پاسخ‌های فیزیولوژیکی برخی پایه‌ها و ارقام آلو و گوجه (Prunus spp.) به تنش خشکی
محورهای موضوعی : تنش
بهناز سلیمانی
1
,
حمید طهماسب‌پور
2
,
محی‌الدین پیرخضری
3
,
بهزاد کاویانی
4
*
1 - گروه باغبانی، زنجان، دانشکده کشاورزی، زنجان، ایران
2 - گروه باغبانی، واحد رشت، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، رشت، ایران
3 - پژوهشکده میوه‌های معتدله و سردسیری، موسسه تحقیقات علوم باغبانی، سازمان تحقیقات ترویج و آموزش کشاورزی، تهران، ایران
4 - گروه باغبانی، واحد رشت، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، رشت، ایران
کلید واژه: پایه رویشی, ژنوتیپ (ارقام), تنش خشکی, شاخص‌های فتوسنتزی, صفات فیزیولوژیکی,
چکیده مقاله :
آلو و گوجه سبز یکی از مهم‌ترین محصولات باغی ایران است. تنش خشکی مهم‌ترین عامل محیطی محدود کننده رشد، عملکرد و کیفیت محصولات باغی در سراسر جهان است. این پژوهش با هدف بررسی و مقایسه برخی از پاسخ‌های فیزیولوژیکی و بیوشیمیایی چهار رقم و هشت پایه آلو از نظر تحمل به خشکی، به سطوح مختلف محدودیت آب صورت گرفت. این آزمایش به صورت فاکتوریل در قالب طرح بلوک‌های کامل تصادفی با 3 تکرار در پژوهشکده باغبانی کمال‌شهر، کرج، ایران در سال ۱۴۰۲-۱۴۰۱ روی درختان در حال رشد چهار ساله انجام شد. فاکتورها شامل هشت پایه میروبالان 29C (Myrobalan 29C)، پنتا (Penta)، تترا (Tetra)، سنت جولین (St. Julien)، ماریانا 2624 (Mariana 2624)، جی‌اف ۶۷۷ (GF 677)، جی‌ان ۱۵ (GN 15) و پایه بذری (دانه‌رست) به عنوان فاکتور اول؛ چهار رقم سیمکا (Simka)، ان‌او ۱۶ (NO 16)، آلو اروپایی (Zochelo) و گوجه شهریار (Greengage)، به عنوان فاکتور دوم؛ و شرایط تنش خشکی (بدون آبیاری به مدت 14 روز) و شاهد (بدون وقفه در آبیاری) به عنوان فاکتور سوم بودند. نتایج نشان داد که ویژگی‌های فیزیولوژیکی مرتبط با فتوسنتز تحت تأثیر خصوصیات ژنتیکی (پایه و ارقام) و تنش خشکی قرار گرفتند. ارقام Zochelo و Greengage و پایه GN 15 دارای بیشترین و رقم Simka و پایه‌های Mariana 2624 و Myrobalan 29C دارای کمترین دی‌اکسید کربن درون سلولی و فتوسنتز فعال بودند. تنش خشکی باعث کاهش شاخص‌های فیزیولوژیکی مرتبط با فتوسنتز شامل دی‌اکسید کربن درون‌سلولی، کارایی فتوسیستمی، شاخص سبزینگی، کارایی مصرف آب و هدایت مزوفیلی گردید. در بین پایه‌ها؛ GN 15، GF 677و Mariana 2624 از ثبات فیزیولوژیکی مناسب‌‌تری تحت تنش برخوردار بودند و متحمل‌ترین رقم در بین ارقام، NO 16 می‌باشد که گوجه سبز در بیشتر شاخص‌ها با آن همراه است. در مجموع، پژوهش حاضر، ترکیب پیوندی NO 16/ GN 15 را به عنوان متحمل‌ترین ترکیب به تنش خشکی معرفی می‌کند.
Plum and prune is one of the most important garden products in Iran. Drought stress is the most important environmental factor limiting the growth, yield and quality of horticultural crops worldwide. This research was conducted with the aim of investigating and comparing some physiological and biochemical responses of four cultivars and eight rootstocks of plum and prune in terms of drought tolerance to different levels of water limitation. This experiment was conducted as factorial in the form of randomized complete block design with three replications in Kamalshahr Horticultural Research Institute, Karaj, Iran, in 2022-2023 on 4-year-old growing trees. The factors include the eight rootstocks of Myrobalan 29C, Penta, Tetra, Saint Julien), Mariana 2624, GF 677, GN 15 and seedling as the first factor; four varieties of Simka, NO 16, Zochelo and Greengage, as the second factor; and the conditions of drought stress (without irrigation for 14 days) and control (without interruption in irrigation) were as the third factor. The results showed that the physiological characteristics related to photosynthesis were affected by genetic characteristics (rootstocks and cultivars) and drought stress. Zochelo and Greengage varieties and GN 15 rootstock had the highest and Simka variety and Mariana 2624 and Myrobalan 29C rootstocks had the lowest intracellular carbon dioxide and active photosynthesis. Drought stress caused a decrease in physiological parameters related to photosynthesis, including intracellular carbon dioxide, photosystem efficiency, greenness index, water consumption efficiency and mesophilic conductance. Among the rootstocks; GN 15, GF 677 and Mariana 2624 had better physiological stability under stress and the most tolerant variety among the varieties is NO 16, which is associated with plum and prune in most of the parameters. In total, the current research introduces the grafted compound NO 16/GN 15 as the most tolerant to drought stress.
1. Akbarpour, E., & Imani, A. (2016). Effects of drought stress on the morphological factors of 5 almond explants in vitro. Plant Biology, 45, 105–108.
2. Atashkar, D., Ershadi, A., Taheri, M., & Abdollah, H. (2019). Screening for drought tolerance in some hybrid apple rootstocks based on photosynthesis characteristics. Iranian Journal of Horticultural Science, 49 (4), 1013–1024. (in Persian with English abstract).
3. Bhusal, N., Han, S.–G., & Yoon, T.-M. (2019). Impact of drought stress on photosynthetic response, leaf water potential, and stem sap flow in two cultivars of bi-leader apple trees (Malus × domestica Borkh.). Scientia Horticulturae, 246, 535–543.
4. Blaya-Ros, P.J., Blanco, V., Torres-Sánchez, R., & Domingo, R. (2021). Drought-adaptive mechanisms of young sweet cherry trees in response to withholding and resuming irrigation cycles. Agronomy, 11, 1812.
5. Chaves, M.M., Flexas, J., & Pinheiro, C. (2009). Photosynthesis under drought and salt stress: regulation mechanisms from whole plant to cell. Journal of Integrative Plant Biology, 103, 551–560.
6. FAO-STAT (2022). Statistics. Database. Available at: http://apps.fao.org.
7. Fathi, H., Imani, A., Esmaeel, M., & Nikbakht, J. (2017). Response of almond genotypes/cultivars grafted on GN 15 ‘Garnem’ rootstock in deficit-irrigation stress sonditions. Journal of Nuts, 8 (2), 123–135.
8. Gasemi, M., Arzani, K., Yadollahi, A., & Hokmabadi, H. (2014). Effect of drought stress on fluorescence, content and chlorophyll indices on four pistasio seedling rootstok. Journal of Water Research in Agriculture, 27 (4), 475–485.
9. Ghaderi, N., Talaee, A.R., Ebadi, A., & Lesani, H. (2010). Study of some physiological characteristics in grapes during drought stress and their subsequent recovery. Iranian Journal of Horticultural Science, 41 (2), 179–188. (in Persian with English abstract).
10. Ghahremani, A., Ganji-Moghadam, E., Tatari, M., & Khosroyar, S. (2021). Effect of drought stress (polyethylene glycol) on antioxidant and some physiological traits of Paneer-boot (Withania coagulans Dunal.). Journal of Sabzevar University in Medicinal Science, 28 (2), 274–285. (in Persian with English abstract).
11. Haider, M., Mahantesh, M., Kurjogi, S., & Khalil-ur-Rehman, M. (2018). Drought stress revealed physiological, biochemical and gene-expressional variations in Yoshihime’ peach (Prunus Persica L) cultivar. Journal of Plant Interaction, 13 (1), 83–90. https://doi.org/10.1080/17429145.2018.1432772.
12. Hajlaoui, H., Maatallah, S., Guizani, M., Boughattas, N.E.H., Guesmi, A., Ennajeh, M., Dabbou, S., & Lopez-Lauri, F. (2022). Effect of regulated deficit irrigation on agronomic parameters of three plum cultivars (Prunus salicina L.) under semi-arid climate conditions. Plants, 11, 1545.
13. Hamdani, A., Bouda, S., Hssain, L., & Adiba, A. (2023). The effect of heat stress on yield, growth, physiology and fruit quality in Japanese plum ‘Angelino’. Plant Research 67 (8), 89–98. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42535-023-00644-y
14. Irisarri, P., Errea, P., & Pina, A. (2021). Physiological and molecular characterization of new apricot cultivars grafted on different Prunus rootstocks. Agronomy, 11, 1464. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy11081464.
15. Isaakidis, A., Isaadic, T., & Sotripolus, A. (2010). Response to severe water stress of the almond (Prunus amygdalus) Ferragnès' grafted on eight rootstocks. New Zealand Journal of Crop and Horticultural Science, 32, 355–362.
16. Javadi, T., & Jafari, M. (2016). Effects of drought stress on growth and physiological characteristics of sour cherry cv. "Mykrez" saplings. Research in Pomology, 1 (1), 70-88. (in Persian with English abstract).
17. Jiménez, S., Dridi, J., Gutiérrez, D., Moret, D., Irigoyen, J.J., Moreno, M.A., Gogorcena, Y. (2013). Physiological, biochemical and molecular responses in four Prunus rootstocks submitted to drought stress. Tree Physiology, 33, 1061–1075.
18. Korkmaz, K., Bolat, I., Uzun, A., Sahin, M., & Kaya, O. (2023). Selection and molecular characterization of promising plum rootstocks (Prunus cerasifera L.) among seedling-origin trees. Life, 13, 1476.
19. Kuhnclumb, E., Neutzing, R., Jacira, E., & Joao, V. (2017). Evaluation of gas exchanges in different Prunus spp. rootstocks under drought and flooding stress. Revista Brasilica Frutica, 39 (4), e-899.
20. Kumar, R., & Kishan (2021). A review on European plum (Prunus domestica) for its pharmacological activities and phytochemicals. Research Journal of Pharmacy and Technology, 14, 36–44.
21. Laita, M., Sabbahi, R., Elbouzidi, A., Hammouti, B., & Oussain, A. (2024). Effects of sustained deficit irrigation on vegetative growth and yield of plum trees under the semi-arid conditions experiments and review with bibliometric analysis. ASEAN Journal of Science and Engineering, 4 (2), 16–90.
22. Mashabatu, M., Jovanovi, N., & Timothy Dube, N. (2024). Assessing the seasonal water requirement of fully mature Japanese plum orchards: A systematic review. Applied Science, 14, 4097. https://doi.org/10.3390/app14104097
23. Maxwell, K., & Johnson, G.N. (2000). Chlorophyll fluorescence, a practical guide. Journal of Experimental Botany, 51 (345), 659–668.
24. Martínez-García, P.J., Hartung, J., de los Cobos, F.P., Martínez-García, P., Jalili, S., Sánchez-Roldán, J.M., Rubio, M., Dicenta, F., & Martínez-Gómez, P. (2020). Temporal response to drought stress in several Prunus rootstocks and wild species. Agronomy, 10, 1383.
25. Moradi, H., Esna-Ashari, M., & Ershadi, A. (2018). Evaluation of some physiological responses to drought stress in grafted and ungrafted almond rootstocks. Iranian Journal of Horticultural Science, 50 (2), 311–323. doi:10.22059/ijhs.2018.246776.1356. (in Persian with English abstract).
26. Paudel, I., Gerbi, H., Wagner, Y., & Zisovich, A. (2024). Drought tolerance of wild versus cultivated tree species of almond and plum in the field. Tree Physiology, 40, 454–466. doi:10.1093/treephys/tpz134.
27. Sabaghpour, S.H. (2006). Indicators and mechanisms of drought tolerance in plants. Ministry of Agriculture, Department of Agriculture, Drought and Drought Management Committee, 154 pp.
28. Tahmasebpoor, H., Kaviani, B., Pirkhezri, M., & Hashemabadi, D. (2024). Drought-stress tolerance potential in plum and prune rootstocks and cultivars (Prunus spp.) based on physiological and photosynthetical parameters. Indian Journal of Agricultural Science, 94 (9), 977–982.
29. Yadollahi, A., Arzani, K., & Ebadi, A. (2009). An evaluation of morphological markers linked to drought resistance in cultivated almond seedlings (Prunus dulcis Mill.). Iranian Journal of Horticultural Science, 40 (1), 1–12. (in Persian with English abstract).
30. Yamasaki, T., Yamakawa, T., Yamane, Y., Koike, H., Satohand, K., & Katoh, S. (2002). Temperature acclimation of photosynthesis and related changes in photosystem ІІ electron transport in winter wheat. Plant Physiology, 128, 1087–1097.
31. Wang, L., Wei, J., Shi, X., Qian, W., Mehmood, J., Yin, Y., & Jia, H. (2023). Identification of the light-harvesting chlorophyll a/b binding protein gene family in peach (Prunus persica L.) and their expression under drought stress. Genes, 14, 1475.
32. Zokaee Khosroshahi, K.M.R., Esna Ashari, M., Ershadi, A., & Imani, A. (2014). Physiological responses of five almond species to PEG-induced drought stress. Plant Production Technology, 5 (2), 73–88. https://doi.org/10.22059/ijhs.2018.246776.1356