Combined effect of boron and salt on polypeptide resolutions in wheat (Triticum aestivum) varieties differing in their tolerance

ASHWANI KUMAR; S K SHARMA; CHARU LATA; SHITAL SHEOKAND; NEERAJ KULSHRESHTA

doi:10.56093/ijas.v85i12.54331

Authors

ASHWANI KUMAR Scientist, Central Soil Salinity Research Institute, Karnal, Haryana 1321 001
S K SHARMA Principal Scientist and Head, Central Soil Salinity Research Institute, Karnal, Haryana 1321 001
CHARU LATA Senior Research Fellow, Central Soil Salinity Research Institute, Karnal, Haryana 1321 001
SHITAL SHEOKAND Ph D Scholar, Department of Botany and Plant Physiology, CCS HAU, Hisar, Haryana 125 004
NEERAJ KULSHRESHTA Principal Scientist, Central Soil Salinity Research Institute, Karnal, Haryana 1321 001

https://doi.org/10.56093/ijas.v85i12.54331

Keywords:

Boron, Intolerant variety, Polypeptides, Protein profile, Salinity, Tolerant variety

Abstract

Salinity aggravates toxicity symptoms of boron in wheat. Four wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) varieties differing in tolerance to these stresses were subjected to five stress treatments [control (2.5 ppm B), 50 ppm B + 6 dS/m, 100 ppm B + 6 dS/m, 50 ppm B + 10 dS/m and 100 ppm B + 10 dS/m]. Higher reductions for root length, fresh and dry weight were observed in Schomburgk and HD 2009 varieties at 100 ppm B + 10 dS/m NaCl in comparison to KRL 35 and BTSchomburgk. Results indicated that combined boron and salt stresses significantly increased soluble B and proline concentrations in the roots. At the highest level of stress (100 ppm B + 10 dS/m), maximum proline accumulation was evident in HD 2009 (18.6 mg/g) and minimum in KRL 35 (13.5 mg/g). Protein profile expressions of boron tolerant and intolerant varieties of wheat showed de novo synthesis of two specific polypeptides (35.73 and 31.10 KDa) in boron tolerant variety and one (16.98 kDa) in boron intolerant variety. Likewise, KRL 35 (salt tolerant) showed 4 specific polypeptides of 89.13, 58.4, 46.21 and 31.10 kDa, whereas three specific polypeptides (24.05, 19.13 and 17.52 kDa) appeared in the salt intolerant variety (HD 2009). Appearance of 5 common polypeptides bands of MW 89.13, 53.4, 46.21. 31.10 and 25.12 kDa in both the tolerant varieties, i.e. BT-Schomburgk (boron tolerant) and KRL 35 (salt tolerant) is of special interest and could have possible use as markers for tolerance. The synthesis of common polypeptide of MW 25.12 kDa was observed in all the four varieties with increase in stress treatments.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Alpaslan M and Gunes A. 2001. Interactive effects of born and salinity stress on the growth, membrane permeability and mineral composition of tomato and cucumber plants. Plant Soil 236: 123–8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011931831273

Amzallag G N and Lerner R. 1994. Physiological adaptation of plants to environmental stress. (In) Handbook of Plant and Crop Physiology, pp 557–76. Pessarakli M (Ed). Marcel Dekker, New York.

Ashraf M Y, Azmi A R, Khan A H and Ala S A. 1994. Effect of water stress on total phenol, peroxidase activity and chlorophyll contents in 1994 wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Acta Physiol Plant 16: 185–91.

Bates L S, Waldren R P and Teare I D. 1993. Rapid determination of free proline for water stress studies. Plant Soil 39: 205–7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00018060

Bhagwat A A and Apte S K. 1989. Comparative analysis of proteins induced by heat shock, salinity, and osmotic stress in the nitrogen-fixing cyanobacterium Anabaena sp. strain L- 31. Journal of Bacteriology 171: 5 187–9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1128/jb.171.9.5187-5189.1989

Bishnoi S K, Kumar B, Rani C, Datta K S, Kumari P, Sheoran I S, and Angrish R. 2006. Changes in protein profile of pigeonpea varieties in response to NaCl and boron stress. Biol Plant. 50: 135–7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10535-005-0088-4

Blinda A, Koch B, Ramanjulu S, and Dietz K J. 1997. De novo synthesis and accumulation of apoplastic proteins in leaves of heavy metal-exposed barley seedlings. Plant Cell and Environment 20: 969–81. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3040.1997.tb00674.x

Bohnert H J, Nelson D E and Jensen R G. 1995 Adaptations to environmental stresses. Plant Cell 7: 1 099–1 111. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/3870060

Camacho-Cristobal J J, Rexach J and Gonzalez-Fontes A. 2008. Boron in plants: deficiency and toxicity. Journal of Integrated Plant Biology 50: 1 247–55. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-7909.2008.00742.x

Chandershekhar V, Kar M and Chavan P D. 1986. Influence of salt stress on biochemical processes in chickpea. Plant Soil 96: 439–43. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02375150

Chinnusamy V, Jagendorf A and Zhu J K. 2005. Understanding and improving salt tolerance in plants. Crop Science 45: 437– 48. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2005.0437

Elobeidy A A, Fayek M A and Mohmoud R A. 2001. Quantifying salt tolerance responses of some banana genotypes in vitro. 1st International Conference on Biotechnology Applications for the Arid Regions. Shayji Y A, Siolhu J S, Saleem M and Guerinik K (Eds). State of Kuwait-Kuwait.135–65.

Grattan S R, Shannon M C, Grieve C M, Poss J A, Suares D and Leland F. 1997. Interaction effects of salinity and boron on the performance and water use Eucalyptus. Acta Horticulturae. 449: 607–13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17660/ActaHortic.1997.449.84

Hassan M. 2007. ‘The transcriptional response of barley to boron toxicity.’ Ph D thesis, University of Adelaide.

Hu H and Brown P H. 1997. Absorption of boron by plant roots. (In) Boron in Plants and Soils, pp 49–58. Dell B, Brown P H and Bell R W. (Eds). Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-5580-9_4

Ismail A M. 2003. Response of maize and sorghum to excess boron and salinity. Biol Plant 47(2): 313–6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:BIOP.0000022274.72111.12

Kanjaria M V and Patel M S. 1985. 14th Seminar, Vol 1. Gujarat Association of Agriculture Science, Vadodara, pp 284–305.

Laemmli U K. 1970. Cleavage of structural proteins during the assembly of the head of the bacteriophage Ty. Nature 277: 680–5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/227680a0

Lal R K and Bhardwaj S N. 1987. Yield-mineral uptake relation in field pea under saline environment. Ann Agr Res. 8: 110–6.

Maggio A, Miyazaki S, Veronese P, Fujita T and Ibeas J I. Does proline accumulation play an active role in stress induced growth reduction? Plant Journal 31: 699–712. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-313X.2002.01389.x

Minhas P S and Samra J S. 2003. Quality Assessment of Water Resources in the Indo-Gangetic Basin Part in India. Central Soil Salinity Research Institute, Karnal, India, 68 p.

Misra N and Gupta A K. 2005. Effect of salt stress on proline metabolism in two high yielding genotypes of green gram. Plant Science 169: 331–9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plantsci.2005.02.013

Nable R O, Banuelos G S and Paull J G. 1997. Boron toxicity. Plant and Soil 193: 181–98. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1004272227886

Nable R O, Lance R C M and Cartwright B. 1990. Uptake of boron and silicon by barley varieties with differing susceptibilities to boron toxicity. Ann Bot. 66: 83–90. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.aob.a088003

Pareek A, Singla S L and Grover A. 1997. Salt responsive proteins/ genes in crop plants. (In) Strategies for improving salt tolerance in higher plants, pp 365–91. Jaiwal P K, Singh R P and Gulati A editors. Oxford and IBH Publication Co., New Delhi.

Paull J G, Nable R O, Lake A W H, Materne M A and Rathjen A J. 1992. Response of annual medics (Medicago spp.) and field peas (Pisum sativum) to high concentration of boron: genetic variation and the mechanism of tolerance. and Australian Journal of Agricultural Research. 43: 203–13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1071/AR9920203

Qasim M, Ashraf M, Amir Jamil M, Ashraf M Y, and Shafiq-ur- Rehman E S R. 2003. Water relations and leaf gas exchange properties in some elite canola (Brassica napus) lines under salt stress. Ann Appl Biol. 2003; 142: 307–16. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-7348.2003.tb00255.x

Rani C, Bishnoi S K, Kumar B, Sheoran I S, Angrish R and Datta K S. 2007. Changes in protein profile under sodium chloride and boron toxicity stress in seedlings of two wheat cultivars. Indian Journal of Plant Physiology 12(1): 13–7.

Sairam R K, Veerabhadra R K and Srivastava G C. 2002. Differential responses of wheat genotypes to long term salinity stress in relation to oxidative stress, antioxidant activity and osmolyte concentration. Plant Science 163: 1 037–47. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-9452(02)00278-9

Schuman G E. 1969. Boron tolerance in tall wheat grass. Agron Journal 61: 445–7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj1969.00021962006100030034x

Singh N K, Bracken C A, Hasegawa P M, Handa A K, Buckel S, Hermodson M A, Pfankoch F, Regnier F E and Bressan R A. Characterization of osmotin: a thaumatin-like protein associated with osmotic adjustment in plant cells. Plant Physiology 85: 529–36. Singh N K, Handa A K, Hasegawa P M and Bressan R A. 1985. Protein associated with adaptation of cultured tobacco cells to NaCl. Plant Physiology. 79: 126–37. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.85.2.529

Storey R and Wyn Jones, R G. 1975. Betaine and choline levels in plants and their relationship to NaCl stress. Plant Science Letters 4: 161–8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4211(75)90090-5

Viegas R A and Silviera J A G. 1999. Ammonia assimilation and proline accumulation in young cashew plants during long term exposure to NaCl salinity. Brazilian Journal of Plant Physiology 1999; 11: 153–9.

Wimmer M A, Muhling K H, Lauchli A, Brown P H and Goldbach HE. 2003. The interaction between salinity and B toxicity affects the sub-cellular distribution of ions and proteins in wheat leaves. Plant Cell Environment 26: 1 1267–74. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0016-8025.2003.01051.x

Yokoi S, Bressan R A and Hasegawa P M. 2002. Salt stress tolerance of plants. JIRCAS Working Report, pp 25–33.