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

Research Articles

Early Access

Effect of chemical mutagens on wheat’s morphology of two genotypes under normal and osmotic stress conditions

DOI
https://doi.org/10.14719/pst.7701
Submitted
12 February 2025
Published
19-08-2025
Versions

Abstract

Drought caused by climate change results in water scarcity, reduced global wheat yields and unpredictable rainfall, impacting nearly 50 % of wheat production worldwide. India, the second-largest wheat producer after China, contributes about 12 % to global wheat output. Mutation breeding is a promising approach for improving drought tolerance in wheat, especially in drought-prone regions. This study evaluated the effects of varying EMS and SA concentrations on drought tolerance in wheat genotypes HD-3226 and HI-1620 under PEG-induced stress during 2020–2021 Rabi season at SVPUA&T, Meerut, India. In-vitro screening of EMS and SA induced mutants using PEG-6000 as a chemical drought agent proved to be an effective method for identifying drought-tolerant wheat lines. The results revealed that EMS treatments led to an increase in plant height and spike length as compared to control-wild types, whereas SA treatments caused a decline in these traits across both genotypes. Additionally, number of reproductive tillers per plant decreased in EMS treatments, while it increased in SA treatments relative to wild type. Further, phenotypic traits such as days to 50 % heading, anthesis and maturity were delayed in both EMS and SA treated plants, as well as in control-wild types. Yield-related attributes such as number of spikelets per spike and 1000-grain weight were significantly reduced under PEG treatment across all treatments. This study underscores the substantial influence of chemical mutagens on vital morphological and yield-related traits in wheat under drought stress. The differential response of EMS and SA treatments suggests their potential utility in generating genetic variability for drought tolerance. These findings support the role of mutation breeding as an efficient approach in developing resilient wheat cultivars suitable for water-limited environments.

References

  1. 1. Wang W, Vinocur B, Altman A. Plant responses to drought, salinity and extreme temperatures: towards genetic engineering for stress tolerance. Planta. 2003;218(1):1-4. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00425-003-1105-5
  2. 2. Khan SA, Li MZ, Wang SM, Yin HJ. Revisiting the role of plant transcription factors in the battle against abiotic stress. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2019;19(6):1634. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms19061634
  3. 3. Joshi R, Anwar K, Das P, Pareek SL, Pareek A. Overview of methods for assessing salinity and drought tolerance of transgenic wheat lines. Wheat Biotechnology. 2017:83-95. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-7337-8_5
  4. 4. Penna S, Vitthal SB, Yadav PV. In vitro mutagenesis and selection in plant tissue culture and their prospects for crop improvement. Bioremediation, Biodiversity and Bioavailability. 2012;6(1):6-14.
  5. 5. Pacher M, Puchta H. From classical mutagenesis to nuclease-based breeding-directing natural DNA repair for a natural end-product. The Plant Journal. 2017;90:819-33. https://doi.org/10.1111/tpj.13469
  6. 6. Hallajian MT. Mutation breeding and drought stress tolerance in plants. Springer International Publishing Switzerland. 2017;2:359-84. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-32423-4_13
  7. 7. Lethin J, Shakil SS, Hassan S, Sirijiovski N, Topel M, Olsson O, et al. Development and characterization of an EMS-mutagenized wheat population and identification of salt-tolerant wheat lines. BMC plant biology. 2020;20(1):1-15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12870-019-2137-8
  8. 8. Khan S, Al-Qurainy F, Anwar F. Sodium Azide: a chemical mutagen for enhancement of agronomic traits of crop plants. International Journal of Scientific Research in Science and Technology. 2009;4:1-21.
  9. 9. Adeoti OM, Sodiq Z, Olufemi SO, Komolafe KA. Effects of chemical mutagen (sodium azide) on tomato grown in organic and inorganic fertilized soil. International Journal of Science and Research Archive. 2021;2(1):72-8.
  10. 10. Gottschalk W, Wolff G. Induced mutation in plant breeding. Monograph on theoretical and applied genetics. Springer Verlag. 1983. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-81997-1_2
  11. 11. Micke A, Donini B, Maluszynski M. Induced mutations for crop improvement-A review. Tropical Agriculture (Trinidad). 1987;64(4):259–78.
  12. 12. Turkan I, Bor M, Ozdemir F, Koch H. Differential responses of lipid peroxidation and antioxidants in the leaves of drought tolerant P. acutifolius Grey and drought P. vulgaris L. subjected to polyethylene glycol mediated water stress. Plant Science. 2005;168(1):223-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plantsci.2004.07.032
  13. 13. Rauf M, Munir MM, Hassan M, Ahmad M, Afzal M. Performance of wheat genotypes under osmotic stress at germination and early seedling growth stage. African Journal of Biotechnology. 2006;6:971-5.
  14. 14. Landjeva S, Neumann K, Lohwasser U, Borner A. Molecular mapping of genomic regions associated with wheat seedling growth under osmotic stress. Biologia Plantarum. 2008;52(2):259-66. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10535-008-0056-x
  15. 15. Khakwani AA, Dennett MD, Munir M. Early growth response of six wheat varieties under artificial osmotic stress condition. Pak J Agri Sci. 2011;48(2):119-23.
  16. 16. Memo S, Abro AA, Jakhro MI, Farid A, Habib M, Ahmed M, et al. Polyethylene glycol mediated osmotic stress impacts on growth and biochemical aspects of wheat under artificial osmotic stress condition. Journal of Innovative Sciences. 2023;9(1):44-50. https://doi.org/10.17582/journal.jis/2023/9.1.44.50
  17. 17. Aquila AD, Pignone D, Carella G. Polyethylene glycol 6000 priming effect on germination of aged wheat seed lots. Biologia Plantarum. 1984;26:166-73. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02895042
  18. 18. Kim YJ, Shanmuga-sundaram S, Yun SJ, Ho-Ki P, Moon-Soo PA. Simple method of seedling screening for drought tolerance in soybean. Korean Journal of Crop Science. 2001;46(4):284-8.
  19. 19. Van den Berg L, Zeng YJ. Response of South African indigenous grass species to drought stress induced by polyethylene glycol (PEG) 6000. African Journal of Botany. 2006;72:284-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sajb.2005.07.006
  20. 20. Radhouane L. Response of Tunisian autochthonous pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum L.) to drought stress induced by polyethylene glycol (PEG) 6000. African Journal of Biotechnology. 2007;6:1102-5.
  21. 21. Kulkarni M, Deshpande U. In-vitro screening of tomato genotypes for drought resistance using polyethylene glycol. Afric J Biotechnol. 2007;6(6):691-6.
  22. 22. Kaur J, Sheoran IS, Nainawatee HS. Effect of heat stress on photosynthesis and respiration in a wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) mutant. In: Photosynthesis. 1998:297-303. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-74221-7_23
  23. 23. Basha MH, Mehta AK. Screening of oat (Avena sativa L.) mutant lines for drought tolerance using polyethylene glycol-6000 at seedling stage. Progressive Research-An International Journal. 2016;11(VIII):5561-9.
  24. 24. El-Siddig MA, Baenziger S, Dweikat I, El Hussein A. Preliminary screening for water stress tolerance and genetic diversity in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) cultivars from Sudan. Journal of Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology. 2013;11:87-94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jgeb.2013.08.004
  25. 25. Rani R, Yadav MK, Tomar A, Vaishali, Gangwar LK, Sengar RS. In-vitro screening of EMS and sodium azide induced mutant population at seedling stage for drought tolerance in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Int J Environ Clim Change. 2023;13(10):4266-75. https://doi.org/10.9734/IJECC/2023/v13i103104
  26. 26. Bhutto AH, Rajpar AA, Kalhoro SA, Ali A, Kalhoro FA, Ahmed M, et al. Correlation and regression analysis for yield traits in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) genotypes. Natural Science. 2016;8:96-104. https://doi.org/10.4236/ns.2016.83013
  27. 27. Singh SK, Chatrath R, Mishran B. Perspective of hybrid wheat research: a review. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences. 2010;80(12):1013-27.
  28. 28. Kijne JW. Abiotic stress and water scarcity: identifying and resolving conflicts from plant level to global level. Field Crops Research. 2006;97(1):3-18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2005.08.011
  29. 29. Hadas A. Water uptake and germination of leguminous seeds under changing external water potential in osmoticum solution. J Exp Bot. 1976;27:480-9. https://www.jstor.org/stable/23688774
  30. 30. Sharma V, Kumar A, Chaudhary A, Mishra A, Rawat S, Basavaraj YB, et al. Response of wheat genotypes to drought stress stimulated by PEG. Stresses. 2022;2:26-51. https://doi.org/10.3390/stresses2010003
  31. 31. Kumar P, Prasad BD, Sahni S. In vitro screening of gamma rays induced mutant population in rice for PEG-induced drought stress. Journal of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry. 2018;7(2):3274-7.
  32. 32. Sen A, Ozturk I, Yaycili O, Alikamanoglu S. Drought tolerance in irradiated wheat mutants studied by genetic and biochemical markers. Journal of Plant Growth Regulation. 2017;36(3):669-79. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00344-017-9668-8
  33. 33. OlaOlorun BM, Shimelis H, Laing M, Mathew I. Morphological variations of wheat (Triticum aestivum L. em.Thell.) under variable ethyl methane sulphonate mutagenesis. Cereal Research Communications. 2020:1-10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42976-020-00092-3
  34. 34. Roux MSL, Burger NFV, Vlok M, Kunert KJ, Cullis CA, Botha AM. EMS derived wheat mutant BIG8-1 (Triticum aestivum L.) – a new drought tolerant mutant wheat line. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2021;22(5314):1-23. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms22105314
  35. 35. Nada RF, Hassan EE, Hassan AA, Attia ZMA. Analysis of genetic correlation between some traits in M2 wheat mutant as influenced by sodium azide under water stress. Journal of Productivity and Development. 2021;26(3):463-78.
  36. 36. Srivastava P, Marker S, Panday P, Tiwari DK. Mutagenic effect of sodium azide on the growth and yield characteristics in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.em. Thell.). Asian Journal of Plant Sciences. 2011;10(3):190-201. https://doi.org/10.3923/ajps.2011.190.201
  37. 37. OlaOlorun BM, Shimelis H, Laing M, Mathew I. Development of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) populations for drought tolerance and improved biomass allocation through ethyl methanesulphonate mutagenesis. Front Agron. 2021;3:655820. https://doi.org/10.3389/fagro.2021.655820
  38. 38. Roux MSL, Burger NFV, Vlok M, Kunert KJ, Cullis CA, Botha AM. Wheat line “RYNO3936” is associated with delayed water stress-induced leaf senescence and rapid water-deficit stress recovery. Front Plant Sci. 2020;11:1053. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2020.01053
  39. 39. Chen XX, Zhang W, Liang XY, Liu YM, Xu SJ, Zhao QY. Physiological and developmental traits associated with the grain yield of winter wheat as affected by phosphorus fertilizer management. Sci Rep. 2019;9(1):16580. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-53000-z
  40. 40. Urbanavičiūtė I, Bonfiglioli L, Pagnotta MA. Diversity in root architecture of durum wheat at stem elongation under drought stress. Agronomy. 2022;12(6):1329. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy12061329
  41. 41. Bastos LM, Carciochi W, Lollato RP, Jaenisch BR, Rezende CR, Schwalbert R. Winter wheat yield response to plant density as a function of yield environment and tillering potential: a review and field studies. Front Plant Sci. 2020;11:54. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2020.00054
  42. 42. Hussain SV, Shah SA, Ali I. Effect of gamma rays and sodium azide on morphological characteristics of wheat. Nucleus. 1988;25(2):19-22.
  43. 43. Chowdhury MK, Hasan MA, Bahadur MM, Islam MR, Hakim MA, Iqbal MA, et al. Evaluation of drought tolerance of some wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) genotypes through phenology, growth, and physiological indices. Agronomy. 2021;11:1792. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy11091792
  44. 44. Hafiz M, Iqbal MS, Saeed M, Yar A, Ali A, Sahi KA, Nadeem MA. Drought tolerance studies of wheat genotypes. Pakistan Journal of Biological Sciences. 2004;7(1):90-2.
  45. 45. Singh NP, Vaishali. Effect of EMS on morpho-physiological characters of wheat in reference to stay green trait. J Appl Nat Sci. 2017;9(2):1026-31. https://doi.org/10.31018/jans.v9i2.1316
  46. 46. Ghaed-Rahimi L, Heidari B, Dadkhodaie A. Construction and efficiency of selection indices in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) under drought stress and well-irrigated conditions. Plant Breeding and Biotechnology. 2017;5(2):78-87. https://doi.org/10.9787/PBB.2017.5.2.78
  47. 47. Shar PA, Shar AH, Memon S, Soomro AA, Naich SA, Rind NA, et al. Morpho-physiological responses in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) influenced by normal and water stress conditions. Journal of Agriculture and Applied Biology. 2021;2(1):1-10. https://doi.org/10.11594/jaab.02.01.01

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.