The Leaf Properties, Stomatal Index and Chlorophyll Content of Turkish Hazelnut (Corylus avellana L.) Cultivars

Abstract

This study examined the leaf micromorphological properties, stomatal indexes, and chlorophyll contents of 20 Turkish hazelnuts (Corylus avellana) cultivars. The cultivars examined included the ‘Acı, Allahverdi, Cavcava, Çakıldak, Foşa, Giresun melezi, Incekara, Kalınkara, Kan, Karafındık, Kargalak, Kuş, Mincane, Okay 28, Palaz, Sivri, Uzunmusa, Tombul, Yassı Badem, and Yuvarlak Badem’. The chlorophyll content was measured by a portable chlorophyll meter and the surface sections of leaves were excised by hand and all measurements were obtained by using imaging software (NIS - Elements, Version 3.00 SP5). The stomatal index per unit area (1x 104 μm2) was calculated. For scanning electron microscope (SEM) imaging, the dried leaves were mounted on stubs using double-sided adhesive tape. The leaf samples were coated with 12.5-15.0 nm of gold and the coated leaves were photographed using a Hitachi SU 1510 Scanning Electron Microscope. Three wax ornamentation types were found in the leaf samples (e.g., crust, smooth, and granules). The epidermal features, stomatal index, and chlorophyll quantities showed some differences among the C. avellana cultivars. The importance of stoma width and stoma length were determined for the ‘Palaz’, ‘Kuş’, ‘Yuvarlak Badem’, and ‘Yassı Badem’. The stomatal index and width and length of upper epidermis and lower epidermis were identified as distinctive properties for the ‘Allahverdi’, ‘Kargalak’, ‘Kara’, and ‘Mincane’. The chlorophyll density was identified as a distinctive feature of the ‘Sivri’, ‘Çakıldak’, ‘Incekara’, and ‘Acı’ cultivars. The highest correlation was found at a rate of 0.98 between ‘Okay 28’ and ‘Tombul’ while the lowest correlation was found at a rate of 0.87 between ‘Sivri’-‘Karafındık’, ‘Sivri’-‘Foşa’, and ‘Sivri’-‘Kargalak’.

Keywords

• Corylus avellana
• Leaf micromorphology
• Scanning electron microscopy
• SPAD
• Stoma

References

1. Akçin Ö E, Şenel G & Akçin Y (2013). Leaf epidermis morphology of some Onosma (Boraginaceae) species from Turkey. Turk. J. Bot. 37: 55-64.
2. Akçin Y & Bostan S Z (2018). Variations in some traits affecting yield in different hazelnut cultivars. Acta Hortic. 1226. ISHS 2018. Proc. IX International Congress on Hazelnut
3. Atar F, Güney D, Bayraktar A, Yıldırım N & Turna I (2020). Seasonal Change Of Chlorophyll Content (Spad Value) In Some Tree And Shrub Species. Turkish Journal of Forest Science 4(2): 245-256.
4. Avcı N & Aygün A (2014). Determination of Stomatal Density and Distribution on Leaves of Turkish Hazelnut (Corylus avellana L.) Cultivars. Journal of Agricultural Sciences 20(4): 454-459.
5. Bahar B (2015). Relationships among flag leaf chlorophyll content, agronomical traits, and some physiological traits of winter wheat genotypes. Dicle University Institute of Natural and Applied Science Journal. 4(1): 1-5
6. Balık H I, Kayalak Balık S, Beyhan N & Erdoğan V (2016). Hazelnut Cultivars. Klasmat Press, Trabzon.
7. Bartholtt W, Neinhuis C, Cutler D, Ditsch F, Meusel I, Theisen I & Wilhelmi H (1998). Classification and terminology of plant epicuticular waxes. Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 126: 237–260.
8. Canova I, Durkovic J & Hladka D (2008). Stomatal and chlorophyll fluorescence characteristics in European beech cultivars during leaf development. Biologia Plantarum 52 (3): 577-581.

9. Chen J, Sun H & Yang Y (2008). Comparative morphology of leaf epidermis of Salix (Salicaceae) with special emphasis on sections Lindleyanae and Retusae. Bot J Linn Soc. 157: 311–322.
10. Cheng Q A (2006). Morphological characters of leaf epidermis in Schisandraceae and their systematic significance. J. Plant Biol. 49(1): 80-87.
11. Çağlar S & Tekin H (1999). Farklı Pistacia anaçlarına aşılı Antepfıstığı çeşitlerinin stoma yoğunlukları. Tr. J. of Agric. and Forestr. 23: 1029-1032.
12. Çağlar S, Sütyemez M & Beyazıt S (2004). Stomatal density in some selected walnut (Juglans regia) types. Mediterr. Agric. Sci. 17: 169-174.
13. Davis P H (Ed.) (1982). Flora of Turkey and the East Aegean Islands. Vol. 7. Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh. Drake P L, Froend R H & Franks P J (2013). Smaller, faster stomata: scaling of stomatal size, rate of response, and stomatal conductance. J Exp Bot. 64:495–505
14. Fillela I, Serrano L, Serra J & Peñuelas J (1995). Evaluating wheat nitrogen status with canopy reflectance indices and discriminant analysis. In: Richardson A D, Duigan S P & Berlyn G P An evaluation of noninvasive methods to estimate foliar chlorophyll content. New Phytologist. 153: 185–194.
15. Güner A, Aslan S, Ekim, T, Vural M & Babaç M T (Eds) (2012). Turkish Plant List. Nezahat Gökyiğit Botanical Garden and Flora Research Association Publication, İstanbul.
16. Hardin J W & Bell J M (1986). Atlas of Foliar Surface Features in Woody Plants, IX. Betulaceae of Eastern United States. Brittonia. 38(2):133- 144.
17. Hurt H & Doğan A 2020. Determination of Stoma Density and Distribution of Hazelnut (Corylus avellana L.) Cultivars and Genotypes Grown in Different Ecologies. YYU Journal of Agricultural Science. 30(3):544-552.
18. Rong-hua L, Guo P, Michael B, Stefania G & Salvatore C (2006). Evaluation of Chlorophyll Content and Fluorescence Parameters as Indicators of Drought Tolerance in Barley. Agricultural Sciences in China 5(10): 751–57.
19. Mert C, Barut E & Uysal T (2009). Farklı anaçlar üzerine aşılı elma çeşitlerinin stoma morfolojilerinin araştırılması. Tarım Bilimleri Araştırma Dergisi 2 (2): 61-64.
20. Nabin S, Nath S C & Simanta D (2000). Foliar micromorphological characters of few taxa of the genus Aquilaria Lamk growing Lamk growing North East India. Adv. Plant Sci. 13: 551-558.
21. Najmaddin C & Saeed M M (2020). Anatomical and Palynological Studies of Some Bougainvillea Glabra Cultivars. Systematic Reviews in Pharmacy 11(11):1177-1191.
22. Nur Fatıhah H, Nashrıyah M, Nor Zaımah A, Khaırıl M & Alı A M (2014). Leaf morphology and anatomy of 7 varieties of Ficus deltoidea (Moraceae). Turkish Journal of Botany. 38: 677-685.
23. Razaz M, Naqinezhad A, Mahmoodi A, Hosseinzadeh A & Azimi R A (2015). Comparative Anatomy of Carpinus orientalis Mill. (Betulaceae) Populations in Iran. J. Genet. Resour. 1(1):45- 54.
24. Sagaram M & Lombardini L (2007). Variation in Leaf Anatomy of Pecan Cultivars from Three Ecogeographic Locations. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 132(5): 592-596.
25. Sonibare M A, Jayeola A A, Egunyomi A & Murata J (2005). A survey of epidermal morphology in Ficus Linn. (Moraceae) of Nigeria. Bot. Bull. Acad. Sin. 46: 231-238. Uzunova K R (1999). A comparative study of leaf epidermis in European Corylaceae. Feddes Repert. 110(3): 209-218.
26. Taiz L, Zeiger E, Moller I M & Murphy A (2014). Plant Physiology. 6th ed. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland.
27. Taner S & Sade B (2005). Low temperature effect of cereal. Journal of Crop Research. 2: 19-28.
28. Vardar Y (1987). Preparation Techniques in Botany. Ege University Press, İzmir.
29. Wilkinson H P (1979). The plant surface (mainly leaf). In: Metcalfe C R & Chalk L (ed.) Anatomy of the Dicotyledons. Clarendon Press. Oxford, pp. 97–165.
30. Yang Z R & Lin Q (2005). Comparative morphology of the leaf epidermis in Schisandra (Schisandraceae). Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 148: 39–56.
31. Zamani A, Attar F & Civeyrel L (2015). Leaf epidermis characters of Iranian Pyrus L. (Rosaceaea) and their taxonomic implications. Genet. Resour. Crop. Evol. 64: 159-176.
32. Zeren I, Cesur A, Saleh E A & Mossi M M (2017). Variation of Chlorophyll Amount in Some Landscape Plants: a case study of Rize, Journal of Chemical, Biological and Physical Sciences, 7(3): 807- 817.