Research Article

Comparison of Soil and Hydroponic Based Screening Process to Select Salt Tolerant Wheat Varieties

Abdul Majeed1*, Muhammad Anwar-ul-Haq2, Abid Niaz3, Abid Mahmood4, Naeem Ahmad1 and Hafiz Muhammad Walyat Ali Khan1

1Sugarcane Research Institute, Ayub Agricultural Research Institute, Faisalabad, Pakistan; 2Institute of Soil and Environmental Sciences, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad, Pakistan; 3Soil Chemistry Section, Institute of Soil Chemistry and Environmental Sciences, Ayub Agricultural Research Institute, Faisalabad, Pakistan; 4Director General, Ayub Agricultural Research Institute, Punjab, Pakistan

Received | February 21, 2018; Accepted | September 06, 2019; Published | November 07, 2019

*Correspondence | Abdul Majeed, Sugarcane Research Institute, Ayub Agricultural Research Institute, Faisalabad, Pakistan; Email: majeed_agrarian@yahoo.com; drmajeed1805@gmail.com

Citation | Majeed, A., M.A. Haq, A. Niaz, A. Mahmood, N. Ahmad and H.M.W.A. Khan. 2019. Comparison of soil and hydroponic based screening process to select salt tolerant wheat varieties. Sarhad Journal of Agriculture, 35(4): 1107-1112.

DOI | http://dx.doi.org/10.17582/journal.sja/2019/35.4.1107.1112

Keywords | Hydroponic, Soil medium, Plant photosynthetic rate, Na+ and K+

Introduction

Irrigating the crops with saline-sodic water accumulates salt contents in soil, which decreases plant growth. Various environmental factors like drought, air pollution and climate change limit the crop production and quality all over the world (IPCC, 2014; Sadiq et al., 2019). Lack of better quality water for irrigation is an important factor that limits crop plant development in several underdeveloped countries. Ever-increasing demand for food security issue is forcing progressive farmers and private sectors to get more land area under crop cultivation. Internationally, almost fifty percent of food stuff necessities will be enhanced in 2050, owing to the growing community (Rengasamy, 2006). In the existing situation, good land area has previously in farming, and the predictable aim can be achieved both by extension in cultivated area, or increasing yield of the presently cultivated area. Globally, brackish water and soil salinity are the main problems that deteriorate the cultivated land. Developing crop genotypes/varieties that tolerate salinity is the best technique to handle this problem (Munns, 2005; Ma et al., 2012). Slow progress in developing wheat varieties/cultivars tolerant to salinity may be owing to complicatedness in screening massive number of genotypes on naturally salt affected soil. Similarly, due to different salt types, salt contents in soil and lack of understanding for the selection of traits that truly represents salinity tolerance. Furthermore, it is reported that most crops give different reactions against salinity-sodicity stresses on various developmental stages. As a result, plant showed tolerant response at one growth period may perhaps be sensitive on other growth phase (Ashraf et al., 2010). Therefore, in most plant genus the extent of salinity/ sodicity tolerance observed on one growth period can or cannot be experienced on other growth phase. At different developmental growth phases, wheat crop reaction to salinity stress is described to be erratic. Early plant growth phases showed higher response to salt stress than later/mature (Munns et al., 2006). Previously most of the experiments were conducted in hydroponic culture, pots, and field conditions to select salt-tolerant wheat varieties/genotypes. Definitely, there are substantial variances between the crop plants grown in soil and hydroponic culture. For example, in soil culture studies, the cation exchange process affects nutrients uptake by changing the cation and anion exchange. Conversely, the crop plants have to overcome the osmotic stress of the solution in hydroponic culture. Therefore, it is essential to clarify the salt tolerant responses of wheat plants in soil and hydroponic mediums. However, several experiments have depicted the effect of salinity stresses on wheat plants at dissimilar growth phases. There is limited information in the literature about a comparison in the changes of physiology, vegetative growth, sodium and potassium ions accumulations in the same wheat variety/genotype grown-up under saline environments in hydroponic and soil medium. And secondly to study the relationship of plant photosynthetic and transpiration rate with plant Na+ and K+ accumulation in the two growth mediums.

 

Materials and Methods

Hydroponic culture experiment

Seeds were sown in sand for germination. When seedling/plant growth reached 2-3 leaves, transferred into holes of thermoplastic sheets floating on 200 liters of size iron tubs. These tubs were lined with polyethylene sheets. Nutrients were added in the solution by following the standard method (Hoagland, 1950). Salt stress was given after seven days of seedling transplant. Electric pump was used to provide air in solution culture. Salinity levels in solution were developed according to (Abid, 2002; Majeed, 2015). A full extended second plant leaf from every one replicate was used to examine physiological parameters like transpiration (E) and photosynthetic rate (A). These physiological parameters were noted with moveable infrared gas analyzer (Abbasi et al., 2015). Each physiological parameter was recorded at noontime, while daylight intensity was full (Majeed et al., 2016; Kanwal et al., 2011). After one month, wheat plants were harvested from each treatment. Leaf juice extracted according to (Gorham et al., 1984) and analyzed for sodium (Na+) and potassium (K+) contents by using Jenway, PFP-7 Flame photometer.

Soil culture experiment

One salt- sensitive (V05003) and one salt-tolerant (V07096) wheat variety/cultivar were selected from first hydroponic culture experiment. Eight grains of each genotype/variety were grown in pots/lysimeters (75cm heigh×30 cm diameter) to compare the results of soil medium with hydroponic. Sandy clay loam soil used for filling of pots/lysimeters. The recommended rate of fertilizers, i.e. N (120), P (90) and K (60) kg ha-1 were added in soil of each pot/lysimeter. Water salinity levels like hydroponic experiment were prepared to irrigate the crop sown in pots/lysimeters. The ionic characteristics of the plant (K+ and Na+ contents) were determined with the use of flame photometer. Photosynthesis and transpiration rates of the plants measured with IRGA in both wheat genotypes/varieties (Abassi et al., 2015; Majeed, 2015).

Statistical design

Completely randomized design (CRD) was used with factorial arrangement. Data of all parameters were analyzed using the Statistics 8.1 software. Least significant difference (LSD) technique was used for comparison of treatments mean (Steel and Torrie, 1997).

 

Results and Discussion

Substantial variations were recorded in potassium and sodium ions in the plant leaf of salt sensitive and tolerant cultivars/varieties under treatments T2 and

 

Table 1: K+ and Na+ contents in normal and salt stress hydroponic culture.

	K+ Contents (mol m-3)			Na+ Contents (mol m-3)
Wheat Varieties/genotypes	T1	T2	T3	T1	T2	T3
Faisalabad-2008	172 ± 2.0	132 ± 3.0	112 ± 1.1	25 ± 0.5	60 ± 1.4	94 ± 3.3
Sahar2006	175 ± 2.5	129 ± 0.6	109 ± 1.4	26 ± 0.6	63 ± 1.4	103 ± 1.2
V07096	178 ± 1.5	139 ± 1.2	130 ± 1.5	24 ± 0.8	52 ± 1.4	76 ± 1.1
V07102	171 ± 1.5	126 ± 1.1	101 ± 1.1	25 ± 1.2	70 ± 1.4	121 ± 1.2
V04022	174 ± 1.4	123 ± 1.2	98 ± 1.2	26 ± 0.5	74 ± 0.8	127 ± 1.5
V08173	172 ± 1.5	122 ± 1.6	97 ± 1.6	26 ± 1.2	75 ± 0.5	130 ± 1.1
V07032	180 ± 2.0	121 ± 1.4	96 ± 1.4	31 ± 0.2	83 ± 1.2	136 ± 1.2
V07663	182 ± 2.0	124 ± 1.7	99 ± 1.7	30 ± 1.3	80 ± 1.4	133 ± 1.3
SARC 7	176 ± 0.8	142 ± 2.6	137 ± 0.8	24 ± 0.8	46 ± 1.7	64 ± 1.4
V06096	184 ± 2.0	126 ± 1.4	95 ± 1.7	29 ± 1.2	74 ± 0.5	127 ± 1.5
V08164	182 ± 1.4	127 ± 1.2	99 ± 1.8	31 ± 0.6	79 ± 1.2	133 ± 1.7
V08171	186 ± 2.0	121 ± 1.7	94 ± 1.2	30 ± 0.8	84 ± 1.1	140 ± 1.0
V03094	185 ± 1.7	125 ± 1.5	96 ± 2.5	28 ± 1.1	77 ± 1.4	132 ± 0.9
V05082	183 ± 1.7	137 ± 0.8	126 ± 1.2	25 ± 0.8	58 ± 1.7	81 ± 1.7
V08158	183 ± 2.3	147 ± 2.6	122 ± 2.6	32 ± 0.8	81 ± 2.4	136 ± 1.4
SARC 1	181 ± 2.0	145 ± 4.3	139 ± 0.8	27 ± 0.6	43 ± 1.4	62 ± 1.1
V07194	184 ± 2.6	116 ± 0.8	90 ± 0.8	31 ± 1.8	88 ± 0.8	143 ± 1.7
V05003	183 ± 1.7	115 ± 1.1	88 ± 0.8	32 ± 0.5	95 ± 0.6	155 ± 0.8
V07076	186 ± 2.6	118 ± 1.2	91 ± 0.5	30 ± 0.8	93 ± 0.8	147 ± 1.7
Pasban 90	179 ± 1.7	141 ± 1.7	135 ± 1.2	26 ± 0.5	49 ± 1.0	68 ± 1.5

T1: Control; T2: EC (Electrical Conductivity) 2.0 dS m-1; SAR (Sodium Absorption Ratio) 15.0 (m mol L-1)1/2 and RSC (Residual Sodium Carbonate) 2.25 m molc L-1 and T3: EC (Electrical Conductivity) 4.0 dS m-1; SAR (Sodium Absorption Ratio) 25.0 (m mol L-1)1/2 and RSC (Residual Sodium Carbonate) 5.0 m molc L-1.

 

T3 in both hydroponic and soil medium compared to control treatment (T1). Minimum sodium contents in plant leaf was recorded in SARC 1, Pasban-90, V07096 and V05082, while the highest in V05003 and V07194 cultivars in T2 and T3 salinity levels in hydroponic culture (Table 1). In T2 and T3 treatments, salt- tolerant wheat cultivars/genotypes had greater K+ uptake as compared to salt- sensitive cultivar. Under saline sodic conditions the salt tolerant maize varieties/genotypes accumulated minimum Na+ than salt sensitive (Abasi et al., 2015; Majeed et al., 2014). Similarly, in soil medium under treatments T2 and T3, the salt-tolerant V07096 cultivar accumulated less Na+ than salt sensitive V05003 (Table 3). The results showed that response of sensitive and tolerant genotypes/varieties also differed significantly within a soil medium. Stunted growth and lower photosynthetic rate were observed in T2 and T3 treatments due to higher sodium contents of plant as compared to T1 in both hydroponic (Table 2) and soil culture methods (Table 3). Higher sodium contents uptake in plant disturbed the leaf osmotic potential

 

and causes the damage to plant cells (Hussain et al., 2011). Escalating accumulation of sodium ion in plant caused the reduction in potassium contents that caused in a decline of K+: Na+. Higher sodium concentration affects K+ ion entry into plant cell (Saqib et al., 2006). Plant photosynthetic and transpiration rates decreased in treatments T2 and T3 due to higher

 

Table 2: Transpiration and photosynthetic rate in normal and salt stress hydroponic culture.

	Transpiration rate (mmol H2O m-2 S-1)			Photosynthetic rate (μmol CO2 m-2 S -1)
Wheat Varieties/genotypes	T1	T2	T3	T1	T2	T3
Faisalabad-2008	3.7± 0.13	2.3 ± 0.20	1.9 ± 0.08	9.6 ± 0.88	6.2 ± 0.78	3.3 ± 0.17
Sahar2006	3.8 ± 0.17	2.1 ± 0.17	1.8 ± 0.27	10.0 ± 0.58	5.7 ± 0.20	3.1 ± 0.18
V07096	3.9 ± 0.60	2.5 ± 0.18	2.2 ± 0.22	9.0 ± 0.52	6.6 ± 0.33	3.8 ± 0.17
V07102	4.0 ± 0.26	2.1 ± 0.18	1.6 ± 0.23	10.4 ± 0.33	5.1 ± 0.44	2.8 ± 0.17
V04022	4.1 ± 0.10	1.6 ± 0.24	1.5 ± 0.22	10.0 ± 0.58	4.3 ± 0.33	2.1 ± 0.20
V08173	3.9 ± 0.07	1.7 ± 0.14	1.1 ± 0.14	10.2 ± 0.69	4.6 ± 0.33	1.8 ± 0.06
V07032	4.2 ± 0.42	1.7 ± 0.30	1.1 ± 0.13	10.1 ± 0.69	4.6 ± 0.33	1.9 ± 0.03
V07663	3.8 ± 0.13	1.8 ± 0.24	1.2 ± 0.13	9.7 ± 0.63	5.0 ± 0.58	1.9 ± 0.10
SARC 7	3.8 ± 0.42	3.2 ± 0.18	2.9 ± 0.07	10.0 ± 0.58	6.3 ± 0.31	4.1 ± 0.17
V06096	3.6 ± 0.33	1.7 ± 0.24	1.3 ± 0.14	10.2 ± 0.51	5.0 ± 0.58	2.2 ± 0.21
V08164	3.8 ± 0.17	1.3 ± 0.25	1.1 ± 0.19	10.3 ± 0.33	5.0 ± 0.17	1.9 ± 0.15
V08171	3.6 ± 0.33	1.7 ± 0.23	1.3 ± 0.15	10.0 ± 0.58	4.3 ± 0.19	1.9 ± 0.07
V03094	3.8 ± 0.13	2.4 ± 0.23	1.7 ± 0.13	9.7 ± 0.41	5.2 ± 0.37	2.1 ± 0.20
V05082	3.8 ± 0.44	3.0 ± 0.20	2.4 ± 0.22	9.4 ± 0.29	5.9 ± 0.36	3.5 ± 0.29
V08158	3.9 ± 0.26	1.8 ± 0.22	1.3 ± 0.09	10.3 ± 0.40	5.0 ± 0.58	1.9 ± 0.07
SARC 1	3.6 ± 0.33	3.0 ± 0.10	2.6 ± 0.19	9.6 ± 0.33	6.7 ± 0.29	4.5 ± 0.29
V07194	4.2 ± 0.23	1.5 ± 0.15	1.0 ± 0.21	10.2 ± 0.51	4.3 ± 0.33	1.4 ± 0.09
V05003	4.1 ± 0.32	1.6 ± 0.34	0.7 ± 0.08	10.6 ± 0.33	3.6 ± 0.33	1.2 ± 0.06
V07076	4.1 ± 0.17	1.6 ± 0.19	0.8 ± 0.12	10.0 ± 0.58	4.0 ± 0.53	1.3 ± 0.09
Pasban 90	3.8 ± 0.44	2.7 ± 0.13	2.5 ± 0.19	10.1 ± 0.59	6.2 ± 0.57	3.8 ± 0.17

T1: Control; T2: EC (Electrical Conductivity) 2.0 dS m-1; SAR (Sodium Absorption Ratio) 15.0 (m mol L-1)1/2 and RSC (Residual Sodium Carbonate) 2.25 m molc L-1 and T3: EC (Electrical Conductivity) 4.0 dS m-1; SAR (Sodium Absorption Ratio) 25.0 (m mol L-1)1/2 and RSC (Residual Sodium Carbonate) 5.0 m molc L-1.

 

Table 3: Plant K+, Na+, photosynthetic and transpiration rates in normal and salt stress under soil medium.

Treatments	K+ Contents (mol m-3)		Na+ Contents (mol m-3)		Photosynthetic rate (μmol CO2 m-2 S -1)		Transpiration rate (mmol H2O m-2 S-1)
	Cultivars/Varieties		Cultivars/Varieties		Cultivars/Varieties		Cultivars/Varieties
	V07096	V05003	V07096	V05003	V07096	V05003	V07096	V05003
T1	394 ± 3.08	371 ± 1.71	46 ± 1.44	52 ± 2.5	8.31 ± 0.16	7.19 ± 0.03	1.72 ± 0.01	1.65 ± 0.02
T2	303 ± 1.48	241 ± 2.96	90 ± 1.43	117 ± 2.51	4.18 ± 0.04	3.45 ± 0.03	1.15 ± 0.02	1.06 ± 0.05
T3	204 ± 2.26	156 ± 2.95	123 ± 1.44	160 ± 1.45	3.25 ± 0.06	2.61 ± 0.04	1.05 ± 0.04	0.89 ± 0.01

T1: Control; T2: EC (Electrical Conductivity) 2.0 dS m-1; SAR (Sodium Absorption Ratio) 15.0 (m mol L-1)1/2 and RSC (Residual Sodium Carbonate) 2.25 m molc L-1 and T3: EC (Electrical Conductivity) 4.0 dS m-1; SAR (Sodium Absorption Ratio) 25.0 (m mol L-1)1/2 and RSC (Residual Sodium Carbonate) 5.0 m molc L-1.

 

accumulation of sodium than T1 under soil and hydroponic medium. Negative correlation observed between plant sodium contents and photosynthetic rate (Figure 1). Sodium ion toxicity caused damage to cell membrane, reduction in potassium uptake, plant development and photosynthetic rate (Abbasi et al., 2015; Majeed et al., 2016). Decrease in rate of photosynthesis activity of plants against salt stress takes place due to stomata closing (Shahbaz et al., 2011). Salt tolerant variety/genotype V07096 showed higher plant growth by sustaining superior photosynthetic activity and transpiration rate in salt stress treatments due to lower sodium uptake in contrast to V05003 variety/genotype. Salt -tolerant maize genotypes sustained superior photosynthetic activity and transpiration rate in contrast to salt-sensitive against salinity (Abbasi et al., 2015; Majeed et al., 2016). Salinity development in soil causes inadequate accessibility to nutrient present in soil medium and a smaller amount of water absorption through plant roots for photosynthetic activity and metabolic process that results in lower rate of transpiration, photosynthesis and affects cells division (Munns et al., 2005; Ashraf et al., 2008).

 

Conclusions and Recommendations

Salt-tolerant varieties/genotypes showed greater salt tolerance response both in hydroponic and soil medium as compared to salt-sensitive variety. Negative correlation observed between the plant photosynthetic rate and Na+ uptake. Plant sodium, potassium, and photosynthetic rate can be used as standards to determine genotypic differences among different varieties against salt tolerance both in hydroponic and soil medium.

 

Acknowledgements

The authors are thankful to the Director Institute of Soil and Environmental Sciences, University of Agriculture Faisalabad, Pakistan for providing the required facilities for conducting the experimental work. The authors are also grateful to the Director Wheat Research Institute, Ayub Agricultural Research Institute Faisalabad, Pakistan, for providing the wheat seed used in this experiment.

 

Novelty Statement

Plant sodium, potassium contents, and photosynthetic rate can be used as screening criteria to determine genotypic differences against salt tolerance both in hydroponic and soil medium.

 

Author’s Contribution

Abdul Majeed: Planned the study, conducted the eperiments and wrote the manuscript.

Muhammad Anwar-ul-Haq: Helped in writing the manuscript.

Abid Niaz: Analyzed the plant samples.

Abid Mahmood: Helped in reviewingthe literature to write methodolgy.

Naeem Ahmad: Helped in statistical analysis.

Hafiz Muhammad Walyat Ali Khan: Edited and proofread the article.

 

References

Abbasi, G.H., J. Akhtar, R. Ahmad, M. Jamil, M. Anwar-ul- Haq, S. Ali and M. Ijaz. 2015. Potassium application mitigates salt stress differentially at different growth stages in tolerant and sensitive maize hybrids. Plant Growth Regul. 76: 111-125. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10725-015-0050-1

Abid, M. 2002. Effect of brackish water on different soil textures and crop production. Ph. D. Thesis. Fak. Agric. Univ. Agric. Faisalabad, Pakistan.

Ashraf, M., H.R. Athar, P.J.C. Harris and T.R. Kown. 2008. Some prospective strategies for improving crop salt tolerance. Adv. Agron. 97: 45-110. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2113(07)00002-8

Ashraf, M.A., M. Ashraf and Q. Ali. 2010. Response of two genetically diverse wheat cultivars to salt stress at different growth stages: leaf lipid peroxidation and phenolic contents. Pak. J. Bot., 42(1): 559-565.

Gorham, J., E. McDonnel and R.G. Wyn Jones. 1984. Salt tolerance in the Triticeae. I. Leymussabulosus. J. Exp. Bot. 35: 1200-1209. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/35.8.1200

Hoagland, D.R. and D.I. Arnon. 1950. The water culture method for growing plants without soil. Calif. Agic. Exp. Stat. Cir. No. 347, pp. 39.

Hussain, S.A., J. Akhtar, M.A. haq and R. Ahmad. 2011. Growth, yield and ionic concentration of two sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.) genotypes exposed to brackish water irrigation. Soil Environ. 30(1): 58-65.

IPCC. 2014. Asia. In: Climate change 2014: Impacts, adaptations and vulnerability. Working group II to the 5th Assess. Rep. of IPCC. 1327- 1370.

Kawal, H., M. Ashraf and M. Shahbaz. 2011. Assessment of salt tolerance of some newly developed and candidate wheat (triticum aestivum L.) cultivars using gas exchange and chlorophyll fluorescence attributes. Pak. J. Bot. 43(6): 2693-2699.

Majeed, A., M.A. Haq, J. Akhtar, Shahzad and M.A. Basra. 2014. Screening of maize genotypes against poor quality water in solution culture. J. Agric. Res. 52(3): 357-368.

Majeed, A. 2015. Use of poor quality ground water as a source of irrigation with organic and inorganic amendments. Ph.D. Thesis. Faculty of Agriculture, Univ. Agric. Faisalabad, Pak.

Majeed, A., M.A. Haq, A. Niaz, J. Akhtar, Z.A. Ahmad, A. Muhmood, M.A. Anjum and S.S.H. Shah. 2016. Gas exchange traits and biplot analysis method can be used as screening criteria for salt tolerance in maize (Zea mays L.) cultivars. Am. J. Exp. Agric. 11 (2): 1-11. https://doi.org/10.9734/AJEA/2016/23267

Ma, Y.N., R.G. Wang, C. Wu, Y.W. Shi, Z.H. Wang, S.D. Xie, S.P. Zhou, H.M. Xu and X.L. Ren. 2012. Developmental analysis on genetic behavior of quality traits of flue-cured tobacco (Nicotianatabacum) in multiple environments. Int. J. Agric. Biol., 14: 345-352.

Munns, R., R.A. James and A. Lauchli. 2006. Approaches to increase the salt tolerance of wheat and other cereals. J. Exp. Bot. 57: 1025-1043. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erj100

Munns, R., 2005. Genes and salt tolerance: bringing them together. New Phytol. 167: 645-663. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2005.01487.x

Rengasamy, P., 2006. World salinization with emphasis on Aust. J. Exp. Bot. 57: 1017-1023. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erj108

Sadiq, S., A. Saboor, F. Jamshaid, A.Q. Mohsin and A. Khalid. 2019. Assessment of farmers’ vulnerability to climate change in agroclimatic zones of Pakistan: An index based approach. Sarhad J. Agric. 35(3): 734-740. https://doi.org/10.17582/journal.sja/2019/35.3.734.740

Saqib, M., J. Akhtar and R.H. Qureshi. 2004. Pot study on wheat growth in saline and waterlogged compacted soil: II. Root growth and leaf ionic relations. Soil Till. Res. 77: 179-187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2003.12.005

Saqib, M., C. Zörb and S. Schubert. 2006. Salt-resistant and sensitive wheat genotypes do not show very different biochemical reaction at the level of proteins in the first phase of their response to NaCl salinity. J. Plant Nut. Soil Sci. 169: 542-548. https://doi.org/10.1002/jpln.200520557

Shahbaz, M., M. Ashraf, N.A. Akram, A. Hanif, S. Hamid, S. Joham and R. Rehman. 2011. Salt induced modulation in growth, photosynthetic capacity, proline content and ion accumulation in sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.). Acta Physiol. Plant. 33(4): 1113-1122. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11738-010-0639-y

Steel, R.G.D., J.H. Torrie and D.A. Deekey. 1997. Principles and Procedures of Statistics: A Biometrical Approach. 3rd edt. McGraw Hill book Co. Inc. New York. 400-428.