گزینش ژنوتیپ‌های منتخب عدس (Lens culinaris Medik) متحمل به تنش خشکی با به‌کارگیری پنج شاخص تحمل جدید در شرایط مشهد

نوع مقاله : مقالات پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشگاه بوعلی سینا

2 دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد

چکیده

به‌منظور ارزیابی و انتخاب ژنوتیپ‌های عدس منتخب متحمل به تنش خشکی و بررسی کارآیی شاخص‌های قدیمی و جدید تحمل به تنش، پژوهشی در سال زراعی 94-1393 در مزرعه تحقیقاتی دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد در قالب طرح بلوک‌های کامل تصادفی با سه تکرار و تحت دو شرایط رطوبتی عدم تنش خشکی (تأمین 100درصد نیاز آبی گیاه) و تنش خشکی (تأمین 40 درصد نیاز آبی گیاه) بر روی 9 ژنوتیپ برگزیده از بین 73 ژنوتیپ مورد بررسی در آزمایش زراعی سال قبل، اجرا گردید. برای اعمال دقیق محدودیت آبی، از سیستم آبیاری قطره‌ای نواری استفاده شد و میزان آب ورودی توسط کنتور مورد پایش قرار گرفت. بر اساس نتایج، در شرایط بدون تنش، ژنوتیپ‌های MLC356 و MLC121 به ترتیب، با تولید 2621 و 993 کیلوگرم دانه در هکتار، بالاترین و پایین‌ترین رتبه تولید دانه در واحد سطح را به خود اختصاص دادند. در شرایط تنش نیز ژنوتیپ‌های‌ Cabralinta و MLC121 به‌ترتیب، با تولید 876 و 288 کیلوگرم دانه در هکتار، بالاترین و پایین‌ترین رتبه تولید دانه در واحد سطح را کسب کردند. ارزیابی تحمل به تنش خشکی، بر اساس هشت شاخص قدیمی (HM، TOL، MP، STI، GMP، YI، DI و REI) و پنج شاخص جدید (SSPI، ATI، SNPI، K1STI و K2STI) صورت گرفت. مطالعۀ همبستگی بین عملکرد دانه در شرایط تنش و عدم تنش و شاخص‌های تحمل به خشکی نشان داد که شاخص جدید K2STI و شاخص‌های قدیمی STI، GMP، REI، HM و MP برای شناسایی ژنوتیپ‌هایی با عملکرد بالا در هر دو شرایط رطوبتی (تنش و بدون تنش) مناسب هستند. تجزیه به مؤلفه‌های اصلی و ترسیم بای‌پلات نیز نشان داد که شاخص‌های جدید SNPI و K2STI و شاخص‌های قدیمی YI، HM، GMP، REI و STI بهترین شاخص‌ها برای جداسازی ژنوتیپ‌های در هر دو شرایط رطوبتی هستند و بر این اساس، ژنوتیپ‌های MLC356، Cabralinta و MLC025 به‌عنوان ژنوتیپ‌های متحمل به تنش خشکی و با عملکرد بالا انتخاب شدند. برای گروه‌بندی ژنوتیپ‌ها، تجزیه خوشه‌ای انجام گرفت و رسم دندروگرام، ژنوتیپ‌ها را به چهار کلاستر گروه‌بندی کرد که در این گروه‌بندی، Cabralinta و MLC025 در یک کلاستر (کلاستر دوم) قرار گرفتند.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Selection of sieved drought tolerant lentil (Lens culinaris Medik) genotypes via five new tolerance indices in Mashhad conditions

نویسندگان [English]

  • Mohammad Hasan Vafaei 1
  • Mehdi Parsa 2
  • Ahmad Nezami 2
  • Ali Ganjeali 2
1 , Bu-Ali Sina University
2 Ferdowsi University of Mashhad
چکیده [English]

Introduction
Drought is one of the most important stresses which reduce yields of crops and is one of the most important production constraints in arid and semi-arid regions. Iran with annual mean rainfall of 257 mm was classified among the arid regions of the world. Lentil is a pulse crop, rich in proteins and have 18 of the 20 amino acids including all 8 essential amino acids. Thus, lentils play an important role in human diet, especially in low-income people in the developing countries. In Iran, lentil is usually grown in rainfed areas. The average lentil yield in Iran is 476 and 1195 Kg.ha-1 in rainfed and irrigated farms, respectively. Identification of drought-tolerant genotypes is essential for cultivation in arid areas. To identify and select tolerant genotypes, researchers have proposed many drought indices based on a mathematical relationship between grain yield under stress and non-stress conditions, which are based on tolerance or susceptibility to drought genotypes. The aim of this study was to identify indicators that can identify high-yielding and drought tolerant genotypes in rainfed conditions of Mashhad.
 
Materials and Methods
This research was carried out at the Agricultural Research Station, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, during growth season 2015. In this research, nine genotypes were used that eight genotypes of them were relatively drought tolerant in stress conditions and one genotype (MLC121) susceptible to drought stress were cultivated. These genotypes were selected from 73 genotypes including native populations and ICARDA genotypes in the seed bank of the Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, which were planted in the same plot at last year. Experiments were conducted as completely randomized design with non-stress and drought stress conditions (providing 100% and 40% water requirement of the plant) with three replications.
 
Results and Discussion
The analysis of variance showed a significant difference between yield genotypes in non-stress and drought stress conditions. Based on the results, in non-stress conditions, MLC356 and MLC121 genotypes produced the highest and lowest grain yields per hectare with 2621 and 993 kg.ha-1 respectively. Under stress conditions, Cabralinta and MLC121 genotypes produced the highest and lowest grain yields per hectare with 876 and 288 kg.ha-1, respectively. The mean yield of genotypes in non-stress and stress condition were 1616.7 and 625.6 kg.h-1, respectively that showed a decrease of 61.3% in water stress condition. Correlation between yields in stress and non-stress condition with tolerance indices showed that the old indices of STI, GMP, REI, HM and MP and the new K2STI index had a positive and significant correlation with yield in stress and non-stress conditions. The 3D Charts of the K2STI index with Yp and Ys showed that MLC356, Cabralinta and MLC025 genotypes had the highest rate of this index under non-stress and drought stress. The biplot drawing showed that high yielding genotypes are in D region. In this area, the old indices of YI, HM, GMP, REI, STI, the new indicators of SNPI K2STI and all of which are consistent with the Ys. The sharp angle between Ys, SNPI and YI indices shows a strong and positive correlation between these indices and indicates their superiority in separating high-tolerance genotypes with stress conditions and having relatively high performance in non-stress conditions. Considering this criterion, Cabralinta, MLC025, and MLC356 genotypes which had the highest correlation with the two indices, can be selected.
 
Conclusion
In all, the results of this study showed that SNPI and YI indices have a high correlation (99.9%) with performance in stress conditions, as well as K2STI, HM, GMP, REI and STI indices, all of which in D area. They have the most positive and significant correlations with each other and with performance in two conditions of non-stress and stress as the most suitable and effective criteria for identifying and selecting genotypes tolerant to drought stress. In all, if the goal is to introduce three genotypes, Cabralinta, MLC025 and, MLC356 genotypes which are the most susceptible genotypes are suggested compared to the stress conditions, but if the goal is to introduce only one genotype, Cabralinta genotype that has the highest and most stable yield under stress condition and in comparison with MLC356 genotype under stress conditions, 10.2% more yield could be introduced for arid and severe stress areas. For lentil planting in areas with mild stress, a high yielding genotype and tolerant, MLC356 genotype is recommended. It is also suggested that again to increase the accuracy of the experiment, three selected genotypes are again cultivated in the field.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Drought resistance indices
  • Correlation
  • Biplot
  • Cluster analysis
  1. Agricultural Statistics. 2016. Ministry of Agriculture Jihad. First Volume (Crop Products) 21-22. (In Persian).
  2. Ajayi, E.O., Sakariyamo, O.S., Okeleye, K.A., Ariyo, O.J., Sakariyawo, O.S., Okeleye, K.A., and Ariyo, O.J. 2016. Preliminary evaluation of grain amaranth (Amaranthus spp.) accessions for drought tolerance by multivariate technique. Agronomski Glasnik 78 (5&6): 231-249.
  3. Aktaş, H. 2016. Drought tolerance indices of selected landraces and bread wheat (Triticum aestivum) genotypes derived from synthetic wheats. Applied Ecology and Environmental Research 14(4): 177-189.
  4. Alizadeh, A. 2008. Soil, Water, Plant Relationship. Emam Reza University Publication. (In Persian).
  5. Anoma, A., Collins, R., and McNeil, D. 2014. The value of enhancing nutrient bioavailability of lentils: the Sri Lankan Scenario. African Journal of Food, Agriculture, Nutrition and Development 14(7): 9529-9543.
  6. Anwar, J., Subhani, G.M., Hussain, M., Ahmad, J., Hussain, M., and Munir. M. 2011. Drought tolerance indices and their correlation with yield in exotic wheat genotypes. Pakistan Journal of Botany 43(3): 1527–1530.
  7. Azizi Chakherchaman, S., Mostafaei, H. Imanparast, L. and Eivazian, M.R. 2009. Evaluation of drought tolerance in lentil advanced genotypes in Ardabil region, Iran. Journal of Food, Agriculture and Environment 7(3&4): 283-2
  8. Biosci, I.J., Semcheddinne, N., Guendouz, A., Oulmi, A., and Hafsi, M. 2017. Screening of wheat (Triticum durum) for drought tolerance in semiarid conditions. International Journal of Biosciences 6655: 166-178.
  9. Blum, A. 1988. Plant Breeding for Stress E Boca Raton: CRC Press.
  10. Dashtaki, M., Ali Pour Yamchi, M., and Bihamta, M.R. 2015. Evaluation of the effects of late season water stress on genotypes of bean (Phaseolus vulgaris). Iranian Journal of Pulses Research 6(2): 109-122. (In Persian with English Summary).
  11. Dixit, S., Singh, A., and Kumar, A. 2014. Rice breeding for high grain yield under drought: a strategic solution to a complex problem. International Journal of Agronomy 2014.
  12. 2018. Available at: http://www.fao.org/iran/news/detail-events/en/c/38535.
  13. Farshadfar, E., and Sutka, J. 2002. Screening drought tolerance criteria in maize. Acta Agronomica Hungarica 50(4): 411-
  14. Farshadfar, E., Poursiahbidi, M.M., and Safavi, S.M. 2013. Assessment of drought tolerance in land races of bread wheat based on resistance-tolerance indices. International Journal of Advanced Biological and Biomedical Research 1(2): 2322-4827.
  15. Fathi, M., Bihamta, M.R., Majnoon Hosseini, N., Shah Nejat Boushehry, A., and Ali Pour Yamchi, M. 2012. Screening for terminal drought stress tolerance in cowpea genotypes (Vigna unguiculata). Iranian Journal of Pulses Research 3(2): 45-54. (In Persian with English Summary).
  16. Fernandez, G.C.J. 1992. Effective selection criteria for assessing plant stress tolerance. In: Proceedings of the International Symposium on Adaptation of Vegetables and Other Food Crops in Temperature and Water Stress. 13-18 August 1992, Taiwan. 257-270.
  17. Gavuzzi, P., Rizza, F., Palumbo, M., Campaline, R.G., Ricciardi, G.L., & Borghi, B. 1997. Evaluation of field and laboratory predictors of drought and heat tolerance in winter cereals. Canadian Journal of Plant Science 77: 523-531.
  18. Gholinezhad, E., Darvishzadeh, R., and Bernousi, I. 2014. Evaluation of drought tolerance indices for selection of confectionery sunflower (Helianthus anuus) landraces under various environmental conditions. Notulae Botanicae Horti Agrobotanici Cluj-Napoca 42(1): 187-201.
  19. Goodarzvand Chegini, K., Fotovat, R., Bihamta, M.R., Omidi, M., and Shahnejant Boushehri, A.A. 2017. Grouping of tolerance indices and response of kabuli and desi type chickpea genotypes to drought stress. Iranian Journal of Field Crop Science 48(3): 647-664. (In Persian).
  20. Hossain, A.B.S., Sears, R.G., Cox, T.S., and Paulsen, G.M. 1990. Desiccation tolerance and its relationship to assimilate partitioning in winter wheat. Crop Science 30(3): 622-
  21. Iran Meteorological Organization. 2018. Available at: http://www.razavimet.ir/fa/node/38.
  22. Jalalifar, S., Moosavi, S.S., Abdollahi, M.R., Chaichi, M., and Mazaherylaghab, H. 2012. Evaluation of tolerance to drought stress in some bread wheat cultivars using old and new indices. Plant Production Technology 12(1): 15-26. (In Persian with English Summary).
  23. Kafi, M., Borzoee, A., Salehi, M., Kamandi, A., Masoumi, A., and Nabati, J. 2009. Physiology of Environmental Stress in P Jihad-e-Daneshgahi Publishers. p. 502. (In Persian).
  24. Kristin, A.S., Serna, R.R., Perez, F.I., Enriquez, B.C., Gallegos, A.J.A., Vallejo, R.P., Wassimi, N., and Kelly, J.D. 1997. Improving common bean performance under drought stress. Crop Science 37(1): 43-
  25. Kumar, A., Bernier, J., Verulkar, S., Lafitte, H.R., and Atlin, G.N. 2008. Breeding for drought tolerance: direct selection for yield, response to selection and use of drought-tolerant donors in upland and lowland-adapted populations. Field Crops Research 107(3): 221-
  26. Lan, J. 1998. Comparison of evaluating methods for agronomic drought resistance in crops. Acta Agriculture Boreali-occid Sinica 7: 85-87.
  27. Mafakheri, K., Bihamta, M.R., and Abbasi, A.R. 2015. Screening for drought stress tolerance in cowpea genotypes (Vigna unguiculata). Iranian Journal of Pulses Research 6(2): 123-138. (In Persian with English Summary).
  28. Mohammed, A.K., and Kadhem, F.A. 2017. Screening drought tolerance in bread wheat genotypes (Triticum aestivum) using drought indices and multivariate analysis. The Iraqi Journal of Agricultural Sciences 48(Special Issue): 41-51.
  29. Moosavi, S.S., Samadi, B.Y., Naghavi, M.R., and Zali, A.A. 2008. Introduction of new indices to identify relative drought tolerance and resistance in wheat genotypes. Desert 12: 165-
  30. Rahimi, M.H., Houshmand, S., and Khodambashi, M. 2017. Evaluation of lentil recombinant inbred lines using drought tolerance indices. Journal of Crop Eco-Physiology 10-4(40): 907-927. (In Persian with English Summary).
  31. Raman, A., Verulkar, S., Mandal, N., Variar, M., Shukla, V., Dwivedi, J., and Mall, A. 2012. Drought yield index to select high yielding rice lines under different drought stress severities. Rice 5(31): 1-12.
  32. Reddy, A.R., Chaitanya, K.V., and Vivekanandan, M. 2004. Drought induced responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants. Journal of Plant Physiology 161: 1189-1202.
  33. Roozrokh, M., Sabaghpour, S.H., and Armin, M. 2013. Determining the best indices of drought tolerance in chickpea genotypes. Plant Echophysiology 4(2): 25- (In Persian with English Summary).
  34. Rosielle, A.A., and Hamblin, J. 1981. Theoretical aspects of selection for yield in stress and non-stress environment. Crop Science 21(6): 943-
  35. Schneider, K.A., Rosales-Serna, R., Ibarra-Perez, F., Cazares-Enriquez, B., Acosta-Gallegos, J.A., Ramirez-Vallejo, P., Wassimi, N., and Kelly, J.D. 2004. Improving common bean performance under drought stress. Crop Sciences 37: 43-50.
  36. Sedigh, S., Zabet, M., Ghaderi, M.G., and Samadzadeh, A.R. 2015. Determination of the suitable indices for drought tolerance in cotton genotypes. Iranian Journal of Cotton Researches 3(2): 41-53. (In Persian with English Summary).
  37. Siahsar, B.A., Ganjali, S., and Allahdoo, M. 2010. Evaluation of drought tolerance indices and their relationship with grain yield of lentil lines in drought-stressed and irrigated environments. Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences 4(9): 4336-43
  38. Souri, J., and Dehghani, H. 2006. A study of chickpea genotypes in water stress conditions. Iranian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 36(6): 1517-1527. (In Persian with English Summary).
  39. Tabkhkar, N., Rabiei, B., Samizadeh Lahiji, H., and Hosseini Chaleshtori, M. 2018. Assessment of rice genotypes response to drought stress at the early reproductive stage using stress tolerance indices. Journal of Crop Production and Processing 7(4): 83-106. (In Persian with English Summary).
  40. Takeda, S., and Matsuoka, M. 2008. Genetic approaches to crop improvement: responding to environmental and population changes. Nature Reviews Genetics 9(6): 444-
  41. USDA, N. 2016. Sprinkler I National Engineering Handbook (Vol. 623).

 

  1. Vafaei, M.H., Parsa, M., Nezami, A., and Ganjali, A. 2019. Screening for drought tolerance in lentil genotypes (Lens culinaris Medik) with emphasis on comparing old and new indices of stress tolerance in order to introduce promising genotypes. Iranian Journal of Pulses Research 10(3). (In Persian with English Summary).
  2. Venuprasad, R., Cruz, M.T.S., Amante, M., Magbanua, R., Kumar, A., and Atlin, G. N. 2008. Response to two cycles of divergent selection for grain yield under drought stress in four rice breeding populations. Field Crops Research 107(3): 232-
  3. Zahedino, M., Moosavi, S.S., Chaichi, M.H., Mazaherylaghab, H., and Abdolahi, R. 2013. Evaluation of tolerance to terminal moisture stress in 20 barley promising lines. Daneshe Zeraat 6(9): 79- (In Persian with English Summary).