Growth and Physiological Responses of Sugarcane to Drought Stress at an Early Growth Stage

Date Received: May 14, 2020

Date Published: May 15, 2020

DOI: https://doi.org/10.31817/vjas.2019.2.4.01

Views

2471

Download

827

How to Cite:

Khuynh, B., Thang, V., Chinh, V., & Thom, P. (2020). Growth and Physiological Responses of Sugarcane to Drought Stress at an Early Growth Stage. Vietnam Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 2(4), 451–460. https://doi.org/10.31817/vjas.2019.2.4.01

Growth and Physiological Responses of Sugarcane to Drought Stress at an Early Growth Stage

Bui The Khuynh (*) 1 , Vu Ngoc Thang 1 , Vu Dinh Chinh 1   , Pham Thi Thom 1

  • Corresponding author: btkhuynh@vnua.edu.vn
  • 1 Faculty of Agronomy, Vietnam National University of Agriculture, Hanoi 131000, Vietnam

    • Keywords

    Sugarcane, drought stress, growth, physiological response

    Abstract


    A pot experiment was conducted in a net house to evaluate the effects of drought stress (a 20-day water withholding treatment from 100-120 days after planting) on the growth and physiology of five sugarcane cultivars. The results showed that water stress at an early stage significantly affected sugarcane growth and physiology. Water stress resulted in reductions in plant height, stalk diameter, and leaf number of sugarcane, in addition to reductions in the photosynthetic pigment content, Fv/Fm, and SPAD (Soil Plant Analysis Development) readings after the 20-day withholding water period (120 DAP), and in stem, root, and leaf fresh weights, and leaf area at 150 DAP. Besides, drought stress led to increases in stomata density and decreases in stomata length. Variation was also found among the cultivars in response to water stress. Significant genotypic differences in stem fresh weight and leaf area under water stress among the cultivars were observed. The highest value of stem fresh weight under stressed conditions was recorded in ROC22 (50.6 g), followed by QĐ159 (46.5g), ROC16 (46.2g), ROC10 (46.1g), and VL06 (44.4g). However, the highest DTI was recorded in ROC16, followed by VL06, ROC10, QĐ93-159, and ROC22, respectively.

    References

    Amalraj R. S., Selvaraj N., Veluswamy G. K., Rananujan R. P., Muthurajan R. & Palaniyandi M. (2010). Sugarcane proteomics: Establishment of a protein extraction method for 2-DE in stalk tissues and initiation of sugarcane proteome reference map. Electrophoresis. 31: 1959-1974.

    Arnon D. I. (1949). Copper enzymes in isolated chloroplasts, polyphenoxidase in Beta vulgaris. Plant Physiology. 24(1): 1-15.

    Ashraf M. & Harris P. J. C. (2013). Photosynthesis under stressful environments: An overview. Photosynthetica. 51(2): 163-190.

    Begcy K., Mariano E. D., Gentile A., Lembke C. G., Zingaretti S. M., Souza G. M. & Menossi M. (2012). A novel stress-induced sugarcane gene confers tolerance to drought, salt and oxidative stress in transgenic tobacco plants. PLoS One. 7:e44697.

    Camargo M. A. B. & Marenco R. A. (2011). Density, size and distribution of stomata in 35 rainforest tree species in Central Amazonia. Acta Amazonia. 41(2): 205-212.

    Chaves M. M., Maroco J. P. & Pereira J. S. (2003). Understanding plant responses to drought-from genes to the whole plant. Functional Plant Biology. 30: 239-264.

    Farooq M., Hussain M., Wahid A. & Siddique K. H. M. (2012). Drought stress in plants: an overview. In: Aroca R. (Eds.) Plant responses to drought stress. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg. 1-33.

    Graça J. P., Rodrigues F. A., Farias J. R. B., Oliveira M. C. N., Hoffmann-Campo C. B. & Zingaretti S. M. (2010). Physiological parameters in sugarcane cultivars submitted to water deficit. Brazilian Journal of Plant Physiology. 22: 189-197.

    Hoang D. T., Hiroo T. & Yoshinobu K. (2018). Nitrogen use efficiency and drought tolerant ability of various sugarcane varieties under drought stress at early growth stage. Plant Production Science. 22: 250-261.

    Jaiphong T., Tominaga J., Watanabe K., Nakabaru M., Takaragawa H., Suwa R., Ueno M. & Kawamitsu Y (2016). Effects of duration and combination of drought and flood conditions on leaf photosynthesis, growth and sugar content in sugarcane, Plant Production Science. 19: 427-437.

    Jangpromma N., Thammasirirak S., Jailsil P. & Songsri P. (2012). Effects of drought and recovery from drought

    stress on above ground and root growth, and water use efficiency in sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum L.). Australian Journal of Crop Science. 6: 1298-1304.

    Jangpromma N., Songsri P. & Jaisil P. (2010). Rapid assessment of chlorophyll content in sugarcane using a SPAD chlorophyll meter across different water stress conditions. Asian Journal of Plant Science. 9: 368-374.

    Koonjah S. S., Walker S., Singels A., Van Antwerpen R. & Nayamuth A. R. (2006). A quantitative study of water stress effect on sugarcane photosynthesis. Proceedings of the South African Sugarcane Technologists’ Association. 80: 148-158.

    Larcher W. (2003). Physiological plant ecology: Ecophysiology and stress physiology of functional groups (4th ed). Springer-Verlag. 401-416.

    Mafakheri A., Siosemardeh A. & Bahramnejad B. (2010). Effect of drought stress on yield, proline and chlorophyll contents in three chickpea cultivars. Australian Journal of Crop Science. 4: 580-585.

    Maxwell K. & Johnson G. N. (2000). Chlorophyll florescence: a practical guide. Journal of Experimental Botany. 51: 659-668.

    Meng L., Li L., Chen W., Xu Z. & Liu L. (1999). Effect of water stress on stomatal density, length, width and net photosynthetic rate in rice leaves. Journal of Shenyang Agricultural University. 30: 477-480.

    Medeiros D. B., Silva E. C., Nogueira R. J. M. C., Teixeira M. M., Buckeridge M. S. (2013). Physiological limitations in two sugarcane varieties under water suppression and after recovering. Theoretical and Experimental Plant Physiology. 25: 213-222.

    Nonami H. (1998). Plant water relations and control of cell elongation at low water potentials. Journal of Plant Research. 111: 373-382.

    Robertson M. J., Inman-Bamber N. G., Muchow R. C. & Wood A. W. (1999). Physiology and productivity of sugarcane with early and mid-season water deficit. Field Crop Research. 64: 211-227.

    Reddy T. Y., Reddy V. R. & Anbumozhi V. (2003). Physiological response of groundnut (Arachis hypogea L.) to drought stress and its amelioration: A critical review. Plant Growth Regulation. 41: 75-88.

    Silva M. A., Jifon J. L., Santos C. M., Jadoski C. J. & Silva J. A. G. (2013). Photosyntheitc capacity and water use efficiency in sugarcane genotypes subject to water deficit during early growth phase. Brazilian Archives of Biology and Technology. 56: 735-748.

    Silva M. A., Jifon J. L., Silva J. A. G. & Sharma V. (2007). Use of physiological parameters as fast tools to screen for drought tolerance in sugarcane. Brazilian Journal of Plant Physiology. 19: 735-748.

    Silva M. A., Silva J. A. G., Enciso J., Sharma V. & Jifon J. (2008). Yield components as indicators of drought tolerance of sugarcane. Scientia Agricola. 65: 620-627.

    Smith D. M., Inman-Bamber N. G. & Thorburn P. J. (2005). Growth and function of the sugarcane root system. Field Crops Research. 92: 169-183.

    Xu Z. & Zhou Z. (2008). Responses of leaf stomatal density to water status and its relationship with photosynthesis in a grass. Journal of Experimental Botany. 59: 3317-3325.

    Yang L., Han M., Zhou G. & Li J. (2007). The changes of water-use efficiency and stoma density of Leymus chinensis along Northeast China Transect. Acta Ecologica Sinica. 27: 16-24.