American Journal of Potato Research

, Volume 76, Issue 3, pp 143–151 | Cite as

Evaluation of tuber-bearingSolanum species for nitrogen use efficiency and biomass partitioning

  • Mohamed Errebhi
  • Carl J. Rosen
  • Florian I. Lauer
  • Max W. Martin
  • John B. Bamberg
Article

Abstract

Modern potato cultivars (Solanum tuberosum L.) require high rates of fertilizer nitrogen (N). This practice is costly and can pose a serious threat to surface and groundwater. Previous evaluation of wild potato germplasm demonstrated the existence of species capable of producing high total biomass under low N conditions, with the ability to make maximum use of added N. Therefore, a two-year field experiment was conducted in 1994 and 1995 to investigate the response of selected wild potato accessions and their hybrids with the haploid USW551 (USW) to low and high N environments. The haploid USW and cultivars Russet Burbank, Red Norland, and Russet Norkotah were also included in the study. Uniform propagules and seedlings from the variousSolanum species were transplanted to a Hubbard loamy sand (Udic Haploboroll) at Becker, Minn. and were subjected to two N treatments: 0 and 225 kg N ha-1. At harvest, total dry biomass of wild and hybrid potato germplasm was equal to or higher than that of the cultivars. However, cultivar biomass partitioning was 1% to roots, 15% to shoots, 0% to fruits, and 84% to tubers, whereas wild potato species partitioned 18% to roots plus nontuberized stolons, 52% to shoots, 23% to fruits, and only 7% to tubers. Hybrids were intermediate, allocating 9% of their biomass to roots plus nontuberized stolons, 39% to shoots, 14% to fruits, and 38% to tubers. Nitrogen use efficiencies for many of the species and crosses were comparable to that for Russet Burbank and greater than those for Red Norland and Russet Norkotah. Of the wild species tested,S. chacoense accessions had the highest biomass accumulation and N uptake efficiencies and may be the best source of germplasm for improving NUE in a potato breeding program.

Additional Key Words

Potato wild germplasm hybrids cultivars 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literature Cited

  1. Association of Official Analytical Chemists. 1970. Official Methods of Analysis of the Association of Official Analytical Chemists. 11th ed Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Washington D.C.Google Scholar
  2. Bock, B.R. 1984. Efficient use of nitrogen in cropping systems. p. 273–294.In: R.D. Hauck (ed.) Nitrogen in crop production. ASA, CSSA, and SSSA, Madison, WI.Google Scholar
  3. Carlson, R.M., R.I. Cabrera, J.L. Paul, J. Quick, and R.Y. Evans. 1990. Rapid direct determination of ammonium and nitrate in soil and plant tissue extracts. J Plant Nutr 21:1519–1529.Google Scholar
  4. Chevalier, P. and L.E. Schrader. 1977. Genotypic differences in nitrate absorption and partitioning of N among plant parts in maize. Crop Sci 17:897–901.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cox, M.C., C.O. Qualst, and D.W. Rains. 1985. Genetic variation for nitrogen assimilation and translocation in wheat. I. Dry matter and nitrogen accumulation. Crop Sci 15:430–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Errebhi M., C.J. Rosen, S.C. Gupta, and D.E. Birong. 1998a. Potato yield and nitrate leaching as influenced by nitrogen management. Agron J 90:10–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Errebhi M., C.J. Rosen, F.I. Lauer, M.W. Martin, J.B. Bamberg, and D.E. Birong. 1998b. Screening of exotic potato germplasm for nitrogen uptake and biomass production. Amer J Potato Res 75:93–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gardner, J.C., J.W. Maranville, and E.T. Paparozzi. 1994. Nitrogen use efficiency among diverse sorghum cultivars. Crop Sci 34:728–733.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Haag, W.L., M.W. Adams, and J.V. Wiersma. 1978. Differential response of dry bean genotypes to N and P fertilization of a Central American soil. Agron J 70:565–568.Google Scholar
  10. Hawkes, J.G. 1977. The importance of wild germplasm in plant breeding. Euphytica 26:615–621.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hawkes, J.G. 1990. The potato: evolution, biodiversity, and genetic resources. 3rd ed. Belhaven Press. London, U.K. 259 p.Google Scholar
  12. Hutchison, W. 1991. Commercial vegetable pest management: production guide. University of Minnesota, Minnesota Extension Service. Bulletin 1880-S. pp. 67–74.Google Scholar
  13. Kleinkopf, G.E., D.T. Westermann, and R.B. Dwelle. 1981. Dry matter production and nitrogen utilization by six potato cultivars. Agron J 73:799–802.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. May, L., D.A. Van Sanford, C.T. MacKown, and P.L. Cornelius. 1991. Genetic variation for nitrogen use in soft red X hard red winter wheat populations. Crop Sci 31:626–630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Millard, P., D. Robinson, and L.A. Mackie-Dawson. 1989. Nitrogen partitioning within the potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) plant in relation to nitrogen supply. Ann Bot 63:289–296.Google Scholar
  16. Moll, R.H., E.J. Camprath, and W.A. Jackson. 1982. Analysis and interpretation of factors which contribute to efficiency of nitrogen utilization. Agron J 74: 562–564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Oparka, K.J., H.V. Davies, and D.A.M. Prior. 1987. The influence of applied nitrogen on export and partitioning of current assimilate by field grown potato plants. Ann Bot 59:311–323.Google Scholar
  18. Peloquin, S.J. and R.W. Hougas. 1959. Decapitation and genetic markers as related to haploidy inSolanum tuberosum. Eur Potato J 2:176–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Rooney, J.M. and R.A. Leigh. 1993. Dry matter and nitrogen partitioning to the grain of winter wheat cultivars grown on Broadbalk since 1843. Aspects of Appl Biol 34:219–227.Google Scholar
  20. Siddiqi, M.Y. and D.M. Glass. 1981. Utilization index: a modified approach to the estimation and comparison of nutrient utilization efficiency in plants. J Plant Nutr 4:289–302.Google Scholar
  21. Rowe, P.R. 1969. Nature, distribution, and use of diversity in the tuberbearingSolanum species. Econ Bot 23:330–338.Google Scholar
  22. Simmonds, N.W. 1962. Variability in crop plants, its use and conservation. Biol Rev 27:442–465.Google Scholar
  23. Spooner, D.M, and J.B. Bamberg. 1994. Potato genetic resources: sources of resistance and systematics. Am Potato J 71:325–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Vitosh, M.L. and L.W. Jacobs. 1990. Nutrient management to protect water quality. Michigan State Univ. Ext. Bull.: Water quality series. (25). 6pp.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mohamed Errebhi
    • 1
  • Carl J. Rosen
    • 1
  • Florian I. Lauer
    • 2
  • Max W. Martin
    • 3
  • John B. Bamberg
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Soil, Water, and ClimateUniversity of MinnesotaSt. Paul
  2. 2.Department of Horticultural ScienceUniversity of MinnesotaSt. Paul
  3. 3.USDA/ARS, Vegetable Crops Research UnitPotato Introduction StationSturgeon Bay

Personalised recommendations