روند تغییر پارامترهای فیزیولوژیک و بیان نیمه‌کمی ژن‌های CapLEA-1 و Dehydrin 1 در ژنوتیپ های نخود زراعی تحت تنش کم‌آبی

نوع مقاله : علمی پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانش‌آموخته کارشناسی‌ارشد رشته بیوتکنولوژی کشاورزی دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد، ایران

2 استادیار پژوهشکده علوم گیاهی، دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد، ایران

3 استاد گروه بیوتکنولوژی، دانشکده کشاورزی دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد، ایران

چکیده

کم‌آبی مهمترین تنش غیرزیستی است که تولید محصولات زراعی را در مناطق خشک و نیمه‌خشک دنیا و ایران محدود می‌کند. به‌منظور انجام مقایسات کنترل‌شده ابتدا پاسخ فیزیولوژیک دو ژنوتیپ متمایز MCC508 و MCC521 نخود به تنش کم‌آبی بررسی و سپس بیان دو ژن مؤثر در همان شرایط اندازه‌گیری شد. رطوبت نسبی برگ MCC508 به‌ویژه پس از 24 ساعت در حد معنی‌داری کمتر از MCC521 بود (05/0 ≥p). در MCC508 پایداری غشا ثبات بیشتری داشت به‌طوری‌که نشت الکترولیت و میزان تجمع مالون‌دی‌‌آلدئید (MDA) تقریباً ثابت بود. اما چهار روز تنش، باعث افزایش 2/1 برابری نسبت به شاهد شد. میزان تجمع پرولین چهار روز پس از تنش در MCC508 و MCC521 به ترتیب 8/16 و 4/9 میکرو مول بر گرم بافت تر برگ بود که نسبت به شاهد 1/5 و 8/3 برابر افزایش داشت. بیان نیمه کمی دو ژن‌ Dehydrin1 و CapLEA-1 در ژنوتیپ متحمل MCC508 به ترتیب با 4 و 1/2 برابر نسبت به شاهد، افزایش معنی‌داری نشان داد (05/0 ≥p) و با ادامه روند تنش این افزایش ادامه داشت. بیان ژن CapLEA-1 در ژنوتیپ حساس تغییرات معنی‌داری نشان نداد، اما بیان ژن Dehydrin1 در ابتدا نسبت به شاهد 4/1 برابر افزایش و سپس با ادامه تنش کاهش یافت (05/0 ≥p). با توجه به نقش ژن‌هایDehydrin1 وCapLEA-1 در حفظ ساختار لیپیدها و غشای سلولی، پایداری تاخوردگی صحیح پروتئین‌ها و سم‌زدایی به نظر می‌رسد سطح بیان بالاتر و منظم‌تر این ژنها می‌تواند یکی از دلایل احتمالی تحمل بیشتر ژنوتیپ MCC508 نسبت به MCC521 در برابر تنش کم‌آبی باشد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

Trend of changes in physiological parameters and semi-quantification gene expression for CapLEA-1 and Dehydrin 1 genes in chickpea genotypes under water deficit stress

نویسندگان [English]

  • Aliasghar Sedaghati 1
  • Saeedreza Vessal 2
  • Farajallah Shahriari 3
  • Abdoreza Bagheri 3
1 M.Sc. Department of Biotechnology, College of Agriculture, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Iran
2 Assistant Professor, Research Center for Plant Sciences, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Iran
3 Professor, Department of Biotechnology, College of Agriculture, & Research Center for Plant Sciences, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Iran
چکیده [English]

Water deficit is the most important abiotic stress limiting crop productivity in most arid and semi-arid areas of the world and Iran. In order to achieve precise experimental comparisons, the response of chickpea genotypes MCC508 and MCC 521 to water deficit was evaluated and then expression of the genes assessed under the same stress situation. Decreasing trend of Relative Water Content (RWC) was significantly less in MCC508 compared with MCC521, especially after 24 hours (p≤0.05). Membrane Stability Index (MSI) was also higher in MCC508 whereas electrolyte leakage and Malondialdehyde (MDA) accumulation were almost stable but increased 1.2-fold relative to control after four days stress. Proline was accumulated up to 16.8 and 9.4 µ mol g-1FW in MCC508 and MCC521 after 4 days, which indicated an increase of 5.1 and 3.8 fold related to the control, respectively. Semi-quantification gene expression analysis for Dehydrin1and CapLEA-1 showed different response to water deficit for each genotype. Both of these genes up-regulated in tolerant genotype MCC508 with the amount of 4 and 2.1 fold compared to their respective control (p≤0.05) so that the up-regulation trend steadily continued under the stress situation. However, CapLEA-1 expression was not significantly regulated in the sensetive genotype; instead, Dehydrin1regulation was significantly evident as much as 1.4 fold increase and then decreased (p≤0.05). It, therefore, seems that stable, high up-regulation of Dehydrin1and CapLEA-1 genes and their function (stability of lipids and cell memebrane, correct protein folding and detoxificaton) might be a possible reason for high tolerancy response to water deficit in MCC508 compared to MCC521.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Chickpea
  • CapLEA-1
  • Dehydrin 1
  • water deficit stress

مراجع

Amini F, Ehsanpour A (2005) Soluble proteins, proline, carbohydrates and Na + /K + changes in two tomatoes (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) cultivars under in vitro salt stress, Am. J. Biochem. Biotechnol. 1: 212-216.
Arefian M, Vessal S, Bagheri A (2014) Biochemical changes in response to salinity in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) during early stages of seedling growth. The J. Anim. Plant Sci. 24 (6): 1849-1857.
Bates LS, Waldran RP, Teare ID (1973) Rapid determination of free proline for water studies. Plant Soil 39: 205–208.
Beck EH, Fettig S, Knake C, Hartig K, Bhattarai T (2007) Specific and unspecific responses of plants to cold and drought stress. J. Biosci. 32: 501-510.
Bhushan D, Jaiswal DK, Ray D, Basu D, Datta A, Chakraborty S, Chakraborty N (2011) Dehydration-responsive reversible and irreversible changes in the extracellular matrix: comparative proteomics of chickpea genotypes with contrasting tolerance. J. Proteome Res. 10: 2027-2046.
Campbell SA, Close TJ (1997) Dehydrins: genes, proteins, and associations with phenotypic traits. New Phytol. 137(1): 61-74.
Cattivelli L, Rizza F, Badeck FW, Mazzucotelli E, Mastrangelo A M, Francia E, Mare C,Tondelli A,  Stanca AM (2008) Drought tolerance improvement in crop plants: An integrated view from breeding to genomics. Field Crops Res. 105: 1-14.
Choi DW, Close TJ (2000) A newly identified barley gene, Dhn12, encoding a YSK2 DHN, is located on chromosome 6H and has embryo-specific expression. Theor. Appl. Genet. 100: 1274-1278.
de Silva M, Purcell LC, King CA (1996) Soybean petiole ureide response to water deficits and decreased transpiration. Crop Sci. 36: 611-616
Eraslan F, Inal A, Savasturk O, Gunes A (2007) Changes in antioxidative system and membrane damage of lettuce in response to salinity and boron toxicity. Scientia Horticulturae 114: 5-10.
Figueiredo MVB, Bezerra-Neto E, Burity HA (2001) Water stress response on the enzymatic activity in cowpea nodules. Brazilian J. Microbiol. 32: 195-200.
Galle A, Csiszár J, Tari I, and Erdei L (2002) Changes in water and chlorophyll fluorescence parameters under osmotic stress in wheat cultivars. Acta Biologica Szegediensis 46: 85-86.
Ganjali A, Bagheri A, Porsa H (2010) Evaluation of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) germplasm for drought resistance. Iranian J of Pulses Res. 7:185-196.
Ganjeali A, Kafi M, Bagheri A, Shahriyari F (2006) Screening for drought tolerance in chickpea genotypes (Cicer arietinum L.). Iranian J of Pulses Res. 3:103-122.
Gao WR, Wang XS, Liu QY, Peng H, Chen C, Li JG, Zhang JS, Hu SN, Ma H (2008) "Comparative analysis of ESTs in response to drought stress in chickpea (C. arietinum L.)." Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 376(3): 578-583.
Goyal K, Walton LJ, Tunnacliffe A (2005) LEA proteins prevent protein aggregation due to water stress. Biochemistry J. 388: 151-157.
Groover A, Kapoor A, Lakshumi OS, Agarwal S, Sahi C, Katiar AS, Agrol M, Dubey H (2001) Understanding molecular alphabet of the plant abiotic stress responses. Curr. Sci. 80: 206–216.
Guerfel M, Baccouri O, Boujnah D, Cha W, Zarrouk M (2008) Impacts of water stress on gas exchange, water elations, chlorophyll content and leaf structure in the two main Tunisian olive (Olea europaea L.) cultivars. Scientia Horticulturae 1: 1-7.
Guo P, Baum M, Grando S, Ceccarelli S, Bai G, Li R, Von Korff M, Varshney R K, Graner A, Valkoun J (2009) Differentially expressed genes between drought-tolerant and drought-sensitive barley genotypes in response to drought stress during the reproductive stage. J. Exp. Bot. 60: 3531-3544.
Heath RL, Parker L (1968) Photoperoxidation in isolated chloroplast. 1. Kinetics and stoichiometry of fatty acid peroxidation. Arch. Biochem. Biophys., 125: 189-198.
Helal RM, Samir MA (2008) Comparative response of drought tolerant and drought sensitive maize genotypes to water stress. Aust. J. Crop Sci. 1: 31-36.
Hussain SS (2006) Molecular breeding for abiotic stress tolerance: drought perspective. In: Proceedings of the Pakistan Academy of Sciences 43: 189-210.
Jaleel CA, Manivannan P, Wahid A, Farooq M, Al-Juburi HJ, Somasundaram R, Panneerselvam R (2009) Drought stress in plants: a review on morphological characteristics and pigments composition. Int. J. Agric. Biol. 11: 100-105.
Kume S, Kobayashi F, Ishibashi M, Ohno R, Nakamura C, Takumi S (2005) Differential and coordinated expression of Cbf and Cor/Leagenes during long-term cold acclimation in two wheat cultivars showing distinct levels of freezing tolerance. Genes Genet. Syst. 80: 185-197.
Kuper PJC (1998) Adaptation mechanisms of green plants to environmental stress: The role of plant sterols and the phosphatidyl linolenoyl cascade in the functioning of plants and the response of plants to global climate change. In: Csermely P(ed) Stress of Life: From Molecules to Man, New York, 851: 209-215.
Malhotra RS, Saxena MC (2002) Strategies for overcoming drought stress in chickpea, ICARDA caravan 17: 20-22.
Mantri NL, Ford R, Coram TE, Pang ECK (2007) Transcriptional profiling of chickpea genes differentially regulated in response to high-salinity, cold and drought. BMC Genomics 8: 303-316.
Marjani A, Farsi M, Majidi Hervan E, Ganjeali A (2014) Comparative analysis of LEA and Dehydrin genes in response to drought stress in chickpea phonological different stages. Int. J. Biosci. 4(4): 49-57.
Munns R, Tester M (2008) Mechanisms of salinity tolerance. Annu. Rev. Plant Biol. 59: 651-681.
Najaphy A, Khamssi NN, Mostafaie A, Mirzaee H (2010) Effect of progressive water deficit stress on proline accumulation and protein profiles of leaves in chickpea. Afr. J. Biotechnol. 9: 7033-7036.
Premachandra G, Saneoka H, Ogata S (1990) Cell membrane stability, an indicator of drought tolerance, as affected by applied nitrogen in soybean. J. Agric. Sci., 115: 63-66.
Rodriguez EM, Svensson JT, Maatrasi M, Choi DW, Close TJ (2005) Barley Dhn13 encodes a KS-type dehydrin with constitutive and stress responsive expression. Theor. Appl. Genet. 110: 852- 858. 
Seki M, Narusaka M, Ishida J, Nanjo T, Fujita1 M, Oono Y, Kamiya A, Nakajima M, Enju A, Sakurai T, Satou M, Akiyama K, Taji T, Yamaguchi-Shinozaki K, Carninci P, Kawai J, Hayashizaki Y, Shinozaki K (2002) Monitoring the expression of 7000 Arabidopsis genes under drought, cold and high-salinity stresses using a full length cDNA microarray. Plant J. 31: 279-292.
Terzi R., Kadioglu A. (2006). Drought stress tolerance and the antioxidant enzyme system. Acta Biologica Cracoviensia Series Botanica 48: 89-96.
Webb MS, Gilmour SJ, Thomashow MF, Steponkus PL (1996) Effects of COR6.6 and COR15am polypeptides encoded by COR (Cold- Regulated) genes of Arabidopsis thaliana on dehydration-induced phase transitions of phospholipid membranes. Plant Physiol. 111: 301-312.
Wise MJ, Tunnacliffe A (2004) POPP the question: what do LEA proteins do? Trends in Plant Sci. 9: 13-17.

فایل ها

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار