Роль фотоперіодичної реакції у формуванні посухостійкості ізогенних ліній сої

  • О. О. Авксентьєва Харківський національний університет імені В. Н. Каразіна, Україна, 61022, м. Харків, майдан Свободи, 4 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3274-3410
  • С. І. Коломийчук Харківський національний університет імені В. Н. Каразіна, Україна, 61022, м. Харків, майдан Свободи, 4 https://orcid.org/0009-0002-8959-3756
  • Є. Д. Батуєва Харківський національний університет імені В. Н. Каразіна, Україна, 61022, м. Харків, майдан Свободи, 4 https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2532-7141
DOI: https://doi.org/10.7124/FEEO.v38.1819
Ключові слова: Glycine max (L.) Merr., NILs, фотоперіодична реакція, гени Е-серії, експрес-аналіз посухостійкості, вільний пролін

Анотація

Aim. Analysis of the role of photoperiodic response in the formation of drought tolerance in soybean by determining morphological, physiological and adaptive traits in cultivars and near-isogenic lines (NILs) differing in photoperiod sensitivity. Methods. Drought tolerance was assessed using a rapid screening approach and vegetation experiments in sand culture. Artificial drought was simulated by germinating seeds in a 10% mannitol solution, while in pot trials plants were grown under different levels of field water capacity (FWC). Seed germination, biomass accumulation, plant growth response at the V3–V4 stage, and free proline content in leaves and roots were measured. Results. Under both osmotic and soil drought, stress-tolerant soybean genotypes exhibited higher drought resistance, reflected in better seed germination, greater biomass production, enhanced root development, and elevated proline accumulation in treated plants. Photoperiod-neutral genotypes showed the highest drought tolerance, whereas short-day sensitive forms displayed the lowest values. Conclusions. Drought tolerance level is likely associated with photoperiod sensitivity and the length of the growing season, traits genetically controlled in soybean by the E-gene system.

Посилання

Abdullah M. M., Waraich E. A., Ahmad M., Hussain S., Asghar H. N., Haider A., Djalovic I. Improving soybean drought tolerance via silicon-induced changes in growth, physiological, biochemical, and root characteristics. Plant Signaling & Behavior. 2025. Vol. 20 (1). 2465232. https://doi.org/10.1080/15592324.2025.2465232.

Avksentiieva O., Taran N. Drought resistance and productivity of wheat and soybean isogenic lines with different photoperiodic sensitivity. EUREKA: Life Sciences. 2016. No. 5. P. 8–17. https://doi.org/10.21303/2504-5695.2016.00226.

González A. M., Pesqueira A. M., García L., Santalla M. Effects of photoperiod and drought on flowering and growth development of protein-rich legumes under Atlantic environments. Agronomy. 2023. Vol. 13 (4). 1025. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy13041025.

Luo X., Yin M., He Y. Molecular genetic understanding of photoperiodic regulation of flowering time in Arabidopsis and soybean. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2022. Vol. 23 (1). 466. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms23010466.

Molodchenkova O. O., Sichkar V. I., Lavrova H. D., Bezkrovna L. Y., Fanin Y. S. Proline content and lectin activity in different soybean varieties during reproductive phases of development. Plant Varieties Studying and Protection. 2025. Vol. 21 (3). P. 131–136. https://doi.org/10.21498/2518-1017.21.3.2025.339314.

Moloi M. J., van der Merwe R. Drought tolerance responses in vegetable-type soybean involve a network of biochemical mechanisms at flowering and pod-filling stages. Plants. 2021. Vol. 10 (8). 1502. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants10081502.

Mwenye O. J., van Rensburg L., van Biljon A., van der Merwe R. The role of proline and root traits on selection for drought-stress tolerance in soybeans: A review. South African Journal of Plant and Soil. 2016. Vol. 33 (4). P. 245–256. https://doi.org/10.1080/02571862.2016.1148786.

Nguyen T. T. Q., Trinh L. T. H., Pham H. B. V., Le T. V., Phung T. K. H., Lee S.-H., Cheong J.-J. Evaluation of proline, soluble sugar and ABA content in soybean (Glycine max (L.)) under drought stress memory. AIMS Bioengineering. 2020. Vol. 7 (3). P. 114–123. https://doi.org/10.3934/bioeng.2020011.

Rasheed A., Mahmood A., Maqbool R., Albaqami M., Sher A., Sattar A., Bakhsh G., Nawaz M., Hassan M. M., Al-Yahyai R., Aamer M., Li H., Wu Z. Key insights to develop drought-resilient soybean: A review. Journal of King Saud University – Science. 2022. Vol. 34 (5). 102089. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jksus.2022.102089.

Roeber V. M., Schmülling T., Cortleven A. The photoperiod: Handling and causing stress in plants. Frontiers in Plant Science. 2022. Vol. 12. 781988. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2021.781988.

Staniak M., Szpunar-Krok E., Kocira A. Responses of soybean to selected abiotic stresses – Photoperiod, temperature and water. Agriculture. 2023. Vol. 13. 146. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture13010146.

Sun Z., Yuan L., Wang Y., Fang R., Lin X., Li H., Chen L., Wu Y., Huang X., Kong F., Liu B., Lu S., Kong L. Post-flowering photoperiod sensitivity of soybean in pod-setting responses. Biology. 2024. Vol. 13 (11). 868. https://doi.org/10.3390/biology13110868.

Yerzhebayeva R., Didorenko S., Bastaubayeva S., Amangeldiyeva A., Maikotov B., Kassenov R., Shavrukov Y. Soybean drought tolerance and escape: Field trial assessment of yield, maturity groups and smooth-wrinkled seed coats in Kazakhstan. Agriculture. 2024. Vol. 14 (11). 1884. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture14111884.

Zhai H., Wan Z., Jiao S., Zhou J., Xu K., Nan H., Liu Y., Xiong S., Fan R., Zhu J., Jiang W., Pang T., Luo X., Wu H., Yang G., Bai X., Kong F., Xia Z. GmMDE genes bridge the maturity gene E1 and florigens in photoperiodic regulation of flowering in soybean. Plant Physiology. 2022. Vol. 189 (2). P. 1021–1036. https://doi.org/10.1093/plphys/kiac092.

Zhang X., Wu T., Wen H., Song W., Xu C., Han T., Sun S., Wu C. Allelic variation of soybean maturity genes E1–E4 in the Huang-Huai-Hai River Valley and the Northwest China. Agriculture. 2022. Vol. 11 (6). 478. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture11060478.