Legume Research

  • Chief EditorJ. S. Sandhu

  • Print ISSN 0250-5371

  • Online ISSN 0976-0571

  • NAAS Rating 6.80

  • SJR 0.391

  • Impact Factor 0.8 (2024)

Frequency :
Monthly (January, February, March, April, May, June, July, August, September, October, November and December)
Indexing Services :
BIOSIS Preview, ISI Citation Index, Biological Abstracts, Elsevier (Scopus and Embase), AGRICOLA, Google Scholar, CrossRef, CAB Abstracting Journals, Chemical Abstracts, Indian Science Abstracts, EBSCO Indexing Services, Index Copernicus
Submit

Legume Research, volume 30 issue 1 (march 2007) : 57 - 60

ANTIOXIDATIVE RESPONSE OF MUNGBEAN (VIGNA RADIATA L.) TO SALT STRESS

Zaffar Mahdi·Dar, A. Hemantaranjan, Sunil Kumar Panday
1Department of Plant Physiology. Institute of Agricultural Sciences. Banaras Hindu University. Varanasi. - 211 005. India

  • Submitted|

  • First Online |

  • doi

Cite article:- Mahdi·Dar Zaffar, Hemantaranjan A., Panday Kumar Sunil (2024). ANTIOXIDATIVE RESPONSE OF MUNGBEAN (VIGNA RADIATA L.) TO SALT STRESS. Legume Research. 30(1): 57 - 60. doi: .

ABSTRACT

The effect of salt stress (NaCl) on growth, specific activity of catalase and peroxidase and accumulation of proline and Na+ and K+ content in leaves from mungbean were examined. The plant dry weight decreased with higher concentrations of the salt. The results at the various growth stages revealed an increase in the activity of catalase and peroxidase activity with the increasing intensity of salt stress from 50 mM to 200 mM NaCl. Activity of catalase and peroxidase significantly increased at 20 days after sowing (DAS) as compared to control. The proline accumulation also increased with higher concentration of salt, whereas K+ concentration decreased that caused an injury to the plants.

KEYWORDS

    REFERENCES

    1. Aziz, A. et al. (1999). Plant Sci., 145: 83-91.
    2. Badiani, M. (1990). Agrochemica, 34: 90-102.
    3. Bates, L.S. et al. (1973). Plant Soil, 39: 205.
    4. Borsani, O. et a/. (1999). J. Plant Physiol., 155: 269-273.
    5. Calairborne, A. (1985). In: CRC. Handbook of Methods for Oxygen Radical Research. (Greenwald ed.) CRC Press. Boca Raton, pp. 283-284.
    6. Del Rio, L.A. etal. (1991). FreeRad. Res. Commun.• 12: 819-827.
    7. Djanaguiraman, M. et a/. (2004). Indian J. Agric. Res., 38: 73-76.
    8. Foyer, C.H. and Mullineaux, P.M. (1994). In: Causes of Photoxidative Stress and Amelioration of Defense Systems in Plants. CRC press, Boca Raton, FL.
    9. Foyer, C.H. (1996). Biochem. Soc. Trans., 24: 427-433.
    10. Guiltino; T. et a/.(2004). J. Plant Physio/., 161: 701-708.
    11. Guyton, K.Z. etaJ. (1996). J. BioI. Chem, 271: 4138-4142.
    12. Larher, E et aJ. (1998). Physio/. Plant., 89: 103-110.
    13. Perez-A1focea. F. et a/. (1993). Plant Soil, 150: 203-211.
    14. Polle, A. et al. (1994). Plant Physio/., 106: 53-60.
    15. Tandon, H.LS. (1995).10: Methods of Analysis of Soils, Plants, Water and Fertilizers. ED.C.O., New Delhi, pp. 62-63.
    16. Trichant, J.C. et a/. (2004). Plant Physio/., 135: 1583-1594.
    17. West, OW. and Francios, L.E. (1982). [rrig. Sci., 3: 169-175.
    18. Willekens, H. et al. (1997). EMBO J., 16(16): 4806-4816.
    Reviewed By

    Download Article
    In this Article
      Contact us
      Follow us

      Editorial Board

      View all (0)