Phenotypes of Citrus Sp. As a Selected in Dwarf Rootstock Material Regard to Abiotic Stress Tolerance

Norry Eka Palupi, Moch Dawam Maghfoer, Nunun Barunawati, Didik Hariyono


Research on abiotic stress tolerant horticultural plants has been widely carried out. However, there has not been much research on the citrus phenotype with rootstock as planting material, which has advantages in overcoming abiotic stress and dwarf performance. This research provides citrus rootstock that is tolerant to some of the marginal land in Indonesia especially on drought, salinity, waterlogging, and acidity. This morphological research was conducted at Punten Experimental Garden in Batu city, Indonesia. Anatomical observations were carried out in the laboratories of Indonesian Balitjestro and Universitas Brawijaya. This has done pre-treatment selection lasted for 8 months and then abiotic stress treatment lasted for 2 months, from July to September 2021. This study consisted of 15 treatment combinations: three rootstock varieties, i.e., Citromello (Cit), Volkameriana (Volk), and Cleopatra mandarin (CM), and five abiotic stress treatments, i.e., control, PEG 10%, NaCl 3.5%, waterlogging 150% FC, and 9 mM Al2SO4. The results showed that abiotic stress, especially NaCl and waterlogging, caused phenotypic changes such as in leaf shape, i.e., leaf lamina shape, reduced leaf area, chlorophyll content, stomata density, and canopy diameter compared to other abiotic stresses. The best stomatal density and open stomata percentage were for Cleopatra mandarin (CM). This was also shown by the increase in proline content when plants are subjected to abiotic stresses, especially in Cleopatra mandarin under NaCl stress, Volkameriana under Al2SO4 stress, and Citromello under waterlogging (WL). The palisade size decreased, its vascular bundles in the leaves increased, and the pore distribution changed. The results showed all rootstock candidates were resistant to several abiotic stresses and had dwarf performance. It can be concluded that the best tolerant of abiotic stress rootstock variety of abiotic stress is Cleopatra mandarin, while Volkameriana and Citromello are better tolerant on acidic soil.


Keywords: rootstock, abiotic stress, proline, phenotype, marginal land.

Full Text:



CENTER FOR AGRICULTURAL DATA AND INFORMATION SYSTEMS. Citrus Outlook; Horticulture Sub-Sector Agricultural Commodities. Ministry of Agriculture, Jakarta, 2016.

AGENCY FOR AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT. Indonesia's Agricultural Land Resources Extensive, Distribution, and Potential Availability. IAARD Press, Jakarta, 2015.

CASTAÑEDA V., & GONZÁLEZ E. M. Strategies to Apply Water-Deficit Stress: Similarities and Disparities at the Whole Plant Metabolism Level In Medicago Truncatula. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 2021, 22: 2813.

AKBARI M., KATAM R., HUSAIN R., FARAJPOUR M., MAZZUCA S., and MAHNA N. Sodium Chloride Induced Stress Responses of Antioxidative Activities in Leaves and Roots of Pistachio Rootstock. Biomolecules, 2020, 10: 189.

JUNG J. S., MUHAMMAD Z., LEE K.-W., MUN J. Y., PARK H. S., KIM Y. J., KIM W. H., LEE S.-H., and LEE S.-H. 2015. Effects of polyethylene glycol-induced water stress on the physiological and biochemical responses of different Sorghum genotypes. Proceedings of the the XXIII International Grassland Congress (Sustainable use of Grassland Resources for Forage Production, Biodiversity and Environmental Protection), New Delhi, 2015.

CIMEN B., & YESILOGLU T. Rootstock Breeding for Abiotic Stress Tolerance in Citrus. Intech, London, 2016.

RAHNESHAN Z., NASIBI F., and MOGHADAM A.A. Effects of salinity stress on some growth, physiological, biochemical parameters and nutrients in two pistachio (Pistacia vera L.) rootstocks. Journal of Plant Interactions, 2018, 13(1): 73–82.

AMADOR M. L., SANCHO S., BIELSA B., GOMEZ-APARISI J., and RUBIO-CABETAS M. J. Physiological and biochemical parameters controlling waterlogging stress tolerance in Prunusbefore and after drainage. Physiologia Plantarum, 2012, 144: 357–368.

MORALES-OLMEDO M., ORTIZ M., and SELLES G. Review: Effects of transient soil waterlogging and its importance for rootstock selection. Chilean Journal of Agricultural Research, 2015, 75(1): 45–56.

BHUYAN M. H. M. B, HASANUZZAMAN M., NAHAR K., AL MAHMUD J., PARVIN K., BHUIYAN T.F., and FUJITA M. Plant Behavior under Soil Acidity Stress: Insight into Morphophysiological, Biochemical, and Molecular Responses. In: Plant Abiotic Stress Tolerance. Springer Nature, Cham, 2019: 35–82.

XIN-YAN L., LIN-TONG Y., YI-BIN L., YE X., and LI-SONG C. Roles of rootstocks and scions in aluminum-tolerance of Citrus. Acta Physiologiae Plantarum, 2015, 37: 1743.

DOS SANTOS I. C., DE ALMEIDA A. A. F., PIROVANI C. P., COSTA M. G. C., DA CONCEIÇÃO A. S., FILHO W. S. S., FILHO M. A. C., and GESTEIRA A. S. Physiological, biochemical and molecular responses to drought conditions in field-grown grafted and ungrafted citrus plants. Environmental and Experimental Botany, 2019, 162: 406-420.

ABOUTALEBI A., & HASANZADEH H. Salinity and Citrus Rootstocks and Interstocks. International Journal of Plant, Animal and Environmental Sciences, 2014, 4: 654–672.

KORDROSTAMI M., & MAFAKHERI M. Consequences of Water Stress and Salinity on Plants/Crops; Physiobiochemical and Molecular Mitigation Approaches. In: PESSARAKLI M. (ed.) Handbook of Plant and Crop Physiology. CRC Press, Boca Raton, 2022: 789–814.

PADILLA Y. G., GISBERT-MULLOR R., LÓPEZ-SERRANO L., LÓPEZ-GALARZA S., and A. CALATAYUD. Grafting Enhances Pepper Water Stress Tolerance by Improving Photosynthesis and Antioxidant Defense Systems. Antioxidants, 2021, 10(576): 1–15.

PIRASTEH-ANOSHEH H., SAED-MOUCHESHI A., PAKNIYAT H., and PESSARAKL M. Stomatal responses to drought stress. In: AHMAD, P. (ed.) Water Stress and Crop Plants: A Sustainable Approach Volume 1. John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, 2016: 24-40.

OTERO A., & GOÑI C. Short hypoxia period affects photosynthesis of citrus scion leaves under different rootstocks. Citrus Research & Technology, 2016, 37(1): 19-25.

LIAO X. Y., YANG L. T., LU Y. B., YE X., and CHEN L. S. Roles of rootstocks and scions in aluminum-tolerance of Citrus. Acta Physiologiae Plantarum, 2015, 37: 1743.

GANDULLO J., AHMAD S., DARWISH E., KARLOVA R., and TESTERINK C. Phenotyping tomato root developmental plasticity in response to salinity in soil rhizotrons. Plant Phenomics, 2021, 2021: 1-14.

POLLE A., CHEN S. L., ECKERT C., and HARFOUCHE A. Engineering Drought Resistance in Forest Trees. Frontiers in Plant Science, 2019, 9: Article 1875.

HORI C., YU X., MORTIMER J. C., SANO R., MATSUMOTO T., KIKUCHI J., DEMURA T., and OHTANI M. Impact of abiotic stress on the regulation of cell wall biosynthesis in Populus trichocarpa. Plant Biotechnology, 2020, 37: 273–283.

MARTÍNEZ-CUENCA M. R., PRIMO-CAPELLA A., and GINER M. A. F. Influence of Rootstock on Citrus Tree Growth: Effects on Photosynthesis and Carbohydrate Distribution, Plant Size, Yield, Fruit Quality, and Dwarfing Genotypes. In: RIGOBELO E. C. (ed.) Plant Growth. InTech Open, London, 2016: 107-129.

SINGH A., SHARMA M.K., and SENGAR R.S. Osmolytes: Proline metabolism in plants as sensors of abiotic stress. Journal of Applied and Natural Science, 2017, 9(4): 2079-2092.

ASHARI A., NURCAHYANI E., HARDOK O., QUDUS I., and ZULKIFLI. Analisis Kandungan Prolin Planlet Jeruk Keprok Batu 55 (Citrus Reticulata Blanco Var. Crenatifolia) Setelah Diinduksi Larutan Atonik Dalam Kondisi Cekaman Kekeringan Secara in Vitro. Analit: Analytical and Environmental Chemistry, 2018, 3(01): 69–78.

MAHMOUD L. M., DUTT M., VINCENT C. I., and GROSSER J. W. Salinity-Induced Physiological Responses of Three Putative Salt Tolerant Citrus Rootstocks. Horticulturae, 2020, 6, 90.

ZECHMANN B. Ultrastructure of plastids serves as reliable abiotic and biotic stress marker. PLoS ONE, 2019, 14(4).

PRASAD V., & RAO R. Various plant’s responses and strategies to cope with the water deficit: A review. Journal of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry, 2019, 8(1): 159–168.

QADERY M. M., MARTEL A. B., and DIXON S. L. Environmental Factors Influence Plant Vascular System and Water Regulation. Plants, 2019, 8: 65.


  • There are currently no refbacks.