| Literature DB >> 31947709 |
Ayesha Farooq1, Shazia Anwer Bukhari2, Nudrat A Akram2, Muhammad Ashraf3, Leonard Wijaya4, Mohammed Nasser Alyemeni4, Parvaiz Ahmad4,5.
Abstract
The present study was conducted to examine the effect of exogenously applied ascorbic acid (AsA) on osmoprotectants and the oxidative defense system in four cultivars (16171, 16183, 16207 and 16246) of safflower under well-watered and water deficit conditions. Water stress (60% field capacity) significantly decreased the shoot and root fresh and dry weights, shoot and root lengths and chlorophyll contents in all four safflower cultivars, while it increased the leaf free proline, total phenolics, total soluble proteins, hydrogen peroxide content and activities of catalase, superoxide dismutase and peroxidase enzymes. Foliar-applied (100 mg L-1 and 150 mg L-1) ascorbic acid caused a marked improvement in shoot and root fresh and dry weights, plant height, chlorophyll and AsA contents as well as the activity of peroxidase (POD) enzyme particularly under water deficit conditions. It also increased the accumulation of leaf proline, total phenolics, total soluble proteins and glycine betaine (GB) content in all four cultivars. Exogenously applied AsA lowered the contents of MDA and H2O2, and the activities of CAT and SOD enzymes. Overall, exogenously applied AsA had a positive effect on the growth of safflower plants under water deficit conditions which could be related to AsA-induced enhanced osmoprotection and regulation of antioxidant defense system.Entities:
Keywords: antioxidants; ascorbic acid; lipid peroxidation; osmoprotectants; safflower; water stress
Year: 2020 PMID: 31947709 PMCID: PMC7020178 DOI: 10.3390/plants9010104
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Plants (Basel) ISSN: 2223-7747
Mean squares from three-way analysis of variance of data for different morphological and biochemical parameters of safflower (Carthamus tinctorious L.) plants treated with foliar spray of ascorbic acid (AsA) under well-watered (control, 100% FC) and water deficit (60% FC) conditions.
| Source of Variations | df | Shoot FW | Shoot DW | Root FW | Root DW | Shoot Length |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cultivars (Cvs) | 3 | 37.02 *** | 3.208 *** | 0.052 *** | 0.008 *** | 163.4 ns |
| Drought (D) | 1 | 221.6 *** | 15.38 *** | 0.034 *** | 0.008 *** | 6118.4 *** |
| Ascorbic acid (AsA) | 2 | 26.99 *** | 3.477 *** | 0.006 *** | 0.001 ** | 1068.5 *** |
| Cvs × D | 3 | 48.17 *** | 4.116 *** | 0.0035 ** | 0.001 ** | 70.42 ns |
| Cv × AsA | 6 | 5.13 *** | 0.283 * | 0.001 ns | 0.0001 ns | 12.46 ns |
| D × AsA | 2 | 2.59 * | 1.125 *** | 0.002 ns | 0.0002 ns | 11.41 ns |
| Cvs × D × AsA | 6 | 2.26 *** | 0.381 ** | 0.0007 ns | 0.0001 ns | 51.76 ns |
|
|
|
|
| |||
| Cultivars (Cvs) | 3 | 19.07 *** | 0.316 *** | 0.198 *** | 0.07 ns | |
| Drought (D) | 1 | 140.3 *** | 1.417 *** | 0.857 *** | 0.68 * | |
| Ascorbic acid (AsA) | 2 | 24.91 *** | 0.122 ** | 0.397 *** | 9.83 *** | |
| Cvs × D | 3 | 6.39 ns | 0.231 *** | 0.036 ns | 0.32 ns | |
| Cv × AsA | 6 | 0.813 ns | 0.021 ns | 0.017 ns | 0.14 ns | |
| D × AsA | 2 | 2.08 ns | 0.012 ns | 0.002 ns | 0.83 ** | |
| Cvs × D × AsA | 6 | 5.42 ns | 0.011 ns | 0.031 ns | 0.11 ns | |
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
| Cultivars (Cvs) | 3 | 12.68 ns | 67.13 *** | 146,428.5 *** | 1.72 ** | 11,391.5 ns |
| Drought (D) | 1 | 0.10 * | 26.96 ** | 72,409.6 *** | 0.695 ns | 94,925.5 *** |
| Ascorbic acid (AsA) | 2 | 145.5 *** | 20.62 *** | 31,712.8 *** | 45.75 *** | 199,078.7 *** |
| Cvs × D | 3 | 80.41 *** | 0.402 ns | 6380.7 ns | 2.558 *** | 29,751.7 ** |
| Cv × AsA | 6 | 15.55 ns | 4.69 ns | 11,800.3 ** | 0.303 ns | 4309.9 ns |
| D × AsA | 2 | 1.064 ns | 2.22 ns | 977.5 ns | 0.148 ns | 31,651.6 * |
| Cvs × D × AsA | 6 | 4.34 ns | 2.702 ns | 2211.1 ns | 0.336 ns | 12,225.1 ns |
|
|
|
|
| |||
| Cultivars (Cvs) | 3 | 1545.4 *** | 339.2 *** | 12.56 *** | 379.7 *** | |
| Drought (D) | 1 | 1.802 ns | 470.1 *** | 20.65 *** | 316.5 ** | |
| Ascorbic acid (AsA) | 2 | 1146.7 *** | 253.8 *** | 9.95 *** | 362.6 *** | |
| Cvs × D | 3 | 947.5 *** | 104.3 ** | 1.555 ns | 88.75 ns | |
| Cv × AsA | 6 | 137.5 ns | 25.48 ns | 1.0817 ns | 52.19 ns | |
| D × AsA | 2 | 118.3 ns | 109.1 *** | 3.812 * | 3.153 ns | |
| Cvs × D × AsA | 6 | 66.22 ns | 22.44 ns | 0.335 ns | 16.25 ns |
ns = non-significant; *, ** and *** = significant at 0.05, 0.01 and 0.001 levels, respectively.
Figure 1Shoot fresh (A) and dry (B) weights, root fresh (C) and dry (D) weights, shoot (E) and root (F) lengths, of four cultivars of safflower (Carthamus tinctorius L.) foliarly treated with ascorbic acid subjected to water stress conditions (mean ± S.E.).
Figure 2Chlorophyll a (A), chlorophyll b (B) contents of four cultivars of safflower (Carthamus tinctorius L.) foliarly treated with ascorbic acid subjected to water stress conditions (mean ± S.E.).
Figure 3Proline (A), glycine betaine (B), ascorbic acid (C), total soluble proteins (D), total phenolic (E) contents of four cultivars of safflower (Carthamus tinctorius L.) foliarly treated with ascorbic acid subjected to water stress conditions (mean ± S.E.).
Figure 4Hydrogen peroxide (A) and malondialdehyde (B) contents of four cultivars of safflower (Carthamus tinctorius L.) foliarly treated with ascorbic acid subjected to water stress conditions (mean ± S.E.).
Figure 5Activities of superoxide dismutase (SOD) (A), catalase (CAT) (B) and peroxidase (POD) (C) enzymes of four cultivars of safflower (Carthamus tinctorius L.) foliarly treated with ascorbic acid subjected to water stress conditions (mean ± S.E.).