Morpho-Physiological Response of Oryza glaberrima to Gradual Soil Drying

doi:10.1016/j.rsci.2019.12.007

Abstract

Abstract:

Soil drought occurrence during dry season has been the main constraint, besides prolonged flooding during rainy season, in increasing cropping intensity and rice productivity in tropical riparian wetland. Use of drought tolerant rice genotype might be a suitable option for overcoming such problem. This study focused on the effects of gradual soil drying during early vegetative growth stage on morphological and physiological traits of five Oryza glaberrima genotypes, namely RAM12, RAM14, RAM59, RAM97 and RAM101, and two Oryza sativa subsp japonica genotypes, i.e. Koshihikari and Minamihatamochi. The plants were subjected to 6 d of gradual soil drying condition from 15 days after transplanting (DAT) to 20 DAT, and were allowed to recover until 22 DAT. Gradual soil drying reduced plant growth as indicated by dry mass accumulation. Drought reduced stomatal conductance and increased leaf rolling score of all the genotypes. All the genotypes showed comparable response on stomatal conductance, but O. glaberrima genotypes performed higher in leaf rolling recovery. Meanwhile, O. sativa genotypes decreased total leaf area and specific leaf area, but increased specific leaf weight in order to avoid further damages due to drought stress. Drought tolerance mechanisms in RAM101, RAM12, RAM59 and RAM14 were associated with leaf morpho-physiological responses, root traits and dry biomass accumulation.

Key words: drought tolerance, leaf rolling, root trait, stomatal conductance, dry matter accumulation

Kartika Kartika, Sakagami Jun-Ichi, Lakitan Benyamin, Yabuta Shin, Wijaya Andi, Kadir Sabaruddin, Ilman Widuri Laily, Siaga Erna, Nakao Yoshihiro. Morpho-Physiological Response of Oryza glaberrima to Gradual Soil Drying[J]. Rice Science, 2020, 27(1): 67-74.

Figures/Tables 10

References 40

[1]	Agnoun Y, Biaou S S H, Sié M, Vodouhè R S, Ahanchédé A.2012. The African riceOryza glaberrima Steud: Knowledge distribution and prospects. Int J Biol, 4(3): 158-180.
[2]	Allah A A A.2009. Genetic studies on leaf rolling and some root traits under drought conditions in rice (Oryza sativa L.). Afr J Biotechnol, 8(22): 6241-6248.
[3]	Bouman B A M, Tuong T P.2001. Field water management to save water and increase its productivity in irrigated lowland rice.Agric Water Manage, 49: 11-30.
[4]	Chaves M M, Pereira J S, Maroco J, Rodrigues M L, Ricardo C P P, Osório M L, Carvalho I, Faria T, Pinheiro C.2002. How plants cope with water stress in the field? Photosynthesis and growth.Ann Bot, 89(7): 907-916.
[5]	Comas L H, Becker S R, Cruz V M, Byrne P F, Dierig D A.2013. Root traits contributing to plant productivity under drought.Front Plant Sci, 4: 442.
[6]	Dingkuhn M, Audebert A Y, Jones M P, Etienne K, Sow A.1999. Control of stomatal conductance and leaf rolling inO. sativa and O. glaberrima upland rice. Field Crops Res, 61(3): 223-236.
[7]	Djedatin G, Ndjiondjop M N, Mathieu T, Cruz C M V, Sanni A, Ghesquière A, Verdier V.2011. Evaluation of African cultivated riceOryza glaberrima for resistance to bacterial blight. Plant Dis, 95(4): 441-447.
[8]	Fahad S, Bajwa A A, Nazir U, Anjum S A, Farooq A, Zohaib A, Sadia S, Nasim W, Adkins S, Saud S, Ihsan M Z, Alharby H, Wu C, Wang D P, Huang J L.2017. Crop production under drought and heat stress: Plant responses and management options.Front Plant Sci, 8: 1-16.
[9]	Fang Y J, Xiong L Z.2015. General mechanisms of drought response and their application in drought resistance improvement in plants.Cell Mol Life Sci, 72(4): 673-689.
[10]	Feng F J, Xu X Y, Du X B, Tong H H, Luo L J, Mei H W.2012. Assessment of drought resistance among wild rice accessions using a protocol based on single-tiller propagation and PVC-tube cultivation.Aust J Crop Sci, 6(7): 1204-1211.
[11]	Gimenez C, Gallardo M, Thompson R B.2005. Plant-water relations. In: Hillel D. Encyclopedia of Soils in the Environment. Oxford: Elsevier: 231-238.
[12]	Guo Y Y, Yu H Y, Kong D S, Yan F, Liu D H, Zhang Y J.2015. Effects of gradual soil drought stress on the growth, biomass partitioning, and chlorophyll fluorescence ofPrunus mongolica seedlings. Turk J Biol, 39(4): 532-539.
[13]	Heinemann A B, Stone L F, Fageria N K.2011. Transpiration rate response to water deficit during vegetative and reproductive phases of upland rice cultivars.Sci Agric, 68(1): 24-30.
[14]	Huang M, Chen J N, Cao F B, Jiang L G, Zou Y B.2015. Root morphology was improved in a late-stage vigor super rice cultivar.PLoS One, 10(11): e0142977.
[15]	International Rice Research Institute (IRRI). 2002. Standard Evaluation System for Rice. Los Banos, the Philippines: IRRI.
[16]	Jaleel C A, Manivannan P, Wahid A, Farooq M, Al-Juburi H J, Somasundaram R, Panneerselvam R.2009. Drought stress in plants: A review on morphological characteristics and pigments composition.Int J Agric Biol, 11(1): 100-105.
[17]	Kadioglu A, Terzi R.2007. A dehydration avoidance mechanism: Leaf rolling.Bot Rev, 73(4): 290-302.
[18]	Kartika K, Lakitan B, Sanjaya N, Wijaya A, Kadir S, Kurnianingsih A, Widuri L I, Siaga E, Meihana M.2018a. Internal versus edge row comparison in jajar legowo 4:1 rice planting pattern at different frequency of fertilizer applications.Agrivita, 40(2): 222-232.
[19]	Kartika K, Lakitan B, Wijaya A, Kadir S, Widuri L I, Siaga E, Meihana M.2018b. Effects of particle size and application rate of rice-husk biochar on chemical properties of tropical wetland soil, rice growth and yield.Aust J Crop Sci, 12(5): 817-826.
[20]	Katsura K, Tsujimoto Y, Oda M, Matsushima K I, Inusah B, Dogbe W, Sakagami J I.2016. Genotype-by-environment interaction analysis of rice (Oryza spp.) yield in a floodplain ecosystem in West Africa. Eur J Agron, 73: 152-159.
[21]	Kijoji A A, Nchimbi-Msolla S, Kanyeka Z L, Klassen S P, Serraj R, Henry A.2013. Water extraction and root traits inOryza sativa × Oryza glaberrima introgression lines under different soil moisture regimes. Funct Plant Biol, 40(1): 54-66.
[22]	Koffler B E, Luschin-Ebengreuth N, Stabentheiner E, Müller M, Zechmann B.2014. Compartment specific response of antioxidants to drought stress inArabidopsis. Plant Sci, 227: 133-144.
[23]	Lakitan B, Alberto A, Lindiana L, Kartika K, Herlinda S, Kurnianingsih A.2018a. The benefits of bichar on growth and yield in tropical riparian wetland, South Sumatera, Indonesia.CMUJ Nat Sci, 17(2): 111-126.
[24]	Lakitan B, Hadi B, Herlinda S, Siaga E, Widuri L I, Kartika K, Lindiana L, Yunindyawati Y, Meihana M.2018b. Recognizing farmers’ practices and constraints for intensifying rice production at riparian wetlands in Indonesia.NJAS Wagen J Life Sci, 84: 10-20.
[25]	Lisar S Y S, Motafakkerazad R, Hossain M M, Rahman I M M.2012. Water Stress in Plants: Causes, Effects and Responses. Rijeka, Croatia: InTech: 1-14.
[26]	Ndjiondjop M N, Seck P A, Lorieux M, Futakuchi K, Yao K N, Djedatin G, Sow M E, Bocco R, Cisse F, Fatondji B.2012. Effect of drought onOryza glaberrima rice accessions and Oryza glaberrima derived-lines. Asian J Agric Res, 6(4): 144-157.
[27]	Ouyang W J, Struik P C, Yin X Y, Yang J C.2017. Stomatal conductance, mesophyll conductance, and transpiration efficiency in relation to leaf anatomy in rice and wheat genotypes under drought.J Exp Bot, 68(18): 5191-5205.
[28]	Pandey V, Shukla A.2015. Acclimation and tolerance strategies of rice under drought stress.Rice Sci, 22(4): 147-161.
[29]	Pantuwan G, Fukai S, Cooper M, Rajatasereekul S, O’Toole J C.2002. Yield response of rice (Oryza sativa L.) genotypes to drought under rainfed lowlands: 2. Selection of drought resistant genotypes. Field Crops Res, 73: 169-180.
[30]	Rodenburg J, Saito K, Kakaï R G, Touré A, Mariko M, Kiepe P.2009. Weed competitiveness of the lowland rice varieties of NERICA in the southern Guinea Savanna.Field Crops Res, 114(3): 411-418.
[31]	Sakagami J I, Joho Y, Ito O.2009. Contrasting physiological responses by cultivars ofOryza sativa and O. glaberrima to prolonged submergence. Ann Bot, 103(2): 171-180.
[32]	Sakagami J I, Joho Y, Sone C.2013. Complete submergence escape with shoot elongation ability by underwater photosynthesis in African rice,Oryza glaberrima Steud. Field Crops Res, 152: 17-26.
[33]	Sarla N, Swamy B P M.2005. Oryza glaberrima: A source for the improvement of Oryza sativa. Curr Sci, 89(6): 955-963.
[34]	Sarvestani Z T, Pirdashti H, Sanavy S A M M, Balouchi H.2008. Study of water stress effects in different growth stages on yield and yield components of different rice (Oryza sativa L.) cultivars. Pak J Biol Sci, 11(10): 1303-1309.
[35]	Siaga E, Lakitan B, Hasbi, Bernas S M, Wijaya A, Lisda R, Ramadhani F, Widuri L I, Kartika K, Meihana M.2018. Application of floating culture system in chili pepper (Capsicum annum L.) during prolonged flooding period at riparian wetland in Indonesia. Aust J Crop Sci, 12(5): 808-816.
[36]	Sikirou M, Shittu A, Konaté K A, Maji A T, Ngaujah A S, Sanni K A, Ogunbayo S A, Akintayo I, Saito K, Dramé K N, Ahanchédé A, Venuprasad R.2018. Screening African rice (Oryza glaberrima) for tolerance to abiotic stresses: I. Fe toxicity. Field Crops Res, 220: 3-9.
[37]	Timung B, Bharali B, Konwar M J.2017. Physiological parameters of some upland rice (Oryza sativa L.) genotypes under moisture stress condition. J Pharm Phytochem, 6(6): 1636-1640.
[38]	Wellstein C, Poschlod P, Gohlke A, Chelli S, Campetella G, Rosbakh S, Canullo R, Kreyling J, Jentsch A, Beierkuhnlein C.2017. Effects of extreme drought on specific leaf area of grassland species: A meta-analysis of experimental studies in temperate and sub-Mediterranean systems.Glob Change Biol, 23(6): 2473-2481.
[39]	Widuri L I, Lakitan B, Hasmeda M, Sodikin E, Wijaya A, Meihana M, Kartika K, Siaga E.2017. Relative leaf expansion rate and other leaf-related indicators for detection of drought stress in chili pepper (Capsicum annuum L.). Aust J Crop Sci, 11(12): 1617-1625.
[40]	Zhang Q F, Wing R A.2013. Genetics and genomics of rice.Plant Genet Genom: Crops Models, 5: 9-25.

Genotype	Start of treatment			End of treatment			Recovery
Genotype	Control (C)	Drought (D)	D/C ratio	Control (C)	Drought (D)	D/C ratio	Control (C)	Drought (D)	D/C ratio
RAM12	22.4 ± 2.0	27.1 ± 1.6	1.2 ns	30.4 ± 0.4	34.3 ± 0.9	1.1 **	33.2 ± 0.4	35.9 ± 0.9	1.1 *
RAM14	25.2 ± 3.8	32.6 ± 0.8	1.3 ns	33.9 ± 2.5	36.9 ± 1.3	1.1 ns	34.3 ± 2.5	36.7 ± 2.1	1.1 ns
RAM59	26.8 ± 2.7	32.8 ± 0.9	1.2 ns	37.4 ± 1.6	37.2 ± 1.0	1.0 ns	37.1 ± 1.6	38.3 ± 0.9	1.0 ns
RAM97	32.7 ± 2.8	30.0 ± 0.6	0.9 ns	36.3 ± 0.5	36.6 ± 0.9	1.0 ns	37.5 ± 0.5	37.4 ± 0.3	1.0 ns
RAM101	34.0 ± 0.8	34.6 ± 0.6	1.0 ns	37.1 ± 4.7	37.7 ± 0.8	1.0 ns	30.9 ± 4.7	37.7 ± 1.1	1.2 ns
Average of O. glaberrima	28.2 ± 2.4	31.4 ± 0.9	1.1 ns	35.0 ± 1.1	36.5 ± 1.0	1.0 ns	34.6 ± 1.9	37.2 ± 1.0	1.1 ns
Koshihikari	9.9 ± 3.1	16.1 ± 5.5	1.6 ns	26.4 ± 3.2	24.3 ± 1.6	0.9 ns	26.8 ± 3.2	30.5 ± 1.8	1.1 ns
Minamihatamochi	30.2 ± 1.7	30.7 ± 3.0	1.8 ns	41.7 ± 0.4	32.7 ± 2.2	0.8 *	39.1 ± 0.4	37.3 ± 0.4	1.0 ns
Average of O. sativa	20.0 ± 2.4	23.4 ± 4.2	1.3 ns	34.1 ± 2.2	28.5 ± 1.9	0.9 ns	33.0 ± 1.8	33.9 ± 1.5	1.0 ns

Genotype	Start of treatment			End of treatment			Recovery
Genotype	Control (C)	Drought (D)	D/C ratio	Control (C)	Drought (D)	D/C ratio	Control (C)	Drought (D)	D/C ratio
RAM12	22.4 ± 2.0	27.1 ± 1.6	1.2 ns	30.4 ± 0.4	34.3 ± 0.9	1.1 **	33.2 ± 0.4	35.9 ± 0.9	1.1 *
RAM14	25.2 ± 3.8	32.6 ± 0.8	1.3 ns	33.9 ± 2.5	36.9 ± 1.3	1.1 ns	34.3 ± 2.5	36.7 ± 2.1	1.1 ns
RAM59	26.8 ± 2.7	32.8 ± 0.9	1.2 ns	37.4 ± 1.6	37.2 ± 1.0	1.0 ns	37.1 ± 1.6	38.3 ± 0.9	1.0 ns
RAM97	32.7 ± 2.8	30.0 ± 0.6	0.9 ns	36.3 ± 0.5	36.6 ± 0.9	1.0 ns	37.5 ± 0.5	37.4 ± 0.3	1.0 ns
RAM101	34.0 ± 0.8	34.6 ± 0.6	1.0 ns	37.1 ± 4.7	37.7 ± 0.8	1.0 ns	30.9 ± 4.7	37.7 ± 1.1	1.2 ns
Average of O. glaberrima	28.2 ± 2.4	31.4 ± 0.9	1.1 ns	35.0 ± 1.1	36.5 ± 1.0	1.0 ns	34.6 ± 1.9	37.2 ± 1.0	1.1 ns
Koshihikari	9.9 ± 3.1	16.1 ± 5.5	1.6 ns	26.4 ± 3.2	24.3 ± 1.6	0.9 ns	26.8 ± 3.2	30.5 ± 1.8	1.1 ns
Minamihatamochi	30.2 ± 1.7	30.7 ± 3.0	1.8 ns	41.7 ± 0.4	32.7 ± 2.2	0.8 *	39.1 ± 0.4	37.3 ± 0.4	1.0 ns
Average of O. sativa	20.0 ± 2.4	23.4 ± 4.2	1.3 ns	34.1 ± 2.2	28.5 ± 1.9	0.9 ns	33.0 ± 1.8	33.9 ± 1.5	1.0 ns

Genotype	TLA (cm²)			SLA (mm²/mg)			SLW (mg/mm²)
Genotype	Control (C)	Drought (D)	D/C ratio	Control (C)	Drought (D)	D/C ratio	Control (C)	Drought (D)	D/C ratio
RAM12	23.2 ± 1.0	23.3 ± 4.6	1.0 ns	33.2 ± 0.03	38.8 ± 0.03	1.1 *	0.03 ± 0.000	0.03 ± 0.002	0.9 ns
RAM14	20.3 ± 3.5	23.2 ± 4.7	1.1 ns	30.7 ± 0.03	29.0 ± 0.02	0.9 ns	0.03 ± 0.003	0.03 ± 0.002	0.3 ns
RAM59	25.3 ± 0.6	32.7 ± 1.9	1.2 *	32.0 ± 0.03	31.3 ± 0.02	0.9 ns	0.03 ± 0.001	0.03 ± 0.000	1.0 ns
RAM97	28.9 ± 2.5	25.5 ± 5.5	0.8 ns	31.1 ± 0.02	32.1 ± 0.04	1.0 ns	0.03 ± 0.000	0.03 ± 0.004	0.9 ns
RAM101	24.4 ± 4.3	27.3 ± 1.1	1.1 ns	32.1 ± 0.03	30.1 ± 0.03	0.9 ns	0.03 ± 0.000	0.03 ± 0.003	1.0 ns
Average of O. glaberrima	24.4 ± 2.4	26.4 ± 3.6	1.0 ns	31.8 ± 0.03	32.3 ± 0.03	1.0 ns	0.03 ± 0.001	0.03 ± 0.002	0.9 ns
Koshihikari	5.0 ± 1.1	3.7 ± 0.2	0.7 ns	31.9 ± 0.03	24.2 ± 0.00	0.7 *	0.03 ± 0.001	0.05 ± 0.003	1.5 **
Minamihatamochi	24.7 ± 2.7	12.3 ± 1.8	0.5 **	32.7 ± 0.03	23.9 ± 0.02	0.7 *	0.03 ± 0.002	0.04 ± 0.005	1.4 *
Average of O. sativa	14.9 ± 1.9	8.0 ± 1.0	0.5 *	32.3 ± 0.03	24.0 ± 0.01	0.7 *	0.03 ± 0.001	0.04 ± 0.004	1.5 *

Genotype	TLA (cm²)			SLA (mm²/mg)			SLW (mg/mm²)
Genotype	Control (C)	Drought (D)	D/C ratio	Control (C)	Drought (D)	D/C ratio	Control (C)	Drought (D)	D/C ratio
RAM12	23.2 ± 1.0	23.3 ± 4.6	1.0 ns	33.2 ± 0.03	38.8 ± 0.03	1.1 *	0.03 ± 0.000	0.03 ± 0.002	0.9 ns
RAM14	20.3 ± 3.5	23.2 ± 4.7	1.1 ns	30.7 ± 0.03	29.0 ± 0.02	0.9 ns	0.03 ± 0.003	0.03 ± 0.002	0.3 ns
RAM59	25.3 ± 0.6	32.7 ± 1.9	1.2 *	32.0 ± 0.03	31.3 ± 0.02	0.9 ns	0.03 ± 0.001	0.03 ± 0.000	1.0 ns
RAM97	28.9 ± 2.5	25.5 ± 5.5	0.8 ns	31.1 ± 0.02	32.1 ± 0.04	1.0 ns	0.03 ± 0.000	0.03 ± 0.004	0.9 ns
RAM101	24.4 ± 4.3	27.3 ± 1.1	1.1 ns	32.1 ± 0.03	30.1 ± 0.03	0.9 ns	0.03 ± 0.000	0.03 ± 0.003	1.0 ns
Average of O. glaberrima	24.4 ± 2.4	26.4 ± 3.6	1.0 ns	31.8 ± 0.03	32.3 ± 0.03	1.0 ns	0.03 ± 0.001	0.03 ± 0.002	0.9 ns
Koshihikari	5.0 ± 1.1	3.7 ± 0.2	0.7 ns	31.9 ± 0.03	24.2 ± 0.00	0.7 *	0.03 ± 0.001	0.05 ± 0.003	1.5 **
Minamihatamochi	24.7 ± 2.7	12.3 ± 1.8	0.5 **	32.7 ± 0.03	23.9 ± 0.02	0.7 *	0.03 ± 0.002	0.04 ± 0.005	1.4 *
Average of O. sativa	14.9 ± 1.9	8.0 ± 1.0	0.5 *	32.3 ± 0.03	24.0 ± 0.01	0.7 *	0.03 ± 0.001	0.04 ± 0.004	1.5 *

Genotype	Coarse root length (cm)			Fine root length (cm)			Surface area (cm²)			Volume (cm³)
Genotype	Control	Drought	D/C ratio	Control	Drought	D/C ratio	Control	Drought	D/C ratio	Control	Drought	D/C ratio
RAM12	98.7 ± 6.3	104.3 ± 33.0	1.1 ns	290.0 ± 14.9	228.9 ± 68.8	0.8 ns	54.7 ± 4.3	34.2 ± 1.5	0.6 *	0.6 ± 0.07	0.3 ± 0.12	0.5 *
RAM14	63.3 ± 2.0	50.0 ± 2.1	0.8 **	241.2 ± 48.9	174.3 ± 30.4	0.7 ns	38.0 ± 3.5	26.1 ± 1.9	0.7 **	0.4 ± 0.04	0.2 ± 0.00	0.6 *
RAM59	88.5 ± 9.3	73.9 ± 11.9	0.8 ns	361.7 ± 32.3	268.2 ± 55.4	0.7 ns	54.1 ± 5.4	40.7 ± 7.9	0.8 ns	0.5 ± 0.05	0.4 ± 0.07	0.7 ns
RAM97	151.4 ± 31.5	69.1 ± 9.5	0.5 *	520.1 ± 73.8	231.1 ± 53.1	0.4 **	83.5 ± 14.2	36.3 ± 6.8	0.4 **	0.8 ± 0.01	0.4 ± 0.06	0.4 *
RAM101	77.7 ± 8.2	72.1 ± 20.2	0.9 ns	353.6 ± 22.9	253.0 ± 73.0	0.7 ns	51.4 ± 5.1	37.6 ± 1.5	0.7 ns	0.5 ± 0.00	0.3 ± 0.09	0.7 *
OG	95.9 ± 11.5	73.9 ± 15.3	0.8 ns	353.3 ± 38.5	231.1 ± 56.2	0.7 ns	56.3 ± 6.5	35.0 ± 3.9	0.6 *	0.6 ± 0.07	0.3 ± 0.07	0.6 *
Koshihikari	25.8 ± 3.3	8.9 ± 0.4	0.3 **	164.1 ± 39.9	87.9 ± 16.0	0.5 *	20.5 ± 3.1	10.0 ± 1.5	0.5 **	0.2 ± 0.02	0.1 ± 0.01	0.5 *
MH	203.4 ± 9.8	61.6 ± 6.4	0.3 ns	271.4 ± 91.0	318.0 ± 57.0	1.2 ns	57.0 ± 2.2	42.1 ± 7.6	0.7 *	0.5 ± 0.03	0.4 ± 0.07	0.7 *
OS	114.6 ± 6.5	35.2 ± 3.4	0.3 *	217.8 ± 65.9	202.9 ± 36.7	0.9 ns	38.8 ± 2.6	26.1 ± 4.6	0.7 *	0.4 ± 0.02	0.2 ± 0.04	0.6 *