Investigating the effect of foliar spraying of zinc nanoparticles and biostimulants on modulating the effect of water deficit stress in sugar beet by using Integrated Biomarker Response Version 2

Investigating the effect of foliar spraying of zinc nanoparticles and biostimulants on modulating the effect of water deficit stress in sugar beet by using Integrated Biomarker Response Version 2 | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Article Investigating the effect of foliar spraying of zinc nanoparticles and biostimulants on modulating the effect of water deficit stress in sugar beet by using Integrated Biomarker Response Version 2 Shahnaz Nikzad, Soran Sharafi, Toraj Mir Mahmoodi, Saman Yazdan Seta, and 1 more This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-7011409/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Published Journal Publication published 29 Oct, 2025 Read the published version in Scientific Reports → Version 1 posted 13 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract The effects of foliar applications of zinc oxide nanoparticles and various biostimulants were studied to alleviate water stress in sugar beet. The experiment used a split-split-plot layout based on a Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD) with three replications over two growing seasons (2022–2024). The main plot consisted of two irrigation levels: Normal (WW) and water deficit (WD). Zinc nanoparticle (ZnO-NPs) levels (control, 2, and 4 g/L) were assigned to subplots, and biostimulants (control, chitosan, proline, and chitosan + proline) were assigned to sub-subplots. The results shoewd under WD conditions foliar spraying of 4 g/L of ZnO-NPs increased the chlorophyll b content (22.85%), carotenoid (9.58%), proline content (18.42%), beta-glycine (13.20%), stomatal conductance (33.53%), gibberellin (GA) (9.09%), cytokinin (CK) (13.07%), catalase enzyme activity (CAT) (7.86%), superoxide dismutase (SOD) (25.56%), ascorbate peroxidase (APX) (5.34%), and root yield (RY) (10.48%) and decreased abscisic acid (ABA) (11.24%), malondialdehyde (MAD) (17.33%), and hydrogen peroxide (17.18%) compared to the control. Among biostimulants treatments, application of chitosan + proline under WD conditions increased the content of chlorophyll a (37.44%), chlorophyll b (16.23%), proline (4.87%), beta-glycine (18.09%), GA (7.00%), auxin (IAA) (35.40%), CK (18.03%), CAT (11.42%), APX (19.6%), and RY (11.46%) compared to control, and decreased the content of ABA (24.16%), MAD (9.03%), and hydrogen peroxide (11.50%). In this experiment, the combination of 2 g/L ZnO-NPs with chitosan and proline exhibited a synergistic effect, increasing the content of chlorophyll a and b, relative water content (RWC), SOD, and RY, while reducing ABA. The lowest IBRv2 values were recorded for control+proline, control+chitosan, 2 g/L ZnO-NPs+Control, 4 g/L ZnO-NPs+Control, and 4 g/L ZnO-NPs+Proline treatments. 4ZnO-NPs+chitosan+proline (I=0.803) and 4 g/L ZnO-NPs+proline (I=0.809) showed the smallest increases in MAD content. In terms of RY, the least decrease was observed in the treatments of 4 g/L ZnO-NPs + Chitosan and Proline (I = -0.492) and 4 g/L ZnO-NPs + Proline (I = -1.014). Biological sciences/Biochemistry Biological sciences/Biotechnology Biological sciences/Plant sciences Antioxidant enzymes Beta vulgaris Integrated Biomarker Response version 2 (IBRv2) Water deficit stress Zinc oxide nanoparticle Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Intrudution Sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) is a vital crop with various applications and nutritional benefits. It is the second most widely cultivated source of white sugar globally, after sugarcane, and is crucial for meeting the growing needs of the population 1 , Multiple factors frequently influence the production of sugar beet, with drought being regarded as the most significant. Drought stress can lead to a reduction in sugar beet yield of up to 30%, resulting in substantial economic and nutritional impacts 2 . Water shortages affect around one-third of the world's agricultural land, significantly impacting crop yields 3 , 4 . Climate change's expected rise in global temperatures of 2 to 5°C by 2050 is likely to intensify these challenges, especially in tropical, semi-arid, and coastal areas, potentially jeopardizing global food security 5 , 6 . This situation has made drought stress a critical global challenge, disrupting plant growth by altering biochemical and metabolic processes, which leads to significant reductions in agricultural productivity. Drought stress leads to the overproduction of reactive oxygen species (ROS), resulting in oxidative stress that damages cellular membranes and disrupts vital processes, such as photosynthesis and mineral absorption, 7 – 9 . To reduce the damage caused by ROS, plants have evolved various adaptive strategies, which involve the activation of antioxidant enzymes and the accumulation of osmoprotectants, such as glycine betaine and proline 10 – 12 . Tus Finding effective technological solutions is essential for mitigating the adverse impacts of severe drought stress on plant yield and quality in regions with scarce water supplies. Various approaches have been explored to enhance plants' ability to withstand drought. One solution is the use of compounds that promote abiotic stress tolerance. Proline is an essential amino acid that serves as an osmoregulator, helping to mitigate the effects of stressors such as drought. It improves growth and physiological traits such as chlorophyll concentration, relative water content, and yield production 13 , 14 . The external application of proline promoted plant growth under stress conditions in calendula and barley plants and reduced oxidative damage by mitigating the detrimental effects of ROS 14 , 15 . It has been suggested that when faced with abiotic stress, the use of proline leads to changes at both the structural and ultrastructural levels in the affected plants, such as enhancing the root surface to cope with deficiencies in water and nutrients 16 . Interestingly, proline had a beneficial impact by improving the number of roots and causing structural changes in the stems and leaves of rice plants subjected to salt stress. Furthermore, the use of proline enhanced water management and the production of sugar beets in conditions of drought 17 . Lately, there has been significant interest in using natural compounds externally to enhance a plant's resistance to drought. Biostimulants, including chitosan, are among these compounds 18 , 19 . Chitosan is a biodegradable material that is a natural biopolymer and an amino polysaccharide commercially obtained from aquatic crustaceans' exoskeletons 19 . It is recognized that chitosan can enhance plant protection against oxidative stress 13 . The use of chitosan at lower concentrations (0.2 g/L) can mitigate the impacts of drought stress and enhance lettuce growth 20 . Research has shown that chitosan can function as an elicitor of signaling pathways related to the control of stomatal opening and closing, which are crucial processes for plants experiencing water limitations 21 , 22 . Conversely, this polymer triggers defensive actions against oxidative stress through both enzymes and non-enzymatic antioxidants, like ascorbate, while also minimizing lipid peroxidation and the production of H 2 O 2 23 . The use of chitosan has been assessed in various crops that are important for agriculture 24 – 26 . Excessive chemical use harms nutrient efficiency and causes environmental issues. To address this, optimizing fertilization practices and exploring alternatives like biofertilizers and nanotechnology are essential. Nanoparticles, due to their unique physical and chemical properties, including nanometric size and high reactivity, have been recognized as effective tools for improving nutrient uptake in plants and reducing environmental pollution compared to conventional chemical fertilizers 3 , 27 . Among them, zinc oxide nanoparticles (ZnO–NPs) play a key role in facilitating zinc uptake and improving the nutritional status of plants under various environmental stresses, such as drought and salinity, due to their highly active surface and nanoscale size 28 . In addition to enhancing zinc absorption, these nanoparticles strengthen antioxidant enzyme activities, improve photosynthesis, and increase plant resilience against abiotic stresses, which ultimately leads to better plant performance and enhanced agricultural product quality 27 , 29 . Given that ZnO–NPs improve nutrient uptake and plant performance, their significance extends beyond agriculture, offering a promising solution to address one of the major global challenges: micronutrient deficiency and hidden hunger, particularly in developing countries, which have far-reaching adverse effects on human health and agricultural productivity 30 – 33 . In this context, numerous studies have demonstrated that the use of ZnO–NPs under abiotic stress conditions leads to increased plant performance and enhanced nutrient uptake. For example, Dimkpa et al. 34 examined the effect of ZnO–NPs at concentrations of 1, 3, and 5 mg/kg soil on sorghum plants under drought stress and reported that the application of these nanoparticles resulted in a 22–183% increase in seed yield, 16–30% increase in nitrogen and potassium uptake, and a 94% increase in zinc uptake. Similarly, Shirvani-Naghani et al. 35 investigated the effects of ZnO–NPs at concentrations of 50, 100, and 200 mg/L and zinc sulfate (ZnSO₄) at 400 mg/L on soybean plants under two different moisture levels, showing that the application of ZnO–NPs led to a 33.1% increase in chlorophyll a, 20.7% in chlorophyll b, enhanced antioxidant enzyme activity, a 25% increase in seed yield, and a 39% decrease in proline content. In recent years, the use of IBR and IBRv2 indexes has gained attention in various studies focused on environmental and ecological aspects, particularly concerning a wide array of biotic and abiotic stressors. Although these indices are gaining popularity, research on their application in assessing the impact of biotic and abiotic stressors on specific crops, such as sugar beet, remains limited. Only a few studies have been conducted on other plant species 36 – 38 . The absence of research highlights the need for further investigation and understanding of the potential advantages and limitations of IBR/IBRv2 indexes in assessing the effects of drought stress on agricultural crops, particularly in the case of sugar beet plants. Gaining a deeper insight into these indices could not only improve our understanding of how crops respond to drought stress but also assist in formulating effective strategies to reduce its effects on sugar beet plants. Our current research aimed to investigate the possible impacts of applying various levels of ZnO NPs and biostimulants—specifically chitosan, proline, and a combination of chitosan and proline—on the widely grown Iranian sugar beet variety, “Shokofa,” under different degrees of water deficit stress over two years (2022–2023 and 2023–2024). By focusing on 17 distinct morpho-physiological and yield-related characteristics, we aim to comprehend and measure the effects of these treatments on sugar beet plants. Our research indicated that the IBRv2 index might function as a dependable measure, where a higher index signifies a greater level of oxidative stress. In comparison, a lower index reflects effective management of drought stress. By employing IBRv2, we aim to highlight the potential of these treatments as viable solutions to combat the detrimental impacts of water deficit stress in sugar beet plants. Materials and Methods Plant material and experimental design This two-year research was conducted at the Faculty of Agriculture of Mahabad Azad University in Northwestern Iran during the growing seasons from 2022 to 2024. The study was conducted at an elevation of 1320 meters above sea level, with coordinates 36°10'N and 45°43'E. This research location experiences 360 mm of annual precipitation and maintains an average temperature of 11°C, with highs reaching 16.5°C and lows dropping to 4.3°C (Table 1). Table 2 presents the physicochemical properties of soil samples collected from the experimental site at a depth of 0-30 cm. The cultivar used in this experiment was Shokofa. The Shokofa variety, a monogram resistant to rhizomania and nematodes, is the most widely used sugar beet cultivar in Iran. It was sourced from the Sugar Beet Seed Institute (SBSI) in Karaj, Iran. The planting took place in the first half of April in both years. Annually, the experimental field was provided with 150 kg/ha of P2O5, 100 kg/ha of K2SO4, and 300 kg/ha of nitrogen in the form of urea. Each plot consisted of four rows of plants, each 5 meters long, with 0.50 meters between the rows and 0.2 meters between the individual plants in each row. During the 4-6 leaf stage, the plants were spaced 0.20 m apart. We managed weed control through manual weeding as needed. Experimental design and application of treatments The experiment used a split-split plot approach grounded in a Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD) with three replications. The main plot was assigned Irrigation conditions at two levels (Normal (WW) and water deficit stress (WD)). Zinc nanoparticle (ZnO-NPs) levels (control, 2 and 4 g/L) were assigned to subplots, and biostimulants (control, chitosan, proline, and chitosan + proline) were assigned to sub-subplots All plots were watered simultaneously, immediately after planting. After 60 mm and 120 mm of evaporation, irrigation was categorized as well-watered (WW) and water-deficient (WD) stress, respectively 17 . After the plants were fully established, water stress was applied starting from the 8-leaf stage. Foliar application of ZnO-NPs, at a concentration of 2 and 4 g/l (On the recommendation of its manufacturer, RochChemi Company (Tehran, Iran), and chitosan and proline, at a concentration of 0.5% and 150 ppm respectively was done at two stages after the water defect stress and at the 12-leaf and 20-leaf stages 39 . The control treatments received applications of distilled water for both the ZnO-NPs and biostimulant treatments. To assess the traits, samples were gathered from the fourth and fifth leaves of each experimental treatment in October, just before harvesting. The samples from each treatment were wrapped in aluminum foil, labeled, and frozen in liquid nitrogen at -196°C before being transferred to a -80°C freezer. Measurements Relative water content (RWC) assay The RWC was evaluated in completely matured upper leaves. The fresh leaf weight was measured after cutting to determine the fresh weight (FW). All samples were immersed in distilled water and maintained at 4°C for 24 hours. Afterward, the turgid weight 40 was measured, and the leaf samples were then dried to determine the dry leaf mass 41 . The relative water content was calculated using a particular formula 42 . Stomatal Conductivity Assay The SC-1 Leaf Porometer (Decagon Devices, Pullman, WA) was used to measure stomatal conductance 43 , a crucial element in plant development and water management. This approach to measurement was utilized from 10 a.m. to 1 p.m. on the top surface of the leaf, selected for its ideal sunlight exposure. To guarantee precision and reduce the possibility of bias, each plant was measured three times, resulting in four plants per plot, with each growing season repeated only once 44 . Proline and Beta ‑ Glycine Content Assay Proline concentration is vital for understanding plant stress responses. 45 established the method for accurately measuring proline levels in sugar beet leaf samples. In this approach, 25 mg of the frozen leaf samples was first homogenized in 10 ml of 3% sulfosalicylic acid, then centrifuged for 15 minutes at 14,000×g, and the supernatant was collected separately. For each sample, 2.0 ml of the resulting supernatant was combined with an equal volume of acid ninhydrin and glacial acetic acid, then incubated in an oven at 100 °C for 1 hour. After completing the reaction by cooling in an ice bath, the reaction mixture was extracted with 4 ml of toluene. The toluene layer was then eliminated, the upper chromophore layer was gathered, and its absorbance was recorded at 520 nm using a UV–Vis spectrophotometer (UV-1800 240 V, Shimadzu Corporation, Kyoto, Japan). Finally, the concentration of proline was measured using a proline standard curve, with the results expressed in milligrams per gram of fresh weight (mg /g FW). The concentrations of glycine betaine in leaf tissue samples were assessed using the original periodide technique described by 46 , with modifications made by 47 .To start, 1.0 g of fresh leaf tissue was blended with 25 ml of 80% ethanol in a 50 ml Falcon tube. The ethanol fraction obtained was evaporated, and the homogenate was then mixed with deionized water. Afterward, 200 μl of the chilled KI-I2 solution was combined with 500 μl of the homogenate, and the resulting mixture was well-mixed before being placed in storage overnight at 4 °C. Following 15 minutes of centrifugation in a microcentrifuge, the supernatant was gently discarded, ensuring the betaine periodide complex remained adhered to the walls and base of the tube. The resultant residue was subsequently re-dispersed in 1,2-dichloroethane and moved into a 10 ml graduated tube. The samples were kept in dark conditions at room temperature for 2 hours, and the absorbance was recorded at 365 nm. Finally, the concentrations of glycine betaine in the samples were measured using a glycine betaine standard curve, with the results expressed in milligrams per gram of fresh weight (mg /g FW). Measurement of photosynthetic pigments The 48 method was employed to assess chlorophyll a, chlorophyll b, and carotenoid levels by utilizing a spectrophotometer to evaluate absorbance at wavelengths of 663, 646, and 470 nm. In the end, the formulas provided below were used to measure each pigment 49 : Cholorophyll a(mg g −1 FW) = 12.25(A663.2) − 2.79(A646.8) Cholorophyll b(mg g −1 FW) = 21.50(A646.2) − 5.10(A663.2) Carotenoid (mg g −1 FW) =(1000(A470) − 1.8(Chl a) − 85.02(Chl b))/198 Determination of antioxidant enzyme activities A 500 mg portion was combined with 5 mL of 50 mM sodium phosphate buffer solution (pH 7.8) using a pre-chilled mortar and pestle. The solution was centrifuged at 15000 × g for a duration of 20 minutes at a temperature of 4°C. Following the collection of the supernatant, the enzyme extract was stored at 4°C for subsequent analysis. The activity levels of superoxide dismutase (SOD; EC 1.15.1.1), ascorbate peroxidase (APX; EC 1.11.1.11), and catalase (CAT; EC 1.11.1.6) were assessed using the techniques outlined by 49 , 50 , and 51 . Determination of Malondialdehyde (MAD) and Hydrogen peroxide (H 2 O 2 ) To determine the MAD, 250 mg of leaf samples were ground in 5 mL of 0.1% trichloroacetic acid, after which they were centrifuged at 12000×g for 10 minutes at 4˚C and kept at 4˚C for further analysis. Malondialdehyde (MDA) concentration in the sugar beet leaves was utilized to indicate lipid peroxidation 49 . The concentration of hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) was evaluated following the method described by. After adding 0.5 mL of supernatant to 0.5 mL of 10 mM potassium phosphate buffer (pH 7.0) and 1 mL of 1 M potassium iodide, the combination was allowed to sit in the dark for 20 minutes. The combination's absorbance was measured at 390 nm, and the concentration of H2O2 was determined using a calibration curve derived from various concentrations of H 2 O 2 . Measurement of plant hormones The methods for extraction and purification of the four hormones (CK, GA3, IAA, and ABA) were carried out as previously described 52,53 . Measurement of root yield The last harvest occurred on October 20th for both years. Before harvesting, the two outer rows, 0.5 meters from the beginning and end of each row, were eliminated. Four square meters were sampled from every experimental unit, and the roots were counted by hand. They were later weighed and classified as the root yield (RY). Statistical analysis The experimental setup was conducted as split-split plots using a Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD) with three replications. The analysis of variance (ANOVA) and mean comparison (least significant differences, LSD; p < 0.05) were conducted using SAS version 9.4 (SAS Institute Inc., USA). Principal component analysis (PCA) was conducted using the FactoMineR package (v.1.34) in R Studio (v. 3.4.4) 54 . The IBRv2 index, which combines responses from multiple biomarkers by assessing their log-transformed values against a mean reference dataset, was computed utilizing the innovative IBRtools R package 55 . The IBRv2 assessment included measuring 17 distinct biomarkers in sugar beet plants cultivated in diverse treatments. The reference (Ref) site for this calculation was the “Control + Control” treatment, which involved growing sugar beet plants under standard conditions and spraying only distilled water. All treatments involving ZnO-NPs and biostimulants administered under WW conditions were excluded from the IBRv2 calculation. The values of IBRv2 for each biomarker were computed, where positive values signify an increase compared to the reference site and negative values denote a decrease. Results The combined analysis of variance revealed significant effects of irrigation levels and ZnO-NPs on all studied traits. Additionally, a significant interaction between year and irrigation was observed for carotenoid content, RWC, beta-glycine, ABA, SOD, and MAD. The interaction between ZnO-NPs and year significantly influenced MAD and hydrogen peroxide content. Biostimulant treatments exhibited significant differences for all traits except chlorophyll b. The interaction between year and biostimulants had a significant effect on chlorophyll b and hydrogen peroxide levels. Furthermore, the two-way interaction of irrigation and ZnO nanoparticles significantly influenced chlorophyll a, chlorophyll b, carotenoids, proline, beta-glycine, stomatal conductance, ABA, GA, IAA, CK, CAT, SOD, APX, MAD, hydrogen peroxide, and RY. Similarly, irrigation combined with biostimulants significantly affected chlorophyll a, chlorophyll b, carotenoid content, RWC, proline, beta-glycine, ABA, GA, IAA, CK, CAT, APX, MAD, hydrogen peroxide, and RY. Finally, the interaction between ZnO-NPs and biostimulants had a significant impact on chlorophyll a , chlorophyll b , RWC, proline, beta-glycine, stomatal conductance, ABA, IAA, GA, CK, CAT, SOD, MAD, and RY (The table is not included in the article text.). Chlorophyll a The mean comparison results indicated that applying 2 g/L ZnO-NPs under WW conditions resulted in the highest chlorophyll a content, averaging 5.29 mg/g FW. The lowest chlorophyll content a content was also attributed to the control under WD conditions, with an average of 2.48 mg/g FW (Table 3). In this experiment, foliar spraying of proline and chitosan + proline under WW conditions resulted in the maximum chlorophyll a content, with averages of 5.42 and 5.46 mg/g FW, respectively. The lowest chlorophyll a content, with an average of 2.27 mg/g FW, was also associated with the biostimulants control under WD conditions. The results of the present experiment showed that foliar spraying of chitosan, proline, and chitosan + proline increased chlorophyll a content by 19.63%, 40.05%, and 41.08% under WW conditions, and by 25.99%, 33.03%, and 37.44% under WD conditions, respectively (Table 4). Comparing the mean of ZnO-NPs with biostimulants interaction treatments showed that the application of 2 g/L ZnO-NPs along with chitosan + proline foliar spray achieved the highest chlorophyll a content with an average of 4.89 mg/g FW. The difference between the mentioned treatment with 2 mg/L ZnO-NPs with prolamin foliar spray and the Zno-NPS control with prolamin foliar spray was insignificant. Plots not treated with ZnO-NPs or biostimulants exhibited the lowest levels of chlorophyll a , averaging 2.72 mg/g FW. In this experiment, the simultaneous application of ZnO-NPs and biostimulants did not demonstrate significant superiority compared to their separate application (Table 5). Chlorophyll b A comparison of the mean treatments revealed that applying 2 g/L Zno-NPS in WW conditions led to the highest chlorophyll b content, averaging 2.99 mg/g FW. Plants that did not receive ZnO-NPs in WD conditions exhibited the lowest accumulation of this pigment, averaging 1.40 mg/g FW. In this study, the application of both levels of ZnO-NPs under the different irrigation conditions notably enhanced the chlorophyll b content in comparison to the respective control (Table 3). Among the irrigation- biostimulants interaction treatments, foliar spraying of chitosan, proline, and the combination of both achieved the maximum chlorophyll b content under WW conditions, with averages of 2.70, 2.73, and 2.66 mg/g FW, respectively. The plants that were not treated with sprays under WD conditions showed the lowest chlorophyll b content, averaging 1.54 mg/g FW. The variation between this treatment and the chitosan and proline foliar spray treatments under WD conditions was not statistically significant. The findings of the current research indicated that applying chitosan + proline enhanced chlorophyll b levels by 30.39% and 16.23% in comparison to the control group under WW and WD conditions, respectively (Table 4). In this experiment, foliar spraying of chitosan, proline, and chitosan + proline with 2 g/L ZnO-NPs showed the highest chlorophyll b content with an average of 2.47, 2.59, and 2.65 mg/g FW, respectively. The ZnO-NPs and biostimulants control exhibited the lowest chlorophyll b content, averaging 1.54 mg/g FW; the difference between this treatment and the treatments using chitosan and proline foliar sprays, as well as the ZnO-NPs control, was not significant. In this study, the combined use of chitosan, proline, and chitosan + proline at a concentration of 2 g/L ZnO-NPs showed a notable benefit compared to the individual application of each biostimulant treatment and the levels of ZnO-NPs (Table 5). Carotenoid The findings from the mean comparison indicated that applying 2 mg/L of ZnO-NPs under WW conditions resulted in the highest carotenoid content, averaging 2.55 mg/g FW. Conversely, the control subjected to WD conditions exhibited the lowest carotenoid content, with an average of 1.67 mg/g FW. In this study, the application of ZnO-NPS to the leaves under both WW and WD conditions led to a rise in carotenoid content by 19.04% and 25.00%, respectively, when compared to the control (Table 3). The results showed that foliar spraying of proline under WW irrigation conditions yielded maximum carotenoids with an average of 2.56 mg/g FW. The lowest carotenoid content was associated with the biostimulants control under water stress conditions, with an average of 1.71 mg/g FW. The difference between this treatment and the chitosan, proline, and chitosan + proline foliar spray under WD and the control under WW conditions was not significant. It should be noted that under normal irrigation conditions, foliar spraying of chitosan, proline, and chitosan + proline increased the carotenoid content by 14.97%, 41.71%, and 18.71% , respectively, compared to the control. Under WD conditions, the difference between the control and biostimulant foliar spraying treatments was not significant (Table 4). Relative water content (RWC) Comparing the means of different irrigation and biostimulant interaction treatments revealed that applying proline under WW conditions resulted in the highest relative water content RWC, with an average of 81.83%. The biostimulant control exhibited the lowest relative leaf water content during WD conditions, averaging 57.92%. There was no significant difference between this treatment and the foliar spray of chitosan + proline when subjected to WD conditions (Table 4). Under WW conditions, the application of chitosan, proline, and chitosan + proline, and under WD conditions, foliar application of chitosan and proline had significant superiority over the control. Foliar spraying with proline, combined with a concentration of 2 g/L ZnO-NPS, resulted in the highest average relative water content (RWC) of 84.80%. This treatment demonstrated a significant benefit compared to applying each component separately. The plots that did not receive biostimulants and ZnO-NPs showed the lowest average RWC content, measuring 58.93%. The difference between this treatment and both the control and the chitosan foliar spray treatment with 2 g/L ZnO-NPs was not statistically significant (Table 5). Proline In this study, plots treated with 4 g/L ZnO-NPs and subjected to WD exhibited the greatest proline concentration, averaging 0.45 mg/g FW . The control and foliar spray treatments at 2 g/l of ZnO-NPs under WW conditions resulted in the lowest proline content, with average values of 0.23 and 0.24 mg/g FW, respectively. In this research, the application of 4 g/L ZnO-NPs elevated the proline levels by 21.73% and 18.42%, respectively, in comparison to the corresponding control (Table 3). The results of the treatment interaction indicated that chitosan and chitosan + proline foliar sprays under WD conditions achieved the maximum proline content with an average of 0.42, and 0.43 mg/g Fw, respectively. Plants treated with proline under WW conditions had the lowest proline content, averaging 0.23 mg/g FW. In our research, using all three biostimulant treatments under WW conditions and foliar application of chitosan and proline under WD resulted in elevated proline levels (Table 4). An analysis of the average from the interaction treatments revealed that plots treated with 2 g/L ZnO-NPs and sprayed with a combination of chitosan and proline exhibited the highest proline content, averaging 0.39 mg/g FW. The control plots and plots sprayed with chitosan, along with ZnO-NPs control, as well as plants sprayed with chitosan + proline and receiving 2 g/L ZnO-NPs, had the lowest proline content, with an average of 0.31 mg/kg fresh weight (Table 5). Beta-glycine In the current research, the application of 4 g/L ZnO-NPs under WD conditions resulted in the highest beta-glycine content, averaging 102.42 mg/g FW. The minimum level of this compound, averaging 83.99 mg g/ FW, was linked to the ZnO-NPs control under WW conditions. In this study, the application of 2 and 4 g/L of ZnO-NPs raised the soluble sugar content by 5.33% and 5.89% under WW conditions, respectively, while under WD conditions, it increased by 8.58% and 13.20%, respectively (Table 3). The current study's results indicate that foliar application of chitosan + proline under WD conditions resulted in the highest beta-glycinecontent, averaging 107.43 mg/g FW. The lowest beta-glycinecontent, averaging 84.80 mg/g FW, was attributed to the proline treatment under WW conditions. The difference between the aforementioned treatment with chitosan + proline foliar spray and the control under WW conditions was insignificant. Under WW conditions, the difference between the control and foliar spray treatments regarding beta-glycinecontent was insignificant, while under WD conditions, foliar spray of chitosan + proline increased soluble sugar content by 17.66% compared to the corresponding control (Table 4). In this study, applying chitosan combined with proline, proline alone, and 4 g/L ZnO-NPs led to the highest soluble sugar content, averaging 101.42 and 100.42 mg/g FW, respectively. The difference between the aforementioned treatments with chitosan spraying combined with 2 and 4 g/L ZnO-NPs was insignificant. The lowest soluble sugar content was attributed to the proline foliar spray treatment with ZnO-NPs control and the biostimulants control with 2 g/L ZnO-NPs level, averaging 79.12 and 80.77 mg/g FW, respectively (Table 5). Leaf stomatal conductance coefficient The findings of this study indicated that the application of 2 and 4 g/L ZnO-NPs under WW conditions resulted in the highest coefficients of stomatal conductance, averaging 15.72 and 15.92 mol m− 2 s -1 , respectively. In contrast, the control with ZnO-NPs under WD conditions recorded the lowest average at 10.08 mol m− 2 s -1 (Table 3). It should be noted that the application of 2 and 4 g/L ZnO-NPs increased stomatal conductance by 6.64% and 8.48% under WW conditions, respectively, and by 10.01% and 8.84% under WD conditions, respectively. In this study, while the foliar application of chitosan + proline with 4 g/L ZnO-NPs resulted in the highest stomatal conductance coefficient of 15.15 mol m− 2 s -1 , the difference between this treatment and the treatments with proline and chitosan at both 2 and 4 g/L ZnO-NPs was not statistically significant. The biostimulants control and proline spraying, with ZnO-NPs control achieved the index's lowest values, with an average of 11.09 and 11.82 mol m− 2 s -1 , respectively (Table 5). Plant hormones Abscisic acid (ABA) The findings from the average comparison indicated that plants exposed to 2 g/l ZnO-NPs during WD stress exhibited the highest level of ABA, averaging 40.13 ppm. In contrast, plants that received 2 g/l ZnO-NPs while under WW showed the lowest ABA content, averaging 26.98 ppm. In this research, levels 2 and 4 of ZnO-NPs decreased ABA content by 24.40% and 12.10% under WW conditions, respectively, Under water stress conditions, this reduction was limited to only of 4g/l ZnO-NPs (21.30%) (Table 3). In this experiment, the biostimulant control under WD conditions had the highest ABA content with an average of 28.65 ppm. The lowest ABA content, with an average of 28.65 and 29.38 ppm, was attributed to the chitosan + proline and proline foliar spray treatments under WW conditions. All three biostimulants foliar spray treatments significantly increased ABA content in this experiment compared to the corresponding control under both irrigation conditions (Table 4). This study's findings revealed that plots that did not receive both ZnO-NPs and biostimulants reached the highest average ABA content of 41.84 ppm. The lowest ABA content, with an average of 27.63 and 28.51 ppm, was assigned to the chitosan + proline and proline treatment with a level of 4 g/L ZnO-NPs. The difference between the aforementioned treatment and the foliar spraying treatment of chitosan + proline and proline treatment with a level of 2 g/L ZnO-NPs was not significant. It is important to highlight that using ZnO-NPs in conjunction with biostimulants significantly reduced ABA content, showing a clear benefit over applying each treatment separately (Table 5). Gibberellin (GA) The findings indicated that utilising 2 g/L ZnO-NPs under WW conditions resulted in the highest GA content, averaging 211.44 ppm. The control group and application of 2 g/l ZnO-NPs exhibited the lowest GA content, with average values of 486.75 and 185.70 ppm, respectively. In this research, the use of 2 g/L ZnO-NPs under WW conditions and 4 g/L ZnO-NPs under WD conditions notably enhanced the GA content in comparison to the respective control (Table 3). The findings indicated that applying chitosan, proline, and chitosan + proline under WW conditions resulted in the highest GA, averaging 209.28, 216.01, and 216.8 ppm, respectively. The control and proline foliar sprays under WD conditions had the lowest GA content, averaging 180.07 and 177.62 ppm, respectively. The results showed that the GA content in plants treated with proline and chitosan + proline was significantly higher than that of the corresponding control in both environmental conditions (Table 4). The findings indicated that the greatest GA content, averaging 213.72 ppm, was linked to the treatment of chitosan foliar spray used in conjunction with applying 4 g/L ZnO-NPs. There was no significant difference between the aforementioned treatment and the treatments of chitosan and chitosan + proline application, along with the application of 2 g/L ZnO-NPs and foliar spraying of 4 g/L ZnO-NPs, along with proline foliar spraying and the control ZnO-NPs, along with chitosan + proline foliar spraying. The lowest GA content, with an average of 179.42 ppm, was assigned to the control of both treatments. There was no significant difference between the aforementioned treatments, with chitosan foliar spraying, proline foliar spraying with ZnO-NPs control, and biostimulants control, with a 4 g/L ZnO-NPs level (Table 5). Auxins (IAA) The current study's findings indicated that using 2 and 4 g/l of ZnO-NPs resulted in the highest IAA levels under WW conditions, averaging 36.97 and 35.79 ppm, respectively. In contrast, the lowest IAA level, averaging 28.22 ppm, was observed in the control of ZnO-NPs under conditions of WD. Plots treated with 2 and 4 levels of ZnO-NPs significantly increased IAA content compared to the control. In contrast, the difference between the control and the ZnO-NPs treatments under WD conditions was insignificant (Table 3). In this study, the highest IAA were observed with the foliar application of proline and chitosan + proline under WW conditions, with averages of 37.63 and 38.66 ppm, respectively. Control of biostimulants and foliar applications of chitosan and proline under WD conditions resulted in the lowest IAA content, averaging 26.41, 27.81, and 26.89 ppm, respectively (Table 4). The findings demonstrated that applying of proline and chitosan + proline under WW conditions, as well as all three foliar spray treatments during WD, notably enhanced auxin levels when compared to the respective control. A comparison of the mean of the interaction treatments showed that foliar spraying of proline and chitosan + proline with a level of 4 g/l ZnO-NPs had the maximum auxin content, with an average of 36.68 and 39.32 ppm, respectively. The control of ZnO-NPs and biostimulants had the lowest IAA content with an average of 26.15 ppm. It should be noted that foliar spraying of proline, chitosan + proline, and 4 g/L ZnO-NPs, significantly increased auxin content compared to the separate application of each treatment (Table 5). Cytokinins 56 In this experiment, the application of 2 g/L ZnO-NPs under WW conditions resulted in the highest CK content, averaging 50.46 ppm. The minimum level of this hormone, averaging 39.62 ppm, was linked to the ZnO-NPs control when subjected to WD conditions. The findings revealed that the use of 2 and 4 g/L ZnO-NPs boosted the CK levels by 21.91% and 14.61% under WW conditions, and by 6.48% and 13.07% under WD conditions, respectively, when compared to the relevant control (Table 3). The comparison results for the interaction between irrigation and biostimulants revealed that the foliar application of chitosan + proline under WW conditions had the highest average CK content, measuring 50.23 ppm. In contrast, the foliar application of proline and control under WD conditions produced the lowest average CK content, which was 40.03 and 39.09 ppm. In WW conditions, the use of all three growth stimulants, as well as the foliar application of chitosan and chitosan combined with proline under WD stress conditions, notably enhanced CK levels in comparison to the relevant control (Table 4). This experiment demonstrated that foliar spraying of proline and chitosan+proline combined with 4 g/L ZnO-NPs resulted in the highest CK content, averaging 49.48 ppm and 49.54 ppm, respectively. However, the ZnO-NPs and biostimulants control, proline foliar spray treatment, along with ZnO-NPs control, and biostimulants control with 4 g/L ZnO-NPs, achieved the lowest CK content with an average of 43.27, 39.13, and 46.53 ppm, respectively (Table 5). Antioxidant enzyme activity Catalase (CAT) In this experiment, the control of ZnO-NPs and the 2 g/L and 4 g/L ZnO-NPs exhibited the highest CAT enzyme activity under WD conditions, with average values of 3.18, 3.25, and 3.43 U mg/protein, respectively. Plants not treated with ZnO-NPs under WW conditions exhibited the lowest CAT activity, averaging 2.44 U mg/protein. The difference between the aforementioned treatment and the 4 g/L ZnO-NPs treatment under WW conditions was insignificant. In this experiment, applying 2 g/L ZnO-NPs significantly increased cat activity compared to the corresponding control. In this study, using 2 g/L ZnO-NPs under WW conditions considerably enhanced the CAT activity compared to the relevant control (Table 3). The findings from the mean comparisons indicated that under WD conditions, foliar application of proline and chitosan + proline resulted in the highest CAT enzyme activity, with average values of 3.28 and 3.51 U mg/protein, respectively. The biostimulants control and chitosan foliar application under WW conditions had the lowest catalase activity with an average of 2.47 and 2.65 U mg/protein, respectively. The results indicated that foliar spraying of proline and chitosan + proline under WW conditions and application of chitosan + proline under WD conditions increased CAT enzyme activity compared to the corresponding control (Table 4). In this study, foliar spraying of chitosan + proline with 4 g/L ZnO-NPs achieved the highest catalase enzyme activity, with an average of 3.47 U mg/protein. The difference between the aforementioned treatment and the chitosan + proline treatment with 2 g/L ZnO-NPs was not significant. The lowest CAT activity was associated with the control of both treatments, with an average of 2.59 U mg/protein. The difference between the aforementioned treatment, with the chitosan and chitosan + proline treatments with ZnO-NPs control, and the biostimulants control with the application of 4 g/L ZnO-NPs was not significant (Table 5). Superoxide dismutase (SOD) The study found that applying 2 and 4 g/L of ZnO-NPs under WD resulted in the highest SOD content, with averages of 4.51 and 4.47 U mg/protein, respectively. In contrast, the control of ZnO-NPs under WW conditions showed the lowest SOD activity with averages of 3.12 U mg/protein.The results indicated that applying 2 and 4 g/L increased SOD activity compared to the control by 25.00% and 9.93% under WW conditions, and by 26.68% and 25.56% under WD conditions (Table 3). Among the irrigation with biostimulants interaction treatments, although the maximum SOD activity was achieved by foliar spraying of proline with a level of 2 g/L with an average of 4.32 U mg/protein, However, the difference between the aforementioned treatment and the foliar spraying of chitosan and chitosan + proline with a level of 2 g/L ZnO-NPs and the foliar spraying of proline and chitosan + proline under the treatment of 4 g/L ZnO-NPs was not significant. The prolamin foliar spray treatment and the ZnO-NPs control exhibited the lowest SOD enzyme activity, averaging 2.93 U mg/protein (Table 5). Ascorbate peroxidase (APX) In this study, the highest Apx activity was observed at 2 g/L and 4 g/L ZnO-NPs levels, under WD conditions with average values of 5.16 and 5.32 U mg/protein, respectively. The lowest amount of activity of this enzyme with an average of 3.91 U mg/protein was attributed to the ZnO-NPs control under WW conditions. It should be noted that levels of 2 and 4 g/L ZnO-NPs under WW and applying 4 g/L ZnO-NPs under WD significantly increased APX enzyme activity compared to the related control (Table 3). The findings indicated that applying a chitosan + proline under WD conditions resulted in the highest activity of APX, averaging 5.61 U mg/protein. The lowest APX activity was also assigned to the biostimulants control under WW conditions, with an average of 4.18 U mg/protein. The difference between the aforementioned treatment and the prolamin foliar spray treatment under WW conditions was insignificant. In this research, the use of proline and chitosan + proline under WW conditions, as well as the use of all three biostimulants treatments during WD conditions, notably enhanced the level of APX activity (Table 4). Malondialdehyde (MDA) The findings from the current research indicated that under WD conditions, the ZnO-NPs treatment demonstrated the highest average MAD content, with an average of 10.56 μM mg / FW. The control and the application of 2 and 4 g/L ZnO-NPs under WW conditions exhibited the lowest MAD content, averaging 7.19, 6.93, and 7.05 μM mg / FW, respectively. The results indicated that applying 2 g/L and 4 g/L ZnO-NPs under WD conditions reduced MAD content by 11.17% and 17.33%, respectively. There was no significant difference between treatments under WW conditions. We found that the biostimulant control under WD conditions showed the highest MAD content, averaging 10.18 μM mg / FW (Table 3). The proline foliar spray treatment had the lowest MAD content under WW conditions, averaging 6.79 μM mg / FW. The distinction between the previously mentioned treatment and the chitosan and chitosan + prolamin treatments in standard irrigation conditions was insignificant. In this study, the use of chitosan, proline, and the combination of chitosan and proline markedly decreased MAD levels when subjected to WD; however, under WW conditions, only the foliar treatment of proline led to a significant reduction in MAD levels compared to the control (Table 4). The mean comparisons of ZnO-NPs and biostimulants treatment interactions showed that the control of both treatments had the highest MAD content, with an average of 9.49 μM mg / FW. The biostimulants control, proline, and chitosan + proline foliar sprays containing 4 g/L of ZnO-NPs had the lowest MAD content, averaging 8.12, 7.59, and 7.57 μM mg / FW, respectively. The difference between the above treatments and the foliar spray treatment of proline and proline + chitosan with a level of 2 g/L of ZnO-NPs was insignificant (Table 5). Hydrogen peroxide The findings indicated that the control ZnO-NPs achieved the highest hydrogen peroxide levels, averaging 5.18 μM mg / FW under WD conditions. The lowest hydrogen peroxide content was attributed to the control, and 2 and 4 g/L ZnO-NPs under WW conditions, with an average of 2.73, 2.62, and 2.68 μM mg / FW, respectively. It is important to mention that applying 2 and 4 g/L ZnO-NPs in WD conditions decreased the hydrogen peroxide levels by 7.91% and 17.18%, respectively, compared to the control group (Table 3). The results of the present study showed that the biostimulants control under WD conditions achieved the highest hydrogen peroxide content with an average of 5.04 μM mg / FW. The lowest average hydrogen peroxide content was 2.39 μM mg / FW, attributed to proline foliar spraying under WW conditions. In this experiment, foliar spraying of proline under WW conditions, along with the application of all three biostimulants treatments chitosan, proline, and the chitosan + proline under WD conditions, significantly reduced hydrogen peroxide content compared to the control (Table 4). Root yield (RY) In our study, using 2 g/L ZnO-NPs under WW conditions resulted in the maximum RY, averaging 74.55 ton/ha. Under WD conditions, the ZnO-NPs control produced the lowest RY, averaging 52.44 ton/ha. There was no significant difference between this treatment and the 2 g/l ZnO-NPs. In this study, the application of 2 g/L ZnO-NPs under WW conditions increased the RY by 11.07%. Additionally, the use of 4 g/L ZnO-NPs under WD conditions resulted in a 10.48% increase compared to the respective control (Table 3). The results of the mean comparison of irrigation with biostimulants interaction showed that foliar spraying of chitosan, proline and chitosan + proline produced the maximum RY under WW conditions with an average of 71.52, 69.67 and 71.68 ton/ha, respectively. The lowest root yields were associated with the control of biostimulants and the application of proline foliar treatments under WD conditions, averaging 53.73 and 52.58 ton/ha, respectively. In this experiment, foliar spraying of all three biostimulant treatments under WW conditions and chitosan + proline under WD conditions significantly increased RY compared to the corresponding control (Table 4). In this experiment, foliar spraying of chitosan + proline combined with 2 g/L of ZnO-NPs resulted in the highest RY, averaging 68.77 ton/ha. The difference between the treatment above, the foliar spraying of proline and chitosan with a level of 2 g/L ZnO-NPs, and the foliar spraying of chitosan + proline with a level of 4 g/L ZnO-NPs was not significant. The lowest RY, averaging 58.74 ton/ha, was observed in plots that did not receive biostimulants or ZnO-NPs. The difference between the treatment above and the foliar spraying of chitosan, proline, and chitosan + proline, along with the ZnO-NPs control, the biostimulants control, and the foliar spraying of chitosan and proline, along with the level of 2 g/L ZnO-NPs, and the biostimulants control and foliar spraying of chitosan and proline, along with the level of 4 g/L ZnO-NPs, was not significant (Table 5). Biplot analysis In this experiment, the first two factors accounted for 65.5% of the total variance in the data, with contributions of 44.4% and 22.1%, respectively (Fig. 1). In the first area of the biplot (top left), the treatments WW-Control+ Control, WW-control+ chitosan, WW-control+ proline, WW-control+chitosan + proline, WW-2 g/L ZnO-NPs + control, WW-4 g/L ZnO-NPs + control, WW-4 g/L ZnO-NPs + Proline, WW-4 g/L ZnO-NPs + Chitosan, and WW-4 g/L ZnO-NPs Chitosan + Proline were located. The chlorophyll a and b and carotenoid traits were adjacent to the treatments above. In the opposite direction of the traits above were the traits WD-2 g/L ZnO-NPs + chitosan, WD-4 g/L ZnO-NPs + control, WD-control+chitosan + proline, WD-2 g/L ZnO-NPs + chitosan + proline, WD-4 g/L ZnO-NPs + proline, WD-4 g/L ZnO-NPs + chitosan, and WW-4 g/L ZnO-NPs chitosan + proline (Fig. 1). In the second area of the biplot (top right), the treatments WD-control + control, WD-Control + proline, WD-2 g/L ZnO-NPs + control, WD-control + chitosan, and WD-2 g/L ZnO-NPs + proline were positioned close to the ABA trait. The ABA content was in the opposite direction of the WW-2 g/L ZnO-NPs chitosan + proline, WW-2 g/L ZnO-NPs + proline, and WW-2 g/L ZnO-NPs + chitosan treatments (Fig. 1). In the third area of the biplot (bottom left) were the treatments WW-2 g/L ZnO-NPs + chitosan + proline, WW-2 g/L ZnO-NPs + proline, and WW-2 g/L ZnO-NPs + chitosan. The mentioned treatments were consistent with the traits RWC, RY, SCC, GB, IAA, and CK. It should be noted that for the aforementioned traits, the treatments WD-control + control, WD-control + proline, WD-2 g/L ZnO-NPs + control, WD-control + chitosan, and WD-2 g/L ZnO-NPs + proline were opposite (Fig. 1). In the fourth area of the biplot (bottom right), the treatments including WW-2 g/L ZnO-NPs +chitosan + proline, WW-2 g/L ZnO-NPs + proline, and WW-2 g/L ZnO-NPs + chitosan were positioned near the traits MAD, hydrogen peroxide, proline, beta-glycine, CAT, SOD, and APX. It should be noted that the traits above were located in the opposite direction of the vector of the treatments WW-control+control, WW-control+chitosan, WW-control+proline, WW-control+chitosan + proline, WW-2 g/L ZnO-NPs + control, WW-4 g/L ZnO-NPs + control, WW-4 g/L ZnO-NPs + proline, WW-4 g/L ZnO-NPs + chitosan, and WW-4 g/L ZnO-NPs chitosan + proline (Fig. 1). IBRv2 Sugar beet plants grown under WS conditions and without foliar application of ZnO-NPs and biostimulant (WD-Control+ Control) (IBRv2= 30.26) showed significant reduction in the values of RWC, carotenoids, chlorophyll a , b and RY, stomatal conductance, GA, IAA, CK compared to Ref” treatment (i.e., WW + control+ control) (Fig. 2A).. At the same time, other traits, such as hydrogen peroxide, MAD, APX, SOD, CAT, beta-glycine, and proline, showed an increase. Plants grown under WD-Control+ chitosan treatment (IBRv2 = 24.06) showed significant reduction in the values of RWC, carotenoid, chlorophyll a, GA, and IAA content, stomatal conductance coefficient, and RY compared to the control treatment. While the values of hydrogen peroxide, MAD, APX, SOD, CAT, CK, ABA, beta-glycine and proline increased in this treatment compared to the reference treatment (Fig. 2B). In the case of WD-control+ proline, it was observed that compared to the Ref” treatment (IBRv2= 22.11), the values of carotenoids, RY, IAA, GA, stomatal conductance coefficient, and beta-glycine decreased. At the same time, other traits, such as RWC, chlorophyll a, hydrogen peroxide, MAD, APX, CAT, and CK, also increased (Fig. 2C). In the case of the WD-control + chitosan + proline treatment (IBRv2 = 27.36), a decrease in the values of RWC, carotenoids, GA, ABA, and stomatal conductance coefficient was evident compared to the Ref treatment, and an increase in the values of proline, chlorophyll a and b , hydrogen peroxide, MAD, APX, SOD, CAT, CK, and IAA (Fig. 2D). In the case of WD-2 g/L ZnO-NPs + control treatment (IBRv2= 24.91), a decrease in the values of RY, IAA, GA, stomatal conductance, beta-glycine and an increase in the values of RWC, carotenoids, chlorophyll a and b , hydrogen peroxide, MAD, APX, SOD, CAT, CK, ABA and proline were observed compared to the Ref” treatment (Fig. 2E). In the case of WD-2 g/L ZnO-NPs + chitosan treatment (IBRv2= 31.50), stomatal conductance, ABA, GA, IAA and RY decreased compared to Ref” treatment. While the content of RWC, carotenoids, chlorophyll a and b , hydrogen peroxide, MAD, APX, SOD, CAT, CK, beta-glycine and proline were higher than Ref” treatment (Fig. 2F). A decrease in stomatal conductance, ABA, and RY was observed in the WD-2 g/L ZnO-NPs + proline treatment (IBRv2= 30.25) compared to the Ref” treatment. Other investigated indices such as carotenoids, chlorophyll a and b , hydrogen peroxide, MAD, APX, SOD, CAT, CK, IAA, GA, beta-glycine, and proline were significantly superior to the Ref” treatment (Fig. 2G). In the WD-2 g/L ZnO-NPs + chitosan + proline treatment (IBRv2= 30.25), a decrease in RY, ABA, and stomatal conductance coefficient and an increase in the amounts of hydrogen peroxide, MAD, APX, SOD, CAT, CK, IAA, GA, beta-glycine, and proline were observed compared to the Ref” treatment (Fig. 2H). In the case of WD-4 g/L ZnO-NPs + control treatment (IBRv2= 24.64), a significant decrease in the values of RWC, carotenoids, chlorophyll a and b , root yield, GA, ABA, stomatal conductance coefficient and a considerable increase in the values of hydrogen peroxide, MAD, APX, SOD, CAT, CK, IAA, beta-glycine and proline were detected compared to the Ref” treatment (Fig. 2I). Compared to Ref” treatment, in the WD-4 g/L ZnO-NPs + chitosan treatment (IBRv2= 30.19), a significant decrease in RWC, chlorophyll a and b, RY and ABA traits and a substantial increase in the amounts of hydrogen peroxide, MAD, APX, SOD, CAT, CK, IAA, GA, beta-glycine and proline were observed (Fig. 2J). In the case of WD-4 g/L ZnO-NPs + proline treatment (IBRv2= 24.10), RWC, chlorophyll a and b, root yield, gibberellin, ABA showed a significant decrease and the values of hydrogen peroxide, MAD, APX, SOD, CAT, CK, beta-glycine and proline showed a considerable increase compared to Ref” treatment (Fig. 2K). A decrease in RWC, carotenoid, chlorophyll a and b content, root yield, ABA, and an increase in the values of hydrogen peroxide, MAD, APX, SOD, CAT, CK, IAA, GA, beta-glycine, and proline were observed in WW-4 g/L ZnO-NPs + chitosan + proline (IBRv2= 30.53) compared to Ref” treatment (Fig. 2L). The spider plot serves as a visual representation of the biomarker deviation index (I), with regions above zero indicating biomarker induction and regions below zero indicating biomarker inhibition 55 . The results of IBRv2 calculations showed that drought stress activated the antioxidant defense system in sugar beet plants, regardless of whether foliar stimulators were applied. However, the foliar application of both stimulators resulted in a higher biomarker deviation index (I) for all scavenging enzymes compared to the control plants, under WD conditions (Fig. 7A–L). The impact of WD on RY, as a critical characteristic in sugar beet breeding programs, was evident in the decrease of its I value. However, the application of 4 g/LZnO-NPs+Chitosan+Proline showed a lower decrement (I = − 0.492) compared to the “4 g/L ZnO-NPs+control”(I = − 1.365),“control+chitosan+prolin” (I = − 1.993) and“control+control”treatments. These findings suggest that applying 4 g/L ZnO-NPs + chitosan + proline may have a beneficial effect on mitigating the negative impact of severe drought stress on sugar beet plants and their fundamental characteristics. Discussion Photosynthetic pigments and carotenoid content The water deficit decreased the levels of photosynthetic pigments; however, adding 2 g/L ZnO-NPs significantly increased the levels of chlorophyll a, b, and carotenoids under both environmental conditions compared to the respective controls. The reduction in chlorophyll concentration during drought is linked to the buildup of reactive oxygen species (ROS), which cause chlorophyll breakdown through the action of the chlorophyllase enzyme, leading to chloroplast damage. Additionally, drought conditions decrease photosystem II activity and lower the rate of CO2 assimilation in sugar beets 57 . Hsu and Kao 58 found that chlorophyll (Chl) levels decrease during drought conditions. This decline is linked to osmotic stress, reduced water retention, and altered stomatal movement, which limits CO 2 entry into leaves, ultimately reducing photosynthesis and lowering chlorophyll a and b concentrations. As noted, applying ZnO-NPs (Especially 2 g/L) positively influenced the enhancement of photosynthetic pigments in conditions of water scarcity. Research shows that ZnO nanoparticles can improve leaf membrane stability, enhance water absorption, and increase nutrient uptake. These effects help maintain and stabilize chlorophyll levels 59 , 60 . Recent studies by 61 and 62 indicate that treating sugar beet with ZnO nanoparticles during water stress conditions results in increased levels of chlorophyll a, chlorophyll b, and carotenoids. Chitosan, proline, and a combination of both improved chlorophyll a and b pigments under WW and WD conditions, with proline showing the most significant effect. However, there was no notable difference in carotenoid content between controls and biostimulant treatments under WD conditions. Plants that experienced drought stress exhibited the least amount of chlorophyll in comparison to control plants 63 41 , leading to a decrease in photosynthesis efficiency and overall plant growth 64 , 65 . Chitosan applications mitigate these adverse effects by enhancing chlorophyll content in plants experiencing water stress and boosting photosynthesis 66 , 67 . The foliar application of chitosan to maize plants cultivated under conditions of water deficit has shown beneficial impacts on photosynthesis, chlorophyll fluorescence, and water-use efficiency 68 . As mentioned above, in this study, proline foliar application had a significant advantage over the control in photosynthetic pigments. 69 found that utilizing proline as an osmotic safeguard against water scarcity resulted in increased levels of chlorophyll, proline, glycine betaine, and total soluble phenols in wheat plants. 70 found that applying proline to cowpea foliage under drought stress improved growth and yield traits, as well as increased levels of leaf chlorophylls a and b, and total carotenoids. The experiment found that applying 2 g/L ZnO-NPs alongside proline and a combination of chitosan + proline led to the highest chlorophyll a and b levels. Additionally, the combination of these treatments had a synergistic effect on chlorophyll b content. The application of silicon (Si), proline, or both significantly increased the concentrations of chlorophyll a, chlorophyll b, and relative water content (RWC) in drought-stressed sugar beet plants compared to untreated stressed plants 71 . The application of salicylic acid (SA) and proline, whether used individually or in combination, mitigated the negative effects of drought and enhanced the levels of chlorophyll and carotenoids in Rice 72 Physiological Characteristics In the experiment, water deficit reduced the RWC and stomatal conductance. The adverse effects of drought on RWC could stem from decreased water flow. This decline in RWC may also induce oxidative stress, leading to the production of ROS in plant tissues and ultimately causing lipid peroxidation and cellular harm. 56 Fugate et al. (2018) reported a decrease in relative water content and stomatal conductance in sugar beet plants subjected to drought conditions. Drought reduces soil water absorption, leading to stomata closure and decreased stomatal conductance, as noted in research by 73 Raza et al. (2024). Drought stress leads to a significant reduction in leaf area index and chlorophyll content. This is attributed to the increased production of reactive oxygen species, which cause lipid peroxidation and result in chlorophyll degradation. In our research, we found that foliar spraying with chitosan and proline increased RWC under both conditions compared to the control treatment. It has been noted that the use of proline, either alone or in conjunction with SA, enhanced RWC in rice varieties 72 . Proline is said to assist in preserving the levels of chlorophyll and carotenoids, contributing to leaf turgor and immproving stomatal conductance, which are factors related to drought tolerance 74 . They enhance membrane stability, leaf area, and relative water content, which improves the rate of photosynthesis and confers drought tolerance to crops. Results showed that applying 2 g/L of ZnO-NPs with proline led to the highest RWC, significantly improving this measure compared to the control group and individual treatments. Earlier studies have shown that ZnO nanoparticles can enhance relative water content (RWC), overall yield, and the absorption of key nutrients like nitrogen and potassium in sorghum 34 . In a different study, it has also been noted that using ZnO nanoparticles may alleviate the adverse effects of drought on cell membrane stability and relative water content in corn 75 We observed the application of both levels of ZnO-NPs increased stomatal conductance compared to the corresponding control under both condition. The study found that combining proline with level 2 ZnO-NPs significantly improved stomatal conductance compared to using each treatment separately. This growth might be due to better absorption of water, greater photosynthetic effectiveness, increased production of phytohormones, and the accumulation of osmolytes, providing improved resilience 39 , 76 It has been observed that ZnO-NPs (150ppm) enhanced stomatal conductance and leaf area index 56 . ZnO-NPs boost the production of cytokinins, which enhance metabolic activity and promote cell growth, thereby significantly increasing the LAI and chlorophyll levels 77 . It has been found that ZnO nanoparticles enhanced stomatal conductance in Coriandrum sativum L. and maize when exposed to drought and salt stress, respectively 29 , 76 . Hamze et al. 62 reported that the application of ZnO NPs had a positive effect on RWC and the stomatal conductivity coefficient in sugar beet under water deficit conditions. Osmotic Adjustment The study found that water deficit increased the production of proline and soluble sugars in leaves. Osmolytes maintain turgor pressure and enhance water uptake by increasing cytoplasmic osmotic pressure 78 . Additionally, they function as ROS and MDA scavengers, reducing oxidative stress through enhanced enzyme activity 79 . In conditions of water stress, an increased accumulation of proline serves as one of the most efficient methods for osmotic regulation and for reducing the effects of drought stress 79 . The water status of plants can become unbalanced during drought conditions, disrupting osmotic regulation and resulting in increased levels of compatible osmolytes in crops. Proline possesses antioxidant properties that decrease lipid peroxidation and support cell stability by safeguarding the redox balance 80 . Plants are said to reduce damage caused by drought by increasing their accumulation of soluble sugars 43 In addition, studies on sugar beet seedlings have indicated that levels of proline and betaine rise in response to water stress, highlighting their role in alleviating the impact of drought 56 Our research showed that the application of ZnO-NPs, especially at a concentration of 4 g/L, significantly increased the levels of proline and soluble sugars in both conditions, In addition, the combination of 4 g/L ZnO-NPs with proline and chitosan + proline effectively increased the content of compatible osmolytes, demonstrating a synergistic effect that resulted in the highest levels of soluble sugars. In this framework, the combined application of ZnO–NPs and biostimulants enhances plants' adaptive mechanisms, which markedly increases the levels of proline and soluble carbohydrates. Additionally, the elevated concentration of proline in stressed plants, triggered by the application of chitosan and glycine betaine, could signify improved tolerance of these plants to water stress 81 , 82 . According to reports, the use of chitosan and glycine betaine has improved and increased the levels of soluble sugars and proline in okra plants that are stressed by drought 66 . The rise in proline concentration resulting from chitosan application might be due to a reduction in the oxidation of proline to glutamate and a heightened synthesis of proline 81 . External applications of proline notably enhanced the levels of proline and soluble sugars when the plants experienced water stress in Rice, suggesting that they contribute to replenishing water in plant tissues and provide osmotic protection 72 . Yasmin et al 83 demonstrate that the combined application of ZnO–NPs and AMF synergistically enhances nutrient uptake, alleviates drought stress, and promotes the accumulation of proline and soluble carbohydrates in safflower ( Carthamus tinctorius L.). Previous research has demonstrated that the joint use of ZnO–NPs and AMF diminishes oxidative stress, elevates proline and soluble carbohydrate levels, and ultimately improves drought resistance 61 , 84 . Plant hormone content In this study, WD significantly increased the content of ABA hormones. In response to drought stress, plants manage their growth and development by adjusting the levels of different endogenous hormones, thereby reducing the negative impacts of drought conditions 85 . ABA is the primary plant hormone that initiates immediate responses (like controlling the opening and closing of stomata) as well as long-term responses (such as altering root structure) during drought conditions. It is essential for managing plant growth and development 86 . Bhusal et al 87 indicate that drought stress causes a notable rise in ABA levels, with higher drought conditions leading to increased ABA concentrations. In drought circumstances, ABA notably lowers the net photosynthetic rate by decreasing the plants' stomatal conductance, which helps mitigate the harm caused by drought stress. However, Certain studies indicated that stomatal closure and reduced transpiration rates are influenced not only by ABA content but also by the combined action of ABA 88 . In this experiment, the use of ZnO-NPs under WW environmental conditions decreased ABA content. Under water deficit WD conditions, the response of ABA to foliar application of ZnO-NPs was different. The level of 2 g/L of ZnO-NPs increased the ABA content, and the level of 4 g/L of ZnO-NPs decreased the content of this hormone. A previous study found that ZnO nanoparticles reduce ABA gene expression in strawberries ( Fragaria ananassa ), supporting current findings 43 . The findings from Ahmed et al. 29 indicated that stomatal conductance improved in plants treated with ZnO nanoparticles, which also corroborated the decrease in ABA levels that are crucial for stomatal function during drought conditions 89 . In our experiment, all three biostimulant treatments significantly reduced ABA content under both environmental conditions, with the maximum reduction associated with applying chitosan + proline. The lowest ABA content was observed with a combination of 4 g/L ZnO-NPs and chitosan + proline foliar application. This treatment had a synergistic effect, reducing ABA content more effectively than applying each treatment separately. Our research findings showed that water deficit decreased the levels of the hormones GA, IAA, and CK hormones. A reduction in GA content may slow plant growth rates to mitigate the effects of water scarcity on their normal physiological functions, thereby enhancing drought resistance 90 . The study found that a concentration of 2 g/L ZnO-NPs under WW conditions increased levels of GA, IAA, and CK hormones. Under WD conditions, a concentration of 4 g/L ZnO-NPs benefited only GA and CK. Additionally, combining 4 g/L ZnO-NPs with proline foliar spray yielded the highest levels of GA and IAA, significantly boosting hormone levels compared to using each treatment alone. The application of zinc (Zn) has a significant impact on the level of indole-3-acetic acid (IAA), and zinc is recognized as a co-enzyme in the synthesis of tryptophan, which is a precursor in the production of IAA 91 , 92 . Applying Zn during periods of drought stress elevates IAA levels, which enhances root development, aids in water absorption, and consequently boosts drought resistance 91 . Water deficiency greatly decreases the levels of IAA and GA, while the application of Zn significantly enhances these levels, leading to improved plant performance 93 . The use of Zn significantly enhances the metabolic routes of tryptophan under drought conditions. As a result, since tryptophan is a precursor to IAA and melatonin, elevated levels of tryptophan help mitigate the impacts of drought by decreasing oxidative damage and maintaining osmotic balance 94 . Inoculating wheat with PGPR and ZnO-NPs also enhanced the levels of phytohormones, specifically IAA, when exposed to drought stress 95 . Elewa et al. 96 found that water shortage stress in Chenopodium quinoa plants resulted in a notable reduction in IAA hormone levels. On the other hand, the addition of proline in these circumstances elevated the IAA hormone content. Antioxidant Properties, MDA and Hydrogen peroxide Concentration In this experiment, WD considerably enhanced the activity of CAT, SOD, and APX enzymes. Drought stress leads to the buildup of reactive oxygen species (ROS), which subsequently triggers the activation of antioxidant enzymes, which are a component of the plant’s defense mechanism against oxidative harm 11 . Nonetheless, during extended and intense drought periods, the effectiveness of the antioxidant defense system is undermined by the reduction of vital cofactors, decreased ability to regenerate, and interruption of ROS-related signaling pathways 97 . Azzouz-Olden et al. 98 found that the differential expression of genes involved in the defense against oxidative stress, particularly those related to producing antioxidant enzymes, is a key strategy for S. bicolor to withstand drought conditions. 12 noted a preliminary rise in the activity of antioxidant enzymes in response to moderate drought stress in lavander ( Lavandula angustifolia L.). This supportive interaction enhances the plant's defensive capabilities by boosting water retention, triggering protective signaling pathways, and promoting the production of essential protective compounds 99 . It has been reported CAT and SOD activities increased significantly in sugar beet under drought conditions compared to controls. This rise is attributed to their role as antioxidant enzymes that help stress tolerance. SOD acts as the first line of defense against oxidative damage by converting superoxide radicals into hydrogen peroxide and oxygen 100 . CAT is involved in the transformation of H2O2 into water and oxygen, playing a crucial role in plant metabolism and in the recognition of signals. These findings align with the results reported by 13 ,14 101 . The results of our experiment indicated that treatment with ZnO-NPs significantly increased antioxidant enzyme activities at levels 2 and 4 under both environmental conditions. Importantly, ZnO-NPs play a role in stabilizing cell membranes, triggering essential antioxidant pathways, and together enhancing the plant's resilience to stress caused by drought 102 , 103 . Mir-Mahmoudi et al 61 . showed that the simultaneous application of ZnO-NPs not only promotes nutrient absorption but also modulates ROS-dependent signaling pathways, thus boosting the expression of antioxidant genes and strengthening the plant's overall defense mechanisms 104 . In this experiment biostimulant treatments, particularly chitosan + proline, enhanced the activity of CAT, SOD, and APX enzymes under both environmental conditions. In addition, applying 4 g/L of ZnO-NPs with chitosan and proline enhances CAT enzyme activity through a synergistic effect. Additionally, 2 g/L of ZnO-NPs combined with proline positively influences SOD enzyme activity. The use of chitosan derivatives, either alone or in combination, has been shown to enhance the activity of antioxidant enzymes such as superoxide dismutase, catalase, ascorbate peroxidase, glutathione reductase, and guaiacol peroxidase during the early stages of stress. Furthermore, it contributes to reducing lipid peroxidation 105 . Furthermore, chitosan and its derivatives have demonstrated efficacy in improving crop resilience to water shortages by alleviating the harmful impacts of water deficit on yield 106 , 107 . As mentioned, proline foliar application had a positive effect on increasing the content of antioxidant enzymes. Furthermore, proline's critical function may be attributed to its beneficial impact as an osmoprotectant, safeguarding plant cells from oxidative stress through osmotic regulation, protein stabilization, and maintaining the balance of antioxidant enzymes. AlKahtani et al. 71 found that silicon (Si), proline, and their combined application significantly benefited drought-stressed sugar beet plants compared to untreated stressed plants. The content of hydrogen peroxide and MAD increased significantly under WD conditions. The results of this research clearly show that drought stress substantially improves the levels of malondialdehyde (MDA) and hydrogen peroxide (H₂O₂), which are key indicators of membrane lipid peroxidation and cellular harm caused by oxidative stress 11 ; 108 ). Under drought conditions, the heightened production of ROS results in cellular harm, which in turn elevates the levels of MDA and H₂O₂ 4 . In line with these findings, Mazhar et al. 6 stated that drought stress activates lipid peroxidation and causes oxidative imbalance in canola. The elevated levels of MDA and proline are a reaction to drought conditions. Our results align with those of several researchers who have observed significant increases in proline and MDA under stressful conditions in various plants 14 , 17 , 109 . The results showed that applying both levels of ZnO-NPs significantly decreased the content of hydrogen peroxide and MAD. However, applying ZnO-NPs under WW conditions did not significantly affect the reduction of these two substances. In contrast, the use of ZnO–NPs significantly alleviated oxidative stress, as indicated by the decrease in levels of MDA and H₂O₂. This combined treatment bolstered the plant’s resistance to oxidative stress by enhancing its nutrient levels and promoting the activity of antioxidant enzymes 110 , 111 . ZnO-NPs specifically aimed at enzymatic antioxidant mechanisms, which consequently reduced ROS production 99 , 112 ; 113 . Prior research has highlighted the effect of ZnO–NPs in diminishing oxidative stress and improving membrane stability in a range of crops, such as wheat and maize 40 , 99 . Research has indicated that drought stress results in an excessive generation of reactive oxygen species (ROS), which causes damage to cell membranes, accumulates malondialdehyde (MDA), and ultimately leads to cell death. The application of zinc (Zn) during drought stress decreases MDA levels, highlighting the essential function of Zn in safeguarding cell membranes from ROS under drought conditions 114 . In this experiment, foliar spraying of proline under WW conditions, as well as the foliar spraying of all three growth stimulant treatments under WD conditions, significantly reduced the levels of hydrogen peroxide and MAD. Other scientists reported comparable results, discovering that the use of proline markedly decreased the concentrations of H2O2 and MDA in various plants experiencing stress 32 , 115 . In the study conducted by AlKahtani et al. 71 a significant reduction in H 2 O 2 was observed due to the foliar application of proline. This treatment was particularly effective in mitigating the adverse effects of drought. Root yield (RY) WD significantly increased RY compared to the corresponding control. Notably, applying both levels of ZnO-NPs under WW conditions significantly enhanced RY compared to the control. The increase in RY under WD conditions was limited to only 4 g/L of ZnO-NPs. The increase in root yield under water deficit conditions under 4 g/L of ZnO-NPs treatment can be attributed to the positive effect of this treatment on increasing the activity of antioxidant enzymes, increasing the content of compatible osmolytes, and consequently reducing the content of hydrogen peroxide and MAD. The sum of these processes paves the way for improving physiological characteristics, photosynthetic pigments' content, and consequently, root yield. Drought stress significantly diminishes soybean seed yield by affecting soil moisture levels, impairing the absorption of water, and obstructing the transport of nutrients 116 . Consequently, the reduction in photosynthetic ability, along with metabolic impairment, greatly affects seed production 27 , 117 Previous studies on wheat and maize have demonstrated that AMF and ZnO–NPs treatments more effectively promotes plant growth, strengthens stress tolerance, and improves yield outcomes compared to individual treatments 113 . It has been observed that ZnO–NPs support the stability of photosystem structures and boost the activity of antioxidant enzymes, which improves the efficiency of light energy conversion and decreases oxidative damage 31 , 118 . These results are in agreement with the obtained results with 71 , 62 , and 119 , who reported that drought led to inhibiting the assimilation of CO2 and reducing the assimilate supply in sugar beet, consequently decreasing sucrose%, root, and sugar yield. In the study by 34 on sorghum and hirvani- 35 on soybean, the foliar application of ZnO–NPs significantly improved the economic yield of the crops compared to the control group. On the other hand, applying all three biostimulant treatments under WW conditions increased RY compared to the control. The increase in RY under WS conditions was attributed solely to the chitosan + proline treatment. The treatment above positively increased photosynthetic pigments, compatible osmolytes, growth hormones, antioxidant enzyme activity, and reduced MAD content. These processes can significantly improve root yield under water deficit conditions. In this experiment, Chitosan + Proline spraying with both levels of 2 and 4 g /l ZnO-NPS produced maximum RY. The foliar application of chitosan + proline, combined with 2 g/L ZnO-NPs, had a synergistic effect on enhancing RY compared to the separate application of each. Chitosan has been found to activate signaling pathways that regulate stomatal opening and closing, which are essential for plants under water stress conditions 21 , 22 . Furthermore Chitosan can enhance the plant's defenses against oxidative stress by promoting certain enzymes and non-enzymatic antioxidants, such as ascorbate, while reducing lipid peroxidation and hydrogen peroxide production 23 .Research has shown that applying chitosan to the leaves of plants during periods of water deficiency significantly enhances their economic yield. This has been observed in various crops, including marigold ( Calendula officinalis L.) 24 , rice 25 , and sunflower ( Helianthus annuus L.) 26 . Our findings align with these studies. It has been reported that proline application has been shown to enhance plant growth and reduce oxidative damage under stress conditions in calendula and barley plants by alleviating the negative effects of ROS 14 , 15 . Ghaffari et al. 17 discovered that employing proline improved water management and boosted sugar beet production under drought conditions. The superior effect of proline might be due to the role of proline in improving sugar beet as a storage sink for nutrient elements, for example, carbon and nitrogen, and as a scavenger for free radicals; consequently, decreased TSS% 120 . Relationships between traits and treatments Based on the results, root yield in the vicinity of the treatments WW-2 g/L ZnO-NPs + Chitosan + Proline, WW-2 g/L ZnO-NPs + Proline, and WW-2 g/L ZnO-NPs + Chitosan and the traits RWC, RY, SCC, GB, IAA, and CK were located in one area of ​​the biplot. It can be concluded that in this study, the use of 2 g/L ZnO-NPs treatment along with all three biostimulant foliar spray treatments resulted in maximum RWC, RY, SCC, GB, IAA, and CK traits and ultimately root yield. In the opposite direction to the root yield axis, the treatments Control + Control, Control + Proline, Control + Chitosan, 2 g/L ZnO-NPs + Control and 2 g/L ZnO-NPs + Proline ABA under water deficit was placed. It can be stated that the lowest values ​​of RWC, RY, SCC, GB, IAA, and CK and finally root yield were related to the aforementioned treatments. IBRv2 We recorded the lowest IBRv2 values of 22.11, 24.06, 24.91, 24.64, and 24.10 for “Control + Proline,” “Control + Chitosan,” “2 g/L ZnO-NPs + Control,” “2 g/L ZnO-NPs + Control,” and “4 g/L ZnO-NPs + Proline” treatments. The maximum IBRv2 with a value of 31.50 was assigned to the 2 g/L ZnO-NPs + Proline treatments. Since lower IBRv2 values indicated lower levels of toxicity and/or oxidative stress, it could be concluded that foliar application of Proline under drought stress could be accompanied by better improvements toward diminishing adverse consequences of severe drought stress. The influence of drought stress on MAD content, a fundamental characteristic for osmotic tension, revealed that 4ZnO-NPs + Chitosan + Proline (I = 0.803) and 4 g/L ZnO-NPs + Proline (I = 0.809) had the lowest increases in MAD content. The highest increase in MAD index was assigned to Control + Control (I = 3.601). In terms of root yield as an economic trait in sugar beet, the least decrease in this trait was observed in the treatments of 4 g/L ZnO-NPs + Chitosan and Proline (I = -0.492) and 4 g/L ZnO-NPs + Proline (I = -1.014). These findings suggested that applying 4 g/L ZnO-NPs combined with Chitosan and Proline and 4 g/L ZnO-NPs with Proline might have a beneficial effect on mitigating the negative impact of severe drought stress on sugar beet plants and their fundamental characteristics. Since higher value of IBRv2 index corresponded to increased oxidative stress reflected in decreasing growth rate 121 , foliar spraying of 4g/L ZnO-NPs combined with Chitosan and Proline and 4 g/L ZnO-NPs with Proline seemed to have a positive effect on improving cell health by regulating the activity of antioxidant enzymes and betaglycine proline the foliar treatments. This is because of lower values of IBRv2 for the sugar beet plants exposed to ZnO-NPs combined with Chitosan and Proline, under water deficit stress conditions. Similarly, in soybean, lower values of IBRv2 index was also observed for the inoculated strain DNS10 which was able to destroy the atrazine in the soil and moderati the phytotoxicity caused by atrazine comparing to the other treatments 122 . Conclusion According to the findings from the comparison of treatments under water deficit (WD) conditions, applying a foliar spray of 4 g/L of ZnO-NPs enhanced the levels of chlorophyll b, carotenoids, proline, beta-glycine, stomatal conductance, GA, CK, CAT, SOD, APX, and RY. At the same time, it reduced the amounts of ABA, MAD, and hydrogen peroxide compared to the control. Among the biostimulant treatments, the combination of chitosan and proline applied under WD conditions increased in chlorophyll a, chlorophyll b, proline, beta-glycine, GA, IAA, CK, CAT, APX, and RY, and a decrease in ABA, MAD, and hydrogen peroxide levels. The application of 4 g/L of ZnO-NPs and foliar spraying of chitosan + proline under water-deficit conditions increased the plant's defense capability against water-deficit stress by increasing the content of antioxidant enzymes. Reducing MAD and hydrogen peroxide content can prove this improvement in plant defense properties. By enhancing defensive characteristics, the plant upholds ideal quantities of growth hormones, which help preserve the arrangement and stability of photosynthetic pigments, ultimately boosting photosynthetic output and enhancing root yield. In this research, under both environmental conditions, the combined use of 4 g/L of ZnO-NPs along with the foliar application of chitosan and proline exhibited a synergistic effect on enhancing root yield, which is a crucial economic trait in sugar beet, when compared to the individual application of each treatment. Even though the Control + Proline treatment received the lowest IBRv2 index in this study, the 4ZnO-NPs + Chitosan + Proline treatment showed the smallest root yield decline and the smallest rise in MAD content. It can be inferred that the treatment of 4ZnO-NPs + chitosan + proline likely alleviated the negative impact of water deficit stress on root functionality by triggering different defense mechanisms, including enhancing the activity of antioxidant enzymes and boosting the levels of compatible osmolytes. To summarize, our findings indicated that the application of ZnO nanoparticles (NPs) in conjunction with biostimulants, especially the mixture of 4 g/L of ZnO-NPs with foliar treatments of chitosan and proline, notably improved root yield. In addition, this combination demonstrated the potential to activate antioxidant enzymes and promote growth in the Shokofa variety of sugar beet when subjected to water stress conditions.This study suggested that using zinc nanoparticles and biostimulants could present promising opportunities for future research in cultivating sugar beet and various crops in arid and semi-arid regions. This is particularly relevant in light of the current trends in global warming, which have resulted in a progressively warmer planet and have considerably impacted the accessibility of water resources around the globe Considering the consequences of current global warming trends, employing such stimulators could be a reliable method to mitigate the negative impacts of water scarcity on the growth, yield, and quality of sugar beets in the future. This is especially important for farmers whose sugar beet crops are negatively impacted by water shortages. Declarations Funding This study does not have any financial support. Author Contribution SH. N and H. H. collected and organized the experimental data, performed data analysis, and wrote the manuscript. T. M. collected and organized the experimental data and edited the manuscript. S.Sh. rewrote the manuscript. S. Y. S., H. H., and SH. N conducted experiments and assisted in collecting and organizing the experimental data. Acknowledgement The authors express their gratitude to the technicians at the Mahabad Azad University, Iran, for their assistance in conducting the experiments Data Availability The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. References Gonzalez, M. N. G. & Björnsson, L. Life cycle assessment of the production of beet sugar and its by-products. Journal of Cleaner Production 346 , 131211 (2022). Hossain, M. S., ElSayed, A. I., Moore, M. & Dietz, K.-J. Redox and reactive oxygen species network in acclimation for salinity tolerance in sugar beet. Journal of experimental botany 68 , 1283-1298 (2017). Alsherif, E. A. et al. Carbon nanoparticles improve the effect of compost and arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi in drought-stressed corn cultivation. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry 194 , 29-40 (2023). Kausar, A. et al. Zinc oxide nanoparticles as potential hallmarks for enhancing drought stress tolerance in wheat seedlings. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry 195 , 341-350 (2023). Ashwin, R., Bagyaraj, D. J. & Mohan Raju, B. Ameliorating the drought stress tolerance of a susceptible soybean cultivar, MAUS 2 through dual inoculation with selected rhizobia and AM fungus. Fungal Biology and Biotechnology 10 , 10 (2023). Mazhar, M. W., Ishtiaq, M., Maqbool, M. & Akram, R. Seed priming with Calcium oxide nanoparticles improves germination, biomass, antioxidant defence and yield traits of canola plants under drought stress. South African Journal of Botany 151 , 889-899 (2022). Hu, Y., Xie, W. & Chen, B. Arbuscular mycorrhiza improved drought tolerance of maize seedlings by altering photosystem II efficiency and the levels of key metabolites. Chemical and biological technologies in agriculture 7 , 1-14 (2020). Feizabadi, A., Noormohammadi, G. & Fatehi, F. Changes in growth, physiology, and fatty acid profile of rapeseed cultivars treated with vermicompost under drought stress. Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition 21 , 200-208 (2021). Haghaninia, M., Javanmard, A., Mahdavinia, G. R., Shah, A. A. & Farooq, M. Co-application of Biofertilizer and Stress-Modulating Nanoparticles Modulates the Physiological, Biochemical, and Yield Responses of Camelina (Camelina sativa L.) Under Limited Water Supply. Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition 23 , 6681-6695 (2023). Alam, M. Z., Choudhury, T. R. & Mridha, M. Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi enhance biomass growth, mineral content, and antioxidant activity in tomato plants under drought stress. Journal of Food Quality 2023 , 2581608 (2023). Begum, N. et al. Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungus Rhizophagus irregularis alleviates drought stress in soybean with overexpressing the GmSPL9d gene by promoting photosynthetic apparatus and regulating the antioxidant system. Microbiological Research 273 , 127398 (2023). Haghaninia, M. et al. Adoption of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi and biochar for alleviating the agro-physiological response of lavander (Lavandula angustifolia L.) subjected to drought stress. Plant Stress 12 , 100461 (2024). Abdelaal, K. A. Effect of salicylic acid and abscisic acid on morpho-physiological and anatomical characters of faba bean plants (Vicia faba L.) under drought stress. Journal of Plant Production 6 , 1771-1788 (2015). Abdelaal, K. A. et al. Exogenous application of proline and salicylic acid can mitigate the injurious impacts of drought stress on barley plants associated with physiological and histological characters. Sustainability 12 , 1736 (2020). Kaur, G. & Asthir, B. Proline: a key player in plant abiotic stress tolerance. Biologia plantarum 59 , 609-619 (2015). Godoy, F., Olivos-Hernández, K., Stange, C. & Handford, M. Abiotic stress in crop species: improving tolerance by applying plant metabolites. Plants 10 , 186 (2021). Ghaffari, H., Tadayon, M. R., Bahador, M. & Razmjoo, J. Investigation of the proline role in controlling traits related to sugar and root yield of sugar beet under water deficit conditions. Agricultural Water Management 243 , 106448 (2021). Hasanuzzaman, M. et al. Targeting glycinebetaine for abiotic stress tolerance in crop plants: physiological mechanism, molecular interaction and signaling. Phyton 88 , 185 (2019). Xu, C. & Mou, B. Chitosan as soil amendment affects lettuce growth, photochemical efficiency, and gas exchange. HortTechnology 28 , 476-480 (2018). Sharif, R. et al. The multifunctional role of chitosan in horticultural crops; a review. Molecules 23 , 872 (2018). Agurla, S., Gayatri, G. & Raghavendra, A. S. Nitric oxide as a secondary messenger during stomatal closure as a part of plant immunity response against pathogens. Nitric Oxide 43 , 89-96 (2014). Czékus, Z. et al. Role of ethylene and light in chitosan-induced local and systemic defence responses of tomato plants. Journal of Plant Physiology 263 , 153461 (2021). Almeida, L. G., Magalhães, P. C., Karam, D., Silva, E. M. d. & Alvarenga, A. A. Chitosan application in the induction of water deficit tolerance in maize plants. Acta Scientiarum. Agronomy 42 , e42463 (2020). Akhtar, G. et al. Chitosan-induced physiological and biochemical regulations confer drought tolerance in pot marigold (Calendula officinalis L.). Agronomy 12 , 474 (2022). Moolphuerk, N., Lawson, T. & Pattanagul, W. Chitosan mitigates the adverse effects and improves photosynthetic activity in rice (Oryza sativa L.) seedlings under drought condition. Journal of Crop Improvement 36 , 638-655 (2022). Sohail, M. A., Nawaz, F., Aziz, M. & Ahmad, W. Effect of supplemental potassium and chitosan on growth and yield of sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.) under drought stress. Agricultural Sciences Journal 3 , 56-71 (2021). Ghiyasi, M. et al. Foliar Applications of ZnO and its nanoparticles increase safflower (Carthamus tinctorius L.) growth and yield under water stress. Agronomy 13 , 192 (2023). Sadak, M. S. & Bakry, B. A. Zinc-oxide and nano ZnO oxide effects on growth, some biochemical aspects, yield quantity, and quality of flax (Linum uitatissimum L.) in absence and presence of compost under sandy soil. Bulletin of the National Research Centre 44 , 1-12 (2020). Ahmed, S. et al. Characterizing stomatal attributes and photosynthetic induction in relation to biochemical changes in Coriandrum sativum L. by foliar-applied zinc oxide nanoparticles under drought conditions. Frontiers in Plant Science 13 , 1079283 (2023). Elemike, E. E., Uzoh, I. M., Onwudiwe, D. C. & Babalola, O. O. The role of nanotechnology in the fortification of plant nutrients and improvement of crop production. Applied Sciences 9 , 499 (2019). Yusefi-Tanha, E., Fallah, S., Rostamnejadi, A. & Pokhrel, L. R. Zinc oxide nanoparticles (ZnONPs) as a novel nanofertilizer: Influence on seed yield and antioxidant defense system in soil grown soybean (Glycine max cv. Kowsar). Science of the Total Environment 738 , 140240 (2020). Singh, M., Kumar, J., Singh, S., Singh, V. P. & Prasad, S. M. Roles of osmoprotectants in improving salinity and drought tolerance in plants: a review. Reviews in environmental science and bio/technology 14 , 407-426 (2015). Parashar, R., Afzal, S. & Singh, N. K. in Phytoremediation and Biofortification 183-199 (Apple Academic Press, 2024). Dimkpa, C. O. et al. Zinc oxide nanoparticles alleviate drought-induced alterations in sorghum performance, nutrient acquisition, and grain fortification. Science of the Total Environment 688 , 926-934 (2019). Shirvani-Naghani, S., Fallah, S., Pokhrel, L. R. & Rostamnejadi, A. Drought stress mitigation and improved yield in Glycine max through foliar application of zinc oxide nanoparticles. Scientific Reports 14 , 27898 (2024). Duarte, B., Pedro, S., Marques, J. C., Adão, H. & Caçador, I. Zostera noltii development probing using chlorophyll a transient analysis (JIP-test) under field conditions: Integrating physiological insights into a photochemical stress index. Ecological Indicators 76 , 219-229 (2017). Koutra, E., Chondrogiannis, C. & Grammatikopoulos, G. Variability of the photosynthetic machinery tolerance when imposed to rapidly or slowly imposed dehydration in native Mediterranean plants. Photosynthetica 60 , 88 (2022). Stirbet, A., Lazár, D., Kromdijk, J. & Govindjee. Chlorophyll a fluorescence induction: can just a one-second measurement be used to quantify abiotic stress responses? Photosynthetica 56 , 86-104 (2018). Rasheed, A. et al. The role of nanoparticles in plant biochemical, physiological, and molecular responses under drought stress: A review. Frontiers in Plant Science 13 , 976179 (2022). Abdelhameed, R. E., Abu-Elsaad, N. I., Abdel Latef, A. A. H. & Metwally, R. A. Tracking of zinc ferrite nanoparticle effects on pea (Pisum sativum L.) plant growth, pigments, mineral content and arbuscular mycorrhizal colonization. Plants 10 , 583 (2021). Hidangmayum, A., Dwivedi, P., Katiyar, D. & Hemantaranjan, A. Application of chitosan on plant responses with special reference to abiotic stress. Physiology and molecular biology of plants 25 , 313-326 (2019). Banchio, E., Bogino, P. C., Zygadlo, J. & Giordano, W. Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria improve growth and essential oil yield in Origanum majorana L. Biochemical Systematics and Ecology 36 , 766-771 (2008). Li, D. et al. Comparative transcriptome analysis reveals the influence of abscisic acid on the metabolism of pigments, ascorbic acid and folic acid during strawberry fruit ripening. PloS one 10 , e0130037 (2015). Bouras, H., Bouaziz, A., Bouazzama, B., Hirich, A. & Choukr-Allah, R. How phosphorus fertilization alleviates the effect of salinity on sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) productivity and quality. Agronomy 11 , 1491 (2021). Bates, L. S., Waldren, R. & Teare, I. Rapid determination of free proline for water-stress studies. Plant and soil 39 , 205-207 (1973). Shaw, B., Thomas, T. & Cooke, D. Responses of sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) to drought and nutrient deficiency stress. Plant Growth Regulation 37 , 77-83 (2002). Chołuj, D., Karwowska, R., Ciszewska, A. & Jasińska, M. Influence of long-term drought stress on osmolyte accumulation in sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) plants. Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 30 , 679-687 (2008). Lichtenthaler, H. (Elsevier. https://doi. org/10.1016/0076-6879 (87), 1987). Islam, M. J., Kim, J. W., Begum, M. K., Sohel, M. A. T. & Lim, Y.-S. Physiological and biochemical changes in sugar beet seedlings to confer stress adaptability under drought condition. Plants 9 , 1511 (2020). Nakano, Y. & Asada, K. Hydrogen peroxide is scavenged by ascorbate-specific peroxidase in spinach chloroplasts. Plant and cell physiology 22 , 867-880 (1981). Zhang, X. The measurement and mechanism of lipid peroxidation and SOD, POD and CAT activities in biological system. Research methodology of crop physiology , 208-211 (1992). Bollmark, M., Kubát, B. & Eliasson, L. Variation in endogenous cytokinin content during adventitious root formation in pea cuttings. Journal of Plant Physiology 132 , 262-265 (1988). He, Z. A laboratory guide to chemical control technology on field crop. Beijing Agr. Univ. Press, Beijing, China (1993). Metsalu, T. & Vilo, J. ClustVis: a web tool for visualizing clustering of multivariate data using Principal Component Analysis and heatmap. Nucleic acids research 43 , W566-W570 (2015). Resende, A. C. & Pereira, D. M. C. IBRtools: An R package for calculating integrated biomarker indexes. Ecology and Evolution 14 , e10864 (2024). Fugate, K. K. et al. Methyl jasmonate alleviates drought stress in young sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) plants. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science 204 , 566-576 (2018). Chołuj, D. et al. Assessment of the physiological responses to drought in different sugar beet genotypes in connection with their genetic distance. Journal of plant physiology 171 , 1221-1230 (2014). Hsu, Y. T. & Kao, C. H. Abscisic acid accumulation and cadmium tolerance in rice seedlings. Physiologia Plantarum 124 , 71-80 (2005). Abd El-Mageed, T. A. & Semida, W. M. Organo mineral fertilizer can mitigate water stress for cucumber production (Cucumis sativus L.). Agricultural Water Management 159 , 1-10 (2015). Reddy, M. & Vora, A. Changes in pigment composition, Hill reaction activity and saccharides metabolism in bajra (Pennisetum typhoides S & H) leaves under NaCl salinity. (1986). Mir Mahmoudi, T., Hamze, H. & Golabi Lak, I. Impact of biofertiliser and zinc nanoparticles on enzymatic, biochemical, and agronomic properties of sugar beet under different irrigation regimes. Zemdirbyste-Agriculture 110 (2023). Hamze, H., Khalili, M., Mir-Shafiee, Z. & Nasiri, J. Integrated biomarker response version 2 (IBRv2)-Assisted examination to scrutinize foliar application of jasmonic acid (JA) and zinc oxide nanoparticles (ZnO NPs) toward mitigating drought stress in sugar beet. Journal of Plant Growth Regulation 44 , 316-334 (2025). Cabillo, C. M. Biomass production of lettuce (Lactuca sativa L.) under water stress. Int. J. Sci. Eng. Res 10 , 928-935 (2019). El-Afifi, S., Ibrahim, E. & Salem, S. Effect of water stress and some anti-transpirants on growth, yield and quality of okra plants (Abelmoschus esculentus). Journal of Plant Production 9 , 619-625 (2018). Franzoni, G., Cocetta, G. & Ferrante, A. Effect of glutamic acid foliar applications on lettuce under water stress. Physiology and Molecular Biology of Plants 27 , 1059-1072 (2021). Murmu, K., Murmu, S., Kundu, C. K. & Bera, P. S. Exogenous proline and glycine betaine in plants under stress tolerance. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences 6 , 901-913 (2017). Annunziata, M. G., Ciarmiello, L. F., Woodrow, P., Dell’Aversana, E. & Carillo, P. Spatial and temporal profile of glycine betaine accumulation in plants under abiotic stresses. Frontiers in plant science 10 , 230 (2019). dos Reis, C. O. et al. Action of N-Succinyl and N, O-Dicarboxymethyl chitosan derivatives on chlorophyll photosynthesis and fluorescence in drought-sensitive maize. Journal of Plant Growth Regulation 38 , 619-630 (2019). Farooq, M., Nawaz, A., Chaudhry, M., Indrasti, R. & Rehman, A. Improving resistance against terminal drought in bread wheat by exogenous application of proline and gamma‐aminobutyric acid. Journal of agronomy and crop science 203 , 464-472 (2017). Merwad, A.-R. M., Desoky, E.-S. M. & Rady, M. M. Response of water deficit-stressed Vigna unguiculata performances to silicon, proline or methionine foliar application. Scientia Horticulturae 228 , 132-144 (2018). AlKahtani, M. D. et al. Evaluation of silicon and proline application on the oxidative machinery in drought-stressed sugar beet. Antioxidants 10 , 398 (2021). Urmi, T. A. et al. Combined effect of salicylic acid and proline mitigates drought stress in rice (Oryza sativa L.) through the modulation of physiological attributes and antioxidant enzymes. Antioxidants 12 , 1438 (2023). Raza, M. A. S. et al. Cu-nanoparticles enhance the sustainable growth and yield of drought-subjected wheat through physiological progress. Scientific Reports 14 , 14254 (2024). Panda, D., Mishra, S. S. & Behera, P. K. Drought tolerance in rice: focus on recent mechanisms and approaches. Rice science 28 , 119-132 (2021). Yan, W., Zhong, Y. & Shangguan, Z. A meta-analysis of leaf gas exchange and water status responses to drought. Scientific Reports 6 , 20917 (2016). Seleiman, M. F., Ahmad, A., Alhammad, B. A. & Tola, E. Exogenous application of zinc oxide nanoparticles improved antioxidants, photosynthetic, and yield traits in salt-stressed maize. Agronomy 13 , 2645 (2023). Raza, M. A. S. et al. ZnO-nanoparticles and stage-based drought tolerance in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.): effect on morpho-physiology, nutrients uptake, grain yield and quality. Scientific Reports 15 , 5309 (2025). Saxena, S. C. et al. Osmoprotectants: potential for crop improvement under adverse conditions. Plant acclimation to environmental stress , 197-232 (2013). El-Bauome, H. A. et al. Exogenous proline, methionine, and melatonin stimulate growth, quality, and drought tolerance in cauliflower plants. Agriculture 12 , 1301 (2022). Gao, S. et al. Effects of drought stress on growth, physiology and secondary metabolites of Two Adonis species in Northeast China. Scientia Horticulturae 259 , 108795 (2020). Geng, W., Li, Z., Hassan, M. J. & Peng, Y. Chitosan regulates metabolic balance, polyamine accumulation, and Na+ transport contributing to salt tolerance in creeping bentgrass. BMC Plant Biology 20 , 1-15 (2020). Shafiq, S. et al. Influence of glycine betaine (natural and synthetic) on growth, metabolism and yield production of drought-stressed maize (Zea mays L.) plants. Plants 10 , 2540 (2021). Yasmin, H. et al. Combined application of zinc oxide nanoparticles and biofertilizer to induce salt resistance in safflower by regulating ion homeostasis and antioxidant defence responses. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety 218 , 112262 (2021). Gatasheh, M. K., Shah, A. A., Kaleem, M., Usman, S. & Shaffique, S. Application of CuNPs and AMF alleviates arsenic stress by encompassing reduced arsenic uptake through metabolomics and ionomics alterations in Elymus sibiricus. BMC Plant Biology 24 , 667 (2024). Pirasteh-Anosheh, H., Emam, Y. & Pessarakli, M. Changes in endogenous hormonal status in corn (Zea mays) hybrids under drought stress. Journal of plant nutrition 36 , 1695-1707 (2013). Sah, S. K., Reddy, K. R. & Li, J. Abscisic acid and abiotic stress tolerance in crop plants. Frontiers in plant science 7 , 571 (2016). Bhusal, N., Han, S.-G. & Yoon, T.-M. Impact of drought stress on photosynthetic response, leaf water potential, and stem sap flow in two cultivars of bi-leader apple trees (Malus× domestica Borkh.). Scientia Horticulturae 246 , 535-543 (2019). Zhou, Y. et al. Effects of drought stress on photosynthetic characteristics and endogenous hormone ABA and CTK contents in green-stayed sorghum. Scientia Agricultura Sinica 47 , 655-663 (2014). Khan, M. T., Ahmed, S. & Shah, A. A. Regulatory role of folic acid in biomass production and physiological activities of Coriandrum sativum L. under irrigation regimes. International Journal of Phytoremediation 24 , 1025-1038 (2022). Nir, I., Moshelion, M. & Weiss, D. The A rabidopsis GIBBERELLIN METHYL TRANSFERASE 1 suppresses gibberellin activity, reduces whole‐plant transpiration and promotes drought tolerance in transgenic tomato. Plant, cell & environment 37 , 113-123 (2014). Waraich, E. A., Ahmad, R. & Ashraf, M. Role of mineral nutrition in alleviation of drought stress in plants. Australian journal of crop science 5 , 764-777 (2011). Bennett, J. & Skoog, F. Preliminary experiments on the relation of growth-promoting substances to the rest period in fruit trees. Plant Physiology 13 , 219 (1938). Moghadam, H. R. T., Zahedi, H. & Ashkiani, A. Effect of zinc foliar application on auxin and gibberellin hormones and catalase and superoxide dismutase enzyme activity of corn (Zea mays L) under water stress. (2013). Jamil, M. et al. INDUCING DROUGHT TOLERANCE IN WHEAT THROUGH COMBINED USE OF L-TRYPTOPHAN AND Pseudomonas fluorescens. Pakistan Journal of Agricultural Sciences 55 (2018). Azmat, A. et al. Coactive role of zinc oxide nanoparticles and plant growth promoting rhizobacteria for mitigation of synchronized effects of heat and drought stress in wheat plants. Chemosphere 297 , 133982 (2022). Elewa, T. A., Sadak, M. S. & Saad, A. M. Proline treatment improves physiological responses in quinoa plants under drought stress. Bioscience Research 14 , 21-33 (2017). Dola, D. B. et al. Nano-iron oxide accelerates growth, yield, and quality of Glycine max seed in water deficits. Frontiers in plant science 13 , 992535 (2022). Azzouz-Olden, F., Hunt, A. G. & Dinkins, R. Transcriptome analysis of drought-tolerant sorghum genotype SC56 in response to water stress reveals an oxidative stress defense strategy. Molecular Biology Reports 47 , 3291-3303 (2020). Joel, J. M., Johnson, R. & Puthur, J. T. Co-application of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi and engineered nanomaterials: a promising strategy for crop resilience against abiotic stresses. South African Journal of Botany 162 , 314-323 (2023). Chung, W.-H. Unraveling new functions of superoxide dismutase using yeast model system: Beyond its conventional role in superoxide radical scavenging. Journal of Microbiology 55 , 409-416 (2017). Li, J. et al. Influence of drought stress on photosynthetic characteristics and protective enzymes of potato at seedling stage. Journal of the Saudi Society of Agricultural Sciences 16 , 82-88 (2017). Solís-Rodríguez, U. et al. Effect of zinc oxide nanoparticles and inoculation with arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi on growth, yield, and antioxidant capacity of Capsicum chinense Jacq.(Habanero pepper). Journal of Nanoparticle Research 26 , 139 (2024). Muhammad, F. et al. Ameliorating drought effects in wheat using an exclusive or co-applied rhizobacteria and ZnO nanoparticles. Biology 11 , 1564 (2022). Basit, F. et al. Protective role of ZnO nanoparticles in soybean seedlings growth and stress management under Cr-enriched conditions. Plant Growth Regulation 100 , 703-716 (2023). Ávila, R. G. et al. Chitosan induces sorghum tolerance to water deficits by positively regulating photosynthesis and the production of primary metabolites, osmoregulators, and antioxidants. Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition 23 , 1156-1172 (2023). Rabêlo, V. M. et al. The foliar application of a mixture of semisynthetic chitosan derivatives induces tolerance to water deficit in maize, improving the antioxidant system and increasing photosynthesis and grain yield. Scientific reports 9 , 8164 (2019). Makhlouf, B. S. I., Khalil, S. R. A. E. & Saudy, H. S. Efficacy of humic acids and chitosan for enhancing yield and sugar quality of sugar beet under moderate and severe drought. Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition 22 , 1676-1691 (2022). Direkvandy, S., Eisvand, H. R., Azizi, K., Akbarpour, O. & Smith, D. L. Mitigation impact of SiO2 nanoparticles and mycorrhiza on wheat growth and yield under late-season drought stress. Cereal Research Communications 53 , 563-576 (2025). El-Shawa, G. M., Rashwan, E. M. & Abdelaal, K. A. Mitigating salt stress effects by exogenous application of proline and yeast extract on morpho-physiological, biochemical and anatomical characters of calendula plants. Scientific Journal of Flowers and Ornamental Plants 7 , 461-482 (2020). Ogunkunle, C., El-Imam, A. A., Bassey, E., Vishwakarma, V. & Fatoba, P. Co-application of indigenous arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi and nano-TiO2 reduced Cd uptake and oxidative stress in pre-flowering cowpea plants. Environmental Technology & Innovation 20 , 101163 (2020). Raghib, F., Naikoo, M. I., Khan, F. A., Alyemeni, M. N. & Ahmad, P. Interaction of ZnO nanoparticle and AM fungi mitigates Pb toxicity in wheat by upregulating antioxidants and restricted uptake of Pb. Journal of Biotechnology 323 , 254-263 (2020). Saleh, A. M. et al. Chitosan nanoparticles support the impact of arbuscular mycorrhizae fungi on growth and sugar metabolism of wheat crop. International Journal of Biological Macromolecules 235 , 123806 (2023). Sayed, E. G. et al. Synergistic influence of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi inoculation with nanoparticle foliar application enhances chili (Capsicum annuum L.) antioxidant enzymes, anatomical characteristics, and productivity under cold-stress conditions. Plants 13 , 517 (2024). Wu, S., Hu, C., Tan, Q., Nie, Z. & Sun, X. Effects of molybdenum on water utilization, antioxidative defense system and osmotic-adjustment ability in winter wheat (Triticum aestivum) under drought stress. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry 83 , 365-374 (2014). Tayyab, N. et al. Combined seed and foliar pre-treatments with exogenous methyl jasmonate and salicylic acid mitigate drought-induced stress in maize. Plos one 15 , e0232269 (2020). Igiehon, N. O., Babalola, O. O., Cheseto, X. & Torto, B. Effects of rhizobia and arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi on yield, size distribution and fatty acid of soybean seeds grown under drought stress. Microbiological Research 242 , 126640 (2021). Sheteiwy, M. S. et al. Inoculation with Bacillus amyloliquefaciens and mycorrhiza confers tolerance to drought stress and improve seed yield and quality of soybean plant. Physiologia Plantarum 172 , 2153-2169 (2021). Bhat, J. A. et al. Defense interplay of the zinc-oxide nanoparticles and melatonin in alleviating the arsenic stress in soybean (Glycine max L.). Chemosphere 288 , 132471 (2022). Molavi, M., Nabizadeh, E., Hamze, H. & Sharafi, S. Investigating the Effect of Priming with UV-B and Foliar Application of Micronutrient Elements in Modulating the Adverse Effect of Water Deficit Stress in Sugar Beet (Beta vulgaris). Agricultural Research , 1-17 (2025). Flors, V. et al. A tolerant behavior in salt-sensitive tomato plants can be mimicked by chemical stimuli. Plant Signaling & Behavior 2 , 50-57 (2007). Ghorbanpour, M., Farahani, A. H. K. & Hadian, J. Potential toxicity of nano-graphene oxide on callus cell of Plantago major L. under polyethylene glycol-induced dehydration. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety 148 , 910-922 (2018). Jing, Y. et al. Influence of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi and zinc oxide nanoparticles on cadmium uptake and accumulation in winter wheat growing in naturally Cd-contaminated soil. Pedosphere (2025). Tables Tables 1 to 5 are available in the Supplementary Files section Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Supplementary Files TableNIK.docx Cite Share Download PDF Status: Published Journal Publication published 29 Oct, 2025 Read the published version in Scientific Reports → Version 1 posted Editorial decision: Revision requested 31 Jul, 2025 Reviews received at journal 27 Jul, 2025 Reviews received at journal 22 Jul, 2025 Reviews received at journal 19 Jul, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 16 Jul, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 10 Jul, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 10 Jul, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 10 Jul, 2025 Reviewers invited by journal 09 Jul, 2025 Editor assigned by journal 09 Jul, 2025 Editor invited by journal 09 Jul, 2025 Submission checks completed at journal 04 Jul, 2025 First submitted to journal 04 Jul, 2025 You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-7011409","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":483329182,"identity":"926cd866-77de-4f9a-be64-beb4e5a11679","order_by":0,"name":"Shahnaz Nikzad","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Islamic Azad University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Shahnaz","middleName":"","lastName":"Nikzad","suffix":""},{"id":483329183,"identity":"1b1f53b7-c55a-4cbe-a9a3-f14167e3f051","order_by":1,"name":"Soran Sharafi","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Islamic Azad University","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Soran","middleName":"","lastName":"Sharafi","suffix":""},{"id":483329184,"identity":"5dca9bfc-9d18-4371-85cc-de197acdb4a7","order_by":2,"name":"Toraj Mir Mahmoodi","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Islamic Azad University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Toraj","middleName":"Mir","lastName":"Mahmoodi","suffix":""},{"id":483329185,"identity":"ff54ed54-9668-4825-ac58-7fb28012cace","order_by":3,"name":"Saman Yazdan Seta","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Islamic Azad University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Saman","middleName":"Yazdan","lastName":"Seta","suffix":""},{"id":483329186,"identity":"ea18cd52-6416-413b-8875-a8a7b7c1d22d","order_by":4,"name":"Hamze Hamze","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Hamze","middleName":"","lastName":"Hamze","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-06-30 14:08:20","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7011409/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7011409/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[{"content":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-19912-9","type":"published","date":"2025-10-29T15:58:46+00:00"}],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":86644810,"identity":"dd9d07ff-1d96-4f41-9cbc-278493c4a967","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-07-14 08:46:09","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":163213,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003ePrincipal component analysis (PCA) elucidates the variable treatment relationships across nine treatments\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7011409/v1/5184b580892555ac4bd71f87.png"},{"id":86645900,"identity":"f376ddda-af14-4344-b1d9-38bdc71e8741","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-07-14 08:54:09","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":501159,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eThe radar charts were performed as a graphic representation of the IBRv2 index from the sugar beet plants grown under different irrigation shortages as well as different foliar treatments. To calculate IBRv2, 14 different biomarkers were measured in the corresponding sugar beet plants grown in different environments (sites). In this sense, only the “WW + Control” treatment (i.e., sugar beet plants grown under normal conditions sprayed only with distilled water) was considered as the reference (Ref) sitwhileile treatments applying ZnO-NPs and biostimulants to the surfaces were omitted under WW conditions. Then, IBRv2 calculation was computed, the first IBRv2 was performed for the sugar plants grown under water deficit and ZnO-NPs with Biostimulants application\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7011409/v1/51952fe7447574e5afd8764c.png"},{"id":95040546,"identity":"3d398b10-34e3-4f28-902f-78537b8d3028","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-11-03 16:09:41","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":1977345,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7011409/v1/b09d05a0-e108-43e9-99c2-c426f926331c.pdf"},{"id":86644819,"identity":"cd4f0dfd-a8a4-4ba0-9fd5-515454d2af36","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-07-14 08:46:09","extension":"docx","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":29787,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"TableNIK.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7011409/v1/c797e53cd78efbacaa2ef5ea.docx"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Investigating the effect of foliar spraying of zinc nanoparticles and biostimulants on modulating the effect of water deficit stress in sugar beet by using Integrated Biomarker Response Version 2","fulltext":[{"header":"Intrudution","content":"\u003cp\u003eSugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) is a vital crop with various applications and nutritional benefits. It is the second most widely cultivated source of white sugar globally, after sugarcane, and is crucial for meeting the growing needs of the population\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e, Multiple factors frequently influence the production of sugar beet, with drought being regarded as the most significant. Drought stress can lead to a reduction in sugar beet yield of up to 30%, resulting in substantial economic and nutritional impacts \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWater shortages affect around one-third of the world's agricultural land, significantly impacting crop yields\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eClimate change's expected rise in global temperatures of 2 to 5\u0026deg;C by 2050 is likely to intensify these challenges, especially in tropical, semi-arid, and coastal areas, potentially jeopardizing global food security\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis situation has made drought stress a critical global challenge, disrupting plant growth by altering biochemical and metabolic processes, which leads to significant reductions in agricultural productivity. Drought stress leads to the overproduction of reactive oxygen species (ROS), resulting in oxidative stress that damages cellular membranes and disrupts vital processes, such as photosynthesis and mineral absorption, \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR8\" citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. To reduce the damage caused by ROS, plants have evolved various adaptive strategies, which involve the activation of antioxidant enzymes and the accumulation of osmoprotectants, such as glycine betaine and proline \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR11\" citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Tus Finding effective technological solutions is essential for mitigating the adverse impacts of severe drought stress on plant yield and quality in regions with scarce water supplies. Various approaches have been explored to enhance plants' ability to withstand drought. One solution is the use of compounds that promote abiotic stress tolerance.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eProline is an essential amino acid that serves as an osmoregulator, helping to mitigate the effects of stressors such as drought. It improves growth and physiological traits such as chlorophyll concentration, relative water content, and yield production\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. The external application of proline promoted plant growth under stress conditions in calendula and barley plants and reduced oxidative damage by mitigating the detrimental effects of ROS \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. It has been suggested that when faced with abiotic stress, the use of proline leads to changes at both the structural and ultrastructural levels in the affected plants, such as enhancing the root surface to cope with deficiencies in water and nutrients\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Interestingly, proline had a beneficial impact by improving the number of roots and causing structural changes in the stems and leaves of rice plants subjected to salt stress. Furthermore, the use of proline enhanced water management and the production of sugar beets in conditions of drought\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e17\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eLately, there has been significant interest in using natural compounds externally to enhance a plant's resistance to drought. Biostimulants, including chitosan, are among these compounds \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e18\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Chitosan is a biodegradable material that is a natural biopolymer and an amino polysaccharide commercially obtained from aquatic crustaceans' exoskeletons\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. It is recognized that chitosan can enhance plant protection against oxidative stress \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. The use of chitosan at lower concentrations (0.2 g/L) can mitigate the impacts of drought stress and enhance lettuce growth\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e20\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Research has shown that chitosan can function as an elicitor of signaling pathways related to the control of stomatal opening and closing, which are crucial processes for plants experiencing water limitations\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e21\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e22\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Conversely, this polymer triggers defensive actions against oxidative stress through both enzymes and non-enzymatic antioxidants, like ascorbate, while also minimizing lipid peroxidation and the production of H\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e23\u003c/sup\u003e. The use of chitosan has been assessed in various crops that are important for agriculture\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR25\" citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e24\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e26\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eExcessive chemical use harms nutrient efficiency and causes environmental issues. To address this, optimizing fertilization practices and exploring alternatives like biofertilizers and nanotechnology are essential.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eNanoparticles, due to their unique physical and chemical properties, including nanometric size and high reactivity, have been recognized as effective tools for improving nutrient uptake in plants and reducing environmental pollution compared to conventional chemical fertilizers \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e27\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Among them, zinc oxide nanoparticles (ZnO\u0026ndash;NPs) play a key role in facilitating zinc uptake and improving the nutritional status of plants under various environmental stresses, such as drought and salinity, due to their highly active surface and nanoscale size \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e28\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. In addition to enhancing zinc absorption, these nanoparticles strengthen antioxidant enzyme activities, improve photosynthesis, and increase plant resilience against abiotic stresses, which ultimately leads to better plant performance and enhanced agricultural product quality\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e27\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e29\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Given that ZnO\u0026ndash;NPs improve nutrient uptake and plant performance, their significance extends beyond agriculture, offering a promising solution to address one of the major global challenges: micronutrient deficiency and hidden hunger, particularly in developing countries, which have far-reaching adverse effects on human health and agricultural productivity \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR31 CR32\" citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e30\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e33\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. In this context, numerous studies have demonstrated that the use of ZnO\u0026ndash;NPs under abiotic stress conditions leads to increased plant performance and enhanced nutrient uptake. For example, Dimkpa et al.\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e34\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e examined the effect of ZnO\u0026ndash;NPs at concentrations of 1, 3, and 5 mg/kg soil on sorghum plants under drought stress and reported that the application of these nanoparticles resulted in a 22\u0026ndash;183% increase in seed yield, 16\u0026ndash;30% increase in nitrogen and potassium uptake, and a 94% increase in zinc uptake. Similarly, Shirvani-Naghani et al. \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e35\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e investigated the effects of ZnO\u0026ndash;NPs at concentrations of 50, 100, and 200 mg/L and zinc sulfate (ZnSO₄) at 400 mg/L on soybean plants under two different moisture levels, showing that the application of ZnO\u0026ndash;NPs led to a 33.1% increase in chlorophyll a, 20.7% in chlorophyll b, enhanced antioxidant enzyme activity, a 25% increase in seed yield, and a 39% decrease in proline content.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn recent years, the use of IBR and IBRv2 indexes has gained attention in various studies focused on environmental and ecological aspects, particularly concerning a wide array of biotic and abiotic stressors. Although these indices are gaining popularity, research on their application in assessing the impact of biotic and abiotic stressors on specific crops, such as sugar beet, remains limited. Only a few studies have been conducted on other plant species\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR37\" citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e36\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e38\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. The absence of research highlights the need for further investigation and understanding of the potential advantages and limitations of IBR/IBRv2 indexes in assessing the effects of drought stress on agricultural crops, particularly in the case of sugar beet plants. Gaining a deeper insight into these indices could not only improve our understanding of how crops respond to drought stress but also assist in formulating effective strategies to reduce its effects on sugar beet plants. Our current research aimed to investigate the possible impacts of applying various levels of ZnO NPs and biostimulants\u0026mdash;specifically chitosan, proline, and a combination of chitosan and proline\u0026mdash;on the widely grown Iranian sugar beet variety, \u0026ldquo;Shokofa,\u0026rdquo; under different degrees of water deficit stress over two years (2022\u0026ndash;2023 and 2023\u0026ndash;2024). By focusing on 17 distinct morpho-physiological and yield-related characteristics, we aim to comprehend and measure the effects of these treatments on sugar beet plants. Our research indicated that the IBRv2 index might function as a dependable measure, where a higher index signifies a greater level of oxidative stress. In comparison, a lower index reflects effective management of drought stress. By employing IBRv2, we aim to highlight the potential of these treatments as viable solutions to combat the detrimental impacts of water deficit stress in sugar beet plants.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Materials and Methods","content":"\u003ch2\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePlant material and experimental design\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis two-year research was conducted at the Faculty of Agriculture of Mahabad Azad University in Northwestern Iran during the growing seasons from 2022 to 2024. The study was conducted at an elevation of 1320 meters above sea level, with coordinates 36\u0026deg;10\u0026apos;N and 45\u0026deg;43\u0026apos;E. This research location experiences 360 mm of annual precipitation and maintains an average temperature of 11\u0026deg;C, with highs reaching 16.5\u0026deg;C and lows dropping to 4.3\u0026deg;C (Table 1). Table 2 presents the physicochemical properties of soil samples collected from the experimental site at a depth of 0-30 cm. The cultivar used in this experiment was Shokofa. The Shokofa variety, a monogram resistant to rhizomania and nematodes, is the most widely used sugar beet cultivar in Iran. It was sourced from the Sugar Beet Seed Institute (SBSI) in Karaj, Iran.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe planting took place in the first half of April in both years. \u0026nbsp;Annually, the experimental field was provided with 150 kg/ha of P2O5, 100 kg/ha of K2SO4, and 300 kg/ha of nitrogen in the form of urea. Each plot consisted of four rows of plants, each 5 meters long, with 0.50 meters between the rows and 0.2 meters between the individual plants in each row. During the 4-6 leaf stage, the plants were spaced 0.20 m apart. We managed weed control through manual weeding as needed.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eExperimental design and application of treatments\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;The experiment used a split-split plot approach grounded in a Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD) with three replications.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe main plot was assigned Irrigation conditions at two levels (Normal (WW) and water deficit stress (WD)). Zinc nanoparticle (ZnO-NPs) levels (control, 2 and 4 g/L) were assigned to subplots, and biostimulants (control, chitosan, proline, and chitosan + proline) were assigned to sub-subplots\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAll plots were watered simultaneously, immediately after planting. After 60 mm and 120 mm of evaporation, irrigation was categorized as well-watered (WW) and water-deficient (WD) stress, respectively\u003csup\u003e17\u003c/sup\u003e . After the plants were fully established, water stress was applied starting from the 8-leaf stage.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFoliar application of ZnO-NPs, at a concentration of 2 and 4 g/l (On the recommendation of its manufacturer, RochChemi Company (Tehran, Iran), and chitosan and proline, at a concentration of 0.5% and 150 ppm respectively was done at two stages after the water defect stress and at the 12-leaf and 20-leaf stages \u003csup\u003e39\u003c/sup\u003e. The control treatments received applications of distilled water for both the ZnO-NPs and biostimulant treatments.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTo assess the traits, samples were gathered from the fourth and fifth leaves of each experimental treatment in October, just before harvesting. The samples from each treatment were wrapped in aluminum foil, labeled, and frozen in liquid nitrogen at -196\u0026deg;C before being transferred to a -80\u0026deg;C freezer.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMeasurements\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRelative water content (RWC) assay\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;The RWC was evaluated in completely matured upper leaves. The fresh leaf weight was measured after cutting to determine the fresh weight (FW). All samples were immersed in distilled water and maintained at 4\u0026deg;C for 24 hours. \u0026nbsp;Afterward, the turgid weight \u003csup\u003e40\u003c/sup\u003e was measured, and the leaf samples were then dried to determine the dry leaf mass \u003csup\u003e41\u003c/sup\u003e. The relative water content was calculated using a particular formula\u003csup\u003e42\u003c/sup\u003e.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cimg src=\"\"\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eStomatal Conductivity Assay\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe SC-1 Leaf Porometer (Decagon Devices, Pullman, WA) was used to measure stomatal conductance \u003csup\u003e43\u003c/sup\u003e, a crucial element in plant development and water management. This approach to measurement was utilized from 10 a.m. to 1 p.m. on the top surface of the leaf, selected for its ideal sunlight exposure. To guarantee precision and reduce the possibility of bias, each plant was measured three times, resulting in four plants per plot, with each growing season repeated only once \u003csup\u003e44\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eProline and Beta\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e‑\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eGlycine Content Assay\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eProline concentration is vital for understanding plant stress responses. \u003csup\u003e45\u003c/sup\u003eestablished the method for accurately measuring proline levels in sugar beet leaf samples. In this approach, 25 mg of the frozen leaf samples was first homogenized in 10 ml of 3% sulfosalicylic acid, then centrifuged for 15 minutes at 14,000\u0026times;g, and the supernatant was collected separately.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFor each sample, 2.0 ml of the resulting supernatant was combined with an equal volume of acid ninhydrin and glacial acetic acid, then incubated in an oven at 100 \u0026deg;C for 1 hour. After completing the reaction by cooling in an ice bath, the reaction mixture was extracted with 4 ml of toluene. The toluene layer was then eliminated, the upper chromophore layer was gathered, and its absorbance was recorded at 520 nm using a UV\u0026ndash;Vis spectrophotometer (UV-1800 240 V, Shimadzu Corporation, Kyoto, Japan). \u0026nbsp;Finally, the concentration of proline was measured using a proline standard curve, with the results expressed in milligrams per gram of fresh weight (mg /g FW).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe concentrations of glycine betaine in leaf tissue samples were assessed using the original periodide technique described by \u003csup\u003e46\u003c/sup\u003e, with modifications made by \u003csup\u003e47\u003c/sup\u003e.To start, 1.0 g of fresh leaf tissue was blended with 25 ml of 80% ethanol in a 50 ml Falcon tube. The ethanol fraction obtained was evaporated, and the homogenate was then mixed with deionized water. Afterward, 200 \u0026mu;l of the chilled KI-I2 solution was combined with 500 \u0026mu;l of the homogenate, and the resulting mixture was well-mixed before being placed in storage overnight at 4 \u0026deg;C.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;Following 15 minutes of centrifugation in a microcentrifuge, the supernatant was gently discarded, ensuring the betaine periodide complex remained adhered to the walls and base of the tube. The resultant residue was subsequently re-dispersed in 1,2-dichloroethane and moved into a 10 ml graduated tube. The samples were kept in dark conditions at room temperature for 2 hours, and the absorbance was recorded at 365 nm. Finally, the concentrations of glycine betaine in the samples were measured using a glycine betaine standard curve, with the results expressed in milligrams per gram of fresh weight (mg /g FW).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMeasurement of photosynthetic pigments\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;The \u003csup\u003e48\u003c/sup\u003e method was employed to assess chlorophyll a, chlorophyll b, and carotenoid levels by utilizing a spectrophotometer to evaluate absorbance at wavelengths of 663, 646, and 470 nm. In the end, the formulas provided below were used to measure each pigment \u003csup\u003e49\u003c/sup\u003e:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eCholorophyll a(mg g\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;1\u003c/sup\u003e FW) = 12.25(A663.2) \u0026minus; 2.79(A646.8)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eCholorophyll b(mg g\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;1\u003c/sup\u003e FW) = 21.50(A646.2) \u0026minus; 5.10(A663.2)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eCarotenoid (mg g\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;1\u003c/sup\u003e FW) =(1000(A470) \u0026minus; 1.8(Chl a) \u0026minus; 85.02(Chl b))/198\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDetermination of antioxidant enzyme activities\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eA 500 mg portion was combined with 5 mL of 50 mM sodium phosphate buffer solution (pH 7.8) using a pre-chilled mortar and pestle. The solution was centrifuged at 15000 \u0026times; g for a duration of 20 minutes at a temperature of 4\u0026deg;C. Following the collection of the supernatant, the enzyme extract was stored at 4\u0026deg;C for subsequent analysis. The activity levels of superoxide dismutase (SOD; EC 1.15.1.1), ascorbate peroxidase (APX; EC 1.11.1.11), and catalase (CAT; EC 1.11.1.6) were assessed using the techniques outlined by \u003csup\u003e49\u003c/sup\u003e , \u003csup\u003e50\u003c/sup\u003e, and \u003csup\u003e51\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDetermination of Malondialdehyde (MAD) and Hydrogen peroxide (H\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTo determine the MAD, 250 mg of leaf samples were ground in 5 mL of 0.1% trichloroacetic acid, after which they were centrifuged at 12000\u0026times;g for 10 minutes at 4˚C and kept at 4˚C for further analysis. Malondialdehyde (MDA) concentration in the sugar beet leaves was utilized to indicate lipid peroxidation \u003csup\u003e49\u003c/sup\u003e. The concentration of hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) was evaluated following the method described by. \u0026nbsp;After adding 0.5 mL of supernatant to 0.5 mL of 10 mM potassium phosphate buffer (pH 7.0) and 1 mL of 1 M potassium iodide, the combination was allowed to sit in the dark for 20 minutes. The combination\u0026apos;s absorbance was measured at 390 nm, and the concentration of H2O2 was determined using a calibration curve derived from various concentrations of H\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMeasurement of plant hormones\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe methods for extraction and purification of the four hormones (CK, GA3, IAA, and ABA) were carried out as previously described \u003csup\u003e52,53\u003c/sup\u003e.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMeasurement of root yield\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe last harvest occurred on October 20th for both years. Before harvesting, the two outer rows, 0.5 meters from the beginning and end of each row, were eliminated. Four square meters were sampled from every experimental unit, and the roots were counted by hand. They were later weighed and classified as the root yield (RY).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eStatistical analysis\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe experimental setup was conducted as split-split plots using a Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD) with three replications. The analysis of variance (ANOVA) and mean comparison (least significant differences, LSD; p \u0026lt; 0.05) were conducted using SAS version 9.4 (SAS Institute Inc., USA). Principal component analysis (PCA) was conducted using the FactoMineR package (v.1.34) in R Studio (v. 3.4.4)\u003csup\u003e54\u003c/sup\u003e. The IBRv2 index, which combines responses from multiple biomarkers by assessing their log-transformed values against a mean reference dataset, was computed utilizing the innovative IBRtools R package \u003csup\u003e55\u003c/sup\u003e. The IBRv2 assessment included measuring 17 distinct biomarkers in sugar beet plants cultivated in diverse treatments. The reference (Ref) site for this calculation was the \u0026ldquo;Control + Control\u0026rdquo; treatment, which involved growing sugar beet plants under standard conditions and spraying only distilled water. All treatments involving ZnO-NPs and biostimulants administered under WW conditions were excluded from the IBRv2 calculation. The values of IBRv2 for each biomarker were computed, where positive values signify an increase compared to the reference site and negative values denote a decrease.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Results","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe combined analysis of variance revealed significant effects of irrigation levels and ZnO-NPs on all studied traits. Additionally, a significant interaction between year and irrigation was observed for carotenoid content, RWC, beta-glycine, ABA, SOD, and MAD. The interaction between ZnO-NPs and year significantly influenced MAD and hydrogen peroxide content. Biostimulant treatments exhibited significant differences for all traits except chlorophyll b. The interaction between year and biostimulants had a significant effect on chlorophyll b and hydrogen peroxide levels. \u0026nbsp;Furthermore, the two-way interaction of irrigation and ZnO nanoparticles significantly influenced chlorophyll a, chlorophyll b, carotenoids, proline, beta-glycine, stomatal conductance, ABA, GA, IAA, CK, CAT, SOD, APX, MAD, hydrogen peroxide, and RY. Similarly, irrigation combined with biostimulants significantly affected chlorophyll a, chlorophyll b, carotenoid content, RWC, proline, beta-glycine, ABA, GA, IAA, CK, CAT, APX, MAD, hydrogen peroxide, and RY. Finally, the interaction between ZnO-NPs and biostimulants had a significant impact on chlorophyll \u003cem\u003ea\u003c/em\u003e, chlorophyll \u003cem\u003eb\u003c/em\u003e, RWC, proline, beta-glycine, stomatal conductance, ABA, IAA, GA, CK, CAT, SOD, MAD, and RY (The table is not included in the article text.).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eChlorophyll \u003cem\u003ea\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe mean comparison results indicated that applying 2 g/L ZnO-NPs under WW conditions resulted in the highest chlorophyll \u003cem\u003ea\u003c/em\u003e content, averaging 5.29 mg/g FW.\u0026nbsp;The lowest chlorophyll content \u003cem\u003ea\u003c/em\u003e content was also attributed to the control under WD conditions, with an average of 2.48 mg/g FW (Table 3).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn this experiment, foliar spraying of proline and chitosan + proline under WW conditions resulted in the maximum chlorophyll \u003cem\u003ea\u003c/em\u003e content, with averages of 5.42 and 5.46 mg/g FW, respectively.\u0026nbsp;The lowest chlorophyll \u003cem\u003ea\u003c/em\u003e content, with an average of 2.27 mg/g FW, was also associated with the biostimulants control under WD conditions.\u0026nbsp;The results of the present experiment showed that foliar spraying of chitosan, proline, and chitosan + proline increased chlorophyll \u003cem\u003ea\u003c/em\u003e content by 19.63%, 40.05%, and 41.08% under WW conditions, and by 25.99%, 33.03%, and 37.44% under WD conditions, respectively (Table 4).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eComparing the mean of ZnO-NPs with biostimulants interaction treatments showed that the application of 2 g/L ZnO-NPs along with chitosan + proline foliar spray achieved the highest chlorophyll \u003cem\u003ea\u003c/em\u003e content with an average of 4.89 mg/g FW. The difference between the mentioned treatment with 2 mg/L ZnO-NPs with prolamin foliar spray and the Zno-NPS control with prolamin foliar spray was insignificant. Plots not treated with ZnO-NPs or biostimulants exhibited the lowest levels of chlorophyll \u003cem\u003ea\u003c/em\u003e, averaging 2.72 mg/g FW.\u0026nbsp;In this experiment, the simultaneous application of ZnO-NPs and biostimulants did not demonstrate significant superiority compared to their separate application (Table 5).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eChlorophyll \u003cem\u003eb\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eA comparison of the mean treatments revealed that applying 2 g/L Zno-NPS in WW conditions led to the highest chlorophyll \u003cem\u003eb\u003c/em\u003e content, averaging 2.99 mg/g FW. Plants that did not receive ZnO-NPs in WD conditions exhibited the lowest accumulation of this pigment, averaging 1.40 mg/g FW. In this study, the application of both levels of ZnO-NPs under the different irrigation conditions notably enhanced the chlorophyll b content in comparison to the respective control (Table 3).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAmong the irrigation- biostimulants interaction treatments, foliar spraying of chitosan, proline, and the combination of both achieved the maximum chlorophyll \u003cem\u003eb\u003c/em\u003e content under WW conditions, with averages of 2.70, 2.73, and 2.66 mg/g FW, respectively.\u0026nbsp;The plants that were not treated with sprays under WD conditions showed the lowest chlorophyll \u003cem\u003eb\u003c/em\u003e content, averaging 1.54 mg/g FW. The variation between this treatment and the chitosan and proline foliar spray treatments under WD conditions was not statistically significant. The findings of the current research indicated that applying chitosan + proline enhanced chlorophyll \u003cem\u003eb\u003c/em\u003e levels by 30.39% and 16.23% in comparison to the control group under WW and WD conditions, respectively (Table 4).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn this experiment, foliar spraying of chitosan, proline, and chitosan + proline with \u0026nbsp; 2 g/L ZnO-NPs showed the highest chlorophyll \u003cem\u003eb\u003c/em\u003e content with an average of 2.47, 2.59, and 2.65 mg/g FW, respectively.\u0026nbsp;The ZnO-NPs and biostimulants control exhibited the lowest chlorophyll b content, averaging 1.54 mg/g FW; the difference between this treatment and the treatments using chitosan and proline foliar sprays, as well as the ZnO-NPs control, was not significant.\u0026nbsp;In this study, the combined use of chitosan, proline, and chitosan + proline at a concentration of 2 g/L ZnO-NPs showed a notable benefit compared to the individual application of each biostimulant treatment and the levels of ZnO-NPs (Table 5).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eCarotenoid\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe findings from the mean comparison indicated that applying 2 mg/L of ZnO-NPs under WW conditions resulted in the highest carotenoid content, averaging 2.55 mg/g FW. Conversely, the control subjected to WD conditions exhibited the lowest carotenoid content, with an average of 1.67 mg/g FW. In this study, the application of ZnO-NPS to the leaves under both WW and WD conditions led to a rise in carotenoid content by 19.04% and 25.00%, respectively, when compared to the control \u0026nbsp;(Table 3).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe results showed that foliar spraying of proline under WW irrigation conditions yielded maximum carotenoids with an average of 2.56 mg/g FW.\u0026nbsp;The lowest carotenoid content was associated with the biostimulants control under water stress conditions, with an average of 1.71 mg/g FW. The difference between this treatment and the chitosan, proline, and chitosan + proline foliar spray under WD and the control under WW conditions was not significant.\u0026nbsp;It should be noted that under normal irrigation conditions, foliar spraying of chitosan, proline, and chitosan + proline increased the carotenoid content by 14.97%, 41.71%, and 18.71% , respectively, compared to the control. Under WD conditions, the difference between the control and biostimulant foliar spraying treatments was not significant \u0026nbsp; (Table 4).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eRelative water content (RWC)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eComparing the means of different irrigation and biostimulant interaction treatments revealed that applying proline under WW conditions resulted in the highest relative water content RWC, with an average of 81.83%.\u0026nbsp;The biostimulant control exhibited the lowest relative leaf water content during WD conditions, averaging 57.92%. There was no significant difference between this treatment and the foliar spray of chitosan + proline when subjected to WD conditions (Table 4).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eUnder WW conditions, the application of chitosan, proline, and chitosan + proline, and under WD conditions, foliar application of chitosan and proline had significant superiority over the control.\u0026nbsp;Foliar spraying with proline, combined with a concentration of 2 g/L ZnO-NPS, resulted in the highest average relative water content (RWC) of 84.80%. This treatment demonstrated a significant benefit compared to applying each component separately.\u0026nbsp;The plots that did not receive biostimulants and \u0026nbsp;ZnO-NPs showed the lowest average RWC content, measuring 58.93%. The difference between this treatment and both the control and the chitosan foliar spray treatment with 2 g/L ZnO-NPs was not statistically significant (Table 5).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eProline\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn this study, plots treated with 4 g/L ZnO-NPs and subjected to WD exhibited the greatest proline concentration, averaging 0.45 mg/g FW\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003e.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003eThe control and foliar spray treatments at 2 g/l of \u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eZnO-NPs\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003eunder WW conditions resulted in the lowest proline content, with average values of 0.23 and 0.24 mg/g FW, respectively.\u0026nbsp;In this research, the application of 4 g/L ZnO-NPs elevated the proline levels by 21.73% and 18.42%, respectively, in comparison to the corresponding control (Table 3).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe results of the treatment interaction indicated that chitosan \u0026nbsp;and chitosan + proline foliar sprays under WD conditions achieved the maximum proline content with an average of 0.42, and 0.43 mg/g Fw, respectively. Plants treated with proline under WW conditions had the lowest proline content, averaging 0.23 mg/g FW. In our research, using all three biostimulant treatments under WW conditions and foliar application of chitosan and proline under WD resulted in elevated proline levels (Table 4).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAn analysis of the average from the interaction treatments revealed that plots treated with 2 g/L ZnO-NPs and sprayed with a combination of chitosan and proline exhibited the highest proline content, averaging 0.39 mg/g FW. The control plots and plots sprayed with chitosan, along with ZnO-NPs control, as well as plants sprayed with chitosan + proline and receiving 2 g/L ZnO-NPs, had the lowest proline content, with an average of 0.31 mg/kg fresh weight (Table 5).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eBeta-glycine\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn the current research, the application of 4 g/L ZnO-NPs under WD conditions resulted in the highest\u0026nbsp;beta-glycine\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003econtent, averaging 102.42 mg/g FW. The minimum level of this compound, averaging 83.99\u0026nbsp;mg g/ FW, was linked to the ZnO-NPs control under WW conditions. In this study, the application of 2 and 4 g/L of ZnO-NPs raised the soluble sugar content by 5.33% and 5.89% under WW conditions, respectively, while under WD conditions, it increased by 8.58% and 13.20%, respectively (Table 3).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe current study's results indicate that foliar application of chitosan + proline under WD conditions resulted in the highest\u0026nbsp;beta-glycinecontent, averaging 107.43 mg/g FW. The lowest\u0026nbsp;beta-glycinecontent, averaging 84.80 mg/g FW, was attributed to the proline treatment under WW conditions. The difference between the aforementioned treatment with chitosan + proline foliar spray and the control under WW conditions was insignificant. Under WW conditions, the difference between the control and foliar spray treatments regarding\u0026nbsp;beta-glycinecontent was insignificant, while under WD conditions, foliar spray of chitosan + proline increased soluble sugar content by 17.66% compared to the corresponding control (Table 4).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;In this study, applying chitosan combined with proline, proline alone, and 4 g/L ZnO-NPs led to the highest soluble sugar content, averaging 101.42 and 100.42 mg/g FW, respectively. The difference between the aforementioned treatments with chitosan spraying combined with 2 and 4 g/L ZnO-NPs was insignificant. The lowest soluble sugar content was attributed to the proline foliar spray treatment with ZnO-NPs control and the\u0026nbsp;biostimulants\u0026nbsp;control with 2 g/L ZnO-NPs level, averaging 79.12 and 80.77 mg/g FW, respectively (Table 5).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eLeaf stomatal conductance coefficient\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe findings of this study indicated that the application of 2 and 4 g/L ZnO-NPs under WW conditions resulted in the highest coefficients of stomatal conductance, averaging 15.72 and 15.92\u0026nbsp;mol m−\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e s\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e, respectively. In contrast, the control with ZnO-NPs under WD conditions recorded the lowest average at 10.08\u0026nbsp;mol m−\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e s\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e(Table 3). It should be noted that the application of 2 and 4 g/L ZnO-NPs increased stomatal conductance by 6.64% and 8.48% under WW conditions, respectively, and by 10.01% and 8.84% under WD conditions, respectively.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn this study, while the foliar application of chitosan + proline with 4 g/L ZnO-NPs resulted in the highest stomatal conductance coefficient of 15.15\u0026nbsp;mol m−\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e s\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e, the difference between this treatment and the treatments with proline and chitosan at both 2 and 4 g/L ZnO-NPs was not statistically significant. The biostimulants control and proline spraying, with ZnO-NPs control achieved the index's lowest values, with an average of 11.09 and 11.82\u0026nbsp;mol m−\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e s\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e, respectively\u0026nbsp;(Table 5).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003ePlant hormones\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eAbscisic acid (ABA)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe findings from the average comparison indicated that plants exposed to 2 g/l ZnO-NPs during WD stress exhibited the highest level of ABA, averaging 40.13 ppm. In contrast, plants that received 2 g/l ZnO-NPs while under WW showed the lowest ABA content, averaging 26.98 ppm. In this research, levels 2 and 4 of ZnO-NPs decreased ABA content by 24.40% and 12.10% under WW conditions, respectively, Under water stress conditions, this reduction was limited to only \u0026nbsp;of 4g/l ZnO-NPs (21.30%)\u0026nbsp;(Table 3).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn this experiment, the biostimulant control under WD conditions had the highest ABA content with an average of 28.65 ppm. The lowest ABA content, with an average of 28.65 and 29.38 ppm, was attributed to the chitosan + proline and proline foliar spray treatments under WW conditions. All three biostimulants foliar spray treatments significantly increased ABA content in this experiment compared to the corresponding control under both irrigation conditions (Table 4).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis study's findings revealed that plots that did not receive both ZnO-NPs and biostimulants reached the highest average ABA content of 41.84 ppm. The lowest ABA content, with an average of 27.63 and 28.51 ppm, was assigned to the chitosan + proline and proline treatment with a level of 4 g/L ZnO-NPs. The difference between the aforementioned treatment and the foliar spraying treatment of chitosan + proline and proline treatment with a level of 2 g/L ZnO-NPs was not significant. It is important to highlight that using ZnO-NPs in conjunction with biostimulants significantly reduced ABA content, showing a clear benefit over applying each treatment separately\u0026nbsp;(Table 5).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eGibberellin (GA)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe findings indicated that utilising 2 g/L ZnO-NPs under WW conditions resulted in the highest GA content, averaging 211.44 ppm. The control group and application of 2 g/l ZnO-NPs exhibited the lowest GA content, with average values of 486.75 and 185.70 ppm, respectively. In this research, the use of 2 g/L ZnO-NPs under WW conditions and 4 g/L ZnO-NPs under WD conditions notably enhanced the GA content in comparison to the respective control\u0026nbsp;(Table 3).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe findings indicated that applying chitosan, proline, and chitosan + proline under WW conditions resulted in the highest GA, averaging 209.28, 216.01, and 216.8 ppm, respectively. The control and proline foliar sprays under WD conditions had the lowest GA content, averaging 180.07 and 177.62 ppm, respectively. The results showed that the GA content in plants treated with proline and chitosan + proline was significantly higher than that of the corresponding control in both environmental conditions\u0026nbsp;(Table 4).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe findings indicated that the greatest GA content, averaging 213.72 ppm, was linked to the treatment of chitosan foliar spray used in conjunction with applying 4 g/L ZnO-NPs. There was no significant difference between the aforementioned treatment and the treatments of chitosan and chitosan + proline application, along with the application of 2 g/L ZnO-NPs and foliar spraying of 4 g/L ZnO-NPs, along with proline foliar spraying and the control ZnO-NPs, along with chitosan + proline foliar spraying. The lowest GA content, with an average of 179.42 ppm, was assigned to the control of both treatments. There was no significant difference between the aforementioned treatments, with chitosan foliar spraying, proline foliar spraying with ZnO-NPs control, \u0026nbsp;and biostimulants control, with a 4 g/L ZnO-NPs level (Table 5).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;Auxins (IAA)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe current study's findings indicated that using 2 and 4 g/l of ZnO-NPs resulted in the highest \u003cstrong\u003eIAA\u003c/strong\u003e levels under WW conditions, averaging 36.97 and 35.79 ppm, respectively. In contrast, the lowest IAA level, averaging 28.22 ppm, was observed in the control of ZnO-NPs under conditions of WD.\u0026nbsp;Plots treated with 2 and 4 levels of ZnO-NPs significantly increased IAA content compared to the control. In contrast, the difference between the control and the ZnO-NPs treatments under WD conditions was insignificant\u0026nbsp;(Table 3).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn this study, the highest \u003cstrong\u003eIAA\u003c/strong\u003e were observed with the foliar application of proline and chitosan + proline under WW conditions, with averages of 37.63 and 38.66 ppm, respectively.\u0026nbsp;Control of biostimulants and foliar applications of chitosan and proline under WD conditions resulted in the lowest \u003cstrong\u003eIAA\u003c/strong\u003e content, averaging 26.41, 27.81, and 26.89 ppm, respectively\u0026nbsp;(Table 4).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe findings demonstrated that applying of proline and chitosan + proline under WW conditions, as well as all three foliar spray treatments during WD, notably enhanced auxin levels when compared to the respective control.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eA comparison of the mean of the interaction treatments showed that foliar spraying of proline and chitosan + proline with a level of 4 g/l ZnO-NPs had the maximum auxin content, with an average of 36.68 and 39.32 ppm, respectively.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe control of ZnO-NPs and biostimulants had the lowest \u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eIAA\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e content with an average of 26.15 ppm.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIt should be noted that foliar spraying of proline, chitosan + proline, and 4 g/L ZnO-NPs, significantly increased auxin content compared to the separate application of each treatment\u0026nbsp;(Table 5).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eCytokinins\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003csup\u003e56\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn this experiment, the application of 2 g/L ZnO-NPs under WW conditions resulted in the highest CK content, averaging 50.46 ppm.\u0026nbsp;The minimum level of this hormone, averaging 39.62 ppm, was linked to the ZnO-NPs control when subjected to WD conditions.\u0026nbsp;The findings revealed that the use of 2 and 4 g/L ZnO-NPs boosted the CK levels by 21.91% and 14.61% under WW conditions, and by 6.48% and 13.07% under WD conditions, respectively, when compared to the relevant control\u0026nbsp;(Table 3).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe comparison results for the interaction between irrigation and biostimulants revealed that the foliar application of chitosan + proline under WW conditions had the highest average CK content, measuring 50.23 ppm. In contrast, the foliar application of proline \u0026nbsp;and control under WD conditions produced the lowest average CK content, which was 40.03 and 39.09 ppm.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn WW conditions, the use of all three growth stimulants, as well as the foliar application of chitosan and chitosan combined with proline under WD stress conditions, notably enhanced CK levels in comparison to the relevant control\u0026nbsp;(Table 4).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis experiment demonstrated that foliar spraying of proline and chitosan+proline combined with 4 g/L ZnO-NPs resulted in the highest CK content, averaging 49.48 ppm and 49.54 ppm, respectively. However, the ZnO-NPs and biostimulants control, proline foliar spray treatment, along with ZnO-NPs control, and biostimulants control with 4 g/L ZnO-NPs, achieved the lowest CK content with an average of 43.27, 39.13, and 46.53 ppm, respectively (Table 5).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eAntioxidant enzyme activity\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eCatalase (CAT)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn this experiment, the control of ZnO-NPs and the 2 g/L and 4 g/L ZnO-NPs exhibited the highest CAT enzyme activity under WD conditions, with average values of 3.18, 3.25, and 3.43\u0026nbsp;U mg/protein, respectively. Plants not treated with ZnO-NPs under WW conditions exhibited the lowest CAT activity, averaging 2.44\u0026nbsp;U mg/protein. \u0026nbsp;The difference between the aforementioned treatment and the 4 g/L ZnO-NPs treatment under WW conditions was insignificant. In this experiment, applying 2 g/L ZnO-NPs significantly increased cat activity compared to the corresponding control. In this study, using 2 g/L ZnO-NPs under WW conditions considerably enhanced the CAT activity compared to the relevant control\u0026nbsp;(Table 3).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe findings from the mean comparisons indicated that under WD conditions, foliar application of proline and chitosan + proline resulted in the highest CAT enzyme activity, with average values of 3.28 and 3.51\u0026nbsp;U mg/protein, respectively. The biostimulants control and chitosan foliar application under WW conditions had the lowest catalase activity with an average of 2.47 and 2.65\u0026nbsp;U mg/protein, respectively. The results indicated that foliar spraying of proline and chitosan + proline under WW conditions and application of chitosan + proline under WD conditions increased CAT enzyme activity compared to the corresponding control\u0026nbsp;(Table 4).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn this study, foliar spraying of chitosan + proline with 4 g/L ZnO-NPs achieved the highest catalase enzyme activity, with an average of 3.47\u0026nbsp;U mg/protein. The difference between the aforementioned treatment and the chitosan + proline treatment with 2 g/L ZnO-NPs was not significant.\u0026nbsp;The lowest CAT activity was associated with the control of both treatments, with an average of 2.59\u0026nbsp;U mg/protein.\u0026nbsp;The difference between the aforementioned treatment, with the chitosan and chitosan + proline treatments with ZnO-NPs control, and the biostimulants control with the application of 4 g/L ZnO-NPs was not significant\u0026nbsp;(Table 5).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eSuperoxide dismutase (SOD)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe study found that applying 2 and 4 g/L of ZnO-NPs under WD resulted in the highest SOD content, with averages of 4.51 and 4.47\u0026nbsp;U mg/protein, respectively. In contrast, the control of \u0026nbsp; ZnO-NPs under WW conditions showed the lowest SOD activity with averages of 3.12\u0026nbsp;U mg/protein.The results indicated that applying 2 and 4 g/L increased SOD activity compared to the control by 25.00% and 9.93% under WW conditions, and by 26.68% and 25.56% under WD conditions (Table 3).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAmong the irrigation \u0026nbsp;with biostimulants interaction treatments, although the maximum SOD activity was achieved by foliar spraying of proline with a level of 2 g/L with an average of 4.32 U mg/protein, However, the difference between the aforementioned treatment and the foliar spraying of chitosan and chitosan + proline with a level of 2 g/L ZnO-NPs and the foliar spraying of proline and chitosan + proline under the treatment of 4 g/L ZnO-NPs was not significant. The prolamin foliar spray treatment and the ZnO-NPs control exhibited the lowest SOD enzyme activity, averaging 2.93 U mg/protein (Table 5).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eAscorbate peroxidase (APX)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn this study, the highest Apx activity was observed at 2 g/L and 4 g/L ZnO-NPs levels, \u0026nbsp;under WD conditions with average values of 5.16 and 5.32\u0026nbsp;U mg/protein, respectively. The lowest amount of activity of this enzyme with an average of \u0026nbsp;3.91\u0026nbsp;U mg/protein\u0026nbsp;was attributed to the ZnO-NPs control under WW conditions. It should be noted that levels of 2 and 4 g/L ZnO-NPs under WW and applying 4 g/L ZnO-NPs under WD significantly increased APX enzyme activity compared to the related control\u0026nbsp;(Table 3).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe findings indicated that applying a chitosan + proline under WD conditions resulted in the highest activity of APX, averaging 5.61\u0026nbsp;U mg/protein. The lowest APX activity was also assigned to the biostimulants control under WW conditions, with an average of 4.18\u0026nbsp;U mg/protein. The difference between the aforementioned treatment and the prolamin foliar spray treatment under WW conditions was insignificant. In this research, the use of proline and chitosan + proline under WW conditions, as well as the use of all three biostimulants treatments during WD conditions, notably enhanced the level of APX activity\u0026nbsp;(Table 4).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eMalondialdehyde (MDA)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe findings from the current research indicated that under WD conditions, the ZnO-NPs treatment demonstrated the highest average MAD content, with an average of 10.56\u0026nbsp;μM mg\u003csub\u003e/\u003c/sub\u003eFW. The control and the application of 2 and 4 g/L ZnO-NPs under WW conditions exhibited the lowest MAD content, averaging 7.19, 6.93, and 7.05\u0026nbsp;μM mg\u003csub\u003e/\u003c/sub\u003eFW, respectively. The results indicated that applying 2 g/L and 4 g/L ZnO-NPs under WD conditions reduced MAD content by 11.17% and 17.33%, respectively. There was no significant difference between treatments under WW conditions.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWe found that the biostimulant control under WD conditions showed the highest MAD content, averaging 10.18\u0026nbsp;μM mg\u003csub\u003e/\u003c/sub\u003eFW (Table 3).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe proline foliar spray treatment had the lowest MAD content under \u0026nbsp;WW conditions, averaging 6.79\u0026nbsp;μM mg\u003csub\u003e/\u003c/sub\u003eFW. The distinction between the previously mentioned treatment and the chitosan and chitosan + prolamin treatments in standard irrigation conditions was insignificant. In this study, the use of chitosan, proline, and the combination of chitosan and proline markedly decreased MAD levels when subjected to WD; however, under WW conditions, only the foliar treatment of proline led to a significant reduction in MAD levels compared to the control\u0026nbsp;(Table 4).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe mean comparisons of ZnO-NPs and biostimulants treatment interactions showed that the control of both treatments had the highest MAD content, with an average of 9.49\u0026nbsp;μM mg\u003csub\u003e/\u003c/sub\u003eFW. The biostimulants control, proline, and chitosan + proline foliar sprays containing 4 g/L of ZnO-NPs had the lowest MAD content, averaging 8.12, 7.59, and 7.57\u0026nbsp;μM mg\u003csub\u003e/\u003c/sub\u003eFW, respectively. The difference between the above treatments and the foliar spray treatment of proline and proline + chitosan with a level of 2 g/L of ZnO-NPs was insignificant (Table 5).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eHydrogen peroxide\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe findings indicated that the control ZnO-NPs achieved the highest hydrogen peroxide levels, averaging 5.18\u0026nbsp;μM mg\u003csub\u003e/\u003c/sub\u003eFW\u0026nbsp;under WD conditions. The lowest hydrogen peroxide content was attributed to the control, and 2 and 4 g/L ZnO-NPs under WW conditions, with an average of 2.73, 2.62, and 2.68\u0026nbsp;μM mg\u003csub\u003e/\u003c/sub\u003eFW, respectively. It is important to mention that applying 2 and 4 g/L ZnO-NPs in WD conditions decreased the hydrogen peroxide levels by 7.91% and 17.18%, respectively, compared to the control group (Table 3).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe results of the present study showed that the biostimulants control under WD conditions achieved the highest hydrogen peroxide content with an average of 5.04\u0026nbsp;μM mg\u003csub\u003e/\u003c/sub\u003eFW. The lowest average hydrogen peroxide content was 2.39\u0026nbsp;μM mg\u003csub\u003e/\u003c/sub\u003eFW, attributed to proline foliar spraying under WW conditions. In this experiment, foliar spraying of proline under WW conditions, along with the application of all three biostimulants treatments chitosan, proline, and the chitosan + proline under WD conditions, significantly reduced hydrogen peroxide content compared to the control (Table 4).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eRoot yield (RY)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn our study, using 2 g/L ZnO-NPs under WW conditions resulted in the maximum RY, averaging 74.55 ton/ha. Under WD conditions, the ZnO-NPs control produced the lowest RY, averaging 52.44 ton/ha. There was no significant difference between this treatment and the 2 g/l ZnO-NPs. In this study, the application of 2 g/L ZnO-NPs under WW conditions increased the RY by 11.07%. Additionally, the use of 4 g/L ZnO-NPs under WD conditions resulted in a 10.48% increase compared to the respective control (Table 3).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe results of the mean comparison of irrigation with biostimulants interaction showed that foliar spraying of chitosan, proline and chitosan + proline produced the maximum RY under WW conditions with an average of 71.52, 69.67 and 71.68 ton/ha, respectively. The lowest root yields were associated with the control of biostimulants and the application of proline foliar treatments under WD conditions, averaging 53.73 and 52.58 ton/ha, respectively. In this experiment, foliar spraying of all three biostimulant treatments under WW conditions and chitosan + proline under WD conditions significantly increased RY compared to the corresponding control (Table 4).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn this experiment, foliar spraying of chitosan + proline combined with 2 g/L of ZnO-NPs resulted in the highest RY, averaging 68.77 ton/ha. The difference between the treatment above, the foliar spraying of proline and chitosan with a level of 2 g/L ZnO-NPs, and the foliar spraying of chitosan + proline with a level of 4 g/L ZnO-NPs was not significant. The lowest RY, averaging 58.74 ton/ha, was observed in plots that did not receive biostimulants or ZnO-NPs. The difference between the treatment above and the foliar spraying of chitosan, proline, and chitosan + proline, along with the ZnO-NPs control, the biostimulants control, and the foliar spraying of chitosan and proline, along with the level of 2 g/L ZnO-NPs, and the biostimulants control and foliar spraying of chitosan and proline, along with the level of 4 g/L ZnO-NPs, was not significant (Table 5).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eBiplot analysis\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn this experiment, the first two factors accounted for 65.5% of the total variance in the data, with contributions of 44.4% and 22.1%, respectively (Fig. 1).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn the first area of the biplot (top left), the treatments WW-Control+ Control, WW-control+ chitosan, WW-control+ proline, WW-control+chitosan + proline, WW-2 g/L ZnO-NPs + control, WW-4 g/L ZnO-NPs + control, WW-4 g/L ZnO-NPs + Proline, WW-4 g/L ZnO-NPs + Chitosan, and WW-4 g/L ZnO-NPs Chitosan + Proline were located. The chlorophyll a and b and carotenoid traits were adjacent to the treatments above. In the opposite direction of the traits above were the traits WD-2 g/L ZnO-NPs + chitosan, WD-4 g/L ZnO-NPs + control, WD-control+chitosan + proline, WD-2 g/L ZnO-NPs + chitosan + proline, WD-4 g/L ZnO-NPs + proline, WD-4 g/L ZnO-NPs + chitosan, and WW-4 g/L ZnO-NPs chitosan + proline (Fig. 1).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn the second area of the biplot (top right), the treatments WD-control + control, WD-Control + proline, WD-2 g/L ZnO-NPs + control, WD-control + chitosan, and WD-2 g/L ZnO-NPs + proline were positioned close to the ABA trait. The ABA content was in the opposite direction of the WW-2 g/L ZnO-NPs chitosan + proline, WW-2 g/L ZnO-NPs + proline, and WW-2 g/L ZnO-NPs + chitosan treatments (Fig. 1).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn the third area of the biplot (bottom left) were the treatments WW-2 g/L ZnO-NPs + chitosan + proline, WW-2 g/L ZnO-NPs + proline, and WW-2 g/L ZnO-NPs + chitosan. The mentioned treatments were consistent with the traits RWC, RY, SCC, GB, IAA, and CK.\u0026nbsp;It should be noted that for the aforementioned traits, the treatments WD-control + control, WD-control + proline, WD-2 g/L ZnO-NPs + control, WD-control + chitosan, and WD-2 g/L ZnO-NPs + proline were opposite (Fig. 1).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn the fourth area of the biplot (bottom right), the treatments including WW-2 g/L ZnO-NPs +chitosan + proline, WW-2 g/L ZnO-NPs + proline, and WW-2 g/L ZnO-NPs + chitosan were positioned near the traits MAD, hydrogen peroxide, proline, beta-glycine, CAT, SOD, and APX. It should be noted that the traits above were located in the opposite direction of the vector of the treatments WW-control+control, WW-control+chitosan, WW-control+proline, WW-control+chitosan + proline, WW-2 g/L ZnO-NPs + control, WW-4 g/L ZnO-NPs + control, WW-4 g/L ZnO-NPs + proline, WW-4 g/L ZnO-NPs + chitosan, and WW-4 g/L ZnO-NPs chitosan + proline (Fig. 1).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eIBRv2\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSugar beet plants grown under WS conditions and without foliar application of ZnO-NPs and biostimulant (WD-Control+ Control) (IBRv2= 30.26) showed significant reduction in the values of RWC, carotenoids, chlorophyll \u003cem\u003ea\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003eb\u003c/em\u003e and RY, stomatal conductance, GA, IAA, CK compared to Ref” treatment (i.e., WW + control+ control) (Fig. 2A).. At the same time, other traits, such as hydrogen peroxide, MAD, APX, SOD, CAT, beta-glycine, and proline, showed an increase.\u0026nbsp;Plants grown under WD-Control+ chitosan\u0026nbsp;treatment (IBRv2 = 24.06) showed significant reduction in the values of RWC, carotenoid, chlorophyll a, GA, and IAA content, stomatal conductance coefficient, and RY compared to the control treatment. While the values of hydrogen peroxide, MAD, APX, SOD, CAT, CK, ABA, beta-glycine and proline increased in this treatment compared to the reference treatment (Fig. 2B). In the case of WD-control+ proline, it was observed that compared to the Ref” treatment (IBRv2= 22.11), the values of carotenoids, RY, IAA, GA, stomatal conductance coefficient, and beta-glycine decreased. At the same time, other traits, such as RWC, chlorophyll a, hydrogen peroxide, MAD, APX, CAT, and CK, also increased (Fig. 2C). In the case of the WD-control + chitosan + proline treatment (IBRv2 = 27.36), a decrease in the values of RWC, carotenoids, GA, ABA, and stomatal conductance coefficient was evident compared to the Ref treatment, and an increase in the values of proline, chlorophyll \u003cem\u003ea\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eb\u003c/em\u003e, hydrogen peroxide, MAD, APX, SOD, CAT, CK, and IAA (Fig. 2D). In the case of WD-2 g/L ZnO-NPs + control treatment (IBRv2= 24.91), a decrease in the values of RY, IAA, GA, stomatal conductance, beta-glycine and an increase in the values of RWC, carotenoids, chlorophyll \u003cem\u003ea\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eb\u003c/em\u003e, hydrogen peroxide, MAD, APX, SOD, CAT, CK, ABA and proline were observed compared to the Ref” treatment (Fig. 2E). In the case of WD-2 g/L ZnO-NPs + chitosan treatment (IBRv2= 31.50), stomatal conductance, ABA, GA, IAA and RY decreased compared to Ref” treatment. While the content of RWC, carotenoids, chlorophyll \u003cem\u003ea\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eb\u003c/em\u003e, hydrogen peroxide, MAD, APX, SOD, CAT, CK, beta-glycine and proline were higher than Ref” treatment (Fig. 2F). A decrease in stomatal conductance, ABA, and RY was observed in the WD-2 g/L ZnO-NPs + proline treatment (IBRv2= 30.25) compared to the Ref” treatment. Other investigated indices such as carotenoids, chlorophyll \u003cem\u003ea\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eb\u003c/em\u003e, hydrogen peroxide, MAD, APX, SOD, CAT, CK, IAA, GA, beta-glycine, and proline were significantly superior to the Ref” treatment (Fig. 2G).\u0026nbsp;In the WD-2 g/L ZnO-NPs + chitosan + proline treatment (IBRv2= 30.25), a decrease in RY, ABA, and stomatal conductance coefficient and an increase in the amounts of hydrogen peroxide, MAD, APX, SOD, CAT, CK, IAA, GA, beta-glycine, and proline were observed compared to the Ref”\u0026nbsp;treatment (Fig. 2H).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn the case of WD-4 g/L ZnO-NPs + control treatment (IBRv2= 24.64), a significant decrease in the values of RWC, carotenoids, chlorophyll \u003cem\u003ea\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eb\u003c/em\u003e, root yield, GA, ABA, stomatal conductance coefficient and a considerable increase in the values of hydrogen peroxide, MAD, APX, SOD, CAT, CK, IAA, beta-glycine and proline were detected compared to the Ref” treatment (Fig. 2I). Compared to Ref” treatment, in the WD-4 g/L ZnO-NPs + chitosan treatment (IBRv2= 30.19), a significant decrease in RWC, chlorophyll a and b, RY and ABA traits and a substantial increase in the amounts of hydrogen peroxide, MAD, APX, SOD, CAT, CK, IAA, GA, beta-glycine and proline were observed (Fig. 2J). In the case of WD-4 g/L ZnO-NPs + proline treatment (IBRv2= 24.10), RWC, chlorophyll a and b, root yield, gibberellin, ABA showed a significant decrease and the values of hydrogen peroxide, MAD, APX, SOD, CAT, CK, beta-glycine and proline showed a considerable increase compared to Ref” treatment (Fig. 2K). A decrease in RWC, carotenoid, chlorophyll a and b content, root yield, ABA, and an increase in the values of hydrogen peroxide, MAD, APX, SOD, CAT, CK, IAA, GA, beta-glycine, and proline were observed in WW-4 g/L ZnO-NPs + chitosan + proline (IBRv2= 30.53) compared to Ref” treatment (Fig. 2L).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe spider plot serves as a visual representation of the biomarker deviation index (I), with regions above zero\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eindicating biomarker induction and regions below zero indicating biomarker inhibition\u003csup\u003e55\u003c/sup\u003e. The results of IBRv2 calculations showed that drought stress activated the antioxidant defense system in sugar beet plants, regardless of whether foliar stimulators were applied. However, the foliar application of both stimulators resulted in a higher biomarker deviation index (I) for all scavenging enzymes compared to the control plants, under WD conditions (Fig. 7A–L).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe impact of WD on RY, as a critical characteristic in sugar beet breeding programs, was evident in the decrease of its I value. However, the application of 4 g/LZnO-NPs+Chitosan+Proline showed a lower decrement (I =\u0026nbsp;−\u0026nbsp;0.492) compared to the\u0026nbsp;“4 g/L ZnO-NPs+control”(I =\u0026nbsp;−\u0026nbsp;1.365),“control+chitosan+prolin”\u0026nbsp;(I =\u0026nbsp;−\u0026nbsp;1.993) and“control+control”treatments. These findings suggest that applying 4 g/L ZnO-NPs + chitosan + proline may have a beneficial effect on mitigating the negative impact of severe drought stress on sugar beet plants and their fundamental characteristics.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003ePhotosynthetic pigments and carotenoid content\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe water deficit decreased the levels of photosynthetic pigments; however, adding 2 g/L ZnO-NPs significantly increased the levels of chlorophyll a, b, and carotenoids under both environmental conditions compared to the respective controls. The reduction in chlorophyll concentration during drought is linked to the buildup of reactive oxygen species (ROS), which cause chlorophyll breakdown through the action of the chlorophyllase enzyme, leading to chloroplast damage. Additionally, drought conditions decrease photosystem II activity and lower the rate of CO2 assimilation in sugar beets \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR57\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e57\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eHsu and Kao\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR58\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e58\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e found that chlorophyll (Chl) levels decrease during drought conditions. This decline is linked to osmotic stress, reduced water retention, and altered stomatal movement, which limits CO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e entry into leaves, ultimately reducing photosynthesis and lowering chlorophyll a and b concentrations.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAs noted, applying ZnO-NPs (Especially 2 g/L) positively influenced the enhancement of photosynthetic pigments in conditions of water scarcity. Research shows that ZnO nanoparticles can improve leaf membrane stability, enhance water absorption, and increase nutrient uptake. These effects help maintain and stabilize chlorophyll levels\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR59\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e59\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR60\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e60\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Recent studies by \u003csup\u003e61\u003c/sup\u003e and \u003csup\u003e62\u003c/sup\u003e indicate that treating sugar beet with ZnO nanoparticles during water stress conditions results in increased levels of chlorophyll a, chlorophyll b, and carotenoids.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eChitosan, proline, and a combination of both improved chlorophyll a and b pigments under WW and WD conditions, with proline showing the most significant effect. However, there was no notable difference in carotenoid content between controls and biostimulant treatments under WD conditions. Plants that experienced drought stress exhibited the least amount of chlorophyll in comparison to control plants \u003csup\u003e63 41\u003c/sup\u003e, leading to a decrease in photosynthesis efficiency and overall plant growth \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR64\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e64\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR65\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e65\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Chitosan applications mitigate these adverse effects by enhancing chlorophyll content in plants experiencing water stress and boosting photosynthesis \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR66\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e66\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR67\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e67\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. The foliar application of chitosan to maize plants cultivated under conditions of water deficit has shown beneficial impacts on photosynthesis, chlorophyll fluorescence, and water-use efficiency \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR68\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e68\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAs mentioned above, in this study, proline foliar application had a significant advantage over the control in photosynthetic pigments. \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR69\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e69\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e found that utilizing proline as an osmotic safeguard against water scarcity resulted in increased levels of chlorophyll, proline, glycine betaine, and total soluble phenols in wheat plants.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR70\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e70\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e found that applying proline to cowpea foliage under drought stress improved growth and yield traits, as well as increased levels of leaf chlorophylls a and b, and total carotenoids.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe experiment found that applying 2 g/L ZnO-NPs alongside proline and a combination of chitosan\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;proline led to the highest chlorophyll a and b levels. Additionally, the combination of these treatments had a synergistic effect on chlorophyll b content. The application of silicon (Si), proline, or both significantly increased the concentrations of chlorophyll a, chlorophyll b, and relative water content (RWC) in drought-stressed sugar beet plants compared to untreated stressed plants\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR71\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e71\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. The application of salicylic acid (SA) and proline, whether used individually or in combination, mitigated the negative effects of drought and enhanced the levels of chlorophyll and carotenoids in Rice\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR72\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e72\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003ePhysiological Characteristics\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn the experiment, water deficit reduced the RWC and stomatal conductance. The adverse effects of drought on RWC could stem from decreased water flow. This decline in RWC may also induce oxidative stress, leading to the production of ROS in plant tissues and ultimately causing lipid peroxidation and cellular harm.\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR56\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e56\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e Fugate et al. (2018) reported a decrease in relative water content and stomatal conductance in sugar beet plants subjected to drought conditions. Drought reduces soil water absorption, leading to stomata closure and decreased stomatal conductance, as noted in research by \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR73\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e73\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003eRaza et al. (2024). Drought stress leads to a significant reduction in leaf area index and chlorophyll content. This is attributed to the increased production of reactive oxygen species, which cause lipid peroxidation and result in chlorophyll degradation. In our research, we found that foliar spraying with chitosan and proline increased RWC under both conditions compared to the control treatment. It has been noted that the use of proline, either alone or in conjunction with SA, enhanced RWC in rice varieties \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR72\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e72\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Proline is said to assist in preserving the levels of chlorophyll and carotenoids, contributing to leaf turgor and immproving stomatal conductance, which are factors related to drought tolerance \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR74\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e74\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. They enhance membrane stability, leaf area, and relative water content, which improves the rate of photosynthesis and confers drought tolerance to crops.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eResults showed that applying 2 g/L of ZnO-NPs with proline led to the highest RWC, significantly improving this measure compared to the control group and individual treatments. Earlier studies have shown that ZnO nanoparticles can enhance relative water content (RWC), overall yield, and the absorption of key nutrients like nitrogen and potassium in sorghum \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e34\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. In a different study, it has also been noted that using ZnO nanoparticles may alleviate the adverse effects of drought on cell membrane stability and relative water content in corn \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR75\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e75\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWe observed the application of both levels of ZnO-NPs increased stomatal conductance compared to the corresponding control under both condition. The study found that combining proline with level 2 ZnO-NPs significantly improved stomatal conductance compared to using each treatment separately. This growth might be due to better absorption of water, greater photosynthetic effectiveness, increased production of phytohormones, and the accumulation of osmolytes, providing improved resilience \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e39\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR76\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e76\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIt has been observed that ZnO-NPs (150ppm) enhanced stomatal conductance and leaf area index \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR56\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e56\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. ZnO-NPs boost the production of cytokinins, which enhance metabolic activity and promote cell growth, thereby significantly increasing the LAI and chlorophyll levels \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR77\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e77\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. It has been found that ZnO nanoparticles enhanced stomatal conductance in Coriandrum sativum L. and maize when exposed to drought and salt stress, respectively \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e29\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR76\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e76\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Hamze et al.\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR62\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e62\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e reported that the application of ZnO NPs had a positive effect on RWC and the stomatal conductivity coefficient in sugar beet under water deficit conditions.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eOsmotic Adjustment\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe study found that water deficit increased the production of proline and soluble sugars in leaves. Osmolytes maintain turgor pressure and enhance water uptake by increasing cytoplasmic osmotic pressure \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR78\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e78\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Additionally, they function as ROS and MDA scavengers, reducing oxidative stress through enhanced enzyme activity \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR79\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e79\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn conditions of water stress, an increased accumulation of proline serves as one of the most efficient methods for osmotic regulation and for reducing the effects of drought stress \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR79\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e79\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe water status of plants can become unbalanced during drought conditions, disrupting osmotic regulation and resulting in increased levels of compatible osmolytes in crops. Proline possesses antioxidant properties that decrease lipid peroxidation and support cell stability by safeguarding the redox balance \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR80\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e80\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003ePlants are said to reduce damage caused by drought by increasing their accumulation of soluble sugars \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e43\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e In addition, studies on sugar beet seedlings have indicated that levels of proline and betaine rise in response to water stress, highlighting their role in alleviating the impact of drought \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR56\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e56\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eOur research showed that the application of ZnO-NPs, especially at a concentration of 4 g/L, significantly increased the levels of proline and soluble sugars in both conditions, In addition, the combination of 4 g/L ZnO-NPs with proline and chitosan\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;proline effectively increased the content of compatible osmolytes, demonstrating a synergistic effect that resulted in the highest levels of soluble sugars. In this framework, the combined application of ZnO\u0026ndash;NPs and biostimulants enhances plants' adaptive mechanisms, which markedly increases the levels of proline and soluble carbohydrates. Additionally, the elevated concentration of proline in stressed plants, triggered by the application of chitosan and glycine betaine, could signify improved tolerance of these plants to water stress \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR81\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e81\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR82\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e82\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. According to reports, the use of chitosan and glycine betaine has improved and increased the levels of soluble sugars and proline in okra plants that are stressed by drought \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR66\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e66\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe rise in proline concentration resulting from chitosan application might be due to a reduction in the oxidation of proline to glutamate and a heightened synthesis of proline\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR81\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e81\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eExternal applications of proline notably enhanced the levels of proline and soluble sugars when the plants experienced water stress in Rice, suggesting that they contribute to replenishing water in plant tissues and provide osmotic protection \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR72\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e72\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Yasmin et al\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR83\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e83\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e demonstrate that the combined application of ZnO\u0026ndash;NPs and AMF synergistically enhances nutrient uptake, alleviates drought stress, and promotes the accumulation of proline and soluble carbohydrates in safflower (\u003cem\u003eCarthamus tinctorius\u003c/em\u003e L.). Previous research has demonstrated that the joint use of ZnO\u0026ndash;NPs and AMF diminishes oxidative stress, elevates proline and soluble carbohydrate levels, and ultimately improves drought resistance \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR61\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e61\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR84\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e84\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003ePlant hormone content\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn this study, WD significantly increased the content of ABA hormones. In response to drought stress, plants manage their growth and development by adjusting the levels of different endogenous hormones, thereby reducing the negative impacts of drought conditions \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR85\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e85\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eABA is the primary plant hormone that initiates immediate responses (like controlling the opening and closing of stomata) as well as long-term responses (such as altering root structure) during drought conditions. It is essential for managing plant growth and development \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR86\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e86\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Bhusal et al\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR87\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e87\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e indicate that drought stress causes a notable rise in ABA levels, with higher drought conditions leading to increased ABA concentrations. In drought circumstances, ABA notably lowers the net photosynthetic rate by decreasing the plants' stomatal conductance, which helps mitigate the harm caused by drought stress. However, Certain studies indicated that stomatal closure and reduced transpiration rates are influenced not only by ABA content but also by the combined action of ABA\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR88\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e88\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn this experiment, the use of ZnO-NPs under WW environmental conditions decreased ABA content. Under water deficit WD conditions, the response of ABA to foliar application of ZnO-NPs was different. The level of 2 g/L of ZnO-NPs increased the ABA content, and the level of 4 g/L of ZnO-NPs decreased the content of this hormone. A previous study found that ZnO nanoparticles reduce ABA gene expression in strawberries (\u003cem\u003eFragaria ananassa\u003c/em\u003e), supporting current findings\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e43\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. The findings from Ahmed et al. \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e29\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e indicated that stomatal conductance improved in plants treated with ZnO nanoparticles, which also corroborated the decrease in ABA levels that are crucial for stomatal function during drought conditions \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR89\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e89\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. In our experiment, all three biostimulant treatments significantly reduced ABA content under both environmental conditions, with the maximum reduction associated with applying chitosan\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;proline. The lowest ABA content was observed with a combination of 4 g/L ZnO-NPs and chitosan\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;proline foliar application. This treatment had a synergistic effect, reducing ABA content more effectively than applying each treatment separately.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eOur research findings showed that water deficit decreased the levels of the hormones GA, IAA, and CK hormones.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eA reduction in GA content may slow plant growth rates to mitigate the effects of water scarcity on their normal physiological functions, thereby enhancing drought resistance \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR90\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e90\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe study found that a concentration of 2 g/L ZnO-NPs under WW conditions increased levels of GA, IAA, and CK hormones. Under WD conditions, a concentration of 4 g/L ZnO-NPs benefited only GA and CK. Additionally, combining 4 g/L ZnO-NPs with proline foliar spray yielded the highest levels of GA and IAA, significantly boosting hormone levels compared to using each treatment alone.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe application of zinc (Zn) has a significant impact on the level of indole-3-acetic acid (IAA), and zinc is recognized as a co-enzyme in the synthesis of tryptophan, which is a precursor in the production of IAA \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR91\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e91\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR92\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e92\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eApplying Zn during periods of drought stress elevates IAA levels, which enhances root development, aids in water absorption, and consequently boosts drought resistance\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR91\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e91\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Water deficiency greatly decreases the levels of IAA and GA, while the application of Zn significantly enhances these levels, leading to improved plant performance\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR93\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e93\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. The use of Zn significantly enhances the metabolic routes of tryptophan under drought conditions. As a result, since tryptophan is a precursor to IAA and melatonin, elevated levels of tryptophan help mitigate the impacts of drought by decreasing oxidative damage and maintaining osmotic balance \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR94\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e94\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Inoculating wheat with PGPR and ZnO-NPs also enhanced the levels of phytohormones, specifically IAA, when exposed to drought stress\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR95\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e95\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Elewa et al. \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR96\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e96\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e found that water shortage stress in Chenopodium quinoa plants resulted in a notable reduction in IAA hormone levels. On the other hand, the addition of proline in these circumstances elevated the IAA hormone content.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eAntioxidant Properties, MDA and Hydrogen peroxide Concentration\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn this experiment, WD considerably enhanced the activity of CAT, SOD, and APX enzymes. Drought stress leads to the buildup of reactive oxygen species (ROS), which subsequently triggers the activation of antioxidant enzymes, which are a component of the plant\u0026rsquo;s defense mechanism against oxidative harm\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Nonetheless, during extended and intense drought periods, the effectiveness of the antioxidant defense system is undermined by the reduction of vital cofactors, decreased ability to regenerate, and interruption of ROS-related signaling pathways \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR97\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e97\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAzzouz-Olden et al. \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR98\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e98\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e found that the differential expression of genes involved in the defense against oxidative stress, particularly those related to producing antioxidant enzymes, is a key strategy for S. bicolor to withstand drought conditions. \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e noted a preliminary rise in the activity of antioxidant enzymes in response to moderate drought stress in lavander (\u003cem\u003eLavandula angustifolia\u003c/em\u003e L.). This supportive interaction enhances the plant's defensive capabilities by boosting water retention, triggering protective signaling pathways, and promoting the production of essential protective compounds\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR99\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e99\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. It has been reported CAT and SOD activities increased significantly in sugar beet under drought conditions compared to controls. This rise is attributed to their role as antioxidant enzymes that help stress tolerance. SOD acts as the first line of defense against oxidative damage by converting superoxide radicals into hydrogen peroxide and oxygen\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR100\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e100\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e .\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eCAT is involved in the transformation of H2O2 into water and oxygen, playing a crucial role in plant metabolism and in the recognition of signals. These findings align with the results reported by \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e,14 101\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe results of our experiment indicated that treatment with ZnO-NPs significantly increased antioxidant enzyme activities at levels 2 and 4 under both environmental conditions. Importantly, ZnO-NPs play a role in stabilizing cell membranes, triggering essential antioxidant pathways, and together enhancing the plant's resilience to stress caused by drought \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR102\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e102\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR103\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e103\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Mir-Mahmoudi et al\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR61\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e61\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. showed that the simultaneous application of ZnO-NPs not only promotes nutrient absorption but also modulates ROS-dependent signaling pathways, thus boosting the expression of antioxidant genes and strengthening the plant's overall defense mechanisms \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR104\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e104\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn this experiment biostimulant treatments, particularly chitosan\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;proline, enhanced the activity of CAT, SOD, and APX enzymes under both environmental conditions. In addition, applying 4 g/L of ZnO-NPs with chitosan and proline enhances CAT enzyme activity through a synergistic effect. Additionally, 2 g/L of ZnO-NPs combined with proline positively influences SOD enzyme activity.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe use of chitosan derivatives, either alone or in combination, has been shown to enhance the activity of antioxidant enzymes such as superoxide dismutase, catalase, ascorbate peroxidase, glutathione reductase, and guaiacol peroxidase during the early stages of stress. Furthermore, it contributes to reducing lipid peroxidation \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR105\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e105\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Furthermore, chitosan and its derivatives have demonstrated efficacy in improving crop resilience to water shortages by alleviating the harmful impacts of water deficit on yield \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR106\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e106\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR107\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e107\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAs mentioned, proline foliar application had a positive effect on increasing the content of antioxidant enzymes. Furthermore, proline's critical function may be attributed to its beneficial impact as an osmoprotectant, safeguarding plant cells from oxidative stress through osmotic regulation, protein stabilization, and maintaining the balance of antioxidant enzymes. AlKahtani et al.\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR71\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e71\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e found that silicon (Si), proline, and their combined application significantly benefited drought-stressed sugar beet plants compared to untreated stressed plants.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe content of hydrogen peroxide and MAD increased significantly under WD conditions. The results of this research clearly show that drought stress substantially improves the levels of malondialdehyde (MDA) and hydrogen peroxide (H₂O₂), which are key indicators of membrane lipid peroxidation and cellular harm caused by oxidative stress \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e;\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR108\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e108\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e). Under drought conditions, the heightened production of ROS results in cellular harm, which in turn elevates the levels of MDA and H₂O₂ \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. In line with these findings, Mazhar et al.\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e stated that drought stress activates lipid peroxidation and causes oxidative imbalance in canola. The elevated levels of MDA and proline are a reaction to drought conditions. Our results align with those of several researchers who have observed significant increases in proline and MDA under stressful conditions in various plants \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e17\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR109\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e109\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe results showed that applying both levels of ZnO-NPs significantly decreased the content of hydrogen peroxide and MAD. However, applying ZnO-NPs under WW conditions did not significantly affect the reduction of these two substances. In contrast, the use of ZnO\u0026ndash;NPs significantly alleviated oxidative stress, as indicated by the decrease in levels of MDA and H₂O₂. This combined treatment bolstered the plant\u0026rsquo;s resistance to oxidative stress by enhancing its nutrient levels and promoting the activity of antioxidant enzymes \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR110\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e110\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR111\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e111\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. ZnO-NPs specifically aimed at enzymatic antioxidant mechanisms, which consequently reduced ROS production\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR99\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e99\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR112\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e112\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e; \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR113\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e113\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Prior research has highlighted the effect of ZnO\u0026ndash;NPs in diminishing oxidative stress and improving membrane stability in a range of crops, such as wheat and maize \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e40\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR99\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e99\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Research has indicated that drought stress results in an excessive generation of reactive oxygen species (ROS), which causes damage to cell membranes, accumulates malondialdehyde (MDA), and ultimately leads to cell death. The application of zinc (Zn) during drought stress decreases MDA levels, highlighting the essential function of Zn in safeguarding cell membranes from ROS under drought conditions \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR114\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e114\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn this experiment, foliar spraying of proline under WW conditions, as well as the foliar spraying of all three growth stimulant treatments under WD conditions, significantly reduced the levels of hydrogen peroxide and MAD. Other scientists reported comparable results, discovering that the use of proline markedly decreased the concentrations of H2O2 and MDA in various plants experiencing stress \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e32\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR115\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e115\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. In the study conducted by AlKahtani et al. \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR71\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e71\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e a significant reduction in H\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e was observed due to the foliar application of proline. This treatment was particularly effective in mitigating the adverse effects of drought.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eRoot yield (RY)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWD significantly increased RY compared to the corresponding control. Notably, applying both levels of ZnO-NPs under WW conditions significantly enhanced RY compared to the control. The increase in RY under WD conditions was limited to only 4 g/L of ZnO-NPs.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe increase in root yield under water deficit conditions under 4 g/L of ZnO-NPs treatment can be attributed to the positive effect of this treatment on increasing the activity of antioxidant enzymes, increasing the content of compatible osmolytes, and consequently reducing the content of hydrogen peroxide and MAD. The sum of these processes paves the way for improving physiological characteristics, photosynthetic pigments' content, and consequently, root yield.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eDrought stress significantly diminishes soybean seed yield by affecting soil moisture levels, impairing the absorption of water, and obstructing the transport of nutrients \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR116\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e116\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Consequently, the reduction in photosynthetic ability, along with metabolic impairment, greatly affects seed production \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e27\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR117\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e117\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003ePrevious studies on wheat and maize have demonstrated that AMF and ZnO\u0026ndash;NPs treatments more effectively promotes plant growth, strengthens stress tolerance, and improves yield outcomes compared to individual treatments \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR113\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e113\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. It has been observed that ZnO\u0026ndash;NPs support the stability of photosystem structures and boost the activity of antioxidant enzymes, which improves the efficiency of light energy conversion and decreases oxidative damage\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e31\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR118\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e118\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. These results are in agreement with the obtained results with \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR71\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e71\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e, \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR62\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e62\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e, and \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR119\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e119\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e, who reported that drought led to inhibiting the assimilation of CO2 and reducing the assimilate supply in sugar beet, consequently decreasing sucrose%, root, and sugar yield. In the study by \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e34\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e on sorghum and hirvani-\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e35\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e on soybean, the foliar application of ZnO\u0026ndash;NPs significantly improved the economic yield of the crops compared to the control group.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eOn the other hand, applying all three biostimulant treatments under WW conditions increased RY compared to the control. The increase in RY under WS conditions was attributed solely to the chitosan\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;proline treatment. The treatment above positively increased photosynthetic pigments, compatible osmolytes, growth hormones, antioxidant enzyme activity, and reduced MAD content. These processes can significantly improve root yield under water deficit conditions. In this experiment, Chitosan\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;Proline spraying with both levels of 2 and 4 g /l ZnO-NPS produced maximum RY. The foliar application of chitosan\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;proline, combined with 2 g/L ZnO-NPs, had a synergistic effect on enhancing RY compared to the separate application of each.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eChitosan has been found to activate signaling pathways that regulate stomatal opening and closing, which are essential for plants under water stress conditions \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e21\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e22\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Furthermore Chitosan can enhance the plant's defenses against oxidative stress by promoting certain enzymes and non-enzymatic antioxidants, such as ascorbate, while reducing lipid peroxidation and hydrogen peroxide production \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e23\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.Research has shown that applying chitosan to the leaves of plants during periods of water deficiency significantly enhances their economic yield. This has been observed in various crops, including marigold (\u003cem\u003eCalendula officinalis\u003c/em\u003e L.) \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e24\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e, rice \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e25\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e, and sunflower (\u003cem\u003eHelianthus annuus\u003c/em\u003e L.) \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e26\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Our findings align with these studies. It has been reported that proline application has been shown to enhance plant growth and reduce oxidative damage under stress conditions in calendula and barley plants by alleviating the negative effects of ROS\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Ghaffari et al.\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e17\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e discovered that employing proline improved water management and boosted sugar beet production under drought conditions. The superior effect of proline might be due to the role of proline in improving sugar beet as a storage sink for nutrient elements, for example, carbon and nitrogen, and as a scavenger for free radicals; consequently, decreased TSS% \u003csup\u003e120\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eRelationships between traits and treatments\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eBased on the results, root yield in the vicinity of the treatments WW-2 g/L ZnO-NPs\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;Chitosan\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;Proline, WW-2 g/L ZnO-NPs\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;Proline, and WW-2 g/L ZnO-NPs\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;Chitosan and the traits RWC, RY, SCC, GB, IAA, and CK were located in one area of ​​the biplot. It can be concluded that in this study, the use of 2 g/L ZnO-NPs treatment along with all three biostimulant foliar spray treatments resulted in maximum RWC, RY, SCC, GB, IAA, and CK traits and ultimately root yield. In the opposite direction to the root yield axis, the treatments Control\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;Control, Control\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;Proline, Control\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;Chitosan, 2 g/L ZnO-NPs\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;Control and 2 g/L ZnO-NPs\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;Proline ABA under water deficit was placed. It can be stated that the lowest values ​​of RWC, RY, SCC, GB, IAA, and CK and finally root yield were related to the aforementioned treatments.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eIBRv2\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWe recorded the lowest IBRv2 values of 22.11, 24.06, 24.91, 24.64, and 24.10 for \u0026ldquo;Control\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;Proline,\u0026rdquo; \u0026ldquo;Control\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;Chitosan,\u0026rdquo; \u0026ldquo;2 g/L ZnO-NPs\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;Control,\u0026rdquo; \u0026ldquo;2 g/L ZnO-NPs\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;Control,\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;4 g/L ZnO-NPs\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;Proline\u0026rdquo; treatments. The maximum IBRv2 with a value of 31.50 was assigned to the 2 g/L ZnO-NPs\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;Proline treatments. Since lower IBRv2 values indicated lower levels of toxicity and/or oxidative stress, it could be concluded that foliar application of Proline under drought stress could be accompanied by better improvements toward diminishing adverse consequences of severe drought stress. The influence of drought stress on MAD content, a fundamental characteristic for osmotic tension, revealed that 4ZnO-NPs\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;Chitosan\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;Proline (I\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.803) and 4 g/L ZnO-NPs\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;Proline (I\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.809) had the lowest increases in MAD content. The highest increase in MAD index was assigned to Control\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;Control (I\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;3.601). In terms of root yield as an economic trait in sugar beet, the least decrease in this trait was observed in the treatments of 4 g/L ZnO-NPs\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;Chitosan and Proline (I = -0.492) and 4 g/L ZnO-NPs\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;Proline (I = -1.014).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThese findings suggested that applying 4 g/L ZnO-NPs combined with Chitosan and Proline and 4 g/L ZnO-NPs with Proline might have a beneficial effect on mitigating the negative impact\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eof severe drought stress on sugar beet plants and their fundamental characteristics. Since higher value of IBRv2 index corresponded to increased oxidative stress reflected in decreasing growth rate\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR121\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e121\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e, foliar spraying of 4g/L ZnO-NPs combined with Chitosan and Proline and 4 g/L ZnO-NPs with Proline seemed to have a positive effect on improving cell health by regulating the activity of antioxidant enzymes and betaglycine proline the foliar treatments. This is because of lower values of IBRv2 for the sugar beet plants exposed to ZnO-NPs combined with Chitosan and Proline, under water deficit stress conditions. Similarly, in soybean, lower values of IBRv2 index was also observed for the inoculated strain DNS10 which was able to destroy the atrazine in the soil and moderati the phytotoxicity caused by atrazine comparing to the other treatments \u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR122\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e122\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eAccording to the findings from the comparison of treatments under water deficit (WD) conditions, applying a foliar spray of 4 g/L of ZnO-NPs enhanced the levels of chlorophyll b, carotenoids, proline, beta-glycine, stomatal conductance, GA, CK, CAT, SOD, APX, and RY. At the same time, it reduced the amounts of ABA, MAD, and hydrogen peroxide compared to the control. Among the biostimulant treatments, the combination of chitosan and proline applied under WD conditions increased in chlorophyll a, chlorophyll b, proline, beta-glycine, GA, IAA, CK, CAT, APX, and RY, and a decrease in ABA, MAD, and hydrogen peroxide levels. The application of 4 g/L of ZnO-NPs and foliar spraying of chitosan\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;proline under water-deficit conditions increased the plant's defense capability against water-deficit stress by increasing the content of antioxidant enzymes. Reducing MAD and hydrogen peroxide content can prove this improvement in plant defense properties. By enhancing defensive characteristics, the plant upholds ideal quantities of growth hormones, which help preserve the arrangement and stability of photosynthetic pigments, ultimately boosting photosynthetic output and enhancing root yield. In this research, under both environmental conditions, the combined use of 4 g/L of ZnO-NPs along with the foliar application of chitosan and proline exhibited a synergistic effect on enhancing root yield, which is a crucial economic trait in sugar beet, when compared to the individual application of each treatment. Even though the Control\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;Proline treatment received the lowest IBRv2 index in this study, the 4ZnO-NPs\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;Chitosan\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;Proline treatment showed the smallest root yield decline and the smallest rise in MAD content. It can be inferred that the treatment of 4ZnO-NPs\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;chitosan\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;proline likely alleviated the negative impact of water deficit stress on root functionality by triggering different defense mechanisms, including enhancing the activity of antioxidant enzymes and boosting the levels of compatible osmolytes.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTo summarize, our findings indicated that the application of ZnO nanoparticles (NPs) in conjunction with biostimulants, especially the mixture of 4 g/L of ZnO-NPs with foliar treatments of chitosan and proline, notably improved root yield. In addition, this combination demonstrated the potential to activate antioxidant enzymes and promote growth in the Shokofa variety of sugar beet when subjected to water stress conditions.This study suggested that using zinc nanoparticles and biostimulants could present promising opportunities for future research in cultivating sugar beet and various crops in arid and semi-arid regions. This is particularly relevant in light of the current trends in global warming, which have resulted in a progressively warmer planet and have considerably impacted the accessibility of water resources around the globe Considering the consequences of current global warming trends, employing such stimulators could be a reliable method to mitigate the negative impacts of water scarcity on the growth, yield, and quality of sugar beets in the future. This is especially important for farmers whose sugar beet crops are negatively impacted by water shortages.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003ch2\u003eFunding\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis study does not have any financial support.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAuthor Contribution\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eSH. N and H. H. collected and organized the experimental data, performed data analysis, and wrote the manuscript. T. M. collected and organized the experimental data and edited the manuscript. S.Sh. rewrote the manuscript. S. Y. S., H. H., and SH. N conducted experiments and assisted in collecting and organizing the experimental data.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAcknowledgement\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe authors express their gratitude to the technicians at the Mahabad Azad University, Iran, for their assistance in conducting the experiments\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eData Availability\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGonzalez, M. N. G. \u0026amp; Bj\u0026ouml;rnsson, L. Life cycle assessment of the production of beet sugar and its by-products. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Cleaner Production\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e346\u003c/strong\u003e, 131211 (2022). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHossain, M. S., ElSayed, A. I., Moore, M. \u0026amp; Dietz, K.-J. Redox and reactive oxygen species network in acclimation for salinity tolerance in sugar beet. \u003cem\u003eJournal of experimental botany\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e68\u003c/strong\u003e, 1283-1298 (2017). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAlsherif, E. A.\u003cem\u003e et al.\u003c/em\u003e Carbon nanoparticles improve the effect of compost and arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi in drought-stressed corn cultivation. \u003cem\u003ePlant Physiology and Biochemistry\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e194\u003c/strong\u003e, 29-40 (2023). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKausar, A.\u003cem\u003e et al.\u003c/em\u003e Zinc oxide nanoparticles as potential hallmarks for enhancing drought stress tolerance in wheat seedlings. \u003cem\u003ePlant Physiology and Biochemistry\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e195\u003c/strong\u003e, 341-350 (2023). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAshwin, R., Bagyaraj, D. J. \u0026amp; Mohan Raju, B. Ameliorating the drought stress tolerance of a susceptible soybean cultivar, MAUS 2 through dual inoculation with selected rhizobia and AM fungus. \u003cem\u003eFungal Biology and Biotechnology\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e10\u003c/strong\u003e, 10 (2023). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMazhar, M. W., Ishtiaq, M., Maqbool, M. \u0026amp; Akram, R. Seed priming with Calcium oxide nanoparticles improves germination, biomass, antioxidant defence and yield traits of canola plants under drought stress. \u003cem\u003eSouth African Journal of Botany\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e151\u003c/strong\u003e, 889-899 (2022). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHu, Y., Xie, W. \u0026amp; Chen, B. Arbuscular mycorrhiza improved drought tolerance of maize seedlings by altering photosystem II efficiency and the levels of key metabolites. \u003cem\u003eChemical and biological technologies in agriculture\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e7\u003c/strong\u003e, 1-14 (2020). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFeizabadi, A., Noormohammadi, G. \u0026amp; Fatehi, F. Changes in growth, physiology, and fatty acid profile of rapeseed cultivars treated with vermicompost under drought stress. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e21\u003c/strong\u003e, 200-208 (2021). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHaghaninia, M., Javanmard, A., Mahdavinia, G. R., Shah, A. A. \u0026amp; Farooq, M. Co-application of Biofertilizer and Stress-Modulating Nanoparticles Modulates the Physiological, Biochemical, and Yield Responses of Camelina (Camelina sativa L.) Under Limited Water Supply. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e23\u003c/strong\u003e, 6681-6695 (2023). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAlam, M. Z., Choudhury, T. R. \u0026amp; Mridha, M. Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi enhance biomass growth, mineral content, and antioxidant activity in tomato plants under drought stress. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Food Quality\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e2023\u003c/strong\u003e, 2581608 (2023). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBegum, N.\u003cem\u003e et al.\u003c/em\u003e Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungus Rhizophagus irregularis alleviates drought stress in soybean with overexpressing the GmSPL9d gene by promoting photosynthetic apparatus and regulating the antioxidant system. \u003cem\u003eMicrobiological Research\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e273\u003c/strong\u003e, 127398 (2023). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHaghaninia, M.\u003cem\u003e et al.\u003c/em\u003e Adoption of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi and biochar for alleviating the agro-physiological response of lavander (Lavandula angustifolia L.) subjected to drought stress. \u003cem\u003ePlant Stress\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e12\u003c/strong\u003e, 100461 (2024). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAbdelaal, K. A. Effect of salicylic acid and abscisic acid on morpho-physiological and anatomical characters of faba bean plants (Vicia faba L.) under drought stress. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Plant Production\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e6\u003c/strong\u003e, 1771-1788 (2015). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAbdelaal, K. A.\u003cem\u003e et al.\u003c/em\u003e Exogenous application of proline and salicylic acid can mitigate the injurious impacts of drought stress on barley plants associated with physiological and histological characters. \u003cem\u003eSustainability\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e12\u003c/strong\u003e, 1736 (2020). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKaur, G. \u0026amp; Asthir, B. Proline: a key player in plant abiotic stress tolerance. \u003cem\u003eBiologia plantarum\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e59\u003c/strong\u003e, 609-619 (2015). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGodoy, F., Olivos-Hern\u0026aacute;ndez, K., Stange, C. \u0026amp; Handford, M. Abiotic stress in crop species: improving tolerance by applying plant metabolites. \u003cem\u003ePlants\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e10\u003c/strong\u003e, 186 (2021). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGhaffari, H., Tadayon, M. R., Bahador, M. \u0026amp; Razmjoo, J. Investigation of the proline role in controlling traits related to sugar and root yield of sugar beet under water deficit conditions. \u003cem\u003eAgricultural Water Management\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e243\u003c/strong\u003e, 106448 (2021). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHasanuzzaman, M.\u003cem\u003e et al.\u003c/em\u003e Targeting glycinebetaine for abiotic stress tolerance in crop plants: physiological mechanism, molecular interaction and signaling. \u003cem\u003ePhyton\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e88\u003c/strong\u003e, 185 (2019). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eXu, C. \u0026amp; Mou, B. Chitosan as soil amendment affects lettuce growth, photochemical efficiency, and gas exchange. \u003cem\u003eHortTechnology\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e28\u003c/strong\u003e, 476-480 (2018). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSharif, R.\u003cem\u003e et al.\u003c/em\u003e The multifunctional role of chitosan in horticultural crops; a review. \u003cem\u003eMolecules\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e23\u003c/strong\u003e, 872 (2018). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAgurla, S., Gayatri, G. \u0026amp; Raghavendra, A. S. Nitric oxide as a secondary messenger during stomatal closure as a part of plant immunity response against pathogens. \u003cem\u003eNitric Oxide\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e43\u003c/strong\u003e, 89-96 (2014). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCz\u0026eacute;kus, Z.\u003cem\u003e et al.\u003c/em\u003e Role of ethylene and light in chitosan-induced local and systemic defence responses of tomato plants. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Plant Physiology\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e263\u003c/strong\u003e, 153461 (2021). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAlmeida, L. G., Magalh\u0026atilde;es, P. C., Karam, D., Silva, E. M. d. \u0026amp; Alvarenga, A. A. Chitosan application in the induction of water deficit tolerance in maize plants. \u003cem\u003eActa Scientiarum. Agronomy\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e42\u003c/strong\u003e, e42463 (2020). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAkhtar, G.\u003cem\u003e et al.\u003c/em\u003e Chitosan-induced physiological and biochemical regulations confer drought tolerance in pot marigold (Calendula officinalis L.). \u003cem\u003eAgronomy\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e12\u003c/strong\u003e, 474 (2022). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMoolphuerk, N., Lawson, T. \u0026amp; Pattanagul, W. Chitosan mitigates the adverse effects and improves photosynthetic activity in rice (Oryza sativa L.) seedlings under drought condition. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Crop Improvement\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e36\u003c/strong\u003e, 638-655 (2022). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSohail, M. A., Nawaz, F., Aziz, M. \u0026amp; Ahmad, W. Effect of supplemental potassium and chitosan on growth and yield of sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.) under drought stress. \u003cem\u003eAgricultural Sciences Journal\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e3\u003c/strong\u003e, 56-71 (2021). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGhiyasi, M.\u003cem\u003e et al.\u003c/em\u003e Foliar Applications of ZnO and its nanoparticles increase safflower (Carthamus tinctorius L.) growth and yield under water stress. \u003cem\u003eAgronomy\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e13\u003c/strong\u003e, 192 (2023). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSadak, M. S. \u0026amp; Bakry, B. A. Zinc-oxide and nano ZnO oxide effects on growth, some biochemical aspects, yield quantity, and quality of flax (Linum uitatissimum L.) in absence and presence of compost under sandy soil. \u003cem\u003eBulletin of the National Research Centre\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e44\u003c/strong\u003e, 1-12 (2020). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAhmed, S.\u003cem\u003e et al.\u003c/em\u003e Characterizing stomatal attributes and photosynthetic induction in relation to biochemical changes in Coriandrum sativum L. by foliar-applied zinc oxide nanoparticles under drought conditions. \u003cem\u003eFrontiers in Plant Science\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e13\u003c/strong\u003e, 1079283 (2023). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eElemike, E. E., Uzoh, I. M., Onwudiwe, D. C. \u0026amp; Babalola, O. O. The role of nanotechnology in the fortification of plant nutrients and improvement of crop production. \u003cem\u003eApplied Sciences\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e9\u003c/strong\u003e, 499 (2019). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eYusefi-Tanha, E., Fallah, S., Rostamnejadi, A. \u0026amp; Pokhrel, L. R. Zinc oxide nanoparticles (ZnONPs) as a novel nanofertilizer: Influence on seed yield and antioxidant defense system in soil grown soybean (Glycine max cv. Kowsar). \u003cem\u003eScience of the Total Environment\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e738\u003c/strong\u003e, 140240 (2020). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSingh, M., Kumar, J., Singh, S., Singh, V. P. \u0026amp; Prasad, S. M. Roles of osmoprotectants in improving salinity and drought tolerance in plants: a review. \u003cem\u003eReviews in environmental science and bio/technology\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e14\u003c/strong\u003e, 407-426 (2015). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eParashar, R., Afzal, S. \u0026amp; Singh, N. K. in \u003cem\u003ePhytoremediation and Biofortification\u003c/em\u003e 183-199 (Apple Academic Press, 2024).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDimkpa, C. O.\u003cem\u003e et al.\u003c/em\u003e Zinc oxide nanoparticles alleviate drought-induced alterations in sorghum performance, nutrient acquisition, and grain fortification. \u003cem\u003eScience of the Total Environment\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e688\u003c/strong\u003e, 926-934 (2019). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eShirvani-Naghani, S., Fallah, S., Pokhrel, L. R. \u0026amp; Rostamnejadi, A. Drought stress mitigation and improved yield in Glycine max through foliar application of zinc oxide nanoparticles. \u003cem\u003eScientific Reports\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e14\u003c/strong\u003e, 27898 (2024). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDuarte, B., Pedro, S., Marques, J. C., Ad\u0026atilde;o, H. \u0026amp; Ca\u0026ccedil;ador, I. Zostera noltii development probing using chlorophyll a transient analysis (JIP-test) under field conditions: Integrating physiological insights into a photochemical stress index. \u003cem\u003eEcological Indicators\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e76\u003c/strong\u003e, 219-229 (2017). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKoutra, E., Chondrogiannis, C. \u0026amp; Grammatikopoulos, G. Variability of the photosynthetic machinery tolerance when imposed to rapidly or slowly imposed dehydration in native Mediterranean plants. \u003cem\u003ePhotosynthetica\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e60\u003c/strong\u003e, 88 (2022). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eStirbet, A., Laz\u0026aacute;r, D., Kromdijk, J. \u0026amp; Govindjee. Chlorophyll a fluorescence induction: can just a one-second measurement be used to quantify abiotic stress responses? \u003cem\u003ePhotosynthetica\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e56\u003c/strong\u003e, 86-104 (2018). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRasheed, A.\u003cem\u003e et al.\u003c/em\u003e The role of nanoparticles in plant biochemical, physiological, and molecular responses under drought stress: A review. \u003cem\u003eFrontiers in Plant Science\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e13\u003c/strong\u003e, 976179 (2022). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAbdelhameed, R. E., Abu-Elsaad, N. I., Abdel Latef, A. A. H. \u0026amp; Metwally, R. A. Tracking of zinc ferrite nanoparticle effects on pea (Pisum sativum L.) plant growth, pigments, mineral content and arbuscular mycorrhizal colonization. \u003cem\u003ePlants\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e10\u003c/strong\u003e, 583 (2021). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHidangmayum, A., Dwivedi, P., Katiyar, D. \u0026amp; Hemantaranjan, A. Application of chitosan on plant responses with special reference to abiotic stress. \u003cem\u003ePhysiology and molecular biology of plants\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e25\u003c/strong\u003e, 313-326 (2019). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBanchio, E., Bogino, P. C., Zygadlo, J. \u0026amp; Giordano, W. Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria improve growth and essential oil yield in Origanum majorana L. \u003cem\u003eBiochemical Systematics and Ecology\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e36\u003c/strong\u003e, 766-771 (2008). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLi, D.\u003cem\u003e et al.\u003c/em\u003e Comparative transcriptome analysis reveals the influence of abscisic acid on the metabolism of pigments, ascorbic acid and folic acid during strawberry fruit ripening. \u003cem\u003ePloS one\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e10\u003c/strong\u003e, e0130037 (2015). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBouras, H., Bouaziz, A., Bouazzama, B., Hirich, A. \u0026amp; Choukr-Allah, R. How phosphorus fertilization alleviates the effect of salinity on sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) productivity and quality. \u003cem\u003eAgronomy\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e11\u003c/strong\u003e, 1491 (2021). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBates, L. S., Waldren, R. \u0026amp; Teare, I. Rapid determination of free proline for water-stress studies. \u003cem\u003ePlant and soil\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e39\u003c/strong\u003e, 205-207 (1973). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eShaw, B., Thomas, T. \u0026amp; Cooke, D. Responses of sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) to drought and nutrient deficiency stress. \u003cem\u003ePlant Growth Regulation\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e37\u003c/strong\u003e, 77-83 (2002). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eChołuj, D., Karwowska, R., Ciszewska, A. \u0026amp; Jasińska, M. Influence of long-term drought stress on osmolyte accumulation in sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) plants. \u003cem\u003eActa Physiologiae Plantarum\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e30\u003c/strong\u003e, 679-687 (2008). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLichtenthaler, H. (Elsevier. https://doi. org/10.1016/0076-6879 (87), 1987).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eIslam, M. J., Kim, J. W., Begum, M. K., Sohel, M. A. T. \u0026amp; Lim, Y.-S. Physiological and biochemical changes in sugar beet seedlings to confer stress adaptability under drought condition. \u003cem\u003ePlants\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e9\u003c/strong\u003e, 1511 (2020). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNakano, Y. \u0026amp; Asada, K. Hydrogen peroxide is scavenged by ascorbate-specific peroxidase in spinach chloroplasts. \u003cem\u003ePlant and cell physiology\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e22\u003c/strong\u003e, 867-880 (1981). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eZhang, X. The measurement and mechanism of lipid peroxidation and SOD, POD and CAT activities in biological system. \u003cem\u003eResearch methodology of crop physiology\u003c/em\u003e, 208-211 (1992). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBollmark, M., Kub\u0026aacute;t, B. \u0026amp; Eliasson, L. Variation in endogenous cytokinin content during adventitious root formation in pea cuttings. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Plant Physiology\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e132\u003c/strong\u003e, 262-265 (1988). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHe, Z. A laboratory guide to chemical control technology on field crop. \u003cem\u003eBeijing Agr. Univ. Press, Beijing, China\u003c/em\u003e (1993). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMetsalu, T. \u0026amp; Vilo, J. ClustVis: a web tool for visualizing clustering of multivariate data using Principal Component Analysis and heatmap. \u003cem\u003eNucleic acids research\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e43\u003c/strong\u003e, W566-W570 (2015). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eResende, A. C. \u0026amp; Pereira, D. M. C. IBRtools: An R package for calculating integrated biomarker indexes. \u003cem\u003eEcology and Evolution\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e14\u003c/strong\u003e, e10864 (2024). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFugate, K. K.\u003cem\u003e et al.\u003c/em\u003e Methyl jasmonate alleviates drought stress in young sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) plants. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Agronomy and Crop Science\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e204\u003c/strong\u003e, 566-576 (2018). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eChołuj, D.\u003cem\u003e et al.\u003c/em\u003e Assessment of the physiological responses to drought in different sugar beet genotypes in connection with their genetic distance. \u003cem\u003eJournal of plant physiology\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e171\u003c/strong\u003e, 1221-1230 (2014). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHsu, Y. T. \u0026amp; Kao, C. H. Abscisic acid accumulation and cadmium tolerance in rice seedlings. \u003cem\u003ePhysiologia Plantarum\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e124\u003c/strong\u003e, 71-80 (2005). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAbd El-Mageed, T. A. \u0026amp; Semida, W. M. Organo mineral fertilizer can mitigate water stress for cucumber production (Cucumis sativus L.). \u003cem\u003eAgricultural Water Management\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e159\u003c/strong\u003e, 1-10 (2015). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eReddy, M. \u0026amp; Vora, A. Changes in pigment composition, Hill reaction activity and saccharides metabolism in bajra (Pennisetum typhoides S \u0026amp; H) leaves under NaCl salinity. (1986). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMir Mahmoudi, T., Hamze, H. \u0026amp; Golabi Lak, I. Impact of biofertiliser and zinc nanoparticles on enzymatic, biochemical, and agronomic properties of sugar beet under different irrigation regimes. \u003cem\u003eZemdirbyste-Agriculture\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e110\u003c/strong\u003e (2023). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHamze, H., Khalili, M., Mir-Shafiee, Z. \u0026amp; Nasiri, J. Integrated biomarker response version 2 (IBRv2)-Assisted examination to scrutinize foliar application of jasmonic acid (JA) and zinc oxide nanoparticles (ZnO NPs) toward mitigating drought stress in sugar beet. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Plant Growth Regulation\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e44\u003c/strong\u003e, 316-334 (2025). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCabillo, C. M. Biomass production of lettuce (Lactuca sativa L.) under water stress. \u003cem\u003eInt. J. Sci. Eng. Res\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e10\u003c/strong\u003e, 928-935 (2019). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eEl-Afifi, S., Ibrahim, E. \u0026amp; Salem, S. Effect of water stress and some anti-transpirants on growth, yield and quality of okra plants (Abelmoschus esculentus). \u003cem\u003eJournal of Plant Production\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e9\u003c/strong\u003e, 619-625 (2018). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFranzoni, G., Cocetta, G. \u0026amp; Ferrante, A. Effect of glutamic acid foliar applications on lettuce under water stress. \u003cem\u003ePhysiology and Molecular Biology of Plants\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e27\u003c/strong\u003e, 1059-1072 (2021). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMurmu, K., Murmu, S., Kundu, C. K. \u0026amp; Bera, P. S. Exogenous proline and glycine betaine in plants under stress tolerance. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e6\u003c/strong\u003e, 901-913 (2017). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAnnunziata, M. G., Ciarmiello, L. F., Woodrow, P., Dell\u0026rsquo;Aversana, E. \u0026amp; Carillo, P. Spatial and temporal profile of glycine betaine accumulation in plants under abiotic stresses. \u003cem\u003eFrontiers in plant science\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e10\u003c/strong\u003e, 230 (2019). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003edos Reis, C. O.\u003cem\u003e et al.\u003c/em\u003e Action of N-Succinyl and N, O-Dicarboxymethyl chitosan derivatives on chlorophyll photosynthesis and fluorescence in drought-sensitive maize. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Plant Growth Regulation\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e38\u003c/strong\u003e, 619-630 (2019). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFarooq, M., Nawaz, A., Chaudhry, M., Indrasti, R. \u0026amp; Rehman, A. Improving resistance against terminal drought in bread wheat by exogenous application of proline and gamma‐aminobutyric acid. \u003cem\u003eJournal of agronomy and crop science\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e203\u003c/strong\u003e, 464-472 (2017). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMerwad, A.-R. M., Desoky, E.-S. M. \u0026amp; Rady, M. M. Response of water deficit-stressed Vigna unguiculata performances to silicon, proline or methionine foliar application. \u003cem\u003eScientia Horticulturae\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e228\u003c/strong\u003e, 132-144 (2018). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAlKahtani, M. D.\u003cem\u003e et al.\u003c/em\u003e Evaluation of silicon and proline application on the oxidative machinery in drought-stressed sugar beet. \u003cem\u003eAntioxidants\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e10\u003c/strong\u003e, 398 (2021). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eUrmi, T. A.\u003cem\u003e et al.\u003c/em\u003e Combined effect of salicylic acid and proline mitigates drought stress in rice (Oryza sativa L.) through the modulation of physiological attributes and antioxidant enzymes. \u003cem\u003eAntioxidants\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e12\u003c/strong\u003e, 1438 (2023). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRaza, M. A. S.\u003cem\u003e et al.\u003c/em\u003e Cu-nanoparticles enhance the sustainable growth and yield of drought-subjected wheat through physiological progress. \u003cem\u003eScientific Reports\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e14\u003c/strong\u003e, 14254 (2024). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePanda, D., Mishra, S. S. \u0026amp; Behera, P. K. Drought tolerance in rice: focus on recent mechanisms and approaches. \u003cem\u003eRice science\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e28\u003c/strong\u003e, 119-132 (2021). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eYan, W., Zhong, Y. \u0026amp; Shangguan, Z. A meta-analysis of leaf gas exchange and water status responses to drought. \u003cem\u003eScientific Reports\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e6\u003c/strong\u003e, 20917 (2016). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSeleiman, M. F., Ahmad, A., Alhammad, B. A. \u0026amp; Tola, E. Exogenous application of zinc oxide nanoparticles improved antioxidants, photosynthetic, and yield traits in salt-stressed maize. \u003cem\u003eAgronomy\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e13\u003c/strong\u003e, 2645 (2023). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRaza, M. A. S.\u003cem\u003e et al.\u003c/em\u003e ZnO-nanoparticles and stage-based drought tolerance in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.): effect on morpho-physiology, nutrients uptake, grain yield and quality. \u003cem\u003eScientific Reports\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e15\u003c/strong\u003e, 5309 (2025). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSaxena, S. C.\u003cem\u003e et al.\u003c/em\u003e Osmoprotectants: potential for crop improvement under adverse conditions. \u003cem\u003ePlant acclimation to environmental stress\u003c/em\u003e, 197-232 (2013). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eEl-Bauome, H. A.\u003cem\u003e et al.\u003c/em\u003e Exogenous proline, methionine, and melatonin stimulate growth, quality, and drought tolerance in cauliflower plants. \u003cem\u003eAgriculture\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e12\u003c/strong\u003e, 1301 (2022). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGao, S.\u003cem\u003e et al.\u003c/em\u003e Effects of drought stress on growth, physiology and secondary metabolites of Two Adonis species in Northeast China. \u003cem\u003eScientia Horticulturae\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e259\u003c/strong\u003e, 108795 (2020). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGeng, W., Li, Z., Hassan, M. J. \u0026amp; Peng, Y. Chitosan regulates metabolic balance, polyamine accumulation, and Na+ transport contributing to salt tolerance in creeping bentgrass. \u003cem\u003eBMC Plant Biology\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e20\u003c/strong\u003e, 1-15 (2020). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eShafiq, S.\u003cem\u003e et al.\u003c/em\u003e Influence of glycine betaine (natural and synthetic) on growth, metabolism and yield production of drought-stressed maize (Zea mays L.) plants. \u003cem\u003ePlants\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e10\u003c/strong\u003e, 2540 (2021). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eYasmin, H.\u003cem\u003e et al.\u003c/em\u003e Combined application of zinc oxide nanoparticles and biofertilizer to induce salt resistance in safflower by regulating ion homeostasis and antioxidant defence responses. \u003cem\u003eEcotoxicology and Environmental Safety\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e218\u003c/strong\u003e, 112262 (2021). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGatasheh, M. K., Shah, A. A., Kaleem, M., Usman, S. \u0026amp; Shaffique, S. Application of CuNPs and AMF alleviates arsenic stress by encompassing reduced arsenic uptake through metabolomics and ionomics alterations in Elymus sibiricus. \u003cem\u003eBMC Plant Biology\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e24\u003c/strong\u003e, 667 (2024). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePirasteh-Anosheh, H., Emam, Y. \u0026amp; Pessarakli, M. Changes in endogenous hormonal status in corn (Zea mays) hybrids under drought stress. \u003cem\u003eJournal of plant nutrition\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e36\u003c/strong\u003e, 1695-1707 (2013). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSah, S. K., Reddy, K. R. \u0026amp; Li, J. Abscisic acid and abiotic stress tolerance in crop plants. \u003cem\u003eFrontiers in plant science\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e7\u003c/strong\u003e, 571 (2016). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBhusal, N., Han, S.-G. \u0026amp; Yoon, T.-M. Impact of drought stress on photosynthetic response, leaf water potential, and stem sap flow in two cultivars of bi-leader apple trees (Malus\u0026times; domestica Borkh.). \u003cem\u003eScientia Horticulturae\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e246\u003c/strong\u003e, 535-543 (2019). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eZhou, Y.\u003cem\u003e et al.\u003c/em\u003e Effects of drought stress on photosynthetic characteristics and endogenous hormone ABA and CTK contents in green-stayed sorghum. \u003cem\u003eScientia Agricultura Sinica\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e47\u003c/strong\u003e, 655-663 (2014). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKhan, M. T., Ahmed, S. \u0026amp; Shah, A. A. Regulatory role of folic acid in biomass production and physiological activities of Coriandrum sativum L. under irrigation regimes. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Phytoremediation\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e24\u003c/strong\u003e, 1025-1038 (2022). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNir, I., Moshelion, M. \u0026amp; Weiss, D. The A rabidopsis GIBBERELLIN METHYL TRANSFERASE 1 suppresses gibberellin activity, reduces whole‐plant transpiration and promotes drought tolerance in transgenic tomato. \u003cem\u003ePlant, cell \u0026amp; environment\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e37\u003c/strong\u003e, 113-123 (2014). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWaraich, E. A., Ahmad, R. \u0026amp; Ashraf, M. Role of mineral nutrition in alleviation of drought stress in plants. \u003cem\u003eAustralian journal of crop science\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e5\u003c/strong\u003e, 764-777 (2011). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBennett, J. \u0026amp; Skoog, F. Preliminary experiments on the relation of growth-promoting substances to the rest period in fruit trees. \u003cem\u003ePlant Physiology\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e13\u003c/strong\u003e, 219 (1938). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMoghadam, H. R. T., Zahedi, H. \u0026amp; Ashkiani, A. Effect of zinc foliar application on auxin and gibberellin hormones and catalase and superoxide dismutase enzyme activity of corn (Zea mays L) under water stress. (2013). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJamil, M.\u003cem\u003e et al.\u003c/em\u003e INDUCING DROUGHT TOLERANCE IN WHEAT THROUGH COMBINED USE OF L-TRYPTOPHAN AND Pseudomonas fluorescens. \u003cem\u003ePakistan Journal of Agricultural Sciences\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e55\u003c/strong\u003e (2018). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAzmat, A.\u003cem\u003e et al.\u003c/em\u003e Coactive role of zinc oxide nanoparticles and plant growth promoting rhizobacteria for mitigation of synchronized effects of heat and drought stress in wheat plants. \u003cem\u003eChemosphere\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e297\u003c/strong\u003e, 133982 (2022). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eElewa, T. A., Sadak, M. S. \u0026amp; Saad, A. M. Proline treatment improves physiological responses in quinoa plants under drought stress. \u003cem\u003eBioscience Research\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e14\u003c/strong\u003e, 21-33 (2017). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDola, D. B.\u003cem\u003e et al.\u003c/em\u003e Nano-iron oxide accelerates growth, yield, and quality of Glycine max seed in water deficits. \u003cem\u003eFrontiers in plant science\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e13\u003c/strong\u003e, 992535 (2022). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAzzouz-Olden, F., Hunt, A. G. \u0026amp; Dinkins, R. Transcriptome analysis of drought-tolerant sorghum genotype SC56 in response to water stress reveals an oxidative stress defense strategy. \u003cem\u003eMolecular Biology Reports\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e47\u003c/strong\u003e, 3291-3303 (2020). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJoel, J. M., Johnson, R. \u0026amp; Puthur, J. T. Co-application of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi and engineered nanomaterials: a promising strategy for crop resilience against abiotic stresses. \u003cem\u003eSouth African Journal of Botany\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e162\u003c/strong\u003e, 314-323 (2023). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eChung, W.-H. Unraveling new functions of superoxide dismutase using yeast model system: Beyond its conventional role in superoxide radical scavenging. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Microbiology\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e55\u003c/strong\u003e, 409-416 (2017). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLi, J.\u003cem\u003e et al.\u003c/em\u003e Influence of drought stress on photosynthetic characteristics and protective enzymes of potato at seedling stage. \u003cem\u003eJournal of the Saudi Society of Agricultural Sciences\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e16\u003c/strong\u003e, 82-88 (2017). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSol\u0026iacute;s-Rodr\u0026iacute;guez, U.\u003cem\u003e et al.\u003c/em\u003e Effect of zinc oxide nanoparticles and inoculation with arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi on growth, yield, and antioxidant capacity of Capsicum chinense Jacq.(Habanero pepper). \u003cem\u003eJournal of Nanoparticle Research\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e26\u003c/strong\u003e, 139 (2024). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMuhammad, F.\u003cem\u003e et al.\u003c/em\u003e Ameliorating drought effects in wheat using an exclusive or co-applied rhizobacteria and ZnO nanoparticles. \u003cem\u003eBiology\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e11\u003c/strong\u003e, 1564 (2022). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBasit, F.\u003cem\u003e et al.\u003c/em\u003e Protective role of ZnO nanoparticles in soybean seedlings growth and stress management under Cr-enriched conditions. \u003cem\u003ePlant Growth Regulation\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e100\u003c/strong\u003e, 703-716 (2023). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026Aacute;vila, R. G.\u003cem\u003e et al.\u003c/em\u003e Chitosan induces sorghum tolerance to water deficits by positively regulating photosynthesis and the production of primary metabolites, osmoregulators, and antioxidants. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e23\u003c/strong\u003e, 1156-1172 (2023). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRab\u0026ecirc;lo, V. M.\u003cem\u003e et al.\u003c/em\u003e The foliar application of a mixture of semisynthetic chitosan derivatives induces tolerance to water deficit in maize, improving the antioxidant system and increasing photosynthesis and grain yield. \u003cem\u003eScientific reports\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e9\u003c/strong\u003e, 8164 (2019). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMakhlouf, B. S. I., Khalil, S. R. A. E. \u0026amp; Saudy, H. S. Efficacy of humic acids and chitosan for enhancing yield and sugar quality of sugar beet under moderate and severe drought. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e22\u003c/strong\u003e, 1676-1691 (2022). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDirekvandy, S., Eisvand, H. R., Azizi, K., Akbarpour, O. \u0026amp; Smith, D. L. Mitigation impact of SiO2 nanoparticles and mycorrhiza on wheat growth and yield under late-season drought stress. \u003cem\u003eCereal Research Communications\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e53\u003c/strong\u003e, 563-576 (2025). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eEl-Shawa, G. M., Rashwan, E. M. \u0026amp; Abdelaal, K. A. Mitigating salt stress effects by exogenous application of proline and yeast extract on morpho-physiological, biochemical and anatomical characters of calendula plants. \u003cem\u003eScientific Journal of Flowers and Ornamental Plants\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e7\u003c/strong\u003e, 461-482 (2020). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eOgunkunle, C., El-Imam, A. A., Bassey, E., Vishwakarma, V. \u0026amp; Fatoba, P. Co-application of indigenous arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi and nano-TiO2 reduced Cd uptake and oxidative stress in pre-flowering cowpea plants. \u003cem\u003eEnvironmental Technology \u0026amp; Innovation\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e20\u003c/strong\u003e, 101163 (2020). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRaghib, F., Naikoo, M. I., Khan, F. A., Alyemeni, M. N. \u0026amp; Ahmad, P. Interaction of ZnO nanoparticle and AM fungi mitigates Pb toxicity in wheat by upregulating antioxidants and restricted uptake of Pb. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Biotechnology\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e323\u003c/strong\u003e, 254-263 (2020). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSaleh, A. M.\u003cem\u003e et al.\u003c/em\u003e Chitosan nanoparticles support the impact of arbuscular mycorrhizae fungi on growth and sugar metabolism of wheat crop. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Biological Macromolecules\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e235\u003c/strong\u003e, 123806 (2023). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSayed, E. G.\u003cem\u003e et al.\u003c/em\u003e Synergistic influence of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi inoculation with nanoparticle foliar application enhances chili (Capsicum annuum L.) antioxidant enzymes, anatomical characteristics, and productivity under cold-stress conditions. \u003cem\u003ePlants\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e13\u003c/strong\u003e, 517 (2024). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWu, S., Hu, C., Tan, Q., Nie, Z. \u0026amp; Sun, X. Effects of molybdenum on water utilization, antioxidative defense system and osmotic-adjustment ability in winter wheat (Triticum aestivum) under drought stress. \u003cem\u003ePlant Physiology and Biochemistry\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e83\u003c/strong\u003e, 365-374 (2014). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTayyab, N.\u003cem\u003e et al.\u003c/em\u003e Combined seed and foliar pre-treatments with exogenous methyl jasmonate and salicylic acid mitigate drought-induced stress in maize. \u003cem\u003ePlos one\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e15\u003c/strong\u003e, e0232269 (2020). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eIgiehon, N. O., Babalola, O. O., Cheseto, X. \u0026amp; Torto, B. Effects of rhizobia and arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi on yield, size distribution and fatty acid of soybean seeds grown under drought stress. \u003cem\u003eMicrobiological Research\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e242\u003c/strong\u003e, 126640 (2021). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSheteiwy, M. S.\u003cem\u003e et al.\u003c/em\u003e Inoculation with Bacillus amyloliquefaciens and mycorrhiza confers tolerance to drought stress and improve seed yield and quality of soybean plant. \u003cem\u003ePhysiologia Plantarum\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e172\u003c/strong\u003e, 2153-2169 (2021). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBhat, J. A.\u003cem\u003e et al.\u003c/em\u003e Defense interplay of the zinc-oxide nanoparticles and melatonin in alleviating the arsenic stress in soybean (Glycine max L.). \u003cem\u003eChemosphere\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e288\u003c/strong\u003e, 132471 (2022). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMolavi, M., Nabizadeh, E., Hamze, H. \u0026amp; Sharafi, S. Investigating the Effect of Priming with UV-B and Foliar Application of Micronutrient Elements in Modulating the Adverse Effect of Water Deficit Stress in Sugar Beet (Beta vulgaris). \u003cem\u003eAgricultural Research\u003c/em\u003e, 1-17 (2025). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFlors, V.\u003cem\u003e et al.\u003c/em\u003e A tolerant behavior in salt-sensitive tomato plants can be mimicked by chemical stimuli. \u003cem\u003ePlant Signaling \u0026amp; Behavior\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e2\u003c/strong\u003e, 50-57 (2007). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGhorbanpour, M., Farahani, A. H. K. \u0026amp; Hadian, J. Potential toxicity of nano-graphene oxide on callus cell of Plantago major L. under polyethylene glycol-induced dehydration. \u003cem\u003eEcotoxicology and Environmental Safety\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e148\u003c/strong\u003e, 910-922 (2018). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJing, Y.\u003cem\u003e et al.\u003c/em\u003e Influence of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi and zinc oxide nanoparticles on cadmium uptake and accumulation in winter wheat growing in naturally Cd-contaminated soil. \u003cem\u003ePedosphere\u003c/em\u003e (2025). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"},{"header":"Tables","content":"\u003cp\u003eTables 1 to 5 are available in the Supplementary Files section\u003c/p\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":true,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"scientific-reports","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"scirep","sideBox":"Learn more about [Scientific Reports](http://www.nature.com/srep/)","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"","title":"Scientific Reports","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"Scientific Reports","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Antioxidant enzymes, Beta vulgaris, Integrated Biomarker Response version 2 (IBRv2), Water deficit stress, Zinc oxide nanoparticle","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7011409/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7011409/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eThe effects of foliar applications of zinc oxide nanoparticles and various biostimulants were studied to alleviate water stress in sugar beet. The experiment used a split-split-plot layout based on a Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD) with three replications over two growing seasons (2022–2024). The main plot consisted of two irrigation levels: Normal (WW) and water deficit (WD). Zinc nanoparticle (ZnO-NPs) levels (control, 2, and 4 g/L) were assigned to subplots, and biostimulants (control, chitosan, proline, and chitosan + proline) were assigned to sub-subplots. The results shoewd under WD conditions foliar spraying of 4 g/L of ZnO-NPs increased the chlorophyll \u003cem\u003eb \u003c/em\u003econtent (22.85%), carotenoid (9.58%), proline content (18.42%), beta-glycine (13.20%), stomatal conductance (33.53%), gibberellin (GA) (9.09%), cytokinin (CK) (13.07%), catalase enzyme activity (CAT) (7.86%), superoxide dismutase (SOD) (25.56%), ascorbate peroxidase (APX) (5.34%), and root yield (RY) (10.48%) and decreased abscisic acid (ABA) (11.24%), malondialdehyde (MAD) (17.33%), and hydrogen peroxide (17.18%) compared to the control. Among biostimulants treatments, application of chitosan + proline under WD conditions increased the content of chlorophyll \u003cem\u003ea\u003c/em\u003e(37.44%), chlorophyll \u003cem\u003eb\u003c/em\u003e (16.23%), proline (4.87%), beta-glycine (18.09%), GA (7.00%), auxin (IAA) (35.40%), CK (18.03%), CAT (11.42%), APX (19.6%), and RY (11.46%) compared to control, and decreased the content of ABA (24.16%), MAD (9.03%), and hydrogen peroxide (11.50%). In this experiment, the combination of 2 g/L ZnO-NPs with chitosan and proline exhibited a synergistic effect, increasing the content of chlorophyll a and b, relative water content (RWC), SOD, and RY, while reducing ABA. The lowest IBRv2 values were recorded for control+proline, control+chitosan, 2 g/L ZnO-NPs+Control, 4 g/L ZnO-NPs+Control, and 4 g/L ZnO-NPs+Proline treatments. 4ZnO-NPs+chitosan+proline (I=0.803) and 4 g/L ZnO-NPs+proline (I=0.809) showed the smallest increases in MAD content. In terms of RY, the least decrease was observed in the treatments of 4 g/L ZnO-NPs + Chitosan and Proline (I = -0.492) and 4 g/L ZnO-NPs + Proline (I = -1.014).\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Investigating the effect of foliar spraying of zinc nanoparticles and biostimulants on modulating the effect of water deficit stress in sugar beet by using Integrated Biomarker Response Version 2","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-07-14 08:46:04","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7011409/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"decision","content":"Revision requested","date":"2025-07-31T11:32:34+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2025-07-27T06:28:01+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2025-07-22T09:48:02+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2025-07-19T11:42:41+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"296593864078723851270412780833740975891","date":"2025-07-16T06:32:03+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"255154936863843914106701053003534606259","date":"2025-07-10T06:54:35+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"43778278083538625454512035295335062652","date":"2025-07-10T06:22:37+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"10017595191503648591771129373293956518","date":"2025-07-10T06:04:38+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2025-07-10T00:52:47+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2025-07-10T00:48:48+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvited","content":"","date":"2025-07-09T13:17:13+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"checksComplete","content":"","date":"2025-07-04T12:44:34+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"Scientific Reports","date":"2025-07-04T12:38:43+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"scientific-reports","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"scirep","sideBox":"Learn more about [Scientific Reports](http://www.nature.com/srep/)","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"","title":"Scientific Reports","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"Scientific Reports","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"5cff46b1-619b-46cd-8167-a96276b661d8","owner":[],"postedDate":"July 14th, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"published-in-journal","subjectAreas":[{"id":51320760,"name":"Biological sciences/Biochemistry"},{"id":51320761,"name":"Biological sciences/Biotechnology"},{"id":51320762,"name":"Biological sciences/Plant sciences"}],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2025-11-03T16:06:15+00:00","versionOfRecord":{"articleIdentity":"rs-7011409","link":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-19912-9","journal":{"identity":"scientific-reports","isVorOnly":false,"title":"Scientific Reports"},"publishedOn":"2025-10-29 15:58:46","publishedOnDateReadable":"October 29th, 2025"},"versionCreatedAt":"2025-07-14 08:46:04","video":"","vorDoi":"10.1038/s41598-025-19912-9","vorDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-19912-9","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-7011409","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-7011409","identity":"rs-7011409","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}