Cereal Research Communications

, Volume 45, Issue 2, pp 307–314 | Cite as

Straw Production, Carbon and Ash Content Variations after Ten Cycles of Recurrent Selection in Bread Wheat Grown under Tilled and Non-tilled Soils

  • R. H. MaichEmail author
  • S. Hang
  • J. A. Di Rienzo


The objective of this work was to determine the change for straw production, carbon and ash content in vegetative tissues through ten cycles of recurrent selection in bread wheat, evaluated under tilled (CT) and non-tilled (NT) soils. Twenty-four wheat genotypes, four for each one of the 0, 2, 4, 6, 8 and 10 cycles of recurrent selection (RS), were used in this study. Experiments were established during two successive seasons. Ash content was expressed on dry mass basis. To estimate the carbon content, we based our calculation on the assumption that organic matter is 50% carbon. Straw dry weight was measured. For each trait, a linear mixed model (regression) was fitted to the experimental data. In response to the number of selection cycles, the ash content percentage increased under CT and decreased under NT. Carbon content decreases under CT, but increases under NT. The sequestered straw carbon and the straw production significantly decrease under CT meanwhile there was no change under NT. The observed increase for straw ash content would be related to the highest rate of transpiration in the more advanced recurrent selection cycles. Consistent with these results, the percentage of straw carbon content decreased because of the mobilization of reserves from the stems and leaves to the grains.


mineral straw content carbon straw content soil management wheat breading 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. American Association of Cereal Chemists 1995. Approved Methods of the AACC, 9th Edition. AACC Method 08-01. AACC, St Paul, MN, USA.Google Scholar
  2. Araus, J.L., Amaro, T., Casadesús, J., Asbati, A., Nachit, M.M. 1998. Relationships between ash content, carbon isotope discrimination and yield in durum wheat. Functional Plant Biol. 25:835–842.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Araus, J.L., Casadesus, J., Bort, J. 2001. Recent tools for the screening of physiological traits determining yield. In: Reynolds, M.P., Ortiz-Monasterio, J.I., McNab, A. (eds) Application of Physiology in Wheat Breeding, CIMMYT, Mexico. pp. 59–77.Google Scholar
  4. Baumhardt, R.L., Jones, O.R. 2002. Residue management and tillage effects on soil-water storage and grain yield of dryland wheat and sorghum for a clay loam in Texas. Soil and Tillage Res. 68:71–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Blum, A. 1998. Improving wheat grain filling under stress by stem reserve mobilization. Euphytica 100:77–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cabrera-Bosquet, L., Sánchez, C., Araus, J.L. 2009. How yield relates to ash content, Δ13C and Δ18O in maize grown under different water regimes. Ann. of Bot. 104:1207–1216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Di Rienzo, J.A., Casanoves, F., Balzarini, M.G., Gonzalez, L., Tablada, M., Robledo, C.W. InfoStat versión 2014. Grupo InfoStat, FCA, Universidad Nacional de Córdoba, Argentina. URL Scholar
  8. Fabrizzi, K.P., García, F.O., Costa, J.L., Picone, L.I. 2005. Soil water dynamics, physical properties and corn and wheat responses to minimum and no-tillage systems in the southern Pampas of Argentina. Soil and Tillage Res. 81:57–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fuentes, J.P., Flury, M., Huggins, D.R., Bezdicek, D.F. 2003. Soil, water and nitrogen dynamics in dryland cropping systems of Washington State, USA. Soil and Tillage Res. 71:33–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gajri, P.R., Arora, V.K., Prihar, S.S. 1992. Tillage management for efficient water and nitrogen use in wheat following rice. Soil and Tillage Res. 24:167–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. López, M.V., Arrúe, J.L. 1997. Growth, yield and water use efficiency of winter barley in response to conservation tillage in a semi-arid region of Spain. Soil and Tillage Res. 44:35–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. López-Bellido, R.J., López-Bellido, L. 2001. Efficiency of nitrogen in wheat under Mediterranean conditions: effect of tillage, crop rotation and N fertilization. Field Crops Res. 71:31–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Maich, R., Di Rienzo, J.A. 2014. Genotype×tillage interaction in a recurrent selection program in wheat. Cereal Res. Commun. 42:525–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Masle, J., Farquhar, G.D., Wong, S.C. 1992. Transpiration ratio and plant mineral content are related among genotypes of a range of species. Functional Plant Biol. 19:709–721.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Merah, O., Deléens, E., Monneveux, P. 1999. Grain yield, carbon isotope discrimination, mineral and silicon content in durum wheat under different precipitation regimes. Physiologia Plantarum 107:387–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Merah, O., Deléens, E., Monneveux, P. 2001. Relationships between carbon isotope discrimination, dry matter production, and harvest index in durum wheat. J. of Plant Physiol. 158:723–729.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Misra, S.C., Randive, R., Rao, V.S., Sheshshayee, M.S., Serraj, R., Monneveux, P. 2006. Relationship between carbon isotope discrimination, ash content and grain yield in wheat in the Peninsular Zone of India. J. of Agron. and Crop Sci. 192:352–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Misra, S.C., Shinde, S., Geerts, S., Rao, V.S., Monneveux, P. 2010. Can carbon isotope discrimination and ash content predict grain yield and water use efficiency in wheat? Agric. Water Management 97:57–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Monneveux, P., Rekika, D., Acevedo, E., Merah, O. 2006. Effect of drought on leaf gas exchange, carbon isotope discrimination, transpiration efficiency and productivity in field grown durum wheat genotypes. Plant Sci. 170:867–872.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Monneveux, P., Reynolds, M.P., González- Santoyo, H., Peña, R.J., Mayr, L., Zapata, F. 2004a. Relationships between grain yield, flag leaf morphology, carbon isotope discrimination and ash content in irrigated wheat. J. of Agron. and Crop Sci. 190:395–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Monneveux, P., Reynolds, M.P., Trethowan, R., Peña, J., Zapata, F. 2004b. Carbon isotope discrimination, leaf ash content and grain yield in bread and durum wheat grown under full-irrigated conditions. J. of Agron. and Crop Sci. 190:389–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. O’Leary, G.J., Connor, D.J. 1997. Stubble retention and tillage in a semi-arid environment: 3. Response of wheat. Field Crops Res. 54:39–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Pribyl, D.W. 2010. A critical review of the conventional SOC to SOM conversion factor. Geoderma 156:75–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Sadras, V.O., Connor, D.J. 1991. Physiological basis of the response of harvest index to the fraction of water transpired after anthesis: a simple model to estimate harvest index for determinate species. Field Crops Res. 26:227–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Zhang, X., Chen, S., Sun, H., Pei, D., Wang, Y. 2008. Dry matter, harvest index, grain yield and water use efficiency as affected by water supply in winter wheat. Irrigation Sci. 27:1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Zhang, X., Chen, S., Sun, H., Wang, Y., Shao, L. 2010. Water use efficiency and associated traits in winter wheat cultivars in the North China Plain. Agric. Water Management 97:1117–1125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Zhu, L., Liang, Z.S., Xu, X., Li, S.H. 2008. Relationship between carbon isotope discrimination and mineral content in wheat grown under three different water regimes. J. of Agron. and Crop Sci. 194:421–428.Google Scholar
  28. Zhu, L., Liang, Z.S., Xu, X., Li, S.H., Monneveux, P. 2009. Evidences for the association between carbon isotope discrimination and grain yield–ash content and stem carbohydrate in spring wheat grown in Ningxia (Northwest China). Plant Sci. 176:758–767.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Facultad de Ciencias AgropecuariasUniversidad Nacional de CórdobaCórdobaArgentina

Personalised recommendations