Variation for Staygreen Trait and its Association with Canopy Temperature Depression and Yield Traits Under Terminal Heat Stress in Wheat

Conference paper
Part of the Developments in Plant Breeding book series (DIPB, volume 12)


Nine hundred and sixty three wheat advanced lines from various sources, including Indian and CIMMYT germplasm, were screened for the presence or absence of staygreen (SG) trait during two cycles, 2003–05. Staygreen was evaluated based on visual scoring (0–9 scale) and a new parameter, Leaf Area under Decline (LAUD). Approximately 5.5% of the lines were found to show staygreen character, 10.6% were moderately staygreen, and the remaining showed some or no expression of this trait. From this germplasm, one hundred lines were selected with the objective to find the effect of staygreen on yield and yield traits. These lines were sown under three different sowing dates (timely, late and very late) for three consecutive years to find the association between staygreen trait and heat tolerance. Canopy Temperature Depression (CTD), used as selection criteria for heat tolerance, was recorded at 12h, 14h and 16h at 7days interval, on bright sunny days. Correlation study showed that LAUD and CTD were strongly correlated (r=0.90) . LAUD was also found to be significantly associated with yield traits like grain filling duration (GFD) (r=0.83) , grain yield (r=0.89) , biomass (r=0.84) , but its association with test weight was non-significant. CTD also displayed significant correlation with yield traits like GFD (r=0.78) , grain yield (r=0.84) and biomass (r=0.81) . There was significant association between grain yield, biomass, and GFD under all the sowing dates but the association between CTD, LAUD and test weight was significant only under very late sown conditions. Genotype x Year interaction was found to be non-significant for LAUD and CTD. Genotype x Year x Sowing date was non-significant for LAUD but significant for CTD. T-test done to compare SG and non-SG genotypes was found to be significant for all the traits for both the years and under all sowing dates, except for test weight, under timely sown condition. This investigation revealed that substantial variation exists for SG trait in wheat and there is significant difference between SG and non-SG genotypes for CTD. Hence, SG trait along with CTD can be used as effective selection criteria for tolerance to heat stress


staygreen heat stress 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Amani I, Fischer RA, Reynolds MP (1996) Canopy temperature depression association with yield of irrigated spring wheat cultivars in hot climate. J Agron Crop Sci 176:119–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ceppi D, Sala M, Gentinetta E, Verderio A, Motto M (1987) Genotypic dependent leaf senescence in maize. Plant Physiol 85:720–725PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Duvick DN (1984) Genetic contribution to yield gains of US hybrid maize 1930–1980. In: Fehr WR (ed) Genetic contributions to yield gains of five major crop plants, CSSA special publication 7. Crop Science Society of America, Madison, pp 15–45Google Scholar
  4. Evangelista CC, Tangonan NG (1990) Reaction of 31 non-senescent sorghum genotypes to stalk rot complex in Southern Philippines. Trop Pest Manag 36:214–215Google Scholar
  5. Fischer RA, Rees D, Sayre KD, Lu ZM, Condon AG, Saavedra AL (1998) Wheat yield progress associated with higher stomatal conductance and photosynthetic rate, and cooler canopies. Crop Sci 38:1467–1475CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Joshi AK (2003) Development of physiological approaches for breeding wheat varieties suited to different heat stress environment. Progress Report, NATP (ICAR) Project P-2793, BHU, Varanasi, IndiaGoogle Scholar
  7. Joshi AK, Chand R (2002) Variation and inheritance of leaf angle and its relationship with resistance to spot blotch in wheat (Triticum aestivum). Euphytica 123:221–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Joshi AK, Chand R, Kumar S, Singh RP (2004) Leaf tip necrosis: A phenotypic marker associated with resistance to spot blotch disease in wheat. Crop Sci 44:792–796CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Phillips DA, Pierce RO, Edie SA, Foster KW, Knowles PF (1984) Delayed leaf senescence in soybean. Crop Sci 24:518–522CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Reynolds MP (2002) Physiological approaches to wheat breeding. In: Curtis BC, Rajaram S, Gomez Macpherson H (eds) Bread wheat: Improvement and production, Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome, Italy, pp 118–140Google Scholar
  11. Reynolds MP, Bolota M, Delgado MIB, Amani I, Fischer RA (1994) Physiological and morphological traits associated with spring wheat yield under hot, irrigated conditions. Aust J Plant Physiol 21:717–730CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Reynolds MP, Nagarajan S, Razzaque MA, Ageeb OAA (2001) Breeding for adaptation to environmental factors: Heat tolerance. In: Reynolds MP, Ortiz Monasterio JI, McNab A (eds) Application of physiology in wheat breeding, pp 124–135Google Scholar
  13. Reynolds MP, Singh RP, Ibrahim OA, Ageeb A, Quick JS (1998) Evaluating physiological traits to complement empirical selection for wheat in warm environments. Euphytica 100:84–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Rosenow DT (1987) Breeding sorghum for drought resistance. In: Menyonga JM, Bezuneh T, Youdeowei A (eds) Proc. Int. Drought Symp. Food and grain production in semi arid Africa, Nairobi, 83–89Google Scholar
  15. Rosenow DT, Quisenberry JE, Wendt CW, Clark LE (1983) Drought tolerant sorghum and cotton germplasm. Agr Water Manag 7:207–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Russel WA. (1986) Contribution of breeding maize improvement in the United States, 1920s–1980s. Iowa State J Res 61:5–34Google Scholar
  17. Thomas H, Howarth CJ (2000) Five ways to stay-green. J Exp Bot 51:329–337PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. van der Plank JE (1963) Plant diseases: Epidemics and control. Academic Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  19. Vietor DM, Cralle HT, Miller FR (1989) Partitioning of14C-photosynthate and biomass in relation to senescence characteristics of sorghum. Crop Sci 29:1049–1053CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Walulu RS, Rosenow DT, Wester DR, Nguyen HT (1994) Inheritance of the stay-green trait in sorghum. Crop Sci 34:970–972CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Xu W, Rosenow DT, Nguyen HT (2000) Stay-green trait in grain sorghum: Relationship between visual rating and leaf chlorophyll concentration. Plant Breed 119:365–367CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Zadoks JC, Chang TT, Konzak CR (1974) A decimal code for the growth stages of cereals. Weed Res 14:415–421CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Genetics and Plant breedingInstitute of Agricultural SciencesBHU, Varanasi-221005India
  2. 2.International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT)Apdo. Postal 6-641D.F. Mexico

Personalised recommendations