ارزیابی ارقام و لاین های سورگوم (Sorghum bicolor L.) در شرایط تنش شوری با استفاده از شاخص های تحمل

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری، گروه زراعت و اصلاح نباتات، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه شیراز، شیراز، ایران.

2 استاد، گروه زراعت و اصلاح نباتات، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه شیراز، شیراز، ایران.

3 دانشیار پژوهش، بخش تحقیقات اصلاح و تهیه نهال و بذر، مرکز تحقیقات و آموزش کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی استان یزد، سازمان تحقیقات و ترویج کشاورزی، یزد، ایران.

چکیده

به­منظور بررسی واکنش 45 لاین و رقم سورگوم به تنش شوری، آزمایشی در قالب طرح بلوک­های کامل تصادفی با سه تکرار تحت دو شرایط نرمال (شوری 2 دسی­زیمنس بر متر) و تنش شوری (شوری 12 دسی­زیمنس بر متر) در ایستگاه مرکز تحقیقات کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی استان یزد واقع در شهرستان اردکان در سال 1393 انجام شد. تنش شوری باعث کاهش میانگین شاخص­های مختلف ژنوتیپ­های مورد مطالعه شد، به­طوری­که قطر ساقه، ارتفاع بوته، تعداد برگ، شاخص سطح برگ، عملکرد علوفه تر و عملکرد علوفه خشک تحت شرایط تنش شوری به­ترتیب 45/14، 24/25، 06/18، 86/31، 19/40 و 36/32 درصد کاهش یافتند. بیشترین عملکرد علوفه خشک (28530 کیلوگرم در هکتار) تحت شرایط بدون تنش از لاین 23 (KDFGS23) و تحت شرایط تنش شوری از رقم جامبو (21042 کیلوگرم در هکتار) به­دست آمد. نتایج حاصل از ضرایب همبستگی بین عملکرد علوفه خشک تحت شرایط بدون تنش و تنش شوری با شاخص­های تحمل به تنش نشان داد که مناسب­ترین شاخص­ها برای تعیین ژنوتیپ­های متحمل، شاخص­های GMP، HAM، MP و STI بودند. بر اساس نتایج تجزیه خوشه­ای، ارقام جامبو، پگاه، سیستان، قلمی هرات، سورگوم شیرین و اسپیدفید مغان به­عنوان متحمل­ترین ارقام و لاین­های شماره 23 (KDFGS23)، 26 (KDFGS26) و رقم نکتار به­عنوان ژنوتیپ­های حساس و در عین حال مناسب برای شرایط نرمال شناخته شدند. لاین شماره 1 (KDFGS1) به­دلیل ثبات بالای عملکرد تحت شرایط تنش می­تواند در پروژه­های به­نژادی آینده مورد توجه قرار گیرد.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Evaluation of Sorghum (Sorghum bicolor L.) lines and cultivars under salinity stress using tolerance indices

نویسندگان [English]

  • Ehsan Shakeri 1
  • Yahya Emam 2
  • Seyed Ali Tabatabaei 3
1 Ph. D. Student, Dept. of Crop Production and Plant Breeding, Faculty of Agriculture, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran
2 Prof., Dept. of Crop Production and Plant Breeding, Faculty of Agriculture, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran
3 Research Assoc. Prof., Dept. of Seed and Plant Improvement Research, Yazd Agricultural and Natural Resources and Education Center, Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization (AREEO), Yazd, Iran
چکیده [English]

     To evaluate the response of 45 sorghum lines and cultivars to salinity stress, two experiments were conducted in non-stress (EC=2 dS.m-1) and salinity stress conditions (EC=12 dS.m-1) using randomized complete block design with three replications. The experiments were carried out at Ardakan research station of Agricultural and Natural Resources Research Center of Yazd, Iran, in 2014. Salinity stress significantly decreased all measured traits in lines and genotypes. Under salinity stress conditions, stem diameter, stem height, leaf number, leaf area index, fresh forage yield and dry forage yield were decreased 14.45%, 25.24%, 18.06%, 31.86%, 40.19% and 32.36%, respectively. The highest dry forage yield under non-stress and salinity stress conditions was produced by KDFGS23 (28530 kg.ha-1) and Jumbo cultivar (21042 kg.ha-1), respectively. Results of correlation coefficients among dry forage yield under non-stress and stress conditions and tolerance indices showed that GMP, HAM, MP and STI indices were the most suitable tolerance indices. Results of cluster analysis showed that Jumbo, Pegah, Sistan, Sweet sorghum, Ghalami Herat and Speedfeed (Moghan) had higher tolerance to salinity stress, while lines  KDFGS23 and KDFGS26 and Nectar cultivar had greater sensitivity to salinity stress. Since line No. 1 (KDFGS1) had greater yield stability, it worth further explorations in future breeding projects.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Cluster analysis
  • Dry forage yield
  • Morphologic characteristics
Assadi, B. and Asteki, H. 2015. Response of chitti bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) lines to drought stress based on tolerance indices. Seed and Plant Improvement Journal 31 (2): 231-248. (In Persian with English Abstract).##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.##Chogan, R., Heidari, A. R., Mohamadi, A. and Hadadi, M. H. 2008. Evaluation of drought tolerance in grain maize hybrides using drought tolerance indices. Plant and Soil 24 (3): 543-562. (In Persian with English Abstract).##Dai, X., Huo, Z. and Wang, H. 2011. Simulation for response of crop yield to soil moisture and salinity with artificial neural network. Field Crops Research 121: 441-449.##Dorostkar, S., Dadkhodaie, A. and Heidari, B. 2015. Evaluation of grain yield indices in hexaploid wheat genotypes in response to drought stress. Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science 61 (3): 397-413.##Ebrahimiyan, M., Majidi, M. M., Mirlohi, A. and Gheysari, M. 2011. Assessment of drought tolerance indices in tall fescue genotypes (Festuca arundinasea Schreb.). Journal of Rangelands and Forests Plant Breeding and Genetic Research 19 (1): 101-118. (In Persian with English Abstract).##Fernandez, G. C. J. 1992. Effective selection criteria for assessing plant stress tolerance. Proceeding of Crop Symposium, Aug. 13-18, Taiwan. pp: 257-270.##Fischer, R. A. and Maurer, R. 1978. Drought resistance in spring wheat cultivars. Ι. Grain yield responses. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 29: 897-912.##Fouman, A. 2010. Evaluation of morphological traits and qualitative and quantitative yield of forage sorghum cultivars (Sorghum bicolor L.). Iranian Journal of Crop Sciences 41 (4): 833-840. (In Persian with English Abstract).##Fouman, A. and Khazaei, A. 2014. Evaluation of forage yield of forage sorghum lines under Karaj conditions in Iran. Iranian Journal of Crop Sciences 16 (3): 181-190. (In Persian with English Abstract).##Garavandi, M., Farshadfar, E. A. and Kahrizi, D. 2010. Evaluation of drought tolerance in bread wheat advanced genotypes in field and laboratory conditions. Seed and Plant Improvement Journal 26-1 (2): 223-252. (In Persian with English Abstract).##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: 523-531.##Igartua, E., Gracia, M. P. and Lasa, J. H. 1995. Field responses of grain sorghum to a salinity gradient. Field Crops Research 42: 15-25.##Izaddoost, H., Samizadeh, H., Rabiei, B. and Abdollahi, S. 2013. Evaluation of salt tolerance in rice (Oryza sativa L.) cultivars and lines with emphasis on stress tolerance indices. Cereal Research 3 (3): 167-180. (In Persian with English Abstract).##Kamrani, M., Farzi, A. and Ebadi, A. 2015. Evaluation of grain yield performance and tolerance to drought stress in wheat genotypes using drought tolerance indices. Cereal Research 5 (3): 231-246. (In Persian with English Abstract).##Kazemzadeh Haghighi, A. 2008. Evaluation of salinity tolerance in relation to proline accumulation and soluble sugars in nine forage sorghum varieties. Biology Journal 1 (1): 15-23.##Khaksar, N., Farshadfar, E. and Mohammadi, R. 2014. Evaluation of durum wheat advanced genotypes based on drought tolerance indices. Cereal Research 3 (4): 267-279. (In Persian with English Abstract).##Krishnamurthy, L., Serraj, R., Hash, C. T., Dakheel, A. J. and Reddy, B. V. 2007. Screening sorghum genotypes for salinity tolerant biomass production. Euphytica 156: 15-24.##Lacerda, C. F., Cambraia, J., Oliva, M. A., Ruiz, H. A. and Prisco, J. T. N. 2003. Solute accumulation and distribution during shoot and leaf development in two sorghum genotypes under salt stress. Environmental and Experimental Botany 49: 107-120.##Lobell, D. B., Ortiz-Monsterio, J. I., Gurrola, F. C. and Valenzuuela, L. 2007. Identification of saline soils with multiyear remote sensing of crop yields. Soil Science Society of America Journal 71: 777-783.##Moameni, A. 2010. Geographical distribution and salinity levels of soil resources of Iran. Soil Research Journal 24: 203-215. (In Persian with English Abstract).##Min, W.,  Guo, H., Zhou, G., Zhang, W.,  Ma, L., Ye, J. and  Hou, Z. 2014. Root distribution and growth of cotton as affected by drip irrigation with saline water. Field Crops Research 169: 1-10.##Munns, R. and James, R. A. 2003. Screening methods for salinity tolerance: a case study with tetraploid wheat. Plant and Soil 253: 201-218.##Noble, C. L., Halloran, G. M. and West, D. W. 1984. Identification and selection for salt tolerance in Lucerne (Medicago sativa L.). Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 35: 239-252.##Ould Ahmed, B. A., Yamamoto, T., Rasiah, V., Inoue, M. and Anyoji, H. 2007. The impact of saline water irrigation management options in a dune sand on available soil water and its salinity. Agricultural Water Management 88: 63-72.##Reddy, B. V. S., Ashok Kumar, A., Sanjana Reddy, P., Ibrahim, M., Ramaiah, B., Dakheel, A. J., Ramesh, S. and Krishnamurthy, L. 2010. Cultivar options for salinity tolerance in sorghum. Journal of SAT Agricultural Research 8: 1-5. Available online at: http:// ejournal.icrisat.org.##Riasat, M., Jafari, A. A. and Safavi, Y. 2015. Investigation on forage yield of several accessions of Elymus pertenuis in dry and irrigated conditions based on drought tolerance indices in Fars Province. Iranian Journal of Rangelands and Forests Plant Breeding and Genetic Research 23 (2): 247-258. (In Persian with English Abstract).##Rosielle, A. A. and Hamblin, J. 1981. Theoretical aspects of selection for yield in stress and non-stress environments. Crop Science 21: 943-946.##Saadat, S. and Homaee, M. 2015. Modeling sorghum response to irrigation water salinity at early growth stage. Agricultural Water Management 152: 119-124.##Siosehmardeh, A., Ahmadi, A., Poustini, K. and Mohammadi, V. 2006. Evaluation of drought resistance indices under various environmental conditions. Field Crops Research 98: 222-229.##Soleimani, M. R., Kafi, M., Ziaee, M. and Shabahang, J. 2008. Effect of limited irrigation with saline water on forage of two local populations of Kochia scoparia L. Schrad. Journal of Water and Soil 22: 148-156. (In Persian with English Abstract).##Tari, I., Laskay, G., Takacs, Z. and Poor, P. 2013. Response of sorghum to abiotic stresses: A review. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science 199 (4): 264-274.##Tavakkoli, E., Paull, J., Rengasamy, P. and McDonald, G. K. 2012. Comparing genotypic variation in faba bean (Vicia faba L.) in response to salinity in hydroponic and field experiments. Field Crops Research 127: 99-108.##Torres-Netto, A., Compostrinill, E., Oliveiral, J. G. and Yananishi, O. K. 2002. Portable chlorophyll meter for quantification on photosynthetic pigments, nitrogen and the possible use for assessment of the photochemical process in Carica papaya. Brazilian Journal of Plant Physiology 14: 205-210.##Verma, O. P. S. and Yadava, R. B. R. 1986. Salt tolerance of some oats (Avena sativa L.) varieties at germination and seedling stage. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science 156: 123-127.##Wakeel, A., 2013. Potassium-sodium interactions in soil and plant under saline-sodic conditions. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science 176: 344-354.##Yarami, N. and Sepaskhah, A. R. 2015. Saffron response to irrigation water salinity, cow manure and planting method. Agricultural Water Management 150: 57-66.