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

Document Type : Original Articles

Authors

• Mohammad Hasan Vafaei ¹
• Mahdi Parsa ^{2, 3}
• Ahmad Nezami ^{2, 3}
• Ali Ganjali ^{4, 3}

¹ College of Agriculture, University of Bu-Ali Sina, Hamedan, Hamedan, Iran

² College of Agriculture, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran

³ Research Center for Plant Sciences, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran

⁴ College of Biology. Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran

10.22067/ijpr.v10i2.70269

Abstract

Introduction
Drought stress is one of the main problems in agriculture of Iran and the world. Among the environmental limiting factors of the yield crops, drought is the most important factor to reduce production, especially in arid and semi-arid regions. Drought stress reduces water content in plant tissues, lead to growth shrinkage and some physiological and metabolic changes in them. Food legumes, as one of the most important protein-rich vegetable sources, played a major role in providing human protein, especially in low-income and developing countries, and after cereals are the second most important source of human food. These plants, with bio-stabilization of nitrogen, provide a large portion of their nitrogen, and because they require low water and nutrients, they are highly desirable for cultivation in poor lands. Lentil (Lens culinaris Medik) is one of the beans that had more than 20% protein content and characteristics such as the ability to grow in inappropriate conditions and poor soils, has been able to play an important role in the low-income diet of people in developing countries. Regarding to the success of a breeding program depends on the size and diversity of genetic resources, genetic diversity lead to succeeding in selection, so identification of cultivars with high yield, as well as limiting factors of yield potential and genotypes tolerant to these factors in lentil seems to be necessary.
 
Materials & Methods
This research was carried out in the research farm of Ferdowsi University of Mashhad in 2014. In this experiment, 73 lentil genotypes including native genotypes and lines from other countries were cultivated in two separate plots under non stress and stress conditions in Augmented design. Five genotypes used as control (Kimia, Gachsaran, Cabralinta, ILL325 and ILL857). Controls were cultivated in all blocks. Before planting, field soil was sampled from a depth of 30 cm and pH values, organic matter, EC, macro elements (N, P and K) and soil texture were measured. The planting was carried out on March 20, 2014. At the same time, according to the fertilizer recommendation, the amount of required elements was added to the soil and immediately after cultivation, an irrigation step was conducted to ensure the emergence of all the seeds for both dry conditions (drought stress) and non-stress. Afterwards, irrigation was performed only for non-stress treatments and every 10 days.
 
Results & Discussion
The results showed that mean and standard deviation of lentil genotype yields under drought stress and non stress conditions revealed significant differences. Accordingly, the average yield of genotypes under conditions of stress was 20.4 g.m^-2, which showed a decrease of 70.3% in non-stress conditions with 68.6 g.m^-2. According to 147 mm rainfall from planting to harvest, this yield reduction was not expected, indicating the need for supplementary irrigation. High standard deviation between genotypes indicates a large variety of lentil genotypes, and this wide variety can be used as a valuable genetic resources for later studies. According to the results, there was a significant correlation between yield and stress (P≤0.01) (r=0.71**). Also, there was a positive and significant correlation between performance in non stress conditions with the old indices HARM, TOL, MP, STI, GMP, SSPI, ATI and the new SNPI index (P≤0.01), and the correlation between yield in non stress conditions and SSI and RDI were not significant. There was also a positive and significant correlation between performance in non-stress conditions and ATI, GMP, HARM, RDI, STI, SSI, TOL and MP, and the new SNPI index (P≤0.01), but between yield in non stress conditions and the SSI was a significant negative correlation (P≤0.01). Old indices of HARM, TOL, STI, GMP, MP, ATI, and two new indicators of SSPI and SNPI, all have a positive and significant correlation (p≤0.01) with performance under stress and non stress conditions and can be considered as suitable indicators for screening stress tolerant genotypes.
 
Conclusion
The results of current study showed that the new SNPI index, which has a very high correlation (99.9%) with yield in stress conditions, as well as the old indices of HARM, STI and GMP, which have the positive and significant correlation with each other and with performance in two. The conditions of non stress and stress have been identified as the most suitable and effective criteria for identifying and selecting genotypes tolerant to drought stress. The results obtained from the three-dimensional, biplot, and cluster analysis methods are in agreement with each other for selection of high yielding and drought tolerant lines. Accordingly, it seems that genotypes 40, 48, 71, 73, 3, 8 , 45 and 52 are the promising and proposing genotypes in the Mashhad climate for further studies.

Keywords

• Biplot
• Cluster analysis
• Correlation
• Tolerance indices

---

References

1. Agricultural Statistics. 2016. Ministry of Agriculture Jihad. First Volume (Crop Products). 21-22.
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. Alderfasi, A.A., and Nielsen, D.C. 2001. Use of crop water stress index for monitoring water status and scheduling irrigation in wheat. Agricultural Water Management 47(1):69-75.
5. Bidinger, F.R., Mahalakshmi, V., and Rao, G.D.P. 1987. Assessment of drought resistance in pearl millet [Pennisetum americanum (L.) Leeke]. I. Factors affecting yields under stress. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 38(1): 37-
6. 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.
7. Bitaraf, N., Khoddambashi, M., and Hooshmand, S. 2010. Correlation and path analysis of grain yield and its components for lentil under Shahrekord climate. Iranian Journal of Pulses Research 1(1):51-56. (In Persian with English Summary).
8. Blum, A. 1988. Plant Breeding for Stress E Boca Raton: CRC Press.
9. 2016. FAOSTAT. Available at http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/QC/visualize
10. Farshadfar, A., Zamani, M.R., Motallebi, M., and Emam Jomae, A. 2001. Selection for drought resistance in chickpea lines. Iranian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 32(4): 65-77. (In Persian).
11. 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.
12. Fathi, M., M.R. Bihamta, N., Majnoon Hosseini, A.A., Shah Nejat Boushehry, 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).
13. 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, Taiwan, August 13-18, 1992. p. 257-270.
14. Fischer, R.A., and Maurer, 1978. Drought resistance in spring wheat cultivars. I. Grain yield responses. Australian Journal of Agriculture Agriculture Research 29(5): 897-912.
15. Fischer, R.A., and Wood, J.T. 1979. Drought resistance in spring wheat cultivars. III. Yield associations with morpho-physiological traits. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 30(6): 1001-1020.
16. Ganjali, A., Bagheri, A., and Porsa, H. 2009. Evaluation of chickpea (Cicer arietinum ) germplasm for drought resistance. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research 7(1): 183-193. (In Persian with English Summary).
17. Kafi, M., Borzoee, A., Salehi, M., Kamandi, A., Masoumi, A., and Nabati, J. 2009. Physiology of Environmental Stress in P Jihad-e-Daneshgahi Publishers. 502 pp. (In Persian).
18. 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-
19. 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).
20. Mishra, S.K., Sharma, B., and Sharma, S.K. 2007. Genetics and Cytogenetics of L In: SS. Yadav, D.K. McNeil and C.P. Stevenson (Eds.). Lentil: An Ancient Crop for Modern Times. Springer. p. 187-208.
21. 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.
22. 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-
23. Panthuwan, G., Fokai, S., Cooper, M., Rajatasereekul, S., and O’Toole, J.C. 2002. Yield response of rice genotypes to different types of drought under rainfed lowlands. Part 1: Grain yield and yield components. Field Crop Research 41:45-
24. Parsa, M., and Bagheri, A.R. 2008. Pulses. Jahad Daneshgahi Publication. 530 p (In Persian).
25. Petersen, R.G. 1985. Augmented Designs for Preliminary Yield Trials (Revised). FAO of the UN-Oregon State Univ., Corvallis (USA).
26. Rahimi, M.H., Houshmand, S., and Khodambashi, M. 2017. Evaluation of lentil recombinant inbred lines using drought tolerance indices. Journal of Crop Ecophysiology 10(4/40):907-927. (In Persian with English Summary).
27. Rashidi, V.S.C., Sharifi, M., and Effatdust, N. 2012. Comparison and classification of lentil (Lens culinaris) landraces under drought stress conditions after flowering. Journal of Crop and Weed Eco-Physiology 5(4): 81-96. (In Persian with English Summary).
28. Rosielle, A.A., and Hamblin, J. 1981. Theoretical aspects of selection for yield in stress and non-stress environment. Crop Science 21(6):943-
29. Safari, S., Dehghani, H., and Choghan, R. 2007. Evaluation of maize inbred lines for drought tolerance based on resistance indices and biplot method. Iranian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 38(1/2):215-228.
30. 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. 1997. Improving common bean performance under drought stress. Crop Science 37(1):43-50.
31. Tadayyon, A., Hashemi, L., and Khodambashi, M. 2011. Effective morphological and phonological traits on seed and biological yield in lentil genotypes in Shahrekord region. Iranian Journal of Pulses Research 2(2):47-62. (In Persian with English Summary).
32. Takeda, S., and Matsuoka, M. 2008. Genetic approaches to crop improvement: responding to environmental and population changes. Nature Reviews Genetics 9(6): 444-
33. Walley, F.L., Clayton, G.W., Miller, P.R., Carr, P.M., and Lafond, G.P. 2007. Nitrogen economy of pulse crop production in the Northern Great Plains. Agronomy Journal 99(6):1710-1718.