اثر تنش خشکی و روش کاشت بر برخی ویژگی‌های فیزیولوژیک و بیوشیمیایی دو رقم نخود

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی سابق کارشناسی ارشد، گروه زراعت و اصلاح نباتات، دانشکدۀ کشاورزی، دانشگاه شیراز، شیراز، ایران

2 دانشیار، گروه زراعت و اصلاح نباتات، دانشکدۀ کشاورزی، دانشگاه شیراز، شیراز، ایران

3 استادیار، گروه زراعت و اصلاح نباتات، دانشکدۀ کشاورزی، دانشگاه شیراز، شیراز، ایران

چکیده

به‌منظور بررسی تأثیر تنش خشکی در مراحل مختلف رشد و روش کاشت بر برخی ویژگی­های فیزیولوژیک و بیوشیمیایی دو رقم نخود ‘آرمان’ و ‘آزاد’، آزمایشی در مزرعة تحقیقاتی دانشکدة کشاورزی دانشگاه شیراز به‌صورت اسپلیت فاکتوریل­ در قالب طرح بلوک کامل تصادفی با چهار تکرار در سال 1390 انجام گرفت. فاکتور اصلی تنش خشکی (آبیاری کاملI1=، قطع آبیاری در زمان گلدهی I2=­ و قطع آبیاری در دو هفته پس از سبز شدن I3=) و ­فاکتور فرعی شامل ترکیبی از دو رقم نخود (‘آرمان’ و ‘آزاد’) و روش کاشت (کرتی، درون جوی و روی پشته) ­بود. نتایج نشان داد که شاخص سطح برگ، هدایت روزنه­ای، سرعت فتوسنتز، مقدار کلروفیل a و b و کلروفیل کل تحت تأثیر تنش خشکی کاهش­ و مقدار پرولین افزایش یافت. رقم ‘آزاد’در مقایسه با رقم ‘آرمان’ دارای شاخص سطح برگ، هدایت روزنه­ای، سرعت فتوسنتز و کلروفیل بیشتری بود. بیشترین میزان فتوسنتز در تیمار آبیاری کامل (09/16 میکرومول بر متر مربع بر ثانیه) به­دست آمد و با اعمال تنش آبی در مرحلة دو هفته پس از سبز شدن و گلدهی، فتوسنتز به‌ترتیب 79/25 و 23/14 درصد کاهش یافت. نتایج تحقیق حاضر نشان داد که رقم ‘آزاد’ و کاشت روی پشته به‌دلیل سرعت فتوسنتز بیشتر و کاهش کمتر هدایت روزنه­ای، عملکرد بیشتری دارند و در منطقة مورد مطالعه قابل توصیه‌اند.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Effect of drought stress and planting method on some physiological and biochemical characteristics of two chickpea cultivars

نویسندگان [English]

  • laleh Abaslu 1
  • SEYED ABDOLREZA KAZEMEINI 2
  • Mohsen Edalat 3
  • Ali Dadkhahi 3
چکیده [English]

In order to evaluate the effects of drought stress and planting method on some physiological and biochemical characteristics of two chickpea cultivars (Cicer arietinum L.) an experiment was conducted at the research station of College of Agriculture, Shiraz University using a split factorial based on randomized complete block design in four replications. The main factor was stopping irrigation at different growth stages of chickpea (full irrigation=I1, flowering=I2 and two weeks after emergence =I3) and the sub-factor included a combination of pea varieties (Arman and Azad) and sowing methods (planting on ridges, furrow and basin), respectively. Results showed that under drought stress, leaf area index, stomatal conductance, photosynthetic rate, chlorophyll a and b and total chlorophyll content decreased while proline content increased. The cultivar Azad had higher than to Arman, leaf area index, stomatal conductance, photosynthesis rate and chlorophyll. The highest photosynthesis rate obtained under full irrigation treatment (16.09µmol m-2s-1) and it’s reduced to 25.79 and 14.23 percent under water stress in I3 and I2 treatments respectively. Based on these results, it can be concluded that the cultivar of Azad is suitable for this region and it is suggested to be planted on the ridge as has higher photosynthesis rate and lower stomatal conductance reduction leading to a higher yield.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Photosynthesis
  • proline
  • Ridge planting
  • stomatal conductivity
  • Stopping irrigation

1 . باقری ع، نظامی ا، گنجعلی ا و پارسا م (1376) زراعت و اصلاح نخود. انتشارات جهاد دانشگاهی مشهد، 444 ص.

2 . شبیری س س، قاسمی گلعذانی ک، گلچین ­ا و صبا ج (1386) تأثیر محدودیت آب بر رشد و عملکرد دانۀ سه رقم نخود در زنجان. علوم کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی. 14(2): 32-42.

3 . گلدانی­ م و رضوانی­مقدم پ (1383) اثر سطوح خشکی و تاریخ کاشت بر عملکرد و اجزای عملکرد ارقام دیم و آبی نخود در مشهد. پژوهش­های زراعی ایران. 2(2): 229-239.

4 . منصوری­فر ­س، شعبان م، قبادی م و صباغ پور س ح (1391). خصوصیات فیزیولوژیکی ارقام نخود زراعی (Cicer arietinum L.)  تحت اثر تنش خشکی وکود نیتروژن آغازگر. پژوهش­های حبوبات ایران. 3(1): 53-66.

 

5 . Alexieva V, Sergiev I, Mapelli S and Karanove E (2001) The effect of drought and ultraviolet radiation on growth and stress markers in pea and wheat. Plant Cell Environment. 24: 1337-1344.

6 . Antolin MC, Yoller J and Sanchez-Diaz M (1995) Effects of temporary drought on nitrate-fed and nitrogen fixing alfalfa plants. Plant Science. 107: 159-165.

7 . Arnon DI (1975) Copper enzymes in isolated chloroplasts. Polyphenol oxidase in Beta vulgaris. Plant Physiology. 24: 1-15.

8 . Bates LS, Waldren RP and Teare ID (1973) Rapid determination of free proline for water stress studies. Plant and Soil. 39: 205-208.

9 . Blum A (1974) Genotype response in sorghum to drought stress, II Leaf tissue water relations. Crop Science.14: 691- 692.

10 . Bray EA (1993) Molecular responses to water deficit. Plant Physiology. 67: 1035-1040.

11 . Cabuslay GS, Ito O and Alejar A (2002) Physiological evaluation of responses of rice (Oryza sativa L.) to water deficit. Plant Science. 163: 815-827.

12 . Chaves MM (1991) Effect of water deficit on carbon assimilation. Experiment Botany. 42: 1-16.

13 . Clavel D, Drame NK, Roy-Macauley H, Braconnier S and Laffray D (2005) Analysis of early responses to drought associated with field drought adaptation in four Sahelian ground nut (Arachis­ hypogaea­ L.) cultivars. Environmental and Experimental Botany. 54: 219-230.

14 . De-Lacerda CF, Cambraia J, Oliva MA, Ruiz HA and Prisco JT (2003) Solute accumulation and distribution during shoot and leaf development in two sorghum genotypes under salt stress. Environmental and Experimental Botany. 49: 107-120.

15 . Geravandi M, Farshadfar E and Kahrizi D (2011) Evaluation of some physiological traits as indicators of drought tolerance in bread wheat genotypes. Russian Journal of Plant Physiology. 58(1): 69-75.

16 . Gordner F, Pearce R and Mitchell RL (1985) Physiology of Crop Plants. Iowa State University Press, Ames USA.

17 . Griffith DR, Parsons SD and Mannering JV (1990) Mechanics and adaptability of ridge- planting for corn and soybean. Soil Tillage Research. 18: 113-126.

18 . Gunes A, Nal IA, Adak MS, Bagci E, Cicek GN and Eraslan F (2008) Effect of drought stress implemented at pre-or post-anthesis stage on some physiological parameters as screening criteria in chickpea cultivars. Russian Journal of Plant Physiology. 55(1): 59-67.

19 . Hsu SY, Hsu YT and Kao CH (2003) The effect of polyethylene glycol on proline accumulation in rice leaves. Journal of Plant Biology. 46: 73-78.

20 . Jongdee, B, Fukai S and Cooper M (2002) Leaf water potential and osmotic adjustment as physiological traits to improve drought tolerance in rice. Field Crop Research. 76: 153-163.

21 . Kanouni H, Ahmadi MK, Sabaghpour SH, Malhotra RS and Ketata H (2003) Evaluation of spring sown chickpea varieties for drought tolerance. International Chickpea Conference. Raipur, Chhattisgrah, India.

22 . Kramer PJ (1969) Plant and soil water relationship. MC Grow Hill. New York.

23 . Krouma A (2010) Plant water relations and photosynthetic activity in three Tunisian chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) genotypes subjected to drought. Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry. 34: 257-264.

24 . Lawlor DW and Cornic G (2002) Photosynthetic carbon assimilation and associated metabolism in relation to water deficits in higher plant. Plant Cell and Environment. 25(2): 275-249.

25 . Leport L, Turner NC, French RJ, Barr MD, Duda R, Davies SL, Tennant D and Siddique KHM (1999) Physiological responses of chickpea genotypes to terminal drought in a Mediterranean-type environment. European Journal of Agronomy. 11: 279-291.

26 . Liang J, Zhang J and Wong MH (1997) Can stomatal closure caused by xylem ABA explain the inhibition of leaf photosynthesis under soil drying? Photosynthesis Research. 51: 149-159.

27 . Manivannan P, Abdul Jaleel C, Sankar B, Kishorekumar A, Somasundaram R, Lakshmanan GMA and Panneerselvam R (2007) Growth, biochemical modifications and proline metabolism in Helianthus annuus L. as induced by drought stress. Colloids and Surfaces B: Biointerfaces. 59: 141-149.

28 . Nayyar H and Gupta D (2006) Differential sensitivity of C3 and C4 plants to water deficit stress: Association with oxidative stress and antioxidants. Environmental and Experimental Botany. 58: 106-113.

29 . NiariKhamssi N, GhassemiGolezani K, ZehtabSalmasi S and Najaphy A (2010) Effect of water deficit stress on field performance of chickpea cultivars. African Journal of Agriculture Research. 5(15): 1973-1977.

30 . Niari-Khamssi N, Ghassemi-Golezani K, Zehtab S and Najaphy A (2010) Effects of gradual water deficit stress on phonological and morphological traits in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology. 4(5): 95-100.

31 . Pastori GM and Trippi VS (1993) Cross resistance between water and oxidative stress in wheat leaves. Journal of Agricultural Science. 120: 289-294.

32 . Rosales-Serna R, Kohashi-Shibata J, Acosta-Gallegosb JA, Trejo- Lopez C, Ortiz-Cereceres J and Kelly JD (2004) Biomass distribution, maturity acceleration and yield in drought-stressed common bean cultivars. Field Crops Research. 85: 203-211.

33 . Sanchez FJ, Manzanares MDe, Andres EF, Tenorio JL and Ayerbe L (1998) Turgor maintenance, osmotic adjustment and soluble sugar and proline accumulation in 49 pea cultivars in response to water stress. Field Crops Research. 59: 225-235.

34 . Serraj R and Sinclair TR (2002) Osmolyte accumulation: Can it really help increase crop yield under drought conditions? Plant Cell Environment. 25: 333-341.

35 . Sing KB (1977) Chikpea (Cicer arietinum L.). Field Crop Research. 16: 231-241.

36 . Singh DP, Singh P,  Sharma HC and Turner NC (1987) Influence of water deficit on the water relations, canopy gas exchange and yield of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). Field Crop Research. 16: 231-241.

37 . Synerri CL, Pizino MC and Navari-Izzo F (1993) Chemical changes and O2 production in thylakoid membranes under water stress. Plant Physiology. 87: 211-216.

38 . Yordanov I, Velikova V and Tsone V (2000) Plant responses to drought, acclimation, and stress tolerance. Photosynthetica. 38(1): 171-186.