Plant Growth Regulation

, Volume 20, Issue 2, pp 149–155 | Cite as

Drought as a challenge for the plant breeder

  • S. Ceccarelli
  • S. Grando


Since agriculture began, drought has been on of the major plagues affecting crop production causing famine and death. Despite many decades of research, drought continues to be a major challenge to agricultural scientists. This is due to the unpredictability of its occurrence, severity, timing and duration; and to the interaction of drought with other abiotic stresses, particularly extremes of temperature and variations in nutrients availability; and with biotic stresses. Breeding has not been as effective in improving crop production under drought-stress conditions as it has in their absence — or where the stress can be alleviated by irrigation. This paper argues that the relative lack of success of breeding for stress conditions in general, and for drought-stress conditions in particular, can be partly attributed to use of the same breeding approach that is successful for favourable environments. A different breeding approach for drought-stress conditions is discussed in relation to the environment in which selection should be conducted, the germplasm to be used, and the experimental designs and plot techniques to be employed.


Stress Condition Plant Physiology Abiotic Stress Nutrient Availability Crop Production 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Allard RW and Hansche PE (1964) Some parameters of population variability and their implications in plant breeding. Adv Agron 16: 281–325Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Baker RJ (1988) Tests for crossover genotype-environmental interactions Can J Plant Sci 68: 405–410Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Blum A (1988) Plant Breeding for Stress Environments. Boca Raton, Florida, USA: CRC PressGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ceccarelli S (1994) Specific adaptation and breeding for marginal conditions. Euphytica 77: 205–219Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ceccarelli S, Acevedo E and Grando S (1991) Breeding for yield stability in unpredicatable environments: Single traits, interaction between traits, and architecture of genotypes. Euphytica 56: 169–185Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ceccarelli S, Grando S and vanLeur JAG (1995) Barley landraces of the fertile crescent offer new breeding options for stress environments. Diverity 11: 112–113Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Engledow FL (1925) The economic possibilities of plant breeding. In: FT Brooks (ed) Report of the Proceedings of the Imperial Botanical Conference, pp 31–40Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Falconer DS (1952) The problem of environment and selection. Am Nat 86: 293–298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hayes HK (1923) Controlling experimental error in nursery trials. J A Soc Agron 15: 177–192Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hill J (1975) Genotype-environment interactons — a challenge for plant breeding. J Agric Sci Camb 85: 477–493Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hinz PN (1987) Nearest-neighbor analysis in practice. Iowa State J Res 62: 199–217Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Passioura JB (1986) Resistance to drought and salinity: avenues for improvement. Aust J Plant Physiol 13: 191–201Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Patterson HD and Williams ER (1976) A new class of resolvable incomplete block designs. Biometrika 63: 83–92Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Patterson and Robinson (1989) Row-and-column design with two replicates. J Agric Sci Camb 112: 73–77Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • S. Ceccarelli
    • 1
  • S. Grando
    • 1
  1. 1.International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry AreasAleppoSyria

Personalised recommendations