Advertisement

Euphytica

, Volume 103, Issue 3, pp 293–299 | Cite as

Evaluation of four screening techniques for drought resistance and their relationship to yield reduction ratio in wheat

  • S. Golestani Araghi
  • M.T. Assad
Article

Abstract

Drought is one of the important factors limiting crop production in arid and semi-arid regions. Four drought resistance criteria, consisting of canopy temperature, stomatal resistance, transpiring area and rate of water loss by excised-leaves were examined in two experiments conducted in optimum and stress moisture conditions in 1995. A randomized complete block design with four replications and six genotypes was used for each experiment. Under optimum moisture conditions, there was a significant difference in canopy temperature at midday between drought resistant and drought sensitive genotypes. A significant linear relationship was also obtained between this criterion and yield reduction ratio as determined by Yr = 1-(Ys/Yp) (Ys and Yp = yield under stress and non-stress conditions, respectively), at the ear emergence stage. The only significant difference between cultivars in respect to stomatal resistance in stress conditions was that of adaxial leaf surface in ear emergence stage. No significant linear relationship was obtained between transpiring area and yield reduction ratio. Cultivars differed in respect to rate of water loss (RWL) and initial water content (IWC) in ear emergence and grain filling in stress environment only. Ultimately, three criteria namely canopy temperature, stomatal resistance and RWL, in explicated conditions were recognized as benificial drought resistance indicators.

canopy temperature drought resistance excised-leaf water status stomatal resistance transpiring area Triticum aestivum L. 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Adjei, G.B. & M.B. Kirkham, 1980. Evaluation of winter wheat cultivars for drought resistance. Euphytica 29: 155-160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Blum, A., G. Gozlan & J. Mayer, 1981. The manifestation of dehydration avoidance in wheat breeding germplasm. Crop Sci 21: 495-499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Blum, A., J. Mayer & G. Gozlan, 1982. Infrared thermal sensing of plant canopies as a screening technique for dehydration avoidance in wheat. Field Crop Res 5: 137-146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Clarke, J.M. & T.N. McCaig, 1982a. Excised-leaf water retention capability as an indicator of drought resistance of Triticum genotypes. Can J Plant Sci 62: 571-578.Google Scholar
  5. Clarke, J.M. & T.N. McCaig, 1982b. Evaluation of techniques for screening for drought resistance in wheat. Crop Sci 22: 503-506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Clarke, J.M. & I. Romagosa, 1989. Evaluation of excised-leaf water loss rate for selection of durum wheat for dry environment. In: E. Acevedo, A.P. Conesa, P. Monneveux & J.P. Srivastava (Eds), Physiology-breeding of winter cereals for stressed mediterranean environments, pp. 401-413. INRA 1991 Paris. 490 pp.Google Scholar
  7. Clarke, J.M., I. Romagosa, S. Jana, J.P. Srivastava & T.N. McCaig, 1989. Relationship of excised-leaf water loss rate and yield of durum wheat in diverse environment. Can J Plant Sci 69: 1057- 1081.Google Scholar
  8. Clarke, J.M. & T.F. Townley-Smith, 1986. Heritability and relationship to yield of excised-leaf water retention capacity in durum wheat. Crop Sci 26: 289-292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gummuluru, S., S.L.A. Hobbs & S. Jana, 1989. Genotypic variability in physiological characters and its relationship to drought tolerance in durum wheat. Can J Plant Sci 69: 703-711.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Jones, H.G., 1977. Aspects of the water relations of spring wheat (Triticum aestivumL.) in response to induced drought. J Agric Sci 88: 267-282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. McCaig, T.N. & I. Romagosa, 1989. Measurement and use of excised-leaf water status in wheat. Crop Sci 29: 1140-1145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Pinter Jr., P.J., G. Zipoli, R.J. Reginato, R.D. Jackson, S.B. Idso & J.P. Hopman, 1990. Canopy temperature as an indicator of differeuph4691. ential water use and yield performance among wheat cultivars. Agric Water Manag 18: 35-48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. SAS Institute, 1985. SAS user's guide. Statistics. Version 5th ed. SAS Inst., Cary, NC.Google Scholar
  14. Schonfeld, M.A., R.C. Johnson, B.F. Carver & D.W. Mornhinweg, 1988. Water relations in winter wheat as drought resistance indicators. Crop Sci 28: 526-531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Shimshi D. & J. Ephrat, 1975. Stomatal behavior of wheat cultivars in relation to their transpiration, photosynthesis and yield. Agron J 67: 326-331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Singh, P. & E.T. Kanemasu, 1983. Leaf and canopy temperature of pearl millet genotypes under irrigated and nonirrigated conditions. Agron J 75: 497-501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Venora, G. & F. Calcagno, 1991. Study of stomatal parameters for selection of drought resistance varieties in Triticum durumDESF. Euphytica 55: 275-283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Winter, S.R., J.T. Musik & K.B. Porter, 1988. Evaluation of screening technique for breeding drought-resistant winter wheat. Crop Sci 28: 512-516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • S. Golestani Araghi
    • 1
  • M.T. Assad
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Agronomy, College of AgricultureShiraz University ShirazIran

Personalised recommendations