ارزیابی برخی از واکنشهای فیزیولوژیک ارقام حساس و متحمل پنبه در شرایط تنش خشکی

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 بخش تحقیقات زراعی و باغی، مرکز تحقیقات کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی استان خراسان رضوی، سازمان تحقیقات، آموزش و ترویج کشاورزی، مشهد، ایران، 2و3 استاد دانشکده کشاورزی دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد، گروه زراعت و اصلاح نباتات،

2 استاد دانشکده کشاورزی دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد، گروه زراعت و اصلاح نباتات،

3 استادیار بخش تحقیقات زراعی و باغی، مرکز تحقیقات کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی استان خراسان رضوی، سازمان تحقیقات، آموزش و ترویج کشاورزی، مشهد، ایران.

چکیده

ارزیابی واکنشهای فیزیولوژیک متفاوت ارقام پنبه در شرایط تنش خشکی، روشی دقیق و مطمئن جهت پایش روابط گیاه و آب بوده و می‌تواند در جهت اصلاح ارقام متحمل به خشکی بکار رود. لذا این پژوهش برای ارزیابی مقاومت روزنه‌ای، دمای برگ، کانوپی و همچنین حداکثر کارایی فتوسیستم (ΔF/F́m) IIبر روی چهار رقم پنبه حساس (کوکر349 و نازیلی84) و متحمل (ارمغان و ورامین) به خشکی انجام گرفت. ارقام پنبه به عنوان کرتهای فرعی در سه سطح آب مصرفی به عنوان کرتهای اصلی (آبیاری به میزان (I33%) 33%، (I66%) 66%، و (I100%) 100% نیاز آبی) به صورت کرتهای خرد شده، در قالب بلوکهای کامل تصادفی در سه تکرار در مزرعه ایستگاه تحقیقات کشاورزی کاشمر در سال 1390 مورد ارزیابی قرار گرفتند. نتایج نشان داد به دنبال تنش خشکی، میزان افزایش مقاومت روزنه‌ای ارقام متحمل بیشتر از ارقام حساس در شرایط بود. همچنین تنش خشکی سبب افزایش معنی‌دار دمای برگ (3/15 درصد) و کاهش معنی‌دار حداکثر کارایی فتوسیستم II (8/14 درصد) ارقام پنبه شد. علاوه بر این شیب تغییرات دمای برگ با افزایش مقاومت روزنه‌ای در ارقام حساس بیشتر از ارقام متحمل بود. نتایج همچنین بیانگر تفاوت معنی‌دار ارقام از نظر حداکثر کارایی فتوسیستم IIبود. در این ارتباط رقم متحمل ورامین از بالاترین و رقم حساس کوکر 349 از کمترین حداکثر کارایی فتوسیستم IIبرخوردار بودند. بطور کلی در شرایط تنش خشکی واکنش‌های فیزیولوژیک موثر بر رشد و عملکرد در ارقام متحمل به میزان کمتری در مقایسه با ارقام حساس تحت تاثیر قرار می‌دهند.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Evaluation of some of physiological reactions of sensitive and tolerant cotton cultivars under drought stress

نویسندگان [English]

  • Hamid Reza Mehrabadi 1
  • Ahmad Nezami 2
  • Mohammad Kafi 2
  • Mohammad Reza Ramezanimoghadam 3
1 Former Ph.D student of Crop Physiology, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad
2 Profe., Faculty of Agriculture, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad
3 Assistant Prof., Agricultural and Natural Resources Research Center of Razavi Khorasan
چکیده [English]

Evaluation of physiological reactions in different cotton cultivars under drought stress, is a precise and confident method for monitoring of plant and water relations and it can be applied to breeding of tolerant cotton cultivars. Therefore, this study was carried out for evaluation of stomatal control, leaf and canopy temperature and also maximum efficiency of photosystem II (ΔF/F́m). Field experiment was carried out using two cotton drought tolerant cultivars (Armaghan and Varamin) and two cotton drought sensitive (Coker349 and Nazili84) as sub plots at three levels of water application [33% (I33%), 66% (I66%) and 100% (I100% of water requirement) as main plot using split plot based on complete block design with three replications at Agricultural Research Station of Kashmar in 2011. Results showed drought stress significantly increased (33.3%) stomatal resistance, in addition to its value were 22% more in tolerant cultivars compared with sensitive cultivars. Also drought stress significantly increased leaf temperature (15.3%) and decreased maximum efficiency of photosystem II (ΔF/F́m) (14.8%). But these variations were different in sensitive and tolerant cultivars. With increasing intensity of drought stress, tolerant cultivars showed more increasing of stomatal resistance compared with sensitive cultivars. Variations slope of leaf temperature with increasing in stomatal were more in sensitive compare with tolerant cultivars. The results showed significant difference between maximum efficiency of photosystem II in cotton cultivars. The highest and the lowest of maximum efficiency of photosystem II belonged to Varamin as tolerant cultivar and Coker349 as sensitive cultivar in respectively.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Leaf temperature
  • Maximum efficiency of photosystem II
  • Stomatal resistance
  • Water deficiency stress

مراجع

  1. Aranjuelo I., Molero, G., Erice G., Avice, J.C., and Nogués, S. 2010. Plant physiology and proteomics reveals the leaf response to drought in alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.). Journal of  Experimental Botany. 62: 111-123.
  2. Belhassen, E. 1996. Drought in higher plants: Genetical physiological and molecular biological analysis. ENSA-INR SGAP. Montpellier, France.152pp.
  3. -Bota, J., Medrano, H., and Flexas, H. 2004. Is photosynthesis limited by decreased Rubisco activity and RuBP content under progressive water stress? New Phytol. 162: 671-681.
  4. Chaves, M.M., Flexas J., and Pinheiro, C. 2009. Photosynthesis under drought and salt stress: regulation mechanisms from whole plant to cell. Annual Botany. 103: 551-560.
  5. Cohen, Y., Alchanatis, V., Meron, M., Saranga, Y., and Tsipris, J. 2005. Estimation of leaf water potential by thermal imagery and spatial analysis. Journal of Experimental Botany. 56:1843–1852.
  6. Deeba, F., Pandey, A.K., Ranjan, S., Mishra, A., Singh, R., Sharma, Y.K., Shirke, P.A., and Pandey, V. 2012. Physiological and proteomic responses of cotton (Gossypium herbaceum L.) to drought stress. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry. 53:6-18.
  7. Dobrowski, S.Z., Pushnik, J.C., Tejada, P.J., and Ustin, S.L. 2005. Simple reflectance indices track heat and water stress-induced changes in steady-state chlorophyll fluorescence at the canopy scale. Remote Sensing Environment. 97:403-414.
  8. Ennahli, S., and Earl, H.J. 2005. Physiological limitations to photosynthetic carbon assimilation in cotton under water stress. Crop Science. 45:2374–2382.
  9. Falkenberg, N.R., Piccinni, G., Cothren, J.T., Leskovar, D.I., and Rush, C.M. 2003. Remote sensing of biotic and abiotic stress for irrigation management of cotton. Agricultural Water Management. 87:23–31.
  10. Fracheboud, Y., and Leipner, J. 2003. The application of chlorophyll fluorescence to study light, temperature, and drought stress, in: J.R. DeEll, P.M.A. Toivonen (Eds.), Practical Applications of Chlorophyll Fluorescence in Plant Biology, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht. pp: 125-150.
  11. Inamullah, I.A. 2005. Adaptive responses of soybean and cotton to water stress II. Changes in CO2 assimilation rate, chlorophyll fluorescence and photochemical reflectance index in relation to leaf temperature. Plant Production Science. 8:131-138.
  12. Kitao, M., and Lei, T.T. 2007. Circumvention of over-excitation of PSII by maintaining electron transport rate in leaves of four cotton genotypes developed under long-term drought. Plant Biology. 9: 69-76.
  13. Leinonen, I., and Jones, H.G. 2004. Combining thermal and visible imagery for estimating canopy temperature and identifying plant stress. Journal of Experimental Botany. 55: 1423–1431.
  14. Mahan, J.R., and Yeater, K.Y. 2008. Agricultural applications of a low-cost infrared thermometer. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture. 64: 262–267.
  15. Massacci, A., Nabiev, S.M., Pietrosanti, L., Nematov, S.K., Chernikova, T.N., Thor, K., and Leipner, J. 2008. Response of the photosynthetic apparatus of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) to the onset of drought stress under field conditions studied by gas-exchange analysis and chlorophyll fluorescence imaging. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry 46: 189-195.
  16. Maxwell, K., and Johnson, G.N. 2000. Chlorophyll fluorescence - a practical guide.  Journal of Experimental Botany. 51: 659-668.
  17. Padhia, J., Misraa, R.K., and Payero, J.O. 2012. Estimation of soil water deficit in an irrigated cotton field with infrared thermography. Field Crop Research. 126:45-55.
  18. Petite, A.M., Rueda, A.M., and Lacuesta, M. 2005. Effect of cold storage treatments and transplanting stress on gas exchange, chlorophyll fluorescence and survival under water limiting conditions of Pinus radiata stock-types. European Journal of Forest Research. 124: 73-82.
  19. Pettigrew, W.T. 2004.  Physiological consequences of moisture deficit stress in cotton. Crop Science. 44:1265-1272.
  20. Ullah, I., Rahmana, M.U., Ashraf, M., and Zafar, Y. 2008. Genotypic variation for drought tolerance in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.), Leaf gas exchange and productivity. Flora. 203:105–115.
  21. Wang, Ch.y., Isoda A., LI, M.s. and Wang D.l. 2007. Growth and Eco-Physiological Performance of Cotton under Water Stress Conditions. Agricultural Sciences in China. 6(8): 949-955.
  22. Wanjura, D.F., Maas, S.J., Winslow, J.C. and Upchurch, D.R. 2004. Scanned and spot measured canopy temperatures of cotton and corn. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture. 44: 33–48.
  23. Wanjura, D.F., Upchurch, D.R., and Mahan, J.R. 2006. Behavior of temperature-based water stress indicators in biotic-controlled irrigation. Irrigation Science. 24: 223–232.
  24. Wiegand, C.L., and Namken, L.N. 1996. Influences of plant moisture stress, solar radiation and air temperature on cotton leaf temperature. Agronomy Journal. 58: 552–556.
  25. Zhu, J.J., Zhang, J.L., Liu, H.C., and Cao, K.F. 2009. Photosynthesis, non-photochemical pathways and activities of antioxidant enzymes in a resilient evergreen oak under different climatic conditions from a valley-savanna in Southwest China. Physiol. Planetarium, 135: 62–72.

فایل ها

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار