Comparative Study in Relation to Protein and Protein Profiling of Rhizobium Inoculated Desi and Kabuli Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) Genotypes
Fifteen genotypes of chickpea control and Rhizobium inoculated were investigated for protein content and genetic divergence based on seed protein profile using Sodium Dodecyl Sulphate Polyacrylamide Gel Electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE). Protein content of desi type was relatively higher than kabuli type. Protein content fifteen genotypes ranged from 18.76-23.58% in control, Rhizobium inoculated 19.83-24.54%. Desi and Kabuli genotype of chickpea Rhizobium inoculated gave some unique band in comparison to control genotype of chickpea. Desi genotypes gave some unique band in comparison to Kabuli genotypes of chickpea. Highest number of protein band found in PUSA 362, KWR 108 and followed by H82-2 and Phule G 5 whereas minimum number of protein bands were found in L550. It is clear from the result obtained that the chickpea genotype having highest number of protein band having highest quantity of protein. Maximum bands are of medium molecular weight followed by highest molecular weight and low molecular weight. Electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE) of seed storage protein can economically be used to assess, genetic variation and relation in genotypes. Thus, specific bands of seed storage protein profile may be used as markers for identification of the mutants/genotypes. The research results about the biochemical characteristics of desi chickpea varieties are expected to provide guidelines for the researchers confronted with the need to use such typical food seeds in India as well as in the rest of the world.
Received: January 27, 2014;
Accepted: March 03, 2014;
Published: April 11, 2014
Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) is the third most widely grown grain legume
in the world after bean and soyabean.The Mediterranean origin of the crop imparts
special significance to chickpea in the agriculture of this area, where it has
multiple functions in the traditional farming systems. Besides being an important
source of human and animal food, the crop also plays an important role in the
maintenance of soil fertility, particularly in the dry and rainfed area. In
addition, it is also widely used as green manure. Chickpea seeds contain about
20.6% protein, 61.2% carbohydrates and 2.2% fat (Saini
et al., 2004; Werner and Newton, 2005; Togay
et al., 2008). Chickpea is an important source of vegetable protein
(19-30%) in major part of the world. It is consumed as green vegetables (whole
pods or immature seed) in Asian countries and dry seed in Europe, Australia,
America and Mediterranean regions. Legume crops, the meat of poor,
are cultivated on a large area of Pakistan. Legumes, being rich sources of protein,
calories, certain minerals and vitamins play an important role in human nutrition
(Shad et al., 2009). Food legumes are crops
of the family Leguminosae also called Fabacae. World widely, these are mainly
grown on large area for their edible seeds and thus are also named grain legumes.
Iqbal et al. (2006) reported that legumes are
helpful in enhancing the protein content and improving the nutritional status
of the cereal-based diets. Iqbal et al. (2003)
investigated that cereal proteins are deficient in certain essential amino acids,
particularly lysine. Diversity in the genotypes is the foundation on which improvements
are built. If the genotypes do not have information on characterization, evaluation
and biochemical analyses, their utilization is limited. Genotypes without utilization
for crop improvement mean the wastage of resources. Sodium Dodecyl Sulphate
Polyacrylamide Gel Electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE) is used due to its validity and
simplicity for describing genetic structure of crop genotypes, but its implication
has been limited mainly to cereals due to less polymorphism in most of the legumes
(Ghafoor et al., 2002). Seed storage proteins
have been used as genetic markers obtained by electrophoresis to resolve the
taxonomic and evolutionary problems of several crop plants (Gupta
and Namdeo, 1997; Das and Mukherjee, 1995). Researchers
can use genetic similarity information to make decisions regarding the choice
for selecting superior genotypes for improvement or to be used as parents for
the development of future cultivars through hybridization. The present study
was initiated to study genetic diversity on the basis of seed protein profile
and its relationship with protein content in chickpea.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The present investigation on Biochemical and molecular studies on Rhizobium
inoculated chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) genotypes grown in eastern U.P.
was carried out at Students Instructional Farm and in the laboratory of
Department of Biochemistry during Rabi season of 2010-11 and 2011-12.
After harvesting the seeds were collected and stored in desiccators for the
analysis of various biochemical parameters. The protein content in chickpea
seed was determined by the Lowry et al. (1951).
One gram sample was taken and homogenized in presence of 10% TCA. The whole
content was finally centrifuged at 4000 rpm for 15 min. The residue was discarded.
Thereafter, 1 ml supernatant was taken and mixed with 1 mL 10% TCA. It was kept
for 30 min and the residue obtained was dissolved in 5 mL 0.1 N NaOH. 0.5 and1.0
mL sample extract was taken in another test tube and volume was made upto 1
mL with distilled water. Then, 5 mL alkaline copper reagent was added and it
was mixed properly. After 10 min 0.5 mL folins reagent was added and it
was kept at room temperature for 30 min. Finally, colour intensity was recorded
at 660 nm on spectronic-20 against the blank solution. Calculation was done
by standard curve using BSA as standard protein and results were expressed as
amount of protein in percent. Protein profiling was done by method given by
Laemmli (1970). The 0.25 g of chickpea seed was ground
in 1 mL sample extraction buffer with help of mortar and pestle. Then, transferred
the crushed material in to centrifuge tube of 15 mL capacity and centrifuged
at 10,000 rpm (C-24 remi, 12x15 mL Angle head) for 10 min, In cooling centrifuge
(4°C). Finally supernatant was transferred in to clean microfuge tube. Sample
were kept in the water bath for at 100°C for 5-7 min. Then it was centrifuged
at 5000 rpm (C-24 remi, 12x15 mL Angle head) for 5 min. Thoroughly cleaned glass
plates and spacers were assembled properly and were clamped in on upright position
on a gel casting unit with 1% agar on bottom to seal chamber leak proof between
glass plates. The gel solution was poured in the chamber between glass plates
carefully leaving space from the top and layer of distilled water was added
on top of the gel and allowed to polymerize for 30-60 min. After removing water
from the gel, stacking gel 4% was poured; comb was placed and kept for polymerizing
(30-45 min). The 60 μL protein sample were mixed with 40 μL of loading
dye. From this 70-80 μL was loaded into well with the help of micropipette
after proper loading the electrophase unit was connected with power supply and
run at 30 mA at 220 V. When the tracking dye reached of the end of running gel
after complete separation of molecules, power supply turned off. The gel was
gently removed from the space between the plates, immerged in the staining solution
contained in a tray. The gel was destained by putting it into the destaining
solution. The process was continued until the back ground was colorless. Dye
not bound to protein was removed. The relative mobility of the different protein
band were recorded by comparing the bands with their parents loaded with gel.
RESULTS AND DISCUTTION
The protein content of chickpea seeds have been presented in Table
1 recorded protein content ranged from 18.76-23.58% in control, Rhizobium
inoculated 19.83-24.54%. The protein content of chickpea seeds was estimated
and the maximum content of protein noticed in PUSA 362 (23.52%) followed by
KWR108 (22.90%), Phule G 5 (22.50%) in control, Rhizobium inoculated
PUSA 362 (24.52%) followed by C-235 (24.23%) KWR108 (24.20%) and lowest value
was in KKG 306 (19.54%) followed by L550 (19.25%), KAK 2 (18.75%), in control
whereas, Rhizobium inoculated KKG 306 (20.86%) followed by L550 (20.40%),
KAK 2 (19.80%) during 2010-11. In the second year maximum protein content was
reported in PUSA 362 (23.64%) followed by KWR108 (22.85%), Phule G 5 (22.60%)
in control, Rhizobium inoculated PUSA 362 (23.58%) followed by KWR108
(22.88%), Phule G 5 (22.56%) and lowest value was in KKG 306 (20.90%) followed
by L550 (20.45%), KAK 2 (19.85%), in control whereas, Rhizobium inoculated
KKG 306 (20.90%) followed by L550 (20.45%), KAK 2 (19.85%) during 2011-12. The
results regarding protein content of chickpea seeds varied significantly.
||Percentage of protein content in chickpea seeds
Protein profile by SDS-PAGE
seeds of fifteen genotypes of chickpea, (a) Without Rhizobium
and (b) With Rhizobium
inoculated, V1: Pusa-362, V2: KWR 108, V3:
H82-2, V4: NDG-54, V5: Phule G5, V6: RSG 888, V7: C-235, V8: DCP 92-3,
V9: Uday, V10: Pant G 186, V11: BG 2083, V12: KKG 306, V13: ICCV 10, V14:
L 550, V15: KAK 2
Out of 15 genotypes, genotype PUSA 362 was found superior genotype for both
of the years. The results are incoherence with Gupta and
Protein profiling have been presented in Fig. 1, the banding
patterns produced by the chickpea genotypes were less diverse. Desi genotypes
gave some unique band in comparison to Kabuli genotypes of chickpea. Highest
number of protein band found in PUSA 362, KWR 108 and followed by H82-2 and
Phule G 5 whereas minimum number of protein bands were found in L550. It is
clear from the result obtained that the chickpea genotype having highest number
of protein band having highest quantity of protein. Maximum bands are of medium
molecular weight followed by highest molecular weight and low molecular weight.
Maximum similarity among the desi-chickpea genotypes Pusa-362, KWR 108, H82-2,
NDG-54, Phule G5 in control, Rhizobium inoculated Pusa-362, KWR 108,
H82-2, NDG-54 was recorded 96% similarity. Maximum similarity among the kabuli
chickpea genotypes ICCV 10, KAK 2 in control, Rhizobium inoculated L
550, KAK 2 was recorded with 94% similarity.
Das, S. and K.K. Mukherjee, 1995. Comparative studies on seed proteins of Ipomoea spp. Seed Sci. Technol., 23: 501-509.
Ghafoor, A., Z. Ahmad, A.S. Qureshi and M. Bashir, 2002. Genetic relationship in Vigna mungo (L.) Hepper and V. radiata (L.) R. Wilczek based on morphological traits and SDS-PAGE. Euphytica, 123: 367-378.
CrossRef | Direct Link |
Gupta, S.C. and S.L. Namdeo, 1997. The effect of Rhizobium, phosphate solubilizing bacteria and FYM on nodulation, grain yield and quality of chickpea. Indian J. Pulses Res., 10: 171-174.
Iqbal, A., I.A. Khalil and H. Shah, 2003. Nutritional and amino acids composition of rice protein as influenced by nitrogen fertilizer. Sarhad J. Agric., 19: 127-134.
Direct Link |
Iqbal, A., I.A. Khalil, N. Ateeq and M.S. Khan, 2006. Nutritional quality of important food legumes. Food Chem., 97: 331-335.
CrossRef | Direct Link |
Laemmli, U.K., 1970. Cleavage of structural proteins during the assembly of the head of bacteriophage T4. Nature, 227: 680-685.
CrossRef | Direct Link |
Lowry, O.H., N.J. Rosebrough, A.L. Farr and R.J. Randall, 1951. Protein measurement with the folin phenol reagent. J. Biol. Chem., 193: 265-275.
PubMed | Direct Link |
Saini, V.K., S.C. Bhandari and J.C. Tarafdar, 2004. Comparison of crop yield, soil microbial C, N and P, N-fixation, nodulation and mycorrhizal infection in inoculated and non-inoculated sorghum and chickpea crops. Field Crop Res., 89: 39-47.
CrossRef | Direct Link |
Shad, M.A., H. Pervez, Z.I. Zafar, M. Zia-Ul-Haq and H. Nawaz, 2009. Evaluation of biochemical composition and physicochemical parameters of oil from seeds of desi chickpea varieties cultivated in arid zone of Pakistan. Pak. J. Bot., 41: 655-662.
Direct Link |
Togay, N., T. Togay, K.M. Cimrin and M. Turan, 2008. Effects of Rhizobium inoculation, sulphur and phosphorus applications on yield, yield components and nutrient uptakes in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). Afr. J. Biotechnol., 7: 776-782.
Direct Link |
Werner, D. and W.E. Newton, 2005. Nitrogen Fixation in Agriculture, Forestry, Ecology and the Environment. Springer, Netherlands, Pages: 349.