ارزیابی عملکرد لاین‏های امید‏بخش جو در شرایط تنش کم آبی و آبیاری کامل

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 گروه زراعت، واحد تبریز، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تبریز

2 گروه زراعت و اصلاح نباتات، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، واحد تبریز

3 بخش تحقیقات اصلاح و تهیه نهال و بذر، مرکز تحقیقات کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی استان آذربایجان غربی ، سازمان تحقیقات، آموزش و ترویج کشاورزی، ارومیه

4 گروه زراعت و اصلاح نباتات دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، واحد تبریز

5 گروه زراعت و اصلاح نباتات دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، واحد تبریز

چکیده

چکیده
     به‌منظور ارزیابی پایداری عملکرد لاین‏های امید‏بخش جو، تعداد 9 لاین و رقم بهمن در قالب طرح بلوک‌های کاملاً تصادفی در دو شرایط آبیاری‌کامل و تنش کم‌آبی انتهای فصل در سال‌های زراعی 95-93 مورد ارزیابی قرار گرفتند. نتایج میانگین دو ساله عملکرد دانه نشان داد در شرایط آبیاری‌کامل‌ لاین‌های 3، 4، 5، 7، 9 (رقم جلگه) و 10 بین 15 تا 37 درصد و تحت شرایط تنش کم‌آبی لاین‌های 2، 7 و 9 (رقم جلگه) بین 15 تا 19 درصد نسبت به رقم بهمن (شاهد) افزایش عملکرد داشتند. بر اساس شاخص‏های MP، HARM، STI وGMP لاین‏های 7 و 9 (رقم جلگه) به‌عنوان متحمل‏ترین لاین‏های امید‏بخش جو نسبت به شرایط تنش کم‌آبی شناخته شدند. تجزیه کلاستر بر اساس شاخص‏های تحمل به خشکی، ژنوتیپ‏های جو را در سه کلاستر قرار داد. نتایج نشان داد میزان فعالیت آنزیم‏های GPX، CAT، MDA، H2O2و SOD در شرایط تنش کم‌آبی نسبت به آبیاری ‌کامل افزایش نشان دادند. آنزیم سوپراکسیددسموتاز به‌دلیل داشتن بالاترین همبستگی مثبت و معنی‏دار با عملکرد دانه، موثرترین آنزیم در تحمل گیاه به شرایط تنش کم‌آبی تشخیص داده شد. نتایج تجزیه کلاستر بر اساس خصوصیات آنتی اکسیدانتی نشان داد که ده ژنوتیپ مورد مطالعه در دو کلاستر قرار گرفتند که کلاستر دوم شامل لاین‏های 1، 2، 7 و 9 (رقم جلگه) به عنوان متحمل‏ترین لاین‏های امید‏بخش جو معرفی شدند. در نهایت بر اساس کلیه شاخص های مورد بررسی لاین‏های شماره 7 و 9 (رقم جلگه) به‌عنوان لاین‌های برتر از رقم بهمن در شرایط آبیاری کامل و محتمل‏ترین لاین‏های جو نسبت به تنش کم­آبی شناسایی شدند.
 

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Yield stability of Barley Elite Lines under Water Deficit and full irrigation Condition

نویسندگان [English]

  • Vahid Rastegari 1
  • Bahram Mirshekari 2
  • Soleiman Mohammadi 3
  • Ebrahim Khalilvand 4
  • Farhad Farahvash 5
چکیده [English]

Abstract
      Yield stability of barley elite lines and Bahman genotype (control) studied by complete block design experiment under full irrigation and water deficit stress conditions in 2013-2015. The results of two years' mean revealed that grain yield under complete irrigation condition for lines 3, 4, 5, 7, 9 (Golgeh cultivar) and 10 between 15 to 37 percent and under stress condition, lines 2, 7 and 9 (Golgeh cultivar) between 15 to 19 percent were higher than Bahman cultivar (Control). Based on MP, HARM, STI and GMP indices, lines 7 and 9 (Golgeh cultivar) were identified as the most tolerant barley elite lines under stress condition. Cluster analysis based on drought tolerance indices placed barley genotypes in three clusters. The generation amount of enzymes GPX, CAT, MDA, H2O2 and SOD increased under stress compared to complete irrigation condition, Superoxide dismutase enzyme (SOD) due to the highest positive and significant correlation with seed yield, was detected as the most effective enzyme in tolerance to drought stress condition. The results of cluster analysis based on antioxidant properties showed that the studied lines were placed in two clusters, which second cluster including lines 1, 2, 7 and 9 (Golgeh cultivar) were presented as tolerant barley elite lines. Finally, regarding to all the indicators studied,  lines 7 and 9 (Golgeh) were identified as superior lines compare with Bahman cultivar under normal and water deficit conditions and were identified as most tolerated lines to water deficit condition.
 

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Antioxidant enzymes
  • Barley Lines
  • Drought
  • Grain Yield
  • Tolerance Indices
Arunachalam V and Bandyopadhyay A. 1984. A method to make decisions jointly on a number of dependent characters. Indian Journal of Genetics, 44: 419-424.
Bandeoglu E, Eyidogan F, Yucel M and Oktem HA. 2004. Antioxidant response of shoots and roots of lentil to NaCl Salinity stress. Plant Growth Regulation, 42: 69-77.
Bhattacharjee S and Mukherjee AK. 2002. Salt stress induced cytosolute accumulation, antioxidant response and membrane deterioration in three rice cultivars during early germination. Seed Science and Technology, 30: 279- 287.
Bybordi A, Tabatabaei SJ and Ahmadev A. 2010. Effect of salinity on fatty acid composition of Canola (Brassica napus L). Journal of Food Agriculture and Environment, 8: 113-115.
Cakmak I, Dragan S and Marschner H. 1993. Activities of hyrogen-scavenging enzymes in germinating wheat seeds. Journal Of Experimental Botany, 44: 127-133.
Calhoum DS, Gebeyehu C, Miranda A, Rajaram S and Van Ginkel M. 1994. Choosing evaluation environments to increase grain yield under drought conditions. Crop Science. 34: 673-678.
Choukan R, Taherkhani T, Ghannadha MR and Khodarahmi M. 2006. Evaluation of drought tolerance in grain maize inbred lines using drought tolerance indices. Iranian Journal Of Agricultural Sciences, 8(1): 79-89.
Creissen GP and Mullineaux PM. 2002. The molecular biology of the ascorbatelutathione cycle in higher plants. In: Oxidative Stress in Plants, D. Inze, M. V. Montgan (Eds.), 247-270. Taylor & Francis, London, UK. (2002).
Dat J, Vandenabeele S, Vranova E, Van Montagu M, Inze D and Van Breusegem F. 2000. Dual action of the active oxygen species during plant stress responses. Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences, 57: 779–795.
Dolatabadian A, Modarres-Sanavy S and Ahmadian-Chashmi N. 2008. The effects of foliar application of ascorbic acid (vitamin C) on antioxidant enzymes activities, lipid peroxidation and proline accumulation of canola (Brassica napus L.) under conditions of salt stress. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science, 194: 206-213.
Eghbali S, Aharizad S, Yarnia M and khalili M. 2016. Evaluating of Drought Tolerance of Doubled Haploid Barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) Lines using Toleance Indices. Journal of Crop Ecophysiology, 10(1): 139-149. (In Persian).
Ehdaie B, Waines JG and Hall AE. 1988. Differential responses of landrace and improved spring wheat genotypes to stress. Crop Science, 28: 838-842.
Fernandez GCJ. 1992. Effective selection criteria for assessing plant stress tolerance. In: Kuo, C.G. (Ed), Proceedings of the International Symposium on Adaptation of Vegetables and Other Food Crops in Temperature and Water Stress, Publication, Tainan, Taiwan.
Huang B, 2000. Role of morphological and physiological characteristics in drought resistance of plants. Pp. 39-64. In: R. E. Willkinson (Ed). Plant-Environmental Interactions. Marcel Dekker Inc. New York,
Jin J, Ningwei SH, Jinhe B and Junping G. 2006. Regulation of ascorbate peroxides at the transcript level is involved in tolerance to post harvest water deficit stress in the cut Rose (Rose hybrida L.) CV. Samantha. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 7: 90-103.
Jones MM, Turner N and Osmond CB, 1981. Mechanisms of drought resistance. Pp: 15-37. In: Paleg, LG, and Aspinall D (Eds.). The Physiology and Biochemistry of Drought Resistance in Plants. Academic Press Sydney.
Khokhar MI, Jaime A, Dasilva T and spiertz H. 2012. Evaluation of barley genotypes for yielding Ability and Drought tolerance under Irrigated and water stressed conditions. American-Eurasian Journal Of Agricultural & Environmental Sciences, 12 (3): 287-292.
Mahdavi A, M, Sorkhi Allahlo B, Ahmadi S, and Zare Manesh H. 2012. Evaluation of drought tolerance in barley genotypes using stress tolerance indices. Journal of Crop Production Research, 4(2): 121.133. (In Persian).
Mohammadi S, Sorkhy B, Bayat M and Sharafi S. 2014. Evaluating resistance of different barley (Hordeum vulgar L.) genotypes to water deficit stress using physiological traits. International Journal of Scientific Research in Environmental Sciences. 2(6): 209-219.
Movahhedy-Dehnavy M, Modarres-Sanavy SAM and Mokhtassi-Bidgoli A. 2009. Foliar application of zinc and manganese improves seed yield and quality of safflower (Carthamus tinctorius L.) grown under water deficit stress. Ind crop Prod doi:10.1016/j.indcrop.2009.02.004.
Naderi A, Majidi-Hervan E, Hashemi-Dezfoli A, Rezaei A and Nour mohammadi G. 2000. Efficiency analysis of indices for tolerance to environmental stresses in field crops and introduction of a new index. Plant and Seed Journal. 15 (4): 390-402.
Nikkhah HR, Naghavi MR, Mohammadi V and Soltanloo H. 2014.  Physiological and Agronomic Traits Related to Drought Tolerance in Barley Recombinant Inbred Line Population (Arigashar ×Irri). Seed And Plant Improvement Journal, 30(4): 821-840. (In Persian).
Paglia DE and Valentine WN. 1987. Studies on the quantitative and qualitative characterization of glutation proxidase. Journal of Laboratory Medicine, 70: 158-165.
Reddy AR, Chaitanya KV and Vivekanadan MV, 2004. Drought-induced responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher Plants. Plant Physiology, 161: 1189-1202.
Rosielle AA and Hamblin J. 1984. Theoretical aspects of selection for yield in stress and non-stress environment. Crop Science, 21: 943-946.
Sadeghzade-Ahari, D. 2006. Evaluation for tolerance to drought stress in dryland promising durum wheat genotypes. Iran. J. Crop Science, 8 (1): 30-45. (In Persian).
Sairam RK, Verrabhadra RK and Srivastava GC. 2002. Differential response of wheat genotypes to long term salinity stress in relation to oxidative stress. Plant Science, 163: 1037-1046.
Shepherd A, Ginn SMCM and Wyseure GCL, 2002. Simulation of the effect of water shortage on the yields of winter wheat in North-East England. Ecological Modeling, 147: 41-52.
Shiri M, Aliyev RT and Choukan R. 2010. Water stress effects on combining ability and gene action of yield and genetic properties of drought tolerance indices in maize. Research Journal of Environmental Sciences, 4: 75- 82. (In Persian).
Simontacchi MA, Caro G, Fraga G and Puntaralo S. 1993. Oxidative stress affects α-tocopherol content in soybean embrionic axes during germination. Plant physiology, 103: 949-953.
Singh BD. 2000. Plant Breeding-Principles and Methods. Kalyani Publisher. 896pp.
Sio-Se Mardeh A, Ahmadi A, Poustini K and Mohammadi V. 2006. Evaluation of drought resistance indices under various environmental conditioning. Field Crop Research, 98: 222-229.
Tajalli H, Mosavi SGR, Baradaran R and Saberi MH. 2012. Short Communication: The study of promising genotypes of barley (Hordeum vulgaris L.) under end of season drought stress conditions. Environmental Stresses In Crop Sciences, 4(2): 173-177. (In Persian).
Tavakol Afshari R, Ghasemi F, Majnon Hoseyni N, alizadeh H and Bihamta MR. 2007. Effect of seed aging on germination traits and activity of antioxidant enzymes catalase and peroxidase in barley genotypes (Hordeum vulgar L.). Iranian Journal of Agriculture Science, 38(2): 337-346. (In Persian).
Valentovic P, Luxova M, Kolarovic L and Gasparikova O. 2006.  Effect of osmotic stress on compatible solutes content, membrane stability and water relations in two maize cultivars, Plant Soil Environment, 52: 186-191.
Zahravi M. 2009. Evaluation of Genotypes of Wild Barley (Hordeum spontaneum L.) Based on Drought Tolerance Indices. Seed and Plant Improvment Journal, 25(4): 533.549. (In Persian).
Zhen Y, Miao L, Su J, Liu S, Yin Y, Wang S, Pang Y, Shen H, Tian D, Qi J and Yang Y. 2009. Differential Responses of Anti-Oxidative Enzymes to Aluminum Stress in Tolerant and Sensitive Soybean Genotypes. Journal of Plant Nutrition, 32: 1255-1270.