- همه نشریات
- علوم آب و خاک
- علوم اقتصاد و ترویج کشاورزی
- علوم جنگل, مرتع و آبخیزداری
- علوم دامی و شیلات
- علوم زراعی و باغی
- علوم گیاهپزشکی
- علوم مهندسی و مکانیزاسیون کشاورزی
- مجلات ترویجی
- نشریات انجمن ها
- نشریات با زبان انگلیسی
- نشریات با زبان فارسی
- نشریات دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی
- نشریات علمی پژوهشی
- نشریات علمی پژوهشی سازمان تحقیقات, آموزش و ترویچ
- نشریات علمی ترویجی
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 273 |
| تعداد نشریات سازمان | 72 |
| تعداد شماره‌ها | 1,624 |
| تعداد مقالات | 18,643 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 10,316,101 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 7,517,360 |
شناسایی ژنوتیپ‌های برتر متحمل خشکی جو (Hordeum vulgare L.) با استفاده از شاخص‌های تحمل به تنش | ||
| پژوهش های کاربردی زراعی | ||
| مقاله 2، دوره 31، شماره 4 - شماره پیاپی 121، زمستان 1397، صفحه 90-105 اصل مقاله (617.99 K) | ||
| نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22092/aj.2019.121794.1293 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
محمد شریفی الحسینی  ؛ مجید طاهریان
| ||
| استادیار بخش تحقیقات زراعی و باغی ،مرکز تحقیقات و آموزش کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی خراسان رضوی ، سازمان تحقیقات ،آموزش و ترویج کشاورزی ،ایران ، مشهد | ||
| چکیده | ||
| خشکی حدود 40 تا 60% اراضی کشاورزی دنیا را تحت تاثیر قرار می دهد. ایران با متوسط نزولات آسمانی 240 میلی متر در زمره مناطق خشک و نیمه خشک دنیا قرار می گیرد. به منظور شناسایی بهترین شاخص های تحمل تنش و سپس گزینش برترین ژنوتیپ های جو، این آزمایش با تعداد 20 رقم و لاین امیدبخش جو در قالب طرح بلوکهای کامل تصادفی در سه تکرار در دو شرایط ( آبیاری نرمال و قطع آبیاری بعد از 50% سنبله دهی) در ایستگاه تحقیقات کشاورزی طرق به مدت دو سال مورد مطالعه قرار گرفت. شاخص‌هایتحملتنشبااستفادهازمیانگیندوسالهعملکرددرهرمحیطمحاسبه شدند که عبارت بودند از MP, GMP, STI,SSI, TOL, YI, YSI, RDI. بررسی همبستگی بین شاخص ها و عملکرد دانه در دو محیط تنش و بدون تنش با استفاده از نمودار بای پلات ، نشان داد که شاخص های MP,GMP و STI بهترین شاخص ها جهت شناسایی ژنوتیپ های برتر در دو محیط آزمایش بودند. همچنین بر اساس چند ضلعی GIBiplot لاین های 6، 20 و 15 برترین ژنوتیپ ها شناخته شدند. بررسی همزمان عملکرد و پایداری ژنوتیپ ها با استفاده از GGEBiplot بر اساس عملکرد دانه در مجموع دو شرایط نیز نشان داد که ژنوتیپ های 6، 15 و 20 با داشتن عملکرد و پایداری بالا بهترین ژنوتیپ ها بودند. همچنین لاین شماره 6 در بای پلات تعیین ژنوتیپ ایده ال به عنوان ژنوتیپ برتر شناخته شد. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| اثر متقابل ژنوتیپ و محیط؛ جو؛ شاخص های تنش؛ GGEbiplot؛ GGIbiplot | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| Identification of drought tolerant barley genotypes (Hordeum vulgare L.) using drought tolerance indices | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| mohammad sharifi- alhosseini؛ M. Taherian | ||
| Associated professor of Agronomic and Horticulture Crops Research Department, Khorasan-e Razavi Agricultural and Natural Research and Education Center , Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization (AREEO), Mashhad, Iran | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| Drought stress affects 40-60% of agricultural lands all over the world(Bray, 2002). Having 240 mm precipitation, Iran is located in arid and semi-arid parts of the word. Due to shortage of rainfall in Iran, a big share of crop breeding is devoted to drought tolerance. It has been resulted in stable varieties. Although barley is more tolerant to drought stresscompared to other cereals, however it is susceptible to moisture shortage during tillering and grain formation which would result in yield losses (Nevo and Chen, 2010). Introduction: Yield is the most direct index for evaluation of response to stress. Although grain yield is affected by environmental factors but it is an index to evaluate response of cereals to environmental stress. The propose of drought tolerant genotypes is to provide relatively tolerant varieties so that showing less yield losses compared to other genotypes. Different yield based indices have been suggested. All these indices consider yield under two condition that is stress and no stress (Fernandez, 1992). Material and methods: twenty varieties and promising lines of barley were compared in a randomized complete block design with three replication under two irrigation conditions (normal and water lack after 50% of ear emergence).The experiment was carried out at research station of Torogh for two years. Farm preparation, cultivation and sowing were implemented as standard protocol for experiment. Under normal condition, 3-4 irrigation ere applied according to crop water demand while irrigation was cut after 50% of ear emergence under stress condition. Stress tolerance indices were calculated based on two years means which areMP, GMP, STI, SSI, TOL, YI, YSI, RDI. Data were analyzed and Duncan mean comparison as done (SAS 9.1.3.).Biplot analysis was adopted by GEA-R software. Result and discussion: applying GIBplot based on studied indices made it easy to compare genotypes. There was no significant difference between yield correlations under normal and stress conditions. Genotype*environment interaction was significant over two years of experiments which shows provoking high level of stress. Blum (1999) and Panthuwan et al. (2002), belived that potential yield could only affect yield under normal condition or low stress but under highly stress, genotype*environment interaction would significantly decide level of crop yield.Biplot correlation equations could explain relation between grain yield and calculated indices where GMP, MP and STI were the best ones under both conditions. Lines 6, 20 and 15 were identified as superior gentypes based on GIBplot polygon. Keeping in view both yield and stability adopting GGEBIplot same results were obtained. Line 6 was ideal genotype in biplot. Results showed that GIBplot and GGEBiplot were suitable methods for identifying superior genotypes based on biplot indices considering both yield and stability. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها [English] | ||
| tolerance indices, GGEbiplot, GGIbiplot, interaction genotype &Environment | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
Amini, A, Amirnia, R., and Ghazvini, H.A. 2015. Evaluation of salinity tolerance in breed wheat genotypes under field conditions. Seed and Plant Improvement Journal, 31(1): 95-115. (In Persian with English summary).
Ashraf, M., and Harris, P.J.C. 2006. Abiotic stresses. International book distributing Co.
Blum, A. 1999. Improving wheat grain filling under stress by stem reserves mobilization.Euphytica, 100:77-83.
Bouslama, M., and Schapaugh, W.T. 1984. Stress tolerance in soybean. Part 1. Evaluation of three screening techniques for heat and drought tolerance. Crop Science, 24:933-937.
Bray, E.A. 2002. Classification of genes differentially expressed during water-deficit stress in Arabidopsis thaliana: an analysis micro-array and differential expression data. Annual Botany, 89:803-811.
Ceccarelli, S., and Grando, S. 1996.Drought as a challenge for the plant breeder.Plant Growth Regulation, 20: 149-155.
Ceccarelli, S. 1987. Yield potential and drought tolerance ofsegregation populations of barley in contrasting environments. Euphytica, 36:265–273.
Clarke, J.M., DePauw, R.M., and TownleySmith, T.F. 1992. Evaluation of methods for quantification of drought tolerance in wheat. Crop Science, 32:723-728.
Ehdaie, B., Alloush, G.A., and Waines, J.G. 2008. Genotypic variation in linear rate of grain growth and contribution of stem reserves to grain yield in wheat. Field Crops Research, 106: 34–43.
Farshadfar, E., Jamshidi, B., and Aghaee, M. 2012. Biplot analysis of drought tolerance indicators in breed wheat landraces of Iran. Internatinal Journal of Agriculturre and Crop Science, 4(5):226-233.
Fernandez, G. C. 1992. Effective selection criteria for assessing plant stress tolerance. In: proceeding of the International Symposium on Adaptation of Vegetables and other food Crops in Temperature and Water Stress, 13-16 Aug., 1992, Taiwan, pp. 257-270.
Fischer, R.A., and Maurer, R. 1978. Drought resistance in spring wheat cultivars. Part 1: grain yield response. Austuralian Journal of Agricultural Research, 29:897-912.
Fischer, R.A., and Wood, J.T. 1979. Drought resistance in spring wheat cultivars. Part 3: yield association with morpho-phisiological traits. Austuralian Journal of Agricultural Research,30:1001-1020.
Gabriel, K.R. 1971. The biplot graphic display of matrices with application to principal component analysis. Biometrika, 58: 453-467.
Gavuzzi, P., Rizza F., Palumbo, M., Campaline, R.G., Ricciardi, G.L., and Borghi, B. 1997. Evaluation of field and laboratory predictors of drought and heat tolerance in winter cereals. Canadian Journal of Plant Science, 77 (4): 523-531.
Greenway, H., and Munns, R. 1980. Mechanisms of salt tolerance in non-halophytes. Annual Review of Plant Physiology, 31:149-190.
Guttieri, M.J., Stark, J.C., Brien, K.O., and Souza, E. 2001. Relative sensitivity of spring wheat grain yield and quality parameters to moisture deficit. Crop Science, 41:327-335.
Mohammadi, R., Armion, M., Kahrizi, D., Amri, A. 2010. Efficiency of screening techniques for evaluating durum wheat genotypes under mild drought conditions. International Journal of Plant Production, 4(1):1735-8043.
Munns, R., and Tester, M. 2008. Mechanisms of salinity tolerance. Annual Review of Plant Biology, 59:651-681.
Nevo, E., and Chen, G. 2010. Drought and salt tolerances in wild relatives for wheat and barley improvement. Plant Cell Environment, 33:670-685.
Nikkhah, H. R., and Dehghani, H. 2014.The effect of late-terminal drought stress on yield and many physiological characteristics in barley varieties and lines. Journal of Water Research in Agriculture, 27(4): 535-549.
Nor Mohamadi, G., Seiadat, A., and Kashani, A. 2001. Cereal Agronomy.Vol. 1.Shahid Chamran University Publications.Ahvaz, Iran (in Persian).
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, 41:45-54.
Pireivatlou, A.S., Masjedlou, B.D., and Aliyev, R.T. 2010. Evaluation of yield potential and stress adaptive trait in wheat genotypes under post anthesis drought stress conditions. African Journal of Agriculture Research,5:2829-2836.
Ramirez, P., and Kelly, J.D. 1998. Traits related to drought resistance in common bean. Euphytica, 99:127-136.
Richards, R.A., Condon, A.G., and Rebetzke, G.J. 2001.Traits to improve yield in dry environments. Pp. 88-100, in: M.P. Reynolds, J.I. Ortiz-Monasterio and A. McNab (eds), Application of physiology in wheat breeding. Mexico, D.F. (CIMMYT).
Rosielle, A.A., and Hamblin J. 1981. Theoretical aspects of selection for yield in stress and non-stress environment. Crop Science, 42:1441-1446.
Salehi, M., and Mosavat, S.A. 2008. Selection criteria of wheat genotypes under salt stress in Golestan province.Electronic Journal of Crop Production, 1(4):19-33. (In Persian with English summary).
Schulte, D., Close, T.J., Graner, A., Langridge, P., Matsumoto, T., Muehlbauer, G., Sato, K., Schulman, A.H., Waugh, R., Wise, R.P., and Stein, N. 2009. The international barley sequencing consortium-at the threshold of efficient access to the barley genome. Plant Physiology, 149:142-147.
Sedigh, S., Zabet, M., Ghaderi, M.G., and Samadzadeh, A.R. 2016. Identification of superior varieties of cotton under drought stress and normal conditions using GGEbiplot and GTBiplot method . Journal of Crop Breeding, 8(19): 134-144.
Shannon, M.C. 1984. Breeding, selection, and the genetics of salt tolerance, In: Salinity Tolerance in Plants: Strategies for Crop Improvement. R.C. Staples andG.H. Toenniessen (Eds). New York (USA).
Sio-se Mardeh, A., Ahmadi, A., Poustini, K., and Mohammadi,V. 2006. Evaluationof drought resistance indices under various environmental conditions. Field CropsResearch, 98: 222-229.
Taherian, M., Rasoulnia, A.R., Bihamta, M.R., Peyghambari, A., and Alizadeh, H. 2017. Evaluation of stress tolerance indices in iranian barley genotypes under salinity and drought conditions. Agricultural communications, 5(3): 7-17.
Talebi, R., Fayaz, F., and Naji., A. M. 2009. Effective selection criteria for assessing drought stress tolerance in durum wheat (Triticum durum Desf.). General and Applied Plant Physiology, 35: 64-74.
Yan, W., Hunt, L.A., Sheng, Q., and Szlavincs, Z. 2000. Cultivar evaluation based on yield trial data with special reference to winter wheat in Ontario. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, Canada. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 46 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 30 |
||
