Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
Plant Science Today (PST)

Research Articles

Early Access

Evaluation of enzymatic and agronomic characteristics and yield stability of sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) genotypes under normal conditions and water deficit stress

DOI
https://doi.org/10.14719/pst.3123
Submitted
23 November 2023
Published
05-01-2025
Versions

Abstract

This study evaluated sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) genotypes for quantitative and qualitative characteristics under normal and water deficit conditions. The experimental design was a split plot based on randomized complete blocks with three replications. Irrigation treatments (normal, water deficit stress) were assigned to the main plots, and 18 sugar beet genotypes were assigned to the subplots. The results showed that irrigation deficit increased the content of proline, glutathione peroxidase (GPX), superoxide dismutase (SOD), and peroxidase (POX) by 57.69%, 54.78%, 50.89%, and 55.56%, and decreased root and white sugar yield by 21.35% and 11.93%, compared with normal irrigation, respectively. Under normal irrigation, genotype F-20734 produced the highest yield of white sugar, followed by genotype F-20851. However, genotype F-20851 had the maximum white sugar yield under water deficit. The results of AMMI analysis based on root yield indicate that 62.12%, 12.70%, and 2.21% of the total data variance were accounted for by the additive effects of genotype and environment and the multiplicative effect of G×E, respectively. Based on the AMMI stability value (ASV), the F-20814 genotype was recognized as a stable variety with acceptable root yield in four environments. Based on the AMMI stability value (ASV) and GGE analysis, genotype F-20814 achieved acceptable root yield and yield stability compared to other genotypes. According to the MTSI index, genotypes F-20734 and F-20851 exhibited stability across all traits and environments studied. Considering all the indicators, the F-20851 genotype can be suitable for cultivation in areas where plants face different periods and intensities of water shortage stress.

References

  1. Artyszak A, Gozdowski D, Kuci?ska K. Impact of foliar fertilization on the content of silicon and macronutrients in sugar beet. Plants. 2019;8(5):136. doi: 10.3390/plants8050136.
  2. Li W, Wang Y, Zhang Y, Wang R, Guo Z, Xie Z. Impacts of drought stress on the morphology, physiology and sugar content of Lanzhou lily (Lilium davidii var unicolor). Acta Physiol Plant. 2020;42(8):1-9. doi: 10.1007/s11738-020-03115-y.
  3. Panda D, Mishra SS, Behera PK. Drought tolerance in rice: focus on recent mechanisms and approaches. Rice Sci. 2021;28(2):119-32. doi: 10.1016/j.rsci.2021.01.002.
  4. Iqbal R, Raza MAS, Rashid MA, Toleikiene M, Ayaz M, Mustafa F, et al. Partial root zone drying irrigation improves water use efficiency but compromise the yield and quality of cotton crop. Commun Soil Sci Plan. 2021;52(13):1558-73. doi: 10.1080/00103624.2021.1892720.
  5. Chrysargyris A, Xylia P, Litskas V, Stavrinides M, Heyman L, Demeestere K, et al. Assessing the impact of drought stress and soil cultivation in Chardonnay and Xynisteri grape cultivars. Agronomy. 2020;10(5):670. doi: 10.3390/agronomy10050670.
  6. Shinozaki K, Yamaguchi-Shinozaki K. Gene networks involved in drought stress response and tolerance. J Exp Bot. 2007;58(2):221-27. doi: 10.1093/jxb/erl164.
  7. Jaggard K, Jaggard KW, KochH-J, Sanz JM, Arroyo Cattanach A, Duval R, et al. The yield gap in some sugar beet producing countries. Int Sugar J. 2012;114:496.
  8. Taleghani D, Rajabi A, Saremirad A, Fasahat P. Stability analysis and selection of sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) genotypes using AMMI, BLUP, GGE biplot and MTSI. Sci Rep. 2023;13:10019. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-37217-7
  9. Studnicki M, Lenartowicz T, Noras N, El ?zbieta Wójcik G, Wyszy ´nski Z. Assessment of stability and adaptation patterns of white sugar yield from sugar beet cultivars in temperate climate environments. Agronomy. 2019;9:405. doi:10.3390/agronomy9070405. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy9070405.
  10. Abbasi Z, Bocianowski J. Genotype by environment interaction for physiological traits in sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) parents and hybrids using additive main effects and multiplicative interaction model. Eur Food Res Technol. Ezoic. 2021;247:3063-81. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00217-021-03861-4
  11. Mostafavi K. Effect of salt stress on germination and early seedling growth stage of sugar beet cultivars. American-Eurasian J Sustain Agric. 2012;6:120-25.
  12. Rajabi A, Ahmadi M, Bazrafshan M, Hassani M, Saremirad A. Evaluation of resistance and determination of stability of different sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) genotypes in rhizomania-infected conditions. Nutr Food Sci. 2023;11:1403-14. https://doi.org/10.1002/fsn3.3180.
  13. Olivoto T, Lúcio AD, da Silva JA, Sari BG, Diel MI. Mean performance and stability in multi-environment trials II: Selection based on multiple traits. Agron J. 2019;111:2961-69. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj2019.03.0221
  14. Ghaffari A, Rajabi A, Izadi Darbandi A, Roozbeh F, Amiri R. Evaluation of new hybrids of sugar beet monogerm in terms of drought tolerance. J Crop Breed. 2016;8(17):8-16. https://doi.org/10.18869/acadpub.jcb.8.17.16
  15. Bates LS, Waldren RP, Teare ID. Rapid determination of free proline for water-stress studies. Plant and Soil. 1973;39:205-07. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00018060
  16. Bradford MM. A rapid and sensitive method for the quantitation of microgram quantities of protein utilizing the principle of protein-dye binding. Anal Biochem. 1976;72:248-54. https://doi.org/10.1006/abio.1976.9999
  17. Purchase JL, Hatting H, Vandeventer CS. Genotype × environment interaction of winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) in South Africa: ?. Stability analysis of yield performance. South Afr J Plant Soil. 2000;17:101-07. https://doi.org/10.1080/02571862.2000.10634878
  18. Mir Mahmoudi T, Hamze H, Golabilak I. Impact of biofertilizer and zinc nanoparticles on enzymatic, biochemical and agronomic properties of sugar beet under different irrigation regimes. Zemdirbyste. 2023;110:217-24. DOI 10.13080/z-a.2023.110.025
  19. Wisniewska A, Andryka-Dudek P, Czerwinski M, Choluj D. Fodder beet is a reservoir of drought tolerance alleles for sugar beet breeding. Plant PhysiolBiochem. 2019;145:120-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plaphy.2019.10.031
  20. Foyer CH, Descourvieres P, Kunert KJ. Protection against oxygen radicals: An important defence mechanism studied in transgenic plants. Plant, Plant Cell Environ. 1994;17:507-23. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3040.1994.tb00146.x
  21. Gill SS, Tuteja N. Reactive oxygen species and antioxidant machinery in abiotic stress tolerance in crop plants. Plant Physiol Biochem. 2010;48:909-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plaphy.2010.08.016
  22. AlKahtani MDF, Hafez YM, Attia K, Rashwan E, Husnain LA, AlGwaiz HIM, Abdelaal KAA. Evaluation of silicon and proline application on the oxidative machinery in drought-stressed sugar beet. Antioxidants. 2021;10:398. https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox10030398.
  23. Hussein HAA, Mekki BB, El-Sadek MEA, El Lateef EE. Effect of L-ornithine application on improving drought tolerance in sugar beet plants. Heliyon. 2019;5:e02631. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e02631.
  24. Islam MJ, Kim JW, Begum MK, Sohel MAT, Lim YS. Physiological and biochemical changes in sugar beet seedlings to confer stress adaptability under drought condition. Plants. 2020;9:1511. DOI: 10.3390/plants9111511
  25. Romano A, Sorgonà A, Lupini A, Araniti F, Stevanato P, Cacco G, Abenavoli MR. Morpho-physiological responses of sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) genotypes to drought stress. Acta Physiol Plant. 2013;35:853-65. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11738-012-1129-1
  26. Liu L, Wang B, Liu D, Zou C, Wu P, Wang Z, et al. Transcriptomic and metabolomic analyses reveal mechanisms of adaptation to salinity in which carbon and nitrogen metabolism is altered in sugar beet roots. BMC Plant Biol. 2020;20:138. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12870-020-02349-9
  27. Szymanska S, Tyburski J, Piernik A, Sikora M, Mazur J, Katarzyna H. Raising beet tolerance to salinity through bioaugmentation with halotolerant endophytes. Agronomy. 2020;10:1571. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy10101571
  28. Wang Y, StevanatoP, Lv C, Li R, Geng G. Comparative physiological and proteomic analysis of two sugar beet genotypes with contrasting salt tolerance. J Agric Food. 2019;67:6056-73. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jafc.9b00244
  29. Geng G, Lv C, Stevanato P, Li R, Liu H, Yu L, Wang Y. Transcriptome analysis of salt-sensitive and tolerant genotypes reveals salt-tolerance metabolic pathways in sugar beet. Int J Mol Sci. 2019;20:5910. doi: 10.3390/ijms20235910.
  30. Simane B, Struik P, Nachit M, Peacock J. Ontogenetic analysis of yield components and yield stability of durum wheat in water-limited environments. Euphytica. 1993;71:211-19. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00040410
  31. Richards R. Defining selection criteria to improve yield under drought. Plant Growth Regul. 1996;20:157-66. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00024012
  32. Sharif P, Abbasian A, Mohaddesi A. Evaluation the mean performance and stability of rice genotypes by combining features of AMMI and BLUP techniques and selection based on multiple traits. Plant Genet Resour. 2021;7:163-80. https://doi.org/10.52547/pgr.7.2.13

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.