Physio-morphological and molecular analysis for salt tolerance in chickpea (Cicer arietinum)

NEERAJ KUMAR; C BHARADWAJ; ANJALI SONI; SUPRIYA SACHDEVA; M C YADAV; MADAN PAL; K R SOREN; M C MEENA; MANISH ROORKIWAL; RAJEEV KUMAR VARSHNEY; MANEET RANA

doi:10.56093/ijas.v90i4.102228

Authors

NEERAJ KUMAR ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110012, India
C BHARADWAJ ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110012, India
ANJALI SONI ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110012, India
SUPRIYA SACHDEVA ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110012, India
M C YADAV ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110012, India
MADAN PAL ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110012, India
K R SOREN ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110012, India
M C MEENA ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110012, India
MANISH ROORKIWAL ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110012, India
RAJEEV KUMAR VARSHNEY ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110012, India
MANEET RANA ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110012, India

https://doi.org/10.56093/ijas.v90i4.102228

Keywords:

Chickpea, Hydroponics, Salinity, Seedling Screening

Abstract

After drought salinity is the major abiotic stress that severely affects agricultural productivity globally. Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) is the important grain legume which suffers approximately 8-10% of total global yield loss due to salinity. Screening for salt stress is difficult and traits that correlate salinity tolerance are least understood. The present study was carried out at ICAR-IARI, New Delhi 2017-18, deals with the important morphological and physiological traits like RWC (Relative water content), EL (Electrolyte Leakage), Na/K (sodium and potassium ratio) to characterize the salt tolerant genotypes under hydroponic condition which is a quick and easy method to screen large number of chickpea genotypes at initial stage under salt stress condition. Genotypes showing high RWC, low EL and Na/K ratio were tolerant like ICCV 10, JG 11, JG 62 and CSG-8962 whereas genotypes like ICC4958 and Pusa362 fall under moderately tolerant genotypes and DCP 93-3, Pusa 256, Phule G5 and SBD 377 were classified as susceptible genotypes. This study also attempts to understand the candidate genes responsible for salt-stress related pathways in chickpea genotypes based on sequence similarity approach exploiting known salt-stress responsive genes from model crops or other crop species.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Allagulova C R, Gimalov F R, Shakirova F M and Vakhitov VA. 2003. The plant dehydrins: structure and putative functions. Biochemistry 68(9): 945–51. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026077825584

Arraouadi S, Badri M, Abdelly C, Huguet T and Aouani M E. 2012. QTL mapping of physiological traits associated with salt tolerance in Medicago truncatula recombinant inbred line. Genomics 99: 118–25. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygeno.2011.11.005

Barrs H D and Weatherley P E. 1962. A re-examination of the relative turgidity technique for estimating water deficits in leaves. Australian Journal of Biological Sciences 15(3): 413–28. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1071/BI9620413

Bhargava B S and Raghupathi H B. 1993. Analysis of plant materials for macro and micronutrients. Methods of Analysis of Soil, Plant, Water and Fertilizers, pp 49–82. Fertilizers Development and Consultation Organization, New Delhi, India.

Dure L, Crouch M, Harada J, Ho T HD, Mundy J, Quatrano R and Sung Z R. 1989. Common amino acid sequence domains among the LEA proteins of higher plants. Plant Molecular Biology 12(5): 475–86. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00036962

FAOSTAT database. Available at http://faostat3.fao.org/ faostatgateway/go/to/download/Q/QC/E (2017). Accessed 28 Jan 2019.

Flowers T J, Gaur P M, Gowda C L, Krishnamurthy L, Samineni S, Siddique K H, Turner N C, Vadez V, Varshney R K and Colmer T D. Salt sensitivity in chickpea. Plant Cell and Environment 33: 490–509. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3040.2009.02051.x

Jha U C, Chaturvedi S K, Bohra A, Basu P S, Khan M S and Barh D. 2104. Abiotic stresses, constraints and improvement strategies in chickpea. Plant breeding 133(2): 163–78. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/pbr.12150

Jamil M and Rha E S. 2004. The effect of salinity (NaCl) on the germination and seedling of sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) and cabbage (Brassica oleracea L.). Plant Resources 7(3): 226–32.

Kader M A and Lindberg S. 2005. Uptake of sodium in protoplasts of salt-sensitive and salt-tolerant cultivars of rice, Oryza sativa L. determined by the fluorescent dye SBFI. Journal of Experimental Botany 56(422): 3149–58 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/eri312

Kashiwagi J, Krishnamurthy L, Purushothaman R, Upadhyaya H D, Gaur P M, Gowda C L, Ito O and Varshney R K. 2015. Scope for improvement of yield under drought through the root traits in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). Field Crops Research 170: 47–54. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2014.10.003

Manish R and Sharma P C. 2012. Sequence similarity base identification of abiotic stress responsive genes in chickpea. Bioinformation 8(2): 092–7.

Murray M G and Thompson W F.1980. Rapid isolation of high molecular weight plant. DNA Nucleic Acids Research 8(19): 4321–6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/8.19.4321

Neumann P M. 1995. Inhibition of root growth by salinity stress: Toxicity or an adaptive biophysical response. Structure and Function of Roots, pp 299–304. Springer Dordrecht. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-3101-0_39

Park J M, Park C J, Lee S B, Ham B K, Shin R and Paek K H. 2001. Overexpression of the tobacco Tsi1 gene encoding an EREBP/AP2-type transcription factor enhances resistance against pathogen attack and osmotic stress in tobacco. Plant Cell 13(5): 1035–46. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1105/tpc.13.5.1035

Purcell P C, Smith A M and Halford N G. 1998. Antisense expression of a sucrose non-fermenting-1-related protein kinase sequence in potato results in decreased expression of sucrose synthase in tubers and loss of sucrose-inducibility of sucrose synthase transcripts in leaves. Plant Journal 14(2): 195–202. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-313X.1998.00108.x

Raes J, Rohde A, Christensen J H, Van de Peer Y and Boerjan W. 2003. Genome-wide characterization of the lignification toolbox in Arabidopsis. Plant Physiology 133(3): 1051–71. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.103.026484

Rains D W and Epstein E. 1967. Sodium absorption by barley roots: its mediation by mechanism 2 of alkali cation transport. Plant Physiology 42(3): 319–23. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.42.3.319

Rengasamy P. 2006. World salinization with emphasis on Australia. Journal of Experimental Botany 57: 1017–23. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erj108

Rudrabhatla P and Rajasekharan R. 2002. Developmentally regulated dual–specificity kinase from peanut that is induced by abiotic stresses. Plant Physiology 130(1): 380–90. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.005173

Samineni S, Siddique K H M, Gaur P M and Colmer T D. 2011. Salt sensitivity of the vegetative and reproductive stages in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) podding is a particularly sensitive stage. Environmental and Experimental Botany 71: 260–8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envexpbot.2010.12.014

Sivasankarmoorthy S. 2013. Effect of salinity on sodium, potassium and proline content of chickpea seedlings. International Research Journal of Pharmacy 4(7): 147–50. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7897/2230-8407.04732

Shukla R K, Raha S, Tripathi V and Chattopadhyay D. 2006. Expression of CAP2, an APETALA2-family transcription factor from chickpea, enhances growth and tolerance to dehydration and salt stress in transgenic tobacco. Plant Physiology 142(1): 113–23. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.106.081752

Tapan K, Bharadwaj C, Tara Satyavathi C and Jain P K. 2014. A high throughput, improved rapid and reliable genomic DNA extraction protocol from chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). Society of Plant Research 26(2): 185–90. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5958/j.2229-4473.26.2.073

Tester M and Davenport R. 2003. Na+ tolerance and Na+ transport in higher plants. Annals of Botany 91(5): 503–27 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcg058

Tyerman S D, Skerrett M, Garrill A, Findlay G P and Leigh R A. 1997. Pathways for the permeation of Na and Cl into protoplasts derived from the cortex of wheat roots. Journal of Experimental Botany 48: 459–80 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/48.Special_Issue.459

Warne T R, Hickok L G, Kinraide T B and Vogelien D L. 1996. High salinity tolerance in the stl2 mutation of Ceratopteris richardii is associated with enhanced K+ influx and loss. Plant Cell and Environment 19(1): 24–32. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3040.1996.tb00223.x

Werner J E and Finkelstein R R. 1995. Arabidopsis mutants with reduced response to NaCl and osmotic stress. Physiology Plant 93: 659–66. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1399-3054.1995.tb05114.x

Wood A J, Saneoka H, Rhodes D, Joly R J and Goldsbrough P B. 1996. Betaine aldehyde dehydrogenase in sorghum (molecular cloning and expression of two related genes). Plant Physiology 110(4): 1301–08. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.110.4.1301