Advertisement

Physiology and Molecular Biology of Plants

, Volume 25, Issue 1, pp 59–69 | Cite as

Evaluation of tea (Camellia sinensis L.) biochemical traits in normal and drought stress conditions to identify drought tolerant clones

  • Mehdi RahimiEmail author
  • Mojtaba Kordrostami
  • Mojtaba Mortezavi
Research Article
First Online:
  • 92 Downloads

Abstract

Abiotic stresses, such as drought, can induce different morphological, physiological and molecular responses in the tea plants. Since there have not been any experiments on the screening of tea genotypes in terms of drought tolerance, this study was conducted to screen the drought resistance of 14 tea clones of Iran germplasm in a randomized complete block design with three replications, separately in two stressed and non-stressed conditions at Fashalam tea station. The results of grouping the clones under normal and stress conditions and comparing their results with the results of mean comparison of the agronomic and biochemical traits showed that in all cases, clones 100, Bazri and 399 were in the group that can be identified as the drought-tolerant group. Also, the results showed that in the most cases, clones 278, 276 and 285 were placed in a group that had low values for all of the traits and could be considered as a group that are susceptible to drought stress.

Keywords

Biochemical traits Drought stress Mean comparison Tea 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Al-Achi A (2008) An introduction to botanical medicines: history, science, uses, and dangers. ABC-CLIO, PraegerGoogle Scholar
  2. Allen RD (1995) Dissection of oxidative stress tolerance using transgenic plants. Plant Physiol 107:1049–1054CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anjum SA, X-y Xie, L-c Wang, Saleem MF, Man C, Lei W (2011) Morphological, physiological and biochemical responses of plants to drought stress Afr. J Agric Res 6:2026–2032Google Scholar
  4. Bacelar EA, Santos DL, Moutinho-Pereira JM, Lopes JI, Gonçalves BC, Ferreira TC, Correia CM (2007) Physiological behaviour, oxidative damage and antioxidative protection of olive trees grown under different irrigation regimes. Plant Soil 292:1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ban Q et al (2017) Comparative analysis of the response and gene regulation in cold resistant and susceptible tea plants. PLoS ONE 12:e0188514CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Basu Majumder A, Bera B, Rajan A (2010) Tea statistics: global scenario. Inc J Tea Sci 8:121–124Google Scholar
  7. Bates L, Waldren R, Teare I (1973) Rapid determination of free proline for water-stress studies. Plant Soil 39:205–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Boldaji SH, Khavari-Nejad R, Sajedi RH, Fahimi H, Saadatmand S (2012) Water availability effects on antioxidant enzyme activities, lipid peroxidation, and reducing sugar contents of alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.). Acta Physiol Plant 34:1177–1186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bradford MM (1976) A rapid and sensitive method for the quantitation of microgram quantities of protein utilizing the principle of protein-dye binding. Anal Biochem 72:248–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Carr M (2017) Advances in Tea Agronomy. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  11. Carr M, Stephens W (1992) Climate, weather and the yield of tea. In: Willson KC, Clifford MN (eds) Tea cultivation to consumption. Springer, pp 87–135Google Scholar
  12. Chen L, Apostolides Z, Chen Z-M (2013) Global tea breeding: achievements, challenges and perspectives. Springer-Verlag, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  13. De Costa W, Mohotti AJ, Wijeratne MA (2007) Ecophysiology of tea. Braz J Plant Physiol 19:299–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Devi SPS, Sujatha B (2014) Drought-induced accumulation of soluble sugars and proline in two pigeon pea (Cajanus Cajan L. Millsp.) cultivars. Int J Innov Res Dev 3:302–306Google Scholar
  15. Dong B, Wu B, Hong W, Li X, Li Z, Xue L, Huang Y (2017) Transcriptome analysis of the tea oil camellia (Camellia oleifera) reveals candidate drought stress genes. PLoS ONE 12:e0181835CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Egert M, Tevini M (2002) Influence of drought on some physiological parameters symptomatic for oxidative stress in leaves of chives (Allium schoenoprasum). Environ Exper Bot 48:43–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fahad S et al (2017) Crop production under drought and heat stress: plant responses and management options Front. Plant Sci 8:1147Google Scholar
  18. Falakroo K, Masoudian Z, Norastehnia A (2014) Study of drought tolerance in selective clones of tea (Camellia sinensis L.). Iran J Plant Biol 6:155–170Google Scholar
  19. Farooq M, Wahid A, Kobayashi N, Fujita D, Basra S (2009) Plant drought stress: effects, mechanisms and management. Agron Sustain Dev 29:185–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gonbad RA, Afzan A, Karimi E, Sinniah UR, Swamy MK (2015) Phytoconstituents and antioxidant properties among commercial tea (Camellia sinensis L.) clones of Iran. Electron J Biotechnol 18:433–438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Guo Y et al (2017) Identification of drought-responsive miRNAs and physiological characterization of tea plant (Camellia sinensis L.) under drought stress. BMC Plant Biol 17:211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gupta S et al (2012) Identification of drought tolerant progenies in tea by gene expression analysis. Funct Integr Genomics 12:543–563CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gupta S et al (2013) Molecular analysis of drought tolerance in tea by cDNA-AFLP based transcript profiling. Mol Biotechnol 53:237–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hatfield JL, Prueger JH (2015) Temperature extremes: effect on plant growth and development. Weather Clim Extrem 10:4–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Jeyaramraja P, Jayakumar D, Pius P, Rajkumar R (2002) Screening of certain tea cultivars for productivity and drought hardiness using biochemical markers. J Plant Crops 30:23–26Google Scholar
  26. Jiménez S, Dridi J, D Gutiérrez, Moret D, Irigoyen JJ, Moreno MA, Y Gogorcena (2013) Physiological, biochemical and molecular responses in four Prunus rootstocks submitted to drought stress. Tree Physiol 33:1061–1075CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Johari-Pireivatlou M (2010) Effect of soil water stress on yield and proline content of four wheat lines. Afr J Biotechnol 9:36–40Google Scholar
  28. Kafi MA, Mahdavi Damghani M (2003) Mechanisms of environmental stress resistance in plants. Ferdwsi University of Mashhad Press, Mashhad (translated in Persian) Google Scholar
  29. Kang Y, Khan S, Ma X (2009) Climate change impacts on crop yield, crop water productivity and food security—a review. Prog Nat Sci 19:1665–1674CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Koech RK, Malebe PM, Nyarukowa C, Mose R, Kamunya SM, Apostolides Z (2018) Identification of novel QTL for black tea quality traits and drought tolerance in tea plants (Camellia sinensis). Tree Genet Genomes 14:Article 9Google Scholar
  31. Lotfi N, Vahdati K, Hassani D, Kholdebarin B, Amiri R (2009) Peroxidase, guaiacol peroxidase and ascorbate peroxidase activity accumulation in leaves and roots of walnut trees in response to drought stress. In: VI International Walnut symposium 861, pp 309–316Google Scholar
  32. Lotfi N, Vahdati K, Kholdebarin B, Amiri R (2010) Soluble sugars and proline accumulation play a role as effective indices for drought tolerance screening in Persian walnut (Juglans regia L.) during germination. Fruits 65:97–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Maralian H, Ebadi A, Haji-Eghrari B (2010) Influence of water deficit stress on wheat grain yield and proline accumulation rate Afr. J Agric Res 5:286–289Google Scholar
  34. Mohammadkhani N, Heidari R (2008) Drought-induced accumulation of soluble sugars and proline in two maize varieties. World Appl Sci J 3:448–453Google Scholar
  35. Monakhova O, Chernyad’ev I (2002) Protective role of kartolin-4 in wheat plants exposed to soil draught. Appl Biochem Microbiol 38:373–380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Mondal TK (2014) Breeding and biotechnology of tea and its wild species. Springer, New DelhiCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Nasibi F, Manouchehri KK, Yaghoobi M (2011) Comparison the effects of sodium nitroprusside and arginine pretreatment on some physiological responses of tomato plant (Lycopersicun esculentum) under water stress. Iran J Biol 24:833–847 (In Persian) Google Scholar
  38. Niknam V, Razavi N, Ebrahimzadeh H, Sharifizadeh B (2006) Effect of NaCl on biomass, protein and proline contents, and antioxidant enzymes in seedlings and calli of two Trigonella species. Biol Plant 50:591–596CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Rahdari P, Hoseini SM (2012) Drought stress: a review. Intl J Agron Plant Prod 3:443–446Google Scholar
  40. Rahnama H, Ebrahimzadeh H (2005) The effect of NaCl on antioxidant enzyme activities in potato seedlings. Biol Plant 49:93–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Sairam R, Saxena D (2000) Oxidative stress and antioxidants in wheat genotypes: possible mechanism of water stress tolerance. J Agron Crop Sci 184:55–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Sairam R, Srivastava G (2001) Water stress tolerance of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.): variations in hydrogen peroxide accumulation and antioxidant activity in tolerant and susceptible genotypes. J Agron Crop Sci 186:63–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Sato F, Yoshioka H, Fujiwara T, Higashio H, Uragami A, Tokuda S (2004) Physiological responses of cabbage plug seedlings to water stress during low-temperature storage in darkness. Sci Hort 101:349–357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Shinozaki K, Yamaguchi-Shinozaki K (2007) Gene networks involved in drought stress response and tolerance. J Exp Bot 58:221–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Smith BG, Burgess PJ, Carr M (1994) Effects of clone and irrigation on the stomatal conductance and photosynthetic rate of tea (Camellia sinensis). Exp Agric 30:1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Smith BG, Stephens W, Burgess PJ, Carr M (1993) Effects of light, temperature, irrigation and fertilizer on photosynthetic rate in tea (Camellia sinensis). Exp Agric 29:291–306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Somogyi M (1952) Notes on sugar determination. J Biol Chem 195:19–23Google Scholar
  48. Sudhakar P, Latha P, Reddy P (2016) Phenotyping crop plants for physiological and biochemical traits. Academic Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  49. Türkan İ, Bor M, Özdemir F, Koca H (2005) Differential responses of lipid peroxidation and antioxidants in the leaves of drought-tolerant P. acutifolius Gray and drought-sensitive P. vulgaris L. subjected to polyethylene glycol mediated water stress. Plant Sci 168:223–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Upadhyaya H, Panda S (2004) Responses of Camellia sinensis to drought and rehydration. Biol Plant 48:597–600CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Upadhyaya H, Panda SK, Dutta BK (2008) Variation of physiological and antioxidative responses in tea cultivars subjected to elevated water stress followed by rehydration recovery. Acta Physiol Plant 30:457–468CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Valliyodan B, Nguyen HT (2006) Understanding regulatory networks and engineering for enhanced drought tolerance in plants. Curr Opin Plant Biol 9:189–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Wang X-C et al (2013) Global transcriptome profiles of Camellia sinensis during cold acclimation. BMC Genom 14:415CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Zhang Y et al (2014) Identification and characterization of cold-responsive microRNAs in tea plant (Camellia sinensis) and their targets using high-throughput sequencing and degradome analysis. BMC Plant Biol 14:271CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Prof. H.S. Srivastava Foundation for Science and Society 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Biotechnology, Institute of Science and High Technology and Environmental SciencesGraduate University of Advanced TechnologyKermanIran
  2. 2.Department of Plant Biotechnology, Faculty of Agricultural SciencesUniversity of GuilanRashtIran

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options