, 214:42 | Cite as

Genetic potential to improve seed and forage yield simultaneously in smooth bromegrass under water deficit conditions

  • F. Saeidnia
  • M. M. Majidi
  • A. Mirlohi


This study was conducted to assess genetic potential of smooth bromegrass for water stress and to identify the association among different seed and forage production related traits. Thirty-six genotypes were clonally propagated and evaluated in the field under two moisture environments (normal irrigation and water stress) during 2013–2015. High variation was observed among genotypes for all of the measured traits. Water stress had negative effects on seed yield and its components and reduced genotypic variation of measured traits. On average, water stress reduced seed and forage yield by 38 and 14%, respectively. Genetic coefficient of variation for seed yield and its components was higher under stress, providing opportunities for a greater selection differential. The estimates of heritability were higher in normal condition than water stress condition for all of the evaluated traits, which is advantageous for successful selection. Moreover, the majority of seed yield components had higher heritability estimates than seed yield. The higher heritability estimates of some seed yield components, compared to SYP, suggests a potential for indirect selection. The results showed that selection for both forage and seed yield is possible simultaneously in normal irrigation as well as in water stress environment. Genotypes 7, 8, 26 and 27 had high forage yield, while genotypes 23 and 27 had high seed yield under both normal irrigation and water stress condition. Three genotypes ranked among the top three for both seed and forage yield and under both normal irrigation and water stress condition. They are promising parents for further use in developing improved cultivars by cross-breeding.


Clonal evaluation Drought Seed yield Smooth bromegrass 


  1. Allen RG, Pereira LS, Raes D, Smith M (1998) Crop evapotranspiration: guidelines for computing crop requirements. FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper 56, Rome, Italy, p 300Google Scholar
  2. Amini F, Majidi MM, Mirlohi A (2013) Genetic and genotype × environment interaction analysis for agronomical and some morphological traits in half-Sib families of tall fescue. Crop Sci 53:411–421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Annicchiarico P, Pecetti L, Bouzerzour H, Kallida R, Khedim A, Porqueddu C, Simões NM, Volaire F, Lelièvre F (2011) Adaptation of contrasting cocksfoot plant types to agricultural environments across the Mediterranean basin. Environ Exp Bot 74:82–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Araghi B, Barati M, Majidi MM, Mirlohi A (2014) Application of half-sib mating for genetic analysis of forage yield and related traits in Bromus inermis. Euphytica 196:25–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Araujo MRA, Coulman BE (2004) Genetic variation and correlation of agronomic traits in meadow bromegrass (Bromus inermis) clones. Cieˆnc. Rural 34:505–510CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bean EW (1972) Clonal evaluation for increased seed production in two species of forage grasses, Festuca arundinacea Schreb. and Phleum pratense L. Euphytica 21:377–383CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Blum A (2011) Plant breeding for water-limited environments. CRC, Boca Raton, FL, pp 163–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Boelt B, Studer B (2010) Breeding for grass seed yield. In: Boiler B, Veronesi F, Posselt U (eds) Fodder crops and amenity grasses. Handbook of plant breeding. Springer, New York, vol 5, pp 161–174Google Scholar
  9. Casler MD, Vogel KP, Balasko JA, Berdhal JD, Miller DA, Hansen JL, Frits JO (2000) Genetic progress from 50 years of smooth bromegrass breeding. Crop Sci 40:13–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chugh K (2013) Measuring phenotypic and genetic variances and narrow sense heritability in three populations of annual ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum Lam.). MSc thesis, University of Auburn, AlabamaGoogle Scholar
  11. Clarke Topp C, Parkin GW, Ferre TPA (2007) Soil water content. In: Gregorich EG, Gregorich EG (eds) Carter MRSoil sampling and methods of analysis. Canadian Society of Soil Science, PinawaGoogle Scholar
  12. Dudley JW, Moll RH (1969) Interpretation and use of heritability and genetic estimates in plant breeding. Crop Sci 9:257–262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ebrahimiyan M, Majidi MM, Mirlohi A (2012) Genotypic variation and selection of traits related to forage yield in tall fescue under irrigated and drought stress environments. Grass Forage Sci 68:59–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gustafson DI (2011) Climate change: a crop protection challenge for the twenty-first century. Pest Manag Sci 67:691–696CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Huff DR (2010) Bluegrasses. In: Boiler B, Veronesi F, Posselt U (eds) Fodder crops and amenity grasses. Handbook of plant breeding. Springer, New York, pp 345–379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Humphreys M, Feuerstein U, Vandewalle M, Baert J (2010) Ryegrasses. In: Boiler B, Veronesi F, Posselt U (eds) Fodder crops and amenity grasses. Handbook of plant breeding. Springer, New York, pp 211–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Irani S, Majidi MM, Mirlohi A (2015) Half-Sib matting and genetic analysis of agronomic, morphological, and physiological traits in Sainfoin under non-stressed versus water-deficit conditions. Crop Sci 55:123–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Jafari AA (2003) Evaluation of seed yield and seed components in 29 accessions of cocksfoot (Dactylis glomerata L.) through a multivariate analysis. In: Proceedings of the 5th herbage seed congress, Gatton, Australia, pp 94–99Google Scholar
  19. Johnson RA, Wichern DW (2007) Applied multivariate statistical analysis. Prentice Hall International, Upper Saddle River, NJGoogle Scholar
  20. Kearsey MJ, Pooni HS (1996) The genetical analysis of quantitative traits. Chapman and Hall, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kirigwi FM, Van Ginkel M, Trethowan R, Sears RG, Rajaram S, Paulsen GM (2004) Evaluation of selection strategies for wheat adaptation across water regimes. Euphytica 135:361–371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kole PC, Saha A (2013) Correlation coefficients of component characters with seed yield and their direct effects in path analysis in fenugreek grown under six environments. J Hortic Forest 5:17–20Google Scholar
  23. Majidi MM, Hoseini B, Abtahi M, Mirlohi A, Araghi B (2015) Genetic analysis of seed related traits in orchardgrass (Dactylis glomerata L.) under normal and drought stress conditions. Euphytica 203:409–420CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Majidi MM, Hoseini B, Barati M, Mirlohi A, Araghi B (2016) Simultaneous selection for seed and forage production in cocks-foot: application of drought tolerance and susceptibility indices. Grass Forage Sci. Google Scholar
  25. Marshall AH, Wilkins PW (2003) Improved seed yield in perennial ryegrass (Lolium Perenne L.) from two generations of phenotypic selection. Euphytica 133:233–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Martinez-Calvo J, Gisbert AD, Alamar MC, Hernandorena R, Romero C, Llacer G, Badenes ML (2008) Study of a germplasm collection of loquat (Eriobotrya japonica Lindl.) by multivariate analysis. Genet Resour Crop Evol 55:695–703CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Mishra SN, Drolsom PN (1973) Association among certain morphological traits of diallel cross progenies in Bromus inermis Leyss. J Agric Sci 81:69–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Nguyen HT, Sleper DA (1983) Theory and application of half-sib matings in forage breeding. Theor Appl Genet 64:187–196CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Pavetti DR, Sleper DA, Roberts CA, Krause GF (1994) Genetic variation and relationship of quality traits between herbage and seed of tall fescue. Crop Sci 34:427–431CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Pecetti L, Annicchiarico P, Abdelguerfi A, Kallida R, Mefti M, Porqueddu C, Simões NM, Volaire F, Lelièvre F (2011) Response of Mediterranean tall fescue cultivars to contrasting agricultural environments and implications for selection. J Agron Crop Sci 197:12–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Rumbaugh MO, Asay KH, Johnson OA (1984) Influence of drought stress on genetic variance of alfalfa and wheat grass seedling. Crop Sci 24:297–303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Saeidnia F, Majidi MM, Mirlohi A, Shahidaval S (2016) Selection for productivity, persistence and drought tolerance in orchardgrass. Euphytica 212:111–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Saeidnia F, Majidi MM, Mirlohi A (2017) Analysis of seed production and its association with forage production and agronomic traits in orchardgrass (Dactylis glomerata) under different moisture conditions. Crop Pasture Sci 68:657–669CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Salesman JB, Thomsen M (2011) Smooth brome (Bromus inermis) in tallgrass pairies: a review of control methods and future research directions. Restor Ecol 29:374–381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. SAS Institute (2008) User’s guide. Release 9.2. SAS Inst. Inc., Cary, NCGoogle Scholar
  36. Serin Y, Tan M, Koc A, Gokku SA (1999) Farkli mevsim ve dozlarda verilen azotun kilc¸iksiz brom (Bromus inermis Leyss.) ‘un tohum verimi ile buna iliskin karakterlere etkisi ve karakterler arasindaki iliskiler. Turk J Agric For 23:257–264Google Scholar
  37. Statgraphics (2007) Statgraphics. Version 15.2.11. Stat Point Inc., HerndonGoogle Scholar
  38. Steel RGD, Torrie JG (1980) Principles and procedures of statistics, 2rd edn. McGraw–Hill Book Co, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  39. Thomas HL, Kernkamp MF (1954) The use of heritability ratios and correlation coefficients for measuring combining ability with smooth bromegrass, Bromus inermis Leyss. Agron J 46:553–556CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Vogel KP (2000) Improving warm-season forage grasses using selection, breeding, and biotechnology. In: Moore KJ, Anderson BE (eds) Native warm-season grasses: research trends and issues. CSSA and ASA, Madison, WI, pp 83–106Google Scholar
  41. Vogel KP, Moore KJ, Moser LE (1996) Bromegrass. In: Moser LE, Boxton DR, Casler MD (eds) Cool season forage grasses. ASA Inc., Madison, pp 535–567Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Agronomy and Plant Breeding, College of AgricultureIsfahan University of TechnologyIsfahanIran

Personalised recommendations