مشایخی, مهری, حبیبی, فریبرز, امیری, محمد اسماعیل. (1393). سازوکار تحمل تنش خشکی پایه GF677 (هیبرید هلو و بادام) در شرایط درونشیشهای. به زراعی کشاورزی, 16(3), 707-716. doi: 10.22059/jci.2014.53269
مهری مشایخی; فریبرز حبیبی; محمد اسماعیل امیری. "سازوکار تحمل تنش خشکی پایه GF677 (هیبرید هلو و بادام) در شرایط درونشیشهای". به زراعی کشاورزی, 16, 3, 1393, 707-716. doi: 10.22059/jci.2014.53269
مشایخی, مهری, حبیبی, فریبرز, امیری, محمد اسماعیل. (1393). 'سازوکار تحمل تنش خشکی پایه GF677 (هیبرید هلو و بادام) در شرایط درونشیشهای', به زراعی کشاورزی, 16(3), pp. 707-716. doi: 10.22059/jci.2014.53269
مشایخی, مهری, حبیبی, فریبرز, امیری, محمد اسماعیل. سازوکار تحمل تنش خشکی پایه GF677 (هیبرید هلو و بادام) در شرایط درونشیشهای. به زراعی کشاورزی, 1393; 16(3): 707-716. doi: 10.22059/jci.2014.53269
سازوکار تحمل تنش خشکی پایه GF677 (هیبرید هلو و بادام) در شرایط درونشیشهای
1دانشجوی کارشناسی ارشد گروه علوم باغبانی، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه زنجان، زنجان، ایران
2کارشناس ارشد گروه علوم باغبانی، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه زنجان، زنجان، ایران
3دانشیار گروه علوم باغبانی، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه زنجان، زنجان، ایران
چکیده
سازوکار تحمل تنش خشکی پایة GF677، هیبرید هلو و بادام (Prunus persica × Prunus amygdalus) در شرایط درونشیشهای بررسی شد. گیاهچه‌های پایة GF677 به محیط کشت پرآوری جامد موراشیگ و اسکوگ (MS) حاوی 1 میلی‌گرم در لیتر بنزیل‌آدنین (BA) و 1/0 میلی‌گرم در لیتر نفتالین استیک اسید (NAA) در چهار سطح خشکی صفر (شاهد)، 10، 20 و 30 گرم بر لیتر پلی‌اتیلن گلیکول 6000 (به ترتیب، معادل پتانسیل اسمزی صفر، 2/0-، 4/0- و 6/0- مگاپاسکال) واکشت شد. بعد از گذشت شش هفته نتایج نشان داد تنش خشکی القاشده اثر معناداری بر پارامترهای اندازه‌گیری شده داشت. با افزایش سطوح خشکی در محیط کشت، فعالیت آنزیم‌های آنتی‌اکسیدانت (کاتالاز و پراکسیداز)، مقدار پروتئین کل و مقدار پرولین به طور معناداری افزایش یافت، در حالی که قندهای محلول افزایش غیرمعناداری در سطوح مختلف خشکی داشتند. از نتایج حاصل می‌توان چنین استنباط کرد که مهم‌ترین سازوکار تحمل به تنش خشکی پایة GF677 در شرایط درونشیشهای، به‌کارگیری سیستم دفاع آنتی‌اکسیدانتی، افزایش سنتز پروتئین (افزایش بیان ژن‌ها) و تجمع پرولین است. تنظیم اسمزی با قندهای محلول اهمیت کمتری دارد.
1M.Sc. Student, Department of Horticultural Science, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Zanjan, Zanjan, Iran
2M.Sc., Department of Horticultural Science, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Zanjan, Zanjan, Iran
3Associate Professor, Department of Horticultural Science, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Zanjan, Zanjan, Iran
چکیده [English]
Mechanisms of drought stress tolerance of GF677 rootstock, peach and almond hybrid, (Prunus persica × Prunus amygdalus) were studied under in vitro conditions. Plantlets of GF677 rootstock were subcultured into the Murashige and Skoog (MS) solid proliferation medium containing 1 mg/l BA (6-Benzyladenine) and 0.1 mg/l NAA (naphthaline acetic acid) in four drought stress levels 0 (control), 10, 20 and 30 g/l polyethylene glycol 6000 (corresponding to osmotic potentials 0, -0.2, -0.4 and -0.6 Mpa, respectively). After six weeks results showed that induced drought stress had a significant effect on measured parameters. By increasing drought levels in the culture medium, antioxidant enzymes activity (catalase and peroxidase), total protein content and proline content significantly increased; meanwhile soluble sugars had non-significant increasing in the different levels of drought. According to the results it can be concluded that, the most important mechanisms of drought tolerance of GF677 rootstock under in vitro conditions are the use of antioxidant defense system, increasing protein synthesis (enhancing genes expression) and proline accumulation and osmoregulation by soluble sugars had less important.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
Antioxidant enzymes, Osmoregulation, Proline, soluble sugars, total protein
مراجع
Al-Khayri JM and Al-Bahrany AM (2004) Growth, water content, and proline accumulation in drought-stressed callus of date palm. Biologia Plantarum. 48(1): 105-108.
Anjum SA, Xie XY, Wang LC, Saleem MF, Man C and Lei W (2011) Morphological, physiological and biochemical of plants to drought stress. African Journal of Agriculture Research. 6: 2026-2032.
Asada K (2006) Production and scavenging of reactive oxygen species in chloroplasts and their functions. PlantPhysiology. 141: 391-396.
Ashraf M and Foolad MR (2007) Roles of glycine betaine and proline in improving plant abiotic stress resistance. Environmental and Experimental Botany. 59: 206-216.
Bartels D and Salamini F (2001) Desiccation tolerance in resurrection plant Craterostigmaplantagineum. A contribution to the study of drought tolerance at the molecular level.Plant Physiology. 127: 1346-1353.
Blokhin O, Virolainen E and Fagerstedt K (2003) Antioxidant oxidative damage and oxygen deprivation stress. Annual Review Botany. 91: 179-194.
Bosabalidis AM and Kofidis G (2002) Comparative effects of drought stress on leaf anatomy of tow olive cultivars. Plant science. 163: 375-379.
Chai TT, Fadzillah NM, Kusnan M and Mahmood M (2005) Water stress-induced oxidative damage and antioxidant responses in micropropagated banana plantlets. Biologia Plantarum. 49(1): 153-156.
Chaves MM, Maroco JP and Pereira JS (2003) Underestanding plant responses to drought-from genes to the whole plant. Functional Plant Biology. 30: 239-246.
Demiral T and Turkan I (2004) Does exogenous glycine betaine affect antioxidative system of rice seedlings under NaCl treatment. Plant Physiology. 161: 1089-1100.
Doganlar ZB, 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(15): 2056-2065.
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.
Flowers TJ (2004) Improving crop salt tolerance. Journal of Experimental Botany. 55(396): 307-319.
Georgieva MD, Djilianov D, Konstantinova T and Parvanova D (2004) Screening of Bulgarian raspberry cultivars and elites for osmotic tolerance in vitro. Biotechnology Equipment. 18: 95-98.
Gill SS and Tuteja N (2010) Reactive oxygen species and antioxidant machinary in abiotic stress tolerant in crop plants. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry. 48: 909-930.
Grassely C (1956) New method of vegetative propagation of hybrid Peach×almand used like rootstock. Review Horticultural Suisse. 29: 116-118.
Guo Z, Ouw Lu S and Zhong Q (2006) Differential responses of antioxidative system to chilling and drought in four rice cultivars differing in sensitivity. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry. 44: 828-836.
Gupta S and Gupta NK (2005) High temperature induced antioxidative defense mechanism in contrasting wheat seedlings. Indian Journal of Plant Physiology. 10: 73-75.
Hayat S and Ahmad A (2007) Salicylic Acid: A Plant Hormone. Springer. Pp: 97-99.
Hoekstra F, Golovina E and Buitink J (2001) Mechanisms of plant desiccation tolerance. Trendsin Plant Science. 8(9): 431-438.
Jiang Y and Hung B (2001) Drought and heat stress injury to two cool-season turfgrasses in relation to antioxidant metabolism lipid peroxidaion. Crop Science. 41: 436-442.
Lagerwerff J, Ogata VG and Eagle HE (1961) Control of osmotic pressure of culture solutions with polyethylene glycol. Science. 133:1486-1787.
Maruyama H, Koyama R, Oi T,Yagi M, Takeda M and Kanechi M (2008) In vitro evaluation of osmotic stress tolerance using a novel root recovery assay. Plant Cell Tissue and Organ Culture. 1: 101-106.
Mittler R (2002) Oxidative stress, antioxidant and stress tolerance. Annual Review of Plant Science. 7: 405-415.
Pagter M, Bragato C and Brix H (2005) Tolerance and physiological responses of Phragmites australis to water deficit. Aquatic Botany. 81: 285-299.
Parry MAJ, Androjc J, Khan S, Lea PJ and Keys AJ (2002) Rubisco activity: effects of drought stress. Annals of Botany. 89: 833-839.
Ranjbarfardooei A, Samson R, Van Damme P and Lemeur R (2000) Effects of osmotic drought stress induced bypolyethylene glycol on pigment content and photosynthetic gas exchange of Pistacia khinjuk and P. mutica.Photocynthetica. 38: 443-447.
Shibli RA and Al-Juboory K (2002) Comparative responses of Nabali olive Microsshoot, Callus, andsuspension cell cultures to salinity and water deficit. Plant Nutrition. 25(1): 61-74.
Sircelj H, Tausz M, Grill D and Batic F (2005) Biochemical responses in leaves of two apple tree cultivars subjected to progressing drought. Plant Physiology. 162: 1308-1318.
Sivritepe N, Erturk U, Yerlikaya C, Turkan I, Bor M and Ozdemir F (2008) Response of the cherry rootstock to water stress induced in vitro. Biologia Plantarum. 52(3): 573-576.
Sofo A, Dichio B, Xiloyannis C and Masia A (2005) Antioxidant defences in olive trees during drought stress: changes in activity of some antioxidant enzymes. Functional Plant Biology. 32: 45-53.
Swati Z, Muhammad AI and Hayataj F (2003) In situ and In vitro studies in wheat (Triticum aestivumL.) genotypes for drought tolerance. Treatment of plant breeding and genetic faculty of crop production Science. 197 p.
Turkan I, Bor M, Ozdemir F and Koca H (2005) Differential responses of lipid peroxidation and antioxidants in the leaves of drought-tolerant P. acutifolius Gray and drought-sensitive P. vulgaris L. subjected to polyethylene glycol mediated water stress. Plant Science. 168: 223-231.
Verslues PE, Ober ES and Sharp RE (1998) Root growth and oxygen relations at low water potentials, Impact of oxygen availability in polyethylene glycol solutions. Plant Physiology. 116: 1403-1412.
Vranova E, Inze D and Breusegem VF (2002) Signal transduction during oxidative stress. Experimental Botany. 53: 1227-1236.
Xu YC, Li SH, Cai CL, Liu GJ and Chen SW (2001) Carbohydrate metabolism in source leaves of Jonagold apple tree under water stress and afterwater stress relief. Fruit Science. 18(1): 1-6.
Yordanov V and Tsoev T (2000) Plant responses to drought, acclimation and stress tolerance. Photosynthica. 38: 171-186.
Zeid IM and El-Semary NA (2001) Response of two differentially drought tolerant varieties of maize to drought stress. Pakistan Journal Biologic Science. 4: 779-784.
Zlatev ZS, Lidon FC, Ramalho JC and Yordanov IT (2006) Comparison of resistance to drought of three bean cultivars. Biologia Plantarum. 50: 389-394.
ابتدای صفحه