Differential response of antioxidant enzymes to water deficit stress in maize (Zea mays) hybrids during two leaf stage

N DWIVEDI; K SINGH; P C NAUTIYAL; S GOEL; K G ROSIN

doi:10.56093/ijas.v86i6.58836

Authors

N DWIVEDI Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012
K SINGH Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012
P C NAUTIYAL Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012
S GOEL Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012
K G ROSIN Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012

https://doi.org/10.56093/ijas.v86i6.58836

Keywords:

Antioxidant defence system, Climate resilient crop, Crop improvement, Drought tolerance

Abstract

Experiment was conducted to analyse maize (Zea mays L.) hybrids for antioxidant enzymes and non-enzyme compound at two leaf stages, under normal irrigation (IRR) and water deficit stress (WDS) condition. WDS was induced by withholding irrigation water for three days in seven-day old seedlings grown in pots. The hybrids exhibited wide variability in their antioxidant pools combined with activities of enzymes involved in defence against oxidative stress. The results showed that antioxidant activity was higher in tolerant hybrids than the susceptible hybrids. Superoxide dismutase activity was higher in susceptible hybrids under IRR, whereas it decreased significantly under WDS. On the other hand, peroxidase activity was increased almost two folds in all the tolerant hybrids. Under WDS, glutathione reductase activity increased in all the hybrids except VIVEKHYD-9, whereas the increase was highest, i.e.37.4% in tolerant than the susceptible hybrids. Catalase activity increased 56% in tolerant hybrid, whereas a decrease of about 30% was recorded in susceptible under WDS. Also, ascorbate peroxidase activity increased in tolerant hybrids and decreased in susceptible hybrids under WDS. In response to WDS, glutathione content (GSH) decreased 11% in tolerant while increased 55% in susceptible hybrids. Increase in GSH content was highest (100%) in HQPM-7 followed by NK-6240 (56%). In general, ascorbic acid content increased under WDS in both tolerant and susceptible hybrids, however the increase was higher in tolerant (80%) than susceptible (45%). Among the hybrids, highest increase was recorded in PRAKASH (99%) and lowest in VIVEKHYD-9 (29%), thus PRAKASH seems to be drought tolerant while VIVEKHYD-9 is drought susceptible. Thus status of antioxidant enzymes in maize hybrids could be evaluated with the drought tolerance during different stages of development and growth and could be used in developing climate resilient maize hybrids.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Abrokwah O A. 2015. Screening of maize (Zea Mays L.) inbred lines for tolerance to drought. Diss.

Bartwal A, Mall R, Lohani P, Guru S K and Arora S. 2013. Role of secondary metabolites and brassinosteroids in plant defense against environmental stresses. Journal of Plant Growth Regulation 32: 216–32. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00344-012-9272-x

Blum A. 2005. Drought resistance, water-use efficiency, and yield potential: Are they compatible, dissonant, or mutually exclusive? Australian journal Agricultural Research 56: 1 159–68. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1071/AR05069

Chance B and Macehly A C. 1955. Assay of catalase and peroxidase. Methods in Enzymology 2: 764–5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0076-6879(55)02300-8

Chugh V, Kaur N and Gupta A K. 2011. Evaluation of oxidative stress tolerance in maize (Zea mays L.) seedlings in response to drought. Indian Journal of Biochemistry and Biophysics 48: 47–53.

Dalal M and Khanna-Chopra R. 2001. Differential response of antioxidant enzymes in leaves of necrotic wheat hybrids and their parents. Physiologia Plantarum 111: 297–304. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1399-3054.2001.1110306.x

Esterbauer H and Grill D. 1978. Seasonal variation of glutathione and glutathione reductase in needles of Picea abies. Plant Physiology 61: 119–21. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.61.1.119

Farooq M, Wahid A, Kobayashi N, Fujita D and Basra S M A. 2009. Plant drought stress: effects, mechanisms and management. Agronomy for Sustainable Development 29: 185–212. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1051/agro:2008021

Gill S S and Tuteja N. 2010. Reactive oxygen species and antioxidant machinery in abiotic stress tolerance in crop plants. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry 48: 909–30. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plaphy.2010.08.016

Godfray H C J and Garnett T. 2014. Food security and sustainable intensification. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 369: 2 012–273. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2012.0273

Heath R L and Packer L. 1968. Photoperoxidation in isolated chloroplasts: I. Kinetics and stoichiometry of fatty acid peroxidation. Archives of Biochemistry and Biophysics 125: 189–98. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-9861(68)90654-1

Hirayama T and Shinozaki K. 2010. Research on plant abiotic stress responses in the post genome era: past, present and future. Plant Journal 61: 1 041–52. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-313X.2010.04124.x

Law M Y, Charles S A and Halliwell B. 1983. Glutathione and ascorbic acid in spinach (Spinacia oleracea) choloroplasts. Biochemistry Journal 210: 899–903. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1042/bj2100899

Licausi F. 2013. Molecular elements of low oxygen signaling in plants. Physiologia Plantarum 148: 1–8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ppl.12011

Lim S, Kim Y H, Kim S H, Kwon S Y, Lee H S, Kim J S, Cho K Y, Paek K Y and Kwak S S. 2007. Ehanced tolerance of transgenic sweetpotato plants that express both CuZnSOD and APX in chloroplasts to methyl viologen-mediated oxidative stress and chilling. Molecular Breeding 19: 227–39. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11032-006-9051-0

Lowry O H, Rosebrough N J, Farr A L and Randall R J. 1951. Protein measurement with the Folin phenol reagent. The Journal of biological Biological chemistry Chemistry DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0021-9258(19)52451-6

: 265–75.

Marklund S and Marklund G. 1974. Involvement of the superoxide anion radical in the autoxidation of pyrogallol and a convenient assay for superoxide dismutase. Europian Journal of Biochemistry 47: 469–74. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1432-1033.1974.tb03714.x

Moussa H R and Abdel-Aziz S M. 2008. Comparative response of drought tolerant and drought sensitive maize genotypes to water stress. Australian Journal of Crop Science 1: 31–6.

Nakano Y and Asada K. 1981. Hydrogen peroxide is scavenged by ascorbate-specific peroxidase in spinach chloroplasts. Plant and Cell Physiology 22: 867–80.

Nautiyal P C, Rachaputi N S and Joshi Y C. 2002. Moisture deficit induced changes in leaf water content, leaf carbon exchange rate and biomass production in groundnut cultivars differing in specific leaf area. Field Crops Research 74: 67–79. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-4290(01)00199-X

Nehnevajova E, Lyubenova L, Herzig R, Schroder P, Schwitzguebel J P and Schulling T. 2012. Metal accumulation and response of antioxidant enzymes in seedlings and adult sunflower mutants with improved metal removal traits on a metalcontaminated soil. Environmental and Experimental Botany 76: 39–48. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envexpbot.2011.10.005

Sairam R K, Srivastava G C and Saxena D C. 2000. Increased antioxidant activity under elevated temperature: a mechanism of heat stress tolerance in wheat genotypes. Biologia Plantarum 43: 245–51. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1002756311146

Shannon L M, Kay E and Lew L Y. 1966. Peroxidases Isozymes from Horseraddish roots I Isolation and Physical properties. Journal of Biology Chemistry 241: 2 166–71. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0021-9258(18)96680-9

Sinha A K. 1972. Colorimetric assay of catalase. Analytical Biochemistry 47: 389–94. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-2697(72)90132-7

Smith P K, Krohn R I, Hermanson G T, Mallia A K, Gartner F H, Provenzano M D, Fujimoto E K, Goeke N M, Olson B J and Klenk D C. 1985. Measurement of protein using bicinchoninic acid. Anaytical Biochemistry 150: 76–85. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-2697(85)90442-7

Sreenivasulu N, Sopory S K and Kavi Kishor P B. 2007. Deciphering the regulatory mechanisms of abiotic stress tolerance in plants by genomic approaches. Gene 388: 1–13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gene.2006.10.009

Wang Y J, Wisiniewski M, Meilan R, Cui M, Webb R and Fuchigami L. 2005. Overexpression of cytosolic Ascorbate peroxidase in tomato confer tolerance to chilling and salt stress. Journal of the american American Society of Horticultural Sciences 130: 167–73. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21273/JASHS.130.2.167