Genetic variability, heritability, and multivariate analysis of drought tolerance-related traits in field pea (Pisum sativum L.) under varying drought stresses

Muhammad Kamran; Tanveer Hussain; Ayesha Manzoor; Tamoor Hussain; Khuram Danial Shah; Muhammad Ali; Muhammad Tanveer Akhtar

doi:10.66432/e27z3t83

Muhammad Kamran * Department of Plant Breeding and Genetics, PMAS Arid Agriculture University, Rawalpindi, 46300, Pakistan , Dr. Tanveer Hussain Department of Horticulture, PMAS Arid Agriculture University, Rawalpindi, 46300, Pakistan , Ayesha Manzoor Barani Agricultural Research Institute, Chakwal, Pakistan. , Tamoor Hussain Barani Agricultural Research Institute, Chakwal, Pakistan. , Khuram Danial Shah Department of Plant Breeding and Genetics, PMAS Arid Agriculture University, Rawalpindi, 46300, Pakistan , Muhammad Ali Department of Plant Breeding and Genetics, PMAS Arid Agriculture University, Rawalpindi, 46300, Pakistan , Muhammad Tanveer Akhtar College of Horticulture and Landscape Architecture, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou 225009, China

* Corresponding author: muhammadkamran8385@gmail.com

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.66432/e27z3t83

Keywords:

Peas, Drought Stress, Drought Tolerance, Abiotic stress

Abstract

Field peas (Pisum sativum L.) withstand short-term drought stress; however, prolonged water deficiency causes a significant reduction in grain yield, reported up to 25%. Drought tolerance is a complex mechanism involving the morphological, physiological, molecular, and cellular mechanisms. This study aimed to quantify genetic variability and identify key physiological traits governing drought tolerance in field pea under contrasting water stresses. Thirty-six pea genotypes were utilized to determine the inheritance of drought tolerance using a completely randomized design (CRD). Key traits evaluated include plant height, leaf area, days to fifty percent flowering, root length, shoot to root ratio, chlorophyll content, electrolyte leakage, relative water content, and proline accumulation. Highly significant differences (P ≤ 0.01) were observed for all traits, indicating substantial genetic variability. Plant height, root length, relative water content, and chlorophyll content exhibited high GCV, heritability, and genetic advance, indicating strong additive gene action and suitability for selection. Under drought stress, physiological traits including relative water content, leaf area, and chlorophyll content remained key contributors to variability, as confirmed by principal component analysis. Findings revealed a strong positive correlation among root length, leaf area, and relative water content, highlighting their collective role in drought tolerance. In contrast, yield per plant showed weak and inconsistent correlations under stress, suggesting its complex inheritance and dependence on multiple interacting traits. This weak association of yield with individual traits under severe stress suggests that indirect selection through key physiological traits may be more effective for improving productivity under drought conditions. Traits such as root length, relative water content, and chlorophyll content can be effectively used for selecting drought-tolerant genotypes.

References

1. Dell’Olmo E, Tiberini A, Sigillo L. Leguminous Seedborne Pathogens: Seed Health and Sustainable Crop Management. Plants 2023;12:2040. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants12102040.

2. Alexandra D, Martín D-Z. Pea cultivation in semiarid regions: Yield, protein content, and climatic adaptability performance. Next Research 2025;2:100740. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nexres.2025.100740.

3. FAOSTATS. Agricultural production statistics. 2024. https://doi.org/10.4060/cd8035en.

4. Thakur J, Shinde B. Effect of water stress and AM fungi on the growth performance of pea. International Journal of Applied Biology 2020;4:36–43. https://doi.org/10.20956/ijab.v4i1.9446.

5. Wu D-T, Li W-X, Wan J-J, Hu Y-C, Gan R-Y, Zou L. A Comprehensive Review of Pea (Pisum sativum L.): Chemical Composition, Processing, Health Benefits, and Food Applications. Foods 2023;12:2527. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods12132527.

6. Kumari T, Deka SC. Potential health benefits of garden pea seeds and pods: A review. Legume Science 2021;3. https://doi.org/10.1002/leg3.82.

7. Sharma A, Yadav R, Sheoran R, Kumar P, Kaushik D, Dhaka K, et al. Evaluation of genotype × environment interactions for seed yield in field pea (Pisum sativum L.) genotypes using multivariate analysis model. Euphytica 2025;221:58. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10681-025-03507-6.

8. Singh B, Bohra A, Mishra S, Joshi R, Pandey S. Embracing new-generation “omics” tools to improve drought tolerance in cereal and food-legume crops. Biol Plant 2015;59:413–28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10535-015-0515-0.

9. Sánchez FJ, Manzanares M, de Andres EF, Tenorio JL, Ayerbe L. Turgor maintenance, osmotic adjustment and soluble sugar and proline accumulation in 49 pea cultivars in response to water stress. Field Crops Res 1998;59:225–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-4290(98)00125-7.

10. Prudhomme C, Giuntoli I, Robinson EL, Clark DB, Arnell NW, Dankers R, et al. Hydrological droughts in the 21st century, hotspots and uncertainties from a global multimodel ensemble experiment. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2014;111:3262–7. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1222473110.

11. Sanches M, Sampaio AM, Araújo S, van Eeuwijk F, Van Breusegem F, Vaz Patto MC. Grass pea (Lathyrus sativus) interesting panoply of mechanisms to cope with contrasting water stress conditions – a controlled study of sub populational differences in a worldwide collection of accessions. Agric Water Manag 2024;292:108664. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2023.108664.

12. RAMPINO P, PATALEO S, GERARDI C, MITA G, PERROTTA C. Drought stress response in wheat: physiological and molecular analysis of resistant and sensitive genotypes. Plant Cell Environ 2006;29:2143–52. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3040.2006.01588.x.

13. Carvalho M, Castro I, Moutinho-Pereira J, Correia C, Egea-Cortines M, Matos M, et al. Evaluating stress responses in cowpea under drought stress. J Plant Physiol 2019;241:153001. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jplph.2019.153001.

14. Bodah E, Braunwart K, Bodah B, Neckel A. A Rapid Morphological Screening Procedure for Pea (Pisum sativum L.) under Drought Stress in Greenhouse Settings. American Journal of Experimental Agriculture 2015;8:68–74. https://doi.org/10.9734/AJEA/2015/16669.

15. Barrs H, Weatherley P. A Re-Examination of the Relative Turgidity Technique for Estimating Water Deficits in Leaves. Aust J Biol Sci 1962;15:413. https://doi.org/10.1071/BI9620413.

16. Bates LS, Waldren RP, Teare ID. Rapid determination of free proline for water-stress studies. Plant Soil 1973;39:205–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00018060.

17. Arafa SA, Attia KA, Niedbała G, Piekutowska M, Alamery S, Abdelaal K, et al. Seed Priming Boost Adaptation in Pea Plants under Drought Stress. Plants 2021;10:2201. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants10102201.

18. Singh S, Verma V, Singh B, Sharma VR, Kumar M. Genetic variability, heritability and genetic advance studies in pea (Pisum sativum L.) for quantitative characters. Indian J Agric Res 2019. https://doi.org/10.18805/IJARe.A-5245.

19. AL-Quraan NA, Al-Ajlouni ZI, Qawasma NF. Physiological and Biochemical Characterization of the GABA Shunt Pathway in Pea (Pisum sativum L.) Seedlings under Drought Stress. Horticulturae 2021;7:125. https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae7060125.

20. Bagheri M, Santos CS, Rubiales D, Vasconcelos MW. Challenges in pea breeding for tolerance to drought: Status and prospects. Annals of Applied Biology 2023;183:108–20. https://doi.org/10.1111/aab.12840.

21. Blicharz S, Beemster GTS, Ragni L, De Diego N, Spíchal L, Hernándiz AE, et al. Phloem exudate metabolic content reflects the response to water‐deficit stress in pea plants (Pisum sativum L.). The Plant Journal 2021;106:1338–55. https://doi.org/10.1111/tpj.15240.