In nature, plants may suffer rapid dehydration (RD), which causes significant loss of the annual global chickpea production. Thus, ascertaining more knowledge concerning the RD-tolerance mechanisms in chickpea is crucial for developing high drought-tolerant varieties to assure sustainable chickpea production under sudden water deficit. Here, we focused on genotype-driven variation in leaf relative water content (RWC) and associated differences in RD-responsive physiological and biochemical attributes in roots and leaves of two chickpea cultivars, 'FLIP00-21C' and 'FLIP02-89C', subjected to well-watered and RD conditions. 'FLIP00-21C' showed higher RD-tolerance than 'FLIP02-89C', evident by its higher leaf RWC during RD. Consistently, 'FLIP00-21C' exhibited lower membrane injury due to lower hydrogen peroxide (H2 O2 ) accumulation than 'FLIP02-89C' during RD, indicating reduced RD-induced oxidative damage. Under RD conditions, total phenolics in roots and flavonoids in roots and leaves increased more in 'FLIP02-89C' compared to 'FLIP00-21C'; however, the increased activities of superoxide dismutase and H2 O2 -scavenging enzymes were more properly coordinated in 'FLIP00-21C' than in 'FLIP02-89C', which might contribute to more efficient antioxidant defense in 'FLIP00-21C' than in 'FLIP02-89C'. The higher leaf RWC of 'FLIP00-21C' versus 'FLIP02-89C' under RD might be associated with greater increases in the levels of the osmo-regulators proline and total free amino acids (TFAAs) in 'FLIP00-21C' than in 'FLIP02-89C'. Collectively, the higher RD-tolerance of 'FLIP00-21C' is mainly associated with the maintenance of higher RWC, stronger antioxidant defense, and greater accumulation of proline and TFAAs. These traits could be useful for evaluating the drought-tolerance of chickpea cultivars and further marker-assisted breeding approaches for improvement of chickpea productivity.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 January 2022.
All research outputs
#15,798,379
of 27,274,276 outputs
Outputs from Physiologia Plantarum
#1,702
of 2,890 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#209,872
of 467,064 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Physiologia Plantarum
#46
of 80 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 27,274,276 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,890 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 467,064 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 80 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
