## 3 Results and Discussion
### Salicylic Acid Seed Priming Effect on Stress Indicator  
As anticipated by [PERSON] et al. [3], plants commonly react to oxidative stress via inducing the accumulation of secondary metabolites in order to mitigate different environmental \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l l l l l} \hline \hline
**Varieties/Variables** & **C** & **C+SA** & **D** & **D+SA** \\ \hline Kalbia & & & & \\ Shoot DW & 165.2 \(\pm\) 3 C & 255.8 \(\pm\) 3 A & 94.6 \(\pm\) 4 D & 237.4 \(\pm\) 3.0 B \\ Root DW & 89.5 \(\pm\) 3 D & 149.5 \(\pm\) 3.5 B & 140.4 \(\pm\) 2 C & 159.7 \(\pm\) 3.0 A \\ Plant DW & 254.7 \(\pm\) 5 B & 405.3 \(\pm\) 6 A & 235 \(\pm\) 4 C & 397.1 \(\pm\) 3 A \\ Root/Shoot DW & 0.58 \(\pm\) 0.04 D & 0.84 \(\pm\) 0.0 A & 0.64 \(\pm\) 0.0 C & 0.70 \(\pm\) 0.00 B \\ Fe\({}^{2+}\) Shoot & 1469 \(\pm\) 44 B & 1939 \(\pm\) 26 A & 816 \(\pm\) 13 C & 1484 \(\pm\) 27 B \\ Fe\({}^{2+}\) Root & 1834 \(\pm\) 36 B & 1920 \(\pm\) 6 A & 1125 \(\pm\) 18 D & 1390 \(\pm\) 52 C \\ CHL a & 0.46 \(\pm\) 0.13 B & 0.77 \(\pm\) 0.1 A & 0.38 \(\pm\) 0.0 C & 0.36 \(\pm\) 0.00 C \\ CHL b & 0.26 \(\pm\) 0.09 B & 0.31 \(\pm\) 0.03 A & 0.11 \(\pm\) 0.02 D & 0.16 \(\pm\) 0.03 C \\ CHL (a + b) & 0.72 \(\pm\) 0.20 A & 1.08 \(\pm\) 0.04 B & 0.49 \(\pm\) 0.02 C & 0.52 \(\pm\) 0.03 C \\ Sidi Khif & & & & \\ Shoot DW & 164.5 \(\pm\) 3.0 C & 392 \(\pm\) 11 A & 96.5 \(\pm\) 3.0 D & 244 \(\pm\) 2.0 B \\ Root DW & 96.25 \(\pm\) 3.2 C & 163.3 \(\pm\) 3 B & 166.6 \(\pm\) 7.0 B & 176.6 \(\pm\) 7.0 A \\ Whole plant DW & 260.75 \(\pm\) 2.5 D & 475 \(\pm\) 14 A & 273.1 \(\pm\) 9 C & 411.6 \(\pm\) 4.0 B \\ Root / Shoot & 0.58 \(\pm\) 0.1 C & 1.83 \(\pm\) 0.12 A & 0.52 \(\pm\) 0.0 C & 0.68 \(\pm\) 0.0 B \\ Fe\({}^{2+}\) Shoot & 2017 \(\pm\) 77 C & 2910 \(\pm\) 53 A & 871 \(\pm\) 19 D & 2247 \(\pm\) 55 B \\ Fe\({}^{2+}\) Root & 1687 \(\pm\) 27 B & 2269 \(\pm\) 79 A & 1120 \(\pm\) 8 D & 1635 \(\pm\) 27 C \\ CHL a & 0.47 \(\pm\) 0.02 B & 0.79 \(\pm\) 0 A & 0.22 \(\pm\) 0.0 D & 0.34 \(\pm\) 0.0 C \\ CHL b & 0.23 \(\pm\) 0.02 A & 0.25 \(\pm\) 0.01 A & 0.07 \(\pm\) 0.0 C & 0.15 \(\pm\) 0.01 B \\ CHL (a + b) & 0.70 \(\pm\) 0.11 B & 1.04 \(\pm\) 0.01 A & 0.30 \(\pm\) 0.02 D & 0.49 \(\pm\) 0.02 C \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} Plant DW, Root DW Shoot DW expressed as g/plant; chlorophylls contents expressed as mg/g FW; bivalent Fe (Fe\({}^{2+}\)) content expressed as ug/g DW; CHL a: Chlorophyll a; CHL b: Chlorophyll b. C treatment (control: 50 mM Fe); D treatment (Deficient: 1 uM Fe); SA (Salicylic acid: 0.25 mM). Data are means of 6 replicates \(\pm\) SE. Values in the same line with different superscripts are significantly different at \(p<0.05\).  
\end{table} 
Table 2: Physiological parameters of _Sulla carnosa_ tissues (shoots and roots) in Kalbia and Sidi Khif primed with SA and grown under different Fe concentrations for 8 days. constraints. Indeed, phenolic compounds play an imperative function in the adaptive behavior to Fe deficiency due to their antioxidant and chelating properties [5]. Additionally, flavonoids have the ability to alter the membrane peroxidation via the alteration of the lipid filler arrangement and the reduction of its fluidity, which could delay the dispersion of free radicals and thus reducing damages of peroxididative reactions [28]. In order to correlate the Fe scarcity tolerance with defending mechanisms against oxidative stress, the levels of malondialdehyde (MDA) i.e., a marker of lipid peroxidation damage, were estimated in roots and shoots (Table 3). The results revealed that Fe deficiency increased MDA contents in tissues of both _S. carnosa_ varieties, suggesting the occurrence of oxidative stress. In accordance with bivalent Fe content, changes in MDA levels were less evident in SK than in KA (126% and 119% of the respective control C), respectively, in leaves and roots. With this regard, [PERSON] [28] explained that membrane damage might be caused by high H\({}_{2}\)O\({}_{2}\) levels, resulting in hydroxyl radical (OH\({}^{-}\)) formation and consequently in lipid peroxidation.