Kuraklık Stresi Altında Yetiştirilen Bakla (Vicia Faba L.) Bitkisinde Rizobakteri ve Alg Uygulamalarının Bitki Gelişimi Üzerindeki Etkilerinin İncelenmesi

Year 2022, , 1124 - 1133, 01.06.2022

Mustafa Çirka , Rüveyde Tunçtürk , Haluk Kulaz , Murat Tunçtürk , Tamer Eryiğit , İshak Baran

https://doi.org/10.21597/jist.1076428

Cited By: 6

Abstract

Bu çalışma, rizobakteri ve alg uygulamalarının, kuraklık stresi altında yetiştirilen baklada (Vicia faba L.) bazı fizyolojik ve biyokimyasal özelliklere olan etkisini belirlemek için yapılmıştır. Çalışma tesadüf parselleri deneme deseni’ne göre faktöriyel düzende 4 tekerrürlü olarak şekilde yürütülmüştür. Denemede bitki materyali olarak Filiz-99 bakla çeşidi kullanılmıştır. Çalışmada üç farklı kuraklık seviyesi (%100 NS, %50 K1 ve %25 K2) ve dört farklı biyolojik uygulama (Kontrol, Bacillus megaterium (B1), Azospirillum lipoferum (B2) ve Chlorella saccharophilia (A)) mavi yeşil alg kullanılmıştır. Kuraklık stresi klorofil, yaprak sıcaklığı ve MDA üzerindeki etkisi önemli bulunmuştur. En yüksek klorofil değerleri (44.45 ve 42.78 μg cm-2) ile K2 ve K1 uygulamalarından alınırken en düşük klorofil değer ise (36.82 μg cm-2) ile NS uygulamasından alındığı tespit edilmiştir. En yüksek yaprak sıcaklığı (25.91 oC) K2 ve en düşük yaprak sıcaklığı (24.78 oC) NS uygulamasından elde edilmiştir. Ayrıca, bakteri ve alg uygulamaları yaprak alanı ve Malondialdehit içeriği üzerindeki etkisi anlamlı görülmüştür. En yüksek yaprak alanı değeri (10.71 cm2) A uygulamasından alınırken en düşük değer (8.02 cm2) ise B1 uygulamasından saptanmıştır. En yüksek Malondialdehit içeriği (0.86 nmol g-1) kontrol gurubundan elde edilirken en düşük değerler ise (0.63, 0.67 ve 0.68 nmol g-1) ile B1, B2 ve A uygulamalarından elde edilmiştir. Çalışmada interaksiyon göz önüne alındığında, en yüksek MDA değerleri (0.85 ve 0.95 nmol g-1) olarak kontrol x K1 ve kontrol x K2 uygulamalarından elde edilmiştir.

Keywords

Bakla (Vicia faba L.), Rizobakteri, Kuraklık stresi

Supporting Institution

Van Yüzüncü Yıl Üniversitesi Bilimsel Araştırma Projeleri Koordinasyon Birimi

Project Number

FYD-2020-8967

Thanks

Mali desteklerinden dolayı Van Yüzüncü Yıl Üniversitesi Bilimsel Araştırma Projeleri Koordinasyon Birimine teşekkürlerimizi sunarız.

Investigation of the Effects of Rhizobacteria and Algae Applications on Plant Growth in Broad Bean (Vicia faba L.) Plant Grown under Drought Stress

Abstract

This study was carried out to determine the effects of rhizobacteria and algae treatments on some physiological and biochemical properties of broad bean (Vicia faba L.) grown under drought stress. The study was carried out in a factorial arrangement with 4 replications according to the completely randomized experimental design. Filiz-99 broad bean variety was used as plant material in the experiment. In the study, three different drought levels (100% NS, 50% K1 and 25% K2) and four different biological treatments (Control, Bacillus megaterium (B1), Azospirillum lipoferum (B2) and Chlorella saccharophilia (A)) blue green algae were applied. The effects of drought stress on chlorophyll, leaf temperature and MDA were found to be significant. It was determined that the highest chlorophyll values (44.45 and 42.78 μg cm-2) were obtained from K2 and K1 applications, while the lowest chlorophyll value (36.82 μg cm-2) were obtained from NS application. The highest leaf temperature (25.91 oC) was obtained from K2 and the lowest leaf temperature (24.78 oC) was obtained from NS application. Additionally, the effects of bacteria and algae applications on leaf area and malondialdehyde content were found to be significant. In leaf area, the highest value (10.71 cm2) was determined from A application, and the lowest value (8.02 cm2) from B1 application. The highest Malondialdehyde content (0.86 nmol g-1) was obtained from control while the lowest values (0.63, 0.67 and 0.68 nmol g-1) were obtained from B1, B2 and A applications, respectively. Considering the interactions in the study, the highest MDA values of (0.85 and 0.95 nmol g-1) were obtained from control x K1 and control x K2 applications.

Keywords

Broad Bean (Vicia faba L.), Rhizobacteria, Drought Stress

Project Number

FYD-2020-8967

References

• Abayomi YA, Abidoye TO, 2009. Evaluation of Cowpea Genotypes for Soil Moisture Stress Tolerance Under Screen House Conditions. African Journal of Plant Science, 3(10), 229-237.
• Abogadallah GM, 2011. Differential regulation of photorespiratory gene expression by moderate and severe salt and drought stress in relation to oxidative stress. Plant Science, 180(3), 540-547.
• Akbaş A, 2014. Türkiye üzerindeki önemli kurak yıllar. Coğrafi Bilimler Dergisi, 12 (2), 101-118. DOI: 10.1501/Cogbil_0000000155.
• Aktar S, Cebe GE, 2010. Alglerin Genel Özellikleri, Kullanım Alanları ve Eczacılıktaki Önemi. Ankara Ecz. Fak. Derg. J. Fac. Pharm. 39 (3):237-264.
• Aslam MU, Raza MAS, Saleem MF, Waqas M, Iqbal R, Ahmad S, Haider I, 2020. Improving Strategic Growth Stage-Based Drought Tolerance in Quinoa by Rhizobacterial Inoculation. Community Soil Science Plant Anal., 51(5):1-16.
• Arora A, Sairam RK, Srivastava GC, 2002. Oxidative Stress and Antioxidative Systems in Plants. Curr. Sci. 82: 1227-1238.
• Blokhina O, Virolainen E, Fagerstedt KV, 2003. Antioxidants, Oxidative Damage and Oxygen Deprivation Stres Annual Botany. 91: 179-194.
• Blum A, 2009. Effective Use of Water (EUW) and Not Water-Use Efficiency (WUE) is the Target of Crop Yield Improvement Under Drought Stress. Field Crops Res. 112(2-3): 119-123.
• Catola S, Marino G, Emiliani G, Hüseynovai T, Musayev M, Akparov Z, Maserati BE, 2016. Physiological and Metabolomic Analysis of Punica granatum (L.) Under Drought Stress. Planta. 243: 441–449.
• Chaves MM, Pereira JS, Maroco J, Rodrigues ML, Ricardo, CPP, Osorio ML, Carvalho L, Faria T, Pinheiro C, 2002. How Plants Cope with Water Stress in the Field. Photosynthesis and Growth. Annals of Bot. 89: 970-916.
• Çakmakçı R, Turan R, Güllüce M, Şahin F, 2014. Rhizobacteria for Reduced Fertilizer Inputs in Wheat (Triticum aestivum spp. vulgare) and Barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) on Aridisols in Turkey. International Journal of Plant Production 8 (2):163-181.
• Çırak C, Esendal E, 2006. Soyada Kuraklik Stresi. Anadolu Tarım Bilimleri Dergisi, 21(2), 231-237.
• Çoşkan A, Şenyiğit U, 2018. Farklı sulama Suyu Düzeyi ve Vermikompost Dozlarının Marul Bitkisinin Mikro Element Alımına Etkileri. 1. Uluslararası Tarımsal Yapılar ve Sulama Kongresi Özel Sayısı:348-356
• Djordjevic MA, Gabriel DW, Rolfe BG, 1987. Rhizobium the Refined Parasite of Legumes. Annual review of phytopathology, 25(1), 145-168.
• Dodd IC, Belimov AA, Sobeih WY, Safronova VI, Grierson D, Davies WJ, 2004. Will modifying plant ethylene status improve plant productivity in water-limited environments. In Proceedings of the 4th international crop science congress, Brisbane, Australia (Vol. 26).
• Düzgüneş O, Kesici T, Kavuncu O, Gürbüz F, 1987. Research and experimental methods. Statistical Methods-II. Ankara Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Yayınları. 1:1021-1295.
• Easlon HM, Bloom AJ, 2014. Easy Leaf Area: Automated digital image analysis for rapid and accurate measurement of leaf area. Applications in plant sciences, 2(7), 1400033.
• FAO, 2020. http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/QCL/visualize. Erişim tarihi; 17.03.2022.
• Ferreira MCB, Fernandes MS, Döbereiner J, 1987. Role of Azospirillum Brasilense Nitrate Reductase in Nitrate Assimilation by Wheat Plants. Biology and fertility of soils, 4(1), 47-53.
• Gill SS, Tuteja N, 2010. Reactive Oxygen Species and Antioxidant Machinery in Abiotic Stress Tolerance in Crop Plants. Plant Physiol. Biochem.48:909-930.
• Harman GE, Howell CR, Voterbo A, Chet I, Lordto M, 2004. Trichoderma Species: Opportunistic, a Virulent Plant Symbionts. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2: 43-56.
• Heath, R.L., Packer, L, 1968. Photoperoxidation in isolate chloroplast.i. Kinetics and Stoichmetryof Fatty Acid Peroxidation. Arch. Biochem. Biophys. 125: 189-198.
• Huo Y, Wang M, Wei Y, Xia Z, 2016. Overexpression of the Maize Psba Gene Enhances Drought Tolerance Through Regulating Antioxidant System, Photosynthetic Capability, and Stress Defense Gene Expression in Tobacco. Frontiers in plant science, 6, 1223.
• Inbar J, AbramSuy M, Cohen D, Chet I, 1994. Plant Growth Enhancement and Disease Control by Trichoderma harzianum in Vegetable Seedlings Grown Under Commercial Conditions. Eur. J. Plant Pathol. 100: 337-346.
• Kabay T, Şenso, S, 2016. Kuraklık Stresinin Bazı Fasulye Genotiplerinde Oluşturduğu Enzim, Klorofil ve İyon Değişimleri. Yüzüncü Yıl Üniversitesi Tarım Bilimleri Dergisi, 26(3), 380-395.
• Kadıoğlu S, 2011. Fosforlu Gübre ve Bakteri Uygulamalarının Farklı Yem Bezelyesi Çeşitlerinin Tarımsal ve Morfolojik Özelliklerine Etkileri (Doctoral dissertation, Doktora Tezi, Atatürk Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü (Basılmamış), Erzurum).
• Kapluhan E, 2013. Türkiye’de Kuraklik ve Kurakliğin Tarima Etkisi. Marmara Coğrafya Dergisi, 0 (27), 487-510. Retrieved from https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/marucog/issue/474/3913
• Karagöz H, Çakmakçi R, Hosseinpour A, Kodaz,S, 2018. Alleviation of Water Stress and Promotion of the Growth of Sugar Beet (Beta vulgaris L.) Plants by Multi-Traits Rhizobacteria. Applied Ecology and Environmental Res. 16(5):6801-6813.
• Kijne JW, 2006. Abiotic Stress and Water Scarcity: İdentifying and Resolving Conflicts From Plant Level To Global Level. Field Crops Res. 97: 3–18.
• Kloepper JW, Schroth MN, Miller TD, 1980. Effects of Rhizosphere Colonization by Plant Growth-Promoting Rhizobacteria on Potato Plant Development and Yield. Phytopathology, 70(11), 1078-1082.
• Li H, Zhao Y, Jiang X, 2019. Seed Soaking with Bacillus sp. Strain HX-2 Alleviates Negative Effects of Drought Stress on Maize Seedlings. Chilian Journal Agriculture Res. 79:3.
• Jodeh S, Alkowni R, Hamed R, Samhan S, 2015. The Study of Electrolyte Leakage from Barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) and Pearlmillet Using Plant Growth Promotion (PGPR) and Reverse Osmosis. J. Food Nutr. Res. 3: 422–429. doi: 10.12691/jfnr-3-7-3.
• Mullet JE, Whitsitt MS,1996. Plant Cellular Responses to Water Deficit. Plant Growth Regul. 20: 119-124.
• Nadeem SM, Ahmad M, Zahir ZA, Javaid A, Ashraf M, 2014. The Role of Mycorrhizae and Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria (PGPR) in İmproving Crop Productivity under Stressful Environments. Biotechnology advances, 32(2), 429-448.
• Nordstedt NP, Jones ML, 2020. Isolation of Rhizosphere Bacteria That İmprove Quality and Water Stress Tolerance in Greenhouse Ornamentals. Front. Plant Sci. 11:826. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2020.00826.
• Özdemir S, 2002. Yemeklik Baklagiller. Hasat Yayıncılık Ltd. Şti., İstanbul.
• Öztürk MA, Seçmen Ö, 1992. Bitki Ekolojisi. Ege Üniversitesi Fen Fakültesi Yayınları, 141.
• Öztürk İ, Korkut KZ, 2018. Kuraklığın Buğdayın Kök Ağırlığına Etkisi ve Kökün Bazı Fizyolojik Parametrelerle İlişkisi. Tarla Bitkileri Merkez Araştırma Enstitüsü Dergisi 2018, 27 (1): 14−24.
• Patiwal C, Mitra M, Bhayani K, SV, VB, 2017. Abiotic Stresses as Tools for Metabolites in Microalgae. Bioresource Tech. 244: 1216–1226.
• Premchandra GS, Saneoka A, Ogato S, 1990. Cell Membrane Stability and Indicator of Drought Tolerance, as Affected by Applied Nitrogen in Soybean. Journal of Agriculture Sci. 115: 63- 66.
• Samancıoğlu A, Yildirim E, Şahin Ü, 2016. Bitki Gelişimini Teşvik Eden Rizobakteri Uygulamalarının Farklı Sulama Seviyelerinde Yetiştirilen Lahanada Fide Gelişimi, Bazı Fizyolojik ve Biyokimyasal Özelliklerin Etkisi. KSÜ Doğa Bilimleri Dergisi. 19(3):332-338.
• Saied El-Sayed, Amany Abd El-Mohsen Ramadan and Farid Hellal, 2020. Drought Stress Mitigation by Application of Algae Extract on Peanut Grown under Sandy Soil Conditions. Asian Journal of Plant Sciences, 19: 230-239.
• Sairam RK, Saxena, D.C, 2000. Oxidative Stress and antioksidants in Wheat Genotypes: Possible Mechanism of Water Stres Tolerance. J. Agron. 13-18:223 p.
• Sreenivasulu N, Grimm B, Wobus U, Weschke W, 2000. Differential Response of Antioxidant Compounds to Salinity Stress in Salt-Tolerant and Saltsensitive Seedlings of Foxtail Millet (Setaria italica). Physiol. Plant. 109: 435-442.
• Tiwari S, Lata C, Chauhan PS, Nautiyal CS, 2016. Pseudomonas putida attunes morphophysiological, Biochemical and Molecular Responses in Cicer arietinum L. During Drought Stress And Recovery. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 99, 108–117. doi: 10.1016/j.plaphy.2015.11.001. Tunçtürk R, Tunçtürk M, Oral E, 2021. Kuraklık Stresi Koşullarında Yetiştirilen Soya Fasulyesinin (Glycine max L.) Bazı Fizyolojik Özellikleri Üzerine Rizobacterium (PGPR) Uygulamalarının Etkisi. ÇOMÜ Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, 9 (2), 359-368. DOI: 10.33202/comuagri.881226.
• Tüfenkçi Ş, Demir S, Şensoy S, Ünsal H, Durak ED, Erdin C, Ekincialp A, 2012. The effects of Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi on the Seedling Growth of Four Hybrid Cucumber (Cucumis sativus L.) Cultivars. Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry, 36(3), 317-327.
• Valentovic P, Luxova M, Kolarovic l, Gasparikova O, 2006. Effect of Osmotic Stress on Compatible Solutes Content, Membrane Stability and Water Relations in Two Maize Cultivars. Plant Soil Environ. 52(4): 186-191.
• Vardharajul, S, Ali SZ, Grover M, Reddy G, Bandi V, 2011. Drought-Tolerant Plant Growth Promoting Bacillus spp.: Effect on Growth, Osmolytes, and Antioxidant Status of Maize Under Drought Stress. J. Plant Interact. 6, 1–14. doi: 10.1080/17429145.2010.535178.
• Vural H, Eşiyok D, Duman İ, 2000. Kültür Sebzeleri (Sebze Yetiştirme). Ege Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Bahçe Bitkileri Bölümü, s. 440, Bornova, İzmir.
• Yıldırım E, Caşka KS, Ekinci M, Kul R, 2020. Kuraklık Stresinin Fasulyede Bitki Gelişimi, Bazı Fizyolojik ve Biyokimyasal Özellikler Üzerine Etkisi. Erciyes Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Fen Bilimleri Dergisi, 36 (2), 264-273.
• Zhang W, Xie Z, Zhang X, LanGD, Zhang X, 2019. Growth-promoting bacteria Alleviates Drought Stress of g. Uralensis Through İmproving Photosynthesis Characteristics and Water Status. Journal of Plant Interactions. 14 (1):580-589.