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

Research Article

Legume Research, volume 39 issue 3 (june 2016) : 405-410

Specific activities and transcript levels of glycolytic enzymes under dehydration in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) seedlings  

Suruchi M. Khanna*, Pooja C. Taxak, Pradeep K. Jain, R. Saini1
1<p>National Research Centre on Plant Biotechnology,&nbsp;Pusa Campus, New Delhi-110 012, India</p>
Cite article:- Khanna* M. Suruchi, Taxak C. Pooja, Jain K. Pradeep, Saini1 R. (2015). Specific activities and transcript levels of glycolytic enzymes underdehydration in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) seedlings . Legume Research. 39(3): 405-410. doi: 10.18805/lr.v0iOF.7485.

ABSTRACT

The effect of dehydration on the specific activities and transcript levels of several glycolytic enzymes was determined in two chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) cultivars- Pusa362 (drought tolerant) and SBD377 (drought sensitive). Dehydration treatment was imposed on 6 days old chickpea seedlings by removing them from pots and keeping them on table top on 3MM Whatman paper at room temperature for 5 h. The stress imposed was judged by determining relative water content (RWC) and proline content. RWC decreased and proline content accumulated after five hours of dehydration treatment. The decline in RWC was higher in SBD377 than in Pusa362, while varietal differences were absent in proline content. With the exception of NADP-glyceraldehyde-3-phospahte dehydrogense, whose activity as well as transcript level showed marginal decrease in both the varieties, dehydration had little effect on all glycolytic enzymes studied.

REFERENCES


  1. Ahmad, F., Gaur, P. and Croser, J. (2005). Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.), p. 185-214. In: Singh, R. and Jauhar, P. (eds.). Genetic resources, chromosome engineering and crop improvement –Grain legumes. CRC Press, USA.

  2. Bates, L., Waldren, R.P. and Teare, I.D. (1973). Rapid determination of free proline for water-stress studies. Plant Soil 39: 205-207.

  3. Bellinger, Y. and Larher, F. (1987). Proline accumulation in higher plants: A redox buffer? Plant Physiol. 6:23-27.

  4. Bergmeyer, H.U., Gawenn, K. and Grassl, M. (1974). Enzymes as biochemical reagents. p 425-522. In: H.U. Bergmeyer (ed.). Methods in Enzymatic Analysis. Academic Press, NY. 

  5. Bogeat-Triboulot, M., Brosché, M., Renaut, J., Jouve, L., Thiec, LD. and Fayyaz, P. (2007). Gradual soil water deletion results in reversible changes of gene expression, protein profiles, ecophysiology, and growth performance in Populus euphratica, a poplar growing in arid regions. Plant Physiol. 143: 876-892.

  6. Boominathan, P., Shukla, R., Kumar, A., Manna, D., Negi, D., Verma, P.K. and Chattopadhyay, D. (2004). Long term transcript accumulation during the development of dehydration adaptation in Cicer arietinum. Plant Physiol. 135: 1608-1620.

  7. Castillejo, M.A., Maldonado, A.M., Ogueta, S. and Jorrín, J.V. (2008). Proteomic analysis of responses to drought stress in sunflower (Helianthus annuus) leaves by 2DE gel electrophoresis and mass spectrometry. Open Proteomics J. 1: 59-71.

  8. Casonka, L.N. (1989). Physiological and genetic responses of bacteria to osmotic stress. Microbio. Rev. 53: 121-147.

  9. Delauney, A.J. and Verma, D.P.S. (1993). Proline biosynthesis and osmoregulation in plants. Plant J. 4: 215-223.

  10. Echevarria-Zomeño, S., Ariza, D., Jorge, I., Lenz, C., Campo, A.D., Jorrin, J.V. and Navarro, R.M. (2009). Changes in the protein profile of Quercus ilex leaves in response to drought stress and recovery. J. Plant Physiol. 166: 233-245.

  11. Ford, K.L., Cassin, A. and Bacic, A. (2011). Quantitative proteomic analysis of wheat cultivars with differing drought stress tolerance. Front. Plant. Sci. 2: 44.

  12. Garg, R., Sahoo, A., Tyagi, A.K. and Jain, M. (2010). Validation of internal control genes for quantitative gene expression studies in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). Biochim. Biophysic. Res. Commun. 396: 283-288.

  13. Gimeno, T.E., Sommerville, K.E., Valladares, F. and Atkin, O.K. (2010). Homeostasis of respiration under drought and its important consequences for foliar carbon balance in a drier climate: insights from two contrasting Acacia species. Funct. Plant Biol. 37: 323-333.

  14. Gunes, A., Inal, A., Adak, M.S., Bagci, E.G., Cicek, N. and Eraslan, F. (2008). Effect of drought stress implemented at pre- or post- anthesis stage some physiological as screening criteria in chickpea cultivars. Russ. J. Plant Physiol. 55: 59-67.

  15. Hare, P.D. and Cress, W.A. (1997). Metabolic implications of stress-induced proline accumulation in plants. Plant Growth Regul. 21: 79-102.

  16. Herppich, W. and Peckmann, K. (2000). Influence of Drought on Mitochondrial Activity, Photosynthesis, Nocturnal Acid Accumulation and Water Relations in the CAM Plants Prenia sladeniana (me-type) and Crassula lycopodioides (pepck-type). Ann. Bot. 86: 611-620.

  17. Hummel, I., Pantin, F., Sulpice, R., Piques, M., Rolland, G., Dauzat, M., Christophe, A., Pervent, M., Bouteille, M., Stitt, M., Gibon, Y. and Muller, B. (2010). Arabidopsis plants acclimate to water deficit at low cost through changes of carbon usage: An integrated perspective using growth, metabolite, enzyme, and gene expression analysis. Plant Physiol. 154: 357-372.

  18. Ingle, R.A., Schmidt, U.G., Farrant, J.M., Thomson, J.A. and Mundree, S.G. (2007). Proteomic analysis of leaf proteins during dehydration of the resurrection plant Xerophyta viscosa. Plant Cell. Environ. 30: 435-446. 

  19. Khanna, S.M., Taxak, P.C., Jain, P.K., Ssaini, R. and Srinivasan R. (2014). Glycolytic enzyme activities and gene expression in Cicer arietinum exposed to water-deficit stress. Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol. 173:2241-2253.

  20. Kim, C., Lemke, C. and Paterson, A.H. (2009). Functional dissection of drought-responsive gene expression patterns in Cynodon dactylon L. Plant Mol. Biol. 70: 1-16.

  21. Lowry, O.H., Rosebrough, N.J., Farr, A.L. and Randall, R.J. (1951). Protein measurement with the Folin phenol reagent. J. Biol. Chem. 193: 265-275.

  22. Mafakheri, A., Siosemardeh, A., Bahramnejad, B., Straik, P.C. and Sohrabi, E. (2010). Effect of drought stress on yield, proline and chlorophyll contents in three chickpea cultivars. Aust. J. Crop Sci. 4: 580-585.

  23. Najaphy, A., Khamssi, N.N., Mostafaie, A. and Mirzaee, H. (2010). Effect of progressive water deficit stress on proline accumulation and protein profiles of leaves in chickpea. Afr. J. Biotechnol. 9: 7033-7036.

  24. Oliver, M.J., Jain, R., Balbuena, TS., Agrawal, G., Gasulla, F. and Thelen, J.J. (2011). Proteome analysis of leaves of the desiccation-tolerant grass, Sporobolus stapfianus, in response to dehydration. Phytochemistry 72: 1273-1284.

  25. Ozturk, Z.N., Talame, V., Deyholos, M., Michalowski, C.B., Galbraith, D.W., Gozukirmizi, N., Tuberosa, R. and Bohnert, H.J. (2002). Monitoring large-scale changes in transcript abundance in drought-and salt-stressed barley. Plant Mol. Biol. 48: 551-573.

  26. Piques, M., Schulze, W.X., Hohne, M., Usadel, B., Gibon, Y., Rohwer, J. and Stitt, M. (2009). Ribosome and transcript copy numbers, polysome occupancy and enzyme dynamics in Arabidopsis. Mol. Syst. Biol. 5: 314.

  27. Plomion, C., Lalanne, C., Claverol, S., Meddour, H., Kohler, A. and Bogeat-Triboulot, M.B. (2006). Mapping the proteome of poplar and application to the discovery of drought stress responsive proteins. Proteomics 6: 6509-6527. 

  28. Roche, J., Hewezi, T., Bouniols, A. and Gentzbittel, L. (2007). Transcriptional profiles of primary metabolism and signal transduction-related genes in response to water stress in field-grown sunflower genotypes using a thematic cDNA microarray. Planta 226: 601-617.

  29. Singal, H.R., Sheoran, I.S. and Singh, R. (1985). Effect of water stress on photosynthesis and in vitro activities of the PCR cycle enzymes in pigeonpea (Cajanus cajan L.). Photosynthesis Res. 7: 69-76.

  30. Stewart, G.R. and Lee, J.A. (1972). Desiccation injury in mosses II. The effect of moisture stress on enzyme levels. New Phytol. 71: 461-466.

  31. Strand, A., Hurry, V., Henkes, S., Huner, N., Gustafsson, P., Gardestrom, P. and Stitt, M. (1999). Acclimation of Arabidopsis leaves developing at low temperatures: increasing cytoplasmic volume accompanies increased activities of enzymes in the Calvin cycle and in the sucrose-biosynthesis pathway. Plant Physiol. 119: 1387-1398.

  32. Valentovic, P., Luxova, M., Kolarovic, L. and Gasparikova, O. (2006). Effect of osmotic stress on compatible solutes content, membrane stability and water relations in two maize cultivars. Plant Soil Environ. 4: 186-191

  33. Velasco, R., Salamini, F. and Bartels, D. (1994). Dehydration and ABA increase mRNA levels and enzyme activity of cytosolic GAPDH in the resurrection plant Craterostigma plantagineum. Plant Mol. Bio. 26: 541-546.

  34. Watkinson, J.I., Hendricks, L., Sioson, A.A., Heath, L.S., Bohnert, H.J. and Grene, R. (2008). Tuber development phenotypes in adapted and acclimated, drought-stressed Solanum tuberosum sp. andigena have distinct expression profiles of genes associated with carbon metabolism. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 46: 34-45.

  35. Xu, C. and Huang, B. (2010). Differential proteomic responses to water stress induced by PEG in two creeping bentgrass cultivars differing in stress tolerance. J. Plant Physiol. 167: 1477-1485.
Reviewed By

Download Article
In this Article
    Contact us
    Follow us

    Editorial Board

    View all (0)