Advertisement

Cereal Research Communications

, Volume 38, Issue 3, pp 327–334 | Cite as

Simulation of osmotic stress during the early stages of triticale development as a promising laboratory test for screening drought resistance

  • T. HuraEmail author
  • K. Hura
  • S. Grzesiak
  • Z. Banaszak
Open Access
Physiology

Abstract

PEG-6000 induced osmotic stress caused differences in the relative water content (RWC), in the leaves of tested varieties of winter triticale. The highest values of RWC were observed for the Hortenso, Kazo and Gniewko varieties. The observed, low values of osmotic potential, allow one to conclude, that these varieties have adapted to stress conditions by maintaining the osmoregulation. Since osmotic tolerance is part of drought tolerance, the ability to maintain the osmotic regulation can be an important factor in the selection of varieties/genotypes resistant to the water deficit in the soil. The effectiveness of the photosynthetic apparatus was observed for above-mentioned varieties, with high values of RWC. The response test to the osmotic stress induced by the PEG solution, carried out under laboratory conditions, justified the decision to include Timbo in the group of drought resistant plants and as a standard physiological response to drought.

Keywords

triticale drought photosynthetic apparatus RWC osmotic potential 

References

  1. Baker, N.R., Rosenqvist, E. 2004. Applications of chlorophyll fluorescence can improve crop production strategies: an examination of future possibilities. J. Exp. Bot. 55: 1607–1621.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Balla, K., Bedő, Z., Veisz, O. 2006. Effect of heat and drought stress on the photosynthetic processes of wheat. Cereal Res. Commun. 34: 381–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cornic, G., Briantais, J.M. 1991. Partitioning of photosynthetic electron flow between CO2 and O2 reduction in a C3 leaf (Phaceolus vulgaris L.) at different CO2 concentrations and during drought stress. Planta 183: 178–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cornic, G., Fresneau, Ch. 2002. Photosynthetic carbon reduction and carbon oxidation cycles are the main electron sinks for photosystem II activity during a mild drought. Ann. Bot. 89: 887–894.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 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 Agr. Hung. 54: 49–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Flexas, J., Escalona, J.M., Medrano, H. 1998. Down-regulation of photosynthesis by drought under field conditions in grapevine leaves. Aust. J. Plant Physiol. 25: 893–900.Google Scholar
  7. Havaux, M. 1992. Stress tolerance of photosystem II in vivo. Plant Physiol. 100: 424–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hoffmann, B., Burucs, Z. 2005. Adaptation of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) genotypes and related species to water deficiency. Cereal Res. Commun. 33: 681–687.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hura, T., Grzesiak, S., Hura, K., Thiemt, E., Tokarz, K., Wedzony, M. 2007. Physiological and biochemical tools useful in drought-tolerance detection in genotypes of winter triticale: Accumulation of ferulic acid correlates with drought tolerance. Ann. Bot. 100: 767–775.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Maxwell, K., Johnson, G.N. 2000. Chlorophyll fluorescence — A practical guide. J. Exp. Bot. 51: 659–668.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Nayyar, H. 2003. Accumulation of osmolytes and osmotic adjustment in water stressed wheat (Triticum aestivum) and maize (Zea mays) as affected by calcium and its antagonists. Environ. Exp. Bot. 50: 253–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Noctor, G., Veljovic-Jovanovic, S., Driscoll, S., Novitskaya, L., Foyer, C.H. 2002. Drought and oxidative load in the leaves of C3 plants: A predominant role for photorespiration? Ann. Bot. 89: 841–850.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ort, D.R., Baker, N.R. 2002. A photoprotective role for O2 as an alternative electron sink in photosynthesis? Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 5: 193–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Pinheiro, C., Chaves, M.M., Ricardo C.P.P. 2001. Alterations in carbon and nitrogen metabolism induced by water deficit in the stem and leaves of Lupinus albus L. J. Exp. Bot. 52: 1063–1070.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Shangguan, Z., Shao, M., Dyckmans, J. 1999. Interaction of osmotic adjustment and photosynthesis in winter wheat under soil drought. J. Plant Physiol. 154: 753–758.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Verslues, P.E., Bray, E.A. 2004. LWR1 and LWR2 are required for osmoregulation and osmotic adjustment in Arabidopsis. Plant Physiol. 136: 2831–2842.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Weng, J.H. 1993. Photosynthesis of different ecotypes of Miscantus spp. as affected by water stress. Photosynthetica 29: 43–48.Google Scholar
  18. Yagmur, M., Kaydan, D. 2008. Alleviation of osmotic stress of water and salt in germination and seedling growth of triticale with seed priming treatments. Afr. J. Biotechnol. 7: 2156–2162.Google Scholar
  19. Yordanov, I., Velikova, V., Tsonev, T. 2000. Plant responses to drought, acclimation, and stress tolerance. Photosynthetica 38: 171–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest 2010

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The Franciszek Górski Institute of Plant PhysiologyPolish Academy of SciencesKrakówPoland
  2. 2.Department of Plant Physiology, Faculty of Agriculture and EconomicsAgricultural UniversityKrakówPoland
  3. 3.Danko Plant Breeders Ltd.KościanPoland

Personalised recommendations