Skip to main content
PMC home page
Plants logoLink to Plants
. 2021 Nov 12;10(11):2443. doi: 10.3390/plants10112443

The Variability for the Biochemical Indicators at the Winter Wheat Assortment and Identifying the Sources with a High Antioxidant Activity

Ramona Aida Paunescu 1, Elena Bonciu 2,*, Elena Rosculete 3,*, Gabriela Paunescu 4, Catalin Aurelian Rosculete 2, Cristina Babeanu 5
Editors: Kinga Dziurka, Mateusz Labudda, Ewa Muszyńska
PMCID: PMC8617625  PMID: 34834806

Abstract

This study presents the variability of some biochemical indicators in the winter wheat assortments tested in south-western Oltenia (Romania) and identification of the sources showing a high antioxidant activity. The peroxidase activity has intensified as the stress induced by treatment with PEG of different concentrations and in different doses increased. Regarding the peroxidase content, among the varieties treated with PEG 10,000 25%, the majority of the Romanian varieties tested showed higher values of the PEG/control treatment ratio, which suggests tolerance to drought. In reverse, the activity of ascorbate peroxidase is lower in tolerant varieties. The varieties with a subunit report have been noted. Among them are the Izvor variety, known as the drought-tolerant variety, as well as other Romanian varieties: Alex, Delabrad, Lovrin 34, etc. An increased activity of catalase was present in most varieties, so there is the possibility of drought tolerance. Among the varieties highlighted are Romanian varieties (Dropia, Trivale, Nikifor, etc.) but also foreign varieties (Kristina, GH Hattyu, Karlygash, etc.). However, the correlation between yield index in the limited assortment and the antioxidant enzyme content ratios between PEG and control treatments does not exist, suggesting that none of these biochemical indicators are a selective indicator for drought tolerance under the experimental condition.

Keywords: wheat, peroxidase, ascorbate peroxidase, catalase, yield index

1. Introduction

Wheat is a cheap source of essential amino acids (which are not synthesized in the body), good quality minerals, vitamins, and vital dietary fibres to the human diet [1]. Besides this, it is also considered a natural source of both enzymatic and non-enzymatic antioxidants [2]. The enzymatic antioxidants include superoxide dismutase (SOD), glutathione reductase (GR), and ascorbate peroxidase (APX), catalase (CAT), and peroxidase (POD), while non-enzymatic antioxidants include vitamin C (tocopherols and tocotrienols), vitamin E, and carotenoids [3].

Drought tolerance is a complex trait that refers to the degree to which a plant is adapted to arid or drought conditions that lead to different morphological and physiological changes. Adaptation processes to drought stress conditions involve the genetics at different molecular, physiological, biochemical, and biological levels and processes [4,5].

Under drought conditions, oxidative degradation products occur at the cellular level, leading to oxidative stress. Numerous experiments on the study of wheat drought resistance showed cell-based induction of enzyme oxidative stress protection systems [6,7,8]. A drought-tolerant genotype had the highest activity of peroxidase and catalase ascorbate and high ascorbic acid content and showed the lowest accumulation of hydrogen peroxide and lipid peroxidase, compared to a sensitive genotype that had the lowest activity of antioxidant enzymes and ascorbic acid content and the highest content of hydrogen peroxide and lipid peroxidase [7,8]. Reactive oxygen species (ROS) are generated in plants upon exposure to stressful conditions [9]. ROS are byproducts of numerous enzymatic reactions in various cell compartments [10].

The combating ROS in plants during stressful conditions is maintained by the enzymatic components comprising of the superoxide dismutase (SOD), ascorbate peroxidase (APX), guaiacol peroxidase (GPX), glutathione-S-transferase (GST), and catalase (CAT). The omnipresent nature of these enzymatic components underlies the necessity of the detoxification of ROS for cellular survival [9,10].

One of the most important goals of plant breeding is to produce new wheat cultivars with a high degree of drought tolerance. Thus, the first step is to select the potential germplasm that contains genotypic differences for drought tolerance [11].

Some authors [12] studied Triticum genotypes with three levels of polyploidy: hexaploid, tetraploid, and diploid, submitted to a stress of 4, 8, and 12 days, respectively. In general, catalase showed an increase or maintenance in the early stages of drought and then a decrease as the magnitude of stress increased. In contrast, peroxidase increased to water stress.

According to [13], who studied the role of the plant’s antioxidant system in stress tolerance, drought induced in two different stages after anthesis resulted in increased accumulation of oxygenated water and decreased ascorbic acid content. Antioxidant enzymes such as ascorbate peroxidase and catalase have increased under water stress conditions. A drought-tolerant genotype had the highest activity of ascorbate peroxidase and catalase and high ascorbic acid content and also showed the lowest accumulation of oxygenated water and lipid peroxidase. By comparison, a sensitive genotype had the lowest antioxidant enzyme activity and ascorbic acid content and the highest content of oxygenated water and lipid peroxidase.

A solution of polyethylene glycol (PEG) can be used to induce drought stress that is measured using a timescale of days after treating the seeds with the PEG solution. There are many different concentrations of PEG; therefore, it is essential to test a wide range of concentrations. In germination experiments using PEG, the seeds of genotypes are tested to different concentration [14,15].

Some authors [16] analysed five wheat cultivars submitted to 3, 6, and 9 days water stress, respectively. The activity of peroxidase and ascorbate peroxidase showed an initial increase. In cultivars that were found to be more stress-tolerant than others, peroxidase activity increased with increasing stress duration while ascorbate peroxidase activity decreased. The study conducted by [17] on an assortment of wheat cultivars and lines created at Șimnic regarding the phenol content and the activity of the antioxidants revealed that they are significantly influenced by genotype and environment. The Dropia variety was superior to the Boema variety and to the lines tested by point of view of phenol content.

Results reported by some authors suggest that water stress alters the balance between free radical production and enzymatic protection mechanisms in wheat plants [18]. Studies conducted by [19] investigated the effects of salicylic acid (SA) and cold on apoplastic protein levels and activities of apoplastic catalase (CAT), peroxidase (POX), and polyphenol oxidase (PPO) in winter wheat (Triticum aestivum cv. Dogu-88) leaves. When the activities with cold + SA treatment are compared to their cold treatments, CAT and POX activities were decreased while PPO activity was increased by SA.

The activities of antioxidant enzyme defence system depended on wheat cultivar, duration of drought, and the stage of leaf development [20].

Drought-tolerant genotypes also kept higher ascorbate compared with sensitive genotypes under stress and non-stress conditions, while peroxidase activity was not affected by drought stress [21]. Antioxidants and stress markers can be efficiently and economically used as biochemical indices to screen or to enrich wheat germoplasm for drought tolerance at the early seedling stage [21]. Plant materials should be phenotyped accurately using an appropriate assay and trait that has a direct relation to drought tolerance. Single-trait evaluation for drought tolerance to distinguish between tolerant and susceptible genotypes is not recommendable [22,23].

This study aimed at investigating the variability of some biochemical indicators (peroxidase, ascorbate peroxidase, and catalase) at the winter wheat assortments and identification of the sources showing a high antioxidant activity.

2. Results

In our experiment in south-western Oltenia, the activity of peroxidase increased as the stress induced by PEG treatment of different concentrations and at different doses increased. The varieties that showed an increase in the activity of the peroxidase are shown in Table 1.

Table 1.

The activity of peroxidase in an assortment of 50 wheat cultivars analysed.

No. Cultivar PEROXIDASE (ΔA/1 min/1 gsp)
In Normal Conditions (Water–Control) In Water-Stress-Induced Conditions (25% PEG 10,000) In Water-Stress-Induced Conditions (40% PEG 4000) Ratio PEG (25%/Control) Ratio PEG (40%/Control)
35. KRISTINA 57.60 211.43 319.02 3.671 5.539
39. MOLDAU 91.69 308.8 0 3.368 0.000
40. MV PALMA 66.21 220.78 0 3.335 0.000
50. TRIVALE 23.27 71.31 0 3.064 0.000
31. GK HATTYU 104.88 293 431.14 2.794 4.111
36. LADA 72.94 188.09 141.2 2.579 1.936
48. SHOHAM 71.46 177.44 0 2.483 0.000
30. GRUIA 75.75 176.8 200.6 2.334 2.648
47. ROMULUS 75.16 168.75 0 2.245 0.000
34. KARLYGASH 72.01 158.66 275.62 2.203 3.828
41. NIKIFOR 85.89 180.38 100.54 2.100 1.171
29. GK GOBE 119.08 238.71 174.45 2.005 1.465
43. ORQUAL 69.33 134.46 0 1.939 0.000
25. GIAVA 111.83 216 321.96 1.932 2.879
33. IZVOR 114.15 216.16 190.17 1.894 1.666
27. GK ELET 105.89 199.7 387 1.886 3.655
21. EXOTIC 76.19 141 332 1.851 4.358
42. ORATORIO 72.12 128.97 0 1.788 0.000
18. ELIANA 85.96 125.55 87.59 1.461 1.019
26. GK DAVID 207.61 301 543.27 1.450 2.617
46. ROMANSA 111.45 157.97 76.76 1.417 0.689
11. CUBUS 108.57 151.5 219.64 1.395 2.023
1. AGRON 134.4 176 218.3 1.310 1.624
5. BITOP 140.21 176.25 162.7 1.257 1.160
38. LOVRIN 34 126.92 144.34 0 1.137 0.000
6. BOEMA 151.28 171.53 165 1.134 1.091
13. DELABRAD 122.7 137.88 166.65 1.124 1.358
28. GLOSA 137.53 151.6 372 1.102 2.705
2. ALEX 130.9 141.28 191.75 1.079 1.465
23. FLAMURA 85 171 176 316 1.029 1.848
3. AZTEC 138 140.77 161 1.020 1.167
32. MIRANDA 90.6 92.25 170.25 1.018 1.879
22. FAUR 107.55 108 184.48 1.004 1.715
14. DEMETRA 129.66 128.76 215.12 0.993 1.659
7. SIMNIC 50 121.1 113.92 255.1 0.941 2.107
16. DROPIA 120.4 111.57 140.68 0.927 1.168
19. ENESCO 132.89 121.96 321.83 0.918 2.422
24. GABRIELA 149.67 135.62 265 0.906 1.771
20. ESQUISIT 199.74 168.06 219.21 0.841 1.097
12. DARIEL 132.97 110.44 163.74 0.831 1.231
4. BEZOSTAIA 162.83 130.92 175 0.804 1.075
15. DOR 160.66 126.42 166.11 0.787 1.034
17. DUNAI 164.75 125.78 211.99 0.763 1.287
49. SIMNIC 30 59.58 43.96 0 0.738 0.000
10. CRINA 133.22 84.7 138.87 0.636 1.042
44. JULIUS 207.74 121.65 0 0.586 0.000
8. CAPO 179.5 103.76 182.28 0.578 1.015
37. LITERA 139.04 77.74 0 0.559 0.000
45. NATHAN 238.33 113.04 0 0.474 0.000
9. CAROLINA 126.33 56.63 163.25 0.448 1.292
Open in a new tab

The cultivars from the limited assortment were yellow highlighted (winter wheat cultivars tested for 14 years, year by year). It is observed that they are distributed everywhere in the range of the results obtained by the 50 cultivars, this fact indicating that the varieties that are part of this assortment and the obtained results could have a high probability of identifying the sources of stress tolerance for the south-western Oltenia drought conditions.

Among the varieties treated with PEG 10,000 25%, most of the Romanian varieties tested, components of the limited assortment, Gruia, Izvor, Lovrin 34, Boema, Delabrad, Glosa, Alex, Miranda, and Faur, presented super unitary values of the ratio between PEG/control treatment, which suggests drought tolerance.

Conversely, the activity of ascorbate peroxidase is lower in the tolerant varieties, so in Table 2, the varieties with subunit ratio were noted. Among them are the Izvor variety, known as the drought-tolerant variety, as well as other Romanian varieties: Alex, Delabrad, Lovrin 34, Miranda, Dor, and Romulus (Table 2).

Table 2.

The activity of ascorbat peroxidase in an assortment of 50 wheat cultivars analysed.

No. Cultivar ASCORBAT PEROXIDAZE (μgAsA/1 min/1 gsp)
In Normal Conditions—Water–Control In Water-Stress-Induced Conditions—25% PEG 10,000 In Water-Stress-Induced Conditions—40% PEG 4000 Ratio PEG 25%/Control Ratio PEG 40%/Control
50. TRIVALE 4693 40,522 0 8.635 0.000
49. SIMNIC 30 4754 35,528 0 7.473 0.000
29. GK GOBE 2990 21,994 3661 7.356 1.224
8. CAPO 16,313 57,206 4550 3.507 0.279
9. CAROLINA 5834 17,921 11,101 3.072 1.903
7. SIMNIC 50 9829 29,888 14,349 3.041 1.460
11. CUBUS 4606 11,865 13,154 2.576 2.856
40. MV PALMA 52,089 129,907 0 2.494 0.000
10. CRINA 13,795 33,881 30,699 2.456 2.225
41. NIKIFOR 75,225 179,104 41,893 2.381 0.557
37. LITERA 26,825 62,474 0 2.329 0.000
14. DEMETRA 9350 20,147 6711 2.155 0.718
48. SHOHAM 34,285 70,888 0 2.068 0.000
23. FLAMURA 85 31,788 60,423 80,790 1.901 2.542
5. BITOP 13,523 24,456 20,302 1.808 1.501
6. BOEMA 11,930 20,898 0 1.752 0.000
22. FAUR 29,801 51,107 34,830 1.715 1.169
24. GABRIELA 33,376 51,546 43,200 1.544 1.294
30. GRUIA 18,476 28,177 13,396 1.525 0.725
21. EXOTIC 20,906 31,348 52,677 1.499 2.520
3. AZTEC 12,420 17,802 4565 1.433 0.368
28. GLOSA 28,813 37,094 14,970 1.287 0.520
39. MOLDAU 63,595 70,754 0 1.113 0.000
43. ORQUAL 35,074 38,866 0 1.108 0.000
16. DROPIA 23,299 25,689 22,446 1.103 0.963
17. DUNAI 28,531 31,389 18,868 1.100 0.661
36. LADA 13,827 13,470 16,152 0.974 1.168
12. DARIEL 7299 6995 12,564 0.958 1.721
27. GK ELET 25,027 23,328 7278 0.932 0.291
2. ALEX 9663 9001 5758 0.931 0.596
25. GIAVA 56,518 50,899 61,391 0.901 1.086
45. NATHAN 34,463 29,747 0 0.863 0.000
13. DELABRAD 20,398 17,253 20,925 0.846 1.026
15. DOR 20,618 17,412 39,525 0.845 1.917
35. KRISTINA 37,092 29,585 0 0.798 0.000
47. ROMULUS 46,875 35,744 0 0.763 0.000
38. LOVRIN 34 29,747 21,739 0 0.731 0.000
33. IZVOR 43,547 29,441 26,106 0.676 0.599
1. AGRON 10,847 6428 6007 0.593 0.554
46. PKB ROMANSA 70,721 39,318 60,942 0.556 0.862
32. MIRANDA 51,011 27,675 15,796 0543 0.310
26. GK DAVID 35,090 18,654 0 0.532 0.000
4. BEZOSTAIA 9221 45,85 5098 0.497 0.553
42. ORATORIO 73,625 31,888 0 0.433 0.000
44. JULIUS 80,042 30,550 0 0.382 0.000
19. ENESCO 65,789 24,314 12,227 0.370 0.186
18. ELIANA 36,772 13,413 29,207 0.365 0.794
31. GK HATTYU 17,537 6002 12,975 0.342 0.740
34. KARLYGASH 34,110 11,376 6852 0.334 0.201
20. ESQUISIT 10,981 2838 20,284 0.258 1.847
Open in a new tab

Increased activity of catalase has been present in most varieties, so that the possibility of drought tolerance exists. Among the varieties listed in Table 3 are Romanian varieties: Dropia, Trivale, Nikifor, Simnic 30, Simnic 50, Faur, Glosa, Gruia, Miranda, and Flamura 85. Of the foreign varieties that maintain a high activity of catalase at higher dose stress intensification, we can see: Kristina, GH Hattyu, Karlygash, Esquisit, Lada, Enesco, GK Elet, Cubus, and GK Gobe (Table 3).

Table 3.

The activity of catalase in an assortment of 50 wheat cultivars.

No. Cultivar CATALASE
In Normal Conditions—Water–Control In Water-Stress-Induced Conditions—25% PEG 10,000 In Water-Stress-Induced Conditions—40% PEG 4000 Ratio PEG 25%/Control Ratio PEG 40%/Control
48. SHOHAM 656 3318 - 5.058 -
16. DROPIA 298 1407 1492 4.721 5.007
35. KRISTINA 896.8 3155.81 5534.08 3.519 6.171
4. BEZOSTAIA 1536.98 4471 1087.7 2.909 0.708
50. TRIVALE 987 2765 - 2.801 -
42. ORATORIO 1652 4578 - 2.771 -
31. GK HATTYU 1945.44 5378.13 5536.33 2.764 2.846
18. ELIANA 1046 2862 290 2.736 0.277
41. NIKIFOR 1288 3422 3422 2.657 2.657
9. CAROLINA 435.73 1142.05 - 2.621 -
34. KARLYGASH 1819.21 3519.15 2557.91 1.934 1.406
49. SIMNIC 30 982 1876 - 1.910 -
20. ESQUISIT 1749 3309 3137 1.892 1.794
36. LADA 1482.57 2753.87 4020.1 1.857 2.712
7. SIMNIC 50 366.97 680.13 - 1.853 -
33. IZVOR 929 1685.36 1021.05 1.814 1.099
22. FAUR 763 1362.8 - 1.786 -
46. PKB ROMANSA 1128 1864 - 1.652 -
19. ENESCO 701 1141 4565 1.628 6.512
28. GLOSA 1782.55 2868.62 3832.3 1.609 2.150
27. GK ELET 1993.32 3110.42 4885.5 1.560 2.451
43. ORQUAL 1808 2784 - 1.540 -
30. GRUIA 1839.45 2604 2703.61 1.416 1.470
11. CUBUS 1253 1654 1497 1.320 1.195
45. NATHAN 1387 1829 - 1.319 -
32. MIRANDA 1432.37 1668.02 1904.12 1.165 1.329
26. GK DAVID 3992.5 4158.68 1923.07 1.042 0.482
29. GK GOBE 3472.56 3501.76 3645.2 1.008 1.050
12. DARIEL 1370 1380 965 1.007 0.704
39. MOLDAU 1208 1211 - 1.002 -
23. FLAMURA 85 5086 5086 5086 1.000 1.000
24. GABRIELA 5086 5086 5086 1.000 1.000
21. EXOTIC 1115 1103.4 1274 0.990 1.143
2. ALEX 1020.46 921.75 3071.01 0.903 3.009
40. MV PALMA 2200 1877 - 0.853 -
15. DOR 1173 990 1265 0.844 1.078
8. CAPO 1020 854.3 - 0.838 -
44. JULIUS 2100 1685 - 0.802 -
38. LOVRIN 34 1625 1265 - 0.778 -
1. AGRON 3010 2285.71 4605.66 0.759 1.530
3. AZTEC 2700 1898.88 2207.8 0.703 0.818
37. LITERA 987 674 - 0.683 -
10. CRINA 820.55 542.1 382.04 0.661 0.466
13. DELABRAD 1450 938 - 0.647 -
5. BITOP 3300.23 2086.96 1082.78 0.632 0.328
47. ROMULUS 4562 2647 - 0.580 -
25. GIAVA 3014.31 1266.82 3274.2 0.420 1.086
14. DEMETRA 1662 286 1577 0.172 0.949
6. BOEMA 3800 334.38 - 0.088 -
17. DUNAI 3570 312 1342 0.087 0.376
Open in a new tab

However, the correlation between YI in the limited assortment and the ratio of antioxidant enzyme content between PEG and control treatments does not exist, suggesting that none of these biochemical indicators represent a selection indicator for drought tolerance under the conditions of south-western Oltenia (Table 4).

Table 4.

The correlation between the YI index and the antioxidant activity for the limited assortment.

Cultivar YI Ratio PEROX PEG 25%/ct Ratio PEROX PEG 40%/ct Ratio ASC PEG 25%/ct Ratio ASC PEG 40%/ct Ratio CAT PEG 25%/ct Ratio CAT PEG 40%/ct
GLOSA 1.252 1.102 2.705 1.287 0.520 1.609 2.150
GRUIA 1.220 2.334 2.648 1.525 0.725 1.416 1.470
IZVOR 1.219 1.894 1.666 0.676 0.599 1.814 10.991
FAUR 1.153 1.004 1.715 1.715 1.169 1.786 0.000
DELABRAD 1.116 1.124 1.358 0.846 1.026 0.647 0.000
CRINA 0.996 0.636 1.042 2.456 2.225 0.000 0.000
ALEX 0.955 1.079 1.465 0.931 0.596 0.903 3.009
DROPIA 0.941 0.927 1.168 1.103 0.963 4.721 5.007
SIMNIC 30 0.895 0.738 1.029 7.473 5.972 1.910 -
BEZOSTAIA 0.854 0.804 1.075 0.497 0.553 2.909 0.708
BOEMA 0.847 1.134 1.091 1.752 1.400 0.000 0.000
ROMULUS 0.800 2.245 3.130 0.763 0.609 0.580 0.000
LOVRIN 34 0.753 1.137 1.585 0.731 0.584 0.000 0.000
Corelation with YI 0.25 0.31 −0.11 −0.18 0.14 0.42
Open in a new tab

From previous studies [24,25], it was clear that there is a close correlation between the YI index, which expresses drought tolerance, and the ratio between the stem length at PEG treatment 20% and the length of the stem at the control of 15 days from the sowing date (T1) or on average at three moments of determination (15, 24, and 35 days from sowing) and the ratio of the weight of the stem to PEG treatment 20% against the weight of the stem on the control, on the other hand.

In turn, these reports were correlated, as follows (Table 5):

Table 5.

Correlations between the characters determined in south-western Oltenia on a limited assortment of wheat varieties.

graphic file with name plants-10-02443-i001.jpg Ratio Length Stem PEG 15%/ct T1 Ratio Length Stem PEG 15%/ct T2 Ratio Length Stem PEG 15%/ct T3 Ratio Length Stem PEG 15%/ct aver. Ratio Length Stem PEG 20%/ct T1 Ratio Length Stem PEG 20%/ct T2 Ratio Length Stem PEG 20%/ct T3 Ratio Length Stem PEG 20%/ct Aver. Ratio Weight Root PEG 15%/ct Ratio Weight Root PEG 20%/ct Ratio Weight Stem PEG 15%/ct Ratio Weight Stem PEG 20%/ct Ratio Root/Stem PEG 15%/Root/Stem/ct Ratio Root/Stem PEG 20%/Root/Stem/ct Seed Germ. Stress/Normal Var (%)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Peroxidase PEG 25%/per ct 23 0.491 0.727 0.380 0.710 0.469 0.589 0.296 0.636 0.540 0.033 0.702 0.150 0.095 −0.131 0.224
Peroxidase PEG 40%/per ct 24 0.463 0.668 0.412 0.684 0.321 0.479 0.322 0.515 0.436 −0.114 0.689 −0.081 0.109 −0.001 0.269
Asc PEG 25%/asc ct 25 −0.090 −0.383 0.388 −0.062 −0.108 −0.055 0.208 0.002 −0.186 0.076 −0.223 −0.248 −0.007 0.402 −0.407
Asc PEG 40%/asc ct 26 −0.231 −0.440 0.379 −0.173 −0.205 −0.095 0.219 −0.066 −0.220 0.091 −0.242 −0.231 −0.042 0.384 −0.467
Cat PEG 25%/cat ct 27 0.169 0.352 0.127 0.280 0.183 0.740 0.357 0.561 0.250 0.796 0.223 0.762 −0.105 0.204 −0.406
Cat PEG 40%/cat ct 28 0.279 0.326 0.003 0.294 0.236 0.656 0.170 0.479 0.218 0.734 0.181 0.700 −0.084 0.189 −0.259
graphic file with name plants-10-02443-i002.jpg Red. Coleoptil Length (%) Ratio Length pl PEG 25%/Length pl. ct Ratio Length pl PEG 40%/Length pl. ct Initial Water Cont. (%) Water Loss after 4 h (%) Water Loss after 20 h (%) Water Loss after 24 h (%) Peroxidase PEG 25%/per ct Peroxidase PEG 40%/per ct Asc per PEG 25%/Asc per ct Asc per PEG 40%/Asc per ct Catalase PEG 25%/Cat ct Catalase PEG 40%/Cat ct
16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Peroxidase PEG 25%/per ct 23 −0.393 0.045 0.111 0.204 0.590 −0.295 0.114 1
Peroxidase PEG 40%/per ct 24 −0.781 0.128 0.115 0.067 0.156 −0.351 −0.194 0.771 1
Ascorbat peroxidase PEG 25%/asc ct 25 0.235 −0.468 −0.863 −0.055 0.156 −0.200 −0.131 −0.336 −0.298 1
Ascorbat peroxidase PEG 40%/asc ct 26 0.338 −0.450 −0.843 −0.043 0.027 −0.127 −0.088 −0.397 −0.404 0.985 1
Catalase PEG 25%/cat ct 27 0.202 −0.255 0.049 0.242 0.410 0.009 0.255 0.290 −0.042 −0.147 −0.130 1
Catalase PEG 40%/cat ct 28 0.109 −0.115 0.160 0.189 0.446 0.006 0.274 0.289 0.005 −0.258 −0.260 0.932 1
Open in a new tab

The ratio of stem length to 20% PEG treatment and control on average of three determination times (Med) was correlated with:

  • -

    Ratio between peroxidase content after 25% PEG treatment and peroxidase content in the control-significant correlation.

The ratio of the stem weight to PEG treatment 20% and the weight of the stem to the control was correlated with:

  • -

    Ratio between catalase content at 25% PEG treatment and control catalase content—distinctly significant correlation;

  • -

    Ratio between catalase content at 40% PEG treatment and control catalase content—significant correlation.

Directly or indirectly, all these determinations mentioned above can be used as selection indicators for drought tolerance, and, depending on the results obtained from the varieties tested, certain parents may be suggested.

The biochemical indicators were correlated, as follows:

The ratio of peroxidase content to 25% PEG treatment to peroxidase content in the control was significantly correlated with:

  1. The ratio between the stem length at 15% PEG treatment and the length of the stem at the control after 24 days from sowing (T2);

  2. The ratio of stem length to 15% PEG treatment and control stem length on average on determinations made at 15, 24, and 35 days;

  3. The ratio of stem length to 20% PEG treatment and control stem length on average on determinations made at 15, 24, and 35 days;

  4. The ratio of stem weight to the 15% PEG treatment and the weight of the stem to the control.

When the PEG dose is increased to 40%, another correlation appears:

  • -

    Distinctly significant positive with the ratio of peroxidase content to 20% PEG treatment and peroxidase content to control.

The ratio of ascorbate peroxidase content to 25% PEG treatment and ascorbate peroxidase content control and ratio of ascorbate peroxidase to 40% PEG treatment and ascorbat peroxidase determined in control were significantly negatively correlated with reduction of seedling length in 40% PEG treatment compared to the control (treated with water).

3. Discussion

Drought (water deficit) one the emerging threat worldwide and adversely affects the morpho-physiology and biochemical activity of plants, finally leading to a decrease in the grain yield of wheat [26,27]. Additionally, [28] showed that drought stress is one of the main threats that negatively affected the morphological, physiological, and biochemical behaviours of plants than other abiotic stresses. Drought adversely deteriorated the plant metabolic process by affecting the photosynthesis and water relations of the plant and also the uptake of nutrients [29].

At the biochemical indices, there is a change of meaning of the classification because a high ratio of peroxidase and catalase but a lower ratio of ascorbate peroxidase are desirable. In our study, the best of this pattern is the folded Kristina cultivar. On the other hand, the Izvor cultivar, known for its drought tolerance, is not noticeable by very good values for the enzymatic reaction possibly involved in drought conditions. Our results suggest ways to improve the Izvor cultivar performance under water stress conditions by hybridizing it with Kristina or Dropia varieties. Thus, descendants can be selected that accumulate good growth in the presence of water stress (simulated by PEG treatment), with a better reaction of the enzyme apparatus.

The results of many authors suggest that ascorbate peroxidase, a central enzyme for ROS scavenging in plants, can be induced under abiotic and biotic stresses [30,31,32,33,34]. Thus, the antioxidant enzymes APX, SOD, POD, and CAT are produced under different environmental stresses (such as drought, salt, etc.) for scavenging the activity of ROS in plants [35,36].

Additionally, the peroxidase activity has intensified as stress induced by PEG treatment of different concentrations and in different doses increased. Among the varieties treated with PEG 10,000 25%, most of the Romanian varieties tested presented super unit values of the PEG/control ratio, suggesting tolerance to drought. In reverse, the activity of ascorbate peroxidase is lower in tolerant varieties. Among the varieties evidenced by the increased activity of catalase were the Romanian varieties: Dropia, Trivale, Nikifor, Simnic 30, Simnic 50, Faur, Glosa, Gruia, Miranda, and Flamura 85. Among the foreign varieties that have maintained a high catase activity to increase stress through a higher dose of PEG were Kristina, GH Hattyu, Karlygash, Esquisit, Lada, Enesco, GK Elet, Cubus, and GK Gobe.

Drought stress can occur at any growth stage and depends on the local environment. According to [11], genotypes may be tested for their drought tolerance at relevant and often different growth stages because some genotypes may tolerate drought at the germination or seedling stage, but these may be very sensitive to drought at the flowering stage or vice versa. The ability of seeds and young seedlings to cope with oxidative stress during early vegetative growth and biotic (attachment of the soil and seed-borne pathogens) and abiotic stresses (drought, salinity, heat, and chilling) is vital for crop performance and production [37]. High activities of antioxidant enzymes such as superoxide dismutase (SOD), catalase (CAT), peroxidase (POD), and ascorbate peroxidase (APX) have been recorded during seed germination, early growth, and biotic and abiotic stresses [38,39,40]. APX plays a considerable role in wheat drought tolerance by detoxifying plants from the accumulation of H2O2 [41]

There are many studies that suggest that the yield index is correlated to antioxidant activity [38,39,40,41,42]. Generally, the genotypes respond differently to drought tolerance at different growth stages [11]. Some wheat genotypes exhibited a similar pattern of stress response, comprising proline accumulation, rise in hydrogen peroxide content, oxidative damage to membrane lipids, and increase in total antioxidant and antiradical activities, phenolic and flavonoid content, ascorbate and glutathione pools, and mobilization of superoxide dismutase (SOD), catalase (CAT), and peroxidase (POX) enzyme isoforms [42]. Other results reveal the important role of certain chloroplast chaperone proteins in drought stress response and different strategies of stress adaptation depending on the wheat genotype [43]. According to [44], the combination of lower N supply and water deprivation (osmotic stress induced by polyethylene glycol treatment) led to greater damage of the photosynthetic efficiency and a higher degree of oxidative stress than the individually applied stresses. Plant materials should be phenotyped accurately using an appropriate assay and trait that has a direct relation to drought tolerance [22].

Reactive oxygen species (ROS) plays an important signalling role in plants, controlling processes such as growth, development, and especially response to biotic and abiotic environmental stressors [45,46]. However, ROS are unable to cause damage, as they are being scavenged by different antioxidant mechanisms [47,48,49].

Plants treated with herbicides, similarly to those grown under various abiotic stress conditions, are subjected to enhanced attacks by ROS. According to [50], the stress markers, enzymatic and non-enzymatic antioxidant defence, were additionally increased during the stress period after the combined herbicide and drought treatment.

4. Materials and Methods

The experiments were located in the South-West area of Oltenia region (Romania). This belongs to the temperate climate zone, with Mediterranean influences due to its south-western position. The position and the depressional feature of the land it occupies, close to the curvature of the Carpathian–Balkan mountain range, determine, on the whole, a warmer climate than in the central and northern part of the country, with an annual average of 10–11.5 °C.

4.1. Plant Materials

Fifty wheat varieties of various origins were tested in the laboratory to detect differences between biochemical indicators: peroxidase, ascorbate peroxidase, and catalase. Fresh tissue, necessary for enzymatic analysis, was collected after 30 days in which the seedlings were grown in a controlled environment, under three experimental conditions (H2O, 25% PEG 10,000, and 40% PEG 4000).

From 50 varieties, 13 varieties were also field tested for the period 2002–2015, and the YI-specific drought tolerance index was calculated from yield data from the field, taking into account the average yield of years with the most severe drought 2002 and 2003 as Ys. This is the limited assortment.

Field experiments were placed in triple balanced grid without repeating the basic scheme.

4.2. Laboratory Researche Methods

Plants can be protected by antioxidant synthesis and by increasing the activity of antioxidant enzymes (peroxidase, superoxide dismutase, and catalase). The response of plants to exposure to water stress can be determined by different mechanisms, including the ability to maintain high levels of antioxidants and to regenerate them.

Peroxidase is the most extensively used enzyme as a biochemical marker of plant growth and development processes. The implications of peroxidases in plant physiology are multiple, but the most intensively studied refer to participation in the control of cell growth.

The laboratory analyses were carried out in 2017. The soil used in the planting pots had the same origin and was subsequently dried and brought to a uniform humidity.

Fifty variants were sown in plant pots containing the same amount of soil. After sprouting, six seedlings were kept in each vegetation pot. These were placed in the Sanyo growth chamber, previously adjusted to the optimal temperature, light, and atmospheric humidity parameters for proper growth of wheat plants (Table 6).

Table 6.

Optimal parameters for proper growth of wheat plants.

Parameters Values
Time (h) 0:00 3:00 6:00 9:00 11:00 13:00 15:00 17:00 19:00 22:00
Temperature (°C) 15.0 14.0 15.0 18.0 20.0 25.0 25.0 20.0 18.0 16.0
Light (lux) 0 0 1 2 4 5 4 3 1 0
Humidity (%) 60 65 65 60 55 55 55 55 55 55
Open in a new tab

The enzymatic determinations were performed according to the working methodology specific to the biochemical analyses. Fresh tissue was homogenized with 0.1 M phosphate buffer (pH = 7.0) containing 0.1 mM ascorbic acid and 0.1 mM EDTA. The homogenate was centrifuged 20 min at 10,000 r.p.m. (rotation per minute), and the supernatant was used for enzyme assays.

  • -

    The activity of peroxidase (guaiacol-peroxidase type E.C.1.11.1.7) was determined colorimetrically at λ = 470 nm and was expressed as the variation in absorbance per minute due to the oxidation of guaiacol from the extract of one gram of fresh substance [51].

  • -

    The activity of catalase (E.C.1.11.1.6) was determined by the Sinha method by colorimetrically determining the amount of H2O2 decomposed for 1 min by the enzyme in 1 g fresh substance. The method is based on the fact that potassium chromate in acidic medium is reduced by hydrogen peroxide to chromic acetate, which can be colorimetric at 570 nm [52,53].

4.3. Statistical Analysis

The paper contains the YI computation and the calculation of correlation coefficients.

Yield index [54],

YI=YsY¯s

where Ys is the production in the dry year and Ȳs is the average of the production in the dry year, best reflects the behaviour under stress conditions, compared to the average of all varieties. It is not influenced by other conditions and therefore seems the most adequate to characterize the ability of indirect methods to describe the drought resistance. The correlations between yield index and the antioxidant activity for the limited assortment were calculated.

The correlations were performed with the Pearson correlation test after [55].

5. Conclusions

Peroxidase activity has intensified as stress induced by PEG treatment of different concentrations and in different doses increased. Among the varieties treated with PEG 10,000 25%, most of the Romanian varieties tested (Gruia, Izvor, Lovrin 34, Boema, Delabrad, Glosa, Alex, Miranda, and Faur) presented super unit values of the PEG/control ratio, suggesting tolerance to drought. In reverse, the activity of ascorbate peroxidase is lower in tolerant varieties. The varieties with a subunit report were remarked upon. Among them are the Izvor variety, known as the drought-tolerant variety, as well as other Romanian varieties: Alex, Delabrad, Lovrin 34, Miranda, Dor, and Romulus.

Among the varieties evidenced by the increased activity of catalase were the Romanian varieties: Dropia, Trivale, Nikifor, Simnic 30, Simnic 50, Faur, Glosa, Gruia, Miranda, and Flamura 85. Among the foreign varieties that have maintained a high catalase activity to increase stress through a higher dose of PEG were Kristina, GH Hattyu, Karlygash, Esquisit, Lada, Enesco, GK Elet, Cubus, and GK Gobe.

There was no significant correlation between field behaviour to stress, expressed by the YI index on the limited assortment and ratios of antioxidant enzyme content between PEG and control treatments, suggesting that none of these biochemical indicators individually represent a selection marker for drought tolerance under the conditions of south-western Oltenia.

From the improver’s point of view, thus, given that the Izvor cultivar does not stand out for very good values for the enzyme (activity of catalase—1814 ratio PEG 10,000 25%/control and 1099 ratio PEG 4000 40%/control) device possibly involved in drought behaviour, one can expect that from its hybridization with the Kristina (activity of catalase —3519 ratio PEG 10,000 25%/control and 6171 ratio PEG 4000 40%/control) or Dropia (activity of catalase—4721 ratio PEG 10,000 25%/control and 5.007 ratio PEG 4000 40%/control cultivars), it is possible to select progeny that will cumulate good growth in the presence of water stress (simulated by PEG treatment), causing a better device enzymatic reaction.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, R.A.P. and G.P.; methodology, C.B.; validation, E.R., E.B., and C.A.R.; formal analysis, E.R.; investigation, R.A.P.; writing—original draft preparation, G.P.; writing—review and editing, E.B.; visualization, G.P.; supervision, C.A.R. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

All the data supporting this article were included in the main text.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Footnotes

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

References

  • 1.Okarter N., Liu C.S., Sorrells M.E., Liu R.H. Phytochemical content and antioxidant activity of six diverse varieties of whole wheat. Food Chem. 2010;119:249–257. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2009.06.021. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Mughal I., Shah Y., Tahir S., Haider W., Fayyaz M., Yasmin T., Ilyas M., Farrakh S. Protein quantification and enzyme activity estimation of Pakistani wheat landraces. PLoS ONE. 2020;15:e0239375. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0239375. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Narwal S., Thakur V., Sheoran S., Dahiya S., Jaswal S., Gupta R.K. Antioxidant activity and phenolic content of the Indian wheat varieties. J. Plant Biochem. Biotechnol. 2014;23:11–17. doi: 10.1007/s13562-012-0179-1. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Hu H., Xiong L. Genetic engineering and breeding of drought-resistant crops. Annu. Rev. Plant Biol. 2014;65:715–741. doi: 10.1146/annurev-arplant-050213-040000. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Tricker P.J., ElHabti A., Schmidt J., Fleury D. The physiological and genetic basis of combined drought and heat tolerance in wheat. J. Exp. Bot. 2018;69:3195–3210. doi: 10.1093/jxb/ery081. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Khanna-Chopra R., Selote D.S. Acclimation to drought stress generates oxidative stress tolerance in drought-resistant than-susceptible wheat cultivar under field conditions. Environ. Expt. Bot. 2007;60:276–283. doi: 10.1016/j.envexpbot.2006.11.004. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Osakabe Y., Osakabe K., Shinozaki K., Tran L.S.P. Response of plants to water stress. Front. Plant Sci. 2014;5:86. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2014.00086. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Zhang G., Zhang M., Zhao Z., Ren Y., Li Q., Wang W. Wheat TaPUB1 modulates plant drought stress resistance by improving antioxidant capability. Sci. Rep. 2017;7:7549. doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-08181-w. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Apel K., Hirt H. Reactive oxygen species: Metabolism, oxidative stress, and signal transduction. Annu. Rev. Plant Biol. 2004;55:373–399. doi: 10.1146/annurev.arplant.55.031903.141701. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Dietz K.J. Thiol-based peroxidases and ascorbate peroxidases: Why plants rely on multiple peroxidase systems in the photosynthesizing chloroplast? Mol. Cells. 2016;39:20–25. doi: 10.14348/molcells.2016.2324. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Sallam A., Alqudah A.M., Dawood M.F.A., Baenziger P.S., Börner A. Drought Stress Tolerance in Wheat and Barley: Advances in Physiology, Breeding and Genetics Research. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2019;20:3137. doi: 10.3390/ijms20133137. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Zhang J.N., Kirkha M.B. Antioxidant responses to drought in sunflower and sorghum seedlings. New Phytol. 1996;132:361–373. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8137.1996.tb01856.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Sairam R.K., Deshmukh P.S., Saxena D.C. Role of antioxidant systems in wheat genotypes tolerance to water stress. Biol. Plant. 1998;41:384–394. doi: 10.1023/A:1001898310321. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Kido É.A., Ferreira-Neto J.R.C., Pandolfi V., de Melo Souza A.C., Benko-Iseppon A.M. Drought Stress Tolerance in Plants. Volume 2. Springer; Cham, Switzerland: 2016. Drought Stress Tolerance in Plants: Insights from Transcriptomic Studies; pp. 153–185. [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Khazayi H., Kafi M., Masumi A. Physiological effects of stress induced by polyethylene glycol on germination of chickpea genotypes. J. Agron. Res. Iran. 2008;2:453. [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Chakraborty U., Pradhan B. Oxidative stress in five wheat varieties (Triticum aestivum L.) exposed to water stress and study of their antioxidant enzyme defense system, water stress responsive metabolites and H2O2 accumulation. Braz. J. Plant Physiol. 2012;24:17–130. doi: 10.1590/S1677-04202012000200005. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Păunescu A., Dodocioiu A.M., Băbeanu C., Păunescu G., Buzatu G.D. Total phenols content and antioxidant activity of whole grain flours from some wheat lines tested in the south-west of Romania. SGEM. 2016;1:845–852. [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Zhang Y., Shih D.S. Isolation of an osmotion like protein genefron strawerry and analysis of the response of this gene to abiotic stresses. J. Plant Physiol. 2007;164:68–77. doi: 10.1016/j.jplph.2006.02.002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Tașgin E., Okkeș A., Nalbantoglu B., Petrova Popova L. Effects of salicylic acid and cold treatments on protein levels and on the activities of antioxidant enzymes in the apoplast of winter wheat leaves. Phytochemistry. 2006;67:71–75. doi: 10.1016/j.phytochem.2006.01.022. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Nikolaeva M.K., Maevskaya S.N., Shugaev A.G., Bukhov N.G. Effect of drought on chlorophyll content and antioxidant enzyme activities in leaves of the wheat cultivars varying in productivity. Russ. J. Plant Physiol. 2010;57:87–95. doi: 10.1134/S1021443710010127. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Hameed A., Goher M., Iqbal N. Biochemicals Indices of Drought Tolerance in Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) at Early Seedling Stage. Philipp. Agric. Sci. 2014;97:236–242. [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Sallam A., Amro A., EL-Akhdar A., Dawood M.F.A., Kumamaru T., Stephen Baenziger P. Genetic diversity and genetic variation in morpho-physiological traits to improve heat tolerance in Spring barley. Mol. Biol. Rep. 2018;45:2441–2453. doi: 10.1007/s11033-018-4410-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Al Abdallat A.M., Ayad J.Y., Abu Elenein J.M., Al Ajlouni Z., Harwood W.A. Overexpression of the transcription factor HvSNAC1 improves drought tolerance in barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) Mol. Breed. 2014;33:401–414. doi: 10.1007/s11032-013-9958-1. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Păunescu G., Păunescu A.R. Identification of wheat varieties tolerant to water stress based on ratio between the stem growth measured in seedlings after 20% PEG treatment and the stem growth measured after water treatment 15 days after sowing. EWAC. 2018;17:91–97. [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Păunescu R.A. The stem growth measured in seedlings after 20% PEG treatment 15 days after sowing is significantly correled with field response to drought in the field. Rom. Agric. Res. 2018;35:29–37. [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Zahoor A., Waraich E.A., Barutçular C., Hossain A., Erman M., Çiğ F., Gharib H. El Sabagh, A. Enhancing drought tolerance in wheat through improving morphophysiological and antioxidants activities of plants by the supplementation of foliar silicon. Phyton. 2020;89:529–539. [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Wang J.Y., Xiong Y.C., Li F.M., Siddique K.H.M., Turner N.C. Effects of drought stress on morphophysiological traits, biochemical characteristics, yield and yield components in different ploidy wheat: A meta-analysis. Adv. Agron. 2017;143:139–173. [Google Scholar]
  • 28.El Sabagh A., Hossain A., Barutcular C., Islam M.S., Awan S.I., Galal A., Iqbal M.A., Sytar O., Yildirim M., Meena R.S., et al. Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) production under drought and heat stress-adverse effects, mechanisms and mitigation: A review. Appl. Ecol. Environ. Res. 2019;17:8307–8332. doi: 10.15666/aeer/1704_83078332. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Zhu Y., Gong H. Beneficial effects of silicon on salt and drought tolerance in plants. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2014;34:455–472. doi: 10.1007/s13593-013-0194-1. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Agrawal G.K., Jwa N.S., Iwahashi H., Rakwal R. Importance of ascorbate peroxidases OsAPX1 and OsAPX2 in the rice pathogen response pathways and growth and reproduction revealed by their transcriptional profiling. Gene. 2003;322:93–103. doi: 10.1016/j.gene.2003.08.017. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Baxter A., Mittler R., Suzuki N. ROS as key players in plant stress signalling. J. Exp. Bot. 2014;65:1229–1240. doi: 10.1093/jxb/ert375. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Caverzan A., Passaia G., Barcellos Rosa R., Werner Ribeiro C., Lazzarotto F., Margis-Pinheiro M. Plant responses to stresses: Role of ascorbate peroxidase in the antioxidant protection. Genet. Mol. Biol. 2012;35:1011–1019. doi: 10.1590/S1415-47572012000600016. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Chen Y., Cai J., Yang F.X., Zhou B., Zhou L.R. Ascorbate peroxidase from Jatropha curcas enhances salt tolerance in transgenic Arabidopsis. Genet. Mol. Res. 2015;14:4879–4889. doi: 10.4238/2015.May.11.20. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Fryer M.J., Ball L., Oxborough K., Karpinski S., Mullineaux P.M., Baker N.R. Control of Ascorbate Peroxidase 2 expression by hydrogen peroxide and leaf water status during excess light stress reveals a functional organisation of Arabidopsis leaves. Plant J. 2003;33:691–705. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-313X.2003.01656.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Abdelaal K.A.A., Omara I.R., Hafez M.Y., Samar M.E., El Sabagh A. Anatomical, biochemical and physiological changes in some Egyptian wheat cultivars inoculated with Puccinia gramini f. sp. tritici. Fresenius Environ. Bull. 2018;27:296–305. [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Shen X., Zhou Y., Duan L., Li Z., Eneji A.E., Li J. Silicon effects on photosynthesis and antioxidant parameters of soybean seedlings under drought and ultraviolet-B radiation. J. Plant Physiol. 2010;167:1248–1252. doi: 10.1016/j.jplph.2010.04.011. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Yu Q., Rengel Z. Drought and salinity differentially influence activities of superoxide dismutase in narrow-leafed lupins. Plant Sci. 1999;142:1–11. doi: 10.1016/S0168-9452(98)00246-5. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Giannopolitis C.N., Ries S.K. Superoxide dismutases: I. Occurrence in higher plants. Plant Physiol. 1977;59:309–314. doi: 10.1104/pp.59.2.309. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Prasad T.K. Mechanisms of chilling-induced oxidative stress injury and tolerance in developing maize seedlings: Changes in antioxidant system, oxidation of proteins and lipids, and protease activities. Plant J. 1996;10:1017–1026. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-313X.1996.10061017.x. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Gupta V.K., Sharma S.K. Plants as natural antioxidants. Nat. Prod. Radiance. 2006;5:326–334. [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Jallouli S., Ayadi S., Landi S., Capasso G., Santini G., Chamekh Z., Zouari I., Ben Azaiez F.E., Trifa Y., Esposito S. Physiological and Molecular Osmotic Stress Responses in Three Durum Wheat (Triticum Turgidum ssp Durum) Genotypes. Agronomy. 2019;9:550. doi: 10.3390/agronomy9090550. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Kirova E., Pecheva D., Simova-Stoilova L. Drought response in winter wheat: Protection from oxidative stress and mutagenesis effect. Acta Physiol. Plant. 2021;43:8. doi: 10.1007/s11738-020-03182-1. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Simova-Stoilova L., Kirova E., Pecheva D. Drought stress response in winter wheat varieties–changes in leaf proteins and proteolytic activities. Acta Bot. Croat. 2020;79:121–130. doi: 10.37427/botcro-2020-018. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Kartseva T., Dobrikova A., Kocheva K., Alexandrov V., Georgiev G., Brestič M., Misheva S. Optimal Nitrogen Supply Ameliorates the Performance of Wheat Seedlings under Osmotic Stress in Genotype-Specific Manner. Plants. 2021;10:493. doi: 10.3390/plants10030493. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Das K., Roychoudhury A. Reactive oxygen species (ROS) and response of antioxidants as ROS-scavengers during environmental stress in plants. Front. Environ. Sci. 2014;2:53. doi: 10.3389/fenvs.2014.00053. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Shao H.B., Liang Z.S., Shao M.A., Sun Q. Dynamic changes of antioxidative enzymes of 10 wheat genotypes at soil water deficits. Colloids Surf. B Biointerfaces. 2005;42:187–195. doi: 10.1016/j.colsurfb.2005.02.007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Bhattacharjee S. Reactive oxygen species and oxidative burst: Roles in stress, senescence and signal. Curr. Sci. 2005;89:1113–1121. [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Farnese F.S., Menezes-Silva P.E., Gusman G.S., Oliveira J.A. When bad guys become good ones: The key role of reactive oxygen species and nitric oxide in the plant responses to abiotic stress. Front. Plant Sci. 2016;7:471. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2016.00471. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Foyer C.H., Noctor G. Redox homeostasis and antioxidant signaling: A metabolic interface between stress perception and physiological responses. Plant Cell. 2005;17:1866–1875. doi: 10.1105/tpc.105.033589. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Todorova D., Sergiev I., Katerova Z., Shopova E., Dimitrova L., Brankova L. Assessment of the Biochemical Responses of Wheat Seedlings to Soil Drought after Application of Selective Herbicide. Plants. 2021;10:733. doi: 10.3390/plants10040733. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Putter J. Peroxidase. In: Bergmeyer H.U., editor. Methods of Enzymatic Analysis. Verlag Chemie; Weinhan, Germany: 1974. pp. 685–690. [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Sinha A.K. Colorimetric assay of catalase. Anal. Biochem. 1972;47:389–391. doi: 10.1016/0003-2697(72)90132-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Paunescu R.A. Ph.D. Thesis. University of Agriculture and Veterinary Medicine; Bucharest, Romania: 2017. Identification of Resistant Phenotypes in order to Improve the Behaviour of Wheat in Drought Conditions on the Luvisoil from Simnic. [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Gavuzzi P., Rizza F., Palumbo M., Campaline R.G., Ricciardi G.L., Borghi B. Evaluation of field and laboratory predictors of drought and heat tolerance in winter cereals. Can. J. Plant Sci. 1997;77:523–553. doi: 10.4141/P96-130. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Hawkins D. Biomeasurement: A Student’s Guide to Biological Statistics. 2rd ed. Oxford University Press; Oxford, UK: 2009. pp. 10–360. [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Data Availability Statement

All the data supporting this article were included in the main text.

Articles from Plants are provided here courtesy of Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI)

RESOURCES