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

Research Articles

Early Access

Response of transient soil waterlogging on shoot growth pattern and root architecture of finger millet and barnyard millet seedlings

DOI
https://doi.org/10.14719/pst.4121
Submitted
16 June 2024
Published
19-11-2024
Versions

Abstract

Millets, as key crops in semi-arid and arid tropical regions, are gaining recognition for their nutritional benefits and resilience to challenging conditions. Finger millet and barnyard millet, in particular, stand out for their nutrient profiles and adaptability. However, research on their response to waterlogging, a major abiotic stress, remains limited. This study aimed to examine the immediate response of finger millet and barnyard millet seedlings to transient waterlogging conditions, focusing on their growth patterns and changes in root architecture to understand their morpho-physiological adaptive strategy. Seedlings were subjected to varying durations of waterlogging: control, 48, 74, and 120 hours to assess parameters such as shoot and root characteristics, leaf growth, and tolerance indices. Results showed a decrease in root length and an increase in shoot length with prolonged waterlogging. Root and shoot biomass, along with seedling dry weight, rose as waterlogging durations increased. Significant increases were observed in root surface area, volume, and the number of root tips and forks. Leaf area initially expanded but declined after 72 hours of waterlogging, accompanied by changes in specific leaf area and chlorophyll concentration. Tolerance indices, such as root-to-shoot ratio, decreased under waterlogging conditions, with finger millet exhibiting higher tolerance than barnyard millet. These findings provide insights into the adaptive strategies of millets under waterlogging, which is valuable for crop management and breeding for enhanced stress tolerance.

References

  1. Sakamoto S. Origin and dispersal of P. miliaceum and S. italica. Jpn Agric Res Q. 1987;21:84-89.
  2. McDonough CM, Rooney LW, Serna-Saldivar SO. The millets. In karel Kulp (Ed) Handbook of cereal science and technology, revised and expanded. CRC Press. 2000; p. 177-201. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781420027228
  3. Numan M, Serba DD, Ligaba-Osena A. Alternative strategies for multi-stress tolerance and yield improvement in millets. Genes. 2021;12(5):739. https://doi.org/10.3390/genes12050739
  4. Nithiyanantham S, Kalaiselvi P, Mahomoodally MF, Zengin G, Abirami A, Srinivasan G. Nutritional and functional roles of millets—A review. J Food Biochem. 2019;43(7): e12859. https://doi.org/10.1111/jfbc.12859
  5. Sharma D, Jamra G, Singh UM, Sood S, Kumar A. Calcium biofortification: three pronged molecular approaches for dissecting complex trait of calcium nutrition in finger millet (Eleusine coracana) for devising strategies of enrichment of food crops. Front Plant Sci. 2017;7:2028. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2016.02028
  6. Nakarani UM, Singh D, Suthar KP, Karmakar N, Faldu P, Patil HE. Nutritional and phytochemical profiling of nutracereal finger millet (Eleusine coracana L.) genotypes. Food Chem. 2021; 341:128271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2020.128271
  7. Hittalmani S, Mahesh HB, Shirke MD, Biradar H, Uday G, Aruna YR, et al. Genome and transcriptome sequence of Finger millet (Eleusine coracana (L.) Gaertn.) provides insights into drought tolerance and nutraceutical properties. BMC Genomics. 2017;18(1):465. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12864-017-3850-z
  8. Kaur H, Sharma S. An overview of Barnyard millet (Echinochloa frumentacea). Pharmacogn Phytochem. 2020;9(4):819-22.
  9. Chandel G, Meena RK, Dubey M, Kumar M. Nutritional properties of minor millets: neglected cereals with potentials to combat malnutrition. Curr Sci. 2014;107(7): 1109-1111.
  10. Ugare R, Chimmad B, Naik R, Bharati P, Itagi S. Glycemic index and significance of Barnyard millet (Echinochloa frumentacae) in type II diabetics. J Food Sci Technol. 2014;51:392-95. https://doi.org/10.1007%2Fs13197-011-0516-8
  11. Gupta A, Mahajan V, Kumar M, Gupta H. Biodiversity in the barnyard millet (Echinochloa frumentacea Link, Poaceae) germplasm in India. Genet Resour Crop Evol. 2009;56:883-89. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10722-009-9462-y
  12. Tiwari A, Kesarwani K, Sharma A, Ghosh T, Bisht N, Punetha S. Drought stress in millets and its response mechanism. Advances in Plant Defense Mechanisms. IntechOpen; 2022. http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.105942
  13. Pan J, Sharif R, Xu X, Chen X. Mechanisms of waterlogging tolerance in plants: Research progress and prospects. Front Plant Sci. 2020;11:627331. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2020.627331
  14. Food and Agriculture Organization. Millets: climate-smart seeds of the future. 2023. https://www.fao.org/millets-2023/resources/millets--climate-smart-seeds-of-the-future/en
  15. Abdul-Baki AA, Anderson JD. Vigor determination in soybean seed by multiple criteria. Crop Sci. 1973;13(6):630-63. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci1973.0011183X001300060013x
  16. Liu Y-z, Tang B, Zheng Y-l, Ma K-j, Xu S-z, Qiu F-z. Screening methods for waterlogging tolerance at maize (Zea mays L.) seedling stage. Agr Sci China. 2010;9(3):362-69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1671-2927(09)60105-X
  17. Gopinath PP, Parsad R, Joseph B, Adarsh VS. GRAPES (General Rshiny based analysis platform empowered by statistics)- Web application of data analysis in Agriculture. 2020;PP Version 1(0):22. https://www.kaugrapes.com/
  18. Matsuura A, Tsuji W, An P, Inanaga S, Murata K. Effect of pre- and post-heading water deficit on growth and grain yield of four millets. Plant Prod Sci. 2012;15(4):323-31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1626/pps.15.323
  19. Zegada-Lizarazu W, Iijima M. Deep root water uptake ability and water use efficiency of pearl millet in comparison to other millet species. Plant Prod Sci. 2005;8(4):454-60. http://dx.doi.org/10.1626/pps.8.454
  20. Daniel K, Hartman S. How plant roots respond to waterlogging. J Exp Bot. 2023;75(2):511-25. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erad332
  21. Tyagi A, Ali S, Park S, Bae H. Exploring the potential of multiomics and other integrative approaches for improving waterlogging tolerance in plants. Plants (Basel). 2023 ;12(7):1544. https://doi.org/10.3390%2Fplants12071544
  22. Kuroha T, Nagai K, Gamuyao R, Wang DR, Furuta T, Nakamori M, et al. Ethylene-gibberellin signaling underlies adaptation of rice to periodic flooding. Science. 2018;361(6398):181-86. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aat1577
  23. Bailey-Serres J, Fukao T, Gibbs DJ, Holdsworth MJ, Lee SC, Licausi F, et al. Making sense of low oxygen sensing. Trends Plant Sci. 2012;17(3):129-38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tplants.2011.12.004
  24. Hayashi T, Yoshida T, Fujii K, Mitsuya S, Tsuji T, Okada Y, et al. Maintained root length density contributes to the waterlogging tolerance in common wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Field Crops Res. 2013; 152:27-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2013.03.020
  25. Qi X, Li Q, Shen J, Qian C, Xu X, Xu Q, et al. Sugar enhances waterlogging-induced adventitious root formation in cucumber by promoting auxin transport and signalling. Plant Cell Environ. 2020;43(6):1545-57. https://doi.org/10.1111/pce.13738
  26. Mommer L, Pons TL, Wolters-Arts M, Venema JH, Visser EJ. Submergence-induced morphological, anatomical and biochemical responses in a terrestrial species affect gas diffusion resistance and photosynthetic performance. Plant Physiol. 2005;139(1):497-508. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.105.064725
  27. Voesenek LA, Colmer TD, Pierik R, Millenaar FF, Peeters AJ. How plants cope with complete submergence. New Phytol. 2006;170(2):213-26. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2006.01692.x
  28. 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
  29. Mommer L, Wolters-Arts M, Andersen C, Visser EJW, Pedersen O. Submergence-induced leaf acclimation in terrestrial species varying in flooding tolerance. New Phytol. 2007;176(2):337-45. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2007.02166.x
  30. Xu Z, Ye L, Shen Q, Zhang GP. Advances in studies on waterlogging tolerance in plants. Journal of Integrative Agriculture. 2023;23(9):2095-3119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jia.2023.12.028
  31. Mustroph A, Boamfa EI, Laarhoven LJ, Harren FJ, Pörs Y, Grimm B. Organ specific analysis of the anaerobic primary metabolism in rice and wheat seedlings II: light exposure reduces needs for fermentation and extends survival during anaerobiosis. Planta. 2006;225:139-52. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00425-006-0336-7

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.