Comparison of Pomological, Physiological and Molecular Responses of Almond Genotypes to Drought Stress under Field and Greenhouse Conditions

Articles in Press

Document Type : Original Research

Authors
Babak Jolfaei 1
Saeed Piri 1
Ali Imani 2
Kamran Akbari Noghabi 1
1 Department of Horticulture, Ab.C., Islamic Azad University, Abhar, Islamic Republic of Iran.
2 Temperate Fruit Research Center, Horticultural Sciences Research Institute, Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization (AREEO), Karaj, Islamic Republic of Iran.
Abstract
Nowadays, drought stress is creating new challenges in agricultural production. The almond tree a crucial agricultural component with commercial importance and widespread cultivation, is considered a drought-tolerant species due to its pomological and physiological characteristics. To investigate the pomological, physiological and molecular responses in the field and greenhouse conditions and the effects of drought stress on new almond genotypes (11-10, D-11,  B-6,  D-7,  A-33, 100-2-8,   TT100,  SU, 7-11 , 100-1-4,  B-3,  M-S-13,  B-551,  D-12, and  D-5) grafted onto GF677 rootstock, an experiment was conducted with two irrigation period (every 5 (normal) and 10 (drought stress) days) in Karaj, Iran. In field conditions, pomological and physiological traits results showed that the TT100, SU, 7-11, 100-1-4, and D-12 genotypes exhibited the most appropriate responses to drought stress. In greenhouse conditions, 15 almond genotypes were studied under two irrigation levels with 100 ml of water applied to each pot. Screening based on the chlorophyll fluorescence index indicated that genotypes D-12, B551, and 11-10 were classified as resistant, semi-resistant, and sensitive, respectively, under drought stress conditions. Under applied stress, the leaf relative water content (RWC) (13.75%) and leaf chlorophyll content (3.80%) were decreased. Enzyme activity of catalase (108.3% in genotype 11-10) and superoxide dismutase (676.25% in genotype D-12) increased with the intensity of stress. Gene expression analysis of catalase under stress showed that only the D-12 cultivar exhibited the highest increase in gene expression, with a 206.8% increase. QRT-PCR analysis of miR159 expression revealed that in genotypes 11-10, a significant decrease in miR159 expression was observed under drought stress. The D-12 genotype was tolerant under applied drought stress conditions and could be useful in almond development projects in arid regions.

Keywords

Subjects

  1. 1.      Aebi, H. 1974. Methods of enzymatic analysis. Bergmeyer: Chemie Weinheim. 11: 673-84.

    2.      Akbarpour, E., Imani, A. and Ferdowskhah Yeganeh, S. 2017. Physiological and morphological responses of almond cultivars under in vitro drought stress. J. Nuts. 8(1): 61-72.

    3.      Alizadeh-Choobari, O. and Najafi, M. S. 2018. Extreme weather events in Iran under a changing climate. Clim. Dyn. 50: 249–260.

    4.      Ashraf, M. 2009. Biotechnological approach of improving plant salt tolerance using antioxidants as markers. Biotechnol. Adv. 27(1): 84-93.

    5.      Achard, P., Herr, A., Baulcombe, D. C. and Harberd, N. P. 2004. Modulation of floral development by a gibberellin-regulated microRNA. Development. 131: 3357-3365.

    6.      Bian, S. and Jiang, Y., 2009. Reactive oxygen species, antioxidant enzyme activities and gene expression patterns in leaves and roots of Kentucky bluegrass in response to drought stress and recovery. Sci. Hortic. 120: 264-270.

    1. De Pascali, M., Rocco, M., Arena, C., and others. 2025. Physiological responses and gene expression profiling in almond tree genotypes under drought stress. Horticulturae. 11(5): 515.

    8.      Eldem, V., Akçay, U. Ç., Ozhuner, E., Bakır, Y., Uranbey, S. and Unver, T. 2012. Genome-wide identification of miRNAs responsive to drought in peach (Prunus persica) by high-throughput deep sequencing. Plos. One. 7 (12): e50298.  

    9.      Esmaili, F., Shiran, B., Mirakhorli, N. and Fallahi, H. 2015. Study of miR159 and miR171 expression patterns under drought stress in peach, almond and GN. J. Modern Genet. 10(3): 407-416.

    10.  Fahim, S., Ghanbari, A., Naji, A. M., Shokohian, A. A. and Maleki Lajayer, H. 2023. Impact of drought stress on morphological and physiological traits in some Iranian grape cultivars. Plant Process Func. 11(47):16.

    11.  Ge, Y., Lai, Q., Luo, P., Liu, X., and Chen, W. 2019. Transcriptome profiling of Gerbera hybrida reveals that stem bending is caused by water stress and regulation of abscisic acid. BMC genomics. 20: 1-22.

    1. Grant, O. M., Johnson, A. W., Davies, M. J., James, C. M. and Simpson, D. W. 2010. Physiological and morphological diversity of cultivated strawberry in response to water deficit. Environment Exp. Bot. 68(3): 264-272.  
    2. Goharai, S., Imani, A., Talaei, A., Abdossi, V. and Asghari, M. 2023. Physiological response of almond genotypes to drought stress. Russ. J. Plant Physiol. 70 (6): 141-152.

    14.  Guo, C., Jiang, Y., Shi, M., Wu, X. and Wu, G. 2021. ABI5 acts downstream of miR159 to delay vegetative phase change in Arabidopsis. New Phytol. 231(1): 339-350.

    15.  Haider, S., Bibi, K., Munyaneza, V., Zhang, H., Zhang, W., Ali, A., Ahmad, A. L., Mehran, M., Xu, F., Yang, C., Yang, J. and Ding, G. 2024. Drought-induced adaptive and ameliorative strategies in plants. Chemosphere. 364: 134-143.

    16.  Hall, T.A. 1999. BioEdit: a user-friendly biological sequence alignment editor and analysis program for Windows 95/98/NT. In Nucleic Acids Symposium Series. 41(41): 95-98.

    17.  Hashemi, S. R., Malekzadeh Shafarudi, S., Marashi, S. H. and Ganjali, A. 2013. Study of gene expression pattern of Cu/znSOD and SOD enzyme activity under drought treatment in tolerant and sensitive lines of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). Iran J. Pulses Res. 4(1): 43-50.

    18.  Islam, W., Tauqeer, A., Waheed, A. and Zeng, F. 2022. MicroRNA Mediated Plant Responses to Nutrient Stress. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 23(5): 2562.

    19.  Kapoor, D., Bhardwaj, S., Lan di, M., Sharma, A., Ramakrishnan, M. and Sharma, A. 2020. The impact of drought in plant metabolism: How to exploit tolerance mechanisms to increase crop production. Appl. Sci. 10(16): 1-19.

    20.  Kim, J., Kim, K. S., Kim, Y. and Chung, Y. S. 2020. A short review: Comparisons of high-throughput phenotyping methods for detecting drought tolerance. Sci. Agric. 78:10.1590.

    21.  Liu, F., Xi, M., Liu, T., Wu, X., Ju, L. and Wang, D. 2024. The central role of transcription factors in bridging biotic and abiotic stress responses for plants’ resilience. New Crops. 1: 100005.

    22.  Li, Z., Yang, J., Cai, X., Zeng, X., Zou, J. J. and Xing, W. 2024. A systematic review on the role of miRNAs in plant response to stresses under the changing climatic conditions. Plant Stress. 14: 100674.

    1. Livak, K. J. and Schmittgen, T. D. 2001. Analysis of relative gene expression data using real-time quantitative PCR and the 2− ΔΔCT method. Methods. 25(4): 402-408.

    24.  Luo, C., Bashir, N. H., Li, Z., Liu, C., Shi, Y. and Chu, H. 2024. Plant microRNAs regulate the defense response against pathogens. Front. Microbiol. 15: 1434798.

    25.  Luo, D., Wang, C. and Jin, Y. 2019. Stomatal regulation of plants in response to drought stress. J. Appl. Ecol. 30: 4333-4343. Chinese.

    26.  Maxwell, K. and Johnson, G.N. 2000. Chlorophyll fluorescence-a partial guide. J. Exp. Bot. 51: 659-668.

    27.  McClung, T. N., Lampinen, B. D., Gaudin, A. C. M. and Volder, A. 2024. Inoculation with arbuscular mycorrhiza did not affect growth, root traits or gas exchange of grafted almond saplings when exposed to drought stress. Plant Stress. 12: 100475.

    28.  Muhammad, M., Waheed, A., Wahab, A., Majeed, M., Nazim, M., Liu, Y. H., Li, L. and Wen-Jun, L. 2024. Soil salinity and drought tolerance: An evaluation of plant growth, productivity, microbial diversity, and amelioration strategies. Plant Stress. 100319.

    29.  Napolitano, G., Fasciolo, G. and Venditti, P. 2022. The Ambiguous Aspects of Oxygen. Oxygen. 2(3): 382-409.

    30.  Nouri, M., Homaee, M., Pereira, L. S. and Bybordi, M. 2023. Water management dilemma in the agricultural sector of Iran: A review focusing on water governance. Agri. Water Manag. 288: 108480.

    1. National Research Council. 2005. Water Conservation, Reuse, and Recycling: Proceedings of an Iranian-American Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

    32.  Prajapati, H. A., Yadav, K., Hanamasagar, Y., Kumar, M. B., Khan, T., Belagalla, N., Qureshi, S., Jaiswal, P., Prasad, B. S. V. S. S. S. and Kumar, J. 2024. Impact of Climate Change on Global Agriculture: Challenges and Adaptation. Int. J. Environ. Climate Change. 14(4): 72-79.

    33.  Rajanna, G. A., Suman, A. and Venkatesh, P. 2023. Mitigating Drought Stress Effects in Arid and Semi-Arid Agro-Ecosystems through Bioirrigation Strategies-A Review. Sustainability. 15(4): 3542.

    34.  Rychlik, W. 2007. OLIGO 7 primer analysis software. PCR Primer Design. 35-59.

    35.  Saed-Moucheshi, A., Sohrabi, F., Fasihfar, E., Baniasadi, F., Riasat, M. and Mozafari, A. A. 2021. Superoxide dismutase (SOD) as a selection criterion for triticale grain yield under drought stress: a comprehensive study on genomics and expression profiling, bioinformatics, heritability, and phenotypic variability. BMC Plant Biol. 21(1): 148.

    36.  Saini, A., Li, Y., Jagadeeswaran, G. and Sunkar, R. 2012. Role of microRNAs in plant adaptation to environmental stresses. In MicroRNAs in Plant Development and Stress Responses. 219-232.

    1. Safavi Bakhtiari, S., Gohari, G., Razavi, F., and others. 2025. Physiological and biochemical   responses of almond (Prunus dulcis) cultivars to drought stress under semi-arid conditions. Plants. 14(5): 734.

    38.  Shi, L., Guo, C., Fang, M., Yang, Y., Yin, F. and Shen, Y. 2024. Cross-kingdom regulation of plant microRNAs: potential application in crop improvement and human disease therapeutics. Front Plant Sci. 15: 1512047.

    39.  Sideli, G. M., Mather, D., Wirthensohn, M., Dicenta, F., Goonetilleke, S. N., Martínez-García, P. J. and et al. 2023. Genome-wide association analysis and validation with KASP markers for nut and shell traits in almond (Prunus dulcis [Mill.] D.A.Webb). Tree Genet. Genomes. 19(2): 13.

    40.  Sunkar, R., Li, Y.F. and Jagadeeswaran, G. 2012. Functions of microRNAs in plant stress responses. Trends Plant Sci. 17: 196-203.

    1. Oliveira, I., Meyer, A., Santos, C. and Chaves, M. M. 2023. Almond tree adaptation to water stress under Mediterranean conditions: physiological and photosynthetic responses. Plants. 12(5): 1131.

    42.  Winterbourn, C. C., McGrath, B. M. and Carrell, R. W. 1976. Reactions involving superoxide and normal and unstable hemoglobins. Biochem. J. 155: 493-502.

    43.  Yildrim, A. N., San, B., Yildrim, F., Celik, C., Bayar, B. and Karakurt, Y. 2021. Physiological and biochemical responses of almond rootstocks to drought stress. Turk J. Agric. Forest. 45: 522-532.

    44.  Zokaee-Khosroshahi, M., Esna-Ashari, M., Ershadi, A. and Imani, A. 2014. Morphological Changes in Response to Drought Stress in Cultivated and Wild Almond Species. Int. J. Hortic. Sci. Technol. 1(1): 79-92.

Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology

Articles in Press, Accepted Manuscript
Available Online from 11 May 2026