Differences in drought tolerance between cultivars of field bean and field pea. Morphological characteristics, germination and seedling growth

• Autorzy: Grzesiak S , Iijima M. , Kono Y. , Yamauchi A.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Different responses among legume species were observed, but the morphological and physiological differences that confer drought resistance or susceptibility are not well explained. The objective of this study was the determination of variation of morphological characteristics within 7 field bean and 4 field pea cultivars as related to drought tolerance. Also differences in the effect of drought on seed germination and seedling growth in 2 field bean and 2 field pea cultivars of different drought tolerances were investigated. The examined cultivars were characterized by variation of certain morphological characteristics regarded as xeromorphic features associated with the ability of plant to survive under drought. The drought resistant cultivars (field bean Gobo and field pea Solara) in comparison with the sensitive ones (field bean Victor and field pea Bareness) were characterized by more favourable relations between the size of the above—ground parts and the size of root, as well as the frequency and size of stomata. Moreover, in the resistant cultivars there was observed, a smaller influence of simulated drought (ψ=−0.6 MPa) on the increase of dry matter of the above-ground parts and of the roots. Also there was smaller influence on the height of seedlings and on the length of lateral roots. The correlation coefficients between the measured characteristics and the values of the drought susceptibility index (DSI) were in most cases statistically not significant, although, on the whole, they were very high. This may be an indication of a relatively high participation of the measured characteristics in the total variation of the drought tolerance in the cultivars. In cultivars regarded as belonging to the group of sensitive ones, a more disadvantageous effect of simulated drought (ψ=−0.6 MPa) on seed germination was observed, especially in the determination of the promptness index (PI).

Słowa kluczowe

EN

drought tolerance; bean; pea; growth; field; seed; germination

• Wydawca: -
• Czasopismo: Acta Physiologiae Plantarum
• Rocznik: 1997
• Tom: 19
• Numer: 3
• Opis fizyczny: p.339-348

Twórcy

autor

Grzesiak S

• Polish Academy of Sciences, Podluzna 3, 30-239 Cracow, Poland

autor

Iijima M.

autor

Kono Y.

autor

Yamauchi A.

Bibliografia

• Blum A., Sinmena B., Ziv O. 1980. An evaluation of seed and seedling drought tolerance screening tests in wheat. Euphytica 29: 727–736.
• Blum A., Golan G., Mayer J., Sinmena B., Shpiler L., Burra J. 1989. The drought response of landraces of what from northern Negev Desert in Israel. Euphitica, 43: 87–96.
• Bouslama M., Schapauch W.T. 1984. Stress tolerance in soybean. I. Evaluation of tree screening techniques for heat and drought tolerance. Crop Sci., 24: 933–937.
• Brown E.A., Caviness C.E., Brown D.A. 1985. Response of selected soybean cultivars to soil moisture deficit. Agron. J., 77: 274–278.
• Gates C.T. 1964. The effects of water stress on plant growth. J. Aust. Inst. Agr. Sci., 30: 3–22.
• Grzesiak S., Filek W., Pienkowski S., Nizioł B. 1996 a. Screening for drought resistance: Evaluation of drought susceptibility index of legume plants in natural growth conditions. J. Agr. and Crop Sci., 177: 237–252.
• Grzesiak S., Filek W., Skrudlik G., Nizioł B. 1996 b. Screening for drought resistance: Evaluation of seed germination and seedling growth for drought resistance in legume plants. J. Agr. and Crop Sci., 177: 245–252.
• Grzesiak S., Iijima M., Kono Y., Yamauchi A., 1997. Differences in drought tolerance between cultivars of field bean and field pea. A comparison of drought-resistance and drought-sensitive cultivars. Acta Physiol. Plantarum, 19: 349–357.
• Hurd E.A. 1974. Can we breed for drought resistance?. In: Larson K.L., Eastin J.D. (eds) Drought injury and resistanc e in crops. Published by Crop Science Society of America, Madison, 77–88.
• Hurd E.A. 1976. Plant breeding for drought resistance. In: Kozlowski T.T. (eds) Water deficits and plant growth, Vol. IV, Academic Press New York, San Francisco, London.
• Itoh R., Kumura A. 1986. Acclimation of soybean plants to water deficit II. Recovery of photosynthesis and leaf water status under prolonged water deficit. Japan J. Crop Sci., 55(3): 374–378.
• Jones H.G. 1993. Drought tolerance and water-use efficiency. In: (eds) Smith J.A.C., Griffiths H. Water deficits plant responses from cell to community. Bios Scientific Publishers Limited, Oxford, 193–204.
• Kassam A.H. 1972. Determination of water potential and tissue characteristics of leaves of Vicia faba L.. Hort. Res. 12: 12–23.
• Kono Y., Yamauchi., Kawamura N., Tatsumi J. 1987. Interspecific differences of the capacities of water-logging and drought tolerances among summer cereals. Japan J. Crop Sci., 56(1): 115–129.
• Kpoghomou B.K., Sapra V.T., Beyl C.A. 1990. Screening for drought tolerance: Soybean germination and its relationship to seedling response. J. Agron. and Crop Sci., 164: 153–159.
• Krizek D.T. 1985. Methods of inducing water stress in plants., Hort. Science, 20: 1028–1038.
• Kvet J., Ondok J.P., Necas J., Jarvis P.G. 1971. Methods of growth analysis. In: (eds) Šesták Z., Čatský J. Plant photosynthetic production manual of methods. dr. W. Junk N.V. Publishers, The Haque, 343–391.
• Martiniello P., Lorenzoni C. 1985. Response of maize genotypes to drought tolerance tests. Maydica, 30: 361–370.
• Michel B.E., Wiggins K.O., Outlow W.H.J. 1983. A quide to establishing water potential for aqueous two phase solutions (Polyethylene glycol plus dextran) by amendment with mannitol. Plant Physiol., 72: 60–65.
• Passioura J.B., Condon A.G., Richards R.A. 1993. Water deficits, the development of leaf area and crop productivity. In: Smith J.A.C., Griffiths H. (eds). Water deficits plant responses from cell to community. BIOS Scientific Publishers Limited, Oxford, 253–264.
• Richards R.A. 1978. Variation between and within species of rapeseed (Brassica campestris and B. napus) in response to drought stress. III. Physiological and biochemistry characters. Aust. J. Agric. Res., 29: 495–501.
• Ristic Z., Cass D.D. 1991. Leaf anatomy of Zea mays L. in response to water shortage and high temperature: a comparison of drought-resistant and drought-sensitive lines. Bot. Gaz. 152(2): 173–185.
• Sullivan Ch. Y., Ross W.N. 1979. Selecting for drought and heat resistance in grain sorghum. In: Mussel H., Staples R. (eds). Stress physiology in crop plant. J. Wiley and Sons, New York, 263–281.
• Tardieu F., Katerji N. 1991. Plant response to soil water reserve: consequences of the root system environment. Irrigation Sci., 12: 145–152.
• Tardieu F. 1993. Will progresses in understanding soil-root relations and root signalling substantially alter water flux models?., Phil. Trans. R. Soc., London, 338.
• Trapani N., Gentinetta E. 1984. Screening of maize genotypes using drought tolerance tests. Maydica, 29: 89–100.
• Turner N.C. 1979. Drought resistance and adaptation to water deficit in crop plants. In Stress physiology in crop plants (eds) H. Mussel, and R.C. Staples, Wiley, New York, 343–372.
• Winter S.R., Musick J.T., Porter K.B., 1988. Evaluation of screening techniques for breeding drought-resistant winter wheat., Crop Sci., 28: 512–516.
• Wright L. N. 1971. Drought influence on germination and seedling emergence. In: Larson K.L., Eastin J.D., (eds), Drought injury and resistance in crops. Madison, WI, 19–44.
• Yamauchi A. 1993. Significance of root system structure in relation to the stress tolerance in cereal crops. Low-Input sustainable crop production system in Asia. 347–360, Korean Soc. of Crop Sci., Korea.