Efficiency of Biochemical Characterization to Differentiate Chickpea Genotypes for Cold Stress

محورهای موضوعی : Plant Physiology

Masoumeh Pouresmael ¹ , Nazanin Amirbakhtiar ² , Zahra-Sadat Shobbar ³ , Behzad Sorkhi ⁴ , Mehdi Zahravi ⁵ , Ali Sajjad Bokaei ⁶

1 - Genetic Research Department, Seed and Plant Improvement Institute, Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization, Karaj, Iran.
2 - Genetic Research Department, Seed and Plant Improvement Institute, Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization, Karaj, Iran.
3 - Department of Systems Biology, Agricultural Biotechnology Research Institute of Iran (ABRII), Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization, Karaj, Iran
4 - Genetic Research Department, Seed and Plant Improvement Institute, Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization, Karaj, Iran
5 - Genetic Research Department, Seed and Plant Improvement Institute, Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization, Karaj, Iran
6 - Genetic Research Department, Seed and Plant Improvement Institute, Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization, Karaj, Iran

تاریخ دریافت : 1402/07/19 تاریخ پذیرش : 1402/12/16 تاریخ انتشار : 1403/05/15

کلید واژه: Biochemical, Cicer, Chiling, Gene, expression,

چکیده مقاله :

In order to differentiate among susceptible and tolerant chickpea genotypes, different biochemical traits were investigated. A factorial experiment based on a completely randomized design was performed in three replications. A combination of two factors i.e. genotype (cold tolerant and suseptible line) and temperature (4 and 20 ° C), were used in this experiment. Leaf samples were prepared 12 and 72 hours after stress. Based on the results obtained, H2O2 content was significantly higher in the susceptible genotype under both conditions. Sequencing results comparison showed that the proline dehydrogenase gene expression was increased in the susceptible line. In addition, expression of an isoform of proline 5 carboxylate synthetase reduced in this line. Cold stress caused a significant increase in catalase activitiy in the tolerant cultivar. Decreased expression of a homologue of ascorbate oxidase in susceptible line showed a positive role of this enzyme and regulation of ascorbate homeostasis in the tolerant cultivar. Decreased expression of ABA hydrolase in the tolerant cultivar, decreased expression of ABA receptor in the susceptible line, expression of different ABI5 isoforms in the tolerant cultivar under stress as compared to the susceptible line indicated differences in ABA transduction pathway in the susceptible and tolerant genotypes. The result of this study clearly explained the differences between the biochemical responses of tolerant and susceptible chickpea genotypes in response to the cold stress, which could be considered as an indirect screening method for identification of chickpea genotypes tolerant unde rcold stress conditions.

چکیده انگلیسی:

In order to differentiate among susceptible and tolerant chickpea genotypes, different biochemical traits were investigated. A factorial experiment based on a completely randomized design was performed in three replications. A combination of two factors i.e. genotype (cold tolerant and suseptible line) and temperature (4 and 20 ° C), were used in this experiment. Leaf samples were prepared 12 and 72 hours after stress. Based on the results obtained, H2O2 content was significantly higher in the susceptible genotype under both conditions. Sequencing results comparison showed that the proline dehydrogenase gene expression was increased in the susceptible line. In addition, expression of an isoform of proline 5 carboxylate synthetase reduced in this line. Cold stress caused a significant increase in catalase activitiy in the tolerant cultivar. Decreased expression of a homologue of ascorbate oxidase in susceptible line showed a positive role of this enzyme and regulation of ascorbate homeostasis in the tolerant cultivar. Decreased expression of ABA hydrolase in the tolerant cultivar, decreased expression of ABA receptor in the susceptible line, expression of different ABI5 isoforms in the tolerant cultivar under stress as compared to the susceptible line indicated differences in ABA transduction pathway in the susceptible and tolerant genotypes. The result of this study clearly explained the differences between the biochemical responses of tolerant and susceptible chickpea genotypes in response to the cold stress, which could be considered as an indirect screening method for identification of chickpea genotypes tolerant unde rcold stress conditions.

منابع و مأخذ:

Aebi, H., 1984. Catalase in vitro. Methods in Enzymology, 105:121–126.
Akbari, A., A. Ismaili, N. Amirbakhtiar, M. Pouresmael and Z. S. Shobbar. 2023. Genome-wide transcriptional profiling provides clues to molecular mechanisms underlying cold tolerance in chickpea. Scientific Reports, 13: 6279.
Arora, A., R.K. Sairam and G. C. Srivastava. 2002. Oxidative stress and antioxidative system in plants. Current Science, 82 (10):1227-1237.
Ayala, A., M. F. Muñoz and S. Argüelles. 2014. Lipid peroxidation: production, metabolism, and signaling mechanisms of malondialdehyde and 4-hydroxy-2-nonenal. Oxidative medicine and cellular longevity, 360438.
Bakht, J., A. Bano, M. Shafi and P. Dominy. 2013. Effect of abscisic acid applications on cold tolerance in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). European Journal of Agronomy, 44: 10-21.
Bates, L, R.P. Waldren and I.D. Teare. 1973. Rapid determination of free proline for water-stress studies. Plant and Soil, 39: 205–207.
Batth, R., K. Singh., S. Kumari and A. Mustafiz. 2017. Transcript profiling reveals the presence of abiotic stress and developmental stage specific ascorbate oxidase genes in plants. Frontiers in Plant Science, 8:198.
Bergmeyer, H. U. 1983. Methods of enzymatic analysis: Third edition, Verlag Chemie: Weinhem. 605 p.
Bhattacharjee, S., 2012. The language of reactive oxygen species signaling in plants. Journal of Botany, 2012(1), p.985298.
Cakmak, I. and H. Marschner. 1992. Magnesium deficiency and high-light intensity enhance activities of superoxide dismutase, ascorbate peroxidase and glutathione reductase in bean leaves. Plant Physiology, 98:1222–1227.
Chance, B. and A.C. Maehly. 1955. Assay of catalases and peroxidases. In: Methods in enzymology. Colowick S.P. and N. O. Kaplane (Eds.). New York: Academic Press. pp. 764–775.
Collin, A., A. Daszkowska-Golec and I. Szarejko. 2021. Updates on the role of abscisic acid insensitive 5 (ABI5) and abscisic acid-responsive element binding factors (ABFs) in ABA signaling in different developmental stages in plants. Cells, 10: 1996.
Croser, J. S., H. J. Clarke, K. H. M. Siddique and T. N. Khan. 2003. Low-temperature stress: implications for chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) improvement. Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences, 22(2):185–219.
Hayat, S., Q. Hayat, M.N. Alyemeni, A.S. Wani, J. Pichtel, and A. Ahmad. 2012. Role of proline under changing environments: a review. Plant Signaling and Behavior, 7(11):1456-66.
Heidarvand, L. and R. Maali-Amiri. 2013. Physio-biochemical and proteome analysis of chickpea in early phases of cold stress. Journal of Plant Physiology, 170: 459– 469.
Hodges, D. M., J. M. DeLong, C. F. Forney and R. K. Prange. 1999. Improving the thiobarbituric acid-reactive-substances assay for estimating lipid peroxidation in plant tissues containing anthocyanin and other interfering compounds. Planta, 207:604–611.
Hong, Z., K. Lakkineni, Z. Zhang and D. P. Verma, 2000. Removal of feedback inhibition of delta (1)-pyrroline-5-carboxylate synthetase results in increased proline accumulation and protection of plants from osmotic stress. Plant Physiology, 122(4): 1129–1136.
Jithesh, M.N., S.R. Prashanth, K.R. Sivaprakash and A.K. Parida. 2006. Antioxidative response mechanisms in halophytes: their role in stress defense. Journal of Genetics, 85 (3): 237-254.
Karami-Moalem, S., R. Maali-Amiri and S. Kazemi-Shahandashti, 2018. Effect of cold stress on oxidative damage and mitochondrial respiratory properties in chickpea. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry, 122: 31–39.
Kavi Kishor, P.B., Hima Kumari, P., Sunita, M.S.L. and Sreenivasulu, N. 2015. Role of proline in cell wall synthesis and plant development and its implications in plant ontogeny. Frontiers in Plant Science, 6:544.
Kazemi-Shahandashti, S. S., R. Maali-Amiri, H. Zeinali, M. Khazaei, A. Talei and S. S. Ramezanpour, 2014. Effect of short-term cold stress on oxidative damage and transcript accumulation of defense-related genes in chickpea seedlings. Journal of Plant Physiology, 171: 1106–1116.
Kaur, S., M. Arora, A. K. Gupta and N. Kaur. 2012. Exploration of biochemical and molecular diversity in chickpea seeds to categorize cold stress-tolerant and susceptible genotypes. Acta Physiologia Plantarum, 34:569–580.
Kaur, S., B. Sharma, A. K. Gupta, S. Kaur and J. Kaur. 2014. Nodule metabolism in cold stress tolerant and susceptible chickpea cultivars. Symbiosis, 64(1): 33-42.
Kumar, S., G. Kaur and H. Nayyar. 2008. Exogenous application of abscisic acid improves cold tolerance in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science, 194: 449 – 456.
Liu, H. and S.L. Stone. 2014. Regulation of ABI5 turnover by reversible post-translational modifications. Plant Signaling and Behavior, 9: e27577; PMID: 24398698.
Lüthje, S. and T. Martinez-Cortes. 2018. Membrane-bound class iii peroxidases: unexpected enzymes with exciting functions. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 19: 6167.
Mittler, R. 2002. Oxidative stress, antioxidants and stress tolerance. Trends in Plant Science, 7 (9):405-410.
Mohammadi, A., D. Habibi, M. Rohami and S. Mafakheri. 2011. Effect of drought stress on antioxidant enzymes activity of some chickpea cultivars. American-Eurasian Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, 11: 782-785.
Nakano, Y. and K. Asada, 1980. Spinach chloroplasts scavenge hydrogen peroxide on illumination. Plant Cell Physiology, 21:1295–1307.
Nakano, Y. and K. Asada, 1981. Hydrogen peroxide is scavenged by ascorbate-specific peroxidase in spinach chloroplasts. Plant Cell Physiology, 22:867-880.
Nayyar, H., T. Bains and S. Kumar. 2005. Chilling stressed chickpea seedlings: effect of cold acclimation, calcium and abscisic acid on cryoprotective solutes and oxidative damage. Environmental and Experimental Botany, 54: 275–285.
Pouresmael, M., R.A. Khavari-Nejad, J. Mozafari, F. Najafi and F. Moradi. 2013. Efficiency of screening criteria for drought tolerance in chickpea. Archive of Agronomy and Soil Science, 59 (12): 1675-1693.
Pouresmael, M., R.A. Khavari-Nejad, J. Mozafari, F. Najafi and F. Moradi. 2015. Diverse responses of tolerant and sensitive lines of Chickpea to drought stress. Archive of Agronomy and Soil Science, 61: 1561-1580.
Rahbarian, R., R.A. Khavari-Nejad, A.R. Bagheri, F. Najafi and M. Roshanfekr. 2012. Use of biochemical indices and antioxidant enzymes as a screening technique for drought tolerance in chickpea genotypes (Cicer arietinumL.). African Journal of Agricultural Research, 7:5372-5380.
Rakei, A., R. Maali-Amiri, H. Zeinali and M. Ranjbar. 2016. DNA methylation and physio-biochemical analysis of chickpea in response to cold stress. Protoplasma, 253(1): 61-76.
Rao, M.V., G. Paliyath and D. P. Ormrod. 1996. Ultraviolet-B- and ozoneinduced biochemical changes in antioxidant enzymes of Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant Physiology, 110:125–136.
Shin, H., S. Oh, D. Kim, J. K. Hong, J. G. Yun, S. W. Lee and K.H. Son. 2018. Induced freezing tolerance and free amino acids perturbation of spinach by exogenous proline. Journal of Plant Biotechnology, 45(4): 357–363.
Skubacz, A., A. Daszkowska-Golec and I. Szarejko. 2016. The role and regulation of ABI5 (ABA-Insensitive 5) in plant development, abiotic stress responses and phytohormone crosstalk. Frontiers in Plant Science, 7:1884. Doi: 10.3389/fpls.2016.01884.
Slesak, I., Z. Miszalski, B. Karpinska, E. Niewiadomska, R. Ratajczak and S. Karpinski. 2002. Redex control of oxidative stress responses in the C3-CAM intermediate plant Mesembryanthemum crystallinum. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry. 40: 669-677.
Su, P., J. Yan, W. Li, L. Wang, J. Zhao, X. Ma, A. Li, H. Wang and L. Kong. 2020. A member of wheat class III peroxidase gene family, TaPRX-2A, enhanced the tolerance of salt stress. BMC Plant Biology, 392.
Thakur, A., K. D. Sharma, K. H.M. Siddique and H. Nayyar. 2020. Cold priming the chickpea seeds imparts reproductive cold tolerance by reprogramming the turnover of carbohydrates, osmo-protectants and redox components in leaves. Scientia Horticulturae, 261: 108929.
Tripathy, J.N., J. Zhang, S. Robin, T.T. Nguyen and H.T. Nguyen. 2000. QTLs for cell-membrane stability mapped in rice (Oryza sativa L.) under drought stress. Theoretical and Applied Genetics, 100:1197–1202.
Yadav, S.S., R.J. Redden, W. Chen and B. Sharma. 2007. Chickpea breeding and management. CAB International: Wallingford, UK. 638 P.
Yan, F., W. Deng, X. Wang, C. Yang, and Z. Li. 2012. Maize (Zea mays L.) homologue of ABA-insensitive (ABI) 5 gene plays a negative regulatory role in abiotic stresses response. Plant Growth Regulation, 68: 383–393.
Yokota, A., K. Takahara and K. Akashi. 2006. Physiology and molecular biology of stress tolerance in plants. In: Rao, K.M., A.S. Raghavendra and K.J. Reddy (Eds.), Springer, pp: 15-40.
Yousefi, V., J. Ahmadi, D. Sadeghzadeh-Ahari and E. Esfandiari. 2018. Influence of long-term cold stress on enzymatic antioxidative defense system in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). Acta Agrobotanica, 71(3): 1745.