FEEDING PREFERENCE OF SILKWORM LARVAE DEPENDING ON BIOCHEMICAL ATTRIBUTES RELATED TO MULBERRY GENOTYPES
Objective: The silkworm rearing was influenced by different mulberry cultivars according to the biochemical properties of leaves. In this present study, a comparative analysis was made to investigate feeding preference of silkworm larvae depending on biochemical attributes of mulberry genotypes.
Methods: For this purpose, seven different mulberry cultivars and one germ plasm namely Dudhiya was selected. F1 hybrid (Nistari Ã— bivoltine) of silkworm larvae was reared under selected cultivars of mulberry leaves at different seasons. Biochemical assessment of all leaves was also done.
Results: Among these, S1, V1 and S1635 mulberry cultivars showed higher amount of total protein, total sugar and chlorophyll, also exhibited better feeding response on economic attributes of silkworm. Maximum accumulation of ascorbic acid and glutathione was recorded during winter in Dudhiya leaves. The accumulation of H2O2, superoxide and lipid peroxidation was comparatively higher than other cultivars during stress period in Dudhiya. Statistical analysis revealed that larval growth and economical parameters depend on biochemical properties of leaves and inversely associated with excessive production of Reactive oxygen species (ROS).
Conclusion: The scavenger and ROS ratio was properly maintained in S1, V1 and S1635 leaves which might help leaf metabolic homeostasis. Proper metabolic activities of leaves possibly will produce higher proteins and carbohydrates which were required for larval growth and silk production as established from the PCA plot analysis. Therefore S1, V1 and S1635 might be recommended for silkworm rearing or commercial cultivation purpose throughout all season.
Keywords: Silkworm, Mulberry cultivars, Proline, Reactive Oxygen Species (ROS), MDA, Single cocoon weight.Â
2. Ito T. Silkworm nutrition in the silkworm an important laboratory tool. Tazima Y. ed. Ko. Ltd. Tokyo; 1978.
3. Susheelamma BN, Jolly MS, Giridhar K, Sengupta K. Evaluation of germplasm genotypes for the drought resistance in mulberry. Sericologia 1990;30:327-40.
4. Terman A, Brunk UT. Oxidative stress, accumulation of biological â€˜garbageâ€™, and aging. Antioxid Redox Signaling 2006;8:197-204.
5. Reddy AR, Chaitanya KV, Jutur PP, Gnanam A. Photosynthesis and oxidative stress responses to water deficit in five different mulberries (Morus alba L.) cultivars. Physiol Mol Biol Plants 2005;11:291-8.
6. Reddy AR, Chaitanya KV, Jutur PP, Sumitra K. Differential antioxidative responses to water stress among five mulberry (Morus alba L.) cultivars. Environ Exp Bot 2004;52:33-42.
7. Chaitanya KV, Jutur PP, Sundar D, Reddy AR. Water stress effects on photosynthesis in different mulberry cultivars. Plant Growth Regul 2003;40:75-80.
8. Kotresha D, Rao AP, Srinivas N, Vidyasagar GM. Antioxidative response to drought and high-temperature stress in selected mulberry genotypes. Physiol Mol Biol Plants 2007;13:57-63.
9. Guha A, Sengupta D, Rasineni GK, Reddy AR. Non-enzymatic antioxidative defence in drought-stressed mulberry (Morus indica L.) genotypes. Trees 2012;26:903-18.
10. Gangwar SK. The impact of varietal feeding of eight Mulberry varieties on Bombyx mori L. Agric Biol J North Am 2010;1:350-4.
11. Bates LS, Walderen RP, Teare ID. Rapid determination of free proline for water stress studies. Plant Soil 1973;39:205-7.
12. Arnon DI. Estimation of chlorophyll (DMSO). Plant Physiol 1949;24:1-15.
13. Lichtenthaler HK, Wellburnn AR. Determination of total carotinoids and chl-a chl-b of leaf extracts in different solvents. Biochem Soc Trans 1983;603:531-92.
14. Thimmaiah SR. Standard methods of biochemical analysis. Kalyani publishers, New Delhi, India; 2004.
15. Sadasivam S, Manickam A. Biochemical methods. 2nd Ed. New Age International (P) Ltd. and Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore; 1996.
16. Lowry OH, Rosebrough NJ, Farr AL, Randall RJ. Protein measurement with the folin phenol reagent. J Biol Chem 1951;193:265.
17. Griffith OW, Meister A. Potent and specific inhibition of glutathione synthesis by buthionine sulfoximine (s-n-but homocysteine sulfoximine). J Biol Chem 1979;254:7558-60.
18. Fu J, Huang B. Involvement of antioxidants and lipid peroxidation in the adaptation of two cool-season grasses to localized drought stress. Environ Exp Bot 2001;45:105-14.
19. Becana M, Aparicio-Tejo P, Irigoyen JJ, Sanchez-Diaz M. Some enzymes of hydrogen peroxide metabolism in leaves and root nodules of Medicago sativa. Plant Physiol 1986;82:1169-71.
20. Doke N. Involvement of superoxide anion generation in the hypersensitive response of potato tuber tissues to infection with an incompatible race of Phytophthora infestans and to the hyphal wall components. Physiol Plant Pathol 1983;23:345-57.
21. Omaye ST, Turnbull JD, Sauberilich HE. Selected methods for the determination of ascorbic acid in animal cells, tissues and fluids. Methods Enzymol 1979;62:3-11.
22. Das BC, Sahu PK, Sengupta T, Misra AK, Saratchandra B, Sen SK. Genetic variability in some physiological traits in mulberry. Indian J Plant Physiol 2001;6:162-5.
23. Tewari RK, Kumar P, Sharma PN. Oxidative stress and antioxidant responses in young leaves of mulberry plants grown under nitrogen, phosphorus or potassium deficiency. J Integr Plant Biol 2007;49:313-22.
24. Tewari RK, Kumar P, Sharma PN. Oxidative stress and antioxidant responses of mulberry (Morus alba) plant subjected to deficiency and excess of manganese. Acta Physiol Plant 2013;35:3345-56.
25. Yogananda Murthy VN, Ramesh HL, Lokesh G, Munirajappa, Yadav BRD. Leaf quality evaluation often mulberries (Morus) germplasm varieties through phytochemical analysis. Int J Pharm Sci Rev Res 2013;21:182-9.
26. Sarkar A. Effects of feeding different races of silkworm (Bombyx mori L.) with mulberry (Morus indica L.) leaves varying in ploidy level. Sericologia 1993;33:25-34.
27. Raggi V. Changes in free amino acids and osmotic adjustments in leaves of water-stressed bean. Physiol Plantarum 1994;9:427-34.
28. Bongale UD, Chaluvachari. Evaluation of eight mulberry germplasm varieties by leaf biochemical and bio-assay moulting studies. Sericologia 1995;35:83-94.
29. Mishra RK, Choudhury PC, Mathur VB, Ghosh A. Studies on the development of a package of cultivation for mulberry garden exclusively for young age silkworm rearing. Indian J Seric 1996;35:10-8.
30. Ram Rao DM, Reddy MP, BK, Suryanarayana N. Nitrate reductase (NR) activity and its relationship with protein content, leaf yield and its components in mulberry. Indian J Seric 2000;39:86-8.
31. Matei A, Tanase DB, Diaconescu C, Constantinescu M, Dolis M. Contributions to the study of the leaf protein value in different mulberry varieties. Archiva Zootechnica 2006;9:153-7.
32. Chaluvachari, Bongale UD. Bioassay moulting response of silkworm Bombyx mori L. in relation to leaf nutritive constituents in mulberry (Morus spp.) genotypes. Indian J Seric 1996;35:160-2.
33. Hotta. Textbook of tropical sericulture. Japan Overseas Co-Operative Volunteer, Tokyo; 1975.
34. Santosha Gowda V Patil. Evaluation of promising genotype S1635 under irrigated conditions. Indian Silk 2002;41:7-9.
35. Purohit KM, Pavankumar T. Influence of various agronomical practices in India on the leaf quality in mulberry, a review. Sericologia 1996;36:27-39.
36. Kumar H, Priya YS, Kumar M, Elangovan V. Effect of different mulberry varieties and seasons on growth and economic traits of bivoltine silkworm (Bombyx mori). J Entomol 2013;10:147-55.
37. Julia Bailey-Serres, Ron Mittler. The roles of reactive oxygen species in plant cells. Plant Physiol 2006;141:311.
38. Gapper C, Dolan L. Control of plant development by reactive oxygen species. Plant Physiol 2006;141:341-5.