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

Research Articles

Vol. 12 No. sp1 (2025): Recent Advances in Agriculture by Young Minds - II

Exploring potentials of the physical and biochemical characteristics of Gracilaria gracilis and Gracilaria edulis for enhancing plant growth under abiotic stress

DOI
https://doi.org/10.14719/pst.8353
Submitted
18 March 2025
Published
26-07-2025 — Updated on 07-08-2025
Versions

Abstract

Seaweed may assist agricultural crops to adapt with abiotic stress and are widely used in agriculture, especially as biostimulants that improve plant growth and resistance to abiotic stressors. The study focuses on the biochemical characteristics of these seaweeds and their effect as plant biostimulant to improve germination and crop growth. Seaweeds were collected from Mandapam area of Ramanathapuram district and identified as Gracilaria gracilis and Gracilaria edulis from AJC Bose Indian Botanic Garden, West Bengal and their physico-chemical properties were evaluated. Higher protein levels were obtained in G. edulis (16.72 %), swelling capacity (SWC) in G. gracilis (23.25 mL g-1) is more compared to G. edulis, however, water holding capacity (WHC) of G. edulis (11.31 g g-1) was higher. The findings demonstrate that G. edulis has superior WHC, whereas G. gracilis has higher SWC, which improves soil moisture retention and nutrient availability. Further study shows that the two species' mineral compositions differ significantly, with G. gracilis being higher in potassium (6413.5 ppm) and sodium (1051.5 ppm), which may help with osmotic management in plants. Growth parameters were significantly improved by the treatment (T2–T5). In comparison to control T1, treatment T5 (10 % papermill effluent + G2 sps @ 7.5 %) exhibited the longest roots (51 ± 0.37 cm) and shoots (34 ± 0.35 cm), remarkable seed vigor index (26.88 ± 0.30) and a high germination percentage (96 ± 0.06 %). Overall, the results provide support to the usage of these seaweeds as organic fertilizers in difficult environmental situations to enhance crop growth.

References

  1. 1. Battacharyya D, Babgohari MZ, Rathor P, Prithiviraj B. Seaweed extracts as biostimulants in horticulture. Scientia Horticulturae. 2015;196:39–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2015.09.012
  2. 2. Pathak J, Ahmed H, Kumari N, Pandey A, Rajneesh, Sinha RP. Role of calcium and potassium in amelioration of environmental stress in plants. In: Roychoudhury A, Tripathi DK, editors. Protective Chemical Agents in the Amelioration of Plant Abiotic Stress: Biochemical and Molecular Perspectives. John Wiley & Sons Ltd; 2020. p. 535–62. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119552154.ch27
  3. 3. Rouphael Y, De Micco V, Arena C, Raimondi G, Colla G, De Pascale S. Effect of Ecklonia maxima seaweed extract on yield, mineral composition, gas exchange, and leaf anatomy of zucchini squash grown under saline conditions. Journal of Applied Phycology. 2017;29:459–70. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10811-016-0937-x
  4. 4. Singh PM, Maity D, Saha S, Dhal NK. Seaweed utilization and its economy in Indian agriculture. Materials Today: Proceedings. 2022;65(1):63–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2022.04.595
  5. 5. Ahmed DA, Gheda SF, Ismail GA. Efficacy of two seaweeds dry mass in bioremediation of heavy metal polluted soil and growth of radish (Raphanus sativus L.) plant. Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 2021;28(10):12831–46. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-11289-8
  6. 6. Rosemary T, Arulkumar A, Paramasivam S, Mondragon-Portocarrero A, Miranda JM. Biochemical, micronutrient and physicochemical properties of the dried red seaweeds Gracilaria edulis and Gracilaria corticata. Molecules. 2019;24(12):2225. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules24122225
  7. 7. Jacomassi LM, Viveiros JD, Oliveira MP, Momesso L, de Siqueira GF, Crusciol CA. A seaweed extract-based biostimulant mitigates drought stress in sugarcane. Frontiers in Plant Science. 2022;13:865291. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2022.865291
  8. 8. Singh AK, Chandra R. Pollutants released from the pulp paper industry: Aquatic toxicity and their health hazards. Aquatic Toxicology. 2019;211:202–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquatox.2019.04.007
  9. 9. Wong KH, Cheung PC. Nutritional evaluation of some subtropical red and green seaweeds: Part I—proximate composition, amino acid profiles and some physico-chemical properties. Food Chemistry. 2000;71(4):475–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0308-8146(00)00175-8
  10. 10. Thiex N, Novotny L, Crawford A. Determination of ash in animal feed: AOAC official method 942.05 revisited. Journal of AOAC International. 2012;95(5):1392–7. https://doi.org/10.5740/jaoacint.12-129
  11. 11. Lowry OH, Rosebrough NJ, Farr AL, Randall RJ. Protein measurement with the Folin phenol reagent. Journal of Biological Chemistry. 1951;193(1):265–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0021-9258(19)52451-6
  12. 12. Syad AN, Shunmugiah KP, Kasi PD. Seaweeds as nutritional supplements: Analysis of nutritional profile, physicochemical properties and proximate composition of G. acerosa and S. wightii. Biomedicine & Preventive Nutrition. 2013;3(2):139–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bionut.2012.12.002
  13. 13. Yaich H, Garna H, Besbes S, Paquot M, Blecker C, Attia H. Chemical composition and functional properties of Ulva lactuca seaweed collected in Tunisia. Food Chemistry. 2011;128(4):895–901. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2011.03.114
  14. 14. Gómez-Ordóñez E, Rupérez P. FTIR-ATR spectroscopy as a tool for polysaccharide identification in edible brown and red seaweeds. Food Hydrocolloids. 2011;25(6):1514–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodhyd.2011.02.009
  15. 15. Abdul‐Baki AA, Anderson JD. Vigor determination in soybean seed by multiple criteria 1. Crop Science. 1973;13(6):630–3. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci1973.0011183X001300060013x
  16. 16. Yücetepe A, Kırkın C, Mertdinç Z, Ayar EN, Soylukan C, Dikici E, et al. Chemical composition and nutrient profiles of nine red macroalgae species. Food Production, Processing and Nutrition. 2024;6(1):84. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43014-024-00258-0
  17. 17. Rasyid A, Ardiansyah A, Pangestuti R. Nutrient composition of dried seaweed Gracilaria gracilis. Indonesian Journal of Marine Sciences. 2019;24(1):1–6. https://doi.org/10.14710/ik.ijms.24.1.1-6
  18. 18. Bhushan S, Veeragurunathan V, Bhagiya BK, Krishnan SG, Ghosh A, Mantri VA. Biology, farming and applications of economically important red seaweed Gracilaria edulis (SG Gmelin) PC Silva: A concise review. Journal of Applied Phycology. 2023;35(3):983–96. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10811-023-02955-8
  19. 19. Sun D, Wu S, Li X, Ge B, Zhou C, Yan X, et al. The structure, functions and potential medicinal effects of chlorophylls derived from microalgae. Marine Drugs. 2024;22(2):65. https://doi.org/10.3390/md22020065
  20. 20. Mouedden R, Abdellaoui S, El Madani F, El Ouamari N, Slimani D, Kasmi K, et al. Gracilaria gracilis–A review of ecological knowledge, chemical composition, cultivation, and applications. Ecological Engineering & Environmental Technology. 2024;25(1):276–87. https://doi.org/10.12912/27197050/175506
  21. 21. Freitas MV, Mouga T, Correia AP, Afonso C, Baptista T. New insights on the sporulation, germination, and nutritional profile of Gracilaria gracilis (Rhodophyta) grown under controlled conditions. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering. 2021;9(6):562. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse9060562
  22. 22. Mangal V, Donaldson ME, Lewis A, Saville BJ, Guéguen C. Identifying Euglena gracilis metabolic and transcriptomic adaptations in response to mercury stress. Frontiers in Environmental Science. 2022;10:836732. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2022.836732
  23. 23. Koh YS, Wong SK, Ismail NH, Zengin G, Duangjai A, Saokaew S, et al. Mitigation of environmental stress-impacts in plants: Role of sole and combinatory exogenous application of glutathione. Frontiers in Plant Science. 2021;12:791205. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2021.791205
  24. 24. Mareri L, Parrotta L, Cai G. Environmental stress and plants. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2022;23(10):5416. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms23105416
  25. 25. Kapazoglou A, Gerakari M, Lazaridi E, Kleftogianni K, Sarri E, Tani E, et al. Crop wild relatives: A valuable source of tolerance to various abiotic stresses. Plants. 2023;12(2):328. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants12020328
  26. 26. Sahu PK, Jayalakshmi K, Tilgam J, Gupta A, Nagaraju Y, Kumar A, et al. ROS generated from biotic stress: Effects on plants and alleviation by endophytic microbes. Frontiers in Plant Science. 2022;13:1042936. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2022.1042936
  27. 27. Sah SK, Reddy KR, Li J. Abscisic acid and abiotic stress tolerance in crop plants. Frontiers in Plant Science. 2016;7:571. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2016.00571
  28. 28. Kopecká R, Kameniarová M, Černý M, Brzobohatý B, Novák J. Abiotic stress in crop production. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2023;24(7):6603. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms24076603
  29. 29. Pardo-Hernández M, López-Delacalle M, Rivero RM. ROS and NO regulation by melatonin under abiotic stress in plants. Antioxidants. 2020;9(11):1078. https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox9111078
  30. 30. Schumann J, Leichtle A, Thiery J, Fuhrmann H. Fatty acid and peptide profiles in plasma membrane and membrane rafts of PUFA supplemented RAW264. 7 macrophages. PloS one. 2011;6(8):e24066 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0024066
  31. 31. Ahanger MA, Akram NA, Ashraf M, Alyemeni MN, Wijaya L, Ahmad P. Plant responses to environmental stresses—from gene to biotechnology. AoB Plants. 2017;9(4):plx025. https://doi.org/10.1093/aobpla/plx025
  32. 32. Arruda P, Barreto P. Lysine catabolism through the saccharopine pathway: enzymes and intermediates involved in plant responses to abiotic and biotic stress. Frontiers in Plant Science. 2020;11:587. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2020.00587
  33. 33. Pantigoso HA, Manter DK, Fonte SJ, Vivanco JM. Root exudate-derived compounds stimulate the phosphorus solubilizing ability of bacteria. Scientific Reports. 2023;13(1):4050. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-30915-2
  34. 34. Fatangare A, Svatoš A. Applications of 2-deoxy-2-fluoro-D-glucose (FDG) in plant imaging: Past, present, and future. Frontiers in Plant Science. 2016;7:483. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2016.00483
  35. 35. He M, Ding NZ. Plant unsaturated fatty acids: multiple roles in stress response. Frontiers in Plant Science. 2020;11:562785. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2020.562785
  36. 36. Kumari VV, Banerjee P, Verma VC, Sukumaran S, Chandran MA, Gopinath KA, et al. Plant nutrition: An effective way to alleviate abiotic stress in agricultural crops. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2022;23(15):8519. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms23158519
  37. 37. Pinto ME, Araújo SG, Morais MI, Sa NP, Lima CM, Rosa CA, et al. Antifungal and antioxidant activity of fatty acid methyl esters from vegetable oils. Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciências. 2017;89(03):1671–81. https://doi.org/10.1590/0001-3765201720160908
  38. 38. Adebayo IA, Arsad H, Samian MR. Methyl elaidate: A major compound of potential anticancer extract of Moringa oleifera seeds binds with bax and MDM2 (p53 inhibitor) In silico. Pharmacognosy Magazine. 2018;14(59s). https://doi.org/10.4103/pm.pm_125_18
  39. 39. Meena KK, Sorty AM, Bitla UM, Choudhary K, Gupta P, Pareek A, et al. Abiotic stress responses and microbe-mediated mitigation in plants: the omics strategies. Frontiers in Plant Science. 2017;8:172. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2017.00172
  40. 40. Bulgari R, Franzoni G, Ferrante A. Biostimulants application in horticultural crops under abiotic stress conditions. Agronomy. 2019;9(6):306. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy9060306
  41. 41. Lohani N, Jain D, Singh MB, Bhalla PL. Engineering multiple abiotic stress tolerance in canola, Brassica napus. Frontiers in Plant Science. 2020;11:3. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2020.00003
  42. 42. Kishor PK, Suravajhala R, Rajasheker G, Marka N, Shridhar KK, Dhulala D, et al. Lysine, lysine-rich, serine, and serine-rich proteins: link between metabolism, development, and abiotic stress tolerance and the role of ncRNAs in their regulation. Frontiers in Plant Science. 2020;11:546213. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2020.546213
  43. 43. Ning J, Gu X, Zhou J, Zhang H, Sun J, Zhao L. Palmitoleic acid as a coordinating molecule between the invasive pinewood nematode and its newly associated fungi. The ISME Journal. 2023;17(11):1862–71. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41396-023-01489-8
  44. 44. Mahalingam R, Duhan N, Kaundal R, Smertenko A, Nazarov T, Bregitzer P. Heat and drought induced transcriptomic changes in barley varieties with contrasting stress response phenotypes. Frontiers in Plant Science. 2022;13:1066421. https://doi.org/10.1093/treephys/tpz039
  45. 45. Wu QS, He JD, Srivastava A, Zou YN, Kuča K. Mycorrhizas enhance drought tolerance of citrus by altering root fatty acid compositions and their saturation levels. Tree Physiology. 2019;39(7):1149–58. https://doi.org/10.1093/treephys/tpz039
  46. 46. Nguyen HM, Sako K, Matsui A, Suzuki Y, Mostofa MG, Ha CV, et al. Ethanol enhances high-salinity stress tolerance by detoxifying reactive oxygen species in Arabidopsis thaliana and rice. Frontiers in Plant Science. 2017;8:1001. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2017.01001
  47. 47. Gill SS, Tuteja N. Polyamines and abiotic stress tolerance in plants. Plant Signaling & Behavior. 2010;5(1):26–33. https://doi.org/10.4161/psb.5.1.10291
  48. 48. Kumar K, Debnath P, Singh S, Kumar N. An overview of plant phenolics and their involvement in abiotic stress tolerance. Stresses. 2023;3(3):570–85. https://doi.org/10.3390/stresses3030040
  49. 49. Chojak-Koźniewska J, Kuźniak E, Zimny J. The effects of combined abiotic and pathogen stress in plants: insights from salinity and Pseudomonas syringae pv lachrymans interaction in cucumber. Frontiers in Plant Science. 2018;9:1691. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2018.01691

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.