Analysis on Air Pollution Tolerence Index of Plants Located at selected Sites at Salem and Namakkal District

 

Dr. M. Krishnaveni¹*, R. Sanjana², C. Harinathan², M. Sathyapriya², A. Yazhini², K. Prakash²

¹Assistant Professor, Department of Biochemistry, Periyar University, Salem- 636 011, Tamil Nadu, India.

²M.Sc Students, Department of Biochemistry, Periyar University, Salem- 636 011, Tamil Nadu, India.

 

ABSTRACT:

 

 

INTRODUCTION:

Plants are biological indicators that help in the maintenance of ecological balance by cycling of nutrients, gases. Introduction of chemicals, biological or particulate matter by humans that damage the environment, deteriorating air quality is a serious problem affecting the surrounding environment where we are living, as polluted air affects plants both directly and indirectly either through leaves or acidified soils. Air pollutants cause physiological changes and damages leaves. Pollution prevailing in the environment is measured by air pollution tolerance index. The degree of tolerance to air pollution was measured by biochemical parameters like pH, ascorbic acid, chlorophyll, relative water content.

 

 

APTI used to rank plant species, based on the ability of plants to encounter stress/pollution. The more tolerant plant species could acts as a sink by accumulating pollutants in their leaves. The following are the list of plants selected from the respective study area: Yercaud Bus Stand: Carica papaya, Erythrina indica, Artocarpus heterophyllus, Azadirachta indica, Prunuspersica, Citrus sinesis, Persea americana, Mangifera indica, Tamarindus indica. SIDCO womens park: Psidium guajava, Leonotisnepetifolia, Syziygium cumini, Azairachta indica, Citrus limon, Xanthium strumarium, Jatropacurcas, Carica papaya, Thespesiapo pulnea, Cicerarietinum. Hi Tech Kovai minerals: Ficus religiosa, Cascabelathevetia, Azadirachta indica, Albiziaodoratissima, Pongamia pinnata, Phyllanthus emblica, Tectonagrandis, Artocarpus heterophyllus Albizia lebbeck, Mangifera indica. Quarry, Edappadi, Salem: Azadirachta indica, Tamarindus indica, Syziygium cumini, Pithecellobi umdulce, Prosopisjuli flora, Mangifera indica, Psidium guajava, Aegle marmelos, Millettiapinnata, Ziziphus jujube, Melia azedirachta, Ficus religiosa, Tectonagrandis, Eucalyptus grandis. SSM Processing Mills, Namakkal, Tamil Nadu, India : Psidium guajava, Pongamia pinnata, Lawsonia inermis, Hibiscus rosasinensis, Phyllanthus emblica, Azadirachta indica, Nerium oleander, Terminallacatappa, Tamarindus indica. The aim of this study is therefore to analyze air pollution tolerance index of selected plants from the specific site in Salem and Namakkal district.

 

MATERIALS AND METHODS:

Leaf sample collection:

Initially, general survey was made at the selected sites and after that matured leaves were collected freshly and brought to laboratory for research work. For the present study, fresh leaves from each plants and soil sample were collected from the five different study area and their co-ordinates are: (The specific locations selected in Salem district are: Yercaud bus stand (Lon.78°12’32.27’’E, Lat.11°43’36.33’’N), SIDCO women’s park, Karupur (Lon.78°5’18.507’’E, Lat.11°43’7.36’’N), Hi Tech Kovaiminerals (Lon.78°3’50.17’’E, Lat.11°42’50.64’’N ), Quarry at Edapadi (Lon.77°51’4.35’’E, Lat.11°33’41.44’’N) and SSM processing mills at Namakkal District (Lon.77°41’51.01’’E, Lat.11°27’15.85’’N) their short forms represent the following :Lon.- longitude; Lat.- latitude; E- east; N- north; ° - degree; ‘ - minutes; ’’- seconds, in and around Salem, Namakkal Districts of Tamil Nadu, India during the month of December 2017 to March - 2018. Common plants identified were selected from the study areas. All the selected plants were identified by comparing with book named Dictionary of Medicinal Plants written by Dr. A. Balasubramanian, Executive Director, ABS Botanical garden, Salem, Tamil Nadu, India.

 

Extract preparation:

Fresh leaves were used according to the standard prescribed methods adopted. All estimations were performed in aqueous extract.

 

Air pollution tolerance index assessment:

The air pollution tolerance index was assessed by means of five biochemical parameters:

 

Ascorbic acid:

Ascorbic acid assessment was done according to the method of Sadasivam et.al., 1987¹ using 2, 6, Dichlorophenol indo phenol dye. 500mg of fresh leaf sample was extracted with 4% oxalic acid, then titrated against 2, 6, dichlorophenolindophenol dye until permanent pink color develops. Similarly, a blank without plant extract was also performed.

 

Total chlorophyll:

Total chlorophyll was assessed according to the method of Arnon et.al., 1949.²0.5g of fresh leaves were blended, extracted with 80% acetone (10ml), left for 15 min. The upper layer was decanted into another test tube, centrifuged for 3 min at 2, 500rpm. The absorbance was measured at 645nm and 663nm with the collected upper layer using Schimadzu Spectrophotometer model UV 1800. The following formulae was used for the calculations: Chlorophyll a = 12.7(A663) – 2.69 (A645) Chlorophyll b = 22.9(A645) – 4.68 (A663) Total chlorophyll Content = 20.2 (A645) + 8.02 (A663).

 

pH Analysis:

pH was assessed in digital pH meter after homogenizing 5g of fresh leaves in 10ml of deionized water, filtering.³

 

Relative water content assay:

Relative water content was assayed according to Singh et.al., 1997.⁴ Fresh weight of the fresh leaves collected were measured and then immersed in water overnight, next day it was blotted dry, and weighed for turgid weight. Then dried overnight in an oven at 70°C, reweighed for dry weight. The formulae used was:

 

RWC = (WF-WD) × 100/(WT-WD) Where WF = Fresh weight, WD = Dry weight, WT = Turgid weight.

 

Air pollution tolerance index assay:

It was calculated according to Singh and Rao (1983).³ The formula is as follows: APTI= [A (T+P) + R] / 10. Where: A=Ascorbic acid content (mg/gm), T=Total chlorophyll (mg/gm), P=pH of the leaf extract, R=Relative water content of leaf (%).

 

Soil sample collection and soil nutrient analysis:

The soil samples were collected at a depth of 15cm from the selected sites at Salem and Namakkal District. Which was freed from debris, stones and then sieved. The sieved sample (500gm) was packed and sealed in an airtight plastic bags and sent to Murugappachettiar research centre, Chennai for its nutrient analysis via alternative analytical technique.

 

Stastical tool:

The Mean and Standard deviation (S) was calculated by using the following formula:

 

Mean = Sum of x values / N (Number of values)

 

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION:

 

Pic. 1 Location map of study area seleceted for the evaluation of Air Pollution Tolerence Index

 

Table 1. Air Pollution Tolerance Index of plants selected near Yercaud bus stand and SIDCO women’s park, Salem, TN, India

Values are Mean± SD for Three Experiments

 

Plants are the natural cleaner of the atmosphere by means of absorption, reflection, diffusion of gases via leaves. Dust accumulation will be more in winter and summer when compared to monsoon, this accumulated dust gets entry in to the cell sap thereby increasing the plant pH.⁵ Ascorbic acid (strong reductant) inducing physiological, defence mechanisms in plants varies with concentration.^6,7 The variation in APTI are attributed to any variation in four physiological factors. The level of injury will be maximum in sensitive species and least in tolerant species. The sensitive species gives indication of air pollution and tolerant one help in abatement of air pollution. The study revealed that ascorbic acid decreased significantly in plant leaves at the polluted area. Ascorbic acid plays a role in the cell wall synthesis, defense and cell division.⁸ It is also a strong reducer and plays an important role in photosynthetic carbon fixation.⁹ Moreover, its high level in plants indicated high tolerance level of plant species against pollutions and its lower values rank the plants in a sensitive category against air pollution.^10,11 Thus, the decrease in the ascorbic acid content of plant species at polluted area may be due to vehicular emissions.The sensitive species indicates air pollution, while tolerant species help in abatement of air pollution. The results of air pollution tolerance index, soil nutrient analysis from the respective study areas were Tabulated (Table 1 to Table 5) and are discussed below:

 

Table.1 shows the results of air pollution tolerance index of plants studied near Yercaud bus stand and SIDCO women’s park Salem, TN, India. Air pollution tolerance index is not an independent parameter, which is decided by the composite effect of four different biochemical parameters. The ascorbic acid content was low in all the plants studied and it was in the range of 0.16mg to 0.48mg of ascorbic acid. The chlorophyll content varies from 07.87mg to 53.46mg. The pH was found to be 10 for almost all the plants studied, except Artocarpus heterophyllus and Citrus sinensis which showed 9 as its pH. The relative water content was low for Tamarindus indica (0.92±00.80), moderate for Psidium guajava (42.16 ±31.3), Azadirachta indica (56.27±16.44), Erythrina indica (60.20±17.10), Artocarpus heterophyllus (69.48±22.57). Results of air pollution tolerance index for the selected plants were found to be low and ranges from 0.28 to 3.57. This demonstrates the sensitivity of plants to pollution and they lack the ability to with stand pollution. According to singh and verma, plants showing lower pH are susceptible to pollution, and it is reverse for higher pH.¹² But, in our study, contrary result was observed, which might be due to seasonal variation. Very few plants like Erythrina indica (0.81), Mangifera indica (0.42), Tamarindus indica (0.28) was found to be very sensitive to pollution. The results of Air Pollution Tolerance Index of plants selected near SIDCO women’s park, Salem depicts that the total chlorophyll content was high for Azairachta indica (81.6±0.08), Leonotisnepetifolia (72.6±0.11), Syziygium cumini (72.7±0.13), Thespesiapopulnea (73.7±0.12). Moderate for Jatropacurcas (41.7±3.33), Xanthium strumarium (34.6±0.00). All the other plants showed less chlorophyll. The increase observed might be due to the effect of some air pollutants¹³ and in addition it might also be due to higer pH, which enhances photosynthesis. Chlorophyll is a good biological indicator for productivity of plant (Raza and Murthy 1988). The pH was found to be alkaline for all the plants studied, ranges from 8 to 10. The relative water content was very low for Citrus limon (1.05±0.00), moderate for most of the plants Leonotisnepetifolia (17.6±0.00), Azairachta indica (19.2±0.00), Syziygium cumini (37.6±0.00), Thespesiapopulnea (38.5±0.00), Psidium guajava (41.5±0.00), Cicerarietinum (46.6±0.00), and high for Jatropa curcas (87.7±0.00), Xanthium strumarium (91.5±0.00), Carica papaya (101.6±0.00). The ascorbic acid content was low for all the plants studied ranging from 0.14 to 0.64mg/g. Based on the reports of Lakshmi et.al 2009¹⁴, the APTI value of 30-100 depicts tolerant species, 29-17 for intermediate, 16-1 as sensitive and <1 as very sensitive. On comparing our results with standard values reported, all plants were found to be sensitive as the APTI values range between 2.16 to 11.22.

 

Table.2. Depicts the results of Air Pollution Tolerance Index of plants selected near Hi Tech Kovai minerals, Salem, TN, India. The relative water content was moderate for all the plants studied, Albizialebbeck (35.24±1.22), Mangiferaindica (39.06±5.23), Pongamiapinnata (43.96±1.88), Tectonagrandis (49.51±11.04), Phyllanthusemblica (51.94±4.38), Cascabelathevetia (52.23±1.57), Azadirachtaindica (53.28±2.83), Ficusreligiosa (59.43±0.74), except for Albiziaodoratissima (02.03±0.45), showing very less relative water content. Likewise, higher relative water content was observed for Artocarpusheterophyllus (75.88±7.14). Higher RWC characterizes its capacity to tolerate drought.¹⁵Ascorbic acid decide plants ability to tolerate pollution¹⁶, according to our results, the air pollution tolerance index were found to be below sixteen [Albiziaodoratissima (2.40), Mangifera indica (5.46), Pongamia pinnata (5.59), Phyllanthus emblica (5.98), Tectonagrandis (6.47), Ficus religiosa (6.67), Cascabelathevetia (6.93), Albizialebbeck (6.97), Azadirachta indica (7.44)] and are sensitive in nature as the ascorbic acid levels were very less ranging from 0.16 to 0.48mg/g. The pH observed was alkaline for all the plants studied. The photosynthetic efficiency relies on leaf pH.¹⁷ Here, we could observe the results as reported. The chlorophyll content was higher for the plants studied, Pongamia pinnata (65.78±3.97), Tectona grandis (28.11±5.74), Mangifera indica (28.69±2.55), Phyllanthus emblica (24.03±3.99), Artocarpu sheterophyllus (32.30±4.52), Cascabelathevetia (32.83±8.37), Ficus religiosa (35.76±2.16), Azadirachta indica (42.81±5.47), Albiziaodoratissima (46.12±0.80), Albizialebbeck (44.85±4.20).

 

Table 2. Air Pollution Tolerance Index of plants selected near Hi Tech kovai minerals, Salem, TN, India

Values are Mean± SD for Three Experiments

 

 

Table 3. Air Pollution Tolerance Index of plants selected near Quarry, Edapadi, Salem, TN, India

Values are Mean± SD for Three Experiments

 

Table. 4. Air Pollution Tolerance Index of plants selected near SSM processing mills, Namakkal, TN, India

Value are Mean ± SD for Three experiment

 

Table.3 demonstrates the results of Air Pollution Tolerance Index of plants selected near Quarry, Edappadi, Salem, TN, India. The ascorbic acid content was low, and the pH was alkaline, While the chlorophyll content was higher for most of the plants studied, only few showed moderate level and RWC was also modeate: Azadirachta indica (0.40±0.00, 9±0.0, 10.61±2.63, 24.19±2.36), Tamarindus indica (0.16±0.00, 9±0.0, 30.46±9.40, 03.59±1.98), Syziygium cumini (0.32±0.00, 9±0.0, 28.09±4.66, 55.81±2.13), Pithecellobiumdulce (0.33±0.00, 10±0.0, 33.15±10.49, 27.26±22.73), Prosopisjuliflora (0.40±0.00, 9±0.0, 23.13±3.20, 45.83± 20.82), Mangifera indica (0.40±0.00, 10±0.0, 20.29±10.26, 66.19±14.47), Psidiumguajava (0.24±0.00, 9±0.0, 55.91±3.17, 43.19±5.75), Aeglemarmelos (0.16±0.00, 10±0.0, 07.73±1.73, 54.03±25.41), Millettiapinnata (0.12±0.00, 10±0.0, 11.35±7.78, 41.81±5.95), Ziziphusjujube (0.16±0.00, 10±0.0, 22.42±18.16, 29.33±13.05), Meliaazedirachta (0.64±0.00, 10±0.0, 14.41±4.63, 29.33±13.05), Ficusreligiosa (0.48±0.00, 10±0.0, 25.83±8.67, 45.03±22.97), Tectonagrandis (0.24±0.00, 10±0.0, 16.16±3.16, 26.61±21.39), Eucalyptus grandis (0.24±0.00, 9±0.0, 09.99±4.33, 88.44±22.14). When compared to the standard APTI value given by Lakshmi et.al, the obtained APTI values were found to be very sensitive. Higher ascorbic acid content in leaves protect the thylakoid membrane against oxidative damage.¹⁸ But in our study, observed result was contrary, which might be due to the damage of thylakoid proteins.

 

Table.4 shows the results of Air Pollution Tolerance Index of plants selected near SSM processing mills, Namakkal, TN, India. Except Hibiscus rosasinensis (3.58±1.41), the total chlorophyll observed was moderate for most of the plants studied, Terminalla catappa (16.39±4.86), Psidium guajava (16.86±1.49), Pongamia pinnata (16.89±1.41), Lawsoniainermis (18.75±4.87), Azadirachta indica (20.17±11.35), Tecomastans (22.32±12.77), Neriumo leander (31.51±10.19), Phyllanthus emblica (34.98±12.41), Tamarindus indica (45.12±20.32). The ascorbic acid content was low for all the plants studied, and found to be in the range of 0.4 to 2.4mg/g. The pH was found to be acidic (4.5) for all the plants studied. Plants with lower pH are more susceptible to pollution. The observed change in leaf extract pH due to acidic air pollution, alters theaction of the stomata of leaves and the pH is much lesser in more sensitive plants. Thereby altering the ability to convert hexose sugar to ascorbic acid, a pH controlled mechanism. Ascorbic acid protects the plant tissues from damage caused by air pollutants¹⁹, therefore, imparting resistance to plants. Any change in its level make the plants sensitive to pollution. pH majorly regulates SO₂ sensitivity of plants. During stressful environment, the physiological balance is maintained with the help of their water holding capacity otherwise called as relative water content.

 

Table. 5 Soil nutrients studied from the Five Selected Study Area

Nutrient	Normal values of soil Parameter			Yercaud bus stand	Sidco- womens park	Quarry, Edappadi	Hi tech kovai	SSM processing mills
	Low	Medium	High
pH	-	-	-	7.62	7.24	7.49	7.98	7.83
EC	-	-	-	0.55	0.44	0.13	0.17	0.16
Organic carbon (%)	-	-	-	0.60	0.57	0.55	0.61	0.67
Nitrogen (kg/acre)	˂113	113-182	˃182	129.29	114.31	127.68	124.97	139.81
Phosphrous(kg/acre)	˂18	18-36	˃36	11.68	15.09	15.91	10.16	22.47
Calcium (mg/kg)	˂300(D)	˃300(S)	-	513.16	498.51	434.51	554.32	408.50
Magnesium(mg/kg)	˂10	10-15	˃15	155.06	166.62	154.07	192.94	169.13
Sodium (mg/kg)	-	-	-	103.02	134.66	94.87	138.02	120.66
Iron (mg/kg)	˂6	6-8	˃8	8.93	6.55	9.28	5.13	8.93
Manganese(mg/kg)	˂1	1.2-2.5	˃2.5	7.33	4.49	6.81	2.85	7.08
Copper (mg/kg)	˂0.3	0.3-1	˃1	1.24	1.32	1.71	1.24	1.54
Zinc (mg/kg)	˂0.5	0.5-1	˃1	0.7	0.65	0.9	0.47	0.93
Boron (mg/kg)	˂0.5(D)	˃0.5(S)	-	0.38	0.26	0.42	0.39	0.48
Sulfate (mg/kg)	0-10	10-15	˃15	13.57	10.37	15.84	9.31	13.75
Potassium(kg/acre)	˂60	60-138	˃138	81.44	141.72	123.18	149.35	107.31
Humus (mg/acre)	˂18	18-31	˃31	75.59	177.78	81.02	113.54	59.64
Total nutrient (kg/acre)				222.4	271.12	266.77	284.47	269.59

 

Table.5 shows the results of soil nutrients assessed in the five different study area and its normal values. The pH of the soils studied from Yercaud bus stand was 7.62, SIDCO park - 7.24, Quarry at Edappadi - 7.49, Hi Tech kovai - 7.93, SSM processing mills -7.83. All the soil samples were found to be alkaline. Electrolytic conductance was higher for Yercaud bus stand (0.55) and SIDCO Park (0.44), Whereas, other three study areas namely Quarry – Edappadi, Hi Tech koval minerals, SSM processing mills it was 0.13, 0.17, 0.16. The organic carbon were of 0.60 %, 0.57%, 0.55%, 0.61%, 0.67%. When compared to normal values, the nitrogen content were found to be medium. The phosphorus content was low with all the soil samples studied (Yercaud bus stand -11.68, SIDCO park – 15.09, Quarry at Edappadi - 15.91, Hi Tech kovai – 10.16) except SSM processing mills (22.47). The calcium content was found to be sufficient in all the soil samples studied (Yercaud bus stand- 513.16, SIDCO park -498.51, Quarry at Edappadi - 434.51, Hi Tech kovai - 554.32, SSM processing mills - 408.50). The sodium content was moderate for the soil samples collected at (Yercaud bus stand-103.02, SIDCO park - 134.66, Quarry at Edappadi - 94.87, Hi Tech kovai -138.02, SSM processing mills - 120.66). Likewise, the manganese, copper content was also in higher limit in the samples studied and zinc content was moderate with the assessed samples. The iron content was low in soil collected at Hi Tech kovai – 5.13 on comparison with normal value, While, all the other soil samples were showing higher limit when compared to reference value ((Yercaud bus stand- 8.93, SIDCO park - 6.55, Quarry at Edappadi - 9.28, SSM processing mills -8.93). Boron was mildly deficient in all the soil samples studied. The sulfate content was higher (15.84) in the soil sample collected at Quarry, Edappadi, remaining samples were of moderate. The potassium content were of high (149.35) in Hi tech kovai minerals and SIDCOpark (141.72), rest of the sites showed moderate level of potassium. The humus content was high at two sites- SIDCO PARK - 177.78, Hi Tech Kovai minerals -113.54, Other soil samples were belonging to higher category when compared to normal. The humus content was good in all the sites studied. Similarly, the total nutrient was satisfactorily good for all the soil samples studied.

 

CONCLUSION:

From the result, it is concluded, that the variation in phenolic content might be due to different phenolic constituents present in each plants. The secondary metabolites flavonoids possessing phenolic hydroxyl groups helps in protection against oxidative damage induced by environmental pollutants. To arrive at the conclusion, the results of the present study conducted on air pollution tolerence index at five selected places of Salem and Namakkal district were found to be sensitive and needs to be protected by planting more tolerant species. This will help to increase the air pollution tolerance index capacity of plants and also ameasure to protect sensitive species. The total nutrient present was moderate and each nutrient are essential for the basic functioning of the plant growth system like photosynthesis, regulation of oxidation–reduction system, carbohydrate metabolism, enzyme, coenzyme, protein production etc.

 

CONFLICT OF INTEREST:

The author has no conflict of interest.

 

REFERENCE:

1.      Sadasivam, S, Balasubraminan T. ‘In:Practical Manual in Biochemistry.” Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, 14. 1987.

2.      Arnon DI. Copper enzymes in isolated chloroplasts polyphenol oxidase in Beta Vulgaris, Plant Physiol. 1983; 24(1):1-15.

3.      Singh, S.K, Rao, DN. Evaluation of plants for their tolerance to air pollution, In:Proceedings Symposiumon Air Pollution Control. Indian Association for Air Pollution Control, New Delhi, India.1983; 1: 218-224.

4.      Singh A. Practical Plant Physiology. New Delhi: Kalyari Publishers; 1977.

5.      KatiyarV, Dubey PS. Sulphur dioxide Sensitivity on two stage of leaf development in a few tropical tree species. Journal of Environmental Sciences. Toxicology.2001; 11: 78-81.

6.      Raza SH, Murthy MSR, Ahmed A. Air pollution tolerance index of certain plants of Nacharam Industrial Area, Hyderabad. Indian J. Bot.1988; 11: 91-5.

7.      Agbaire PO, Esiefarienrhe E. Air pollution tolerance indices (APTI) of some plants around otorogun gas plant in Delta state, Nigeria. J. Applied Sci. Environ. Manage.2009; 13:11-4.

8.      Conklin PL. Recent advances in the role and biosynthesis of ascorbic acid in plants. Plant Cell Environ. 2001; 24: 383-94.

9.      Pasqualini S, Batini P, Ederli L. Effects of short-term ozone fumigation on tobacco plants: Response of the scavenging system and expression of the glutathione reductase. Plant Cell Environ.2001; 24: 245-52.

10.   Chaudhary CS, Rao DN. Study of some factors in plants controlling their susceptibility to sulphur dioxide pollution. Proceedings Indian Natl.Sci Academy-Part B. 1977; 46: 236-41.

11.   Varshney SRK, Varshney CK. Effects of sulphur dioxide on ascorbic acid in crop plants. Environ Pollut.1984; 35: 285- 90.

12.   Singh SN, Verma A. Phytoremediation of air pollutants: A review. In: Environmental Bioremediation technology, Singh SN and Tripathi RD (Eds). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. 2007; 293- 314.

13.   Allen LH, Boote KL, Jones JW. Response of vegetation to rising carbondioxide photosynthesis, biomass and seed yield of soybeans, Global Biogeochem.cy.1987; 13: 1-44.

14.   Lakshmi PS, Sravanti, Srinivas N. Air pollution tolerance index of various plant species growing in industrial areas. Ecoscan.2009; 2: 203-206.

15.   Joshi PC, Swami A. Physiologigal responses of some tree species under roadside automobile pollution stress around city of Haridwar, India. Environmentalist.2007; 27: 365-374.

16.   Dedio W. Water Relations in wheat leaves as Screening Test for Drought Resistance. Can. J. Plant Sci. 1975; 55: 369-378.

17.   Turk R, Wirth V. The pH dependence of SO2 damage to lichenes. Oecollogia. 1975; 19: 285-291.

18.   Tambussi EA, Bartoli CG, Beltrano J, Guiamet JJ, Araus JL. Oxidative Damage to Thylakoid Proteins in Water-Stressed Leaves of Wheat (Triticumaestivum). PhysiologiaPlantarum. 2000; 108: 398-404.

19.   Singh SK, Rao DN. Agrawal M, Pandey J, Narayan D. Air Pollution Tolerance index of plants. Journal of Environmental Management.1991; 32: 45-55.

 

 

Accepted on 14.12.2019           © RJPT All right reserved

Research J. Pharm. and Tech 2020; 13(6): 2752-2758.