Comparative leaf, root morpho-anatomical phenes in sugarcane wild germplasm and commercial genotypes conferring drought and salinity stress tolerance
Abstract views: 147
/ 
PDF downloads: 152
Authors
-
P.Vinoth
Division of Crop Improvement, ICAR-Sugarcane Breeding Institute, Coimbatore- 641007
-
G. Ariharasutharsan
-
A. Malarvizhi
-
P. Senthilrajan
-
C. Appunu
-
V.Vinu
-
H.K.MAHADEVA Swamy
-
Valarmathi R
Division of Crop Improvement, ICAR-Sugarcane Breeding Institute, Coimbatore- 641007
Keywords:
Erianthus, Salinity, Drought, Root penetration ability, AnatomyAbstract
The morpho-anatomical phenes which plays an important role in imparting stress tolerance are less explored for their stress adaptability in sugarcane. The present study was carried out to identify the leaf and root anatomical modifications conferring drought and salinity tolerance in sugarcane germplasm compared to commercial genotypes at early stages of stress development. In the study the commercial hybrids (Co 99004 and Co 86032) showed early physiological stress symptoms with few anatomical modifications viz., cell wall lignification around the metaxylem and reduction in metaxylem diameter elements under both drought and salinity stress. Both the Erianthus clones (SES 347 and SES181) showed several anatomical modifications viz., significantly lignified cells around leaf and root vascular tissues, pericycle, narrowed root metaxylem diameter under drought and salinity stress condition. Erianthus clones showed higher root penetration ability under drought stress with significant anatomical variations viz., smaller cortical cell file, multilayered epidermis and lignified sclerenchymatous hypodermis, lignified endodermis, reduced stele diameter, lignified cells around metaxylem and narrowed metaxylem contributing to root mechanical strength. The study shows that both Erianthus and commercial genotypes could sense the early stage of stress development. At early stages of drought and salinity stress the commercial genotypes were able to survive with few anatomical modifications, while Erianthus clones showed several anatomical modifications to combat the extreme environment. The anatomical traits observed in germplasm clones under salinity and drought stress can be further explored in order to utilize them for developing extreme abiotic stress tolerant sugarcane genotypes.
References
Apel K, Hirt H. 2004. Reactive oxygen species: metabolism, oxidative stress, and signal transduction. Annu Rev Plant Biol. 55:373- 399.
Awasthi O, Pathak R. 1999. Effect of salinity levels on survival and anatomy of four scion cultivars budded on Indian jujube. Hort J. 12(2):53-59.
Baloch, Gates, Baloch. 1998. Anatomical changes brought about by salinity in stem, leaf and root of Arabidopsis thaliana (L.) Heynh (thale cress). Sarhad Journal of Agriculture (Pakistan).
Bates LS, Waldren Ra, Teare I. 1973. Rapid determination of free proline for water-stress studies. Plant and soil. 39:205-207.
Baum SF, Tran PN, Silk WK. 2000. Effects of salinity on xylem structure and water use in growing leaves of sorghum. The New Phytologist. 146(1):119-127.
Bosabalidis AM, Kofidis G. 2002. Comparative effects of drought stress on leaf anatomy of two olive cultivars. Plant science. 163(2):375- 379.
Cai G, Ahmed MA, Dippold MA, Zarebanadkouki M, Carminati A. 2020. Linear relation between leaf xylem water potential and transpiration in pearl millet during soil drying. Plant and Soil. 447:565-578.
Cha-um S, Chuencharoen S, Mongkolsiriwatana C, Ashraf M, Kirdmanee C. 2012. Screening sugarcane (Saccharum sp.) genotypes for salt tolerance using multivariate cluster analysis. Plant Cell, Tissue and Organ Culture (PCTOC). 110:23-33.
Chen TH, Murata N. 2002. Enhancement of tolerance of abiotic stress by metabolic engineering of betaines and other compatible solutes. Current opinion in plant biology.5(3):250-257.
Chimungu J, Loades K, Lynch J. 2015. Root anatomical phenes predict root penetration ability and biomechanical properties in maize (Zea mays). Journal of Experimental Botany. 66(11):3151-3162.
Chmielewska K, Rodziewicz P, Swarcewicz B, Sawikowska A, Krajewski P, Marczak Ł, Ciesiołka D, Kuczyńska A, Mikołajczak K, Ogrodowicz P. 2016. Analysis of drought- induced proteomic and metabolomic changes in barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) leaves and roots unravels some aspects of biochemical mechanisms involved in drought tolerance. Frontiers in plant science. 7:1108.
Darko E, Ambrus H, Fodor J, Kiraly Z, Barnabas B. 2009. Enhanced tolerance to oxidative stress with elevated antioxidant capacity in doubled haploid maize derived from microspores exposed to paraquat. Crop science. 49(2):628- 636.
Davenport RJ, MUÑOZ‐MAYOR A, Jha D, Essah PA, Rus A, Tester M. 2007. The Na+ transporter AtHKT1; 1 controls retrieval of Na+ from the xylem in Arabidopsis. Plant, cell & environment. 30(4):497-507.
Fan M, Zhu J, Richards C, Brown KM, Lynch JP. 2003. Physiological roles for aerenchyma in phosphorus-stressed roots. Functional Plant Biology. 30(5):493-506.
Friedrich T. 2015. A new paradigm for feeding the world in 2050 the sustainable intensification of crop production. Resource Magazine. 22(2):18-18.
Gill SS, Tuteja N. 2010. Reactive oxygen species and antioxidant machinery in abiotic stress tolerance in crop plants. Plant physiology and biochemistry. 48(12):909-930.
Gleason SM, Butler DW, Ziemińska K, Waryszak P, Westoby M. 2012. Stem xylem conductivity is key to plant water balance across Australian angiosperm species. Functional Ecology. 26(2):343-352.
Gomathi R, Krishnapriya V, Arunkumar R, Govindaraj P, Ram B. 2020. Physiological traits imparting drought stress tolerance to promising sugarcane (Saccharum spp.) clones. Plant Physiology Reports. 25:509-515.
Guha A, Chhajed SS, Choudhary S, Sunny R, Jansen S, Barua D. 2018. Hydraulic anatomy affects genotypic variation in plant water use and shows differential organ specific plasticity to drought in Sorghum bicolor. Environmental and Experimental Botany. 156:25-37.
Hacke UG, Sperry JS. 2001. Functional and ecological xylem anatomy. Perspectives in plant ecology, evolution and systematics. 4(2):97-115.
Hayat S, Hayat Q, Alyemeni MN, Wani AS, Pichtel J, Ahmad A. 2012. Role of proline under changing environments: a review. Plant signaling & behavior. 7(11):1456-1466.
Heath RL, Packer L. 1968. Photoperoxidation in isolated chloroplasts: I. Kinetics and stoichiometry of fatty acid peroxidation. Archives of biochemistry and biophysics. 125(1):189-198.
Hemaprabha G, Swapna S, Lavanya DL, Sajitha B, Venkataramana S. 2013. Evaluation of drought tolerance potential of elite genotypes and progenies of sugarcane (Saccharum sp. hybrids). Sugar Tech. 15:9-16.
Hiscox J, Israelstam G. 1979. A method for the extraction of chlorophyll from leaf tissue without maceration. Canadian journal of botany. 57(12):1332-1334.
Holste EK, Megan JJ, Steven LM. 2006. Long‐term acclimatization of hydraulic properties, xylem conduit size, wall strength and cavitation resistance in Phaseolus vulgaris in response to different environmental effects. Plant, Cell & Environment. 29(5):836-843.
Hong Y, Zhang H, Huang L, Li D, Song F. 2016. Overexpression of a stress-responsive NAC transcription factor gene ONAC022 improves drought and salt tolerance in rice. Frontiers in plant science. 7:4.
Mittler R. 2002. Oxidative stress, antioxidants and stress tolerance. Trends in plant science.
Kadam NN, Yin X, Bindraban PS, Struik PC, Jagadish KS. 2015. Does morphological and anatomical plasticity during the vegetative stage make wheat more tolerant of water deficit stress than rice? Plant physiology. 167(4):1389-1401.
Karahara I, Ikeda A, Kondo T, Uetake Y. 2004. Development of the Casparian strip in primary roots of maize under salt stress. Planta. 219:41- 47.
Kishor K, B P, Sreenivasulu N. 2014. Is proline accumulation per se correlated with stress tolerance or is proline homeostasis a more critical issue? Plant, cell & environment. 37(2):300-311.
Kumari A, Das P, Parida AK, Agarwal PK. 2015. Proteomics, metabolomics, and ionomics perspectives of salinity tolerance in halophytes. Frontiers in Plant Science. 6:537.
Liang X, Zhang L, Natarajan SK, Becker DF. 2013. Proline mechanisms of stress survival. Antioxidants & redox signaling. 19(9):998- 1011.
Liu J, Zhang W, Long S, Zhao C. 2021 . Maintenance of cell wall integrity under high salinity. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 22(6):3260.
Lynch JP. 2011. Root phenes for enhanced soil exploration and phosphorus acquisition: tools for future crops. Plant physiology. 156(3):1041-1049.
Mahadevaiah C, Vignesh P, Appunu C, Valarmathi R, Dhansu P, Kumar A, Dharshini S, Padmanabhan TSS, Narayan JA, SelvamuthuK. 2023. Physiological Characterization of Tripidium arundinaceum and Sugarcane (Saccharum
spp.) Germplasm for Salinity Stress Tolerance at the Formative Stage. Sustainability. 15(8):6962. 7(9):405-410.
Mittler R, Vanderauwera S, Suzuki N, Miller G, Tognetti VB, Vandepoele K, Gollery M, Shulaev V, Van Breusegem F. 2011. ROS signaling: the new wave? Trends in plant science. 16(6):300-309.
Munns R, Gilliham M. 2015. Salinity tolerance of cropswhat is the cost? New phytologist. 208(3):668-673.
Oladokun M, Ennos A. 2006 . Structural development and stability of rice Oryza sativa L. var. Nerica 1. Journal of Experimental Botany. 57(12):3123-3130.
Pagter M, Bragato C, Malagoli M, Brix H. 2009. Osmotic and ionic effects of NaCl and Na2SO4 salinity on Phragmites australis. Aquatic Botany. 90(1):43-51.
Rejeb KB, Abdelly C, Savoure A. 2014. How reactive oxygen species and proline face stress together. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry. 80:278-284.
Schneider HM, Klein SP, Hanlon MT, Kaeppler S, Brown KM, Lynch JP. 2020. Genetic control of root anatomical plasticity in maize. The Plant Genome. 13(1):e20003.
Shabala S, Pottosin I. 2014. Regulation of potassium transport in plants under hostile conditions: implications for abiotic and biotic stress tolerance. Physiologia plantarum. 151(3):257-279.
Sharma P, Jha AB, Dubey RS, Pessarakli M. 2012. Reactive oxygen species, oxidative damage, and antioxidative defense mechanism in plants under stressful conditions. Journal of Botany. 2012.
Shrivastava P, Kumar R. 2015. Soil salinity: A serious environmental issue and plant growth promoting bacteria as one of the tools for its alleviation. Saudi journal of biological sciences. 22(2):123-131.
Simoes WL, Coelho DS, Mesquita AC, Calgaro M, SILVA JSD. 2020. Physiological and biochemical responses of sugarcane varieties to salt stress. Revista Caatinga. 32:1069-1076.
Singels A, Jones M, Marin F, Ruane A, Thorburn P. 2014. Predicting climate change impacts on sugarcane production at sites in Australia, Brazil and South Africa using the Canegro model. Sugar Tech. 16:347-355.
Singh M, Kumar J, Singh S, Singh VP, Prasad SM. 2015. Roles of osmoprotectants in improving salinity and drought tolerance in plants: a review. Reviews in Environmental Science and Bio/Technology. 14:407-426.
Singhal P, Jan AT, Azam M, Haq QMR. 2016. Plant abiotic stress: a prospective strategy of exploiting promoters as alternative to overcome the escalating burden. Frontiers in Life Science. 9(1):52-63.
Slama I, Ghnaya T, Hessini K, Messedi D, Savouré A, Abdelly C. 2007. Comparative study of the effects of mannitol and PEG osmotic stress on growth and solute accumulation in Sesuvium portulacastrum . Environmental and Experimental Botany. 61(1):10-17.
Soukup A, Mala J, Hrubcova M, Kalal J, Votrubova O, Cvikrova M. 2004. Differences in anatomical structure and lignin content of roots of pedunculate oak and wild cherry-tree plantlets during acclimation. Biologia plantarum. 48:481-489.
Striker GG, Insausti P, Grimoldi AA, Vega AS. 2007. Trade off between root porosity and mechanical strength in species with different types of aerenchyma. Plant, Cell & Environment. 30(5):580-589.
Taratima W, Ritmaha T, Jongrungklang N, Raso S, Maneerattanarungroj P, Worasitikulya, Ritmaha T, Jongrungklang N, Raso S, Maneerattanarungroj P. 2019 . Leaf anatomical responses to drought stress condition i n hybrid sugarcane leaf (Saccharum officinarum KK3). Malaysian Applied Biology. 48(3):181-188.
Tayade A, Geetha P, Anusha S, Arunkumar R, Vasantha S. 2023. Agro-technologies to Sustain Sugarcane Productivity Under Abiotic Stresses. Agro-industrial Perspectives o n S u g a r c a n e P r o d u c t i o n u n d e r Environmental Stress. Springer. p. 231-266.
Tognetti R, Minotta G, Pinzauti S, Michelozzi M, Borghetti M. 1998. Acclimation to changing light conditions of long-term shade-grown beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) seedlings of different geographic origins. Trees. 12:326- 333.
Ullah I, Waqas M, Khan MA, Lee I-J, Kim W-C. 2017. Exogenous ascorbic acid mitigates flood stress damages of Vigna angularis. Applied Biological Chemistry. 60:603-614.
Valarmathi R, Mahadeva Swamy H, Appunu C, Kambale R, Sudhagar R. 2023. Anatomy of Tolerance Mechanisms in Sugarcane Crop to Abiotic Stresses. Agro-industrial Perspectives o n S u g a r c a n e P r o d u c t i o n u n d e r Environmental Stress. Springer. p. 107-121.
Valarmathi R, Mahadevaswamy H, Ulaganathan V, Appunu C, Hemaprabha G, Sathishraj R. 2021. Low cost high throughput image based root phenotyping pipeline for evaluation of sugarcane root system architecture under drought stress. Journal of Sugarcane Research. 11:24-36.
Valarmathi R, Rahman H, Subramanian S, Nallathambi J, Kaliyaperumal A, Manickam S, Ranganathan C, Muthurajan R. 2018. Os ARD 4 encoding an acireductone dioxygenase improves root architecture in rice by promoting development of secondary roots. Scientific Reports. 8(1):15713.
Valarmathi R., Mahadeva Swamy H. K, Preethi K., Narayan J. A, Appunu C, Rahman H. 2020. Characterization and in silico analysis of RTCS gene from sugarcane encoding LOB Protein family of transcription factors: a key regulator of shoot borne root initiation. Journal of Sugarcane Research. 10(1): 12-23.
Vasantha S, Gomathi R, Brindha C. 2017a. Growth and nutrient composition of sugarcane genotypes subjected to salinity and drought stresses. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis. 48(9):989- 998.
Vasantha S, Gomathi R, Venkataramana S, Arunkumar R. 2017b. Evaluation of sugarcane germplasm for drought and salinity tolerance. Journal of Sugarcane Research. 7(1):35-45.
Vasantha S, Tayade AS, Anusha S, Geetha P, Hemaprabha G. 2020. Physiological efficiency of sugarcane clones under water- limited conditions. Transactions of the ASABE. 63(1):133-140.
Vasantha S, Gomathi R. 2012. Growth and development of sugarcane under salinity. Journal of Sugarcane Research. 2(1):1-10.
Vignesh P, Mahadevaiah C, Parimalan R, Valarmathi R, Dharshini S, Nisha S, Suresha G, Swathi S, Mahadeva Swamy H, Sreenivasa V. 2021. Comparative de novo transcriptome analysis identifies salinity stress responsive genes and metabolic pathways in sugarcane and its wild relative Erianthus arundinaceus [Retzius] Jeswiet. Scientific Reports. 11(1):24514.
Yang S, Chu N, Feng N, Zhou B, Zhou H, Deng Z, Shen X, Zheng D. 2023. Global Responses of A u t o p o l y p l o i d S u g a r c a n e B a d i l a (Saccharum officinarum L.) to Drought Stress Based on Comparative Transcriptome and Metabolome Profiling. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 24(4):3856.
Yu LX, Ray JD, O'Toole JC, Nguyen HT. 1995. Use of wax petrolatum layers for screening rice root penetration. Crop science. 35(3):684-687.
Zhang Y, Luan Q, Jiang J, Li Y. 2021. Prediction and utilization of malondialdehyde in exotic pine under drought stress using near-infrared spectroscopy. Frontiers in Plant Science. 12:735275.
Zhu XG, Lynch JP, LeBauer DS, Millar AJ, Stitt M, Long SP. 2016. Plants in silico: why, why now and what?an integrative platform for plant systems biology research. Plant, Cell & Environment. 39(5):1049-1057.
Downloads
Submitted
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
It is mandatory on the part of the corresponding author to furnish the article declaration form at the time of submission of the manuscript or after acceptance.
Authors who publish with JSR agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant JSR right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
Society for Sugarcane Research and Development
How to Cite
