پیوندهای مفید
اخبار و اعلانات
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 158 |
| تعداد شمارهها | 6,226 |
| تعداد مقالات | 67,708 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 115,010,428 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 89,693,800 |
Identification of Drought Tolerant and Sensitive Species of Thyme through Some Physiological Criteria | ||
| International Journal of Horticultural Science and Technology | ||
| مقاله 6، دوره 5، شماره 1، شهریور 2018، صفحه 53-63 اصل مقاله (409.16 K) | ||
| نوع مقاله: Research paper | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22059/ijhst.2018.255144.231 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| Mohsen Ashrafi1؛ Mohammad Reza Azimi Moqadam* 1؛ Parviz Moradi2؛ Farid Shekari1؛ Ehsan MohseniFard1 | ||
| 1Department of Agronomy and Plant Breeding, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Zanjan, Zanjan, Iran. | ||
| 2Research Division of Natural Resources, Zanjan Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Centre, AREEO, Zanjan, Iran. | ||
| چکیده | ||
| Drought as the most important abiotic stress has deleterious effects on plants. Developing drought tolerant varieties can help produce plants in a sustainable way. This study was conducted to identify drought tolerant and drought sensitive thyme species including Thymus vulgaris, T. vulgaris (origin: Spain), T. carmanicus, T. daenensis and T. kotschyanus and to study the mechanism used by them to cope with drought stress. For this purpose, relative water content, water use efficiency, soil water depilation rate, root:shoot ratio, drought resistance index and a new criterion "FC ceased growth" were used. T. carmanicus and T. daenensis had the lowest and the highest reduction on relative water content, respectively. In terms of water use efficiency and soil water depletion curve, the highest and the lowest values were detected for T. daenensis and T. carmanicus, respectively. The most and the least root:shoot ratios were recorded for T. daenensis and T. vulgaris (origin: Spain), respectively. Analyses by drought resistance index and PCA revealed that T. carmanicus is drought susceptible, T. kotschyanus and T. vulgaris are semi-drought susceptible, and T. daenensis and T. vulgaris (origin: Spain) are semi-drought tolerant species. FC ceased growth analysis showed that T. carmanicus stopped its growth at higher FC, while T. kotschyanus stopped it at lower FC. Therefore, based on this criterion and considering the sustainability of growth under drought condition, T. carmanicus and T. kotschyanus are the least and the most drought tolerant Thymus species. | ||
| کلیدواژهها | ||
| Agriculture؛ Breeding؛ Drought tolerance؛ Screening؛ Thyme؛ Water deficiency | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
Akhzari D, GhasemiAghbash F. 2013. Effect of Salinity and Drought Stress on the Seedling Growth and Physiological Traits of Vetiver Grass ( Vetiveria zizanioides stapf .). ECOPERSIA 1, 339-352.
Amos B, Walters D.T. 2006. Maize Root Biomass and Net Rhizodeposited Carbon. Soil Science Society of America Journal 70, 1489.
Barchet G.L.H, Dauwe R, Guy R.D, Schroeder W.R, Soolanayakanahally R.Y, Campbell M.M, Mansfield S.D. 2014. Investigating the drought-stress response of hybrid poplar genotypes by metabolite profiling. Tree Physiology 34, 1203-1219.
Barr H.D, Weatherley P. 1962. Are-examination of the relative turgidity technique for estimating water deficit in leaves. Australian Journal of Biological Sciences 15, 413-28.
Blum A. 2011. Plant breeding for water-limited environments. Springer Science and Business Media.
Boning C.R. 2010. Florida’s Best Herbs and Spices: Native and Exotic Plants Grown for Scent and Flavor. Pineapple Press Inc.
Chen B, Fu Z, Pan Y, Wang J, Zeng Z. 2011. Single Leaf Area Measurement Using Digital Camera Image. In: Computer and Computing Technologies in Agriculture IV. Springer Berlin Heidelberg. pp. 525-530.
De la Barrera E, Smith W. 2009. Perspectives in biophysical plant ecophysiology. Universidad Nacional Autónoma de Méxi.
De Mendiburu F. 2009. Una herramienta de analisis estadistico para la investigacion agricola.
Fernandez G. 1992. Effective selection criteria for assessing plant stress tolerance. 4th international symposium Asian Vegetable Research and Development Center 257-270.
Fischer R, Maurer R. 1978. Drought resistance in spring wheat cultivars. I. Grain yield responses. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 29, 897-912.
Ghaffari G, Pourhosseini M, Baghbani F, Tahmasebpour B, Samimifar P. 2013. The identify of tolerate and sensitive cultivars thorough drought tolerance indices in winter rapeseed cultivars. Advance in Agriculture and Biology 1, 71-74.
Hu H, Xiong L. 2014. Genetic Engineering and Breeding of Drought-Resistant Crops. Annual Review of Plant Biology 65, 715-741.
Lawson T, Blatt M.R. 2014. Stomatal Size, Speed, and Responsiveness Impact on Photosynthesis and Water Use Efficiency. Plant Physiology 164, 1556-1570.
Levitt J. 1980. Responses of plants to environmental stresses. Academic Press.
Moradi P. 2016. Key plant products and common mechanisms utilized by plants in water deficit stress Responses. Botanical Sciences 94, 657-671.
Moradi P, Ford-Lloyd B, Pritchard J. 2014. Plant-water responses of different medicinal plant thyme (Thymus spp.) species to drought stress condition. Australian Journal of Crop Science 8, 666-673.
Munns, R. et al. 2016. Growth analysis: a quantitative approach. In: Plants in Action. 2nd edition. Australian Society of Plant Scientists, in press.
Nakabayashi R, Saito K. 2015. Integrated metabolomics for abiotic stress responses in plants. Current Opinion in Plant Biology 24, 10-16.
Norton M.R, Lelièvre F, Volaire F. 2014. Measuring dehydration tolerance in pasture grasses to improve drought survival. Crop and Pasture Science 65, 828-840.
Passioura J.B, Spielmeyer W, Bonnett D.G. 2007. Marker-Assisted Breeding for Drought-Prone Environments. In: Jenks, M.A. et al. (eds), Advances in Molecular Breeding Toward Drought and Salt Tolerant Crops. Springer Netherlands. pp. 479-500.
Ramegowda V, Basu S, Krishnan A, Pereira A. 2014. Rice Growth Under Drought Kinas Is Required for Drought Tolerance and Grain Yield under Normal and Drought Stress Conditions. Plant Physiology 166, 1634-1645.
Reddy A.R, Chaitanya K.V, Vivekanandan M. 2004. Drought-induced responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants. Journal of Plant Physiology 161, 1189-1202.
Rosielle A.A, Hamblin J. 1981. Theoretical Aspects of Selection for Yield in Stress and Non-Stress Environment1. Crop Science 21, 943.
Sanchez D.H, Schwabe F, Erban A, Udvardi M.K, Kopka J. 2012. Comparative metabolomics of drought acclimation in model and forage legumes. Plant, cell and environment 35, 136-149.
Shiri M, Choukan R, Aliyev R. 2010. Drought Tolerance Evaluation of Maize Hybrids using Biplot Method. Trends in Applied Sciences Research 5, 129-137.
Silva D.D, Kane M.E, Beeson R.C. 2012. Changes in root and shoot growth and biomass partition resulting from different irrigation intervals for Ligustrum japonicum Thunb. HortScience 47, 1634-1640.
Stahl-Biskup E, Sáez F. 2002. Thyme - The genus Thymus (E Stahl-Biskup and F Saez, Eds.). CRC Press.
Tanentzap F.M, Stempel A, Ryser P. 2015. Reliability of leaf relative water content (RWC) measurements after storage: consequences for in situ measurements. Botany 93, 535-541.
Vurukonda S.S.K.P, Vardharajula S, Shrivastava M, SkZ A. 2016. Enhancement of drought stress tolerance in crops by plant growth promoting rhizobacteria. Microbiological Research 184, 13-24. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 474 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 507 |
||