All Issue

2020 Vol.38, Issue 5

Research Article

Drought Tolerance of ‘Fuji’ Apple Trees Grafted onto G, CG, or M Series Rootstocks: Growth and Physiology
Byeong-Ho Choi1
,
Narayan Bhusal1
,
Woo-Tae Jeong1
,
In-Hee Park2
,
Su-Gon Han2
,
Tae-Myung Yoon12*
1Department of Horticultural Science, Kyungpook National University
2Apple Research Institute, Kyungpook National University
* Corresponding Author
31 October 2020. pp. 583-594
PDF XML Citation
Abstract

In this study, we assessed the drought tolerance of 1-year-old apple (Malus domestica Borkh.) trees exposed to extreme water stress, focusing on growth and physiological responses. After grafting ‘Fuji’ variety onto M26 and M9 rootstocks or Cornell-Geneva rootstocks (G11, G202, G214, G935, CG4814, and CG5087), the grafted plants were planted in 17-L pots and managed in a greenhouse. After irrigation was stopped, soil water potential dropped to about –700 hPa in 12 days. The leaf water potential and tree vertical growth rate of drought-stressed trees decreased dramatically, and the decreased growth rate of the G202, G935, and M26 trees, which generally produced a large leaf area, was considerable. Trunk cross-sectional area and leaf area of all trees under drought stress were reduced by almost 50% or more than 60%, respectively. Drought-stressed trees were subjected to control-level irrigation during the recovery of about 11 days, but their leaf water potential still did not fully recover to the control level. Photosynthesis-related parameters also showed a substantial decrease as the soil water potential changed, but the difference among trees was not noticeable. Fine root (<2 mm diameter) dry weight showed the greatest decrease in the CG5087 tree, whereas the G935 tree was insensitive. The root:shoot biomass ratio of the CG5087 and M26 trees was 0.24 and 0.23, respectively, and 0.38 for the G214 and CG4814 trees. The CG5087 tree was the most sensitive to drought stress, whereas drought tolerance was higher in the G202, G214, and G935 trees than in the M26 tree, which had a comparable drought tolerance to the G11, CG4814, and M9 trees.

Keywords
apple rootstock
dry matter
photosynthesis
water deficit
water potential

References
1
Arbona V, Iglesias DJ, Jacas J, Primo-Millo E, Talon M, Gómez-Cadenas, A (2005) Hydrogel substrate amendment alleviates drought effects on young citrus plants. Plant Soil 270:73-82. doi:10.1007/s11104-004-1160-0
10.1007/s11104-004-1160-0
2
Atkinson CJ, Policarpo M, Webster AD, Kingswell G (2000) Drought tolerance of clonal Malus determined from measurements of stomatal conductance and leaf water potential. Tree Physiol 20:557-563. doi:10.1093/treephys/20.8.557
10.1093/treephys/20.8.55712651437
3
Auvil TD, Schmidt TR, Hanrahan I, Castillo F, McFerson JR, Fazio G (2011) Evaluation of dwarfing rootstocks in Washington apple replant sites. Acta Hortic 903:265-271. doi:10.17660/ActaHortic.2011903.33
10.17660/ActaHortic.2011.903.33
4
Bauerle TL, Centinari M, Bauerle WL (2011) Shifts in xylem vessel diameter and embolisms in grafted apple trees of differing rootstock growth potential in response to drought. Planta 234:1045-1054. doi:10.1007/s00425-011-1460-6
10.1007/s00425-011-1460-621710199
5
Beyá-Marshall V, Herrera J, Fichet T, Trentacoste ER, Kremer C (2018) The effect of water status on productive and flowering variables in young 'Arbequina' olive trees under limited irrigation water availability in a semiarid region of Chile. Hortic Environ Biotechnol 59:815-826. doi:10.1007/s13580-018-0088-x
10.1007/s13580-018-0088-x
6
Blackman CJ, Brodribb TJ, Jordan GJ (2009) Leaf hydraulics and drought stress: response, recovery and survivorship in four woody temperate plant species. Plant Cell Environ 32:1584-1595. doi:10.1111/j.1365-3040.2009.02023.x
10.1111/j.1365-3040.2009.02023.x19627564
7
Brunner I, Herzog C, Dawes MA, Arend M, Sperisen C (2015) How tree roots respond to drought. Front Plant Sci 6:547. doi:10.3389/fpls.2015.00547
10.3389/fpls.2015.0054726284083PMC4518277
8
Chaves MM, Pereira JS, Maroco J, Rodrigues ML, Ricardo CPP, Osório ML, Carvalho I, Faria T, Pinheiro C (2002) How plants cope with water stress in the field? Photosynthesis and growth. Ann Bot 89:907-916. doi:10.1093/aob/mcf105
10.1093/aob/mcf10512102516PMC4233809
9
Cochard H, Bréda N, Granier A (1996) Whole tree hydraulic conductance and water loss regulation in Quercus during drought: evidence for stomatal control of embolism? Ann Sci For 53:197-206. doi:10.1051/forest:19960203
10.1051/forest:19960203
10
Comas LH, Becker SR, Cruz VMV, Byrne PF, Dierig DA (2013) Root traits contributing to plant productivity under drought. Front Plant Sci 4:442. doi:10.3389/fpls.2013.00442
10.3389/fpls.2013.0044224204374PMC3817922
11
Conesa MR, de la Rosa JM, Domingo R, Bañon S, Pérez-Pastor A (2016) Changes induced by water stress on water relations, stomatal behaviour and morphology of table grapes (cv. Crimson Seedless) grown in pots. Sci Hortic 202:9-16. doi:10.1016/j.scienta.2016.02.002
10.1016/j.scienta.2016.02.002
12
Corso M, Bonghi C (2014) Grapevine rootstock effects on abiotic stress tolerance. Plant Sci Today 1:108-113. doi:10.14719/pst.2014.1.3.64
10.14719/pst.2014.1.3.64
13
Cui N, Du T, Li F, Tong L, Kang S, Wang M, Liu X, Li Z (2009) Response of vegetative growth and fruit development to regulated deficit irrigation at different growth stages of pear-jujube tree. Agric Water Manag 96:1237-1246. doi:10.1016/j.agwat.2009.03.015
10.1016/j.agwat.2009.03.015
14
Fernandez RT, Perry RL, Flore JA (1997) Drought response of young apple trees on three rootstocks: growth and development. J Am Soc Hortic Sci 122:14-19. doi:10.21273/JASHS.122.1.14
10.21273/JASHS.122.1.14
15
Giorio P, Sorrentino G, d'Andria R (1999) Stomatal behaviour, leaf water status and photosynthetic response in field-grown olive trees under water deficit. Environ Exp Bot 42:95-104. doi:10.1016/S0098-8472(99)00023-4
10.1016/S0098-8472(99)00023-4
16
Girona J, Behboudian MH, Mata M, Del Campo J, Marsal J (2010) Exploring six reduced irrigation options under water shortage for 'Golden Smoothee' apple: responses of yield components over three years. Agric Water Manag 98:370-375. doi:10.1016/j.agwat.2010.09.011
10.1016/j.agwat.2010.09.011
17
Guerfel M, Baccouri O, Boujnah D, Chaïbi W, Zarrouk M (2009) Impacts of water stress on gas exchange, water relations, chlorophyll content and leaf structure in the two main Tunisian olive (Olea europaea L.) cultivars. Sci Hortic 119:257-263. doi:10.1016/j.scienta.2008.08.006
10.1016/j.scienta.2008.08.006
18
Kramer PJ (1983a) Drought tolerance and water use efficiency. In PJ Kramer, ed, Water Relations of Plants. Academic Press, New York, USA, pp 390-415. doi:10.1016/B978-0-12-425040-6.50016-3
10.1016/B978-0-12-425040-6.50016-3
19
Kramer PJ (1983b) Development of root systems. In PJ Kramer, ed, Water Relations of Plants. Academic Press, New York, USA, pp 146-186. doi:10.1016/B978-0-12-425040-6.50009-6
10.1016/B978-0-12-425040-6.50009-6
20
Kwak MJ, Lee SH, Woo SY (2011) Physiological and biochemical traits of different water and light intensities on cork oak (Quercus suber L.) seedlings. Afr J Biotechnol 10:15305-15319. doi:10.5897/AJB11.2845
10.5897/AJB11.2845
21
Li F, Cohen S, Naor A, Shaozong K, Erez A (2002) Studies of canopy structure and water use of apple trees on three rootstocks. Agric Water Manag 55:1-14. doi:10.1016/S0378-3774(01)00184-6
10.1016/S0378-3774(01)00184-6
22
Liu BH, Cheng L, Ma FW, Liang D, Zou YJ (2012) Influence of rootstock on drought response in young 'Gale Gala' apple (Malus domestica Borkh.) trees. J Sci Food Agric 92:2421-2427. doi:10.1002/jsfa.5647
10.1002/jsfa.564722430615
23
Miyashita K, Tanakamaru S, Maitani T, Kimura K (2005) Recovery responses of photosynthesis, transpiration, and stomatal conductance in kidney bean following drought stress. Environ Exp Bot 53:205-214. doi:10.1016/j.envexpbot.2004.03.015
10.1016/j.envexpbot.2004.03.015
24
Nilsen ET, Orcutt DM (1996) Physiology of Plants under Stress: Abiotic Factors. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, USA, pp 322-361
25
Pedroso FKJV, Prudente DA, Bueno ACR, Machado EC, Ribeiro RV (2014) Drought tolerance in citrus trees is enhanced by rootstock-dependent changes in root growth and carbohydrate availability. Environ Exp Bot 101:26-35. doi:10.1016/j.envexpbot.2013.12.024
10.1016/j.envexpbot.2013.12.024
26
Psarras G, Merwin IA (2000) Water stress affects rhizosphere respiration rates and root morphology of young 'Mutsu' apple trees on M.9 and MM.111 rootstocks. J Am Soc Hortic Sci 125:588-595. doi:10.21273/JASHS.125.5.588
10.21273/JASHS.125.5.588
27
Robinson TL, Fazio G, Aldwinckle HS, Hoying SA, Russo N (2006) Field performance of Geneva® apple rootstocks in the Eastern USA. Sodinink Daržinink 25:181-191
28
Rodríguez-Gamir J, Intrigliolo DS, Primo-Millo E, Forner-Giner MA (2010) Relationships between xylem anatomy, root hydraulic conductivity, leaf/root ratio and transpiration in citrus trees on different rootstocks. Physiol Plant 139:159-169. doi:10.1111/j.1399-3054.2010.01351.x
10.1111/j.1399-3054.2010.01351.x20088906
29
Serra I, Strever A, Myburgh PA, Deloire A (2014) Review: the interaction between rootstocks and cultivars (Vitis vinifera L.) to enhance drought tolerance in grapevine. Aust J Grape Wine Res 20:1-14. doi:10.1111/ajgw.12054
10.1111/ajgw.12054
30
Šircelj H, Tausz M, Grill D, Batič F (2007) Detecting different levels of drought stress in apple trees (Malus domestica Borkh.) with selected biochemical and physiological parameters. Sci Hortic 113:362-369. doi:10.1016/j.scienta.2007.04.012
10.1016/j.scienta.2007.04.012
31
Sparks JP, Black RA (1999) Regulation of water loss in populations of Populus trichocarpa: the role of stomatal control in preventing xylem cavitation. Tree Physiol 19:453-459. doi:10.1093/treephys/19.7.453
10.1093/treephys/19.7.45312651551
32
Thalheimer M (2013) A low-cost electronic tensiometer system for continuous monitoring of soil water potential. J Agric Eng 44:114-119. doi:10.4081/jae.2013.e16
10.4081/jae.2013.e16
33
Wang Z, Stutte GW (1992) The role of carbohydrates in active osmotic adjustment in apple under water stress. J Am Soc Hortic Sci 117:816-823. doi:10.21273/JASHS.117.5.816
10.21273/JASHS.117.5.816
34
Wu Y, Cosgrove DJ (2000) Adaptation of roots to low water potentials by changes in cell wall extensibility and cell wall proteins. J Exp Bot 51:1543-1553. doi:10.1093/jexbot/51.350.1543
10.1093/jexbot/51.350.154311006305
35
Yıldırım K, Yağcı A, Sucu S, Tunç S (2018) Responses of grapevine rootstocks to drought through altered root system architecture and root transcriptomic regulations. Plant Physiol Biochem 127:256-268. doi:10.1016/j.plaphy.2018.03.034
10.1016/j.plaphy.2018.03.03429627732
Information
  • Publisher :KOREAN SOCIETY FOR HORTICULTURAL SCIENCE
  • Publisher(Ko) :원예과학기술지
  • Journal Title :Horticultural Science and Technology
  • Journal Title(Ko) :원예과학기술지
  • Volume : 38
  • No :5
  • Pages :583-594
  • Received Date : 2020-04-01
  • Revised Date : 2020-05-26
  • Accepted Date : 2020-06-11
  • DOI :https://doi.org/10.7235/HORT.20200054
Journal Informaiton Horticultural Science and Technology Horticultural Science and Technology
Online Submission
  • scopus
  • NRF
  • KOFST
  • crossref crossmark
  • crossref cited-by
  • crosscheck
  • orcid
  • open access
  • ccl
Journal Informaiton Journal Informaiton - close