Comparative Functioning of Photosynthetic Apparatus and Leaf Water Potential in Zygophyllum eurypterum (Boiss & Bushe) During Phenological Phases and Summer Drought

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسنده

Department of desert control and management

چکیده

Background: In arid regions, seasons are often marked by differences in rainfall, with life-history events, along with phenological stages. Materials and Methods: Three phenological phases were distinguished as vegetative phase (VP), flowering phase (FP) and seeding phase (SP). Chlorophyll fluorescence parameters (Chl. FPs) such as maximum quantum yield of PSII photochemistry (Fv/Fm), photochemical efficiency of photosystem II (ΦPSII), effective quantum yield (Fv'/Fm'), photochemical dissipation of absorbed energy (qP) and non-photochemical dissipation of the absorbed energy (NPQ) along with pigment contents and predawn leaf water potential (ΨL) were determined. Results:All Chl. FPs changed along drought stress gradient and phenological phases, with significant changes at SP. Discussion: A significant change in the mentioned parameters explains the happening of severe photoinhibition because of photo-inactivation of the PSII reaction centers, or expresses thermal dispersion from the antenna pigment-protein compound. A remarkable alteration in pigment content was noticed at the SP. Decrease in the chlorophyll content under drought stress can be due to a reduction in synthesis of pigment complexes encoded by the cab gene family or destruction of light harvesting chlorophyll ‘a’ or ‘b’ pigment protein systems. Conclusions: we can say that Z. eurypterumcan protects the PSII reaction center from damage at the middle stage of drought stress (end of July) and can be qualified as a drought tolerant species.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Comparative Functioning of Photosynthetic Apparatus and Leaf Water Potential in Zygophyllum eurypterum (Boiss & Bushe) During Phenological Phases and Summer Drought

نویسنده [English]

  • Abolfazl Ranjbar-Fordoei
Department of desert control and management
چکیده [English]

Background: In arid regions, seasons are often marked by differences in rainfall, with life-history events, along with phenological stages. Materials and Methods: Three phenological phases were distinguished as vegetative phase (VP), flowering phase (FP) and seeding phase (SP). Chlorophyll fluorescence parameters (Chl. FPs) such as maximum quantum yield of PSII photochemistry (Fv/Fm), photochemical efficiency of photosystem II (ΦPSII), effective quantum yield (Fv'/Fm'), photochemical dissipation of absorbed energy (qP) and non-photochemical dissipation of the absorbed energy (NPQ) along with pigment contents and predawn leaf water potential (ΨL) were determined. Results:All Chl. FPs changed along drought stress gradient and phenological phases, with significant changes at SP. Discussion: A significant change in the mentioned parameters explains the happening of severe photoinhibition because of photo-inactivation of the PSII reaction centers, or expresses thermal dispersion from the antenna pigment-protein compound. A remarkable alteration in pigment content was noticed at the SP. Decrease in the chlorophyll content under drought stress can be due to a reduction in synthesis of pigment complexes encoded by the cab gene family or destruction of light harvesting chlorophyll ‘a’ or ‘b’ pigment protein systems. Conclusions: we can say that Z. eurypterumcan protects the PSII reaction center from damage at the middle stage of drought stress (end of July) and can be qualified as a drought tolerant species.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • phenophase
  • Photoinhibition
  • photosystem
  • pigment
  • quenching
  • Water deficit

مراجع

  1. Alves F, Costa J, Costa P, Correia C, Gonçalves B, Soares R, Pereira JM. Grapevine water stress management in Douro Region: Long-term physiology, yield and quality studies in cv. Touriga Nacional. In: Group of International Experts of Vitivinicultural Systems for Co-Operation (ed.). Proc. 18th Int. Symp. GiESCO, Porto, Portugal. 2013.
  2. Burke JJ. Evaluation of source leaf responses to water deficit stresses in cotton using a novel stress bioassay. Plant Physiol. 2007; 143: 108–121.
  3. Colom MR, Vazzana C. Photosynthesis and PSII functionality of drought-resistant and drought-sentitive weeping love grass plants. Environ. Exp. Bot. 2003; 49(2): 135-144.
  4. Dias MC, Bruggemann W. Limitations of photosynthesis in Phaseolus vulgaris under drought stress: gas exchange, chlorophyll fluorescence and Calvin cycle enzymes. Photosynthetica 2010; 48(1): 96-102.
  5. David BM, Elizamar C da Silva, Rejane JMCN, Marcelo MT, Marcos SB. Physiological limitations in two sugarcane varieties under water suppression and after recovering. Theo. Exp. Plant Physiol. 2013; 25(3): 213-222.
  6. Din J, Khan SU, Ali I, Gurmani AR. Physiological and agronomic response of canola varieties to drought stress. J. Anim. Plant Sci. 2011; 21(1): 78-82.
  7. Efeoğlu B, Ekmekçi Y, Ciçek N. Physiological responses of three maize cultivars to drought stress and recovery. South Afr. J. Bot. 2009; 75:34–42.
  8. Elias, KM, Jane A, James G, Arnol MO, Willis OO. Carotenoid profiling of the leaves of selected African eggplant accessions subjected to drought stress. Food Sci. Nut. 2017; 5(1): 113-122.
  9. Esmaeili S, Hamzeloo-Moghadam M, Ghaffari S, Mosaddegh M. Cytotoxic activity screening of some medicinal plants from south of Iran. Res. J. Pharm. 2014; 1(4):19-25.
  10. Farooq M, Wahid A, Kobayashi N, Fujita D, Basra SMA. Plant drought stress: effects, mechanisms and management. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2009; 29(1): 185–212.
  11. Genty B, Briantais JM, Baker NR. Relationships between the quantum yield of photosynthetic electron transport and quenching of chlorophyll fluorescence. Biochim. Biophys. Acta, 1989; 990: 87-92.
  12. Gholami R, Khayatnezhad M. The effect of end season drought stress on the chlorophyll content, chlorophyll fluorescence parameters and yield in maize cultivars, Sci. Res. Essay, 2011; 6: 5351-5357.
  13. Hailemichael G, Catalina A, González MR, Martin P. Relationships between Water Status, Leaf Chlorophyll Content and Photosynthetic Performance in Tempranillo Vineyards. Sou. Afr. J. Enol. Vitic. 2016; 37(2): 149-156.
  14. Hussein MM, Safi-naz SZ. Influence of water stress on photosynthetic pigments of some Fenugreek Varieties. J. Appl. Sci. Res. 2013; 9(8): 5238-5245.
  15. José Francisco DG., Ricardo AM, Gil V. Concentration of photosynthetic pigments and chlorophyll fluorescence of mahogany and Tonka bean under two light environments. Rev. Bras. Fisiol. 2001; 13(2): 149-157.
  16. Kate M., Giles NJ. Chlorophyll fluorescence — a practical guide. J. Exp. Bot. 2000; 51 (345): 659-668.
  17. Kirk J, Allen R. Dependence of chloroplast pigment synthesis on protein synthesis: Effect of actidione. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Comm. 1965; 21(6): 523-530.
  18. Ladjal M, Epron D, Ducrey M. Effects of drought preconditioning on thermotolerance of photosystem II and susceptibility of photosynthesis to heat stress in cedar seedlings. Tree Physiol.2000; 20: 1235-1241.
  19. Li GL, Wu HX, Sun YQ, Zhang XY. Response of chlorophyll fluorescence parameters to drought stress in sugar beet seedling. Russ J. Plant Physiol. 2013; 60: 337-342.
  20. Liu M, Qi H, Zhang ZP, Song ZW, Kou TJ, Zhang WJ, YU JL. Response of photosynthesis and chlorophyll fluorescence to drought stress in two maize cultivars. Afr. J. Agri. Res.2012; 7(34): 4751-4760.
  21. Michael F. The phenology of growth and reproduction in plants. Perspectives in Plant Ecol., Evolution and Syst.1998; 1(1): 78-91.
  22. Mosallam AM. Hossein. Size Structure of Zygophyllum album and Cornulaca monacantha populations in Salhyia Area, East of Egypt. Inter. J. Agri. Biol. 2005; 7(3): 345-351.
  23. Neha GB, Vinay S, Nilima K. Drought-induced changes in chlorophyll fluorescence, photosynthetic pigments, and thylakoid membrane proteins of Vigna radiate. J. Plant Interact. 2014; 9(1): 712-721.
  24. Nikolaeva MK, Maevskaya SN, Shugaev AG, Bukhov NG. Effect of drought on chlorophyll content and antioxidant enzyme activities in leaves of three wheat cultivars varying in productivity. Russ J. Plant physiol. 2010; 57:87–95.
  25. Piper FI, Corcuera LJ, Alberdi M, Lusk C. Differential photosynthetic and survival responses to soil drought in two evergreen Nothofagus species. Ann. For. Sci. 2007; 64: 447–452.
  26. Ranjbarfordoei A, Samson R, Van Damme P. Chlorophyll fluorescence performance of sweet almond (Prunus dulcis (Miller) in response to salinity stress induced by NaCl. Photosynthetica 2006; 44 (4): 513-522.
  27. Ranjbar A. Variation characteristics of chlorophyll fluorescence of a typical Eremophyte (Smirnovia Iranica (Sabeti)) during phenological stages, in the sand drift desert (Case study: In Kashan Region). Desert J. 2015; 21(1): 35-41.
  28. Reynolds MP, Kazi AM, Sawkins M. Prospects for utilizing plant adaptive mechanisms to improve wheat and other crops in drought and salinity prone environments. Ann. Appl. Bio. 2005; 146: 239-259.
  29. Velikova V, Tesonev T, Yordanov I. Light and CO2 responses of photosynthesis and chlorophyll fluorescence characteristics in bean plants after simulated acid rain. Plant Physiol.1999; 107: 77-83.
  30. Yuhai Y, Yaning C, Weihong L, Chenggang Z. Effects of progressive soil water deficit on growth, and physiological and biochemical responses of Populus euphratica in arid area: a case study in China. Pakistan J. Bot. 2015; 47(6): 2077-2084.
  31. Zhang Y, Xie Z, Wang Y, Su P, An L, Gao H. Effects of water stress on leaf photosynthesis, chlorophyll content and growth of oriental lily. Russ. J. Plant Physiol. 20115; 8(5): 844–850.
  32. Zlatev ZS, Yordanov IT. Effects of soil drought on photosynthesis and chlorophyll fluorescence in bean plants. Bulg. J. Plant Physiol. 2004; 30(3-4): 3-18.

 

مهندسی اکوسیستم بیابان
دوره 7، شماره 1 انگلیسی
شهریور 1397
صفحه 60-53

فایل ها

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار