Effect of combination of light and drought stress on physiology and oxidative metabolism of rice plants
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14719/pst.2021.8.4.1245Keywords:
Antioxidant enzymes, Drought, Oxidative stress, light stress, Rice, ROS productionAbstract
The realized productivity of crop plants is generally lower than the potential productivity due to the influence of one or more external stresses (biotic and abiotic). Simultaneous occurrence of combination of abiotic stresses, which is more common under field condition, results in compounded effect on functional processes. Main focus of the present work is the combined effect of drought and light (irradiance) on rice plants. Potted seedlings of four selected rice lines (viz., IR36, N22, CRD40 and Bhootmuri) were exposed to three different levels of drought stress (50%, 25%, 12.5% of water) along with control (100%) in combination with three different light intensities (high, medium and low) during experimental period. After 7 days of stress, plant height and relative water content (RWC) were relatively low while root length increased with increasing water stress level and light intensity. Protein content increased with increasing water stress and light intensity, while chlorophyll level was higher at higher light intensities. Malondialdehyde (MDA) content, indicative of lipid peroxidation, increased with water stress only at high light intensities. Superoxide dismutase (SOD), peroxidase (POX) and ascorbate peroxidase (APX) activities increased with combined drought and light stress level, whereas catalase (CAT) activity was higher at higher light intensities. On the other hand, superoxide (O2.-) production, but not hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) production was higher with increasing water stress and light intensity. It appears that light-induced ROS (O2.-) production under drought condition provoked oxidative stress, though a potential mechanism of tolerance was apparent through antioxidant system.
Downloads
References
Suzuki N, Rivero RM, Shulaev V, Blumwald E, Mittler R. Abiotic and biotic stress combinations. New Phytol. 2014;203:32–43. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.12797
Mahalingam R. Consideration of combined stress: a crucial paradigm for improving multiple stress tolerance in plants. In: Mahalingam R (editor). Combined Stresses in Plants. Belin: Springer International Publishing; 2015. p. 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07899-1_1
Pandey P, Ramegowda V. Senthil-Kumar M. Shared and unique responses of plants to multiple individual stresses and stress combinations: physiological and molecular mechanisms. Front Plant Sci. 2015a;6:723. https://doi.org/10.3389/ fpls.2015.00723
Ramegowda V, Senthil-Kumar M. The interactive effects of simultaneous biotic and abiotic stresses on plants: mechanistic understanding from drought and pathogen combination. J Plant Physiol. 2015;176:47–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jplph.2014.11.008
Agarwal S, Grover A. Molecular biology, biotechnology and genomics of flooding-associated low O2 stress response in plants. Crit Rev Plant Sci. 2006;25:1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/07352680500365232
Nakashima K, Yamaguchi-Shinozaki K. Regulons involved in osmotic stress-responsive and cold stress-responsive gene expression in plants. Physiol Plant. 2006;126:62–71. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1399-3054.2005.00592.x
Hirel B, Le Gouis J, Ney B, Gallais A. The challenge of improving nitrogen use efficiency in crop plants towards a more central role for genetic variability and quantitative genetics within integrated approaches. J Exp Bot. 2007;58:2369–87. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erm097
Bailey-Serres J, Voesenek LA. Flooding stress: acclimations and genetic diversity. Annu Rev Plant Biol. 2008;59:313–39. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.arplant.59.032607. 092752
Atkinson NJ, Lilley CJ, Urwin PE. Identification of genes involved in the response to simultaneous biotic and abiotic stress. Plant Physiol. 2013;162:2028–41. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.113.222372
Prasch CM, Sonnewald U. Simultaneous application of heat, drought and virus to Arabidopsis plants reveals significant shifts in signaling networks. Plant Physiol. 2013;162:1849–66. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.113.22 1044
Pandey P, Sinha R, Mysore KS. Senthil-Kumar M. Impact of concurrent drought stress and pathogen infection on plants. In: Mahalingam R (editor). Combined Stresses in Plants. Belin: Springer International Publishing; 2015b. p. 203–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07899-1_10
Choudhary A, Pandey P, Senthil-Kumar M. Tailored responses to simultaneous drought stress and pathogen infection in plants. In: Hossain MA, Wani SH, Bhattacharjee S, Burritt DJ, Tran L-SP, editors. Drought Stress Tolerance in Plants Vol. 1. Berlin: Springer International Publishing; 2016. p. 427–38. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28899-4_18
Ramu VS, Paramanantham A, Ramegowda V, Mohan-Raju B, Udayakumar M. Senthil-Kumar M. Transcriptome analysis of sunflower genotypes with contrasting oxidative stress tolerance reveals individual and combined biotic and abiotic stress tolerance mechanisms. PLoS One. 2016;11:e0157522. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0157522
Mittler R. Abiotic stress, the field environment and stress combination. Trends Plant Sci. 2006;11:15–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tplants.2005.11.002
Lauteri M, Haworth M, Serraj R, Monteverdi MC, Centritto M. Photosynthetic diffusional constraints affect yield in drought stressed rice cultivars during flowering. PLoS One. 2014;9:e109054. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0109054
Heyne EG, Brunson AM. Genetic studies of heat and drought tolerance in maize J Am Soc Agro. 1940;32:803–14. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj1940.0002196200320010000 9x
Moffat AS. Finding new ways to protect drought-stricken plants. Science. 2002;296:1226–29. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.296.5571.1226
Weatherley PE. Studies in the water relations of the cotton plant I. The field measurement of water deficits in leaves. New Phytol. 1950;49:81-97. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.1950.tb05146.x
Arnon DI. Copper enzymes in isolated chloroplasts. Polyphenoloxidase in Beta vulgaris. Plant Physiol. 1949;24:1-15. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.24.1.1
Lowry OH, Rosebrough NJ, Farr AL, Randall RJ. Protein measurement with the Folin phenol reagent. J Biol Chem. 1951;193:265-75. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0021-9258(19)52451-6
Heath RL, Packer L. Photoperoxidation in isolated chloroplasts: I. Kinetics and stoichiometry of fatty acid peroxidation. Arch Biochem Biophys. 1968;125:189-98. https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-9861(68)90654-1
Giannopolitis CN, Ries SK. Superoxide dismutases: I. Occurrence in higher plants. Plant Physiol. 1977;59:309-14. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.59.2.309
Biswas AK, Choudhuri MA. Differential behaviour of the flag leaf of intact rice plant during ageing. Biochem Physiol Pflanz. 1978;173:220-28. https://doi.org/10.1016/ S0015-3796(17)30485-7
Kar RK, Choudhuri MA. Possible mechanisms of light-induced chlorophyll degradation in senescing leaves of Hydrilla verticillata. Physiol Plant. 1987;70:729-34. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1399-3054.1987.tb04331.x
Nakano Y, Asada K. Hydrogen peroxide is scavenged by ascorbate-specific peroxidase in spinach chloroplasts. Plant Cell Physiol. 1981;22:867-80.
Fick GN, Qualset CO. Genetic control of endosperm amylase activity and gibberellic acid responses in standard-height and short-statured wheats. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1975;72:892-95. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.72.3.892
Misra HP, Fridovich I. The role of superoxide anion in the autoxidation of epinephrine and a simple assay for superoxide dismutase. J Biol Chem. 1972;247:3170-75. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0021-9258(19)45228-9
Gay C, Gebicki JM. A critical evaluation of the effect of sorbitol on the ferric-xylenol orange hydroperoxide assay. Analyt Biochem. 2000;284:217-20. https://doi.org/ 10.1006/abio.2000.4696
McElrone AJ, Choat B, Gambetta GA, Brodersen CR. Water Uptake and Transport in Vascular Plants. Nature Education Knowledge. 2013;4(5):6.
Bayat L, Arab M, Aliniaeifard S, Seif M, Lastochkina O and Li T. Effects of growth under different light spectra on the subsequent high light tolerance in rose plants. AoB Plants. 2018;10:ply052. https://doi.org/10.1093/aobpla/ply052
Klem K, Gargallo-Garriga A, Rattanapichai W, Oravec M, Holub P, Vesela B, Sardans J, Penuelas J, Urban O. Distinct morphological, physiological and biochemical responses to light quality in barley leaves and roots. Front Plant Sci. 2019;10:1026. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2019.01026
Fahad S, Bajwa AA, Nazir U, Anjum SA, Farooq A, Zohaib A, Sadia S, Nasim W, Adkins S, Saud S, Ihsan MZ, Alharby H, Wu C, Wang D, Huan J. Crop production under drought and heat stress: Plant responses and management options. Front Plant Sci. 2017;8:1147.https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2017.01147
Francini A, Sebastiani L. Abiotic stress effects on performance of horticultural crops. Horticulturae. 2019;5:67. https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae5040067
Pandey P, Irulappan V, Bagavathiannan MV and Senthil-Kumar M. Impact of combined abiotic and biotic stresses on plant growth and avenues for crop improvement by exploiting physio-morphological traits. Front Plant Sci. 2017;8:537. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2017.00537
Fenta BA, Beebe SE, Kunert KJ, Burridge JD, Barlow KM, Lynch JP, Foyer CH. Field phenotyping of soybean roots for drought stress tolerance. Agronomy. 2014;4:418-35. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy4030418
Taiz L, Zeiger E, Moller IM, Murphy A. Plant Physiology and Development. 6th ed. USA: Sinauer Associates; 2015. p. 561.
Kwon MY, Woo SY. Plant’s responses to drought and shade environments. Afr J Biotechnol. 2016;15(2):29-31. https://doi.org/10.5897/AJB2015.15017
Das S, Kar RK. Reactive oxygen species mediated promotion of root growth under mild water stress during early seedling stage of Vigna radiata (L.) Wilczek. J Plant Growth Regul. 2017;36:338-47. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00344-016-9643-9
Yokawa K, Kagenishi T, Kawano T, Mancuso S, Baluška F. Illumination of Arabidopsis roots induces immediate burst of ROS production. Plant Signal Behav. 2011;6:1460–64. https://doi.org/10.4161/psb.6.10.18165
Mo M, Yokawa K, Wan Y, Baluska F. How and why do root apices sense light under the soil surface? Front Plant Sci. 2015; https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2015.00775
Mandoli DF and Briggs WR. Optical properties of etiolated plant tissues, Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1982;79:2902-06.
Galen C, Rabenold JJ, Liscum E. Light-sensing in roots. Plant Signal Behav. 2007;2:106-08. https://doi.org/10.4161/psb.2.2.3638
Zhou Y, Lam HM, Zhang J. Inhibition of photosynthesis and energy dissipation induced by water and high light stresses in rice. J Exp Bot. 2007;58:1207–17. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erl291
Nauš J, Šmecko S, Špundová M. Chloroplast avoidance movement as a sensitive indicator of relative water content during leaf desiccation in the dark. Photosynth Res. 2016;129(2):217–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11120-016-0291-5
Aarti PD, Tanaka R, Tanaka A. Effects of oxidative stress on chlorophyll biosynthesis in cucumber (Cucumis sativus) cotyledons. Physiol Plant. 2006;128:186-97. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1399-3054.2006.00720.x
Maria H. Drought stress and reactive oxygen species. Production, scavenging and signalling. Plant Signal Behav. 2008;3(3):156-65. https://doi.org/10.4161/psb.3.3.5536
Lum MS, Hanafi MM, Rafii YM, Akmar ASN. Effect of drought stress on growth, proline and antioxidant enzyme activities of upland rice. J Anim Plant Sci. 2014;24(5):1487-93.
Ibrahim EK, Hashem HA, Abou Ali RM, Hassanein AA. Comparative physiological study on six Egyptian rice cultivars differing in their drought stress tolerance. Acta Scientific Agriculture. 2019;3(3):44-52.
Farooq M, Wahid A, Kobayashi N, Fujita D, Basra SMA. Plant drought stress: effects, mechanisms and management. Agron Sustain Dev. 2009;29:153–88. https://doi.org/ 10.1051/agro:2008021
Rahbarian R, Khavari-Nejad R, Ganjeali A, Bagheri A, Najafi F. Drought stress effects on photosynthesis, chlorophyll fluorescence and water relations in tolerant and susceptible chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) genotypes. Acta, Biologica Cracoviensia, Series Botanica. 2011;53:47-56. https://doi.org/10.2478/v10182-011-0007-2
Riccardi F, Gazeau P, Vienne D, Zivy M. Protein changes in response to progressive water deficit in maize. Plant Physiol. 1998;117:1253–63. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.117.4.1253
Merewitz EB, Gianfagna T, Huang B. Protein accumulation in leaves and roots associated with improved drought tolerance in creeping bentgrass expressing an ipt gene for cytokinin synthesis. J Exp Bot. 2011;62:5311–33. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/err166
Anjum SA, Xie XY, Wang LC, Saleem MF, Man C, Lei W. Morphological, physiological and biochemical responses of plants to drought stress. Afr J Agric Res. 2011;6(9):2026-32. https://doi.org/10.5897/AJAR10.027
Sharma P, Dubey RS. Drought induces oxidative stress and enhances the activities of antioxidant enzymes in growing rice seedlings. Plant Growth Regul. 2005;46:209–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10725-005-0002-2
Kar RK. Plant responses to water stress: role of reactive oxygen species. Plant Signal Behav. 2011;6:1741-45. https://doi.org/10.4161/psb.6.11.17729
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
Sahoo S, Saha B, Awasthi JP, Omisun T, Borgohain P, Hussain S, Panigrahi J, Panda S K. Physiological introspection into differential drought tolerance in rice cultivars of North East India. Acta Physiol Plant. 2019;41:53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11738-019-2841-x
Das S, Kar RK. Abscisic acid mediated differential growth responses of root and shoot of Vigna radiata (L.) Wilczek seedlings under water stress. Plant Physiol Biochem. 2018;123:213–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plaphy.2017.12.016
Sahu M, Kar RK. Possible interaction of ROS, antioxidants and ABA to survive osmotic stress upon acclimation in Vigna radiata (L). Wilczek seedlings. Plant Physiol Biochem. 2018;132:415–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plaphy.2018.09.034
Kamarudin ZS, Yusop MR, Mohamed MTM, Ismail MR and Harun AR. Growth performance and antioxidant enzyme activities of advanced mutant rice genotypes under drought stress condition. Agronomy. 2018;8:279. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy8120279
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Atreyee Chatterjee, Tanmay Dey, Gábor Galiba, Gábor Kocsy Kocsy , Narottam Dey, Rup Kumar Kar
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright and Licence details of published articles
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Open Access Policy
Plant Science Today is an open access journal. There is no registration required to read any article. All published articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC Attribution 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
