Advertisement

Plant and Soil

, Volume 267, Issue 1–2, pp 271–284 | Cite as

Zinc fertilization and water stress affects plant water relations, stomatal conductance and osmotic adjustment in chickpea (Cicer arientinum L.)

  • H. R. Khan
  • G. K. McDonald
  • Z. Rengel
Article

Abstract

Chickpea (Cicer arietinum) is an important dryland pulse crop in many parts of the world. Productivity is often limited by periods of water deficit and in a number of regions zinc deficiency occurs, but the interaction between zinc nutrition and water stress has not been studied extensively. This interaction was examined in two glasshouse experiments. Chickpea was grown under deficient (no applied Zn) or adequate (2.5 μg Zn/g soil) levels of zinc in pots for either 53 days (Experiment 1) or 40 days (Experiment 2) before being exposed to a single period of water stress that lasted for 12 days (Experiment 1) or 23 days (Experiment 2). In one experiment four genotypes (Tyson, ICC-4958, T-1587 and NIFA-88) differing in their sensitivity to zinc deficiency were compared during a single drying cycle, and in the second experiment a single cultivar (Tyson) was compared under well-watered and water stress conditions. Water stress was induced by allowing the soil to dry gradually and the responses in shoot biomass, water use, plant water relations and carbon isotope discrimination (Δ, ‰) were measured. Shoot biomass, water use and water use efficiency were reduced by zinc deficiency. Stomatal conductance was lower in zinc-deficient plants as well. Zinc deficiency reduced Δ by about 1‰ and there were significant differences in Δ between genotypes which were independent of the level of zinc nutrition. At an adequate level of zinc there was a significant negative correlation between Δ and shoot biomass and between Δ and water use efficiency among the four chickpea genotypes, but these correlations were not significant under zinc deficiency. Osmotic potential was lower and turgor higher in the leaves of zinc-deficient plants, but the ability to adjust osmotically was reduced by zinc deficiency as stress developed. In conclusion, zinc-deficiency reduced the efficiency with which the water was used for biomass production and compromised the plant’s capacity to respond to water stress by osmotic adjustment.

Key words

carbon isotope discrimination genotypic differences water use efficiency zinc deficiency 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Cakmak I and Marschner H 1993 Effect of zinc nutritional status on activities of superoxide radical and hydrogen peroxide scavenging enzymes in bean leaves. Plant Soil 155/156, 127–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Chapman D S and Augé R M 1994 Physiological mechanisms of drought resistance in four native ornamental perennials. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 119, 299–306.Google Scholar
  3. Condon A G, Richards R A and Farquhar G D 1987 Carbon isotope discrimination is positively correlated with grain yield and dry matter production in field-grown wheat. Crop Sci. 27, 996–1001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Farquhar G D and Richards R A 1984 Isotope composition of plant carbon correlates with water use efficiency of wheat genotypes. Aust. J. Plant Physiol. 11, 539–552.Google Scholar
  5. Graham R D 1984 Breeding for nutritional characteristics in cereals. Adv. Plant Nutr. 1, 57–102.Google Scholar
  6. Hall A E, Richards R A, Condon A G, Wright G C and Farquhar G D 1994 Carbon isotope discrimination and plant breeding. Plant Breed. Rev. 12, 81–113.Google Scholar
  7. Hu H and Sparks D 1991 Zinc deficiency inhibits chlorophyll synthesis and gas exchange in ‘stuart’ pecan. HortSci. 26, 267–268.Google Scholar
  8. Hubrick K T, Farqhuar G D and Shorter R 1986 Correlation between water-use efficiency and carbon isotope discrimination in diverse peanut (Arachis) germplasms. Aust. J. Plant Physiol. 13, 803–816.Google Scholar
  9. Johansen C, Baldev B, Brouwer J B, Erskine W, Jermyn WA, Lang L J, Malik B A, Miah A A and Silim S N 1994 Biotic and abiotic stresses constraining productivity of cool season food legumes in Asia, Africa and Oceania. In Expanding the Production and Use of cool Season Food Legumes. Eds. F J Muehlbauer and W J Kaiser. pp. 175–194. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  10. Jones G H and Rawson H M 1979 Influence of rate of development of leaf water potential upon photosynthesis, leaf conductance, water use efficiency and osmotic potential in sorghum. Physiol. Plant 45, 103–111.Google Scholar
  11. Khan H R, McDonald G K and Rengel Z 1998a Chickpea genotypes differ in their sensitivity to Zn deficiency. Plant Soil 198, 11–18.Google Scholar
  12. Khan H R, McDonald G K and Rengel Z 1998b Assessment of the Zn status of chickpea by plant analysis. Plant Soil 198, 1–9.Google Scholar
  13. Khan H R, McDonald G K and Rengel Z 2000 Response of chickpea genoypes to Zn fertilization under field conditions in South Australia and Pakistan. J. Plant Nutr. 23, 1517–1531.Google Scholar
  14. Khan H R, McDonald G K and Rengel Z 2003 Zn fertilization improves water use efficiency, grain yield and seed Zn content in chickpea. Plant Soil 249, 389–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Leport L, Turner N C, French R J, Tennant D, Thomson D B and Siddique K H M 1998 Water relations, gas exchange and growth of cool-season grain legumes in a Mediterranean-type environment. Eur. J. Agron. 9, 295–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Leport L, Turner N C, French R J, Barr M D, Duda R, Davies S L, Tennant D, Thomson D B and Siddique K H M 1999 Physiological responses of chickpea to terminal drought in a Mediterranean-type environment. Eur. J. Agron. 11, 279–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Morgan J M, Rodriguez-Maribona B and Knights E J 1991 Adaptation to water deficit in chickpea breeding lines by osmoregulation: relationship to grain yields in the field. Field Crops Res. 27, 61–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Nable R O and Webb M J 1993 Further evidence that zinc is required throughout the root zone for optimal plant growth and development. Plant Soil 150, 247–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Qian Y and Fry J D 1997 Water relations and drought tolerance of four turfgrasses. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 122, 129–133.Google Scholar
  20. Rengel Z 1995 Carbonic anhydrase activity in leaves of wheat genotypes differing in Zn efficiency. J. Plant Physiol. 147, 251–256.Google Scholar
  21. Saxena M C 1993 The challenge of developing biotic and abiotic stress resistance in cool-season food legumes. In Breeding for Tolerance in Cool-season Food Legumes. Eds. K B Singh and M C Saxena. pp. 3–14. John Wiley, New York, USA.Google Scholar
  22. Saxena MC, Silim S N and Singh K B 1990 Effect of supplementary irrigation during reproductive growth on winter and spring chickpea (Cicer arietinum) in Mediterranean environment. J. Agric. Sci. Cambr. 114, 285–293.Google Scholar
  23. Saxena N P 1987 Screening for adaptation to drought: Case studies with chickpea and pigeonpea. In Adaptation of Chickpea and Pigeonpea to Abiotic Stresses. Eds. N P Saxena and C Johansen. pp. 63–76. ICRISAT, Hyperabad, India.Google Scholar
  24. Saxena N P, Krishnamurthy L and Johansen C 1993 Registration of a drought resistant chickpea germplasm. Crop Sci. 33, 1424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Scholander P F, Hammel H T, Bradstreet E D and Hemmingsen E A 1965 Sap pressure in vascular plants. Science 1, 107–117.Google Scholar
  26. Sharma C P, Mehrotra S C, Sharma P N and Bisht S S 1984 Water stress induced by zinc deficiency in cabbage. Current Sci. 53, 44–45.Google Scholar
  27. Sharma P N, Kumar N and Bisht S S 1994 Effect of zinc deficiency on chlorophyll contents, photosynthesis and water relations of cauliflower plants. Photosynthetica 30, 353–359.Google Scholar
  28. Sharma P N, Tripathi A and Bisht S S 1995 Zinc requirement for stomatal opening in cauliflower. Plant Physiol. 107, 751–756.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Singh R P and Das S K 1987 Management of chickpea and pigeonpea under stress conditions, with particular reference to drought. In Adaptation of Chickpea and Pigeonpea to Abiotic Stresses. Eds. N P Saxena and C Johansen. pp. 51–62. ICRISAT, Hyderabad, India.Google Scholar
  30. Takkar P N and Walker C D 1993 The distribution and correction of zinc deficiency. In Zinc in Soils and Plants. Ed. A D Robson. pp. 151–165. Kluwer Academic Press, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  31. Turner N C 1997 Further progress in crop water relations. Adv. Agron. 58, 293–338.Google Scholar
  32. Turner N C, Wright G C and Siddique K H M 2001 Adaptation of grain legumes (pulses) to water-limited environments. Adv. Agronomy 71, 193–231.Google Scholar
  33. Yu Q, Osborne L and Rengel Z 1998 Micronutrient deficiency changes activities of superoxide dismutase and ascorbate peroxidase in tobacco plants. J. Plant Nutr. 21, 1427–1437.Google Scholar
  34. Yu Q and Rengel Z 1999 Micronutrient deficiency influences plant growth and activities of superoxide dismutases in narrow-leafed lupins. Ann. Bot. 83, 175–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Yu Q, Worth C and Rengel Z 1999 Using capillary electrophoresis to measure Cu/Zn superoxide dismutase concentration in leaves of wheat genotypes differing in tolerance to zinc deficiency. Plant Sci. 143, 231–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Zarcinas B A, Cartwright B and Spouncer L R 1987 Nitric acid digestion and multi-element analysis of plant material by inductively coupled plasma spectrometry. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 18, 131–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Applied SciencesUniversity of WolverhamptonWolverhamptonUnited Kingdom
  2. 2.Plant and Pest Science, School of Agriculture and WineThe University of Adelaide, Waite Institute, PMB 1Glen OsmondAustralia
  3. 3.Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, School of Earth and Geographical SciencesUniversity of Western AustraliaCrawleyAustralia

Personalised recommendations