Cereal Research Communications

, Volume 37, Issue 2, pp 199–208 | Cite as

Physiological response of wheat seedlings to mild and severe osmotic stress

  • K. V. KochevaEmail author
  • T. Kartseva
  • S. Landjeva
  • G. I. Georgiev


In the present study the physiological status of two wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) cultivars subjected to polyethylene glycol-induced dehydration is evaluated. Wheat seedlings were exposed to either 8-d-long mild (15% PEG) or 24-h-long severe (30% PEG) osmotic stress by immersing their roots in PEG-supplemented Knop nutrient solution. Relative water content in the leaves and the levels of free proline, malondialdehyde, and hydrogen peroxide were chosen as indicative parameters corresponding to the degree of stress of the treated plants. Electrolyte leakage from leaf tissues of control and stressed plants was compared in terms of the common parameter Injury index used for characterizing cell membrane stability. In addition, a model test system was established for preliminary stress evaluation based on the kinetics of ion leakage. Short-term exposure to higher concentration of PEG was considered to be more harmful than prolonged mild stress as judged by RWC, proline and hydrogen peroxide accumulation, and injury index. The two cultivars demonstrated more obvious dissimilarities under conditions of prolonged mild stress than under severe stress.


electrolyte leakage hydrogen peroxide malondialdehyde osmotic stress polyethylene glycol proline wheat 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Alexieva, V., Sergiev, I., Mapelli, S., Karanov, E. 2001. The effect of drought and ultraviolet radiation on growth and stress markers in pea and wheat. Plant Cell Environ. 24:1337–1344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bandurska, H., Gniazdowska, S.H. 1995. Cell membrane stability in two barley genotypes under water stress conditions. Acta Soc. Bot. Poloniae 64:29–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bates, L.S., Walden, R.P., Teare, I.D. 1973. Rapid determination of free proline for water stress studies. Plant Soil 39:205–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cakmak, I., Horst, W.J. 1991. Effect of aluminium on lipid peroxidation, superoxide dismutase, catalase, peroxidase activities in root tips of soybean (Glycine max L.). Physiol. Plant. 83:463–468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chen, W., Li, P.H. 2002. Membrane stabilization by abscisic acid under cold aids proline in alleviating chilling injury in maize (Zea mays L.) cultured cells. Plant Cell Environ. 25:955–962.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Claussen, W. 2005. Proline as a measure of stress in tomato plants. Plant Sci. 168:241–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Czövek, P., Király, I., Páldi, E., Molnár, I., Gáspár, L. 2006. Comparative analysis of stress tolerance in Aegilops accessions and Triticum wheat varieties to detect different drought tolerance strategies. Acta Agronomica Hungarica 54:49–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Farooq, S., Azam F. 2006. The use of cell membrane stability (CMS) technique to screen for salt tolerant wheat varieties. J. Plant Physiol. 163:629–637.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fu, J., Huang, B. 2001. Involvement of antioxidants and lipid peroxidation in the adaptation of two cool-season grasses to localized drought stress. Env. Exp. Bot. 45:105–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hare, P.D., Cress, W.A. 1997. Metabolic implications of stress-induced proline accumulation in plants. Plant Growth Regul. 21:79–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hoekstra, F.A., Golovina, E.A. 1999. Membrane behavior during dehydration: implications for desiccation tolerance. Russ. J. Plant Physiol. 46:295–306.Google Scholar
  12. Hoffmann, B., Burucs, Z. 2005. Adaptation of wheat (Triticum aestivum L) genotypes and related species to water deficiency. Cereal Res. Comm. 33:681–687.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hoson, T. 1998. Apoplast as the site of response to environmental signals. J. Plant Res. 111:167–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Király, I., Czövek, P. 2002. Changes of MDA level and O2 scavenging enzyme activities in wheat varieties as a result of PEG treatment. Acta Biol. Szeged 46:105–106.Google Scholar
  15. Kocheva, K.V., Georgiev, G.I., Kochev, V.K. 2005. A diffusion approach to the electrolyte leakage from plant tissues. Physiol. Plant. 125:1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Konno, H., Yamasaki, Y., Sugimoto, M., Takeda, K. 2008. Differential changes in cell wall matrix polysaccharides and glycoside-hydrolyzing enzymes in developing wheat seedlings differing in drought tolerance. J. Plant Physiol. 165:745–754.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kuzniak, E., Urbanek, H. 2000. The involvement of hydrogen peroxide in plant responses to stresses. Acta Physiol. Plant. 22:195–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Landjeva, S., Korzun, V., Stoimenova, E., Truberg, B., Ganeva, G., Börner, A. 2008. The contribution of the gibberellin-insensitive semi-dwarfing (Rht) genes to genetic variation in wheat seedling growth in response to osmotic stress. J. Agric. Sci. 146:275–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Larher, F.R., Aziz, A., Gibon, Y., Trotel-Aziz, P., Sulpice, R., Bouchereau, A. 2003. An assessment of the physiological properties of the so-called compatible solutes using in vitro experiments with leaf discs. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 41:657–666.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Mexal, J., Fisher, J.T., Osteryoung, J., Patric Reid, C.P. 1975. Oxygen availability in PEG solutions and its implications in plant — water relations. Plant Physiol. 55:20–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Murry, M.B., Cape, J.N., Flower, D. 1989. Quantification of frost damage in plant tissues by rates of electrolyte leakage. New Phytol. 113:307–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Noctor, G., Foyer, C.H. 1998. Ascorbate and glutathione: keeping active oxygen under control. Ann. Rev. Plant Physiol. Plant Mol. Biol. 49:249–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Pastori, G.M., Trippi, V.S. 1993. Antioxidant protection in a drought-resistant maize strain during leaf senescence. Physiol. Plant. 87:227–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Piro, G., Leucci, M.R., Waldron, K., Dalessandro, G. 2003. Exposure to water stress causes changes in the biosynthesis of cell wall polysaccharides in roots of wheat cultivars varying in drought tolerance. Plant Science 165:559–569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Price, A.H., Hendry, G.A.F. 1991. Iron-catalysed oxygen radical formation and its possible contribution to drought damage in nine native grasses and three cereals. Plant Cell Environ. 14:477–484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Richards, R.A., Rebetzke, G.J., Condon, A.G., van Herwaarden, A.F. 2002. Breeding opportunities for increasing the efficiency of water use and crop yield in temperate cereals. Crop Sci. 42:111–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Sánchez-Urdaneta, A.B., Peña-Valdivia, C.B., Trejo, C., Aguirre, J.R., Cárdenas, E.S. 2005. Root growth and proline content in drought sensitive and tolerant maize (Zea mays L.) seedlings under different water potentials. Cereal Res. Comm. 33:697–704.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Serraj, R., Sinclair, T.R. 2002. Osmolyte accumulation: can it really help increase crop yield under drought conditions? Plant Cell Environ. 25:333–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Smirnoff, N. 1993. The role of active oxygen in response of plants to water deficit and desiccation. New Phytol. 125:27–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Smirnoff, N. 1998. Plant resistance to environmental stress. Curr. Opin. Biotech. 9:214–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Turner, N.C. 1981. Techniques and experimental approaches for the measurement of plant water status. Plant Soil 58:339–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Van Rensburg, L., Kruger, G.H.J., Kruger, R.H. 1993. Proline accumulation as drought tolerance selection criterion: its relantionship to membrane integrity and chloroplast ultra structure in Nicotiana tabacum L. J. Plant Physiol. 141:188–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Vendruscolo, E.C.G., Schuster, I., Pileggi, M., Scapim, C.A., Molinari, H.B.C., Marur, C.J., Vieira, L.G.E. 2007. Stress-induced synthesis of proline confers tolerance to water deficit in transgenic wheat. J. Plant Physiol. 164:1367–1376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • K. V. Kocheva
    • 1
    Email author
  • T. Kartseva
    • 2
  • S. Landjeva
    • 2
  • G. I. Georgiev
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Plant PhysiologyBulgarian Academy of SciencesSofiaBulgaria
  2. 2.Institute of GeneticsBulgarian Academy of SciencesSofiaBulgaria

Personalised recommendations