ارزیابی عملکرد و اجزای عملکرد برخی ژنوتیپ‌های لوبیا چیتی L.) (Phaseolus vulgaris در شرایط محدودیت آب انتهای فصل

نوع مقاله : علمی - پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشگاه علوم کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی ساری

2 دانشگاه علوم کشاورزی و نابع طبیعی ساری

3 دانشگاه زنجان

4 دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد اردبیل

چکیده

لوبیا چیتی L.) (Phaseolus vulgaris گیاهی حساس به تنش خشکی است، در عین حال در این گیاه از لحاظ مقاومت به خشکی تنوع ژنتیکی مشاهده می‌شود. به‌منظور بررسی اثر تنش خشکی بر عملکرد و اجزای عملکرد ارقام لوبیا چیتی کشت‌شده در استان زنجان، آزمایشی در مزرعه تحقیقاتی دانشگاه زنجان، در سال 1391 به‌صورت کرت‌های خرد شده بر پایه‌ بلوک‌های کامل تصادفی در چهار تکرار، انجام شد. سطوح آبیاری (شاهد و تنش خشکی) در کرت‌های اصلی و ارقام لوبیا چیتی (محلی خمین، صدری، Ks21193 و Ks21189) در کرت‌های فرعی قرار داده شدند. نتایج به-دست آمده نشان داد که تنش خشکی، ژنوتیپ و اثر متقابل تنش در ژنوتیپ بر کلیه صفات مورد بررسی معنی‌دار بود، تنها استثنا در صفت عملکرد بیولوژیک بود که میان ژنوتیپ‌ها تفاوت معنی‌داری مشاهده نشد. تنش خشکی تعداد غلاف در بوته، تعداد دانه در غلاف، وزن صد دانه، عملکرد دانه، عملکرد بیولوژیک و شاخص برداشت را کاهش داد. یافته‌ها نشان داد که در شرایط تنش خشکی بیشترین تعداد غلاف در بوته (2/9)، تعداد دانه در غلاف (91/2)، عملکرد دانه (6/741 کیلوگرم در هکتار)، عملکرد بیولوژیک (2857 کیلوگرم در هکتار) و شاخص برداشت (31/27 درصد) متعلق به ژنوتیپ Ks21189 بود. همچنین این ژنوتیپ افت کمتری از نظر صفات مذکور در شرایط محدودیت آب داشت. بنابراین، پایداری بیشتری در شرایط تنش کم‌آبی نسبت به دیگر ژنوتیپ‌ها نشان داد. لذا به نظر می‌رسد می‌توان آن را به‌عنوان ژنوتیپ متحمل به تنش کمبود آب معرفی کرد. ژنوتیپ صدری با کاهش عملکرد 18/80 % حساسترین ژنوتیپ به کمبود آب بود. بررسی ضرایب همبستگی، نشانگر همبستگی مثبت و معنی‌دار عملکرد بیولوژیک، تعداد غلاف در بوته و تعداد دانه در غلاف با عملکرد دانه می‌باشد. به‌عبارت‌دیگر ژنوتیپ‌هایی که در شرایط تنش خشکی عملکرد بیولوژیک بالاتری دارند، تعداد غلاف در بوته و دانه در غلاف بیشتری تولید کرده و نهایتاً عملکرد بالاتری دارند.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Evaluation of Yield and Yield Components of Some Pinto bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Genotypes under Late Season Water Deficit Conditions

نویسندگان [English]

  • somayyeh soheili movahhed 1
  • mohammadali esmaeili 2
  • farhad jabbari 3
  • aghil fouladi 4
1 mohaghegh ardabili
2 Sari Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources
3 zanjan university
4 islamic azad university ardabil branch
چکیده [English]

Introduction
Drought or water deficit stress is the most important environmental factor which has severe negative impacts on crop yields, especially when the water stress occurs in the flowering stage. Iran is located in arid and semi-arid areas, therefore, attention to the effects of water deficit stress in different stages of plants growth seems necessary. Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) is one of the most important legumes that has a major contribution to human diet and provides an important part of the human protein. According to studies, cultivation areas of legumes in Iran are about 97300 hectares and its total production is about 208350 tons of grain. Bean is a fast-growing plant (Tran and Singh, 2002), thus soil water must be sufficiently available to ensure its desirable growth and yield. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of drought stress on yield and yield components of some pinto bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) cultivated in Zanjan province.
Materials and methods
An experiment was conducted as spilt plot based on randomized complete block design with four replications in Zanjan university research farm. Irrigation levels (control and drought stress) and genotypes (Local khomein, Sadri, Ks21193 and Ks21189) were set in the main and subplot, respectively. Water deficit stress was applied during flowering stage (50% of the plants were at anthesis). Sampling was performed to measure yield and yield components at the end of the growth period and final maturity. In this experiment number of pod per Plant, numberof grain per pod, 100 grain weight, grain yield, biological yield and harvest index were measured.
Results and Discussion
In this experiment it was observed that drought stress, genotype and interact irrigation×genotyps were significantly for all traits except biological yield. Drought stress reduced number of pod perplant, number of grain per pod, 100 grain weight, grain yield, biological yield and Harvest Index. Results indicated that Ks21189 genotype showed maximum number of pod perplant (9.2), number of grain per pod (2.91), 100 grain weight, grain yield (741.6 Kg.Ha-1), biological yield (2857 Kg.Ha-1) and Harvest Index (27.31%) under drought stress conditions. In addition, this genotype had the least reduction for all traits under water limitation conditions in comparison to control. These findings confirm the resistance of Ks21189 genotype to drought stress and stimulating this genotype to least reduction in Grain yield under water limitation conditions. Minimum number of pod per plant (4.52), number of grain per pod (1.62), grain yield (503.1 Kg.Ha-1), biological yield (2301.6 Kg.Ha-1) and Harvest Index (22.66%) was obtained in sadri genotype under drought conditions. Sadri genotype was identified as water deficit stress sensitive genotypes with reduction of yield up to 80.18%. In all genotypes, water deficit stress reduced grain yield due to reduced yield components (number of pod per plant, number of grain per pod and 100 grain weight).
Conclusion
The results of this experiment showed that water deficit stress on yield and yield components of bean genotypes had a negative effect. The highest and lowest yield and yield components were obtained from normal irrigation and drought stress treatments, respectively. Ks21189 genotype was more stable in water deficit treatment than other genotypes; however grain yield reduce in normal irrigation treatment was lower than other genotypes. Therefore, it seems that this genotype can be used as an appropriate genotype for supplemental evaluation in water deficit stress conditions. Correlation analysis showed significant and positive correlation between biological yield, number of pods per plant, number of grains per pod with grain yield. We concluded that genotypes with higher biological yield under drought stress conditions can produce maximum number of pods per plant, number of grains per pod and grain yield.
Acknowledgments
We would like to express our thanks to the Faculty of Agriculture, Sari Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources University for supporting this study.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Biological yield
  • Drought stress
  • grain yield
  • Ks21189
Acosta-Gallegos, J.A., and Adams, M.W. 1991. Plant traits and yield stability of dry bean (Phaseolus vulgaris. L.) cultivars under drought stress. Journal of Agricultural Science 117: 213-219.
Anld, D., Bettis, L., Crick, J.E., Kephart, K.D. 1988. Planting date and temperature effects on germination, emergebce and seed yield of chick pea. Agronomy Journal 88: 909-971.
Anonymous. 2006. 2005-2006 Agricultural Statistics. Ministry of Jihad-e-Agriculture. (In Persian)
Bonanno, A.R., and Mack, H.J. 1983. Water relations and growth of snap beans as influenced by differential irrigation. Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science 108(5): 837- 844.
Boutraa, T., and Sanders, F.E. 2001. Influence of water stress on grain yield and vegetative growth of two cultivars of bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science 178: 51- 257.
Chaves, M.M., Maroco J.P., and Pereira, J.S. 2003. Understanding plant response to drought: from genes to the whole plant. Functional Plant Biology 30: 239-264.
Chung, J.H., and Goulden, D.S. 1971. Yield components of haricot bean (Phaseolus volgaris L.) growth at different plant densities. N. Z. Y. Agricultural Research 14: 227-234.
Cox, W.J., and Jolliff, G.D. 1986. Growth and yield of sunflower and soybean under soil water deficits. Agronomy Journal 78: 226-230.
De Costa, W.A.J.M., Dennett, M.D., Ratnaweera, U., and Nyalemegbe, K. 1997. Effects of different water regimes on field-grown determinate and indeterminate faba bean (Vicia faba L.). II. Yield, yield components and harvest index. Field Crops Research 52(1-2): 169-178.
De Souza, P.I., Egli, D.B., and Beruening, W.P. 1997. Water stress during sedd filling and leaf senescence in soybean. Agronomy Journal 89: 807-812.
Desclaux, D., and Roumet, P. 1996. Impact of drought strees on the phenology of tow soybean (Glycine max L. Merr) cultivars. Field Crops Research 46: 61-70.
Dimova, D., and Svetleva, D. 1992. Inheritance and correlatin of some quantitative haracters in French bean inreiation to incrasing the effectiveness of selection. Agro Business Solutions. Plant Breeding 63(3): 344.
Duarte, R.A., and Adams, M.W. 1972. A path coefficient analysis of some yield component interrelations in field bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Crop Science 12: 579-582.
Fanaei, H.R., Azmal, H., and Piri, I. 2017. Effect of biological and chemical fertilizers on oil, seed yield and some agronomic traits of safflower under different irrigation regimes. Journal of Agroecology 8(4): 551-566. (In Persian with English Summary)
Farah, S.M. 1981. An examination of the effects of water stress on leaf growth of crop of field beans (Vicia faba L.). 1. Crop growth and yield. Journal of Agricultural Science. 96(2): 327- 336.
Frahm, M.A., Rosas, J.C., Mayek-Perez, M., Lopez-Salinas, E., Acosta-Gallegos, J.A., and Kelly, J.D. 2004. Breeding beans for resistance to terminal drought in the lowland tropics. Euphytica 136(2): 223-232.
Gebeyehu, S. 2006. Physiological response to drought stress of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) genotypes differing in drought resistance. PhD Thesis. University of Giessen. Germany.
Gebeyehu, S. 2006. Physiological response to drought stress of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) genotypes differing in drought resistance. Institut fur Pflanzenernahrung Justus-Liebig-University of Giessen. Germany.
Grzesiak, S., Koscielniak, J., Filek, W., and Augustyniak, G. 1989. Effects of soil drought in generative phase of development of field bean (Vicia faba L var. minor) on leaf water status٫ photosynthesis rate and biomass growth. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science 162: 241-247.
Khoshvaghti, H. 2006. Effect of water limitation on growth rate, grain filling and yield of three pinto bean cultivars. MSc. Thesis, Faculty of Agriculture. Tabriz University. (In Persian)
Kisman, A. 2003. Effects of drought stress in growth and yield of soybean. Science Philosophy 702 pp.
Loss, S.P., and Siddique, K.H.M. 1997. Adaptation of faba bean (vicia faba L.) to dryland medierrranean- type environments I. Seed lowland tropics. Euphytica 136(2): 223-232.
Mayek-Perez, N., Garica-Espinosa, R., Lopez-Castanda, C., Acosta-Gallegos, J.A., and Simpson, J. 2002. Water relations, histopathology and growth of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) during pathogenesis of Macrophomina phaseolina under drought stress. Physiological and Molecula Plant Pathology 60: 158-195.
Meckle, L., Egli, D.B., Phillips R.E., Radcliffe, D., and Leggett, J.E. 1984. Effect of moisture stress on seed growth in soybean. Agronomy Journal 79: 647-650.
Nielsen, D.C., and Nelsen, N.O. 1998. Black bean sensitivity to water stress at various growth stages. Crop Science 38: 422-427.
Pandy, R.K., Herrera, W.A.T., and Pendleton, J.W. 1984. Drought response of grain legumes under irrigation gradient. I. Yield and yield components. Agronomy Journal 76: 549-533.
Pareek, A., Sopory, S.K., and Bohnert, S.J. 2010. Abiotic Stress Adaptation in Plants. Springer Netherlands. New York City. United States 546 pp.
Salemi, H.R., Tavakoli, A.R., and Heydari, N. 2015. Effects of deficit irrigation on yield and yield components of maize and determining of water productivity in Nekuabad Isfahan irrigation network. Journal of Agroecology 6(4): 858-869. (In Persian with English Summary)
Samarah, N.H. 2005. Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley. Agronomy for Sustainable Development 25: 145-149.
Santos, M.G., Ribeiro, R.V., Oliverira, R.F., Machado, E.C., and Pimetel, C. 2006. The role of inorganic phosphate on photosynthesis recovery of common bean after a mild water deficit. Plant Science 170: 659-664.
Saxena, C.M., Silim, S.N., and Singh, B.K. 1990. Effect of supplementary irrigation during reproductive growth on winter and spring chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) in a mediterranian environment. Journal of Agricultural Science 114: 285-293.
Shenkut, A.A., and Brick, M.A. 2003. Traits associated with dry edible bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) productivity under diverse soil moisture environments. Euphytica 133(3): 339-347.
Singh, S.P. 1999. Common Bean Improvement in the Twenty-first Century. Kluwer Academic Springer Netherlands. New York City. United States 405 pp.
Teran, H., and. Singh, S.P. 2002. Comparison of sources and lines selected for drought resistance in common bean. Crop Science 42(1): 64-70.
Wakrim, R., Wahbi, S., Tahi, H., Aganchich, B., and Serraj, R. 2005. Comparative effects of partial root drying (PRD) and regulated deficit errigation (RDI) on water relations and ater use efficiency in common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Agricuture, Ecosystems and Environment 106: 275-287.
Zeinali Gholiabad, E. 1995. Effects of irrigation regims and nitrogen levels on yield and yield components of pinto bean. MSc. Thesis. Faculty of Agriculture, Isfahan University of Technology. (In Persian with English Summary)