1. Introduction
Globally, and notably, in developing nations of South Asia, such as Pakistan, water shortage as a result of climatic change has become a significant challenge to sustainable crop production [1]. Droughts in the agriculture sector pose a substantial threat to crop failure and the resulting food shortages [2,3,4]. The physiological and biochemical activities of plants, including the photosynthetic rate, osmotic potential, turgor pressure and severe membrane damage, are negatively affected by water stress [5]. It is feasible to maximize agricultural productivity by assessing and minimizing drought’s impacts on crops [6].
Due to its high mineral content, improved cholesterol metabolism and antioxidant characteristics, lettuce (Lactuca sativa) is one of the most popular vegetables. It has a cultivation area of 1.3 million hectares and a global production of 29 million tons, making it one of the most widely cultivated green vegetables [7]. Traditional cultivation techniques include hydroponic systems, greenhouses and nurseries, but open-field agriculture is also prevalent [8,9]. Both the plant genotype and growth conditions, such as temperature, irrigation, nutrient solution and light quality, can impact lettuce quality, notably in terms of phytochemistry and visual appearance. In addition, effective irrigation management is intimately linked to future production and the availability of healthy soil, which, in turn, affects the yield of horticulture products [10,11,12]. Therefore, timely drought mitigation strategies are required to safeguard food production in the face of a changing climate.
A recent study suggests that selenium could be a viable mitigating approach [13]. Although it is not essential for plant growth, it is beneficial for plant development [14]. In addition, it increases the photosynthetic capacity, maximum quantum yield of photosystems and photochemical quenching of a variety of plant species [15]. This element may also protect plants from oxidative stress by activating ROS-scavenging pathways during drought stress [16]. Selenium has multiple positive benefits and promotes growth at low concentrations [17]. Numerous researchers have reported that selenium induces drought resistance in plants by limiting water evaporation [18], promoting the synthesis of carotenoids and chlorophyll [19,20] and improving proline accumulation [13]. Selenium supplementation increases drought-induced defense responses in soybeans by enhancing proline accumulation, superoxide dismutase, catalase and glutathione reductase activities, as well as the accumulation of non-enzymatic antioxidants (ascorbate and glutathione). The significance of selenium in increasing the photosynthetic capacity of drought-stressed potatoes has been demonstrated by research on the effect of selenium on drought stress [21]. In soybeans, Galic et al. [22] showed that selenium mitigates drought stress effects by limiting lipid peroxidation and improving osmolyte concentration. Selenium enhances the antioxidative capacity of drought-stressed grapeseed, resulting in low ROS accumulation and lipid peroxidation [23].
The bioavailability of soil-applied Se is lower than that of foliar-applied due to some natural processes such as the immobilization of Fe-Mn oxide [24], redox reactions [25] and losses due to leaching [26]. Therefore, soil application of Se fertilizer is considered disadvantageous due to the lower bioavailability. Foliar- or soil-applied Se can improve the growth and yield of plants; however, foliar-applied Se is more effective than soil applications [13]. Therefore, it becomes necessary to find out some economical and eco-friendly approaches to limit the negative effects of drought stress in lettuce. Based on a literature review, it was found that no study has been conducted yet to investigate the effectiveness of foliar-applied Se at ideal concentrations for lettuce under drought stress conditions. So, the present study is carried out to investigate the protective role of foliage-applied Se in mitigating the adverse effects of an irrigation water deficit (drought stress) by improving the growth characteristics, physiological and biochemical attributes and activity of antioxidant defense system components in lettuce. In addition, this investigation also assesses potential improvements in plant growth, yield and yield quality under drought stress through Se application.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Research Location, Experimental Design and Treatments
A pot experiment was carried out in a greenhouse at the Environmental Science Department, The University of Lahore (lat: 31.3881° N and long: 74.2413° E), Pakistan. Experimental treatments consisted of mainly two factors: drought stress D1 = control (85% ± 5% field capacity) and D2 = drought stress (35 ± 5% field capacity), and foliar-applied selenium levels, 0, 3, 6 and 9 mg L−1), employing a completely randomized design (CRD) under a factorial arrangement (every replication consisted of three pots per treatment). Total number of pots were (2 × 4 × 3 = 24).
2.2. Experiment Setup and Maintenance
Clay loam soil with pH, 8.05; EC, 1.31 dSm−1; available N, 0.036%; available phosphorus, 26.3 ppm; exchangeable potassium, 315 ppm; and organic matter, 0.92% was used in this experiment to fill the pots (25 top diameter and 23 cm height) with 5 kg of soil. The seeds were decontaminated with 0.1% (w/v) sodium dodecyl solution and then thoroughly washed using sterilized deionized water. Eight seeds were sown in each pot, and thinning was carried out to maintain five plants when shoots were about 5 cm tall, leaving only the most viable shoots after 15 days of germination. Tap water was used as source of irrigation at field capacity level on a daily basis. Hoagland’s solution (50%) was used as a source of nutrients and applied at 500 mL per week per pot. After an acclimatization period of 15 days, drought treatments were applied. Drought stress was maintained through field capacity at desired level, and the field capacity (FC) was calculated by using the equation: FC (%) = water added − water leached. However, during the experiment, pots were weighed at the time of irrigation to maintain the desired soil water level (35% FC) by adding an appropriate amount of water. In each replicate pot, water losses were compensated by applying a measured amount of water to prevail the required field capacity. For each treatment, soil moisture contents were measured on a daily basis by using a soil moisture meter (TZS-W). After 10 days of complete drought stress, foliar application of Se (0, 3, 6 and 9 mg L−1) was conducted using sodium selenite (Na2SeO3) as the Se source. Two sprays were used with a 10-day interval, using 500 mL of solution as per treatment. After 15 days of foliar application treatment, data for morphological, biochemical and physiological attributes were recorded.
2.3. Measurement of Growth and Biomass Attributes
Two plants from each replication were collected, and their roots and shoots were separated for the measurements of growth variables. The number of leaves was counted antecedent to the division of plants into shoots and roots. A scale was used to measure the height of the plant as well as the length and width of the leaf. The leaf area was determined by multiplying the leaf length by its width. The fresh weight of the root and leaves was then determined using an analytical balance. To estimate the dry weight of the roots and leaves discreetly, they were oven-dried at 70 °C for 48 h.
2.4. Physio-Biochemical Attributes
To test the electrolyte leakage (EL) level, a small piece of leaf was dipped in purified deionized water. The sample’s first EL measurement was obtained following a 2 h incubation at 32 °C, and its second EL reading was obtained following a 20 min incubation at 121 °C. To calculate the EL level of samples, the following formula was used: EL = (EC1/EC2) × 100. Leaf samples (5) were crushed in a test tube with 85% acetone (v/v) for 24 h and were placed in dark conditions for pigment extraction. After centrifugation for 10 min at 4000× g at 4 °C, the absorbance was calculated at 470, 647 and 664.5 nm using a spectrophotometer (Halo DB-20/DB-20S, Barnoldswick, UK), the value in the supernatant was measured and then, according to Lichtenthaler [27] method, the contents of chlorophyll a, b and carotenoids were determined. The total chlorophyll concentrations were measured by the addition of chlorophyll a and b. All the photosynthetic attributes were measured from uppermost leaves with a portable photosynthesis system (infra-red gas analyzer) between 9:00 am and 12:00 pm on a sunny day.
2.5. Enzymatic Antioxidants Activities and Water-Related Attributes
The supernatant extracted from 1 g of lettuce leaves with 50 mM phosphate buffer was centrifuged (~15,000× g for 10 min) for determination of enzyme activity. By following the procedure reported by Velikova et al. [28], peroxidase (POD) activity was determined. Catalase activity (CAT) and superoxide dismutase activity (SOD) were determined according to Aebi [29] and Beauchamp and Fridovich [30] protocols. The method of Turner and Kramer [31] was employed for RWC measurement, and the following formula was used for the calculation: RWC = [(FW − DW)/(TW − DW)] × 100, where FW—fresh weight; TW—turgid weight; DW—dry weight.
2.6. Osmolyte Attributes
A fresh leaf sample (0.5 g) was collected and ground with a buffer (pH value ~7.2) with protease inhibitors of 1 μM, along with saline phosphate buffer. In 1 L of deionized water, the dissolution of 1.37 mM NaCl, 2 mM KH2PO4, 2.7 mM KCl and 10 mM Na2HPO4 was carried out for the preparation of the saline buffer. By adding HCl to this solution, the pH of the buffer was adjusted. After that, the solution was autoclaved and centrifuged for 5 min for the separation of the supernatant. Proline contents were determined by following the protocols of Maehly and Chance [32], while soluble sugars and soluble proteins were determined by a method defined by Giannakoula et al. [33] and Bradford assay [34], respectively.
2.7. Statistical Analysis
Collected data was tested using Fisher’s Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) technique. The highest significant difference (HSD) test (5% probability level) was applied for comparison of means. Regression and correlation analyses were computed by using Minitab-19 statistical software. All statistical computations were performed with Statistix software, version 10 (Analytical Software, Tallahassee, FL, USA), and for the graphical work, Microsoft Excel (2013 version) was employed in this study.
3. Results
3.1. Growth Attributes
Different rates of selenium and drought stress significantly affected (p ≤ 0.01) the growth attributes of the lettuce plants. Drought stress decreased the root length (28.12%), shoot length (22.06%), number of leaves (34.81%) and head weight (17.35%), as compared to the control. Less variation in growth attributes was found among the foliage-applied selenium treatments, with a significant increase in drought stress treatment only when compared to the control. In terms of growth characteristics under drought stress, the decreasing pattern was control conditions > drought conditions, and for the selenium treatments, 6 mg/L > 9 mg/L > 3 mg/L > 0 mg/L (Figure 1).
3.2. Fresh and Dry Biomass
The fresh and dry biomass of lettuce plants was significantly affected by various levels of selenium treatments, drought stress and their interaction. Drought stress reduced root fresh weight (19.23%), shoot fresh weight (21.28%), plant fresh weight (21.09%), root dry weight (26.15%) and shoot dry weight (32.82%) in comparison with the control. Maximum root fresh weight (6.70 and 5.90 g), shoot fresh weight (67.08 and 58.36 g), plant fresh weight (73.78 and 64.26 g), root dry weight (3.94 and 3.04 g) and shoot dry weight (11.11 and 7.83 g) were observed under control conditions (non-drought) and drought conditions, respectively, where the foliar application of selenium at a rate of 6 mg/L was performed on lettuce plants (Figure 2).
3.3. Biochemical and Water-Related Attributes
Drought-induced stress negatively impacted the biochemical and water-related characteristics of the lettuce plants; however, the foliar application of selenium significantly (p ≤ 0.01) improved the biochemical and water-related attributes of lettuce plants. Drought stress decreased chlorophyll a (21.80%), chlorophyll b (27.58%), total chlorophyll (23.95%), carotenoid (20.54%) and relative water (19.49%) contents and increased electrolyte leakage (20.67%), as compared to the control. The foliar application of selenium at 6 mg/L decreased electrolyte leakage and improved the water status and other biochemical attributes of lettuce plants under drought stress (Figure 3).
3.4. Physiological Attributes
Drought stress decreased the photosynthetic rate (34.83%), transpiration rate (26.70%) and stomatal conductance (25.00%), as compared to the control. The maximum physiological values were observed when the foliar application of selenium at a rate of 6 mg/L was applied to lettuce plants. While the minimum photosynthetic rate (5.63 and 2.74 µmol CO2 m−2 s−1), transpiration rate (4.29 and 2.11 mol H2O m−2 s−1) and stomatal conductance (0.42 and 0.24 mol H2O m−2 s−1) were observed under control conditions (non-drought) and drought conditions, respectively, where the foliar application of distilled water (selenium = 0 mg/L) was performed on lettuce plants (Figure 4).
3.5. Enzymatic Antioxidant Activity and Lipid Peroxidation Attributes
The foliar application of selenium treatments under drought stress affected the activity of enzymatic antioxidants of lettuce plants. Limited water stress marked an enhancement in the SOD, POD and CAT activities. Less variation in antioxidant enzyme attributes was found among the foliage-applied treatments, with a significant increase in drought stress treatment only when compared to the control. An observed decreasing pattern, in terms of the activities of antioxidant enzymes, for drought stress was drought conditions > control conditions, and for the selenium treatments, 0 mg/L > 9 mg/L > 3 mg/L > 6 mg/L (Figure 5).
3.6. Osmolyte Attributes
Drought stress increased the proline contents (62.69%) and decreased the soluble sugars (30.60%), as compared to the control. Maximum soluble sugars (15.37 and 11.44 mg g-1 FW) at 0, 75, under control conditions (non-drought) and drought conditions, respectively, were observed when the foliar application of selenium at a rate of 6 mg/L was performed on lettuce plants (Figure 6).
3.7. Correlation Matrix
All the studied attributes were subjected to correlation analysis. The activities of enzymatic antioxidants, proline contents and electrolyte leakage were found to be negatively correlated with chlorophyll content, leaf dry weight, root dry weight and RWC. Positive correlations of enzymatic activities were noted with electrolyte leakage and proline content. Chlorophyll concentration was observed to be positively correlated with the measured parameters such as leaf dry weight, root dry weight, root length, shoot length and RWC (Table 1).
3.8. Regression Analysis
Growth, biomass, physio-biochemical and water-related parameters were also tested using regression analysis (Figure 7). The R2 values of regressions were RWC and root dry weight, 95.43%; electrolyte leakage and total chlorophyll contents, 51.63%; plant fresh weight and SOD, 51.70%; root dry weight and gs association, 82.46%; soluble sugars and proline contents, 53.85%; and carotenoid contents and proline contents, 50.59%.
3.9. Principal Component Analysis
Principal component analysis (PCA) was carried out to identify the grouping pattern among the measured variables based on agronomic and yield-related characteristics. The major cluster of parameters related to better growth and photosynthetic attributes plots in the positive PC1 quadrant. This group indicates a normal-to-healthy environment for plant development in terms of drought conditions and selenium levels. This includes attributes such as RFW, carotenoids, gs, chlorophyll b, soluble sugar and others. The second cluster plots in the negative sides of the PC1 and PC2 axis consist of SOD, CAT, EL, POD and proline. This cluster is classified as the enzymatic and osmolyte attributes of the lettuce plant, which are associated with stress-related responses. These attributes point to the generation of biomolecules when a plant is subjected to higher stress levels. The arrows show the increasing concentrations of selenium (Se) from the first group of plant enzymatic attributes towards the grouping of better growth and photosynthetic attributes (Figure 8).
4. Discussion
Under changing climatic scenarios, environmental extremes such as water scarcity (drought), salt stress and extreme temperature cause significant variations in physiological, molecular, morphological and biochemical processes in plants [35]. The growth, fresh and dry biomass of lettuce plants were significantly affected due to drought stress in our study. It was observed that when drought stress is applied, the cell size is decreased, and it also reduced the growth of plants [36]. Due to limited water flow from the xylem to the adjacent cells, which lowered cell elongation, water-limiting conditions lead to impaired cell elongation [37]. The availability of assimilates and the turgor pressure often determine how much the leaf expands [38]. Poor growth is caused by drought because it hinders cell elongation and mitosis [39,40]. According to Zhang et al. [41], the other major symptoms of drought stress include a lower number of leaves, branches twigs, and stems, the inhibition of root and shoot growth and decreased biomass. The application of mineral solutes at an appropriate level causes an improvement in the morphological and growth attributes of the lettuce plants by improving the negative impacts of drought stress [42,43]. In the current study, it was noted that after the exogenous application of Se in stressed plants, enhanced leaf area, improved growth and maximum fresh and dry biomass were noticed. It was observed that to enhance the cellular division of plant cells and for the elongation of cells, Se acts as a regulator compound [44] and can be considered a protective approach in order to cope with drought stress [45]. These results correlate with the findings of Karimi et al. [46], who documented that application of Se boosted the area of leaf in seedlings of wheat in stressed plants and non-stressed plants. These results may point to the simulative effect of Se application in enhancing root length and activity, leading to an increase in the plant’s ability to absorb and move water and nutrients from the soil [47].
Photosynthetic attributes have high sensitivity to any biotic and abiotic stresses [48]. Studies have revealed that drought stress decreased porphobilinogen deaminase activity, which decreased the chlorophyll contents [49]. In the current study, electrolyte leakage (EL), which is a true indicator of stress sensitivity, was greater in drought-treated lettuce plants, as compared to the control. The overproduction and accumulation of ROS may be responsible for the improved lipid peroxidation, protein deprivation and severely hampered growth because of damaged DNA [50]. The present findings reveal that drought stress conditions significantly affected the photosynthetic attributes of lettuce plants compared with the control. The decreased photosynthetic rate in drought-stressed conditions is influenced due to the decreased stomatal conductivity and transpiration rate [51]. High stomatal conductivity and transpiration rates in tomatoes due to drought stress increase leaf cooling, giving improved defense for chlorophyll and retaining a relatively improved photosynthetic rate [52,53]. Due to drought stress, the reduction in the solubility of CO2 to O2 takes place in the tissues of leaves because of the lesser availability of CO2 for the substrate [54]. In this study, Se enhanced the chlorophyll and carotenoid contents under drought-stressed and control conditions. Similar observations were also noticed in barley cultivars under drought stress regimes, possibly by protecting the chlorophyll pigments from oxidative damage through strengthening the level of carotenoids [55]. Foliar-applied Se enhances the defense system of a plant in order to cope with the damage caused by stress-induced ROS in the process of drought stress, which will, sequentially, assist in enhancing chlorophyll and carotenoid contents by limiting electrolyte leakage [46]. The enhanced photosynthetic activity and chlorophyll content in lettuce might be due to the better resistance to drought stress [56]. The outcomes of the present study are in line with the findings of Lanza et al. [57] and Skrypnik et al. [58], who found that leaf maturation, throughout which chloroplasts combined with chlorophylls break down, could be delayed with the application of Se, due to which photosynthesis, transpiration rate and enhanced photosynthetic efficiency can be achieved [59]. The increased size of chloroplasts and the maximum number of grana in the leaves might be due to foliar-applied Se, which enhances photosynthetic capacities in crop plants [60]. The optimal exogenous supplementation of selenium increased chlorophyll pigment and its biosynthesizing enzyme activity in plant tissues even in cases of extreme drought stress by reducing ROS production, which is partially responsible for the quenching of photosynthetic pigments [61].
The formation of numerous non-enzymatic and enzymatic ROS-scavenging and detoxification systems increases the ability of tolerant plants against the injurious effects of ROS [62]. Mukarram et al. [63] observed that the enzymatic antioxidant displayed a preliminary increase under drought stress. The activities were also condition-dependent due to their tolerance or susceptibility to several crop types, stages in the growth process and the growing season [64]. An antioxidant system in plants is formed by the usage of the enzymes POD, CAT and SOD to eradicate the excess of ROS induced by stress, thus defending the cells from the lethal effects of oxidation reactions [65]. CAT, SOD and the antioxidants POD are recognized for the dismutation of hydrogen peroxide to water and molecular oxygen in cells [30]. It was observed that the activities of the eliminating enzymes of ROS changed meaningfully in lettuce plants under drought-stressed and control conditions. However, during normal growth conditions, without Se, plants showed greater enzymatic antioxidant activity when compared to foliar-applied Selenium plants. This inexperienced parameter of CAT activity has been testified in numerous revisions [66].
Drought stress led to preventing the integration of CO2 and reducing the integrated supply in lettuce plants, consequently decreasing soluble sugars and increasing the proline contents in the lettuce plants [67]. Moreover, foliar-applied Se plants showed an improvement in enzymatic activities during drought stress compared to normal conditions. This enhancement may be related to selenium’s essential function in promoting the gene expression in charge of the antioxidant defense system, which, in turn, raised the SOD, CAT and POD activities and improved the tolerance of drought stress in plants [57]. Furthermore, Se led to an improved sugar yield and decreased proline contents, especially in improving lettuce as a storage sink for nutrient elements, for example, carbon and nitrogen, and as a scavenger for free radicals, resulting in decreased proline [68]. The activation of the enzymes that aid in the detoxification of O−2, H2O2 and lipid peroxidation, in terms of membrane leakage, and reduce the generation of a very toxic OH may also be attributed to the substantially antagonistic influences of the Se element due to ROS overproduction [69]. Increased RWC concentration has been discovered to be directly connected to increased soluble sugar content, which also boosts plant tolerance to drought-stressed circumstances [54]. The optimal level (dose) and suitable Se salt is beneficial for improving abiotic stress tolerance in crop plants. However, higher levels cause toxicity and limit plant growth and development [57].
5. Conclusions
Drought stress reduced the growth, phenological and biomass-related traits and enhanced electrolyte leakage in lettuce plants. The exogenous application of Se in an appropriate amount promoted growth and biochemical attributes by decreasing electrolyte leakage and improving the enzymatic antioxidant defense system of lettuce plants. Plants exposed to Se under drought conditions had enhanced RWC, enzymatic activity, soluble sugars, photosynthetic pigment levels and fresh and dry biomass, as compared to control plants. In response to drought stress, lettuce plants produce more antioxidants, which counteracts the negative effects of drought stress on biomass accumulation. Based on the findings of this study, it can be concluded that foliar Se supplementation is more effective at minimizing the adverse effects of irrigation water shortage situations. We recommend conducting field studies on water quality and confirming the negative effects of selenium on lettuce growth and yield under multiple abiotic stresses. Prior to making a commercial recommendation, economic factors must be taken into account.
Conceptualization, Q.u.Z., A.A. and B.T.; methodology, B.T. and K.A.; software, K.S.; validation, A.A., K.S. and Q.u.Z.; formal analysis, B.T.; investigation, Q.u.Z.; resources, B.T.; data curation, B.T. and T.M.; writing—original draft preparation, A.A., H.M.A. and K.A.; writing—review and editing, M.T.K., T.M. and Q.u.Z.; visualization, K.S. and M.T.K.; supervision, Q.u.Z.; project administration, H.M.A. and Q.u.Z.; funding acquisition, H.M.A. and A.A. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Not applicable.
Not applicable.
Not applicable.
The authors would like to extend their sincere appreciation to the Researchers Supporting Project number (RSP2023R123), King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
This article has been republished with a minor correction to an Academic Editor’s name. The editorial office conducted a post publication peer review of the article due to concerns about a conflict of interest between the original academic editor and the authors. The editorial office invited a new Editorial Board Member, Jianming Cai, who does not have a COI, to examine the peer review process. The post peer review process confirmed that the peer review process was appropriate. This change does not affect the scientific content of the article.
| Se | Selenium |
| POD | Peroxidase Activity |
| SOD | Superoxide Dismutase activity |
| CAT | Catalase Activity |
| FW | Fresh Weight |
| DW | Dry Weight |
| TW | Turgid Weight |
| EC | Electrical Conductivity |
| RWC | Relative Water Contents |
| HSD | Highest Significant Difference |
Footnotes
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
Figure 1 Growth and yield parameters of lettuce treated with varying concentrations of foliar selenium (0, 3, 6 and 9 mg L−1) under normal (85% ± 5%) and limited water regime circumstances (35% ± 5%). The uppercase letters in the bars denote significant differences between treatment means at p ≤ 0.05 (Tukey’s HSD); the values represent the means with standard deviation (SD) and were replicated three times.
Figure 2 Biomass attributes (fresh and dry) parameters of lettuce treated with varying concentrations of foliar selenium (0, 3, 6 and 9 mg L−1) under normal (85% ± 5%) and limited water regime circumstances (35% ± 5%). The uppercase letters in the bars denote significant differences between treatment means at p ≤ 0.05 (Tukey’s HSD); the values represent the means with standard deviation (SD) and were replicated three times.
Figure 3 Biochemical parameters of lettuce treated with varying concentrations of foliar selenium (0, 3, 6 and 9 mg L−1) under normal (85% ± 5%) and limited water regime circumstances (35% ± 5%). The uppercase letters in the bars denote significant differences between treatment means at p ≤ 0.05 (Tukey’s HSD); the values represent the means with standard deviation (SD) and were replicated three times.
Figure 4 Photosynthetic parameters of lettuce treated with varying concentrations of foliar selenium (0, 3, 6 and 9 mg L−1) under normal (85% ± 5%) and limited water regime circumstances (35% ± 5%). The uppercase letters in the bars denote significant differences between treatment means at p ≤ 0.05 (Tukey’s HSD); the values represent the means with standard deviation (SD) and were replicated three times.
Figure 5 Enzymatic activities of lettuce treated with varying concentrations of foliar selenium (0, 3, 6 and 9 mg L−1) under normal (85% ± 5%) and limited water regime circumstances (35% ± 5%). The uppercase letters in the bars denote significant differences between treatment means at p ≤ 0.05 (Tukey’s HSD); the values represent the means with standard deviation (SD) and were replicated three times.
Figure 6 Osmolyte parameters of lettuce treated with varying concentrations of foliar selenium (0, 3, 6, and 9 mg L−1) under normal (85% ± 5%) and limited water regime circumstances (35% ± 5%). The uppercase letters in the bars denote significant differences between treatment means at p ≤ 0.05 (Tukey’s HSD); the values represent the means with standard deviation (SD) and were replicated three times.
Figure 7 Scatter plots of various measured parameters with regression coefficient values.
Figure 8 A graphical presentation of principal component analysis showing loadings (lines) and scores (circles) plots of various agronomic attributes of lettuce plants under drought and selenium stress conditions. Variability in measured attributes accounted for 92.6% variability.
Pearson correlation matrix of studied attributes of lettuce in response to various concentrations of foliar-applied selenium (0, 3, 6 and 9 mg L−1) under normal and limited water regimes conditions.
| Variables | A | CAT | CAR | E | EL | HW | LA | PFW | POD | PRO | RDW | RL | RWC | SDW | SL | SOD | SS | T CHL |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CAT | −0.75 ** | |||||||||||||||||
| CAR | 0.93 ** | −0.68 ** | ||||||||||||||||
| E | 0.96 ** | −0.78 ** | 0.92 ** | |||||||||||||||
| EL | −0.74 ** | 0.85 ** | −0.67 ** | −0.79 ** | ||||||||||||||
| HW | 0.94 ** | −0.73 ** | 0.94 ** | 0.93 ** | −0.73 ** | |||||||||||||
| LA | 0.95 ** | −0.72 ** | 0.87 ** | 0.91 ** | −0.72 ** | 0.90 ** | ||||||||||||
| PFW | 0.95 ** | −0.75 ** | 0.94 ** | 0.95 ** | −0.73 ** | 0.98 ** | 0.91 ** | |||||||||||
| POD | −0.74 ** | 0.88 ** | −0.69 ** | −0.79 ** | 0.91 ** | −0.75 ** | −0.69 ** | −0.74 ** | ||||||||||
| PRO | −0.76 ** | 0.91 ** | −0.71 ** | −0.80 ** | 0.93 ** | −0.77 ** | −0.75 ** | −0.75 ** | 0.94 ** | |||||||||
| RDW | 0.96 ** | −0.74 ** | 0.93 ** | 0.94 ** | −0.72 ** | 0.97 ** | 0.91 ** | 0.98 ** | −0.72 ** | −0.75 ** | ||||||||
| RL | 0.93 ** | −0.69 ** | 0.92 ** | 0.95 ** | −0.65 ** | 0.90 ** | 0.87 ** | 0.91 ** | −0.72 ** | −0.75 ** | 0.67 ** | |||||||
| RWC | 0.93 ** | −0.68 ** | 0.93 ** | 0.92 ** | −0.67 ** | 0.98 ** | 0.88 ** | 0.91 ** | −0.67 ** | −0.68 ** | 0.92 ** | 0.68 ** | ||||||
| SDW | 0.97 ** | −0.75 ** | 0.93 ** | 0.96 ** | −0.72 ** | 0.92 ** | 0.90 ** | 0.94 ** | −0.72 ** | −0.74 ** | 0.95 ** | 0.94 ** | 0.93 ** | |||||
| SL | 0.93 ** | −0.74 ** | 0.94 ** | 0.93 ** | −0.70 ** | 0.96 ** | 0.90 ** | 0.95 ** | −0.73 ** | −0.75 ** | 0.94 ** | 0.94 ** | 0.94 ** | 0.92 ** | ||||
| SOD | −0.76 ** | 0.94 ** | −0.67 ** | −0.80 ** | 0.90 ** | −0.71 ** | −0.73 ** | −0.71 ** | 0.90 ** | 0.93 ** | −0.71 ** | −0.68 ** | −0.64 ** | −0.75 ** | −0.72 ** | |||
| SS | 0.97 ** | −0.73 ** | 0.91 ** | 0.96 ** | −0.72 ** | 0.90 ** | 0.91 ** | 0.93 ** | −0.70 ** | −0.73 ** | 0.94 ** | 0.92 ** | 0.91 ** | 0.98 ** | 0.89 ** | −0.74 ** | ||
| T CHL | 0.92 ** | −0.69 ** | 0.87 ** | 0.93 ** | −0.71 ** | 0.92 ** | 0.88 ** | 0.93 ** | −0.73 ** | −0.75 ** | 0.91 ** | 0.90 ** | 0.92 ** | 0.91 ** | 0.92 ** | 0.71 ** | 0.90 ** | |
| gs | 0.90 ** | −0.60 ** | 0.88 ** | 0.88 ** | −0.59 ** | 0.89 ** | 0.88 ** | 0.91 ** | −0.61 ** | −0.62 ** | 0.90 ** | 0.85 ** | 0.92 ** | 0.87 ** | 0.88 ** | −0.59 ** | 0.88 ** | 0.88 ** |
** p ≤ 0.01. RL—root length; SL—shoot length; LA—leaf area; PFW—plant fresh weight; HW—head weight; A—photosynthetic rate; E—transpiration rate; gs—stomatal conductance; CAT—catalase activity; T CHL—total chlorophyll content; EL—electrolyte leakage; RDW—root dry weight; PRO—proline content; SDW—shoot dry weight; CROs—carotenoid contents; RWC—relative water content; SOD—superoxide dismutase activity; SSs—soluble sugars.
1. Ahmad, Z.; Waraich, E.A.; Barutçular, C.; Hossain, A.; Erman, M.; Çiğ, F.; Gharib, H.; El-Sabagh, A. Enhancing drought tolerance in wheat through improving morpho-physiological and antioxidants activities of plants by the supplementation of foliar silicon. Phyton Int. J. Exp. Bot.; 2020; 89, pp. 529-539. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.32604/phyton.2020.09143]
2. Wang, L.; D’Odorico, P.; Evans, J.P.; Eldridge, D.J.; McCabe, M.F.; Caylor, K.K.; King, E.G. Dryland ecohydrology and climate change: Critical issues and technical advances. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci.; 2012; 16, pp. 2585-2603. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5194/hess-16-2585-2012]
3. Hao, Z.; Singh, V.P. Drought characterization from a multivariate perspective: A review. J. Hydrol.; 2015; 527, pp. 668-678. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2015.05.031]
4. Zhang, Q.; Gu, X.; Singh, V.P.; Kong, D.; Chen, X. Spatiotemporal behavior of floods and droughts and their impacts on agriculture in China. Glob. Planet Chang.; 2015; 131, pp. 63-72. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gloplacha.2015.05.007]
5. Miao, Y.; Zhu, Z.; Guo, Q.; Ma, H.; Zhu, L. Alternate wetting and drying irrigation-mediated changes in the growth, photosynthesis and yield of the medicinal plant Tulipa edulis. Ind. Crops Prod.; 2015; 66, pp. 81-88. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2014.12.002]
6. Madadgar, S.; AghaKouchak, A.; Farahmand, A.; Davis, S.J. Probabilistic estimates of drought impact on agricultural production. Geophys. Res. Lett.; 2017; 44, pp. 7799-7807. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/2017GL073606]
7. FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization). Agricultural Statistical Database for 2019. Available online: http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/QC (accessed on 25 May 2021).
8. Camejo, D.; Frutos, A.; Mestre, T.C.; Pinero, M.D.C.; Rivero, R.M.; Martinez, V. Artificial light impacts the physical and nutritional quality of lettuce. Hortic. Environ. Biotechnol.; 2020; 61, pp. 69-82. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13580-019-00191-z]
9. Carotti, L.; Graamans, L.; Puksic, F.; Butturini, M.; Meinen, E.; Heuvelink, E.; Stanghellini, C. Plant factories are heating up: Hunting for the best combination of light intensity, air temperature and root-zone temperature in lettuce production. Front. Plant Sci.; 2020; 11, 2251. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2020.592171]
10. Johkan, M.; Shoji, K.; Goto, F.; Hashida, S.N.; Yoshihara, T. Blue light-emitting diode light irradiation of seedlings improves seedling quality and growth after transplanting in red leaf lettuce. Hort Sci.; 2010; 45, pp. 1809-1814. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.21273/HORTSCI.45.12.1809]
11. Kurunc, A. Effects of water and salinity stresses on growth, yield, and water use of iceberg lettuce. J. Sci. Food Agric.; 2021; 101, pp. 5688-5696. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.11223]
12. Filgueiras, L.; Silva, R.; Almeida, I.; Vidal, M.; Baldani, J.I.; Meneses, C.H.S.G. Gluconacetobacter diazotrophicus mitigates drought stress in Oryza sativa. Plant Soil.; 2020; 451, pp. 57-73. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11104-019-04163-1]
13. Ahmad, R.; Waraich, E.; Nawaz, F.; Ashraf, M.Y.; Khalid, M.; Waraich, A. Selenium (Se) improves drought tolerance in crop plants—A myth or fact?. J. Sci. Food Agric.; 2016; 96, pp. 372-380. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.7231] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25906838]
14. White, P.J. Selenium metabolism in plants. Biochim. Biophys. Act-Gen. Subj.; 2018; 1862, pp. 2333-2342. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bbagen.2018.05.006] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29751098]
15. Feng, T.; Chen, S.S.; Gao, D.Q.; Liu, G.Q.; Bai, H.X.; Li, A.; Peng, L.X.; Ren, Z.Y. Selenium improves photosynthesis and protects photosystem II in pear (Pyrus bretschneideri), grape (Vitis vinifera), and peach (Prunus persica). Photosynth; 2015; 53, pp. 609-612. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11099-015-0118-1]
16. Nawaz, F.; Ahmad, R.; Ashraf, M.Y.; Waraich, E.A.; Khan, S.Z. Effect of selenium foliar spray on physiological and biochemical processes and chemical constituents of wheat under drought stress. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf.; 2015; 113, pp. 191-200. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoenv.2014.12.003]
17. Kaur, S.; Nayyar, H. Selenium fertilization to salt-stressed mungbean (Vigna radiata L. Wilczek) plants reduces sodium uptake, improves reproductive function, pod set and seed yield. Sci. Hort.; 2015; 197, pp. 304-317. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2015.09.048]
18. Djanaguiraman, M.; Devi, D.D.; Shanker, A.K.; Sheeba, J.A.; Bangarusamy, U. Impact of selenium spray on monocarpic senescence of soybean (Glycine max L.). Food Agric. Environ.; 2004; 2, pp. 44-47.
19. Malik, J.A.; Goel, S.; Kaur, N.; Sharma, S.; Singh, I.; Nayyar, H. Selenium antagonises the toxic effects of arsenic on mungbean (Phaseolus aureus Roxb.) plants by restricting its uptake and enhancing the antioxidative and detoxification mechanisms. Environ. Exp. Bot.; 2012; 77, pp. 242-248. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envexpbot.2011.12.001]
20. Nawaz, F.; Naeem, M.; Ashraf, M.Y.; Tahir, M.N.; Zulfiqar, B.; Salahuddin, M. Selenium supplementation affects physiological and biochemical processes to improve fodder yield and quality of maize (Zea mays L.) under water deficit conditions. Front. Plant Sci.; 2016; 7, 1438. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2016.01438]
21. Rahman, M.; Rahman, K.; Sathi, K.S.; Alam, M.M.; Nahar, K.; Fujita, M.; Hasanuzzaman, M. Supplemental selenium and boron mitigate salt-induced oxidative damages in Glycine max L. Plants; 2021; 10, 2224. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/plants10102224]
22. Galic, L.; Špoljarevic, M.; Jakovac, E.; Ravnjak, B.; Teklic, T.; Lisjak, M.; Peric, K.; Nemet, F.; Loncaric, Z. Selenium biofortification of soybean seeds influences physiological responses of seedlings to osmotic stress. Plants; 2021; 10, 1498. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/plants10081498] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34451543]
23. Dar, Z.M.; Malik, M.A.; Aziz, M.A.; Masood, A.; Dar, A.R.; Hussan, S.; Dar, Z.A. Role of selenium in regulation of plant antioxidants, chlorophyll retention and osmotic adjustment under drought conditions: A review. Int. J. Plant Soil Sci.; 2021; 33, pp. 52-60. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.9734/ijpss/2021/v33i1430504]
24. Liu, X.; Zhao, Z.; Duan, B.; Hu, C.; Zhao, X.; Guo, Z. Effect of applied sulphur on the uptake by wheat of selenium applied as selenite. Plant Soil; 2015; 386, pp. 35-45. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11104-014-2229-z]
25. Ros, G.H.; Rotterdam, A.M.D.V.; Bussink, D.W.; Bindraban, P.S. Selenium fertilization strategies for bio-fortification of food: An agro-ecosystem approach. Plant Soil.; 2016; 404, pp. 99-112. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11104-016-2830-4]
26. Wang, J.; Wang, Z.; Mao, H.; Zhao, H.; Huang, D. Increasing Se concentration in maize grain with soil- or foliar-applied selenite on the Loess Plateau in China. Field Crops Res.; 2013; 150, pp. 83-90. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2013.06.010]
27. Lichtenthaler, H.K. Chlorophylls and carotenoids pigments of photosynthetic bio membranes in Methods in Enzymology. Plants; 1987; 148, pp. 183-350.
28. Velikova, V.; Yordanov, I.; Edreva, A. Oxidative stress and some antioxidant systems in acid rain-treated bean plants: Protective role of exogenous polyamines. Plant Sci.; 2000; 151, pp. 59-66. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0168-9452(99)00197-1]
29. Aebi, H. Catalase. Methods of Enzymatic Analysis; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1974; pp. 673-684.
30. Beauchamp, C.; Fridovich, I. Superoxide dismutase: Improved assays and an assay applicable to acrylamide gels. Analyt. Biochem.; 1971; 44, pp. 276-287. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0003-2697(71)90370-8]
31. Turner, N.C.; Kramer, P.J. Adaptation of Plants to Water and High Temperature Stress; Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 1980.
32. Maehly, A.; Chance, B. Catalases and peroxidases. Methods Biochem. Anal.; 1954; 1, pp. 357-424.
33. Giannakoula, A.; Moustakas, M.; Mylona, P.; Papadakis, I.; Yupsanis, T. Aluminum tolerance in maize is correlated with increased levels of mineral nutrients, carbohydrates and proline, and decreased levels of lipid peroxidation and Al accumulation. J. Plant Physiol.; 2008; 165, pp. 385-396. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jplph.2007.01.014]
34. Bradford, M.M. A rapid and sensitive method for the quantitation of microgram quantities of protein utilizing the principle of protein-dye binding. Analyt. Biochem.; 1976; 72, pp. 248-254. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0003-2697(76)90527-3] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/942051]
35. Paim, B.T.; Crizel, R.L.; Tatiane, S.J.; Rodrigues, V.R.; Rombaldi, C.V.; Galli, V. Mild drought stress has potential to improve lettuce yield and quality. Sci. Hortic.; 2020; 272, 109578. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2020.109578]
36. Seleiman, M.F.; Al-Suhaibani, N.; Ali, N.; Akmal, M.; Alotaibi, M.; Refay, Y.; Battaglia, M.L. Drought stress impacts on plants and different approaches to alleviate its adverse effects. Plants; 2021; 10, 259. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/plants10020259]
37. Takahashi, F.; Kuromori, T.; Urano, K.; Yamaguchi-Shinozaki, K.; Shinozaki, K. Drought stress responses and resistance in plants: From cellular responses to long-distance intercellular communication. Front. Plant Sci.; 2020; 11, 556972. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2020.556972]
38. Hemati, A.; Moghiseh, E.; Amirifar, A.; Mofidi-Chelan, M.; Asgari Lajayer, B. Physiological Effects of Drought Stress in Plants. Plant Stress Mitigators; Springer: Singapore, 2022; pp. 113-124.
39. Hernandez-Santana, V.; Perez-Arcoiza, A.; Gomez-Jimenez, M.C.; Diaz-Espejo, A. Disentangling the link between leaf photosynthesis and turgor in fruit growth. Plant J.; 2021; 107, pp. 1788-1801. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/tpj.15418] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34250661]
40. Cohen, I.; Zandalinas, S.I.; Huck, C.; Fritschi, F.B.; Mittler, R. Meta-analysis of drought and heat stress combination impact on crop yield and yield components. Physiol. Planta.; 2021; 171, pp. 66-76. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ppl.13203]
41. Zhang, J.; Zhang, S.; Cheng, M.; Jiang, H.; Zhang, X.; Peng, C.; Jin, J. Effect of drought on agronomic traits of rice and wheat: A meta-analysis. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health; 2018; 15, 839. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15050839]
42. Zahedi, S.M.; Moharrami, F.; Sarikhani, S.; Padervand, M. Selenium and silica nanostructure-based recovery of strawberry plants subjected to drought stress. Sci. Rep.; 2020; 10, pp. 1-18.
43. Han, D.; Tu, S.; Dai, Z.; Huang, W.; Jia, W.; Xu, Z.; Shao, H. Comparison of selenite and selenate in alleviation of drought stress in Nicotiana tabacum L. Chemosphere; 2022; 287, 132136. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2021.132136]
44. Ahmad, Z.; Waraich, E.A.; Barutcular, C.; Alharby, H.; Bamagoos, A.; Kizilgeci, F.; El Sabagh, A. Enhancing drought tolerance in Camelina sativa L. and canola (Brassica napus L.) through application of selenium. Pak. J. Bot.; 2020; 52, pp. 1927-1939. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.30848/PJB2020-6(31)]
45. Ikram, M.; Raja, N.I.; Javed, B.; Hussain, M.; Hussain, M.; Ehsan, M.; Akram, A. Foliar applications of bio-fabricated selenium nanoparticles to improve the growth of wheat plants under drought stress. Green Proc. Synt.; 2020; 9, pp. 706-714. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1515/gps-2020-0067]
46. Karimi, R.; Ghabooli, M.; Rahimi, J.; Amerian, M. Effects of foliar selenium application on some physiological and phytochemical parameters of Vitis vinifera L. cv. Sultana under salt stress. J. Plant Nut.; 2020; 43, pp. 2226-2242. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01904167.2020.1766072]
47. Adnan, M. Application of Selenium a useful way to mitigate drought stress: A review. Open Acc. Biol. Sci. Res.; 2020; 3, 39. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.46718/JBGSR.2020.03.000064]
48. Khayatnezhad, M.; Gholamin, R. The effect of drought stress on the superoxide dismutase and chlorophyll content in durum wheat genotypes. Advanc. Life Sci.; 2021; 8, pp. 119-123.
49. Bijanzadeh, E.; Naderi, R.; Egan, T.P. Exogenous application of humic acid and salicylic acid to alleviate seedling drought stress in two corn (Zea mays L.) hybrids. J. Plant Nut.; 2019; 42, pp. 1483-1495. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01904167.2019.1617312]
50. Rezayian, M.; Ebrahimzadeh, H.; Niknam, V. Nitric oxide stimulates antioxidant system and osmotic adjustment in soybean under drought stress. J. Soil Sci. Plant Nut.; 2020; 20, pp. 1122-1132. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s42729-020-00198-x]
51. Ors, S.; Ekinci, M.; Yildirim, E.; Sahin, U.; Turan, M.; Dursun, A. Interactive effects of salinity and drought stress on photosynthetic characteristics and physiology of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum L.) seedlings. South Afr. J. Bot.; 2021; 137, pp. 335-339. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sajb.2020.10.031]
52. Bhusal, N.; Han, S.G.; Yoon, T.M. Impact of drought stress on photosynthetic response, leaf water potential, and stem sap flow in two cultivars of bi-leader apple trees (Malus × domestica Borkh.). Sci. Hortic.; 2019; 246, pp. 535-543. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2018.11.021]
53. Khalvandi, M.; Siosemardeh, A.; Roohi, E.; Keramati, S. Salicylic acid alleviated the effect of drought stress on photosynthetic characteristics and leaf protein pattern in winter wheat. Heliyon; 2021; 7, e05908. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e05908]
54. Onyemaobi, O.; Sangma, H.; Garg, G.; Wallace, X.; Kleven, S.; Suwanchaikasem, P.; Dolferus, R. Reproductive stage drought tolerance in wheat: Importance of stomatal conductance and plant growth regulators. Genes; 2021; 12, 1742. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/genes12111742]
55. Galić, L.; Vinković, T.; Ravnjak, B.; Lončarić, Z. Agronomic biofortification of significant cereal crops with selenium—A review. Agronomy; 2021; 11, 1015. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/agronomy11051015]
56. Luo, H.W.; He, L.X.; Du, B.; Wang, Z.M.; Zheng, A.X.; Lai, R.F.; Tang, X.R. Foliar application of selenium (Se) at heading stage induces regulation of photosynthesis, yield formation, and quality characteristics in fragrant rice. Photosynthetica; 2019; 57, pp. 1007-1014. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.32615/ps.2019.114]
57. Lanza, M.G.D.B.; Dos Reis, A.R. Roles of selenium in mineral plant nutrition: ROS scavenging responses against abiotic stresses. Plant Physiol. Biochem.; 2021; 164, pp. 27-43. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.plaphy.2021.04.026]
58. Skrypnik, L.; Styran, T.; Savina, T.; Golubkina, N. Effect of selenium application and growth stage at harvest on hydrophilic and lipophilic antioxidants in lamb’s lettuce (Valerianella locusta L. Laterr.). Plants; 2021; 10, 2733. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/plants10122733] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34961204]
59. Borbély, P.; Molnár, Á.; Valyon, E.; Ördög, A.; Horváth-Boros, K.; Csupor, D.; Kolbert, Z. The effect of foliar selenium (Se) treatment on growth, photosynthesis, and oxidative-nitrosative signalling of Stevia rebaudiana leaves. Antioxidants; 2021; 10, 72. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/antiox10010072]
60. Wang, C.; Yue, L.; Cheng, B.; Chen, F.; Zhao, X.; Wang, Z.; Xing, B. Mechanisms of growth-promotion and Se-enrichment in Brassica chinensis L. by selenium nanomaterials: Beneficial rhizosphere microorganisms, nutrient availability, and photosynthesis. Environ. Sci. Nano; 2022; 9, pp. 302-312. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1039/D1EN00740H]
61. Huang, H.; Li, M.; Rizwan, M.; Dai, Z.; Yuan, Y.; Hossain, M.M.; Tu, S. Synergistic effect of silicon and selenium on the alleviation of cadmium toxicity in rice plants. J. Hazard. Mat.; 2021; 401, 123393. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2020.123393]
62. Shafiq, B.A.; Nawaz, F.; Majeed, S.; Aurangzaib, M.; Al Mamun, A.; Ahsan, M.; Haq, T. Sulfate-based fertilizers regulate nutrient uptake, photosynthetic gas exchange, and enzymatic antioxidants to increase sunflower growth and yield under drought stress. J. Soil Sci. Plant Nut.; 2021; 21, pp. 2229-2241. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s42729-021-00516-x]
63. Mukarram, M.; Choudhary, S.; Kurjak, D.; Petek, A.; Khan, M.M.A. Drought: Sensing, signalling, effects and tolerance in higher plants. Physiol. Plant.; 2021; 172, pp. 1291-1300. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ppl.13423]
64. Tiepo, A.N.; Constantino, L.V.; Madeira, T.B.; Gonçalves, L.S.A.; Pimenta, J.A.; Bianchini, E.; Stolf-Moreira, R. Plant growth-promoting bacteria improve leaf antioxidant metabolism of drought-stressed Neotropical trees. Planta; 2020; 251, 83. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00425-020-03373-7]
65. Khan, M.N.; Zhang, J.; Luo, T.; Liu, J.; Ni, F.; Rizwan, M.; Hu, L. Morpho-physiological and biochemical responses of tolerant and sensitive rapeseed cultivars to drought stress during early seedling growth stage. Acta Physiol. Plant.; 2019; 41, 25. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11738-019-2812-2]
66. Taha, R.S.; Seleiman, M.F.; Shami, A.; Alhammad, B.A.; Mahdi, A.H. Integrated application of selenium and silicon enhances growth and anatomical structure, antioxidant defense system and yield of wheat grown in salt-stressed soil. Plants; 2021; 10, 1040. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/plants10061040] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34064224]
67. Park, S.H.; Lee, B.R.; La, V.H.; Mamun, M.A.; Bae, D.W.; Kim, T.H. Drought intensity−responsive salicylic acid and abscisic acid crosstalk with the sugar signaling and metabolic pathway in Brassica napus. Plants; 2021; 10, 610. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/plants10030610] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33806958]
68. Abid, M.; Ali, S.; Qi, L.K.; Zahoor, R.; Tian, Z.; Jiang, D.; Snider, J.L.; Dai, T. Physiological and biochemical changes during drought and recovery periods at tillering and jointing stages in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Sci. Rep.; 2018; 8, 4615. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-21441-7] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29545536]
69. Desoky, E.S.M.; Merwad, A.R.M.; Abo El-Maati, M.F.; Mansour, E.; Arnaout, S.M.; Awad, M.F.; Ibrahim, S.A. Physiological and biochemical mechanisms of exogenously applied selenium for alleviating destructive impacts induced by salinity stress in bread wheat. Agronomy; 2021; 11, 926. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/agronomy11050926]
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.
Details
; Sultan Khawar 1
; Tehzeem, Munir 1 ; Khan, Muhammad Tajammal 5
; uz Zaman Qamar 1
1 Department of Environmental Sciences, The University of Lahore, Lahore 54590, Pakistan; [email protected] (B.T.); [email protected] (K.S.); [email protected] (T.M.)
2 Department of Food Sciences, Government College University Faisalabad, Sahiwal Campus, Sahiwal 57000, Pakistan; [email protected]
3 Department of Environmental Sciences, Kohsar University Murree, Murree 47150, Pakistan, School of Plant Sciences, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721, USA
4 Department of Botany and Microbiology, College of Science, King Saud University, Riyadh 11451, Saudi Arabia; [email protected]
5 Institute of Botany, University of the Punjab, Lahore 54590, Pakistan; [email protected], Division of Science and Technology, Department of Botany, University of Education, Lahore 53200, Pakistan