Morpho-Biochemical Parameters in Blackgram (Vigna Mungo L. Hepper) Genotypes Under Drought Stress Condition
Morpho-Biochemical Parameters in Blackgram (Vigna Mungo L. Hepper) Genotypes Under Drought Stress Condition
Morpho-Biochemical Parameters in Blackgram (Vigna Mungo L. Hepper) Genotypes Under Drought Stress Condition
Received: 16 Jul 2024; Received in revised form: 04 Aug 2024; Accepted: 12 Aug 2024; Available online: 17 Aug 2024
©2024 The Author(s). Published by Infogain Publication. This is an open-access article under the CC BY license
(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Abstract— The present study carried out with ten blackgram accessions collected from NBPGR regional centre
and T-9(Check) from ICAR-CRIDA, Hyderabad. The experiment was conducted in experimental farm,
Department of Genetics, Osmania University Hyderabad during Rabi,2021. The ANOVA results revealed that
for treatments all the yield,physiological and biochemical parameters were showed significant variability except
100 seed weight. All the yield and physiological parameters were significant for genotype x treatment except
number of branches per plant and canopy temperature. The character seed yield (g/pl) was observed under
irrigated condition highest by IC436524 and lowest by T-9. Whereas highest seed yield (g/pl) was observed under
drought condition by IC426766. It was also observed that the genotype IC426766 28.84% over its control and
37.65% over T-9 under drought condition. The genotype IC426766 also showed higher proline content, RWC,
lower MDA, higher SPAD reading and lower canopy temperature under drought condition. Among ten
blackgram accession IC 426766 was identified as drought tolerant/resistance based on morphological,
physiological and biochemical parameters.
Keywords— Blackgram, drought stress, physiological and biochemical parameters.
Table 1: Analysis of variance for quantitative characters in blackgram under irrigated and drought stress conditions
MSSQ
Source of
DF
Va ria tion Char acter s
No.of P. 100 S.
Pl.ht(cm) Br ./pl L./pl Cl./pl Pods/pl wt/pl(g) No.of S./pl S.Y.(g/pl) wt H. wt(g)
Replications 2 1.898 1.488 0.197 6.788 0.545 3.519 406.47 0.446 0.09 0.008
Tr eatments 1 184.034** 63.641** 29.333** 49.227** 0.136NS 127.769** 90058.242** 717.421** 6.231** 39.301**
Genotypes 10 46.574** 3.754** 15.479** 29.212** 181.882** 25.564** 9572.542** 22.195** 0.645** 11.501**
Tr eatments
vs 10 7.193**
Genotypes 3.442** 42.533** 22.727** 53.603** 8.805** 681.742* 4.921** 0.324* 1.564**
Er r or 1.6 0.753 1.483 1.677 11.625 1.587 297.660 1.071 0.143 0.209
SD 0.311 0.214 0.300 0.319 0.839 0.31 4.247 0.255 0.093 0.112
CV% 6.5 14.94 9.68 13.29 8.9 8.88 13.06 15.87 10.82 10.2
The mean value of plant height recorded highest by IC426766 Whereas highest plant was observed by IC436628 (15.33)
(30.33cm) under Irrigated condition whereas the variety under Drought condition. The character number of clusters
IC261182 (22.33) recorded highest plant under Drought per plant ranged from IC382811 (12.67) to IC519620 (10.00)
condition. Whereas under Drought condition the plant height under irrigated condition. Where as in drought condition
was ranged from IC261182 (22.33cm) to IC436628 recorded from IC426766 (14.67) to IC519620 (4.00). The
(14.22cm). Number of branches per plant ranged from T-9 mean value of pods per plant highest was observed under
(9.00) to IC476753 (4.33) under Irrigated condition. Whereas irrigated condition by IC261182 (45.00). Whereas under
under Drought condition number of branches ranged from drought condition it was observed in IC426766 (52.00). The
IC436524 (5.67) to IC476784 (3.50). In Drought condition character pod weight per plant was observed highest under
highest number of branches per plant was observed by irrigated condition by IC426766 (17.33g) and lowest by
IC436524 (5.67), IC426766 (5.67) and lowest branches per IC546472 (10.00g). Whereas highest was observed under
plant was recorded by IC476784 (3.50) drought stress Drought condition IC261182 (16.69g) and lowest by T-9
condition. The number of leaves per plant highest was (11.29g). The mean value of number of seeds per plant highest
observed in IC426766 (18.00) under Irrigated condition. seeds are observed in plant by IC426766 (243.33) and lowest
by IC436628 (136.33) under irrigation condition. Whereas in the outcome of defoliation and the cessation of new leaf
Drought condition highest seeds by IC426766 (229.00) and production brought on by drought stress (Mwale et al. 2007).
lowest by IC436628 (57.67). The character hundred seeds was The character seed yield was observed under irrigated
observed highest by IC261182 (4.23g) lowest was observed condition highest by IC436524 as 14.33g/pl and lowest by T-
by T-9 (3.25g) under irrigated condition. Whereas drought 9 (4.67g/pl). Whereas highest seed yield was observed under
condition heights was observed as IC426766 (3.61g) the drought condition by IC426766 recorded as 7.49g/pl and
lowest was observed T-9 (2.64g).The character of husk weight lowest seed yield was observed in IC436628 (2.27g/pl).It was
per plant range from IC382811 (7.24g/pl) to IC519620 also observed that the genotype IC426766 28.84% over its
(4.16g/pl) under irrigated condition where as in drought control and 37.65% over T-9 under drought condition (Table
condition highest husk weight (g/pl) was observed range from 5).Gurumurthy et al.,2019 reported that similar increased seed
IC426766 (7.62) to IC436524 (2.56) (Table 4). Prior research yield and yield contributing traits over control under drought
on legumes also revealed similar results (Bhatt and Srinivasa stress condition in blackgram.
Rao 2005; Baroowa and Gogoi 2012). Reduced leaf count is
Table 3. Mean performance of quantitative traits and physiological parameters in blackgram genotypes under irrigated
condition.
No.of P. No.of 100 H.
Genotypes Pl.ht(cm) Br./pl L./pl Cl./pl Pods/pl wt/pl(g) S./pl S.Y.(g/pl) S. wt wt(g)
IC261182 23.13 7.67 16.67 11.00 45.00 16.67 241.67 10.67 4.23 7.02
IC436524 18.67 7.00 16.00 10.00 39.00 13.67 146.00 14.33 4.22 5.77
IC476753 20.67 4.33 8.67 10.67 32.00 11.33 143.00 4.67 3.41 4.81
IC382811 19.33 7.33 17.00 12.67 35.67 17.00 242.33 5.67 3.36 7.24
IC436628 17.83 4.67 8.33 10.33 36.67 10.67 136.33 4.67 3.72 4.60
IC476784 20.67 7.67 10.00 10.33 35.33 11.33 138.67 5.00 3.62 4.18
IC426766 30.33 7.67 18.00 10.33 39.56 17.33 243.33 5.33 3.50 6.95
IC546452 19.00 6.33 8.33 10.00 31.00 10.67 146.00 5.67 3.42 4.32
IC546472 19.00 7.00 9.00 11.00 35.67 10.00 141.00 5.67 3.26 4.33
IC519620 20.83 6.00 8.67 10.00 33.67 10.67 139.67 4.67 3.78 4.16
T-9 20.52 9.00 10.00 10.33 39.33 11.33 141.00 4.67 3.25 4.37
Mean 20.91 6.79 11.88 10.61 36.63 12.79 169.00 6.45 3.61 5.25
Sd 3.44 1.38 4.06 0.77 3.96 2.86 47.26 3.13 0.35 1.25
Pl.ht(cm)- Plant height (cm); Br/pl-Branches per plant; LN/pl-Leaves number per plant; CL/pl-Clusters per plant; PD/pl-Pods per
plant; PDW-Pod weight; SDN-Seed number per plant; SDW-Seed yield; 100SDW-100 seed weight; HSW-Husk weight.
Table 4. Mean performance of quantitative traits and physiological parameters in blackgram genotypes underdrought stress
condition.
Genotype Pl.ht(cm Br./p No.of Cl./p Pods/p P. No.of S.Y.(g/pl 100 S. H.
s ) l L./pl l l wt/pl(g) S./pl ) wt wt(g)
IC261182 22.33 5.40 14.33 14.00 45.00 16.69 129.33 4.44 3.43 5.76
IC436524 18.26 5.67 9.33 13.00 35.33 13.49 95.00 3.08 3.25 2.56
IC476753 14.31 4.50 14.67 4.33 36.67 12.43 65.00 2.39 3.67 2.57
IC382811 21.51 5.00 12.33 13.33 43.67 15.71 123.33 3.08 3.55 4.74
IC436628 14.22 4.50 15.33 8.67 34.33 13.49 57.67 2.27 3.93 2.82
IC476784 14.57 3.50 14.00 6.33 32.33 14.61 70.67 2.56 3.62 2.65
IC426766 22.15 5.67 11.33 14.67 52.00 16.54 229.00 7.49 3.93 7.62
IC546452 16.47 4.00 13.00 7.00 33.00 13.37 75.67 2.89 3.83 2.59
IC546472 17.27 4.50 14.00 5.33 37.67 13.24 66.33 2.59 3.91 2.62
IC519620 15.48 5.00 14.33 4.00 39.33 13.49 79.00 2.36 2.99 3.44
T-9 19.09 4.50 13.00 7.00 32.67 11.29 88.00 2.33 2.64 3.49
Mean 17.79 4.75 13.24 8.88 38.36 14.03 98.09 3.23 3.52 3.71
Sd 3.13 0.68 1.73 4.09 6.21 1.69 49.21 1.54 0.42 1.66
Pl.ht(cm)- Plant height (cm); Br/pl-Branches per plant; LN/pl-Leaves number per plant; CL/pl-Clusters per plant; PD/pl-Pods per
plant; PDW-Pod weight; SDN-Seed number per plant; SDW-Seed yield; 100SDW-100 seed weight; HSW-Husk weight.
Table 5.% increase/decrease of seed yield (g/pl) over respective controls and over T-9 (check) under drought stress condition in
blackgram genotypes
Irrigation Drought % increase/decrease
Genotypes SDW.(g/pl) SDW(g/pl) over control over T-9
IC261182 10.67 4.44 -140.32 -5.18
IC436524 14.33 3.08 -365.26 -51.62
IC476753 4.67 2.39 -95.40 -95.40
IC382811 5.67 3.08 -84.09 -51.62
IC436628 4.67 2.27 -105.73 -105.73
IC476784 5.00 2.56 -95.31 -82.42
IC426766 5.33 7.49 28.84 37.65
IC546452 5.67 2.89 -96.19 -61.59
IC546472 5.67 2.59 -118.92 -80.31
IC519620 4.67 2.36 -97.88 -97.88
T-9 4.67 2.33 -100.43 -100.43
Proline
80.0 Irrigated Drought
40.0
20.0
0.0
IC261182 IC436524 IC476753 IC382811 IC436628 IC476784 IC426766 IC546452 IC546472 IC519620 T-9
Blackgram Accessions
Fig.1 Graphical representation of Proline (%) in selected blackgrm genotypes under irrigated and drought stress
condition
MDA
25.0
Irrigated Drought
20.0
MDA (µM/g fresh Wt)
15.0
10.0
5.0
0.0
IC261182 IC436524 IC476753 IC382811 IC436628 IC476784 IC426766 IC546452 IC546472 IC519620 T-9
Blackgram Accessions
Fig.2 Graphical representation of MDA (%) in selected blackgrm genotypes under irrigated and drought stress
condition
90.00
RWC (%)
80.00
70.00
60.00
50.00
IC261182 IC436524 IC476753 IC382811 IC436628 IC476784 IC426766 IC546452 IC546472 IC519620 T-9
Blackgram Accessions
Fig.3 Graphical representation of RWC in selected blackgram genotypes under irrigated and drought stress condition
40
30
20
10
0
IC261182 IC436524 IC476753 IC382811 IC436628 IC476784 IC426766 IC546452 IC546472 IC519620 T-9
Blackgram Accessions
Fig.4 Graphical representation of physiological parameter (SPAD readings) under irrigated and drought stress condition in
blackgram accessions
40
30
20
10
0
Blackgram Accessions
Fig.5 Graphical representation of Physiological parameter (Canopy temp℃.) under irrigated and drought stress condition in
blackgram accessions
Table 6. Mean performance of physiological and biochemical parameters in blackgram genotypes under irrigated and drought
condition.
Proline.(µg/g MDA(µM/g fresh
RWC (%) SPAD C. Temp(℃) wt) Wt)
Genotype Droug Droug Droug
s Irr ht Irr ht Irr Drought Irr ht Irr Drought
IC261182 83.22 79.09 37.17 36.12 37.90 37.17 23.9 48.3 11.7 12.9
IC436524 79.90 75.54 34.75 32.45 31.81 40.03 28.0 38.2 14.9 17.0
IC476753 77.56 71.23 33.68 32.45 34.42 41.34 22.5 31.5 11.9 16.6
IC382811 76.13 72.56 34.34 35.00 33.42 37.04 26.4 35.7 17.1 19.4
IC436628 78.82 66.82 34.75 32.45 34.04 41.33 21.7 31.1 16.1 20.1
IC476784 77.54 70.51 33.15 35.34 34.68 40.13 31.2 40.6 15.7 18.8
IC426766 87.08 83.42 33.78 36.00 34.08 38.67 30.1 64.5 11.6 12.0
IC546452 75.51 70.32 34.34 33.68 32.32 41.12 24.7 32.4 16.4 18.4
IC546472 77.42 67.79 33.99 34.40 35.34 39.98 20.2 30.7 13.0 19.3
IC519620 81.99 77.82 34.36 34.34 34.67 42.23 21.1 41.5 14.1 15.4
T-9 76.78 72.31 34.32 33.01 35.09 40.33 27.1 40.3 13.1 16.0
79.26 34.42 14.14
Mean 7 73.401 1 34.113 34.343 39.943 25.172 39.521 2 16.907
Sd 3.522 5.060 1.028 1.404 1.611 1.686 3.687 9.928 2.020 2.677
RWC- Relative water content; SPAD-Chlorophyll content; C.Temp-Canopy temperature (℃); MDA-Malondialdehyde(µM/g fresh
Wt)
III. CONCLUSION [7] Dhole, V.J., Reddy, K.S. (2010). Gamma rays induced moisture
stress tolerant long root mutant in mungbean (Vigna radiata L
It is well known that sufficient water is necessary for crops to
Wilczek). Electronic Journal of Plant Breeding. 1(5): 1299-
thrive and produce as much as possible. Nonetheless, crops
1305.
are frequently subjected to drought stress at various [8] Gurumurthy S., Basudeb Sarkar, M. Vanaja, Jyoti Lakshmi, S.
phenological stages. Productivity of crops under water stress K. Yadav and M. Maheswari. 2019. Morpho-physiological and
may be decreased as a result of modifications to the biochemical changes in black gram (Vigna mungo L. Hepper)
physiological and biochemical processes occurring at the genotypes under drought stress at flowering stage. Acta
molecular and cellular levels of plants because they employ Physiologiae Plantarum (2019)
it as a stress-reduction strategy. It was concluded that the 41:42.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11738-019-2833-x.
genotype IC426766 28.84% over its control and 37.65% over [9] Jain M, Mathur G, Koul S, Sarin NB (2001) Ameliorating
effects of proline on salt stress lipid peroxidation in cell lines
T-9 under drought condition. The genotype IC426766 also
of groundnut (Arachis hypogea L.). Plant Cell Rep 20:463–
showed higher proline content, RWC, lower MDA, higher
468.
SPAD reading and lower canopy temperature under drought [10] Katsuhara M, Otsuka T, Ezaki B (2005) Salt stress-induced
condition. Among ten blackgram accession IC 426766 was lipid peroxidation is reduced by glutathione S-transferase but
identified as drought tolerant/resistance based on this reduction of lipid peroxides is not enough for a recovery of
morphological, physiological and biochemical parameters. root growth in Arabidopsis. Plant Sci 169:369–373.
[11] Kiani, S.P., Maury, P., Sarrafi, A., Grieu, P. (2008). QTL
analysis of chlorophyll fluorescence parameters in sunflower
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT (Helianthus annuus L.) under well-watered and water-stressed
In the doctoral dissertation, the current research is included. conditions. Plant Science. 175: 565-573.
We acknowledge Osmania University, Hyderabad for [12] Maheswari, M., Vijaya Lakshmi, T., Varalaxmi, Y., Sarkar, B.,
providing the lab and outdoor research locations. We also Yadav, SK., Singh, J., Seshu Babu, G., Kumar, A., Sushma, A.,
Jyothilakshmi, N., Vanaja, M. (2016). Functional mechanisms
acknowledge the contribution of seed for the blackgram
of drought tolerance in maize through phenotyping and
accession from ICAR-CRIDA, Hyderabad, and the NBPGR
genotyping under well watered and water stressed conditions.
Regional Center, Hyderabad. European Journal of Agronomy. 79: 43-57.
[13] Mwale SS, Amzad-Ali SN, Massawe FJ (2007) Growth and
development of bambara groundnut in response to soil
REFERENCES moisture: Dry matter and yield. Eur J Agron 26:345-353.
[1] Anitha Y., M. Vanaja, V. Sunitha, P. Sowmya, P. Sathish and [14] Pandey, S., Ror, S., Chakraborty, D. (2014). Analysis of
G. Vijay Kumar. 2015. Performance of blackgram genotypes biochemical responses in Vigna mungo varieties subjected to
under moisture deficit stress- Variability in physiological and drought stress and possible amelioration. International Journal
yield contributing attributes. Internatinal journal of current of Scientific Research in Agricultural Sciences. 1(1): 6-15.
science 17 (E) 82-89. [15] Saravanakumar, D., Harish, S., Loganathan, M.,
[2] Baroowa B, Gogoi N (2012) Effect of induced drought on Vivekananthan, R., Rajendran, L., Raguchander, T. (2007).
different growth and biochemical attributes of black gram Rhizobacterial bioformulation for the effective management of
(Vigna mungo L.) and green gram (Vigna radiata L.). J Env Res Macrophomina root rot in mungbean. Archives of
Dev 6:584–593. Phytopathology and Plant Protection. 40(5): 323-337.
[3] Baroowa, B., Gogoi, N. (2012). Effect of induced drought on [16] Vinocur, B., Altman, A., (2005). Recent advances in
different growth and biochemical attributes of black gram engineering plant tolerance to abiotic stress: Achievements and
(Vigna mungo L.) and green gram (Vigna radiata L.). Journal limitations. Current Opinion Biotechnology. 16: 123–132.
of Environmental Research Development. 6: 584–593. [17] Yordanov, I., Velikova, V., Tsonev, T. (2003). Plant responses
[4] Baroowa, B., Gogoi, N. (2013). Biochemical changes in two to drought and stress tolerance. Bulgarian Journal of Plant
Vigna sp. during drought and subsequent recovery. Indian Physiology (Special Issue). 187-206.
Journal of Plant Physiology. l18: 319-325.
[5] Baroowa, B., Gogoi, N., Farooq, M. (2016). Changes in
physiological, biochemical and antioxidant enzyme activities of
green gram (Vigna radiata L.) genotypes under drought. Acta
Physiology Plantarum. 38: 219.
[6] Bhatt RM, Srinivasa Rao NK (2005) Influence of pod load
response of okra to water stress. Indian J Plant Physiol 10:54–
59.