Table 1 Comparison of physiological and biochemical parameters in grapevine leaves in response to drought stress.
Physiological and biochemical parameters | Control | Drought treatment | Range of increasing % |
---|---|---|---|
Chlorophyll contents (mg g−1) | 1.16 ± 0.08 | 0.85 ± 0.09 | −26.72 |
Chla contents (mg g−1) | 0.43 ± 0.11 | 0.28 ± 0.06 | −34.88 |
Chlb contents (mg g−1) | 0.73 ± 0.06 | 0.57 ± 0.04 | −21.92 |
Photosynthesis activity (µmole m−2sec−1) | 23.67 ± 0.81 | 16.08 ± 0.75 | −32.20 |
Stomatal conductance (µmole m−2sec−1) | 0.15 ± 0.03 | 0.09 ± 0.02 | 40.00 |
Net CO2 assimilation (µmole m−2sec−1) | 9 ± 0.03 | 5 ± 0.03 | 44.44 |
MDA contents (nmol/g) | 5.35 ± 0.21 | 8.61 ± 0.25 | 60.93 |
SOD activity (U/g/min) | 371.56 ± 10.21 | 650.85 ± 15.7 | 75.16 |
POD activity (U/g/min) | 18.23 ± 0.97 | 43.9 ± 1.01 | 140.81 |
CAT activity (U/g/min) | 6.32 ± 1.21 | 19.01 ± 0.99 | 200.79 |
Proline (ng/g FW) | 1.124 ± 0.04 | 1.711 ± 0.05 | 52.37 |