تعیین شاخص های تحمل به خشکی تعدادی از ژنوتیپ های منتخب برنج تحت تنش خشکی در مرحله گلدهی

نوع مقاله : علمی پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری تخصصی، گروه زراعت، دانشکده کشاورزی، واحد چالوس، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، چالوس، ایران

2 دانشیار، گروه زراعت و اصلاح نباتات، دانشکده کشاورزی، واحد چالوس، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، چالوس، ایران

3 استادیار، گروه زراعت و اصلاح نباتات، دانشکده کشاورزی، واحد چالوس، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، چالوس، ایران

4 مربی پژوهشی، گروه زراعت و اصلاح نباتات، دانشکده کشاورزی، واحد چالوس، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، چالوس، ایران

10.30495/jcep.2020.679064

چکیده

ﺗﻨﺶ ﺧﺸﮑﯽ ﺑﻪ­ﻋﻨﻮان ﯾﮏ چالش مهم در ﮐﺎﻫﺶ ﺗﻮﻟﯿﺪ در ﮔﯿﺎﻫﺎن ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﺷﺪه اﺳﺖ، معهذا ﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﯾﯽ و معرفی ژﻧﻮﺗﯿﭗﻫﺎی متحمل ﺑﻪ ﺗﻨﺶ خشکی ﯾﮑﯽ از راهﮐﺎرﻫﺎی ﻏﻠﺒﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺷﺮاﯾﻂ ﻧﺎﻣﺴﺎﻋﺪ ﻣﺤﯿﻄﯽ اﺳﺖ. ﺑﻪﻣﻨﻈﻮر ﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﯾﯽ ژﻧﻮﺗﯿﭗﻫﺎی ﻣﺘﺤﻤﻞ و ﺣﺴﺎس ﺑﺮﻧﺞ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻨﺶ ﺧﺸﮑﯽ در مرحله گلدهی در شرایط مزرعه­ای ﺑﺮ اﺳﺎس ﺷﺎﺧﺺﻫﺎی ﺗﺤﻤﻞ و ﺣﺴﺎﺳﯿﺖ، آزﻣﺎﯾﺸﯽ ﺑﺎ 15 ژﻧﻮﺗﯿﭗ ﺑﺮﻧﺞ در ﻗﺎﻟﺐ ﻃﺮح ﺑﻠﻮکﻫﺎی ﮐﺎﻣﻞ ﺗﺼﺎدﻓﯽ ﺑﺎ ﺳﻪ ﺗﮑﺮار در دو ﻣﺤﯿﻂ ﺑﺪون ﺗﻨﺶ (ﻏﺮﻗﺎب) و ﺗﻨﺶ ﺧﺸﮑﯽ در ﺳﺎل زراﻋﯽ 1397 در دو منطقه عباس آباد و کتالم اﺟﺮا ﮔﺮدﯾﺪ. برای ارزیابی میزان حساسیت یا تحمل ژنوتیپ­ها به تنش خشکی، عملکرد ژنوتیپ­ها در شرایط بدون تنش (Yp) و تنش خشکی (Ys) و میانگین عملکرد کلیه ژنوتیپ­ها در شرایط بدون تنش () و تنش ()، شاخص­های تحمل تنش، میانگین حسابی (MP)، میانگین هندسی (GMP)، میانگین هارمونیک (HM)، تحمل (TOL)، تحمل به تنش (STI)، شاخص پایداری عملکرد (YSI)، شاخص عملکرد (YI) و حساسیت به تنش (SSI) مورد ارزیابی قرار گرفتند. از میان ژﻧﻮﺗﯿﭗﻫـــﺎی مورد مطالعه ژنوتیپ­های شصتک (62/54) و علی کاظمی (92/46) ﺑﻪﺗﺮﺗﯿــﺐ ﺑﯿﺸــﺘﺮﯾﻦ ﻣﻘــﺪار را ﺑــﺮای شاخص  HMﻧﺸﺎن دادﻧﺪ. ﺑﺮ ﻣﺒﻨﺎی ﺷــﺎﺧﺺ MP و GMP، ژنوتیپ­های شصتک (04/61) و سنگ طارم (15/3) و بر ﻣﺒﻨﺎی شاخص STI ﺑه­ترتیب ژنوتیپ­های شصتک (54/1) و علی کاظمی (08/1) برتر بودند. ﮐﻤﺘﺮﯾﻦ ﻣﻘﺪار ﺷﺎﺧﺺ حساسیت به تنش (SSI) و ﺑﯿﺸﺘﺮﯾﻦ ﻣﻘﺪار شاخص پایداری عملکرد (YSI) ﺑـــﺎ روﻧـــﺪ رﺗﺒـــﻪ ﻣﺸـــﺎﺑﻪ ﺑـــﻪﺗﺮﺗﯿـــﺐ ﺑـــﺮای ژنوتیپ­های شیرودی (32/0) و خزر (76/0) ﻣﺤﺎﺳﺒﻪ ﺷﺪ. ﻋﻤﻠﮑﺮد در ﺷــﺮاﯾﻂ ﺗــﻨﺶ (Ys) ارﺗﺒــﺎط ﻣﺜﺒــﺖ و ﻣﻌﻨﯽداری ﺑــﺎ ﻫﻤــﻪ ﺷــﺎﺧﺺﻫﺎی ﺗﻨﺶ به جز شاخص­های تحمل (TOL) و میانگین هندسی (GMP) ﻧﺸﺎن داد. تجزیه کلاستر بر اساس 10 شاخص مورد مطالعه در شرایط تنش خشکی باعث تشکیل 2 گروه گردید. بر اساس نتایج تجزیه به مؤلفه­های اصلی، دو مؤلفه اول بیش از 6/92 درصد از اطلاعات کل را شامل شدند. مؤلفه اول 76/58 درصد تغییرات کل را توجیه کرد. با توجه به شاخص تحمل خشکی ژنوتیپ­های شصتک، علی­کاظمی و سنگ­طارم نظر به دارا بودن بیشترین میزان عملکرد در هر دو شرایط محیطی و داشتن شاخص تحمل به تنش بالا به­عنوان ژنوتیپ­های متحمل پیشنهاد می­شوند.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Determination of Drought Tolerance Indices of some Selected Rice Genotypes under Drought Stress at Flowering Stage

نویسندگان [English]

  • Zeinab Heravi Zadeh 1
  • Morteza Samdaliri 2
  • Morteza Mobaleghi 2
  • Amir Abbas Mosavi 3
  • Mojtaba Neshaei Moghadam 4
1 Ph.D. Student of Agronomy, Chalus Branch, Islamic Azad University, Chalus, Iran
2 Associate Professor, Department of Agronomy and Plant Breeding, Chalus Branch, Islamic Azad University, Chalus, Iran
3 Assistant Professor, Department of Agronomy and Plant Breeding, Chalus Branch, Islamic Azad University, Chalus, Iran
4 Staff Member, Department of Agronomy and Plant Breeding, Chalus Branch, Islamic Azad University, Chalus, Iran
چکیده [English]

Drought stress, as an important constraint to reduce crop yields in Iran. To identify rice genotypes tolerant and sensitive to drought stress during flowering 15 genotypes were studied under two environments (stressed and non–stressed conditions) in a randomized complete block design with three replications at Abbas Abad and Katalom regions during 2018 growing season. To evaluate the susceptibility or tolerance of genotypes to drought stress, traits like yield under non-stress (Yp) and drought stress (Ys) and average yield of all genotypes under stress and nonstress (Ȳs), stress tolerance indicators, arithmetic mean (MP), geometric mean (GMP), harmonic mean (HM), tolerance (TOL), stress tolerance (STI), yield index (YSI), yield index (YI) and sensitivity to stress (SSI) were evaluated. Among the genotypes under study, sixty (54.62) and Ali Kazemi (46.92) showed the highest values for HM index. Shastack based on MP and GMP, shastack (61.04) and Tarom genotype (3.15) and STI index with similar trend to shastack (1.54) and Ali Kazemi (1.08) genotypes, respectively. Stress sensitivity (SSI) and yield stability index (YSI) values were similar for both genotypes of Shirudi (0.32) and Caspian (0.76). Cluster analysis based on 10 indices under drought stress resulted in two groups. Based on the results of principal component analysis, the first two components accounted for more than 92.6% of total information. The first component explained 58.76% of the total variation. According to the drought tolerance index of Shastak, Ali Kazemi and Sang Tarom genotypes are recommended as tolerant genotypes having the highest yield in both environmental conditions and having high stress tolerance index.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Drought tolerance
  • genotype
  • tolerance index
  • Grain yield
· Amini, A.R., A. Soleymani, and M.H. Shahrajabian. 2012. Assess the usefulness of various indices and yield potential in identifying cultivars of barley adapted to water stress. International Journal of Agriculture and Crop Sciences. 4(7): 364-367.
· Aminpanah, H., P. Sharifi and A.A. Ebadi. 2018. Evaluation of drought response in some rice mutant lines using stress tolerance indices. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research. 16(1):191-202. (In Persian).
· Bahrami, F., A. Arzani, and V. Karimi. 2014. Evaluation of yield-based drought tolerance indices for screening safflower genotypes. Agronomy Journal. 106(4): 1219-1224.
· Blum, A. 2005. Drought resistance, water-use efficiency, and yield potential are they compatible, dissonant, or mutually exclusive? Australian Journal of Agricultural Research. 56(11): 1159-1168.
· Dixit, S., A. Singh, and A. Kumar. 2014. Rice breeding for high grain yield under drought: a strategic solution to a complex problem. International Journal of Agronomy. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/863683.
· Erfani, F., and E. Shekarpour, A. Momeni, and R. Erfani. 2010. Selection of drought tolerant rice genotypes under different irrigation conditions. First National Conference on Sustainable Agriculture and Healthy Product Production. (In Persian).
· Fageria, N.K., V.C. Baligar, and R. Clark. 2006. Physiology of crop production. CRC Press.
· Farooq, M., A. Wahid, N. Kobayashi, D.B.S.M.A. Fujita, and S.M.A. Basra. 2009. Plant drought stress: effects, mechanisms and management. In sustainable agriculture (pp. 153-188). Springer, Dordrecht.
· Farshadfar, E., M.M. Poursiahbidi, and A.R. Pour Abooghadareh. 2012. Repeatability of drought tolerance indices in bread wheat genotypes. International Journal of Agriculture and Crop Sciences. 4 (13): 891-903.
· Fischer, K.S., R. Lafitte, S. Fukai, G. Atlin, and B. Hardy. 2003. Breeding rice for drought-prone environments. Los Baños, IRRI, 98.
· Ghiasi Oskoei, M., H. Sabouri, V. Farahbakhsh, and Gh. Mohammad nejad. 2013. Evaluation of rice genotypes under drought stress. First National Conference on Non-Biological Plant Stresses, Isfahan University of Isfahan. (In Persian).
· Ghiasi Oskoei, M., H.S. Farahbakhsh, and G. Mohamadinejad. 2014. Evaluation of rice cultivars in drought and normal conditions based on sensitive and tolerance indices. Journal of Crop Production. 6(4): 55-75.
· Goel, P., M. Bhuria, R. Sinha, T.R. Sharma, and A.K. Singh. 2019. Promising transcription factors for salt and drought tolerance in plants. In molecular approaches in plant biology and environmental challenges (pp. 7-50). Springer, Singapore. Blum, Abraham. Plant breeding for stress environments. CRC press, 2018.
· Jalilvandy, A.M., and M. Rozrokh. 2013. Assessment of drought tolerance indices in wheat genotypes. International Journal of Agriculture and Crop Sciences. 6(7): 370-374.
· Kabiri, R., F. Nasibi, and R. Farahbakhsh. 2014. Effect of exogenous salicylic acid on some physiological parameters and alleviation of water stress in Nigella sativa plant under hydroponic culture. Plant Protection Sciences. 50: 43-51.
· Karami, H., A. Maleki, and A. Fathi. 2018. Determination effect of mycorrhiza and vermicompost on accumulation of seed nutrient elements in maize (Zea mays L.) affected by chemical fertilizer. Journal of Crop Nutrition Science. 4(3): 15-29.‏
· Lafitte, R. 2003. Managing water for controlled drought in breeding plots. In: Fischer, R.A., R. Lafitte, S. Fukai, G. Altin and B. Hardy. (eds.). Breeding rice for drought-prone environment. International Rice Research Institute, Los Banos, Philippines.
· Limouchi, K., M. Yarnia, A. Siyadat, V. Rashidi, and A. Guilani. 2017. The effect of different irrigation regimes on floret and root anatomy of aerobic rice genotypes in Khuzestan, Iran. Applied Ecology and Environmental Research. 15(4): 1947-1970.
· Ilker, E., Ö. Tatar, F. Aykut Tonk, and S. Tosun. 2011. Determination of tolerance level of some wheat genotypes to post-anthesis drought. Turkish Journal of Field Crops. 16(1): 59-63.
· Malakouti, M. 2011. Relationship between balanced fertilization and healthy agricultural products (A Review). Journal of Crop Ecophysiology. 4(16): 133-150. (In Persian).
· Maleki, A., A. Heidari, A. Siadat, A. Tahmasebi, and A. Fathi. 2011. Effect of supplementary irrigation on yield, yield components and protein percentages of chickpea cultivars in Ilam, Iran. Journal of Crop Ecophysiology. 5(3): 65-75. (In Persian).
· Mohammadi, R., M. Armion, D. Kahrizi, and A. Amri. 2012. Efficiency of screening techniques for evaluating durum wheat genotypes under mild drought conditions. International Journal of Plant Production. 4(1): 11-24.
· Pirdashti, H., Z.T. Sarvestani, G. Nematzadeh, and A. Ismail. 2004. Study of water stress effects in different growth stage on yield components of different rice (Oryza sativa L.) cultivars. New directions for a diverse planet: Proceeding of 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane, Australia, 26 Sep. – 1 Oct.
· Raman, A., S. Verulkar, N. Mandal, M. Variar, V. Shukla, J. Dwivedi, B. Singh, O. Singh, P. Swain, A. Mall, S. Robin, R. Chandrababu, A. Jain, T. Ram, S. Hittalmani, S. Haefele, H.P. Piepho, and A. Kumar. 2012. Drought yield index to select high yielding rice lines under different drought stress severities. Rice. 5: 31. 28.
· Safaei Chaeikar, S., B. Rabiei, H. Samizadeh, and M. Esfahani .2008. Evaluation of tolerance to terminal drought stress in rice (Oryza sativa L.) genotypes. Iranian Journal of Crop Science. 9: 315–331. (In Persian).
· Salehifar, M., B. Rabiei, M. Afshar Mohammadian, and J. Asghari. 2014. Effect of IAA and Kinetin application on plant characteristics and chlorophyll fluorescence parameters in rice seedlings under drought stress condition. Iranian Journal of Crop Sciences. 16(4): 293-307. (In Persian).
· Tabkhkar, N., B. Rabiei, H. Samizadeh, and M. Hosseini chaleshtori. 2018. Assessment of rice genotypes response to drought stress at the early reproductive stage using stress tolerance indices. Isfahan University of Technology-Journal of Crop Production and Processing. 7(4): 83-106. (In Persian).
· Toorchi, M. 2015. The response of rice root to time course water deficit stress-two dimensional electrophoresis approach. Journal of Crop Ecophysiology. 9(35): 371-386. (In Persian).
· Venuprasad. R., H.R. Lafitte, and G.N. Atlin. 2007. Response to direct selection for grain yield under drought stress in rice. Crop Scisence. 47: 285-293.
· Falah shamsi, S., M. Esfehani, M. Ghodsi, and H. Samizadeh. 2013. Effect of water deficit stress on grain quantity and quality of native and modified rice genotypes. First National Conference on Non-Biological Plant Stresses. Isfahan University of Isfahan. (In Persian).
Xu, L., L. Han, and B. Huang. 2011. Antioxidant enzyme activities and gene expression patterns in leaves of Kentucky bluegrass in response to drought and post-drought recovery. Journal of American Society Horticulture Scisence. 136: 247–255.