Screening of rice landraces (Oryza sativa L.) for seedling stage salinity tolerance using morpho-physiological and molecular markers

  • Md. Tahjib-Ul-Arif
  • M. Abu Sayed
  • Mirza Mofazzal Islam
  • M. Nurealam Siddiqui
  • S. N. Begum
  • M. Afzal Hossain
Original Article
First Online:
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
  • 173 Downloads

Abstract

Traditional rice landraces of coastal area in Bangladesh are distinct regarding their phenotype, response to salt stress and yield attributes. With characterization of these landraces, suitable candidate genes for salinity tolerance could be identified to introgress into modern rice varieties. Therefore, the aim of this experiment was to uncover prospective rice landraces tolerant to salinity. Relying on morphological, biochemical and molecular parameters 25 rice genotypes were tested for salt tolerance at germination and seedling stage. At germination stage 0 and 12 dSm−1 salinity were imposed on rice genotypes. Ward’s cluster analysis divided rice genotypes into three clusters (susceptible, moderately tolerant and tolerant) based on the physiological indices. The tolerant rice landraces to salinity were Sona Toly, Nakraji and Komol Bhog. At seedling stage screening was performed following IRRI standard protocol at 12 dSm−1 salinity level. Based on all morphological and biochemical parameters Komol Bhog was identified as the highly salinity tolerant landrace while Bolonga, Sona Toly, Dud Sail, Tal Mugur and Nakraji were found as tolerant to salinity. Molecular characterization using two simple sequence repeats (SSR) markers, viz. RM121 and RM337 displayed Bolonga, Til Kapor, Panbra, Sona Toly, Bina Sail, Komol Bhog, Nakraji, Tilkapur, Gajor Goria and Gota were tolerant landraces through genetic similarity in dendrogram. These identified salt-resistant landraces can be used as promising germplasm resources for breeding salt-tolerant high-yielding rice varieties in future.

Keywords

Landraces Physiological indices Rice Salt stress Simple sequence repeat 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgements

Authors are grateful to Tahmina Akter and Manos Kranti Saha for laboratory help.

References

  1. Akhtar M, Hussain F, Ashraf MY et al (2012) Influence of salinity on nitrogen transformations in soil. Commun Soil Sci Plant Anal 43:1674–1683.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00103624.2012.681738 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ali Z, Khan AS, Asad MA (2002) Salt tolerance in bread wheat: genetic variation and heritability for growth and ion relation. Asian J Plant Sci 1:420–422CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ali MN, Yeasmin L, Gantait S et al (2014) Screening of rice landraces for salinity tolerance at seedling stage through morphological and molecular markers. Physiol Mol Biol Plants 20:411–423.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12298-014-0250-6 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. Ashraf M, Harris PJC (2004) Potential biochemical indicators of salinity tolerance in plants. Plant Sci 166:3–16.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plantsci.2003.10.024 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Azhar FM, Ahmad R (2000) Variation and heritability of salinity tolerance in upland cotton at early stage of plant development. Pak J Biol Sci 3:1991–1993CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bafeel SO (2014) Physiological parameters of salt tolerance during germination and seedling growth of Sorghum bicolor cultivars of the same subtropical origin. Saudi J Biol Sci 21:300–304.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sjbs.2014.05.005 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics (BBS) (2016) Yearbook of Agricultural Statistics-2015, Ministry of Planning. Government of the People's Republic of BangladeshGoogle Scholar
  8. Blumwald E (2000) Sodium transport and salt tolerance in plants. Curr Opin Cell Biol 12:431–434.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0955-0674(00)00112-5 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Bor M, Ozdemir F, Turkan I (2003) The effect of salt stress on lipid peroxidation and antioxidants in leaves of sugar beet Beta vulgaris L. and wild beet Beta maritima L. Plant Sci 164:77–84.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-9452(02)00338-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cha-um S, Chuencharoen S, Mongkolsiriwatana C et al (2012) Screening sugarcane (Saccharum sp.) genotypes for salt tolerance using multivariate cluster analysis. Plant Cell, Tissue Organ Cult 110:23–33.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11240-012-0126-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chen Z, Newman I, Zhou M et al (2005) Screening plants for salt tolerance by measuring K+ flux: a case study for barley. Plant, Cell Environ 28:1230–1246.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3040.2005.01364.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chunthaburee S, Dongsansuk A, Sanitchon J et al (2016) Physiological and biochemical parameters for evaluation and clustering of rice cultivars differing in salt tolerance at seedling stage. Saudi J Biol Sci 23:467–477.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sjbs.2015.05.013 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Cominelli E, Conti L, Tonelli C, Galbiati M (2013) Challenges and perspectives to improve crop drought and salinity tolerance. New Biotechnol 30:355–361.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nbt.2012.11.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. De Veylder L, Beeckman T, Inzé D, De Veylder L (2007) The ins and outs of the plant cell cycle. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 8:655–665.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nrm2227 Google Scholar
  15. Ding C, He X (2004) K-means clustering via principal component analysis. Twenty-first Int Conf Mach Learn ICML 04 Cl:29.  https://doi.org/10.1145/1015330.1015408
  16. Doyle J, Doyle J (1991) DNA isolation from small amount of plant tissue. Phytochem Bull 57:13–15.  https://doi.org/10.2307/4119796 Google Scholar
  17. Eckardt NA, Cominelli E (2009) The future of science: food and water for life. Plant Cell 21:368–372.  https://doi.org/10.1105/tpc.109.066209 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) (2009) Declaration of the World Summit on Food Security. World Food Summit, Rome, pp 1–7Google Scholar
  19. Fei-fei XU, Liang JIN, Yan H et al (2016) Association mapping of quantitative trait loci for yield-related agronomic traits in rice (Oryza sativa L.). J Integr Agric 15:2192–2202.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S2095-3119(15)61244-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Garciadeblás B, Senn ME, Bañuelos MA, Rodríguez-Navarro A (2003) Sodium transport and HKT transporters: the rice model. Plant J 34:788–801.  https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-313X.2003.01764.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Gregorio GB (1997) Tagging salinity tolerance genes in rice using amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP). PhD. Thesis, University of the Philippines, Los Baños. pp. 118Google Scholar
  22. Gregorio GB, Senadhira D, Mendoza RD (1997) Screening rice for salinity tolerance. IRRl Discuss Pap Ser 22:30Google Scholar
  23. Hakim MA, Juraimi AS, Hanafi MM et al (2014) Biochemical and anatomical changes and yield reduction in rice (Oryza sativa L.) under varied salinity regimes. Biomed Res.  https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/208584 Google Scholar
  24. HanumanthaRao B, Nair RM, Nayyar H (2016) Salinity and high temperature tolerance in mungbean [Vigna radiata (L.) Wilczek] from a physiological perspective. Front Plant Sci 7:1–20.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2016.00957 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hariadi YC, Nurhayati AY, Soeparjono S, Arif I (2015) Screening six varieties of rice (Oryza sativa) for salinity tolerance. Procedia Environ Sci 28:78–87.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proenv.2015.07.012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Juan M, Rivero RM, Romero L, Ruiz JM (2005) Evaluation of some nutritional and biochemical indicators in selecting salt-resistant tomato cultivars. Environ Exp Bot 54:193–201.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envexpbot.2004.07.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kavitha PG, Miller AJ, Mathew MK, Maathuis FJM (2012) Rice cultivars with differing salt tolerance contain similar cation channels in their root cells. J Exp Bot 63:3289–3296.  https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/ers052 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  28. Khan AA, Rao SA, Mcneilly T (2003) Assessment of salinity tolerance based upon seedling root growth response functions in maize (Zea mays L.). Euphytica 131:81–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Krishnamurthy L, Serraj R, Hash CT et al (2007) Screening sorghum genotypes for salinity tolerant biomass production. Euphytica 156:15–24.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10681-006-9343-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Liu ZH, Anderson JA, Hu J et al (2005) A wheat intervarietal genetic linkage map based on microsatellite and target region amplified polymorphism markers and its utility for detecting quantitative trait loci. Theor Appl Genet 111:782–794.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00122-005-2064-y CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Liu Y, Wang Q, Zhang Y et al (2014) Synergistic and antagonistic effects of salinity and pH on germination in switchgrass (Panicum virgatum L.). PLoS One 9:23–25.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0085282 Google Scholar
  32. Melorose J, Perroy R, Careas S (2015) World population prospects: The 2015 Revision, Key Findings and Advance Tables. Working Paper No. ESA/P/WP. 241, pp 1–59Google Scholar
  33. Miah G, Rafii MY, Ismail MR et al (2013) A review of microsatellite markers and their applications in rice breeding programs to improve blast disease resistance. Int J Mol Sci 14:22499–22528.  https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms141122499 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  34. Munns R (2011) Plant adaptations to salt and water stress. Differences and commonalities, 1st edn. Elsevier Ltd, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  35. Munns R, Tester M (2008) Mechanisms of salinity tolerance. Annu Rev Plant Biol 59:651–681.  https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.arplant.59.032607.092911 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Nei M (1973) The American Society of naturalists. Am Nat 106:283–292.  https://doi.org/10.1086/282187 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Oliveira Alexandre Bosco, Alencar Nara Lídia, Gomes-FIlho E (2013) Comparison between the water and salt stress effects on plant growth and development. Responses Org Water Stress.  https://doi.org/10.5772/54223 Google Scholar
  38. Ott A, Trautschold B, Sandhu D (2011) Using microsatellites to understand the physical distribution of recombination on soybean chromosomes. PLoS One.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0022306 Google Scholar
  39. Oyiga BC, Sharma RC, Shen J et al (2016) Identification and characterization of salt tolerance of wheat germplasm using a multivariable screening approach. J Agron Crop Sci 202:472–485.  https://doi.org/10.1111/jac.12178 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Page RDM (1996) Tree drawing software for Apple Macintosh and Microsoft Windows. Institute of Biomedical and Life Sciences. University of Glasgow, Glasgow G12 8QQ, ScotlandGoogle Scholar
  41. Raihan A, Shamim A, Nahiyan M, Rahman A (2016) Molecular characterization of selected M5 lines of rice after TILLING for salinity tolerance using 20 SSR primers. Br Biotechnol J 12:1–11.  https://doi.org/10.9734/bbj/2016/23868 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Rohlf (1997) NTSYS-pc. Numerical taxonomy and multivariate analysis system. Version 1.8. Exeter Software, NY, USAGoogle Scholar
  43. Roy PR, Tahjib-Ul-Arif M, Akter T et al (2016) Exogenous ascorbic acid and hydrogen peroxide alleviates salt-induced oxidative stress in rice (Oryza sativa L.) by enhancing antioxidant enzyme activities and proline content. Adv Environ Biol 10:148–154Google Scholar
  44. Sakina A, Ahmed I, Shahzad A et al (2015) Genetic variation for salinity tolerance in Pakistani rice (Oryza sativa L.) germplasm. J Agron Crop Sci 202:25–36.  https://doi.org/10.1111/jac.12117 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Seetharam K, Thirumeni S, Paramasivam K (2009) Estimation of genetic diversity in rice (Oryza sativa L.) genotypes using SSR markers and morphological characters. Afr J Biotech 8(10):2050–2059Google Scholar
  46. Senadhera P, Saidi Y, Maathuis F (2012) Long term salinity stress reveals variety specific differences in root oxidative stress response. Rice Sci 19:36–43.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1672-6308(12)60018-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Singh AK, Ansari MW, Pareek A, Singla-Pareek SL (2008) Raising salinity tolerant rice: recent progress and future perspectives. Physiol Mol Biol Plants 14:137–154.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12298-008-0013-3 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  48. Surridge C (2004) Rice cultivation: feast or famine? Nature 428:360–361.  https://doi.org/10.1038/428360a CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Takele A (2000) Seedling emergence and growth of sorghum genotypes under variable soil moisture deficit. Acta Agron Hungarica 48:95–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Tang SX, Jiang YZ, Wei XH, Li ZC, Yu HY (2002) Genetic diversity of isozymes of cultivated rice in China. Acta Agron Sin 28:203–207Google Scholar
  51. Tang T, Lu J, Huang J et al (2006) Genomic variation in rice: genesis of highly polymorphic linkage blocks during domestication. PLoS Genet 2:1824–1833.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.0020199 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Yang GP, Maroof MA, Xu CG et al (1994) Comparative analysis of microsatellite DNA polymorphism in landraces and cultivars of rice. Mol Gen Genet 245:187–194.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00283266 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Franciszek Górski Institute of Plant Physiology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Kraków 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Md. Tahjib-Ul-Arif
    • 1
  • M. Abu Sayed
    • 2
    • 3
  • Mirza Mofazzal Islam
    • 4
  • M. Nurealam Siddiqui
    • 5
  • S. N. Begum
    • 4
  • M. Afzal Hossain
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Biochemistry and Molecular BiologyBangladesh Agricultural UniversityMymensinghBangladesh
  2. 2.Department of Biochemistry and Molecular BiologyHajee Mohammad Danesh Science and Technology UniversityDinajpurBangladesh
  3. 3.United Graduate School of Agricultural ScienceIwate UniversityMoriokaJapan
  4. 4.Plant Breeding DivisionBangladesh Institute of Nuclear AgricultureMymensinghBangladesh
  5. 5.Department of Biochemistry and Molecular BiologyBangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman Agricultural UniversityGazipurBangladesh

Personalised recommendations