Development of Resistance in Two Wheat Cultivars Against Constant Fumigation of Ozone
- 89 Downloads
Tropospheric ozone (O3) has been recognized as the major threat for worldwide agriculture and wheat production will have a crucial bearing on food security in the coming decades. The present study was conducted to evaluate the response of two wheat cultivars (HUW 234 and HP 1209) at constant levels of elevated O3 and to compare results of the present open top chamber studies (OTC) with free air concentration studies (FACE). Wheat cultivars were exposed to 70 (T1) and 100 (T2) ppb O3 for 4 h daily from germination to maturity. Both the cultivars showed differential and negative responses on photosynthetic pigments, morphological characteristics and total biomass at different stages of sampling. Photosynthetic rate, stomatal conductance and photosynthetic efficiency were negatively affected by the exposure of O3 in both the cultivars. Allocation of biomass in different components of plants was observed to be diverse amongst the cultivars under different treatments resulted into the varied responses yield attributes. Exposure of O3 causes variation in quantity as well as quality of grains of both the cultivars with higher yield reduction in HP1209. Therefore, the findings of the experiments revealed that the continuous O3 exposure developed compensatory mechanism particularly reduced stomatal conductance, altered allocation pattern managed to maintain yield against O3, hence led to less reductions in yield was recorded as compared to OTCs and FACE experiments data.
KeywordsOzone Triticum aestivum L. Growth Photosynthetic pigments Biomass Open top chambers Yield and quality
The authors are thankful to the Head of the Department of Botany for all the laboratory and field facilities and to the Department of Science and Technology, New Delhi and University Grant Commission, New Delhi for providing fellowships to RR and BP, respectively.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
There is no conflict of interest between authors of the present paper.
- 1.Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (2014) Fifth assessment report. http://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/index.shtml
- 2.Emberson LD, Buker P, Ashmore MR, Mills G, Jackson LS, Agrawal M, Atikuzzaman MD, Cinderby S, Engardt M, Jamir C, Kobayashi K, Oanh NTK, Quadir QF, Wahid AA (2009) Comparison of North-America and Asian exposure-response data for ozone effects on crop yields. Atmos Environ 43:1945–1953CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 4.Meehl GA, Stocker TF, Collins WD, Friedlingstein P, Gaye AT, Gregory JM, Kitoh A, Knutti R, Murphy JM, Noda A, Raper SCB, Watterson IG, Weaver AJ, Zhao ZC (2007) Global climate projections. In: Solomon S, Qin D, Manning M, Chen Z, Marquis M, Averyt KB, Tignor M, Miller HL (eds) Climate change the physical science basis. Contribution of working group I to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USAGoogle Scholar
- 25.Duxbury AC, Yentsch CS (1956) Plankton pigment monographs. J Mar Res 15:19–101Google Scholar
- 26.Hunt R (1982) Plant growth analysis. University Press, Baltimore, USAGoogle Scholar