Morpho-physiological and Production Responses of Peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) to Biostimulant Protein Hydrolysate Under Drought Stress
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14738/aivp.1304.19159Keywords:
Drought stress, Peanut, Protein hydrolysate, BiostimulantAbstract
Abiotic stress has been demonstrated to exert a deleterious effect on plant growth and development, culminating in diminished crop yields. This phenomenon has also been observed in peanuts. Among the various types of abiotic stress, drought is considered the most critical, as limited water availability has a negative impact on plant growth and development, especially in arid and semi-arid regions. This study aims to assess the impact of applying a protein hydrolysate biostimulant on the morphological, physiological, and production responses of groundnuts (Arachis hypogaea L.) variety 'Takar-2' under drought conditions. The observed parameters included plant height, root length, number of nodules, percentage of active nodules, chlorophyll a, b, total chlorophyll content, relative water content, and number of pods. The findings indicated that the application of protein hydrolysate led to substantial enhancements in the morphological adaptation of the plants, as evidenced by an increase in plant height, root length, and nodule number. Additionally, the application improved physiological parameters, including chlorophyll a and b, total chlorophyll, and relative water content. Furthermore, utilizing biostimulants positively affected the number of pods under drought conditions. Consequently, protein hydrolysate has the potential to function as a biostimulant, thereby enhancing the resilience and yield of groundnuts in environments with limited water availability.
References
Seleiman, M., et al., Drought stress impacts on plants and different approaches to alleviate its adverse effects. Plants, 2021. 10(2): p. 1-25.
Ritte, I., et al., Evaluation of cowpea morpho-physiological and yield responses to vegetative and preanthesis water-deficit stress tolerance under greenhouse conditions. European journal of applied sciences, 2022. 10(2): p. 391–411.
Agliassa, C., et al., A new protein hydrolysate-based biostimulant applied via fertigation enhances drought stress tolerance in Capsicum annuum L. Plants. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry, 2021. 122: p. 1076-1086.
Devi, H. S., et al., Protein hydrolysate: a promising biostimulant for sustainable agriculture. Agriculture & Food. Article, 2023. : p. 43017.
Colla, G., L. Hoagland, and M. Ruzzi, The action of protein hydrolysate biostimulants: unveiling their impact on plant physiology and the microbiome. Frontiers in Plant Science, 2017. 8.
Siswoyo, T. A., et al., S. The growth responses and antioxidant capabilities of melinjo (Gnetum gnemon L.) in different durations of drought stress. Annals of Agricultural Sciences, 2021. 66(1): p. 81–86.
Ahmad, M. A., et al., Peg 6000 inducing drought stress enhances in vitro growth attributes, steviol glycoside production, and antioxidant activity in Stevia rebaudiana Bertoni. Plants, 2020. 9(11): p. 1552.
Pasković, I., et al., Protein hydrolysates—production, effects on plant metabolism, and use in agriculture. Horticulturae, 2024. 10(10): p. 1041.
Colla, G., et al., Biostimulant action of a plant-derived protein hydrolysate produced through enzymatic hydrolysis. Front. Plant Sci, 2014. 5: p. 448.
Rouphael, Y., et al., Foliar applications of a legume-derived protein hydrolysate elicit dose-dependent increases of growth, leaf mineral composition, yield and fruit quality in two greenhouse tomato cultivars. Sci. Hortic, 2017. 22: p. 353–360.
Lindstrom, K., and Sayed, A. M., Effectiveness of nitrogen fixation in rhizobia. Microb Biotechnol, 2019. 13(5): p. 1314-1335.
Wolf, J.J., and Jennifer R., The influence of physical soil conditions on the formation of root nodules of Melilotus officinalis in the montane zone of Rocky Mountain National Park. European journal of soil biology, 2001. 37(1): p. 51-57.
Lakna, 2017. Difference between chlorophyll a and b. Pediaa.
Cao WH, Liu J, and He XJ. Modulation of ethylene responses affects plant salt-stress responses. Plant Physiol, 2007. 143: p. 707–19.
Bulgari, R., et al., Biostimulants & crop responses: a review. Biological Agriculture and Horticulture, 2015. 31(1): p. 1-17.
Sun W., et al., Amino acids, biostimulants and protein hydrolysates in agricultural sciences. Plants (Basel), 2024.13(2): p. 210.
Jiménez-Arias, D., et al., Applying biostimulants to combat water deficit in crop plants: research and debate. Agronomy, 2022. 12(3): p. 571. 121
Maimunah, G. Rusmayadi, and B. F. Langai, Growth and yield of two soybean varieties (Glycine max L.) under drought stress conditions at various growth stages. Enviroscienteae, 2018. 14(3): p. 211-221.
Porra, R. J., et al., Determination of accurate extinction coefficients and simultaneous equations for assaying chlorophylls a and b extracted with four different solvents: Verification of the concentration of chlorophyll standards by atomic absorption spectroscopy. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA) -Bioenergetics, 1989. 975(3): p. 384–394.
Terzi, R. and Kadioglu, Drought stress tolerance and the antioxidant enzyme system in ctenanthe setosa. Acta Biologica Cracoviensia Series Botanica, 2006. 48(2): p. 89-96.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Zida Ilmi Mufida, Tri Candra Setiawati, Tri Agus Siswoyo
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
