Next Article in Journal
Assessment of Genetic Diversity of Rice in Registered Cultivars and Farmers’ Fields in Burkina Faso
Next Article in Special Issue
Genome-Wide Association Mapping of Seedling Vigor and Regrowth Vigor in Winter Wheat
Previous Article in Journal
Effect of Leaf Age, Leaf Segments and Surface Treatments on Pathogenicity Levels of Colletotrichum sublineola in Sorghum and Johnson Grass
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Crops
Volume 1
Issue 3
10.3390/crops1030012
crops-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Drought and Elevated Carbon Dioxide Impact the Morphophysiological Profile of Basil (Ocimum basilicum L.)

by
T. Casey Barickman
1,*,
Bikash Adhikari
1,
Akanksha Sehgal
2,
C. Hunt Walne
2,
K. Raja Reddy
2 and
Wei Gao
3
1
North Mississippi Research and Extension Center, Mississippi State University, Verona, MS 38879, USA
2
Department of Plant and Soil Sciences, Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, MS 39762, USA
3
USDA UVB Monitoring and Research Program, Natural Resource Ecology Laboratory, Department of Ecosystem Science and Sustainability, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Crops 2021, 1(3), 118-128; https://doi.org/10.3390/crops1030012
Submission received: 22 September 2021 / Revised: 25 October 2021 / Accepted: 26 October 2021 / Published: 31 October 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Priming-Mediated Abiotic Stress and Cross-Stress Tolerance in Crop Plants: Physiological, Biochemical and Molecular Interventions)
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Treating plants with elevated carbon dioxide (eCO2) can increase their drought tolerance. Increased atmospheric CO2, a fundamental factor in climate change, may compensate for the drought-induced reduction in crop growth and yield. Basil, being moderately sensitive to drought stress (DS), experiences several morphological changes under DS. Thus, we designed an experiment that addresses how DS and different levels of CO2 affect the overall morphological growth patterns during basil’s early and late-season growth. The experiment was conducted under four different growth conditions: two water treatments, (1) a full-strength Hoagland’s solution was added to the basil plants at 120% of the evapotranspiration each day, and (2) 50% of the full-strength Hoagland’s solution was added to basil plants for the drought treatment, alongside two levels of CO2 application [ambient 420 ppm (aCO2) and elevated 720 ppm (eCO2)]). The DS had a severe impact on the morphological traits of the shoot and root systems. Compared to control, DS reduced the marketable fresh mass (FM) by 31.6% and 55.2% in the early and late stages of growth. FM was highest under control + eCO2 (94.4–613.7 g) and lowest under DS + aCO2 (67.9–275.5 g). Plant height under DS + aCO2 and DS + eCO2 reduced by 16.8% and 10.6% during the late season. On the other hand, dry mass percent (DM%) increased by 31.6% and 55.2% under DS + eCO2 compared to control in the early and late stages of growth, respectively. This study suggested that eCO2 during DS significantly impacts basil morphological traits compared to aCO2. Besides, anthocyanin decreased by 10% in DS + aCO2 and increased by 12.6% in DS + aCO2 compared to control. Similarly, nitrogen balance index, a ratio of chlorophyll and flavonoids, was recorded to be the highest in DS + aCO2 (40.8) compared to any other treatments. Overall, this study indicates that the suppression of basil’s morphophysiological traits by DS is more prominent in its later growth stage than in the earlier stages, and eCO2 played an important role in alleviating the negative effect of DS by increasing the DM% by 55%.

1. Introduction

The progression of climate change has made the global agricultural system vulnerable and has negatively impacted overall agrarian production [1]. The increasing linear warming trend of 0.74 °C over 100 years (1906–2005) and an expected increment of 1.1 to 6.4 °C by the end of the 21st century have become a massive threat to agriculture [2,3]. Likewise, the increased atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) is a fundamental factor in climate change and may compensate for the environmentally induced reduction in crop growth and yield [4]. The increasing level of global atmospheric CO2 (increased by 40% in 2011, i.e., 278–390.5 ppm, and 413.35 ppm in 2020) and its projected rise to 970 ppm by the 21st century suggests a disturbance in climatic resilience to these stress factors [3]. The difference in rainfall patterns comprises a decline in rainwater and increased rainfall intensity over a short period [5]. Thus, it is unequivocal that higher temperatures and uncertain rainfall patterns will increase drying conditions worldwide [1]. Moreover, the anticipated growing drought due to elevated atmospheric CO2 and temperature will affect crops’ growth and development, including basil (Ocimum basilicum L.) [6]. Therefore, it is crucial to assess climate change’s influence on drought stress (DS) conditions for effective DS mitigation and crop adaptation [7,8].
Basil is a culinary and medicinal herb that grows best under warm climatic conditions [9], with an optimal temperature range of 25–30 °C [10]. However, a supplemental water supply is mandatory for the successful commercial production of basil. Several studies on the irrigation of basil have reported sensitivity to DS [11,12]. In general, basil (C3 plants) is grown under a wide range of environmental conditions. The plant reacts to DS via a series of morphological and cellular responses [13]. Previous research has indicated that DS decreases the number and branching of the stems, decreases internode length size, and reduces plant height (Ht), leaf area (LA), nodal length, stem diameter, root, and shoot yield in basil [14,15].
Basil’s response to elevated CO2 (eCO2) has not been appropriately explored in the past. However, eCO2 is considered an innovative approach to improve plants’ vegetative growth and nutritional value [16]. For example, eCO2 increased the yield of leafy vegetables by 38% and stem vegetables by 17% [17]. eCO2 also improves the biomass production in basil by 48% (Al Jaouni et al., 2018) and enhances chlorophyll content in the leaves [18]. A study on several leafy and stem vegetables reported that eCO2 enhanced the total biomass, yield, and dry matter content [17]. These morphological and nutritional benefits in basil due to eCO2 could help to increase its production efficiencies and nutritional value.
Many multidisciplinary approaches have reported the role and effect of DS and eCO2 levels on crops under global climate change scenarios in recent years. However, very few studies have investigated the interactive effects of DS and eCO2 on growth and basil development. Our understanding of the underlying implication of eCO2 under DS conditions in basil is still inconclusive. A previous study reported that basil production increased up to 80%, increasing CO2 levels from 360 to 620 ppm [4]. Similarly, the potential of DS tolerance in basil makes it an excellent alternative crop in dry regions [15,19] due to its high economic value. Besides, the study of basil’s morphophysiological parameters under DS will help identify basil traits resistant to DS [20]. Thus, the current study’s primary purpose is to understand the effect of DS coupled with eCO2 on morpho-physiological attributes in basil.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Plant Materials and Growing Condition

Basil’ Genovese (Johnny’s Selected Seeds, Winslow, ME) seeds were sown in polyvinyl-chloride pots (15.2 cm diameter by 30.5 cm height) filled with a soil medium consisting of 3:1 sand/soil classified as a sandy loam (87% sand, 2% clay, and 11% silt) with a 500 g of gravel at the bottom of each pot. Six seeds were sown in each pot, and the plants were thinned to one plant per pot approximately seven days after emergence. Pots were organized in a randomized complete block design within a three-by-two factorial arrangement with temperature and CO2 treatments. A total of four Soil-Plant-Atmosphere-Research (SPAR) chambers represents two blocks (ten replications each). Each SPAR chamber consisted of 3 rows of pots (ten pots per row). All environmental growing conditions were kept the same throughout the experiment except for irrigation volumes and CO2. More detailed information on the SPAR chamber was earlier described by Reddy et al. [21] and Wijewardana et al. [22].
Basil plants were irrigated three times per day using an automated computer-controlled drip system with full-strength Hoagland’s nutrient solution [23]. Irrigation was provided at 700, 1200, and 1700 h, based on evapotranspiration values. Evapotranspiration rates expressed on the ground area (L·d-1) throughout the treatment period were measured in each SPAR unit as the rate at which the cooling coils removed the condensate at 900-s intervals [21,24,25]. They were obtained by measuring the mass of water in collection devices connected to a calibrated pressure transducer.

2.2. Treatments Application

Basil plants were randomly assigned to each chamber consisting of 30/22 (day/night), in combination with ambient (420 ppm) (aCO2) or elevated (720 ppm) (eCO2) carbon dioxide concentrations. The daytime temperatures were initiated at sunrise and nighttime temperatures 1 h after sunset. There were two water treatments, imposed at 14 days after sowing (DAS) for the experiments: (1) a full-strength Hoagland’s solution [23] was added to the basil plants at 120% of the evapotranspiration each day, and (2) 50% of the full-strength Hoagland’s solution was added to basil plants for the DS treatment.

2.3. Phenology and Growth

Basil plants from each treatment combination were harvested to obtain phenotype and growth data on early and late-stage growth effects of DS and CO2 at 17 and 38 days after treatment (DAT). Basil phenotypic data of Ht, node number (NN), branch number (BN), fresh mass (FM) were measured. Dry mass (DM) of the leaf (LDM), stem (SDM), root (RDM), shoot (ShDM), and whole plant (TDM) were measured for each treatment combination. Root to Shoot Ratio (RS) was measured using the ratio of RDM and ShDM.
LA was measured using the LI-3100 leaf-area meter (Li-Cor Bioscience, Lincoln, NE). Using a weighing scale, plant component FM was extracted from all basil plants. The plant FM samples were then dried for two days at 75 °C in a forced-air oven to yield basil DM. The DM percent (DM%) was calculated using (Shoot DM/FM) × 100%.

2.4. Root Image Acquisition and Analysis

Roots were cut and separated from the stems and washed thoroughly. The total root length (TRL) was determined using a ruler. The cleaned individual root systems were floated in 5 mm of water in a 0.3- by 0.2-m Plexiglas tray. Roots were untangled and separated with a plastic paintbrush to minimize root overlap. The tray was placed on top of a specialized dual-scan optical scanner (Regent Instruments, Inc., Quebec, QC, Canada) linked to a computer. Gray-scale root images were acquired by setting the parameters to high accuracy (resolution 800 × 800 dpi). Acquired images were analyzed for the lateral root length (LRL), root surface area (RSA), average root diameter (RAD), root volume (RV), number of root tips (RT), root forks (RF), and root crossings (RC) using WinRHIZO Pro software (Regent Instruments).

2.5. Morpho-Physiological Measurements

Leaf chlorophyll content (chlorophyll), epidermal flavonoids, epidermal anthocyanin, and nitrogen balance index (NBI) were measured on the second uppermost recently fully expanded leaf, second from the top, under each of three temperature treatments with a Dualex® Scientific Polyphenols and Chlorophyll Meter (FORCE-A, Orsay, France) at 38 DAT.

2.6. Data Analysis

Statistical analysis of the data was performed using SAS (version 9.4; SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA). Data were analyzed using the PROC GLIMMIX analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by mean separation. The experimental design was a randomized complete block in a factorial arrangement with two water and two CO2 treatments, three-block, and ten replications. The standard errors were based on the pooled error term from the ANOVA table. Duncan’s multiple range test (p ≤ 0.05) was used to differentiate treatment classifications when F values were significant for main effects. Model-based values were reported rather than the unequal standard error from a data-based calculation because pooled errors reflect the statistical testing. Diagnostic tests were conducted to ensure that treatment variances were statistically equal before pooling.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Morphological Traits

It is widely understood that basil thrives well under a 70% soil water capacity [26]. Our result indicated that the DS (water supply at 50% or less than 50% soil water capacity) affects the Ht, LA, and FM, as well as several other basil’s morphological traits. A report on basil demonstrated that TDM yield and Ht decreased by 31.6% and 26%, respectively, due to DS [15]. Forouzandeh et al. [15] also reported several other morphological parameters such as that FM, ShDM, and RDM decreased by 42.2–60.1% under the DS with 60% soil water capacity in basil. Like DS, eCO2 is also considered an important environmental factor in affecting the economic yield of C3 plants such as basil [4]. Since these two factors occur concurrently, it is important to study the individual and combined factors to investigate potential interaction among factors. Morphological responses to DS in basil and most agronomic and horticultural crops include slow growth rate, reduced LA and LN, and increased RV and RS [27]. At 17 DAT, the interactive effect (p < 0.001) between DS + eCO2 as well as DS + aCO2 was observed on the Ht (Table 1). There was a significant decrease in Ht by 9.6% (p < 0.05) under DS + aCO2 compared to control on 17 DAT. However, there was no difference for Ht of DS + eCO2 compared to the control on 17 DAT. The decrease in Ht under DS + aCO2 and DS + eCO2 was observed by 16.8% and 10.6%, respectively, on 38 DAT, compared to control. Previous research indicated that DS in commercial basil cultivars significantly reduced Ht [28]. However, the eCO2 can increase the Ht of basil by 8.5%, as reported by Singh et al. [29]. Consequently, the observed reduction in Ht in this study may be due to the disturbance in the basil metabolic process leading to poor cell division and elongation [30].
A previous study reported that DS reduced DM% by 31.5% in basil [15,28]. On the other hand, Singh et al. [29] demonstrated that DM increases by 34.4% in basil treated with 800 ppm CO2. Moreover, eCO2 decreases stomatal conductance and increases photosynthetic rates, reducing transpiration and higher water use efficiency [31,32]. Also, it was reported that CO2 use becomes more efficient under DS when there is more supply of CO2 [33]. As reported earlier, an increase in water use efficiency under DS due to eCO2 also increases DM [34]. In support, eCO2 under DS is expected to start carbon fixation and prolong active growth by maintaining the soil water reserved for longer [35]. Likewise, in the current study, the DM% increased significantly by 31.6% and 55.2% under DS + eCO2 compared to control on 17 DAT and 38 DAT, respectively (Table 1 and Table 2). Thus, it can be suggested that eCO2 ameliorated the adverse effect of DS on DM by increasing the water use efficiency in basil through more carbon assimilation, which leads to more biomass accumulation.
The leaf is considered the most drought-sensitive part of the plant [31]. It is also responsible for reducing water loss and promoting water use efficiency during DS [36]. In the current study, LA decreased by 19% under both DS + aCO2 and DS + eCO2 treatment on 17 DAT compared to control. Similarly, LA decreased by 43.6% and 50.8% under both DS + aCO2 and DS + eCO2 treatment on 38 DAT compared to control. Previous research indicated that basil LA decreased under DS [37]. Similarly, an experiment conducted on sunflowers also demonstrated a significant reduction in LA under the DS [38].
Conversely, different fruits, vegetables, basil, and several other C3 plants treated with eCO2 have demonstrated an increase in LA [29]. In the present study, eCO2 fails to amend the effect of DS on LA, further supported by soybean reports [39]. In plants subjected to DS, their cell weakens, leading to low water potential and low turgor pressure and, ultimately, reduced growth [28], thus demonstrating that these factors are behind LA’s reduction in basil [40].
In the current study, basil FM was also significantly (p < 0.01) reduced under the DS + aCO2 and DS + eCO2 treatment at 17 DAT and 38 DAT, which is further supported by previous research on basil [41]. It is worth noting that FM was highest under control condition at eCO2 level and was lowest under DS at both CO2 levels on 17 and 38 DAT (Table 3 and Table 4). It is important to note that the water retention under DS + eCO2 in the later season was poor, as shown in Table 4. A study in cork oak by Vaz et al. [42] reported that the effect of eCO2 can deteriorate under any stress in the long run, which can make a difference in leaf morphology.
Other the other hand, a previous study demonstrated an increase in FM in basil by 54.1% under eCO2 (827 ppm) + non-drought conditions (control) [43]. O’Leary et al. [43] also reported that, although eCO2 helps to mitigate the negative effect of DS on FM through improved water use efficiency, eCO2 always performs better under water-sufficient conditions (>70% soil water capacity). For this reason, FM was recorded the lowest under DS at both CO2 levels in this study.
TDM and yield were reduced by 34% under deficit irrigation in different basil cultivars [26]. However, in our study, there was no interaction between DS and CO2 treatments when analyzing DM%, NN, BN, LDM, SDM, RDM, ShDM, and RS compared to the control treatment on 17 DAT (Table 1 and Table 3). On 38 DAT, there was no interaction effect between DS and CO2 treatments on any morphological parameters (Table 4).
The root system is responsible for absorbing water and nutrients from the soil, and it plays an essential role in the plant’s response to DS [36]. Some C3 and C4 plants have the robust ability to increase root growth at the early stage of DS to absorb water from the deep soil [44]. This suggests that the density, length, volume, and mass of roots are directly associated with crop DS resistance [45,46]. The root tissues were measured at 17 DAT (Table 5). However, none of the parameters (LRL, TRL, RSA, RAD, RV, RT, RF, or RC showed the interactive effects of the DS and CO2 treatments. A treatment effect (p < 0.01) was observed in LRL, where there was a significant decrease in LRL by 13.5% under DS + eCO2 compared to control at 17 DAT. Interestingly, RV, RT, RF, and RC increased by 13–20% under DS + eCO2 than control under aCO2. A report on cucumber demonstrated that an increasing CO2 level from 400 to 1200 ppm increases RV and RT by 6–8% [47]. In a review by Rogers et al. [48], approximately 150 studies concluded that 92% of root growth increased with eCO2, further supporting the current study’s result.

3.2. Physiological Measurements

Drought is a significant factor for damaging the photosynthetic pigments and thylakoid membranes [49]. DS also inhibits plants’ photosynthetic apparatuses by declining CO2 availability and stomatal closure [50]. To study basil’s leaf physiology changes under DS, different physiological parameters such as chlorophyll content, flavonoids, anthocyanin, and NBI were measured (Table 6). Flavonoid is a ubiquitous secondary metabolite in plants, which helps to protect the plant from abiotic and biotic stresses, while anthocyanin reduces the damage caused by free radical activity [51]. Both anthocyanin and flavonoid compounds are responsible for antioxidant activity in plants [52]. Both compounds increased under the DS + eCO2 conditions [53,54]. However, in the present findings, the flavonoid was indifferent to the control treatment under the DS + eCO2 condition, which contradicts the earlier report on basil by Al Jaouni et al. [4]. Previous research demonstrated that anthocyanin decreased under DS + aCO2 but increased under DS + eCO2 [53,55]. These reports support the recent finding where anthocyanin decreased by 10% in DS + aCO2 and increased by 12.6% in DS + eCO2 compared to control. Similarly, NBI, a ratio of chlorophyll and flavonoid, was measured, and it was recorded to be the highest in DS + aCO2 (40.8) compared to any other treatments. A study by Taub and Wang [56] reported that plants grown under eCO2 had decreased nitrogen concentration compared to plants grown under aCO2.
Similarly, DS is also responsible for decreasing the nitrogen isotope composition and the transient decrease in chlorophyll, which increases the accumulation of anthocyanin [57]. In the present study, chlorophyll increased by 20% and 16% under DS when aCO2 and eCO2 were applied, respectively, compared to control. In brief, DS + eCO2 promotes chlorophyll and inhibits NBI, increasing the accumulation of anthocyanin.

4. Conclusions

This study provides evidence that DS + eCO2 has a significant positive impact on basil’s overall morphology. eCO2 remarkably reduced the negative effect of DS by promoting several morphological traits such as DM, RV, RT, RF, and RC. The DS had a severe impact on several morphological traits comprising both shoot and root systems. Compared to control, the DS reduces the marketable FM remarkably by 31.6% and 55.2% in the early and late basil season. FM is the highest under control + eCO2 (94.4–613.7 g), while it was the lowest under DS + aCO2 (67.9–275.5 g). Similarly, Ht reduction under DS + eCO2 (10.6%) is significantly lower than DS + aCO2 (16.8%) during the late season. DM increases by 31.6% and 55.2% under DS + eCO2 compared to control in the early and late season, respectively.
This study suggests that eCO2 during DS has a more significant positive effect on basil morphological traits than aCO2. Also, eCO2 positively impacted and increased the NBI and chlorophyll by alleviating the negative impact of DS. Conversely, eCO2 failed to lessen the adverse effect of DS on FM, LA, and Ht. Overall, this study indicates that DS impacted the basil more strongly in the late rather than in the early season, and eCO2 in the late season has a more significant impact on some basil’s morphological traits such as LA, FM, RDM, ShDM, and TDM than aCO2.

Author Contributions

T.C.B.: conceptualization, methodology, validation, formal analysis, investigation, resources, data curation, writing—original draft, writing—review & editing, visualization, supervision, project administration, funding acquisition. B.A.: formal analysis, writing—original draft, writing—review & editing. A.S.: methodology, validation, investigation. C.H.W.: methodology, validation, formal analysis, investigation. K.R.R.: conceptualization, methodology, validation, formal analysis, investigation, resources, data curation, writing—review & editing, visualization, supervision, project administration, funding acquisition. W.G.: conceptualization, methodology, validation, resources, funding acquisition. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This material is based on the work supported by the USDA-NIFA Hatch Project under accession number 149210, and the National Institute of Food and Agriculture, 2019-34263-30552, and MIS 043050 funded this research.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author.

Acknowledgments

We thank David Brand for technical assistance and graduate students at the Environmental Plant Physiology Laboratory for their help during data collection. We would also like to thank Thomas Horgan for his technical assistance on the project.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

References

  1. Vanli, Ö.; Ustundag, B.B.; Ahmad, I.; Hernandez-Ochoa, I.M.; Hoogenboom, G. Using crop modeling to evaluate the impacts of climate change on wheat in southeastern turkey. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2019, 26, 29397–29408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. IPCC Climate change 2007: The physical science basis. Agenda 2007, 6, 333.
  3. Stocker, T.F.; Qin, D.; Plattner, G.-K.; Tignor, M.M.B.; Allen, S.K.; Boschung, J.; Nauels, A.; Xia, Y.; Bex, V.; Midgley, P.M. Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis; Contribution of Working Group I to the fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; IPCC: Cambridge, UK; New York, NY, USA, , 2013; Available online: https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2017/09/WG1AR5_Frontmatter_FINAL.pdf (accessed on 27 October 2021).
  4. Al-Jaouni, S.; Saleh, A.M.; Wadaan, M.A.M.; Hozzein, W.N.; Selim, S.; AbdElgawad, H. Elevated CO2 induces a global metabolic change in basil (Ocimum basilicum L.) and peppermint (Mentha piperita L.) and improves their biological activity. J. Plant Physiol. 2018, 224, 121–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Savo, V.; Lepofsky, D.; Benner, J.P.; Kohfeld, K.E.; Bailey, J.; Lertzman, K. Observations of climate change among subsistence-oriented communities around the world. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2016, 6, 462–473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Damalas, C.A. Improving drought tolerance in sweet basil (Ocimum basilicum) with salicylic acid. Sci. Hortic. 2019, 246, 360–365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Haile, G.G.; Tang, Q.; Hosseini-Moghari, S.; Liu, X.; Gebremicael, T.G.; Leng, G.; Kebede, A.; Xu, X.; Yun, X. Projected impacts of climate change on drought patterns over East Africa. Earth’s Future 2020, 8, e2020EF001502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Jehanzaib, M.; Kim, T.-W. Exploring the influence of climate change-induced drought propagation on wetlands. Ecol. Eng. 2020, 149, 105799. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Ahmed, E.A.; Hassan, E.A.; El Tobgy, K.M.K.; Ramadan, E.M. Evaluation of rhizobacteria of some medicinal plants for plant growth promotion and biological control. Ann. Agric. Sci. 2014, 59, 273–280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  10. Mijani, S.; Nasrabadi, S.E.; Zarghani, H.; Abadi, M.G. Seed germination and early growth responses of hyssop, sweet basil and oregano to temperature levels. Not. Sci. Biol. 2013, 5, 462–467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  11. Ekren, S.; Sönmez, Ç.; Özçakal, E.; Kurttaş, Y.S.K.; Bayram, E.; Gürgülü, H. The effect of different irrigation water levels on yield and quality characteristics of purple basil (Ocimum basilicum L.). Agric. Water Manag. 2012, 109, 155–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Alishah, H.M.; Heidari, R.; Hassani, A.; Asadi, D.A. Effect of water stress on Some Morphological and Biochemical Characteristics of Purple Basil (Ocimum basilicum). J. Biol. Sci. 2006, 6, 763–767. [Google Scholar]
  13. Rahbarian, R.; Khavari-Nejad, R.; Ganjeali, A.; Bagheri, A.; Najafi, F. Drought stress effects on photosynthesis, chlorophyll fluorescence and water relations in tolerant and susceptible chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) genotypes. Acta Biol. Cracoviensia. Ser. Bot. 2011, 53, 47–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Safikhani, F.; Sharifabadi, H.H.; Siadat, S.A.; Ashoorabadi, A.S.; Seyyednejad, S.M.; Abbaszadeh, B. Effects of drought stress on yield and morphological traits of dragonhead (Dracocephalum moldavica L.). Iran. J. Med. Aromat. Plants 2007, 23, 183–194. [Google Scholar]
  15. Forouzandeh, M.; Fanoudi, M.; Arazmjou, E.; Tabiei, H. Effect of drought stress and types of fertilizers on the quantity and quality of medicinal plant Basil (Ocimum basilicum L.). Indian J. Innov. Dev. 2012, 1, 696–699. [Google Scholar]
  16. Saleh, A.M.; Selim, S.; Al Jaouni, S.; AbdElgawad, H. CO2 enrichment can enhance the nutritional and health benefits of parsley (Petroselinum crispum L.) and dill (Anethum graveolens L.). Food Chem. 2018, 269, 519–526. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Dong, J.; Gruda, N.; Li, X.; Tang, Y.; Zhang, P.; Duan, Z. Sustainable vegetable production under changing climate: The impact of elevated CO2 on yield of vegetables and the interactions with environments-A review. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 253, 119920. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Zhao, X.; Mao, Z.; Xu, J. Gas exchange, chlorophyll and growth responses of Betula platyphylla seedlings to elevated CO2 and nitrogen. Int. J. Biol. 2010, 2, 143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Ghanbari, A.; Abedi, K.; Taie, S. Effect of municipal wastewater irrigation on yield and quality of wheat and some soil properties in sistan zone. J. Sci. Technol. Agric. Nat. Resour. 2007, 10, 513–528. [Google Scholar]
  20. Sharp, R.E.; Poroyko, V.; Hejlek, L.G.; Spollen, W.G.; Springer, G.K.; Bohnert, H.J.; Nguyen, H.T. Root growth maintenance during water deficits: Physiology to functional genomics. J. Exp. Bot. 2004, 55, 2343–2351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  21. Reddy, K.R.; Hodges, H.F.; Read, J.J.; McKinion, J.M.; Baker, J.T.; Tarpley, L.; Reddy, V.R. Soil-Plant-Atmosphere-Research (SPAR) facility: A tool for plant research and modeling. Biotronics 2001, 30, 27–50. [Google Scholar]
  22. Wijewardana, C.; Hock, M.; Henry, B.; Reddy, K.R. Screening corn hybrids for cold tolerance using morphological traits for early-season seeding. Crop Sci. 2015, 55, 851–867. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  23. Hoagland, D.R.; Arnon, D.I. The Water-Culture Method for Growing Plants without Soil; College of Agriculture, University of California: Davis, CA, USA, 1950; 347p. [Google Scholar]
  24. McKinion, J.M.; Hodges, H.F. Automated system for measurement of evapotranspiration from closed environmental growth chambers. Trans. ASAE 1985, 28, 1825–1828. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Timlin, D.; Fleisher, D.; Kim, S.; Reddy, V.; Baker, J. Evapotranspiration measurement in controlled environment chambers: A comparison between time domain reflectometry and accumulation of condensate from cooling coils. Agron. J. 2007, 99, 166–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Radácsi, P.; Inotai, K.; Sárosi, S.; Czövek, P.; Bernath, J.; Nemeth, E. Effect of water supply on the physiological characteristic and production of basil (Ocimum basilicum L.). Eur. J. Hortic. Sci. 2010, 75, 193. [Google Scholar]
  27. Osakabe, Y.; Osakabe, K.; Shinozaki, K.; Tran, L.-S.P. Response of plants to water stress. Front. Plant Sci. 2014, 5, 86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  28. Sirousmehr, A.; Arbabi, J.; Asgharipour, M.R. Effect of drought stress levels and organic manures on yield, essential oil content and some morphological characteristics of sweet basil (Ocimum basilicum). Adv. Environ. Biol. 2014, 8, 880–885. [Google Scholar]
  29. Singh, H.; Poudel, M.R.; Dunn, B.L.; Fontanier, C.; Kakani, G. Effect of greenhouse CO2 supplementation on yield and mineral element concentrations of leafy greens grown using nutrient film technique. Agronomy 2020, 10, 323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  30. Kordi, S.; Saidi, M.; Ghanbari, F. Induction of drought tolerance in sweet basil (Ocimum basilicum L.) by salicylic acid. Int. J. Agric. Food Res. 2013, 2, 18–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Barickman, T.C.; Adhikari, B.; Sehgal, A.; Walne, C.H.; Reddy, K.R. Drought and elevated CO2 impacts photosynthesis and biochemicals of basil (Ocimum basilicum L.). Stresses 2021, 1, 223–237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Long, S.P.; Ainsworth, E.A.; Rogers, A.; Ort, D.R. Rising atmospheric carbon dioxide: Plants FACE the future. Annu. Rev. Plant Biol. 2004, 55, 591–628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Zhang, J.; Jiang, H.; Song, X.; Jin, J.; Zhang, X. The responses of plant leaf CO2/H2O exchange and water use efficiency to drought: A meta-analysis. Sustainability 2018, 10, 551. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  34. Ayub, G.; Smith, R.A.; Tissue, D.T.; Atkin, O.K. Impacts of drought on leaf respiration in darkness and light in Eucalyptus saligna exposed to industrial-age atmospheric CO2 and growth temperature. New Phytol. 2011, 190, 1003–1018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Reyes-Fox, M.; Steltzer, H.; Trlica, M.J.; McMaster, G.S.; Andales, A.A.; LeCain, D.R.; Morgan, J.A. Elevated CO 2 further lengthens growing season under warming conditions. Nature 2014, 510, 259–262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Fang, Y.; Xiong, L. General mechanisms of drought response and their application in drought resistance improvement in plants. Cell. Mol. Life Sci. 2015, 72, 673–689. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Asgharipour, M.; Rafiei, M. Effect of different organic amendments and drought on the growth and yield of basil in the greenhouse. Adv. Environ. Biol. 2011, 1233–1240. [Google Scholar]
  38. Misra, A.; Srivastava, N.K. Influence of water stress on Japanese mint. J. Herbs. Spices Med. Plants 2000, 7, 51–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Li, D.; Liu, H.; Qiao, Y.; Wang, Y.; Cai, Z.; Dong, B.; Shi, C.; Liu, Y.; Li, X.; Liu, M. Effects of elevated CO2 on the growth, seed yield, and water use efficiency of soybean (Glycine max (L.) Merr.) under drought stress. Agric. Water Manag. 2013, 129, 105–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Sumner, M.E. Beneficial use of effluents, wastes, and biosolids. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 2000, 31, 1701–1715. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Pirbalouti, A.G.; Malekpoor, F.; Salimi, A.; Golparvar, A. Exogenous application of chitosan on biochemical and physiological characteristics, phenolic content and antioxidant activity of two species of basil (Ocimum ciliatum and Ocimum basilicum) under reduced irrigation. Sci. Hortic. 2017, 217, 114–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Vaz, M.; Cochard, H.; Gazarini, L.; Graça, J.; Chaves, M.M.; Pereira, J.S. Cork oak (Quercus suber L.) seedlings acclimate to elevated CO2 and water stress: Photosynthesis, growth, wood anatomy and hydraulic conductivity. Trees 2012, 26, 1145–1157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. O’Leary, G.J.; Christy, B.; Nuttall, J.; Huth, N.; Cammarano, D.; Stöckle, C.; Basso, B.; Shcherbak, I.; Fitzgerald, G.; Luo, Q. Response of wheat growth, grain yield and water use to elevated CO2 under a Free-Air CO2 Enrichment (FACE) experiment and modelling in a semi-arid environment. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2015, 21, 2670–2686. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  44. Hu, H.; Xiong, L. Genetic engineering and breeding of drought-resistant crops. Annu. Rev. Plant Biol. 2014, 65, 715–741. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Forster, B.P.; Thomas, W.T.B.; Chloupek, O. Genetic controls of barley root systems and their associations with plant performance. Asp. Appl. Biol. 2005, 73, 199–204. [Google Scholar]
  46. Hammer, G.L.; Dong, Z.; McLean, G.; Doherty, A.; Messina, C.; Schussler, J.; Zinselmeier, C.; Paszkiewicz, S.; Cooper, M. Can changes in canopy and/or root system architecture explain historical maize yield trends in the US corn belt? Crop Sci. 2009, 49, 299–312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Li, X.; Dong, J.; Chu, W.; Chen, Y.; Duan, Z. The relationship between root exudation properties and root morphological traits of cucumber grown under different nitrogen supplies and atmospheric CO2 concentrations. Plant Soil 2018, 425, 415–432. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Rogers, H.H.; Runion, G.B.; Krupa, S. V Plant responses to atmospheric CO2 enrichment with emphasis on roots and the rhizosphere. Environ. Pollut. 1994, 83, 155–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Anjum, S.A.; Wang, L.C.; Farooq, M.; Hussain, M.; Xue, L.L.; Zou, C.M. Brassinolide application improves the drought tolerance in maize through modulation of enzymatic antioxidants and leaf gas exchange. J. Agron. Crop Sci. 2011, 197, 177–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Chaves, M.M.; Flexas, J.; Pinheiro, C. Photosynthesis under drought and salt stress: Regulation mechanisms from whole plant to cell. Ann. Bot. 2009, 103, 551–560. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  51. El Kelish, A.; Zhao, F.; Heller, W.; Durner, J.; Winkler, J.B.; Behrendt, H.; Traidl-Hoffmann, C.; Horres, R.; Pfeifer, M.; Frank, U. Ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia) pollen allergenicity: SuperSAGE transcriptomic analysis upon elevated CO2 and drought stress. BMC Plant Biol. 2014, 14, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  52. Wang, H.; Race, E.J.; Shrikhande, A.J. Characterization of anthocyanins in grape juices by ion trap liquid chromatography− mass spectrometry. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2003, 51, 1839–1844. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Ghasemzadeh, A.; Jaafar, H.Z.E.; Karimi, E.; Ibrahim, M.H. Combined effect of CO2 enrichment and foliar application of salicylic acid on the production and antioxidant activities of anthocyanin, flavonoids and isoflavonoids from ginger. BMC Complement. Altern. Med. 2012, 12, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  54. Ma, D.; Sun, D.; Wang, C.; Li, Y.; Guo, T. Expression of flavonoid biosynthesis genes and accumulation of flavonoid in wheat leaves in response to drought stress. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 2014, 80, 60–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Al-Gabbiesh, A.; Kleinwächter, M.; Selmar, D. Influencing the contents of secondary metabolites in spice and medicinal plants by deliberately applying drought stress during their cultivation. Jordan J. Biol. Sci. 2015, 147, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  56. Taub, D.R.; Wang, X. Why are nitrogen concentrations in plant tissues lower under elevated CO2? A critical examination of the hypotheses. J. Integr. Plant Biol. 2008, 50, 1365–1374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  57. Ben-Jabeur, M.; Vicente, R.; López-Cristoffanini, C.; Alesami, N.; Djébali, N.; Gracia-Romero, A.; Serret, M.D.; López-Carbonell, M.; Araus, J.L.; Hamada, W. A novel aspect of essential oils: Coating seeds with thyme essential oil induces drought resistance in wheat. Plants 2019, 8, 371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
Table
Table 1. Dry mass percent (DM%), plant height (Ht), node number (NN), branch number (BN), and leaf area (LA) of basil plants grown without drought stress (Control) and with drought stress at two levels of CO2 (420 and 720 ppm) after 17 days of treatment.
Table 1. Dry mass percent (DM%), plant height (Ht), node number (NN), branch number (BN), and leaf area (LA) of basil plants grown without drought stress (Control) and with drought stress at two levels of CO2 (420 and 720 ppm) after 17 days of treatment.
TreatmentDM% 1,3HtNNBNLA
420 ppm
Control8.269 b36.56 a7.1 a15.33 a1223.60 ab
Drought10.101 ab33.05 b6.9 a13.56 a997.72 c
720 ppm
Control8.981 b36.61 a7.0 a15.33 a1321.09 a
Drought11.823 a35.44 a7.0 a14.22 a1070.67 bc
Treatment 2,4*****ns****
CO2ns*nsnsns
Treatment × CO2ns*nsnsns
1 Dry mass in percentage (%); Height in centimeters (cm); Node number and branch number on a per plant basis; Leaf area units in centimeters squared. 2 Mean separation within the column by Duncan’s multiple range tests; ns, *, **, *** indicates non-significant or significant at p ≤ 0.05, 0.01, and 0.001, respectively. 3 Values followed by the same letter are not significantly different. 4 SE-Standard error of the mean, DM% = 0.7, Ht = 0.6, NN = 0.1, BN = 0.8, and LA = 59.4.
Table
Table 2. Dry mass percent (DM%), height (Ht), node number (NN), branch number (BN), and leaf area (LA) of basil plants grown without drought stress (Control) and with drought stress at two levels of CO2 (420 and 720 ppm) after 38 days of treatment.
Table 2. Dry mass percent (DM%), height (Ht), node number (NN), branch number (BN), and leaf area (LA) of basil plants grown without drought stress (Control) and with drought stress at two levels of CO2 (420 and 720 ppm) after 38 days of treatment.
TreatmentDM% 1,3HtNNBNLA
420 ppm
Control11.733 b61.67 a10.0 a29.87 a6946.3 a
Drought16.265 a51.27 b9.8 a31.27 a3913.3 b
720 ppm
Control10.677 b60.93 a10.1 a29.67 a8078.9 a
Drought16.571 a54.47 b10.0 a29.67 a3978.7 b
Treatment 2,4******nsns***
CO2nsnsnsnsns
Treatment × CO2nsnsnsnsns
1 Dry mass in percentage (%); Height in centimeters (cm); Node number and branch number on a per plant basis; Leaf area units in centimeters squared. 2 Mean separation within the column by Duncan’s multiple range test; ns and *** indicates non-significant or significant at p ≤ 0.05 and 0.001, respectively; 3 Values followed by the same letter are not significantly different. 4 SE-Standard error of the mean, DM% = 0.5, Ht = 1.7, NN = 0.1, BN = 1.1, and LA = 581.36.
Table
Table 3. Fresh mass (FM), leaf dry mass (LDM), stem dry mass (SDM), root dry mass (RDM), shoot dry mass (ShDM), total dry mass (TDM), and root-to-shoot ratio (RS) of basil plants grown under without drought stress (Control) and with drought stress at two levels of CO2 (420 and 720 ppm) after 17 days of treatment.
Table 3. Fresh mass (FM), leaf dry mass (LDM), stem dry mass (SDM), root dry mass (RDM), shoot dry mass (ShDM), total dry mass (TDM), and root-to-shoot ratio (RS) of basil plants grown under without drought stress (Control) and with drought stress at two levels of CO2 (420 and 720 ppm) after 17 days of treatment.
TreatmentFM 1,4LDMSDMRDMShDMTDMRS 2
420 ppm
Control80.62 b4.479 bc2.188 bc0.941 a6.667 bc7.608 bc0.140 bc
Drought59.32 c3.987 c2.021 c1.066 a6.008 c7.073 c0.176 a
720 ppm
Control94.37 a5.779 a2.789 a1.021 a8.568 a9.589 a0.119 c
Drought67.94 c5.074 ab2.642 ab1.180 a7.717 ab8.897 ab0.163 ab
Treatment 3,5***nsnsnsnsns**
CO2******ns****ns
Treatment × CO2nsnsnsnsnsnsns
1 Fresh weight, leaf dry weight, stem dry weight, root dry weight, shoot dry weight, and total dry weight units on a gram per plant basis. 2 RS- Root to Shoot Ratio (Root Dry Mass/Shoot Dry Mass) 3 Mean separation within the column by Duncan’s multiple range test; ns, **, *** indicates non-significant or significant at p ≤ 0.05, 0.01, and 0.001, respectively. 4 Values followed by the same letter are not significantly different. 5 SE-Standard error of the mean, FM = 3.9; LDM = 0.3; SDM = 0.2; RDM = 0.1; ShDM = 0.5; TDM = 0.5; RS ratio = 0.01.
Table
Table 4. Fresh mass (FM), leaf dry mass (LDM), stem dry mass (SDM), root dry mass (RDM), shoot dry mass (ShDM), total dry mass (TDM), and root-to-shoot ratio (RS) of basil plants grown under without drought stress (Control) and with drought stress at two levels of CO2 (420 and 720 ppm) after 38 days of treatment.
Table 4. Fresh mass (FM), leaf dry mass (LDM), stem dry mass (SDM), root dry mass (RDM), shoot dry mass (ShDM), total dry mass (TDM), and root-to-shoot ratio (RS) of basil plants grown under without drought stress (Control) and with drought stress at two levels of CO2 (420 and 720 ppm) after 38 days of treatment.
TreatmentFM 1,4LDMSDMRDMShDMTDMRS 2
420 ppm
Control486.33 b25.032 a33.049 ab6.840 ab58.081 ab64.922 ab0.116 b
Drought284.30 c17.591 b27.591 b5.343 b45.182 b50.525 b0.120 b
720 ppm
Control613.71 a28.393 a38.733 a8.511 a67.126 a75.637 a0.128 ab
Drought275.46 c17.060 b29.756 b6.388 b46.816 b53.204 b0.140 a
Treatment 3,5*************ns
CO2nsnsns*nsns*
Treatment × CO2nsnsnsnsnsnsns
1 Fresh weight, leaf dry weight, stem dry weight, root dry weight, shoot dry weight, and total dry weight units on a gram per plant basis. 2 RS- Root to Shoot Ratio (Root Dry Mass/Shoot Dry Mass) 3 Mean separation within the column by Duncan’s multiple range test; ns, *, **, *** indicates non-significant or significant at p ≤ 0.05, 0.01, and 0.001, respectively. 4 Values followed by the same letter are not significantly different. 5 SE-Standard error of the mean, FM = 38.2; LDM = 2.1; SDM = 3.0; RDM = 0.7; ShDM = 5.0; TDM = 5.7; RS ratio = 0.006.
Table
Table 5. The mean of lateral root length (LRL), total root length (TRL), root surface area (RSA), average root diameter (RAD), root volume (RV), root tips (RT), root forks (RF), and root crossings (RC) of basil plants grown under without drought stress (Control) and with drought stress at two levels of CO2 (420 and 720 ppm) after 17 days of treatment.
Table 5. The mean of lateral root length (LRL), total root length (TRL), root surface area (RSA), average root diameter (RAD), root volume (RV), root tips (RT), root forks (RF), and root crossings (RC) of basil plants grown under without drought stress (Control) and with drought stress at two levels of CO2 (420 and 720 ppm) after 17 days of treatment.
TreatmentLRL 1,3TRLRSARADRVRTRFRC
420 ppm
Control45.1 a4572.9 a854.3 a0.597 a14.00 b10,052 b38,545 b2412.6 b
Drought43.0 ab4230.7 a729.5 a0.547 a13.73 b14,347 a44,146 b3255.8 ab
720 ppm
Control46.7 a4159.1 a738.6 a0.560 a15.45 ab12,477 ab46,580 ab3287.8 ab
Drought40.4 b4265.6 a765.1 a0.574 a17.60 a15,042 a55,344 a3840.4 a
Treatment 2,4**nsnsnsns*nsns
CO2nsnsnsns*ns**
Treatment × CO2nsnsnsnsnsnsnsns
1 Lateral root length, total root length, and root average diameter on a centimeter per plant basis; root surface area, root volume on a cubic centimeter basis; root tips, root forks, and root crossings on a number per plant basis. 2 Mean separation within the column by Duncan’s multiple range test; ns, *, ** indicates non-significant or significant at p ≤ 0.05, 0.01, and 0.001, respectively. 3 Values followed by the same letter are not significantly different. 4 SE-Standard error of the mean, LRL = 1.5; TRL = 258.3; RSA = 52.9; RAD = 0.02; RV = 1.3; RT = 1723.8; RF = 4462.6; RC = 370.2.
Table
Table 6. The mean of leaf chlorophyll, flavonoid, anthocyanin, and nitrogen balance index (NBI) of basil plants grown without drought stress (control) and with drought stress at two levels of CO2 (420 and 720 ppm) after 17 days of treatment.
Table 6. The mean of leaf chlorophyll, flavonoid, anthocyanin, and nitrogen balance index (NBI) of basil plants grown without drought stress (control) and with drought stress at two levels of CO2 (420 and 720 ppm) after 17 days of treatment.
TreatmentChlorophyll 3FlavonoidsAnthocyaninNBI 1
[μg·mL−1][mg·g−1 DM][mg·g−1 DM]
420 ppm
Control21.468 bc0.6853 ab0.1144 b32.415 b
Drought25.744 a0.6455 b0.1028 c40.890 a
720 ppm
Control18.978 c0.7044 ab0.1126 bc28.062 c
Drought22.027 b0.7394 a0.1269 a30.391 bc
Treatment 2,4***ns******
CO2********
Treatment × CO2nsnsns*
1 NBI-Nitrogen Balance Index (a ratio of chlorophyll and flavonoid). 2 Mean separation within the column by Duncan’s multiple range test; ns, *, **, *** indicate non-significant or significant at p ≤ 0.05, 0.01, 0.001, respectively. 3 Values followed by the same letter are not significantly different. 4 SE-Standard error of the mean, Chlorophyll = 0.9; Flavonoid = 0.03; Anthocyanin = 0.04; NBI = 1.600.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Barickman, T.C.; Adhikari, B.; Sehgal, A.; Walne, C.H.; Reddy, K.R.; Gao, W. Drought and Elevated Carbon Dioxide Impact the Morphophysiological Profile of Basil (Ocimum basilicum L.). Crops 2021, 1, 118-128. https://doi.org/10.3390/crops1030012

AMA Style

Barickman TC, Adhikari B, Sehgal A, Walne CH, Reddy KR, Gao W. Drought and Elevated Carbon Dioxide Impact the Morphophysiological Profile of Basil (Ocimum basilicum L.). Crops. 2021; 1(3):118-128. https://doi.org/10.3390/crops1030012

Chicago/Turabian Style

Barickman, T. Casey, Bikash Adhikari, Akanksha Sehgal, C. Hunt Walne, K. Raja Reddy, and Wei Gao. 2021. "Drought and Elevated Carbon Dioxide Impact the Morphophysiological Profile of Basil (Ocimum basilicum L.)" Crops 1, no. 3: 118-128. https://doi.org/10.3390/crops1030012

APA Style

Barickman, T. C., Adhikari, B., Sehgal, A., Walne, C. H., Reddy, K. R., & Gao, W. (2021). Drought and Elevated Carbon Dioxide Impact the Morphophysiological Profile of Basil (Ocimum basilicum L.). Crops, 1(3), 118-128. https://doi.org/10.3390/crops1030012

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop