Yield Potential Analysis of Desi Chickpea Genotypes in Water Stress Conditions

Transcription

1 , pp Yield Potential Analysis of Desi Chickpea Genotypes in Water Stress Conditions Alireza Taleei *a and Jalal Shaabani b a Professor in the Department of Agronomy & Plant breeding, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences and Engineering, College of Agriculture and Natural Resources, University of Tehran, Karaj, P.O. Box , Iran b MSc student in the Department of Agronomy & Plant breeding, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences and Engineering, College of Agriculture and Natural Resources, University of Tehran, Karaj, P.O. Box , Iran. ataleei@ut.ac.ir Abstract: The productivity of food legumes such as chickpea are limited by multiple stresses like drought, however, the severity of these stresses in the field conditions is changeable. This research was carried out to screening some of the drought tolerant Desi chickpea genotypes and characterization drought tolerance indices by twenty-eight lines with two cultivars namely Pyrooz and Kaka as check varieties. Two genotypes named 10 and 321and genotype 252 were identified as tolerant and genotypes 9, 252 and Pyrooz were susceptible genotypes in this study. Keywords: Drought stress; Desi chickpea; tolerance; susceptible; yield potential 1 Introduction Chickpea as the second most important grain legume crop in the world is cultivated mainly in arid and semi-arid regions. Improvement and selection of genotypes with higher yield potential and stability under drought stress condition is a great breeding challenge still and has shown low and slow advance and observed in a few crops such as common bean, rice, and maize (White and Castillo, 1992; Fukai and Cooper. 1995; Schneider et al. 1997; Banziger et al. 1999). Ludlow and Muchow (1990) believed that the lak of complete successful in these aims could be due to quantitative and temporary variability in soil moisture among evaluating of traits in the experiments between multiple years, and or low genotypic variance in yield of cultivars under drought condition. High complex genetic basis of drought tolerance can be one of these aims (Turner et al. 2001). Lake and Sadras (2016) reported that the associations between yield and crop growth rate were stronger under drought stress than normal conditions in chickpea. Rate of plant growth is dependent on two factors, enviromental and genotypic source of variation, and hence this character is used to modelling and has potential functions in plant breeding (Wiegand and Richardson, 1990). Krishnamurthy ISSN: ASTL Copyright 2016 SERSC

2 et al. (2010) found that heritability of chickpea shoot biomass and seed yield under drought stress were more than those values in normal irrigated condition. Plant breeders have used many developmental strategies to increase drought tolerance in crops through time. Selection through tolerance criteria is a one of them that have been introduced to segregating genotypes by different responses to drought stress in field. Hall (1993) reported drought resistance indicates as a relative yield of a genotype subjected to the same drought stress compared to other genotypes. Accordingly, selection of some Iranian Desi chickpea landraces with higher tolerance to drought stress and genotypes with higher yield potential at average of drought stress and non-stress conditions were objectives of this research. 2 Materials and Methods This research carried out in the research field of the Department of Agronomy and Plant breeding, University College of Agriculture and Natural Resources, University of Tehran-Karaj, Iran (with latitude 'N and longitude 'E and altitude of m above sea level) between February and August The average annual rainfall based on data of 48 years average is 268 mm and the amount of rainfall for the research period was 94.5 mm. 2.1 Plant Materials and Experimental Design Twenty-eight Desi chickpea lines were selected from departmental gene bank along with two cultivars namely Pyrooz and Kaka as control (Results not shown). A nested completely randomized block design with two replications used to implement the experiment. Each block considered as an environment and all the genotypes were randomly allocated in each block, in a way that the two environmenst contain drought stress and non-stress conditions. The seeds of each line were sown in rows with 1-meter length and between row s distance of 0.5 m and that of between plants was 10 cm. The experiment consists of four blocks, two for drought, and two for non-stress conditions. 2.2 Data Collection Days to 50% flowering (Fl), 50% podding (Po) and 50% maturity (Ma), as phenological traits recorded for every rows during developmental stage of plants. Considering the marginal effects, equal numbers of plants for each line were harvested. The rest of traits were measured after harvesting of plants including yield (Yi), total dry matter (TDM), 100-seed weight (SW) and harvest index (HI). These traits were measured by an electronic weighing scale. In addition, number of seeds (NS) also was recorded. Drought stress was applied in 50% of flowering time for all blocks and since then irrigation was terminated in stress condition, however, in non-stress condition continued it was due to common irrigation regime of the region. 10 Copyright 2016 SERSC

3 2.3 Analysis To eliminate the probable errors, the average of two replications used to analyse. Oneway analysis of variance applied for scored traits. Besides, the above-mentioned indices were calculated for stress and non-stress conditions, respectively. The genotype's mean yield of each environment was compared. In addition, multivariate analysis was carried out for the traits and tolerance indices. The obtained data were subjected to analysis of variance (ANOVA) with the Statistical Software Package (SAS, version 9.3, SAS Institute Inc. Cary, NC, USA). Factor analysis, principal component analysis, cluster analysis, and biplot analysis as multivariate techniques were performed using Statgraphics X64 (Statgraphics Centurion XV1.11, Stat Point Technologies, USA). 3 Results 3.1 Phenological Traits The F-value for flowering time although was not significant among genotypes, however its range was varied from 62.50±3.31 to 77.50±10.23 days for genotypes 267 and 276, respectively. Considering the results for podding time, drought stress was highly significant effect for this trait (P 0.01), as genotype 267 (70.00±1.73) and genotype 276 (81.00±6.50) have the smallest and greatest period of times to rise of pods. Highly significant effect of drought stress on times to maturity was observed (P 0.01) and minimum of days to maturity has seen for genotype 252 (85.00±31.21), and that of the maximum value was for genotype 8 by 110.0±12.32 days (Results not shown). 3.2 Total Dry Matter and Harvest Index The results of ANOVA in table 2 showed that both of the total dry matter and harvest index were affected by drought stress, which were highly significant. Among the evaluated genotypes, genotype 5 with 23.04±9.48gr plant -1 and genotype 407 with 6.26±5.32gr plant -1 have highest and lowest total dry matter, respectively. Genotype 333 has the high harvest index of (0.65±0.24), while that of genotype 5 (0.32±0.04) was the lowest one (Results not shown). 3.3 Yield and its Components The tested genotypes have not affected by drought stress for 100-seed weight; however, the character showed highly significant difference between genotypes within environments (P 0.01). Considering table2, grain yield and seed number showed highly significant differences in stress and non-stress conditions. Results of means comparison revealed that 3.68±2.49 and 10.48±4.85 were lowest and highest grain yield of genotypes 407 and 321, respectively. The genotype 407 with 22.39±12.37 seeds plant -1 has minimum and the genotypes 321 with 69.01±31.54 seeds has maximum of Copyright 2016 SERSC 11

4 seed number per plant. The genotypes 407 and 321 (10.07±0.14) and the genotype 347 (40.66±21.74) showed most and least 100-seed weight per plant (Results not shown). 4 Partial Correlations 4.1 Non-stress Condition The correlation between flowering and podding time, among phenological traits of Desi chickpea, and that of podding and maturity of the crop were highly significant. Total dry matter and harvest index did not show any relationship with the traits related to phenology and maturity; however, those correlations with grain yield were significant and highly significant, respectively. Seed number and 100-seed weight, have highly negative correlation, nevertheless, there were a positive and highly significant correlations between grain yield and both of them. Harvest index and time of podding, in contrary to maturity of the plant, showed a positive significant correlation with yield (Results not shown). 4.2 Stress Condition Only two character have a correlation and of cource severely positive with yield. On the other hand, these traits showed negative relationships between total dry matter and harvest index, but they had a significant correlation with together. The correlation between number of seed and 100-seed weight was significant and negative, too (Results not shown). 4.3 Stress and Non-stress Condition s Mean The phenological measured traits, showed in table 6, did not have any relationships to that of yield and its components. Total dry matter and harvest index have highly, as 100-seed weight, which has a significant positive correlation with grain yield. High negative correlations, in addition, were found between total dry matter with harvest index and between 100-seed weight and seed number, too. 5 Cluster Analysis 5.1 Characters The results of cluster analysis using Ward's method for genotypes (Figure not shown). Considering to these results, four groups were obtained. The first group included genotypes 276, 231, 76, 151, 46, 252, 232, 51, 150, 122, and Pyrooz. The genotypes 21, 247, 407, 333, 267, 316, and Kaka were placed in the second group. The third group 12 Copyright 2016 SERSC

5 included genotypes 47, 49, 48, 90, 50, 321, and 322, as well the genotypes 5, 347, 10, 9, and 8 included in groupe Factor Analysis Factor analysis carried out using principal components method. In this analysis three factors were obtained which justified 76.14% of total variance. Total dry matter and grain yield have high values for the first factor, which justified 30.38% of total varince. Number of seeds explained second factor with 24.43% of variance proportion. The third factor which explained 21.32% of total variation had high value for the flowering time (Results not shown). 6 Discussion The existence of a large variation has established by this work for drought response in the evaluating set of Desi chickpea genotypes in the field. This collection was included Iranian landraces that adapted to the region during years. The phenological traits, it was seen that have not a main-direct influence on related characters to yield. Because of applying stress was in the 50% of flowering, this can one reason of the phenomen. However, drought stress impressed these traits and a significant drought-induced difference has shown between stress and non-stress conditions. Nevertheless, maturity time showed a same direction with total dry matter (Figure not shown); based on this result, due to existance of a possitive correlation between yield and total dry matter, could be said, probably, enhancement in maturity time caused more growth and followed by increase in available period for material remobilization can be resulted to more production in the plant. In other words, more staying immature phases consequently, more photosynthetically activities and production. There has said that the delay in maturity can provide a vital period to hold CO 2 assimilation for photosynthesis (Farooq et al. 2016). Saxena et al. (1993) did not found an association between shorter growth duration with chickpea grain yield under drought stress. Farooq et al. (2016) said that the main reasons terminal drought-mediated loss of grain yield are rate of net photosynthesis reduction, decrease in grain and damage to seed development. In grain legumes as chickpea, stay green longer can be a sufficient potential for increased duration pod filling-mediated more yield (Rong-hua et al. 2006). A collection include 211 chickpea accessions were stablished in three years, shoot biomas and grain yield showed a highly heritability than other such as phenological traits. It said as well as top yielding accessions had a flowering time up to days following sowing seeds, among the set in two years, but this time was 40 DAS for third (Krishnamurthy et al. 2010). Our observations, with respected to the results, suggested any association, whether drought or irrigated condition, has not between flowering time and yield (Results not shown). Podding time has, in the present work, also similar positive association with yield, though at non-stress condition (Results not shown). A droughtinduced decline percent of seed yield was estimated 49-54, 27-40, for late Copyright 2016 SERSC 13

6 ripening, anthesis, and reproductive stage in chickpea, respectively (Samarah et al. 2009; Mafakheri et al. 2010; Nayyar et al. 2006). It seems that, with regard to diverse results of studies, plant phenology behaviour-influenced outcomes of dissection trials could been penetrated by many factors as genetic, environment, season, temperature, moment beginning, severity and duration of water deficit, soil profile and many of others. Capman et al. (2000a) pronounced stress-mediated temporal and spatial unpredictability could make a gap between environments where these factors already limit growth and yield of chickpea and multi-field experiments. The mismatch may be suffice for converse genetic improvement, as in the many of studies in effect with drought stress, the early flowering genotypes are favorite, whereas have a few yield in most desirable environments (Chapman et al. 2000b). The results of modeling to known the pattern of water deficit and temperature determined environment as a dominant source of variation for Australian chickpea yield and/or production (Lake et al. 2016). Krishnamurthy et al. (2010) confirmed that the highly drought sensitive accessions (ICC 3776, ICC 8058 and ICC 7184) have a greater canopy than rest. Total dry matter, in the present work has a great correlation with seed yield. This trait is known as a follower of growth and development events, such as water absorption of root, canopy, or shoot mass, efficiency of radiations, etc, (Results not shown), r (coefficient of correlation) was equal to 0.404, 0.977, and for irrigated, drought, and mean values of those conditions, respectively. 100-seed weight was a unique character that did affected not by drought (Results not shown). Varshney et al. (2014) reported that chickpea's 100-seed weight has least in effect with water scarcity for several years and locations; also its heritability was high that's why supposed selection based on this trait could be positive advancement in more and stable yield breeding programs under terminal drought stress. Cluster analysis on trait-obtained data placed the genotypes 321 and 322 in a same group; these genotypes (Figuers not shown). Although phenological characters did not show any difference between the three more tolerant genotypes, diversity of those in yield and number of seed was considerable (Results not shown). The grain yield has greatest correlation with seed number and total dry mater for stress and non-stress condition, respectively. Factor analysis also proposed the total dry matter, yield, number of seed, and flowering time as mian traits in the case of conditions, in order of importance (Results not shown). According to the above discussion, genotype 321 was known as most tolerant followed by 10 and 321, respectively. The results showed that the intended genotypes had short time to flowering and podding stages, as apllying of stress was at 50% flowering time of overall genotypes. References 1. Bänziger, M., Edmeades, G.O. and Lafitte, H.R., Selection for drought tolerance increases maize yields across a range of nitrogen levels. Crop science, 39(4), pp Chapman, S.C., Cooper, M., Hammer, G.L. and Butler, D.G., 2000a. Genotype by environment interactions affecting grain sorghum. II. Frequencies of different seasonal patterns of drought stress are related to location effects on hybrid yields. Crop and Pasture Science, 51(2), pp Copyright 2016 SERSC

7 3. Chapman, S.C., Hammer, G.L., Butler, D.G. and Cooper, M., 2000b. Genotype by environment interactions affecting grain sorghum. III. Temporal sequences and spatial patterns in the target population of environments. Crop and Pasture Science, 51(2), pp XiangWen, F., Turner, N.C., GuiJun, Y., FengMin, L. and Siddique, K.H.M., Flower numbers, pod production, pollen viability, and pistil function are reduced and flower and pod abortion increased in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) under terminal drought. Journal of Experimental Botany, 61(2), pp Farooq, M., Gogoi, N., Barthakur, S., Baroowa, B., Bharadwaj, N., Alghamdi, S.S. and Siddique, K.H.M., Drought Stress in Grain Legumes during Reproduction and Grain Filling. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science. 6. Farooq, M., Wahid, A., Kobayashi, N., Fujita, D. and Basra, S.M.A., Plant drought stress: effects, mechanisms and management. In Sustainable Agriculture (pp ). Springer Netherlands. 7. Fernandez, G.C., 1992, August. Effective selection criteria for assessing plant stress tolerance. In Proceedings of the international symposium on adaptation of vegetables and other food crops in temperature and water stress (pp ). 8. Fischer, R.A., Rees, D., Sayre, K.D., Lu, Z.M., Condon, A.G. and Saavedra, A.L., Wheat yield progress associated with higher stomatal conductance and photosynthetic rate, and cooler canopies. Crop Science, 38(6), pp Fukai, S. and Cooper, M., Development of drought-resistant cultivars using physiomorphological traits in rice. Field Crops Research, 40(2), pp Hall, A.E., Is dehydration tolerance relevant to genotypic difference in leaf senescence and crop adaption to dry environments?. Current Topics in Plant Physiology (USA). 11. Jusheng, L., Comparison of Evaluating Methods for Agronomic Drought Resistance in Crops [J]. Acta Agriculturae Boreali-Occidentalis Sinica, Krishnamurthy, L., Kashiwagi, J., Gaur, P.M., Upadhyaya, H.D. and Vadez, V., Sources of tolerance to terminal drought in the chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) minicore germplasm. Field Crops Research, 119(2), pp Lake, L., Chenu, K. and Sadras, V.O., Patterns of water stress and temperature for Australian chickpea production. Crop and Pasture Science, 67(2), pp Lake, L. and Sadras, V.O., Screening chickpea for adaptation to water stress: Associations between yield and crop growth rate. European Journal of Agronomy, 81, pp Li, R.H., Guo, P.G., Michael, B., Stefania, G. and Salvatore, C., Evaluation of chlorophyll content and fluorescence parameters as indicators of drought tolerance in barley. Agricultural Sciences in China, 5(10), pp Ludlow, M.M. and Muchow, R.C., A critical evaluation of traits for improving crop yields in water-limited environments. Advances in Agronomy, 43, pp Mafakheri, A., Siosemardeh, A., Bahramnejad, B., Struik, P.C. and Sohrabi, Y., Effect of drought stress on yield, proline and chlorophyll contents in three chickpea cultivars. Australian Journal of Crop Science, 4(8), p Nayyar, H., Kaur, S., Singh, S. and Upadhyaya, H.D., Differential sensitivity of Desi (small seeded) and Kabuli (large seeded) chickpea genotypes to water stress during seed filling: effects on accumulation of seed reserves and yield. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 86(13), pp Ramirez-Vallejo, P. and Kelly, J.D., Traits related to drought resistance in common bean. Euphytica, 99(2), pp Rosielle, A.A. and Hamblin, J., Theoretical aspects of selection for yield in stress and non-stress environment. Crop Science, 21(6), pp Copyright 2016 SERSC 15

8 21. Sabaghpour, S.H., Mahmodi, A.A., Saeed, A., Kamel, M. and Malhotra, R.S., Study on chickpea drought tolerance lines under dryland condition of Iran. Indian J. Crop Sci, 1(1-2), pp Sadras, V. and Dreccer, M.F., Adaptation of wheat, barley, canola, field pea and chickpea to the thermal environments of Australia. Crop and Pasture Science, 66(11), pp Sadras, V.O., Lake, L., Li, Y., Farquharson, E.A. and Sutton, T., Phenotypic plasticity and its genetic regulation for yield, nitrogen fixation and δ13c in chickpea crops under varying water regimes. Journal of Experimental Botany, 67(14), pp Samarah, N.H., Haddad, N. and Alqudah, A.M., Yield potential evaluation in chickpea genotypes under late terminal drought in relation to the length of reproductive stage. Italian Journal of Agronomy, 4(3), pp Saxena, N.P., Krishnamurthy, L., Johansen, C., Registration of a drought-resistant chickpea germplasm. Crop Sci. 33, Schneider, K.A., Rosales-Serna, R., Ibarra-Perez, F., Cazares-Enriquez, B., Acosta- Gallegos, J.A., Ramirez-Vallejo, P., Wassimi, N. and Kelly, J.D., Improving common bean performance under drought stress. Crop Science, 37(1), pp Singh, V.K., Khan, A.W., Jaganathan, D., Thudi, M., Roorkiwal, M., Takagi, H., Garg, V., Kumar, V., Chitikineni, A., Gaur, P.M. and Sutton, T., QTL seq for rapid identification of candidate genes for 100 seed weight and root/total plant dry weight ratio under rainfed conditions in chickpea. Plant Biotechnology Journal. 28. Turner, N.C., Wright, G.C. and Siddique, K.H.M., Adaptation of grain legumes (pulses) to water-limited environments. Advances in Agronomy, 71, pp Varshney, R.K., Thudi, M., Nayak, S.N., Gaur, P.M., Kashiwagi, J., Krishnamurthy, L., Jaganathan, D., Koppolu, J., Bohra, A., Tripathi, S. and Rathore, A., Genetic dissection of drought tolerance in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). Theoretical and Applied Genetics, 127(2), pp White, J.W. and Castillo, J.A., Evaluation of diverse shoot genotypes on selected root genotypes of common bean under soil water deficits. Crop Science, 32(3), pp Wiegand, C.L. and Richardson, A.J., Use of spectral vegetation indices to infer leaf area, evapotranspiration and yield: I. Rationale. Agronomy Journal, 82(3), pp Copyright 2016 SERSC