4.4 Article

Alleviation of salt stress in lemongrass by salicylic acid

期刊

PROTOPLASMA
卷 249, 期 3, 页码 709-720

出版社

SPRINGER WIEN
DOI: 10.1007/s00709-011-0314-1

关键词

Aromatic grass; Cymbopogon flexuosus; Var; Neema; Var; Krishna; Citral content; Electrolyte leakage; PEP carboxylase activity; Salicylic acid; Salt stress

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Soil salinity is one of the key factors adversely affecting the growth, yield, and quality of crops. A pot study was conducted to find out whether exogenous application of salicylic acid could ameliorate the adverse effect of salinity in lemongrass (Cymbopogon flexuosus Steud. Wats.). Two Cymbopogon varieties, Krishna and Neema, were used in the study. Three salinity levels, viz, 50, 100, and 150 mM of NaCl, were applied to 30-day-old plants. Salicylic acid (SA) was applied as foliar spray at 10(-5) M concentration. Totally, six SA-sprays were carried out at 10-day intervals, following the first spray at 30 days after sowing. The growth parameters were progressively reduced with the increase in salinity level; however, growth inhibition was significantly reduced by the foliar application of SA. With the increase in salt stress, a gradual decrease in the activities of carbonic anhydrase and nitrate reductase was observed in both the varieties. SA-treatment not only ameliorated the adverse effects of NaCl but also showed a significant improvement in the activities of these enzymes compared with the untreated stressed-plants. The plants supplemented with NaCl exhibited a significant increase in electrolyte leakage, proline content, and phosphoenol pyruvate carboxylase activity. Content and yield of essential oil was also significantly decreased in plants that received salinity levels; however, SA overcame the unfavorable effects of salinity stress to a considerable extent. Lemongrass variety Krishna was found to be more adapted to salt stress than Neema, as indicated by the overall performance of the two varieties under salt conditions.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据