Assessment of Variation in Morpho-Physiological Traits and Genetic Diversity in Relation to Submergence Tolerance of Five Indigenous Lowland Rice Landraces

doi:10.1016/j.rsci.2019.12.004

Abstract

Abstract:

The present study evaluated submergence responses in 88 lowland indigenous rice (Oryza sativa L.) landraces from Koraput, India, to identify submergence-tolerant rice genotypes. In pot experiments, variations in survival rate, shoot elongation, relative growth index, dry matter, chlorophyll, soluble sugar and starch contents were evaluated in two consecutive years under well-drained and completely submerged conditions. Principal component analysis showed that the first three axes contributed 96.820% of the total variation among the landraces, indicating wide variation between genotypes. Major traits such as survival rate, relative growth index, soluble sugar and starch contents appeared to be important determinants of phenotypic diversity among the landraces. Phenotypic coefficient of variance was higher than genotypic coefficient of variance for all the traits and all showed high heritability (90.38%-99.54%). Five rice landraces (Samudrabali, Basnamundi, Gadaba, Surudaka and Dokarakuji) were the most tolerant to submergence. When submerged for up to 14 d, Samudrabali, Basnamundi and Godoba were notable for having greater survival rates than a standard submergence tolerant variety FR13A, and also notable for elongating more vigorously and accumulating more biomass. These three landraces may therefore be especially useful in lowland rice growing areas that are affected by both moderate stagnant water and flash flooding. Molecular genotyping revealed that the submergence tolerance of Samudrabali, Basnamundi and Godoba is linked to the presence of one or more different Sub1 loci and it may well prove useful for breeding improved submergence tolerant rice varieties, thereby assising to improve yield stability in the rainfed lowland agro-ecosystem.

Key words: genetic variability, genotyping, indigenous rice, submergence tolerance, Sub1 gene

Barik Jijnasa, Kumar Vajinder, K. Lenka Sangram, Panda Debabrata. Assessment of Variation in Morpho-Physiological Traits and Genetic Diversity in Relation to Submergence Tolerance of Five Indigenous Lowland Rice Landraces[J]. Rice Science, 2020, 27(1): 32-43.

Figures/Tables 9

References 57

[1]	Afrin W, Nafis M H, Hossain M A, Islam M M, Hossain M A,.2018. Responses of rice (Oryza sativa L.) genotypes to different levels of submergence. Compt Rend Biol, 341(2): 85-96.
[2]	Angaji S A, Septiningsih E M, Mackill D J, Ismail A M.2010. QTLs associated with tolerance of flooding during germination in rice (Oryza sativa L.). Euphytica, 172(2): 159-168.
[3]	Arnon D I.1949. Copper enzymes in isolated chloroplasts, polyphenol oxidase inBeta vulgaris. Plant Physiol, 24(1): 1-15.
[4]	Arunachalam V, Chaudhury S S, Sarangi S K, Ray T, Mohanty B P, Mishra S.2006. Rising on Rice: The Story of Jeypore. [MS Thesis]. Chennai, India: Swaminathan Research Foundation.
[5]	Bailey-Serres J, Voesenek L A C J.2008. Flooding stress: Acclimations and genetic diversity.Annu Rev Plant Biol, 59: 313-339.
[6]	Bailey-Serres J, Fukao T, Ronald P, Ismail A, Heuer S, Mackill D.2010. Submergence tolerant rice:SUB1’s journey from landrace to modern cultivar. Rice, 3: 138-147.
[7]	Bhattacharjee S.2008. Calcium-dependent signaling pathway in heatinduced oxidative injury inAmaranthus lividus. Biol Plant, 52(1): 137-140.
[8]	Burton G W, Devane E H.1953. Estimating heritability in tall fescue (Festuca Arundinacea) from replicated clonal material 1. Agron J, 45(10): 478-481.
[9]	Colmer T D, Pedersen O.2008. Oxygen dynamics in submerged rice (Oryza sativa). New Phytol, 178(2): 326-334.
[10]	Dar M H, Chakravorty R, Waza S A, Sharma M, Zaidi N W, Singh A N, Singh U S, Ismail A M.2017. Transforming rice cultivation in flood prone coastal Odisha to ensure food and economic security.Food Sec, 9(4): 711-722.
[11]	Das K K, Sarkar R K, Ismail A M.2005. Elongation ability and non-structural carbohydrate levels in relation to submergence tolerance in rice.Plant Sci, 168(1): 131-136.
[12]	Das K K, Panda D, Sarkar R K, Reddy J N, Ismail A M.2009. Submergence tolerance in relation to variable floodwater conditions in rice.Environ Exp Bot, 66(3): 425-434.
[13]	Dey N, Biswas S, Chaudhuri T, Dey S, De M, Ghose T.2005. RAPD-based genetic diversity analysis of aromatic rice (Oryza sativa L.). Plant Cell Biotech Mol Biol, 6(3/4): 133-142.
[14]	Fukao T, Yeung E, Bailey-Serres J.2011. The submergence tolerance regulatorSUB1A mediates crosstalk between submergence and drought tolerance in rice. Plant Cell, 23: 412-427.
[15]	Goswami S, Kar R K, Paul A, Dey N.2017. Genetic potentiality of indigenous rice genotypes from Eastern India with reference to submergence tolerance and deepwater traits.Curr Plant Biol, 11(12): 23-32.
[16]	Guei R G, Sanni K A, Abamu F J, Fawole I.2005. Genetic diversity of rice (Oryza sativa L.). Agron Afr, 5: 17-28.
[17]	Hashimoto Z, Mori N, Kawamura M, Ishii T, Yoshida S, Ikegami M, Takumi S, Nakamura C.2004. Genetic diversity and phylogeny of Japanese sake-brewing rice as revealed by AFLP and nuclear and chloroplast SSR markers.Theor Appl Genet, 109(8): 1586-1596.
[18]	Hwang T Y, Sayama T, Takahashi M, Takada Y, Nakamoto Y, Funatsuki H, Hisano H, Sasamoto S, Sato S, Tabata S, Kono I, Hoshi M, Hanawa M, Yano C, Xia Z J, Harada K, Kitamura K, Ishimoto M.2009. High-density integrated linkage map based on SSR markers in soybean.DNA Res, 16(4): 213-225.
[19]	Iftekharuddaula K M, Ahmed H U, Ghosal S, Amin A, Moni Z R, Ray B P, Barman H N, Siddique M A, Collard B C Y, Septiningsih E M.2016. Development of early maturing submergence-tolerant rice varieties for Bangladesh.Field Crops Res, 190: 44-53.
[20]	Ismail A M, Singh U S, Singh S, Dar M H, Mackill D J.2013. The contribution of submergence-tolerant (Sub1) rice varieties to food security in flood-prone rainfed lowland areas in Asia.Field Crops Res, 152: 83-93.
[21]	Jackson M B, Waters I, Setter T, Greenway H.1987. Injury to rice plants caused by complete submergence: A contribution by ethylene.J Exp Bot, 38: 1826-1838.
[22]	Jackson M B, Ram P C.2003. Physiological and molecular basis of susceptibility and tolerance of rice plants to complete submergence.Ann Bot, 91: 227-241.
[23]	Johnson H W, Robinson H F, Comstock R E.1955. Estimates of genetic and environmental variability in soybeans.Agron J, 47(7): 314-318.
[24]	Kimura M, Crow J F.1964. The number of alleles that can be maintained in a finite population.Genetics, 49(4): 725-738.
[25]	Kuanar S R, Ray A, Sethi S K, Chattopadhyay K, Sarkar R K.2017. Physiological basis of stagnant flooding tolerance in rice.Rice Sci, 24(2): 73-84.
[26]	Mazaredo A M, Vergara B S.1982. Physiological differences in rice varieties tolerant and susceptible to complete submergence. In: Proceedings of the 1981 International Deepwater Rice Workshop. Manila, the Phillippines: International Rice Research Institute: 327-341.
[27]	Mohanty H K, Mallik S, Grover A.2000. Prospects of improving flooding tolerance in lowland rice varieties by conventional breeding and genetic engineering.Curr Sci, 78(2): 132-137.
[28]	Mohapatra M R, Acharya P, Sengupta S.2007. Variability and association analysis in Okra.Ind Agric, 51(1/2): 17-26.
[29]	Murray M G, Thompson W F.1980. Rapid isolation of high molecular weight plant DNA.Nucl Acids Res, 8(19): 4321-4325.
[30]	Neeraja C N, Maghirang-Rodriguez R, Pamplona A, Heuer S, Collard B C, Septiningsih E M, Vergara G, Sanchez D, Xu K, Ismail A M, Mackill D J.2007. A marker-assisted backcross approach for developing submergence-tolerance rice cultivars.Theor Appl Genet, 115(6): 767-776.
[31]	Nei M.1973. Analysis of gene diversity in subdivided populations.Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 70(12): 3321-3323.
[32]	Panaud O, Chen X, McCouch S R.1996. Development of microsatellite markers and characterization of simple sequence length polymorphism (SSLP) in rice (Oryza sativa L.). Mol Gen Genet, 252(5): 597-607.
[33]	Panda D, Rao D N, Sharma S G, Strasser R J, Sarkar R K.2006. Submergence effects on rice genotypes during seedling stage: Probing of submergence driven changes of photosystem II by chlorophyll a fluorescence induction O-J-I-P transients.Photosynthetica, 44: 69-75.
[34]	Panda D, Sharma S G, Sarkar R K.2008. Chlorophyll fluorescence parameters, CO2 photosynthetic rate and regeneration capacity as a result of complete submergence and subsequent re-emergence in rice (Oryza sativa L.). Aquat Bot, 88(2): 127-133.
[35]	Panda D, Sarkar R K.2012. Leaf photosynthetic activity and antioxidant defense associated withSub1 QTL in rice subjected to submergence and subsequent re-aeration. Rice Sci, 19(2): 108-116.
[36]	Patra B C, Dhua S R.2003. Agro-morphoogical diversity scenario in upland rice germplasm of Jeypore tract.Genet Resour Crop Evol, 50(8): 825-828.
[37]	Pradhan S K, Barik S R, Sahoo J, Pandit E, Nayak D K, Pani D R, Anandan A.2015. Comparison ofSub1 markers and their combinations for submergence tolerance and analysis of adaptation strategies of rice in rainfed lowland ecology. Compt Rend Biol, 338(10): 650-659.
[38]	Rahman B A N M R, Zhang J.2016. Flood and drought tolerance in rice: Opposite but may coexist.Food Energ Sec, 5(2): 76-88.
[39]	Ram P C, Singh B B, Singh A K, Ram P, Singh P N, Singh H P, Boamfa I, Harren F, Santosa E, Jackson M B, Setter T L, Reuss J, Wade L J, Singh V P, Singh R K.2002. Submergence tolerance in rainfed lowland rice physiological basis and prospects for cultivar improvement through marker-aided breeding.Field Crops Res, 76: 131-152.
[40]	Roy P S, Patnaik A, Rao G J N, Patnaik S S C, Chaudhury S S, Sharma S G.2016. Participatory and molecular marker assisted pure line selection for refinement of three premium rice landraces of Koraput, India.Agroecol Sust Food, 41(2): 167-185.
[41]	Samal R, Roy P S, Sahoo A, Kar M K, Patra B C, Marndi B C, Gundimeda J N R.2018. Morphological and molecular dissection of wild rice from eastern India suggests distinct speciation betweenO. rufipogon and O. nivara populations. Sci Rep, 8: 2773.
[42]	Sarkar R K, Reddy J N, Sharma S G, Ismail A M.2006. Physiological basis of submergence tolerance in rice and implications for crop improvement.Curr Sci, 91: 899-906.
[43]	Sarkar R K, Panda D, Reddy J N, Patnaik S S C, Mackill D J, Ismail A M.2009. Performance of submergence tolerant rice (Oryza sativa) genotypes carrying the Sub1 quantitative trait locus under stressed and non-stressed natural field conditions. Ind J Agric Sci, 79(11): 876-883.
[44]	Sarkar R K, Bhattacharjee B.2011. Rice genotype withSUB1 QTL differ in submergence tolerance, elongation ability during submergence and re-generation growth at re-emergence. Rice, 5: 7.
[45]	Septiningsih E M, Pamplona A M, Sanchez D L, Neeraja C N, Vergara G V, Heuer S, Ismail A M, Mackill D J.2009. Development of submergence-tolerant rice cultivars: TheSub1 locus and beyond. Ann Bot, 103(2): 151-160.
[46]	Septiningsih E M, Sanchez D L, Singh N, Sendon P M D, Pamplona A M, Heuer S, Mackill D J.2012. Identifying novel QTLs for submergence tolerance in rice cultivars IR72 and Madabaru.Theor Appl Genet, 124(5): 867-874.
[47]	Septiningsih E M, Collard B C Y, Heuer S, Bailey-Serres J, Ismail A M, Mackill D J.2013. Applying genomics tools for breeding submergence tolerance in rice. In: Varshney R K, Tuberosa R. Translational Genomics for Crop Breeding. New York, USA: Wiley-Blackwell: 9-30.
[48]	Shrestha S, Brueck H, Asch F.2012. Chlorophyll index, photochemical reflectance index and chlorophyll fluorescence measurements of rice leaves supplied with different N levels.J Photochem Photobiol B: Biol, 113: 7-13.
[49]	Singh A, Septiningsih E M, Balyan H S, Singh N K, Rai V.2017. Genetics, physiological mechanisms and breeding of flood-tolerant rice (Oryza sativa L.). Plant Cell Physiol, 58(2): 185-197.
[50]	Singh R, Singh Y, Xalaxo S, Verulkar S, Yadav N, Singh S, Singh N, Prasad K S N, Kondayya K, Rao P V R, Rani M G, Anuradha T, Suraynarayana Y, Sharma P C, Krishnamurthy S L, Sharma S K, Dwivedi J L, Singh A K, Singh P K, Nilanjay, Singh N K, Kumar R, Chetia S K, Ahmad T, Rai M, Perraju P, Pande A, Singh D N, Mandal N P, Reddy J N, Singh O N, Katara J L, Maradi B, Swain P, Sarkar R K, Singh D P, Mohapatra T, Padmawathi G, Ram T, Kathiresan R M, Paramsivam K, Nadarajan S, Thirumeni S, Nagarajan M, Singh A K, Vikram P, Kumwe A, Septiningshih E, Singh U S, Ismail A M, Mackill D, Singh N K,.2016. From QTL to variety-harnessing the benefits of QTLs for drought, flood and salt tolerance in mega rice varieties of India through a multi-institutional network.Plant Sci, 242: 278-287.
[51]	Singh S, Mackill D J, Ismail A M.2014. Physiological basis of tolerance to complete submergence in rice involves genetic factors in addition to the SUB1 gene. AoB Plants, 6: plu060.
[52]	Sinha A K, Mishra P K.2013. Morphology based multivariate analysis of phenotypic diversity of landraces of rice (Oryza sativa L.) of Bankura district of West Bengal. J Crop Weed, 9(2): 115-121.
[53]	Steel R G, Torrie J H, Dickey D A.1997. Principles and Procedures of Statistics: A biological Approach. McGraw-Hill.
[54]	Toojinda T, Siangliw M, Tragoonrung S, Vanavichit A.2003. Molecular genetics of submergence tolerance in rice: QTL analysis of key traits.Ann Bot, 91(2): 243-253.
[55]	Xu K, Xu X, Fukao T, Canalas P, Maghirang-Rodriguez R, Heuer S, Ismail A M, Bailey-Serres J, Ronald P C, Mackill D J.2006. Sub1A is an ethylene responsive-factor-like gene that confers submergence tolerance to rice. Nature, 442: 705-708.
[56]	Yeh F C, Boyle T J B.1997. Population genetic analysis of codominant and dominant markers and quantitative traits.Belgian J Bot, 129: 157-163.
[57]	Yoshida S, Forno D A, Cock J H, Gomez K A.1976. Laboratory Manual for Physiological Studies of Rice. Manila, the Phillippines: International Rice Research Institute: 14-46.

Parameter	Source of variation
Parameter	Variety (df = 89)	Treatment (df = 1)	Variety × treatment (df = 89)
SPAD index	3 156** (21.4%)	8 936** (60.7%)	2 229** (15.1%)
Chlorophyll	36.08** (22.2%)	108.40** (66.8%)	16.25** (10.0%)
Dry mass	1223** (19.4%)	4 246** (67.5%)	585* (9.3%)
Soluble sugar	10 405** (21.8%)	28 407** (59.5%)	8 357** (17.5%)
Starch	36 634** (43.8%)	38 310** (45.8%)	7 819* (9.3%)

Parameter	Source of variation
Parameter	Variety (df = 89)	Treatment (df = 1)	Variety × treatment (df = 89)
SPAD index	3 156** (21.4%)	8 936** (60.7%)	2 229** (15.1%)
Chlorophyll	36.08** (22.2%)	108.40** (66.8%)	16.25** (10.0%)
Dry mass	1223** (19.4%)	4 246** (67.5%)	585* (9.3%)
Soluble sugar	10 405** (21.8%)	28 407** (59.5%)	8 357** (17.5%)
Starch	36 634** (43.8%)	38 310** (45.8%)	7 819* (9.3%)

Trait	Range	Mean ± SE	σ²_G	σ²_P	GCV (%)	PCV (%)	h² (%)	GA	GAM
Relative growth index (%)	33.9-95.9	60.5 ± 1.2	200.100	201.700	23.304	23.397	99.21	29.024	47.8
Survival rate (%)	5.0-98.0	33.8 ± 6.7	433.050	479.150	62.870	66.131	90.38	40.754	123.1
Shoot elongation (%)	10.5-97.4	67.2 ± 1.6	560.400	563.000	36.476	36.560	99.54	48.653	75.0
SPAD	3.4-31.1	23.9 ± 0.7	16.910	17.335	17.206	17.421	97.55	8.367	35.0
Chlorophll (mg/g)	0.14-2.00	1.18 ± 0.10	0.192	0.195	37.134	37.423	98.46	0.896	75.9
Dry mass (%)	5.3-18.6	13.9 ± 0.7	6.235	6.715	17.964	18.643	92.85	4.957	35.7
Soluble sugar (mg/g)	8.2-46.2	31.4 ± 0.8	56.400	57.150	23.917	24.076	98.69	15.369	48.9
Starch (mg/g)	20.3-74.2	44.73 ± 0.98	200.290	201.250	31.640	31.715	99.52	29.084	65.0

Trait	Range	Mean ± SE	σ²_G	σ²_P	GCV (%)	PCV (%)	h² (%)	GA	GAM
Relative growth index (%)	33.9-95.9	60.5 ± 1.2	200.100	201.700	23.304	23.397	99.21	29.024	47.8
Survival rate (%)	5.0-98.0	33.8 ± 6.7	433.050	479.150	62.870	66.131	90.38	40.754	123.1
Shoot elongation (%)	10.5-97.4	67.2 ± 1.6	560.400	563.000	36.476	36.560	99.54	48.653	75.0
SPAD	3.4-31.1	23.9 ± 0.7	16.910	17.335	17.206	17.421	97.55	8.367	35.0
Chlorophll (mg/g)	0.14-2.00	1.18 ± 0.10	0.192	0.195	37.134	37.423	98.46	0.896	75.9
Dry mass (%)	5.3-18.6	13.9 ± 0.7	6.235	6.715	17.964	18.643	92.85	4.957	35.7
Soluble sugar (mg/g)	8.2-46.2	31.4 ± 0.8	56.400	57.150	23.917	24.076	98.69	15.369	48.9
Starch (mg/g)	20.3-74.2	44.73 ± 0.98	200.290	201.250	31.640	31.715	99.52	29.084	65.0

Parameter	PC1	PC2	PC3	PC4	PC5	PC6	PC7	PC8
Relative growth index	0.336	0.070	0.879	-0.277	0.091	-0.042	-0.151	-0.011
Survival rate (%)	0.726	0.390	-0.431	-0.348	0.080	-0.085	0.003	-0.003
Shoot elongation (%)	-0.421	0.901	0.097	0.012	-0.033	-0.033	0.010	-0.003
SPAD	0.085	0.067	-0.001	0.454	0.879	0.012	-0.094	0.002
Chlorophyll	0.010	0.005	0.010	0.010	-0.010	-0.026	-0.009	0.999
Dry mass	0.068	0.009	0.138	0.016	0.089	-0.013	0.984	0.007
Soluble sugar	0.231	0.124	0.056	0.288	-0.192	0.899	0.000	0.015
Starch	0.342	0.109	0.104	0.716	-0.407	-0.425	-0.020	-0.027
Eigen value	5.596	0.796	0.605	0.445	0.331	0.105	0.080	0.040
Variance (%)	72.965	18.040	5.815	1.582	0.928	0.632	0.034	0.004