Back to all available

Investigating Genetic Variation for Zn Uptake in Bread Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) Germplasm

agricultural-science
genetics
plant-science
population-biology

Abstract

Zinc (Zn) is an essential micronutrient for normal growth and development, not only in plants but also in humans. Despite its established importance, Zinc absorption and availability remain complex due to many factors, including the variable capabilities of plants for Zn uptake and transport. This study was designed to evaluate the zinc uptake and translocation capabilities of 42 historical and elite genotypes after foliar application of Zinc Sulfate. Zn concentrations in harvested seeds were quantified by using atomic absorption spectroscopy (AAS). The results showed notable differences in the response of different genotypes, with several genotypes showing significant increases in seed Zn concentrations. After statistical analysis, the genotypes were categorized into responsive, neutral, and non-responsive groups based on grain zinc accumulation. The responsive group includes genotypes with maximum grain zinc content, including MILLET 11, KOHISTAN 97, and LASANI 08, exhibiting 84.69%, 76.29%, and 56.91% increase in Zn content, respectively, as a result of foliar application. The neutral group comprises genotypes P.B 76 LU 20 and ANAJ 17, responding marginally with 19.64%, 18.47%, and 12.71% increase in Zn content., The non-responsive group includes genotypes like ROHTAS, POTOHAR-93, and AARI 11, with no increase in grain Zn content after foliar application. This suggests variable responses of genotypes for grain Zn accumulation. In addition to Zn content, variations in agronomic traits were observed among different genotypes. Maximum plant height was observed in C 150 after foliar treatment. Maximum leaf area, spike length, and spikelets per spike were observed in P.B. 96, SANDAL 73, and LASANI 08 under foliar treatment. The genotype-wise trait analysis highlights the existence of significant genetic variability for both agronomic and nutritional traits under treatment conditions. The wide fluctuations in grain zinc content across genotypes point toward promising candidates for biofortification breeding. The parallel trends of leaf area, spike length, spikelets, and yield per plot reinforce their collective contribution to productivity. Crossing high-zinc donors (Zincol-2016, AARI 11) with high-yield genotypes (Punjab 11, Rohtas) will help overcome the yield–nutrition trade-off and produce segregants that are both nutritionally enriched and high-yielding, aligning with the dual goals of food security and nutritional improvement. At the same time, it emphasizes the importance of spike morphology traits (length and spikelets) as reliable predictors of yield performance. The presence of statistically significant positive correlations (p < 0.05) strengthens the reliability of these associations. These findings have important implications for breeding Zn-efficient wheat genotypes and combating Zn-nutrient deficiencies in humans.
Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.
  • PeerJ does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].