Advertisement

Cereal Research Communications

, Volume 35, Issue 4, pp 1573–1582 | Cite as

Root and Plant Characters in Wheat Under Low Input Field Conditions with Dual Inoculation of Mycorrhiza and Azotobacter chroococcum: Gene Effects

  • H. Sharma
  • R. K. BehlEmail author
  • K. P. Singh
  • N. Narula
  • P. Jain
Article

Abstract

Field experiments were conducted over two years under low input conditions to know the influence of bio-inoculants, namely arbuscular mycorrhiza fungi (AMF, Glomus fasciculatum) and Azotobacter chroococcum (Azc) on the performance and gene effects for important root and plant characters in three crosses of wheat (WH147×WH157, WH147×PBW175 and WH147×WH542). Six generations representing P1, P2, F1, F2, BC1 and BC2 populations of each cross were grown in randomized block design with three replications. The estimate of means (m) indicated that bio-inoculants enhanced the mean performance of most of the characters and root length density and grain yield in some crosses only. Crop season also showed considerable effect on impact of bio-inoculants. The joint scaling test revealed adequacy of additive-dominance model of gene effects for root biomass, root length density, flag leaf area, tillers/plant, grain weight and grain yield in all the crosses and bio-inoculants treatments in both years. The AMF treatment brought about changes in the magnitude and significance of additive component for root biomass, plant height, flag leaf area in all the three crosses. Both additive (d) and dominance (h) components were affected with respect to grain yield in WH147×WH157 and WH147×WH542. The dominant component was important for tillers/plant, grain yield, root length in control, as well as bio-inoculants treated populations of WH147×PBW175 but treatment of AMF and AMF+Azc reduced the magnitude of h and increased the magnitude of d. Digenic interactions were prominent for grains/spike in WH147×WH157. Magnitude of digenic interactions was higher under bio-inoculation. Simple pedigree and bulk pedigree methods are suggested to capitalize on adequate additive gene effects for developing bio-inoculants responsive wheat genotypes.

Keywords

wheat Azotobacter chroococcum AMF root traits gene effects 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Behl, R.K., Sharma, H., Kumar, V., Narula, N. 2003. Interactions amongst Mycorrhiza, Azotobacter chroococcum and root characteristics of wheat varieties. J. Agron. Crop Sci. 189:151–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Behl, R.K., Sharma, H., Kumar, V., Singh, K.P. 2002. Effect of dual inoculation of VA mycorrhiza and Azotobacter chroococcum on above flag leaf characters in wheat. Arch. Acker. Pfl. Boden. 48:1–7.Google Scholar
  3. Cavalli, L.L. 1952. An analysis of linkage in quantitative inheritance. In: Roexe, E.C.R., Waddington, C.H. (eds.), Quantitative Inheritance. HMSO, London, pp. 135–144.Google Scholar
  4. Hetrick, B.A.D., Wilson, G.W.T., Todd, T.C. 1996. Mycorrhizal response in wheat cultivars: relationship to phosphorous. Can. J. Bot. 74:19–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Jensen, V. 1951. Notes on the biology of Azotobacter. Proc. Soc. Appl. Bacteriol. 74:89–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Jink, J.L., Jones, R.M. 1958. Estimation of component of heterosis. Genetics 43:223–234.Google Scholar
  7. Kumar, V., Behl, R.K., Narula, N. 2001. Effect of phosphate solubilizing strains of Azotobacter chroococcum on yield traits and their survival in the rhizosphere of wheat genotypes under field conditions. Acta Agronomica Hungarica 49:141–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Leinhos, V., Vacek, O. 1994. Biosynthesis of auxin by phosphate solubilizing rhizobacteria from wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) and rye (Secale cereale). Microbiol. Res. 149:31–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Manske, G.G.B., Luttger, A.B., Behl, R.K., Vlek, P.L.G. 1995. Nutrient efficiency based on VA mycorrhiza (VAM) and total root length of wheat cultivars grown in India. Angew. Bot. 69:108–110.Google Scholar
  10. Manske, G.G.B., Ortiz-Monasterio, J.I., Van Ginkel, M., González, R.M., Rajaram, S., Molina, E., Vlek, P.L.G. 2000. Traits associated with improved P-uptake efficiency in CIMMYTs semidwarf spring bread wheat grown on an acid Andisol in Mexico. Plant Soil 221:189–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Narula, N., Behl, R.K., Dudi, H.R., Suneja, S., Lakshminarayana, K. 1998. Response of wheat genotypes to Azotobacter inoculation under rain fed conditions. Rachis 17:66–67.Google Scholar
  12. Narula, N., Kumar, V., Singh, B., Bhatia, R., Lakshminarayana, K. 2005. Impact of biofertilizers on grain yield in spring wheat under varying fertility conditions and wheat-cotton rotation. Archives Agron. Soil Sci. 51:79–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Singh, R., Behl, R.K., Singh, K.P., Jain, P., Narula, N. 2004. Performance and gene effects for wheat yield under inoculation of arbuscular mycorrhiza fungi and Azotobacter chroococcum. Plant Soil Environment 50:409–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • H. Sharma
    • 1
  • R. K. Behl
    • 1
    Email author
  • K. P. Singh
    • 2
  • N. Narula
    • 3
  • P. Jain
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Plant BreedingCCS Haryana Agricultural UniversityHaryanaIndia
  2. 2.Department of GeneticsCCS Haryana Agricultural UniversityHaryanaIndia
  3. 3.Department of MicrobiologyCCS Haryana Agricultural UniversityHaryanaIndia

Personalised recommendations