Optimization of in vitro culture conditions and evaluation of salinity stress in Scarlett grapevine

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 M.Sc. student in Agricultural Biotechnology, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences, University of Guilan, Rasht, Iran.

2 Assistant Professor. Department of Agricultural Biotechnology, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences, University of Guilan, Rasht, Iran

3 Professor, Department of Agricultural Biotechnology, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences, University of Guilan, Rasht, Iran.

4 Specialized Center for Tissue Culture and Propagation of Fruit Trees and Ornamental Plants, Tehran Academic Center for Education, Culture and Research (ACECR), Tehran, Iran.

10.30466/rip.2022.54286.1246

Abstract

Grapevine is one of the most widely consumed horticultural crops worldwide. However, its relatively low tolerance to salinity poses considerable challenges to production. ‘Royal Scarlett’ is one of the improved grapevine cultivars. In this study, culture conditions were first optimized, followed by an evaluation of the effects of different salinity treatments. To assess the effects of plant growth regulators and culture media on shoot proliferation in Scarlett, three concentrations of 6-benzylaminopurine (BAP; 0, 4.44, and 8.88 μM) and three concentrations of 1-naphthaleneacetic acid (NAA; 0, 2.68, and 5.37 μM) were evaluated in Murashige and Skoog (MS) and Driver and Kuniyuki Walnut (DKW) media using a factorial arrangement in a completely randomized design. The MS medium supplemented with 4.44 μM BAP and 2.68 μM NAA produced the highest shoot proliferation rate, at 77.67%, and outperformed the other treatments. To optimize the rooting medium, three concentrations of indole-3-butyric acid (IBA; 0, 2.46, and 4.92 μM) and three concentrations of indole-3-acetic acid (IAA; 0, 2.86, and 5.71 μM) were tested in MS and DKW media using a factorial arrangement in a completely randomized design. The DKW medium supplemented with 4.92 μM IBA produced the highest rooting percentage, at 81%. Following culture-medium optimization, salinity treatments of 0, 50, 100, and 200 mM NaCl were applied in a completely randomized design. The physiological and biochemical results indicated that the plants tolerated salinity at 50 mM NaCl; however, Scarlett was sensitive to and unable to tolerate salinity levels of 100 and 200 mM.

Keywords

References

جلیلی­مرندی، ر.، جلیل­دوستعلی، پ. و حسنی، ع. 1388. بررسی تحمل دو پایه سیب به غلظت‌های مختلف کلرورسدیم در شرایط درون شیشه­ای. علوم باغبانی ایران،40(2): 29-36.
رستمی، ر. و ارشادی، ا. 1398. بهینه‌سازی باززایی گیاهان حاصل از جنین‌زایی سوماتیکی در شش رقم انگور‏‎(Vitis vinifera L.)‎. علوم باغبانی ایران،50(4): 935-945.
طحانیان، ح.، عبادی، ع.، شهبازی، م. و لسانی، ح.، 1395. بررسی توزیع عناصر (پتاسیم، سدیم و کلر) در برخی ژنوتیپ‌های انگور (Vitis vinifera) در شرایط شوری. علوم باغبانی ایران, 47(1):1-9.‎
فلاح­پور، م.، میری، س.م. و بوذری، ن. 1398. اثر محیط کشت و تنظیم‌کننده‌های رشد گیاهی بر ریزازدیادی پایه نیمه­‌پاکوتاه ‌کننده گیلاس CAB-6P. علوم باغبانی ایران، 50(1): 187-196.‎
کریمی، ه.، عباسپور، ن. و محمودزاده، ح. ۱۳۹۱. اثر تنش شوری بر برخی صفات فیزیولوژیکی چهار رقم انگور در تاکستان­های ارومیه، نشریه به­زراعی نهال و بذر، ۲۸(۱): 119-113.
گرگینی­شبانکاره، ح.، فاخری، ب. و محمدپوروشوایی، ر. 1394. تأثیر سطوح مختلف تنش‌های شوری و خشکی بر شاخص‌های رشدی و اسانس بادرنجبویه (.Melissa officinalis L). علوم گیاهان زراعی ایران، 46(4): 673-668.
محسن­زاده­گلفزانی، م.، سمیع­زاده­لاهیجی، ح. و حسنی­کومله، ح. 1396. ارزیابی فعالیت آنزیم گایکول­پراکسیداز در ژنوتیپ‌های کلزا در شرایط تنش و بدون تنش اسمزی. علوم گیاهان زراعی ایران، 48(1): 71-80.
مرادی­حیدرآباد، ص. و ارشادی، ا.1400. ارزیابی برخی پاسخ­های فیزیولوژیکی و بیوشیمیایی هفت رقم تجاری انگور به تنش سرما طی فصل رشد. علوم باغبانی ایران، 52(1): 213-224.
منصوریار، م.، عبداللهی، ح.، عرفانی‌مقدم، ج.، میرعبدالباقی، م. و سلامی، ع.ر. 1396. اثر نمک‌های نیترات‌آمونیوم و کلرورکلسیم در پرآوری و بهبود کیفیت شاخساره‌‌های درون شیشه پایه‌های پررشد گلابی. مجله به‌زراعی نهال و بذر، 33(2): 249-266.
نامنی، ع.، عباسی، ع. و سبک­دست­نودهی، م. 1400. پاسخ‌های فیزیولوژیکی و بیوشیمیایی گیاهان توتون تراریخت AtEXPA1 به تنش خشکی. تنش‌های محیطی در علوم زراعی, 14(1): 1-12.‎
Alleweldt, G. and Radler, F. 1962. Interrelationship between photoperiodic behavior of grapes and growth of plant tissue cultures. Plant physiology, 37(3): 376.
Arnon, D.I. 1949. Copper enzymes in isolated chloroplasts. Polyphenoloxidase in Beta vulgaris. Plant physiology, 24(1): 1.
Ashraf, M.P.J.C. and Harris, P.J., 2004. Potential biochemical indicators of salinity tolerance in plants. Plant science, 166(1): 3-16.
Baydar, N.G., Özkan, G. and Sağdiç, O. 2004. Total phenolic contents and antibacterial activities of grape (Vitis vinifera L.) extracts. Food control, 15(5): 335-339.
Ashraf, M. 1989. The effect of NaCl on water relations, chlorophyll, and protein and proline contents of two cultivars of blackgram (Vigna mungo L.). Plant and Soil, 119(2): 205-210.
Barakat, A.A., Hussein, B.A., Awad, N.A. and Soliman, M.H. 2019. Evaluation of the two rootstocks (SO4 and Freedom) for the salt stress in vitro conditions. Plant Archives, 19(2): 500-507.
Bates, L.S., Waldren, R.P.A. and Teare, I.D. 1973. Rapid determination of free proline for water-stress studies. Plant and soil, 39(1): 205-207.
Bohidar, S., Thirunavoukkarasu, M., and Rao, T.V. 2008. Effect of Plant Growth Regulators on in vitro micropropagation of “Garden Rue” (Ruta graveolens L.). International Journal of Integrative Biology, 3(1): 36-43.
Bonner, J. 1936. Plant tissue cultures from a hormone point of view. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 22(6): 426-430.
Buyukdemirci, H. 2005, June. The effects of medium ingredients on shoot propagation and rooting of cherry rootstocks in vitro. In V International Cherry Symposium 795: 419-422.
Chance, B., and Maehly, A. C. 1955. Assay of catalases and peroxidases. Methods in Enzymology, 2: 764-775.
Chandran, H., Meena, M., Barupal, T. and Sharma, K. 2020. Plant tissue culture as a perpetual source for production of industrially important bioactive compounds. Biotechnology reports, 26: e00450.
Chang, C.C., Slesak, I., Jordá, L., Sotnikov, A., Melzer, M., Miszalski, Z., Mullineaux, P.M., Parker, J.E., Karpinska, B. and Karpinski, S. 2009. Arabidopsis chloroplastic glutathione peroxidases play a role in cross talk between photooxidative stress and immune responses. Plant Physiology, 150(2): 670-683.
Choudhary, A., Kumar, A. and Kaur, N. 2020. ROS and oxidative burst: Roots in plant development. Plant Diversity, 42(1): 33-43.
Chourasia, K.N., Lal, M.K., Tiwari, R.K., Dev, D., Kardile, H.B., Patil, V.U., Kumar, A., Vanishree, G., Kumar, D., Bhardwaj, V. and Meena, J.K., 2021. Salinity stress in potato: Understanding physiological, biochemical and molecular responses. Life, 11(6), p.545.
Dai, J. and Mumper, R.J. 2010. Plant phenolics: extraction, analysis and their antioxidant and anticancer properties. Molecules, 15(10): 7313-7352.
Das, K., and Roychoudhury, A. 2014. Reactive oxygen species (ROS) and response of antioxidants as ROS-scavengers during environmental stress in plants. Frontiers in environmental science, 2: 53-60.
Deyett, E. and Rolshausen, P.E. 2019. Temporal dynamics of the sap microbiome of grapevine under high Pierce’s disease pressure. Frontiers in Plant Science, 10: 1246.
Farhangi-Abriz, S. and Torabian, S. 2017. Antioxidant enzyme and osmotic adjustment changes in bean seedlings as affected by biochar under salt stress. Ecotoxicology and environmental safety, 137: 64-70.
FAO. 2019. http,//www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/QCL.
Gaspar, T.H., Kevers, C., Faivre-Rampant, O., Crèvecoeur, M., Penel, C.L., Greppin, H. and Dommes, J. 2003. Changing concepts in plant hormone action. In Vitro Cellular & Developmental Biology-Plant, 39(2): 85-106.
Gill, S.S. and Tuteja, N. 2010. Reactive oxygen species and antioxidant machinery in abiotic stress tolerance in crop plants. Plant physiology and biochemistry, 48(12): 909-930.
Gupta, S.K. and Khanuja, S.P.S. 2001. In vitro micropropagation of Lippia. Current science, 81(2): 121-130.
Hanen, F., Ksouri, R., Megdiche, W., Trabelsi, N., Boulaaba, M. and Abdelly, C. 2008. Effect of salinity on growth, leaf-phenolic content and antioxidant scavenging activity in Cynara cardunculus L. Biosaline agriculture and high salinity tolerance, 53(2): 335-343.
Hasegawa, P.M., Bressan, R.A., Zhu, J.K. and Bohnert, H.J. 2000. Plant cellular and molecular responses to high salinity. Annual review of plant biology, 51(1): 463-499.
Hayat, S., Hayat, Q., Alyemeni, M.N., Wani, A.S., Pichtel, J. and Ahmad, A. 2012. Role of proline under changing environments: a review. Plant signaling & behavior, 7(11): 1456-1466.
Jaskani, M.J., Abbas, H., Khan, M.M., Qasim, M. and Khan, I.A. 2008. Effect of growth hormones on micropropagation of Vitis vinifera L. cv. Perlette. Pakistan Journal of Botany, 40(1): 105.
Kamran, M., Parveen, A., Ahmar, S., Malik, Z., Hussain, S., Chattha, M.S., Saleem, M.H., Adil, M., Heidari, P. and Chen, J.T. 2019. An overview of hazardous impacts of soil salinity in crops, tolerance mechanisms, and amelioration through selenium supplementation. International journal of molecular sciences, 21(1): 148.
Kang, S.G., Jeong, H.K. and Suh, H.S. 2004. Characterization of a new member of the glutathione peroxidase gene family in Oryza sativa. Molecules and cells, 17(1): 23-28.
Karamad, Z., Ganji Moghadam, E. and Bolandi, A. 2014. Effects of culture media and growth regulators on micropropagation of Gisela 6 rootstock. Journal of crops improvement, 16(2): 339-351.
Kong, W., Liu, F., Zhang, C., Zhang, J. and Feng, H. 2016. Non-destructive determination of Malondialdehyde (MDA) distribution in oilseed rape leaves by laboratory scale NIR hyperspectral imaging. Scientific reports, 6(1): 1-8.
Li, H., Lei, P., Pang, X., Li, S., Xu, H., Xu, Z. and Feng, X. 2017. Enhanced tolerance to salt stress in canola (Brassica napus L.) seedlings inoculated with the halotolerant Enterobacter cloacae HSNJ4. Applied Soil Ecology, 119: 26-34.
Li, X., Sun, P., Zhang, Y., Jin, C. and Guan, C. 2020. A novel PGPR strain Kocuria rhizophila Y1 enhances salt stress tolerance in maize by regulating phytohormone levels, nutrient acquisition, redox potential, ion homeostasis, photosynthetic capacity and stress-responsive genes expression. Environmental and Experimental Botany, 174: 104023.
Mansseri-Lamrioui, A., Louerguioui, A., Bonaly, J., Yakoub-Bougdal, S., Allili, N. and Gana-Kebbouche, S. 2011. Proliferation and rooting of wild cherry: The influence of cytokinin and auxin types and their concentration. African Journal of Biotechnology, 10(43): 8613-8624.
Mohammadkhani, N. 2018. Effects of salinity on phenolic compounds in tolerant and sensitive grapes. Poljoprivreda i Sumarstvo, 64(2): 73-86.
Mozafari, A.A., Ghadakchi asl, A. and Ghaderi, N. 2018. Grape response to salinity stress and role of iron nanoparticle and potassium silicate to mitigate salt induced damage under in vitro conditions. Physiology and molecular biology of plants, 24(1): 25-35.
Munns, R. and Gilliham, M. 2015. Salinity tolerance of crops–what is the cost?. New phytologist, 208(3): 668-673.
Munns, R. and Tester, M. 2008. Mechanisms of salinity tolerance. Annual Review of Plant Biology, 59: 651-681.
Neshat, M., Abbasi, A., Hosseinzadeh, A., Sarikhani, M.R., Dadashi Chavan, D. and Rasoulnia, A. 2022. Plant growth promoting bacteria (PGPR) induce antioxidant tolerance against salinity stress through biochemical and physiological mechanisms. Physiology and Molecular Biology of Plants, 28(2): 347-361.
Pereira, G.J.G., Molina, S.M.G., Lea, P.J. and Azevedo, R.A.D., 2002. Activity of antioxidant enzymes in response to cadmium in Crotalaria juncea. Plant and soil, 239(1): 123-132.
Qiu, H., Zhang, L., Liu, C., He, L., Wang, A., Liu, H.L. and Zhu, J.B. 2014. Cloning and characterization of a novel dehydrin gene, SiDhn2, from Saussurea involucrata Kar. et Kir. Plant molecular biology, 84(6): 707-718.
Shah, S.H., Houborg, R. and McCabe, M.F. 2017. Response of chlorophyll, carotenoid and SPAD-502 measurement to salinity and nutrient stress in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Agronomy, 7(3): 61.
Sharma, P., Tripathi, S., Purchase, D. and Chandra, R. 2021. Integrating phytoremediation into treatment of pulp and paper industry wastewater: field observations of native plants for the detoxification of metals and their potential as part of a multidisciplinary strategy. Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering, 9(4): 105547.
Simpson, K., Quiroz, L.F., Rodriguez-Concepcion, M. and Stange, C.R. 2016. Differential contribution of the first two enzymes of the MEP pathway to the supply of metabolic precursors for carotenoid and chlorophyll biosynthesis in carrot (Daucus carota). Frontiers in Plant Science, 7: 214365.
Sivritepe, N. and Eris, A. 1999. Determination of Salt Tolerance in Some GrapevineCultivars (Vitis vinifera L.) Under in vitro Conditions. Turkish Journal of Biology, 23(4): 473-486.
Stuart, J.A. and Robb, E.L., 2013. Bioactive polyphenols from wine grapes (Vol. 457). New York, NY, USA: Springer.
Yancey, P.H., Clark, M.E., Hand, S.C., Bowlus, R.D. and Somero, G.N. 1982. Living with water stress: evolution of osmolyte systems. Science, 217(4566): 1214-1222.
Zhang, L., Wu, M., Teng, Y., Jia, S., Yu, D., Wei, T., Chen, C. and Song, W. 2019. Overexpression of the glutathione peroxidase 5 (RcGPX5) gene from Rhodiola crenulata increases drought tolerance in Salvia miltiorrhiza. Frontiers in Plant Science, 9: 429992.
Zörb, C., Geilfus, C.M. and Dietz, K.J. 2019. Salinity and crop yield. Plant biology, 21: 31-38.
Research in Pomology
Volume 8, Issue 2
March 2024
Pages 143-161

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics