Use of Morpho-physiological Parameters and Biochemical Markers to Select Drought Tolerant Genotypes of Durum wheat


  • Ismail Outoukarte, Abderrahim El Keroumi Laboratory of Biotechnologies and Plant Resources Valorization, Cadi Ayyad University, Faculty of Sciences Semlalia, Marrakesh, Morocco
  • Abdelhi Dihazi Laboratory of Biotechnology and Molecular Bio-engineering, Faculty of Sciences and Techniques, Marrakech
  • Khalid Naamani Laboratory of Biotechnologies and Plant Resources Valorization, Cadi Ayyad University, Faculty of Sciences Semlalia, Marrakesh, Morocco



Durum wheat; Drought stress; Peroxidases; Phenolics; Electrolyte leakage; Hydroponics; Stomatal resistance


Nine durum wheat genotypes (Karim, Ourghi, Massa, Isly, Vitron, Sebou, Oum Rbia, Sarif, and Marzak) were grown in pots and evaluated for their phenolic content and peroxidases activity (POX), cell membrane stability (CMS) and Stomatal Resistance (SR). The genotypes Ourghi and Karim exhibited the highest amount of total phenolics (1374 µg.g-1 FW and 1303 µg.g-1 FW respectively) while Massa and Oum Rbia showed the lowest amounts (676 µg.g-1 FW and 761 µg.g-1 FW respectively) under severe stress regime. High performances Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) analysis revealed an important accumulation of hydroxycinnamic acid derivatives for the most accumulating genotypes. Under severe drought stress conditions, Ourghi revealed the highest peroxidase activity and Oum Rbia the lowest. A positive correlation was obtained between total phenolics and CMS. In another experiment hold in the hydroponic system under normal growing conditions, we revealed the superiority of genotype Karim in term of tillers, leaves and roots number, root thickness and dry matter accumulation and allocation to the roots. The present data provide useful information about whether the parameters used in this study are helpful in understanding drought tolerance mechanisms and the possibility to use them in selection programs under Mediterranean conditions. 


Download data is not yet available.


1. Chandrasekar V, Sairam RK, Srivastava GC. Physiological and Biochemical Responses of Hexaploid and Tetraploid Wheat to Drought Stress. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science. 2000; 185:219-227.
2. Gupta NK, Sunita G, Arvind K. Effect of Water Stress on Physiological Attributes and their Relationship with Growth and Yield of Wheat Cultivars at Different Stages. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science. 2001; 186, 55-62.
3. Rampino P, Pataleo S, Gerardi C, Mita G, Perrotta C. Drought stress response in wheat: physiological and molecular analysis of resistant and sensitive genotypes. Plant Cell and Environment. 2006; 29:2143-2152.
4. Sgherri C, Milone MTA, Clijsters H, Navari-Izzo F. Antioxidative enzymes in two wheat cultivars, differently sensitive to Drought and Subjected to subsymptomatic copper doses. Journal of Plant Physiology. 2001; 158:1439–1447.
5. Nayyar H, Gupta D. Differential sensitivity of C3 and C4 plants to water deficit stress: Association with oxidative stress and antioxidants. Environmental and Experimental Botany. 2006; 58:106–113.
6. Nemat Allah MM, Hassan NM. Changes of antioxidants levels in two maize lines following atrazine treatments. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry. 2006; 44:202–210.
7. Zhang C, Shi S, Wang B, Zhao J. Physiological and biochemical changes in different drought tolerant alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) varieties under PEG-induced drought stress. Acta Physiologiae Plantarum. 2018; 40: 1-19.
8. Huseynova I M, Aliyeva D R, Aliyev J A. Subcellular localization and responses of superoxide dismutase isoforms in local wheat varieties subjected to continuous soil drought. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry. 2014; 81:54-60.
9. Tatari M, Ghazvini R F, Mousavi A, Babaei G. Comparison of Some Physiological aspects of Drought Stress Resistance in Two Ground Cover Genus, Journal of Plant Nutrition. 2017. DOI: 10.1080/01904167.2017.1346117.
10. Ahmed IM, Nadira UA, Bibi N, Cao F, He X, Zhang G, Feibo W. Secondary metabolism, and antioxidants are involved in the tolerance to drought and salinity, separately and combined, in Tibetan wild barley. Environmental and Experimental Botany. 2014; 111:1-12.
11. Farooq S, Farooqe A. The use of cell membrane stability (CMS) technique to screen for salt tolerant wheat varieties. Journal of Plant Physiology. 2006; 163:629-637.
12. Sarabi B, Bolandnazar S, Ghaderi N, Ghashghaie J. Genotypic differences
in physiological and biochemical responses to salinity stress in melon (Cucumis melo L.) plants: Prospects for selection of salt tolerant landraces. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry. 2017. doi: 10.1016/ j.plaphy.2017.09.006.
13. Prasil I, Zamecnek J. The use of a conductivity measurement method for assessing freezing injury I. Influence of leakage time, segment number, size and shape in a sample on evaluation of the degree of injury. Environmental and Experimental Botany. 1998; 40:1–10.
14. Bajji M, Kinet JM, Lutts S. The use of the electrolyte leakage method for assessing cell membrane stability as a water stress tolerance test in durum wheat, Plant Growth Regulation. 2001; 00:1–10.
15. Dhanda SS, Sethi GS, Behl RK. Indices of Drought Tolerance in Wheat Genotypes at Early Stages of Plant Growth. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science. 2004; 190:6-12.
16. Meot-Duros L, Mangé C. Antioxidant activity and phenol content of Crithmum maritimum L. leaves. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry. 2009; 47:37–41.
17. Torrecillas A, Alarcon JJ, Domingo R, Planesa J, Sknchez-Blancoa MJ. Strategies for drought resistance in leaves of two almond cultivars. Plant Science. 1996; 118, 135-143.
18. Subrahmanyam D, Subash N, Haris A, Sikka AK. Influence of water stress on leaf photosynthetic characteristics in wheat cultivars differing in their susceptibility to drought. Photosynthetica. 2006; 44:125-129.
19. Pou A, Flexasa J, Mar Alsinab M, Bota J, Carambulaa C, Herraldeb F, Galme´sa J, Lovisoloc C, Jime´nezd M, Ribas-Carbo´M, Rusjane D, Secchic F, Toma`sa M, Zso´ fif Z, Medrano H. Adjustments of water use efficiency by stomatal regulation during drought and recovery in the drought-adapted Vitis hybrid Richter-110 (V. berlandieri V. rupestris). Physiologia Plantarum, 2008; 134:313–323.
20. Leilah AA, Al-Khateeb SA. Statistical analysis of wheat yield under drought conditions, Journal of Arid Environments, 2005; 61:483–496.
21. Zhang XY, Chen SY, Sun HY, Pei D, Wang YM. Dry matter, harvest index, grain yield and water use efficiency as affected by water supply in winter wheat, Irrigation Science. 2008, 27:1–10.
22. Rivelli AR, James RA, Munns R, Condon AGT. Effect of Salinity on Water relations and Growth of Wheat Genotypes with Contrasting Sodium Uptake. Functional Plant Biology. 2002; 29:1065-1074.
23. Barbour NW, Murphy CF. Field Evaluation of Seedling Root Length Selection in Oats. Crop Science, 1983; 24:165-169.
24. Outoukarte I, Belaqziz M, Price A, Nsarellah N, El Hadrami I. Durum Wheat Root Distribution and Agronomical Performance as Influenced by Soil Properties. Crop Science. 2010; 50:803-807.
25. Menge DM, Kameoka E, Kano-Nakata M, Yamauchi A. Asanuma S, Asai H, Kikuta M, Suralta RR, Koyama T, Tran TT, Siopongco JDLC, Mitsuya S, Inukai Y, Makihara D. Drought-induced root plasticity of two upland NERICA varieties under conditions with contrasting soil depth characteristics. Plant Production Science. 2016; 1-12.
26. Matsui T, Singh BB. Root Characteristics in Cowpea Related to Drought Tolerance at the Seedling Stage. Experimental Agriculture, 2003; 39:29–38.
27. Equiza M, Miravé JP, Tognetti JA. Differential Inhibition of Shoot vs. Root Growth at Low Temperature and its Relationship with Carbohydrates Accumulation in Different Wheat Cultivars. Annals of Botany. 2001; 80:657-663.
28. Baaziz M, Saaidi M. Preliminary identification of date palm cultivars by esterase isoenzymes and peroxidase activities. Canadian Journal of Botany. 1988; 66: 89-93.
29. El Hadrami I, Ramos T, El Bellaj M, El Idrissi Tourane A, Macheix JJ. A sinapic derivative as induced defense compound of date palm against Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. abledinis, the agent causing bayoud disease. Journal of Phytopathology. 1997; 145:329-333.
30. Beardsell MF, Cohen D. Relationships between Leaf Water Status, Abscisic Acid Levels, and Stomatal Resistance in Maize and Sorghum. Plant Physiology. 1975; 56:207-212.
31. O’Toole JC, Cruiz RT. Response of Leaf Water Potential, Stomatal Resistance, and Leaf Rolling to Water Stress, Plant Physiology. 1980; 65:428-432.
32. Beck HE, Fettig S, Knake C, Hartig K, Bhattarai T. Specific and unspecific responses of plants to cold and drought stress. Journal of Biosciences. 2007; 32:501–510.
33. Tyagi M, Kayastha AM, Sinha B, The Role of Phenolics and Peroxidase in Resistance to Alternaria tritidna in Bread Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science. 1998; 181:29-34.
34. Menden B, Kohlhoff M, Moerschbacher BM. Wheat cells accumulate a syringyl-rich lignin during the hypersensitive resistance response. Phytochemistry. 2007; 68:513–520.
35. Sairam RK, Saxena DC. Oxidative Stress and Antioxidants in Wheat Genotypes: Possible Mechanism of Water Stress Tolerance. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science. 2000; 184:55-61.
36. Kuk YI, Shin JS, Burgos NR, Hwang TE, Han O, Ho Cho B, Jung S, Guh JO. Antioxidative Enzymes Offer Protection from Chilling Damage in Rice Plants. Crop Science. 2003; 43, 2109-2117.
37. Nacif AI, Mazzafera P. Effect of water and temperature stress on the content of active constituents of Hypericum brasiliense Choisy. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry. 2005; 43:241–248.
38. Cheruiyot EK, Mumera LM, NG’Etich WK, Hassanali A. Wachira F, Polyphenols as Drought Indicators for Drought Tolerance in Tea (Camellia sinensis L.). Biosciences Biotechnology and Biochemistry. 2007; 71: 2190-2197.
39 Jiang M, Zhang J. Water stress-induced abscisic acid accumulation triggers the increased generation of reactive oxygen species and up-regulates the activities of antioxidant enzymes in maize leaves. Journal of Experimental Botany. 2002; 53:2401-2410.
40 Nayyar H. Accumulation of osmolytes and osmotic adjustment in water-stressed wheat (Triticum aestivum) and maize (Zea mays) as affected by calcium and its antagonists. Environmental and Experimental Botany. 2003; 50:253-264.
41 Blum A, Ebercon A. Cell Membrane Stability as a Measure of Drought and Heat Tolerance in Wheat. Crop Science. 1981; 21:43-47.
42 Reynolds MP, Nagarajan S, Razzaque MA, Ageeb OAA. Heat tolerance: Application of Physiology in Wheat Breeding. In: Reynolds M.P., Ortiz-Monastereo J.I., McNab A., Eds. Application of Physiology in Wheat Breeding Mexico, DF CIMMYT: 124-135. 2001.
43 Earl HJ. Stomatal and non-stomatal restrictions to carbon assimilation in soybean (Glycine max) lines differing in water use efficiency. Environmental and Experimental Botany. 2002; 48:237-246.

How to Cite

El Keroumi, I. O. A., A. Dihazi, and K. Naamani. “Use of Morpho-Physiological Parameters and Biochemical Markers to Select Drought Tolerant Genotypes of Durum Wheat”. Journal of Plant Stress Physiology, vol. 5, pp. 01-07, doi:10.25081/jpsp.2019.v5.3700.



Research Article