Rhizobacteria facilitate physiological and biochemical drought tolerance of <i>Halimodendron halodendron</i> (Pall.) Voss

doi:10.1007/s40333-023-0092-6

Journal of Arid Land

2023, Vol. 15

Issue (2): 205-217 DOI: 10.1007/s40333-023-0092-6 CSTR: 32276.14.s40333-023-0092-6

Research article

Rhizobacteria facilitate physiological and biochemical drought tolerance of Halimodendron halodendron (Pall.) Voss

Mohammad Hossein TAGHIZADEH¹, Mohammad FARZAM¹^,^*(

), Jafar NABATI²

¹Department of Range and Watershed Management, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad 9178169371, Iran
²Legume Department, Research Center for Plant Sciences, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad 9177948974, Iran

Download:

HTML

PDF(441KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

Abstract

Growth-promoting bacteria (GPB) have shown promising effects on serving plants against environmental constraints such as drought. Nevertheless, simultaneous effects of different GPB have less been considered for arid land plants and under field conditions. We investigated the effects of single and combined application of GPB, including free-living nitrogen-fixing bacteria (NFB), phosphate solubilizing bacteria (PSB), potassium solubilizing bacteria (KSB), a combination of NFB, PSB, and KSB (NPK), and control, at three drought stress treatments. In order to better understand the interactions between drought and GPB, we measured the morphological, biochemical, and physiological plant traits. The target plant was salt tree (Halimodendron Halodendron (Pall.) Voss), a legume shrub native to arid lands of Central and West Asia. All biofertilizer treatments enhanced the growth, physiology, and biochemistry of salt tree seedlings, and there were significant differences among the treatments. KSB and PSB treatments increased photosynthetic pigments, but KSB treatment was more efficient in transpiration rate and stomatal regulation and increased the soluble carbohydrates. PSB treatment had the highest effect on root traits, such as taproot length, root volume, cumulative root length, and the ratio of root to shoot. NFB treatment enhanced root diameter and induced biomass translocation between root systems. However, only the application of mixed biofertilizer (i.e., NPK treatment) was the most significant treatment to improve all plant morphological and physiological characteristics of salt tree under drought stress. Therefore, our results provided improvement of some specific plant traits simultaneous with application of three biofertilizers to increase growth and establishment of salt tree seedlings in the degraded arid lands.

Key words： growth-promoting bacteria physiological traits drought stress biofertilizer root traits Halimodendron Halodendron (Pall.) Voss

Received: 13 June 2022 Published: 28 February 2023

Corresponding Authors: ^*Mohammad FARZAM (E-mail: mjankju@um.ac.ir)

	Service
	E-mail this article
	Add to my bookshelf
	Add to citation manager
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	Articles by authors
	Mohammad Hossein TAGHIZADEH
	Mohammad FARZAM
	Jafar NABATI

Cite this article:

Mohammad Hossein TAGHIZADEH, Mohammad FARZAM, Jafar NABATI. Rhizobacteria facilitate physiological and biochemical drought tolerance of Halimodendron halodendron (Pall.) Voss. Journal of Arid Land, 2023, 15(2): 205-217.

URL:

http://jal.xjegi.com/10.1007/s40333-023-0092-6 OR http://jal.xjegi.com/Y2023/V15/I2/205

Biofertilizer treatment					Drought level	Biomass and morphological trait
NPK	KSB	PSB	NFB	Control	Drought level	Biomass and morphological trait
41.36±2.10^a	22.44±1.79^g	23.83±1.83^f	31.56±1.33^c	19.72±1.21^h	LD	Total plant height (cm)
34.72±1.04^b	17.12±0.86ⁱ	17.67±1.04ⁱ	26.83±0.63^e	14.11±0.87^j	MD
29.61±0.87^d	13.33±1.49^j	11.61±1.35^k	21.67±1.33^g	7.61±1.38^l	HD
2.140±0.159^a	1.250±0.111^c	0.870±0.140^de	0.924±0.175^d	0.670±0.028^defgh	LD	Stem dry weight (g/Plant)
1.560±0.152^b	0.589±0.112^efghi	0.644±0.026^defgh	0.798±0.007^defg	0.505±0.137^ghi	MD
0.825±0.088^def	0.540±0.127^fghi	0.416±0.061^hi	0.582±0.045^efghi	0.312±0.085ⁱ	HD
2.180±0.212^a	1.580±0.091^b	1.450±0.110 ^b	0.995±0.101^cd	0.837±0.117^de	LD	Leaf dry weight (g/Plant)
1.190±0.112^c	0.572±0.060^fg	0.654±0.063^ef	0.576±0.060^fg	0.383±0.081^g	MD
0.630±0.046^ef	0.474±0.110^fg	0.458±0.098^fg	0.460±0.084^fg	0.364±0.020^g	HD
131.0±15.0^a	119.7±23.0^a	90.3±9.2^b	74.8±5.6^bc	57.1±14.4^cd	LD	Leaf area (cm²/Plant)
80.4±14.8^bc	46.7±5.7^de	56.4±8.4^cd	46.2±7.5^de	27.4±6.1^e	MD
35.4±5.4^de	33.7±6.9^de	33.5±6.5^de	34.8±5.8^de	24.6±1.4^e	HD
44.5±3.4^ab	43.7±2.6^ab	45.4±2.0^a	33.0±0.7^def	37.9±2.0^cde	LD	Taproot length (cm)
45.6±3.4^a	30.9±3.2^f	32.5±0.3^ef	37.5±4.2^cde	30.2±0.6^f	MD
37.9±7.0^cd	36.6±4.8^cde	46.0±7.0^a	39.6±5.2^bc	37.0±4.7^cde	HD
2.180±0.225^a	2.160±0.364^a	1.210±0.101^bc	0.749±0.130^def	0.678±0.101^ef	LD	Root dry weight (g/plant)
1.580±0.198^b	0.730±0.021^def	0.900±0.017^cde	1.110±0.151^cd	0.689±0.019^ef	MD
0.680±0.051^ef	0.364±0.016^f	0.907±0.142^cde	0.912±0.253^cde	0.964±0.055^cde	HD
6.33±0.67^a	5.18±0.82^ab	3.67±0.88^cd	3.00±0.01^def	2.00±0.01^fgh	LD	Root volume (cm³/plant)
4.33±0.33^bc	1.33±0.33^gh	3.63±0.67^cd	3.67±0.33^cd	2.00±0.00^fgh	MD
2.33±0.33^efg	1.00±0.01^h	3.33±0.33^cde	2.42±0.42^efg	2.00±0.58^fgh	HD
95.3±10.7^b	56.4±17.9^c	142.0±12.8^a	41.4±8.3^cde	52.5±18.6^cd	LD	Cumulative root length (m)
58.5±13.2^c	95.0±14.2^b	30.1±5.5^cde	32.5±4.6^cde	42.6±11.7^cde	MD
26.0±4.4^cde	26.1±6.9^cde	47.3±18.6^cde	16.9±0.7^e	21.2±4.7^de	HD
0.504±0.120^cdef	0.956±0.081^ab	0.402±0.149^def	0.776±0.087^bcd	0.797±0.086^abc	LD	Mean root diameter (mm)
0.730±0.244^bcde	0.376±0.102^ef	0.856±0.216^abc	0.783±0.133^abcd	0.331±0.060^f	MD
0.696±0.083^bcdef	0.700±0.157^bcdef	0.669±0.085^bcdef	1.170±0.112^a	1.046±0.125^ab	HD
0.504±0.046^def	0.781±0.163^bcde	0.461±0.096^ef	0.387±0.055^f	0.527±0.066^cdef	LD	Ratio of root to shoot
0.582±0.083^cdef	0.658±0.105^cdef	0.888±0.232^bc	0.814±0.129^bcde	0.700±0.055^bcdef	MD
0.469±0.017^ef	0.362±0.030^f	1.506±0.264^a	0.849±0.146^bcd	1.036±0.155^b	HD

Table 1 Effect of different biofertilizer treatments and drought levels on biomass and morphological traits of salt tree

Table 2 Effect of different biofertilizer treatments and drought levels on photosynthetic traits of salt tree

Fig. 1 Effects of different drought levels and biofertilizer treatments on leaf chlorophyll fluorescence of salt tree. (a), minimum chlorophyll fluorescence; (b), maximum chlorophyll fluorescence; (c), quantum efficiency of photosystem II. Control, without the application of biofertilizer; NFB, free-living nitrogen-fixing bacteria; PSB, phosphate solubilizing bacteria; KSB, potassium solubilizing bacteria; NPK, the combination of NFB, PSB, and KSB; LD, low drought; MD, moderate drought; HD, high drought. Different lowercase letters indicate significantly difference among drought levels and biofertilizer treatments (P≤0.05). Bars are stand errors.

Fig. 2 Effect of different drought levels and biofertilizer treatments on the concentration of photosynthetic pigments of salt tree. (a), chlorophyll a; (b), chlorophyll b; (c), carotenoids; (d), total pigments. Different lowercase letters indicate significantly difference among drought levels and biofertilizer treatments (P≤0.05). Bars are stand errors.

Table 3 Effect of different drought levels and biofertilizer treatments on biochemical traits of salt tree

Table 4 Correlation coefficients between root traits and biochemical traits of salt tree


[1]	Abe N, Murata T, Hirota A. 1998. Novel DPPH radical scavengers, bisorbicillinol and demethyltrichodimerol, from a fungus. Bioscience, Biotechnology, and Biochemistry, 62(4): 661-666. doi: 10.1271/bbb.62.661 pmid: 27392553

[2]	ALKahtani M D, Attia K A, Hafez Y M, et al. 2020. Chlorophyll fluorescence parameters and antioxidant defense system can display salt tolerance of salt acclimated sweet pepper plants treated with chitosan and plant growth promoting rhizobacteria. Agronomy, 10(8): 1180. doi: 10.3390/agronomy10081180

[3]	Arkhipova T, Martynenko E, Sharipova G, et al. 2020. Effects of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria on the content of abscisic acid and salt resistance of wheat plants. Plants, 9(11): 1429. doi: 10.3390/plants9111429

[4]	Asif M, Yilmaz O, Ozturk L. 2017. Potassium deficiency impedes elevated carbon dioxide-induced biomass enhancement in well watered or drought-stressed bread wheat. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science, 180(4): 474-481. doi: 10.1002/jpln.201600616

[5]	Attarzadeh M, Balouchi H, Rajaie M, et al. 2019. Improvement of Echinacea purpurea performance by integration of phosphorus with soil microorganisms under different irrigation regimes. Agricultural Water Management, 221: 238-247. doi: 10.1016/j.agwat.2019.04.022

[6]	Awad W, Byrne P F, Reid S D, et al. 2018. Great plains winter wheat varies for root length and diameter under drought stress. Agronomy Journal, 110(1): 226-235. doi: 10.2134/agronj2017.07.0377

[7]	Ayangbenro A S, Babalola O O. 2021. Reclamation of arid and semi-arid soils: The role of plant growth-promoting archaea and bacteria. Current Plant Biology, 25(1): 100173. doi: 10.1016/j.cpb.2020.100173

[8]	Bates L S, Waldren R P, Teare I. 1973. Rapid determination of free proline for water-stress studies. Plant and Soil, 39: 205-207. doi: 10.1007/BF00018060

[9]	Chavoshi S, Nourmohamadi G, Madani H, et al. 2018. The effects of biofertilizers on physiological traits and biomass accumulation of red beans (Phaseolus vulgaris cv. Goli) under water stress. Iranian Journal of Plant Physiology, 8(4): 2555-2562.

[10]	Chiappero J, del Rosario Cappellari L, Alderete L G S, et al. 2019. Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria improve the antioxidant status in Mentha piperita grown under drought stress leading to an enhancement of plant growth and total phenolic content. Industrial Crops and Products, 139(1): 111553. doi: 10.1016/j.indcrop.2019.111553

[11]	Dey G, Banerjee P, Sharma R K, et al. 2021. Management of phosphorus in salinity-stressed agriculture for sustainable crop production by salt-tolerant phosphate-solubilizing bacteria—A review. Agronomy, 11(8): 1552. doi: 10.3390/agronomy11081552

[12]	Dubois M, Gilles K A, Hamilton J K, et al. 1956. Colorimetric method for determination of sugars and related substances. Analytical Chemistry, 28(3): 350-356. doi: 10.1021/ac60111a017

[13]	Ebrahimi M, Khajehpour M, Naderi A, et al. 2014. Physiological responses of sunflower to water stress under different levels of zinc fertilizer. International Journal of Plant Production, 8(4): 483-504.

[14]	Ejaz S, Fahad S, Anjum M A, et al. 2020. Role of osmolytes in the mechanisms of antioxidant defense of plants. Sustainable Agriculture Reviews, 39(1): 95-117.

[15]	Glanz-Idan N, Wolf S. 2020. Upregulation of photosynthesis in mineral nutrition-deficient tomato plants by reduced source-to-sink ratio. Plant Signaling and Behavior, 15(5): 1712543. doi: 10.1080/15592324.2020.1712543

[16]	Hassanein A, Ibrahim E, Abou Ali R, et al. 2021. Differential metabolic responses associated with drought tolerance in egyptian rice. Journal of Applied Biology & Biotechnology, 9(4): 37-46.

[17]	Jha Y. 2017. Potassium mobilizing bacteria: enhance potassium intake in paddy to regulates membrane permeability and accumulate carbohydrates under salinity stress. Brazilian Journal of Biological Sciences, 4(8): 333-344. doi: 10.21472/bjbs.040812

[18]	Ju C, Zhang W, Liu Y, et al. 2018. Genetic analysis of seedling root traits reveals the association of root trait with other agronomic traits in maize. BMC Plant Biology, 18(1): 171. doi: 10.1186/s12870-018-1383-5 pmid: 30111287

[19]	Kashtoh H, Baek K H. 2021. Structural and functional insights into the role of guard cell ion channels in abiotic stress-induced stomatal closure. Plants, 10(12): 2774. doi: 10.3390/plants10122774

[20]	Khan I, Awan S A, Ikram R, et al. 2021. Effects of 24-epibrassinolide on plant growth, antioxidants defense system, and endogenous hormones in two wheat varieties under drought stress. Physiologia Plantarum, 172(2): 696-706. doi: 10.1111/ppl.13237

[21]	Khan N, Bano A, Babar M. 2019a. The stimulatory effects of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria and plant growth regulators on wheat physiology grown in sandy soil. Archives of Microbiology, 201(6): 769-785. doi: 10.1007/s00203-019-01644-w

[22]	Khan N, Bano A, Babar M A. 2019b. Metabolic and physiological changes induced by plant growth regulators and plant growth promoting rhizobacteria and their impact on drought tolerance in Cicer arietinum L. PLoS ONE, 14(3): e0213040. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0213040

[23]	Khanghahi M Y, Pirdashti H, Rahimian H, et al. 2019. Leaf photosynthetic characteristics and photosystem II photochemistry of rice (Oryza sativa L.) under potassium-solubilizing bacteria inoculation. Photosynthetica, 57(2): 500-511. doi: 10.32615/ps.2019.065

[24]	Kim Y, Chung Y S, Lee E, et al. 2020. Root response to drought stress in rice (Oryza sativa L.). International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 21(4): 1513. doi: 10.3390/ijms21041513

[25]	Kumar A, Singh S, Gaurav A K, et al. 2020. Plant growth-promoting bacteria: biological tools for the mitigation of salinity stress in plants. Frontiers in Microbiology, 11(7): 1216. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2020.01216

[26]	Kumar P, Rouphael Y, Cardarelli M, et al. 2017. Vegetable grafting as a tool to improve drought resistance and water use efficiency. Frontiers in Plant Science, 8(1): 1130. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2017.01130

[27]	Li T, Ma J, Zou Y, et al. 2020. Quantitative trait loci for seeding root traits and the relationships between root and agronomic traits in common wheat. Genome, 63(1): 27-36. doi: 10.1139/gen-2019-0116 pmid: 31580743

[28]	Liu E, Mei X, Yan C, et al. 2016. Effects of water stress on photosynthetic characteristics, dry matter translocation and WUE in two winter wheat genotypes. Agricultural Water Management, 167: 75-85. doi: 10.1016/j.agwat.2015.12.026

[29]	Lombardini L, Rossi L. 2019. Ecophysiology of plants in dry environments, in Dryland Ecohydrology. Springer, Netherlands 71-100.

[30]	Lozano Y M, Aguilar-Trigueros C A, Flaig I C, et al. 2020. Root trait responses to drought are more heterogeneous than leaf trait responses. Functional Ecology, 34(11): 2224-2235. doi: 10.1111/1365-2435.13656

[31]	Lynch J P. 2018. Rightsizing root phenotypes for drought resistance. Journal of Experimental Botany, 69(13): 3279-3292. doi: 10.1093/jxb/ery048 pmid: 29471525

[32]	Maxwell K, Johnson G N. 2000. Chlorophyll fluorescence—a practical guide. Journal of Experimental Botany, 51(345): 659-668. doi: 10.1093/jxb/51.345.659 pmid: 10938857

[33]	Mirzaei M, Ladan Moghadam A, Hakimi L, et al. 2020. Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) improve plant growth, antioxidant capacity, and essential oil properties of lemongrass (Cymbopogon citratus) under water stress. Iranian Journal of Plant Physiology, 10(10): 3155-3166.

[34]	Mohammadi M H S, Etemadi N, Arab M M, et al. 2017. Molecular and physiological responses of Iranian Perennial ryegrass as affected by Trinexapac ethyl, Paclobutrazol and Abscisic acid under drought stress. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry, 111(1): 129-143. doi: 10.1016/j.plaphy.2016.11.014

[35]	Moretti L G, Crusciol C A, Kuramae E E, et al. 2020. Effects of growth-promoting bacteria on soybean root activity, plant development, and yield. Agronomy Journal, 112(1): 418-428. doi: 10.1002/agj2.20010

[36]	Rodríguez-Gamir J, Xue J M, Clearwater M J, et al. 2019. Aquaporin regulation in roots controls plant hydraulic conductance, stomatal conductance, and leaf water potential in Pinus radiata under water stress. Plant, Cell & Environment, 42(2): 717-729.

[37]	Ryan M G, Hubbard R M, Pongracic S, et al. 1996. Foliage, fine-root, woody-tissue and stand respiration in Pinus radiata in relation to nitrogen status. Tree Physiology, 16(3): 333-343. pmid: 14871734

[38]	Sati D, Pande V, Pandey S. et al. 2021. Recent advances in PGPR and molecular mechanisms involved in drought stress tolerance. Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, 1(1):1-9

[39]	Singleton V L, Rossi J A. 1965. Colorimetry of total phenolics with phosphomolybdic-phosphotungstic acid reagents. American Journal of Enology and Viticulture, 16(3): 144-158.

[40]	Şükran D, GÜNEŞ T, Sivaci R. 1998. Spectrophotometric determination of chlorophyll-A, B and total carotenoid contents of some algae species using different solvents. Turkish Journal of Botany, 22(1): 13-18.

[41]	Ullah N, Ditta A, Imtiaz M, et al. 2021. Appraisal for organic amendments and plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria to enhance crop productivity under drought stress: A review. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science, 207(5): 783-802. doi: 10.1111/jac.12502

[42]	Ullah S, Khan M Y, Asghar H N, et al. 2017. Differential response of single and co-inoculation of Rhizobium leguminosarum and Mesorhizobium ciceri for inducing water deficit stress tolerance in wheat. Annals of Microbiology, 67: 739-749. doi: 10.1007/s13213-017-1302-2

[43]	Vanhees D J, Schneider H M, Sidhu J S, et al. 2022. Soil penetration by maize roots is negatively related to ethylene-induced thickening. Plant, Cell and Environment, 45(3): 789-804. doi: 10.1111/pce.14175

[44]	Wang Z, Li G, Sun H, et al. 2018. Effects of drought stress on photosynthesis and photosynthetic electron transport chain in young apple tree leaves. Biology Open, 7(11): bio035279.

[45]	Xie L, Lehvävirta S, Timonen S, et al. 2018. Species-specific synergistic effects of two plant growth—promoting microbes on green roof plant biomass and photosynthetic efficiency. PLoS ONE, 13(12): e0209432. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0209432

[46]	Xu X, Du X, Wang F, et al. 2020. Effects of potassium levels on plant growth, accumulation and distribution of carbon, and nitrate metabolism in apple dwarf rootstock seedlings. Frontiers in Plant Science, 11: 904. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2020.00904 pmid: 32655607

[47]	Yaghoubi Khanghahi M, Pirdashti H, Rahimian H, et al. 2019. The role of potassium solubilizing bacteria (KSB) inoculations on grain yield, dry matter remobilization and translocation in rice (Oryza sativa L.). Journal of Plant Nutrition, 42(10): 1165-1179. doi: 10.1080/01904167.2019.1609511

[48]	Yasin N A, Zaheer M M, Khan W U, et al. 2018. The beneficial role of potassium in Cd-induced stress alleviation and growth improvement in Gladiolus grandiflora L. International Journal of phytoremediation, 20(3): 274-283. doi: 10.1080/15226514.2017.1374337

[49]	Yasmin H, Nosheen A, Naz R, et al. 2017. L-tryptophan-assisted PGPR-mediated induction of drought tolerance in maize (Zea mays L.). Journal of Plant Interactions, 12(1): 567-578. doi: 10.1080/17429145.2017.1402212

[50]	Yuan Y, Zu M, Sun L, et al. 2022. Isolation and Screening of 1-aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylic acid (ACC) deaminase producing PGPR from Paeonia lactiflora rhizosphere and enhancement of plant growth. Scientia Horticulturae, 297: 110956. doi: 10.1016/j.scienta.2022.110956

[51]	Zhu Y F, Wu Y X, Hu Y, et al. 2019. Tolerance of two apple rootstocks to short-term salt stress: focus on chlorophyll degradation, photosynthesis, hormone and leaf ultrastructures. Acta Physiologiae Plantarum, 41: 87. doi: 10.1007/s11738-019-2877-y

[1]	Fateme RIGI, Morteza SABERI, Mahdieh EBRAHIMI. *Improved drought tolerance in Festuca ovina* L. using plant growth promoting bacteria**[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2023, 15(6): 740-755.

[2]	Lobna MNIF FAKHFAKH, Mohamed CHAIEB. *Effects of water stress on growth phenology photosynthesis and leaf water potential in Stipagrostis ciliata* (Desf.) De Winter in North Africa**[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2023, 15(1): 77-90.

[3]	WANG Chunyuan, YU Minghan, DING Guodong, GAO Guanglei, ZHANG Linlin, HE Yingying, LIU Wei. *Size- and leaf age-dependent effects on the photosynthetic and physiological responses of Artemisia ordosica* to drought stress**[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2021, 13(7): 744-758.

[4]	HUANG Laiming, ZHAO Wen, SHAO Ming'an. Response of plant physiological parameters to soil water availability during prolonged drought is affected by soil texture[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2021, 13(7): 688-698.

[5]	MAMUT Jannathan, Dunyan TAN, C BASKIN Carol, M BASKIN Jerry. *Effects of water stress and NaCl stress on different life cycle stages of the cold desert annual Lachnoloma lehmannii* in China**[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2019, 11(5): 774-784.

[6]	DZIKITI Sebinasi, Z JOVANOVIC Nebo, DH BUGAN Richard, RAMOELO Abel, P MAJOZI Nobuhle, NICKLESS Alecia, A CHO Moses, C LE MAITRE David, NTSHIDI Zanele, H PIENAAR Harrison. Comparison of two remote sensing models for estimating evapotranspiration: algorithm evaluation and application in seasonally arid ecosystems in South Africa[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2019, 11(4): 495-512.

[7]	HaiNa ZHANG, PeiXi SU, ShanJia LI, ZiJuan ZHOU, TingTing XIE. *Response of root traits of Reaumuria soongorica* and Salsola passerina to facilitation**[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2014, 6(5): 628-636.

[8]	QiQiang GUO, WenHui ZHANG, HuiE LI. *Comparison of photosynthesis and antioxidative protection in Sophora moorcroftiana* and Caragana maximovicziana under water stress**[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2014, 6(5): 637-645.

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed