Biochemical and Agronomic Traits of Chickpea Cultivars Response to Drought Stress

Research Article

Austin Food Sci. 2016; 1(4): 1019.

Biochemical and Agronomic Traits of Chickpea Cultivars Response to Drought Stress

Shah T¹*, Fareed A² and Nauman M³

¹Department of Agronomy, University of Agriculture Peshawar, Pakistan

²Instiute of Biotechnology and Genetic Engineering University of Agriculture Peshawar, Pakistan

³Department of Agricultural Chemistry, University of Agriculture Peshawar, Pakistan

*Corresponding author: Tariq Shah, Department of Agronomy, University of Agriculture Peshawar, Pakistan

Received: June 14, 2016; Accepted: September 01, 2016; Published: September 12, 2016

Abstract

The drought is one of the foremost a biotic stress in agriculture in the world. This study was planned to explore the effect of water stress on the proline content, the chlorophyll content and yield traits in three cultivars of chickpea (KC-98 drought tolerant and KK-2 and sensitive to drought Punjab Noor-2009). An experiment in the field condition with four irrigation schemes has been managed in a randomized complete block design with three repeats. The treatments involved the control (no drought), the water stress forced during the vegetative stage, water stress forced during anthesis phase, and the water stress during the vegetative phase and during anthesis stage. All physiological attributes were affected by the stress of drought. The drought stress appointed during the vegetative growth or anthesis stage drastically reduces the content of chlorophyll a, chlorophyll b and total chlorophyll content. The accretion of proline was superior in the ‘KK-2” as compared to “Punjab Noor-2009” at the time under the control and water stress situation. The yields were elevated in the water stress situation than under control condition. In drought conditions the drought responsive variety KC-98” gives the uppermost performance while the variety sensitive to drought, variety ‘Punjab Noor-2009” gave the undermost yield. The water stress at anthesis stage diminishes the seed performance more rigorous than that on the vegetative phase.

Keywords: Chickpea; Varieties; Chlorophyll; Proline; Yield

Introduction

Drought is assuredly one of the most influential environmental stresses that affect the productivity of plants grown in the world [1]. The drought is also an essential performance-inhibiting factor in the chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) production as the main areas of growing of chickpea are in the arid and semi-arid areas and approximately 90% of the global volume of chickpea is grown under rain-fed environments [2] chickpea depicts the mechanisms to overcome this condition. In the chickpea, yield losses can be the result of seasonal drought during the vegetative stage, due to the water stress during reproductive development or by reason of the lethal drought at the end of the crop cycle [3]. The drought stress declines the pace of photosynthesis [4]. The plants grown under condition of drought have a lesser stomatal conductance in order to save water. As a result, the fixing of the CO2 is diminished and the rate of photosynthesis declined, resulting in reduced assimilates production for growth and the performance of plants. Deviating resistance of stomata to the entry of CO2 is possibly the foremost factor restraining photosynthesis under drought [5]. Undoubtedly under the mild or moderate water stress (which causes the closing of stomata and reduced leaf internal CO2 concentration (Ci)) is the main reason of declined rates of leaf photosynthesis [6,7]. Intense drought stress also hinders the photosynthesis of plants by inducing changes in the chlorophyll content, affecting the cholorophyll apparatus and destructing the photosynthetic machinery [8,9]. Documented that leaf chlorophyll content declines as a result of the drought stress. The stress caused by the drought has resulted in a sharp decrease in chlorophyll a, chlorophyll b content, and total chlorophyll content in all varieties of sunflower seed studied [10]. The diminish in chlorophyll under the drought stress is generally the result of injure to the chloroplasts induced by the active oxygen species [11]. The plants can generally guard themselves against moderate drought by compiling osmolytes. The proline is one of the most familiar appropriate osmolytes in the water stressed plants. For instance, the proline content was amplified under the effect of the drought in pea [12,13]. The accumulation of proline can also be noticed with other stresses, such as a elevated temperature and under the famine [14]. The metabolism of the proline in plants, however, has mostly been calculated in response to osmotic stress [15]. The proline does not hamper with the typical biochemical reactions but permits the plants to endure in conditions of stress [16]. The accretion of proline in the tissues of the plant is also a clear indicator for environmental stress, in particular in the plants under a drought stress [17]. The accumulation of the proline may also be component of the stress influencing adaptive responses [18]. The intention of this study was to provide to an enhanced indulgent of the physiological feedback of the chickpea plants to the water stress. We explore the impact of four types of water stress on the chlorophyll (a, b, a/b) constituents, proline content and yield characters of chickpea cultivars conflicting in the drought tolerance.

Materials and Methods

The study was conducted with three chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) cultivars distinct in the duration of the crop cycle, type (desi or kabuli), behavior of growth and response to the drought: KC-98 (kabuli), KK-2 (kabuli) and Punjab Noor-2009 (desi). The first two are deliberated comparatively tolerant to drought; the last is sensitive to drought. The seeds of these cultivars were collected from the Agriculture Research Institute Tarnab Peshawar, Pakistan. The trial was conducted in 2016 in a field of Agriculture Research Station Harichand, Charsadda (34° 8” 43”” North, 71° 43” 53”” East 282 m above sea level) in Pakistan. The type of soil was the silt loam soil (pH up to a depth of 30 cm was 7.7). The trial was organized in the split-plot arrangement with the three replications. The varieties were taken as sub plot factor and drought treatment as main plot factor. To achieve the drought treatments, plants have been managed to one of the subsequent four irrigation schemes: control; a well irrigated treatment (no water stress), Water stress imposed during the vegetative phase by the withholding of irrigation and the re-watering at and after blossoming, Water stress forced during the anthesis phase by the withholding of irrigation, Water stress forced at both the vegetative stage and anthesis stage in retaining the irrigation. Respective plots were 6 lines (with a row distance of 0.30 m) of a 6 m long. The plant to plant distance was 0.13 m. The plots were irrigated once instantaneously after seeding to guarantee consistent emergence. Subsequently, the plants were watered from the tap in once a week relaying on the treatment at the -2 bar soil water potential. The plots have been kept free of weeds by hand weeding. Surface implementation and adding of 25 kg N ha-1 and 30 kg P ha-1 was done in the framework of the trial. The seeds were inoculated with a fungicide before planting for protection (Tables 1 & 2).