Agro-Physiological Responses of Different Peal Millet (Pennisetum glaucum L.) Cultivars to Water Deficit in Kerman Climatic Conditions

Subject Areas : Journal of Crop Ecophysiology

Seyed Nabiladin Fatemi ¹ , Ali Akbar Maghsoodi Mood ² , Ghasem Mohammadi Nejad ³

1 - Ph.D. student of Agronomy, Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman, Iran
2 - Associate Professor of Agronomy, Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman, Iran
3 - Professor of Agronomy, Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman, Iran

Received: 2020-03-22 Accepted : 2020-10-18 Published : 2021-01-20

Keywords: Forage yield, Proline, Relative water content, leaf area index,

Abstract :

Cultivar selection is one of the most important factors to obtain maximum yield, based on the climatic conditions of each region. Drought is one of the environmental stresses that causes adverse effects on most stages of plant growth, structure and its activities. To investigate the agro-physiological responses of different pearl millet cultivars (Hybrid 1, Hybrid 2, IP13150, IP13151, IP22269, ICMV5222, HHVBCTA) to two levels of irrigation (100% and 60% of field capacity) an split plot experiment based on randomized complete block design was done in Kerman climatic conditions. The results showed that the simple effect of irrigation treatment and also simple effect of cultivar as well as the interaction of irrigation×cultivar were significant for all traits, except for relative water content and chlorophyll index. Decreasing the value of irrigation water from 100% to 60% of field capacity, caused significantly reduction of chlorophyll index (20.87%) and relative humidity content (29.06%). Drought stress increased proline content in all cultivars and the highest one was obtained from HHVBCTA under this condition. The results showed that the highest values of plant height, leaf area index, fresh and dry forage yield under normal irrigation and also drought stress conditions were obtained from Hybrid 1 and IP13151 cultivars, respectively. According to the comparison results of interaction, the lowest and highest percentage reduction of fresh forage of the due to drought stress were related to IP13151 (13.16%) and Hybrid 2 (61.58%), respectively. Generally, according to the obtained results, Hybrid 1 and IP13151 cultivars are suitable for planting in Kerman climatic region under normal and stress conditions, respectively.

References:

· Adary, A., A. Hachum, T. Oweis, and M. Pala. 2002. Wheat productivity under supplemental irrigation in Northern Iraq. On-Farm Water Husbandry Research Report Series. International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA). 38 pp.
· Ahmadi Lahijani, M.J., and Y. Emam. 2013. Response of wheat genotypes to terminal drought stress using physiological indices. Journal of Crop Production and Processing. 3(9):163-176. (In Persian).
· Alvarz, S., A. Navarro, S. Banon, and S.B. MJ. 2009. Regulated deficit irrigation in potted dianthus plants: Effects of severe and moderate water stress on growth and physiological responses. Scientia Horticulture. 122: 579-585.
· Babaee, K., M. Amini Dehaghi, S.A.M. Modares Sanavi, and R. Jabbari. 2010. Water deficit effect on morphology, prolin content and thymol percentage of Thyme (Thymus vulgaris L.). Iranian Journal of Medicinal and Aromatic Plants. 26(2): 239-251. (In Persian).
· Bates, L.S., R.P. Waldren, and I.D. Teare. 1973. Rapid determination of free proline for water-stress studies. Plant and Soil. 39: 205-207.
· Bradford, M.M. 1976. A rapid sensitive method for the quantitation of microgram quantites of protin utilizing the principle of protein-dye binding. Analytical Biochemistry. 72: 248-254.
· Çakir, R. 2004. Effect of water stress at different development stages on vegetative and reproductive growth of corn. Journal of Field Crops Research. 89(1): 1-16.
· Chopra, P. 2006. Drought risk assessment using remote sensing and GIS: A case study of Gujarat thesis submitted to the International Institute for Geo-information Science and Earth observation in partial fulfillment of the requirments for degree of master. 2-17.
· Gardner, F.P., R.B. Pearce, and R.L. Mitchell. 1985. Physiology of crop plants. Iowa State University Press. 327 pp.
· Haji Hassani Asl, N.A., H. Moradi Aghdam, N. Aliabadi Farahani, N. Hosseini, and M. Rassaei Far. 2011.Three forage yield and its components under water deficit condition in delay cropping in Khoy Zone (Iran). Advances in Environmental Biology. 5(5): 847-852.
· Hayat, S., Q. Fariduddin, B. Ali, and A. Ahmad. 2005. Effect of salicylic acid on growth and enzyme activities of wheat seedlings. Acta Agronomica Hungarica. 53: 433-437.
· Kafi, M., A. Borzoee, M. Salehi, A. Kamandi, A. Masoumi, and J. Nabati. 2009. Physiology of environmental stresses in plants. Mashhad University Jahad Press. 500 pp. (In Persian).
· Keshavarz, L., H. Farahbakhsh, and P. Golkar. 2013. Effect of hydrogel and irrigation regimes on chlorophyll content, nitrogen and some growth indices and yield of forage millet (Pennisetum glaucum L.). Journal of Crop Production and Processing. 3(9): 147-161. (In Persian).
· Kholova, J., C.T.M. Hasan, M. Khocova, and V. Vadie. 2011. Does a terminal drought tolerance QTL contribute to differences in ROS scavenging enzymes and photosynthetic pigments in pear millet exposed to drought? Journal of Environmental and Experimental Botany. 71(2): 99-106.
· Lawlor, D.W., and G. Cornic. 2002. Photosynthetic carbon assimilation and associated metabolism in relation to water deficits in higher plants. Plant cell and Environment. 25: 275-294.
· Lobato, A.K.S., A.C.S. Meirlles, B.G. Santoz Filho, R.C.L. Costa, C.F. Oliveria Neto, F.J.R. Cruz, J.M.N. Freitas, E.M.S. Guedes, A.G.T. Barreto, A.S. Ferreira, B.S. Monteiro, H.K.B. Neves, and M.J.S. Lopes. 2008. Consequences of the progressive water deficit and rehydration on nitrate reductase activity and nitrogen compounds in soybean (Glycine max L.) cv. Sambaiba. Research Journal of Agronomy. 2(3): 64-70.
· Masjedi, A., A. Shokohfar, and M. Alavi Fazel. 2009. A survey of most suitable irrigation scheduling and effect of drought stress on yield for summer corn (SC.704) with class A evaporation pan in Ahvaz. Journal of Water and Soil Science. 12 (46): 543-550. (In Persian).
· Mohsenzadeh, S., M.A. Malboobi, K. Razavi, and S. Farrahi-Aschtiani. 2006. Physiological and molecular responses of Aeluropus lagopoides (Poaceae) to water deficit. Environmental and Experimental Botany. 56: 314–322.
· Moosavi, G., M. Seghatolesla, H. Javadi, and E. Ansari Nia. 2011. Effect of irrigation planting patterns on yield and qualitative traits of forage sorghum. Journal of Environmental Biology. 5(10): 3363- 3368.
· Mousavi, S.G.R., S.M.J. Mirhadi, S.A. Siadat Gh. Nourmohammadi, and F. Darvish. 2009. The effect of drought stress and nitrogen levels on yield and water use efficiency of forage millet and sorghum. Agroecology Journal. 5(15): 101-114. (In Persian).
· Munns, R. 2002. Comparative physiology of salt and water stress. Plant, Cell and Environment. 25: 239–250.
· Nabati, J., and P. Rezvani Moghadam. 2010. Effect of irrigation intervals on the yield and morphological characteristics of forage millet, sorghum and corn. Iranian Journal of Field Crop Science. 41(1): 179-186. (In Persian).
· Najafi Babady, K., P. Hassibi, H. Roshanfekr, and S. Broumand Nassab. 2018. Effect of drought stress on chlorophyll fluorescence and forage yield of two forage millet cultivars (Pennisettum americanum) var nutrifeed and (Punicum sp.) var. pishahang. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research. 16(2): 333-344. (In Persian).
· Noroozi, H., H. Roshanfekr, P. Hassibi, and M. Meskarbashee. 2013. The evaluation of some photosynthetic characteristics in two forage millet cultivars under salt stress conditions. Journal of Plant Process and Function. 2(2): 75-84. (In Persian).
· Nouri azhar, J., and P. Ehsanzedeh. 2007. Study of relationship of some growth indices and yield of five corn hybrids at two irrigation regimes in Esfahan region. Journal of Science and Technology. 41: 261- 272. (In Persian).
· Parida A.K., and A.B. Das. 2005. Salt tolerance and salinity effects on plants: a review. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety. 60: 324-349.
· Parry, M.A.J., P.J. Andraloje, S. Khan, P.J. Lea, and A.J. Keys. 2002. Rubisco activity: Effects of drought stress. Annals of Botany. 89: 833-839.
· Seghatol Eslami, M.J., M. Kafi, H. Majidi, Gh. Noormohamadi, F. Darvish, and A. Ghazi Zade. 2005. Effect of drought stress on leaf soluble sugar content, leaf rolling index and relative water content of proso millet (Panicum miliaceum L.) genotypes. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research. 3(2): 219-232. (In Persian).
· Sepaskhah, A.R., and F. Yousefi. 2007. Effect of zeolite application on nitrate and ammonium retention of a loamy soil under saturated conditions. Soil Restoration. 45: 368-373.
· Siosemardeh, A., A. Ahmadi, K. Poustini, and H. Ebrahimzedeh. 2003. Stomatal and nonstomatal limitations to photosynthesis and their relationship with drought resistance in wheat cultivars. Iranian Journal of Agricultural Science. 34: 93-106. (In Persian).
· Tohidi-Moghadam, H.R., A.H. Shirani-Rad, Gh. Nour-Mohammadi, D. Habibi Modares, S.A.M. Sanavy, M. Mashhadi Akbar Boojar, and A. Dolatabadian. 2009. Response of six oilseed rape genotypes to water stress and hydrogel application. Pesquisa Agropecuaria Tropical. 39(3): 243-250.
· Yari, P., A.H. Keshtkar, and A. Sepehri. 2014. Evaluation of water stress effect on growth and yield of spring safflower. Plant Products Technology. 14(2): 101-117. (In Persian).

Zabet, M., S. Bahamin, S. Ghoreishi, H. Sadeghi, and S.Gh. Moosavi. 2015. Effect of deficit irrigation and nitrogen fertilizer on quantitative yield of aboveground part of forage pear millet (Pennisetum glaucum) in Birjand. Environmental Stresses in Crop Sciences. 7(2): 187-194. (In Persian).