Assessment of soybean collection samples by anatomical, morphological, physiological and biochemical characteristics of drought tolerance
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26577/eb-2019-1-1410Abstract
Soybean varieties, resistant to various stresses, and especially varieties resistant to drought, are required for a wide variety of soil and climatic conditions of Kazakhstan. A necessary condition for effective selection for drought resistance is the correct assessment of drought resistance. Together with the assessment of seed yield in drought, the use of physiological, anatomical, morphological and biochemical traits of drought resistance allows to conduct more comprehensive assessment. The targeted use of phe-notypic markers will allow the breeders to select valuable soybean genotypes from the collection, which can be used in various crossbreeding schemes to develop productive and drought-resistant forms. In this article, soybean collections were assessed using anatomic-morphological and physiological-biochemical methods for the drought tolerance assessment by contrasting conditions of irrigation and noirrigated in scientific field station of KazSRIA&PG during the phase of bean filling and striking manifestations of moisture deficiency. Samples were identified according to high pubescence, well-developed stomatal apparatus, intensive proline accumulation, elevated level of the quantum yield of the photosystem (QY). 3 varieties such as Gessenska, Kye-Shuang, Comet were identified as drought-resistant types by two and three phenotypic markers of drought resistance. The possibility of using a modern fluorometer to assess the physiological state of plants during periods of stress caused by drought was demonstrated. The samples selected as drought-resistant will be used in hybridization to develop valuable hybrid populations and further domestic drought-resistant varieties adapted to conditions non-irrigated agriculture of Kazakhstan. Key words: soybean, drought tolerance, trait, xeromorphism, pubescence, free proline, stomata, quantum yield of the photosystem.
References
– 168с.
2 Статистические данные продовольственной и сельскохозяйственной организации Объединенных наций (ФАО) http://
www.fao.org/faostat.
3 Trenberth KE., Dai A., van der Schrier G., Jones PD., Barichivich J., Briffa KR., Sheffield J. Global warming and changes in
drought // Nat. Clim. Change – 2014. – № 4. – Р.17–22
4 Hussain M., Mumtaz S. Climate change and managing water crisis: Pakistan’s perspective // Rev Environ Health. – 2014. – №
29. – Р. 71–77.
5 Снеговой П.С. Водопотребление орошаемой сои // Зерновые и кормовые культуры на орошаемых землях: сб.статей.
– Кишинев, 1972. – С.25.
6 Балакай Г.Т. Влияние влагообеспеченности на урожай сои. // Мелиорация и водное хозяйство. – 2003. №4. – С. 6-9.
7 Eck H.V., Mathers A.C., Musick J.T. Plant water stress at various growth stages and growth and yield of soybeans // Field
Crops Research. – 1987. – Vol. 17(1). – P.1-16.
8 Desclaux D., Huynh T.T., Roumet P. Identification of soybean plant characteristics that indicate the timing of drought stress
// Crop Science. – 2000. – Vol.40(3). – P. 716-722.
9 Яков Лев. Капельное орошение // Шфаим. – 2003. – С.2.
10 Frederick J.R., Camp C.R., Bauer P.J. Drought-stress effects on branch and main stem seed yield and yield components of
determinate soybean // Crop Science. – 2001. – Vol. 41(3). – P.759-763.
11 Sadeghipour O., Abbasi S. Soybean response to drought and seed inoculation. World // Applied Sciences Journal. – 2012.
– Vol.17(1). – P. 55-60.
12 Manavalan L.P., Guttikonda S.K., Tran L.S.P., Nguyen H.T. Physiological and molecular approaches to improve drought
resistance in soybean // Plant and Cell Physiology. – 2009. – Vol. 50 (7). – P. 1260-1276.
13 Ku Y.Sh., Au-Yeung W.K., Yung Y.L.,Li M., Wen Ch.Q., Liu X. Lam H.M. Drought Stress and Tolerance in Soybean //
Licensee InTech. – 2013. – Chapter 10 – P.209-237 DOI.org/10.5772/52945/
14 Ли Т., Дидоренко С., Оразбаева У., Спанкулова З., Ташкенова А., Биримжанова З. Биохимические индексы
засухоустойчивости сои // Биотехнология. Теория и практика. – 2013. – №3. – С. 35-40 DOI: 10.11134/btp.3.2013.5 1
15 Прозина М.Н. Ботаническая микротехника. – М.: Наука, 1960. – 260 с.
16 Bates L.S., Waldren R.P., Teare I.D. Rapid Determination of Free Proline for Water-Stress Studies // Plant Soil. – 1973. –
Vol. 39. – P. 205–207.
17 Орехов Д.И., Калабин Г.А. Флуоресцентный анализ как инструмент оценки физиологического состояния деревьев в
различных условиях загрязнения в г. Москве // Вестник РУДН, серия Экология и безопасность жизнедеятельности. – 2013.
– № 5. – 5-17.
18 Poorter L., Markesteijn L. Seedling traits determine drought tolerance of tropical tree species // Biotropica. – 2008. – №
40. – Р. 321–331.
19 Garay , A.F. and Wilhelm , W.W. Root system characteristics of two soybean isolines undergoing water stress conditions //
Agron . J. – 1983. – Vol.75 – P. 973 – 977 .
20 Nguyen H.T., Babu R.C., Blum A. Breeding for drought resistance in rice: physiology and molecular genetics considerations
// Crop Science. – 1997. – Vol. 37. – P. 1426-1434.
21 Silvente S., Sobolev A.P., Lara M. Metabolite adjustments in drought tolerant and sensitive soybean genotypes in response
to water stress // PLoS ONE. – 2012. – Vol. 7(6) e38554.
22 Ashraf M., Harris P. Photosynthesis under stressful environments: an overview // Photosynthetica. – 2013. – 51. – Р.163–190.
23 Kocheva K., Lambrev P., Georgiev G., Goltsev V., Karabaliev M. Evaluation of chlorophyll fluorescence and membrane
injury in the leaves of barley cultivars under osmotic stress // Bioelectrochemistry. – 2004. – № 63. – Р . 121–124.
24 Liu , F. , Anderson , M.N. , Jacobson , S.E. and Jensen , C.R. Stomatal control and water use effi ciency of soybean ( Glycine
max L. Merr.) during progressive soil drying // Environ . Exp . Bot. – 2005. – Vol.54. – P. 33 – 40 .
25 Vignes , D. , Djekoun , A. and Planchon , C. Responses de differents genotypes de soja au defi cit hydrique. // Can . J . Plant
Sci. – 1986. – Vol.66. – P. 247 – 255 .
