiol 1995; 107(4): 1049-54. 19. Harris D, Tripathi RS, Joshi A. On-farm seed primingto improve crop establishment and yield in dry direct seeded rice, in: Pandey S, Mortimer M, Wade L, Tuong TP, Lopes K, Hardy B. (Eds.), Direct seeding: Research Strategies and Opportunities, International Research Institute, Manila, Philippines, 2002; 1: 231-40. 20. Zeid IM, Shedeed ZA. Response of alfalfa to put rescine treatment under drought stress. Biol Plant 2006; 50: 635-40. 21. Jaleel CA, Manivannan P, Wahid A, Farooq M, Somasundaram R, Panneerselvam R. Drought stress in plants: a review on morphological characteristics and pigments composition. Int J Agric Biol 2009; 11: 100-5. 22. Bandeoglu E, Eyidogan F, Yucel M, Oktem AH. Antioxidant responses of shoot and root of lentil to NaCl-salinity stress. Plant Growth Regul 2004; 42: 69-77. 23. Mishra BK, Srivastava JP, Lal JP. Drought stress resistance in two diverse genotypes of lentil (Lens culinarisMedik.) imposed at different phenophases. J Food Legume 2014; 27(4): 307-14. 24. Oktem HA, Eyidooan F, Demirba D, Bayrac AT, Oz MT, Ozgur E. Antioxidant responses of lentil to cold and drought stress. J Plant Biochem Biotechnol 2008; 17: 15-21. 25. Erakar S, Murumkar C. Proline accumulation in Tephrosiapurpurea pers. Biologia Plantarum 1995; 37: 301-4. 26. Muscolo A, Sidari M, Anastasi U, Santonoceto C, Maggio A. Effect of PEG-induced drought stress on seed germination of four lentil genotypes. J Plant Interact 2014; 9: 354-63. 27. Talukdar D. Comparative morpho-physiological and biochemical responses of lentil and grass pea genotypes under water stress. J Nat Sci Biol Med 2013; 4(2): 396-402. 28. Liu HP, Dong BH, Zhang YY, Liu ZP, Liu YL. Relationship between osmotic stress and the levels of free, soluble conjugated and insoluble-conjugated polyamines in leaves of wheat seedlings. Plant Sci 2004; 166: 1261-7. 29. Gunes A, Inal A, Adak MS, Bagci EG, Cicek N, Eraslan F. Effect of drought stress implemented atpre- or post-anthesis stage on some physiologicalparameters as screening criteria in chickpea cultivars. Russ J Plant Physiol 2008; 55: 59-67. 30. Chakraborty U, Pradhan D. High temperatureinduced oxidative stress in Lens culinaris role of antioxidantsand amelioration of stress by chemical pretreatments. J Plant Interact 2011; 6: 43-52. 31. Arunyanark A, Jogloy S, Akkasaeng C, Vorasoot N, Kesmala T, Nageswara RC, et al. Chlorophyll stability is an indicator ofdrought tolerance in peanut. J Agron Crop Sci 2008; 194: 113-25. 32. Singh AK, Srivastava JP, Singh RM, Singh MN, Kumar M. Selection parameters for pigeonpea (Cajanus cajanL. Millsp.) genotypes at early growthstages against soil moisture stres. J Food Legume 2013; 26: 97-102. 33. Kumar SM, Ponnuswami V. Effect of different water regimes and organic manures on indole acetic acid (IAA), oxidase activity, leaf area, light transmission ratio, chlorophyll stability index, relative water content and yield attributes of noni (Morinda citrifolia L.). J Med Plant Res 2015; 9: 550-60. 34. Mishra BK, Srivastava JP, Lal JP. Drought stress resistance in two diverse genotypes of lentil (Lens culinaris Medik.) imposed at different phenophases. J Food Legume 2014; 27: 307-14. 35. Shrestha R, Turner C, Siddique M, Turner DW. Physiological and seed yield responses to water deficit among lentil genotypes from diverse origins. Aust J Agric Res 2006; 57: 903-15.